Phase II study investigating the efficacy and safety of glesatinib (MGCD265) in patients with advanced NSCLC containing MET activating alterations.

OBJECTIVES: Dysregulated signaling by mesenchymal epithelial transition factor (MET) and heightened AXL activation are implicated in the pathogenesis of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Glesatinib (MGCD265) is an investigational, oral inhibitor of MET and AXL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This open-label, Phase II study investigated glesatinib (free-base suspension [FBS] capsule 1050 mg BID or spray-dried dispersion [SDD] tablet 750 mg BID) in patients with advanced, previously treated NSCLC across four cohorts grouped according to presence of MET activating mutations or amplification in tumor or ctDNA. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients were enrolled: n = 28 and n = 8 with MET exon 14 skipping mutations in tumor tissue and ctDNA, respectively, and n = 20 and n = 12 with MET gene amplification in tumor tissue and ctDNA, respectively. Overall, ORR was 11.8 %, median progression-free survival was 4.0 months, and median overall survival was 7.0 months. Among patients with MET activating mutations, ORR was 10.7 % with tumor testing and 25.0 % with ctDNA testing. For MET amplification, responses were observed only in patients enrolled by tumor testing (ORR 15.0 %). Diarrhea (82.4 %), nausea (50.0 %), increased alanine aminotransferase (41.2 %), fatigue (38.2 %), and increased aspartate aminotransferase (36.8 %) were the most frequent adverse events assessed as related to study medication. Glesatinib exposure was similar with the SDD tablet and FBS capsule formulations. The study was terminated early by the sponsor due to modest clinical activity. CONCLUSIONS: Glesatinib had an acceptable safety profile in patients with advanced, pre-treated NSCLC with MET activating alterations. Modest clinical activity was observed, which likely reflects suboptimal drug bioavailability suggested by previously reported Phase I data, and pharmacodynamic findings of lower than anticipated increases in circulating soluble shed MET ectodomain (s-MET).

Early Changes in Circulating Cell-Free KRAS G12C Predict Response to Adagrasib in KRAS Mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE: Non-invasive monitoring of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has the potential to be a readily available measure for early prediction of clinical response. Here, we report on early ctDNA changes of KRAS G12C in a Phase 2 trial of adagrasib in patients with advanced, KRAS G12C-mutant lung cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We performed serial droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) and plasma NGS on 60 KRAS G12C-mutant patients with lung cancer that participated in cohort A of the KRYSTAL-1 clinical trial. We analyzed the change in ctDNA at 2 specific intervals: Between cycles 1 and 2 and at cycle 4. Changes in ctDNA were compared with clinical and radiographic response. RESULTS: We found that, in general, a maximal response in KRAS G12C ctDNA levels could be observed during the initial approximately 3-week treatment period, well before the first scan at approximately 6 weeks. 35 patients (89.7%) exhibited a decrease in KRAS G12C cfDNA >90% and 33 patients (84.6%) achieved complete clearance by cycle 2. Patients with complete ctDNA clearance at cycle 2 showed an improved objective response rate (ORR) compared with patients with incomplete ctDNA clearance (60.6% vs. 33.3%). Furthermore, complete ctDNA clearance at cycle 4 was associated with an improved overall survival (14.7 vs. 5.4 months) and progression-free survival (HR, 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: These results support using early plasma response of KRAS G12C assessed at approximately 3 weeks to anticipate the likelihood of a favorable objective clinical response.

Mocetinostat in Combination With Durvalumab for Patients With Advanced NSCLC: Results From a Phase I/II Study.

BACKGROUND: Histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors have potential to augment the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors and overcome treatment resistance. This dose-escalation/expansion study (NCT02805660) investigated mocetinostat (class I/IV HDAC inhibitor) plus durvalumab in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) across cohorts defined by tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and prior experience with anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (anti-PD-1) or anti-PD-L1 regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sequential cohorts of patients with solid tumors received mocetinostat (starting dose: 50 mg TIW) plus durvalumab at a standard dose (1500 mg Q4W) to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D: phase I primary endpoint), based on the observed safety profile. RP2D was administered to patients with advanced NSCLC across 4 cohorts grouped by tumor PD-L1 expression (none or low/high) and prior experience with anti-PD-L1 /anti-PD-1 agents (naïve, clinical benefit: yes/no). The phase II primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR, RECIST v1.1). RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were enrolled (phase I [n = 20], phase II [n = 63]). RP2D was mocetinostat 70 mg TIW plus durvalumab. ORR was 11.5% across the phase II cohorts, and responses were durable (median 329 days). Clinical activity was observed in NSCLC patients with disease refractory to prior checkpoint inhibitor treatment: ORR 23.1%. Across all patients, fatigue (41%), nausea (40%), and diarrhea (31%) were the most frequent treatment-related adverse events. CONCLUSION: Mocetinostat 70 mg TIW plus durvalumab at the standard dose was generally well tolerated. Clinical activity was observed in patients with NSCLC unresponsive to prior anti-PD-(L)1 therapy.

Phase I Study Evaluating Glesatinib (MGCD265), An Inhibitor of MET and AXL, in Patients with Non-small Cell Lung Cancer and Other Advanced Solid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Heightened signaling by mesenchymal epithelial transition factor (MET) is implicated in tumorigenesis. Glesatinib is an investigational, oral inhibitor of MET and AXL. OBJECTIVE: This phase I study determined the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended phase II dose (RP2D), and safety profile of glesatinib in patients with advanced or unresectable solid tumors. Antitumor activity and pharmacokinetics (PK) were secondary objectives. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four formulations of glesatinib glycolate salt (capsule, unmicronized, micronized, and micronized version 2 [V2] tablets) and two free-base formulations (free-base suspension [FBS] capsule and spray-dried dispersion [SDD] tablet), developed to enhance drug exposure and optimize manufacturing processes, were evaluated in patients with genetically unselected advanced/unresectable solid tumors. MTD, based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) observed during the first 21-day treatment cycle, was further evaluated in dose-expansion cohorts comprising patients with overexpression of MET and/or AXL, MET/AXL amplification, MET-activating mutations, or MET/AXL rearrangements for confirmation as the RP2D. RESULTS: Glesatinib was evaluated across 27 dose-escalation cohorts (n = 108). Due to suboptimal exposure with glesatinib glycolate salt formulations in the initial cohorts, investigations subsequently focused on the FBS capsule and SDD tablet; for these formulations, MTD was identified as 1050 mg twice daily and 750 mg twice daily, respectively. An additional 71 patients received glesatinib in the FBS and SDD dose-expansion cohorts. At MTDs, the most frequent treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea (FBS, 83.3%; SDD, 75.0%), nausea (57.1%, 30.6%), vomiting (45.2%, 25.0%), increased alanine aminotransferase (45.2%, 30.6%), and increased aspartate aminotransferase (47.6%, 27.8%). Exploratory pharmacodynamic analyses indicated target engagement and inhibition of MET by glesatinib. Antitumor activity was observed with glesatinib FBS 1050 mg twice daily and SDD 750 mg twice daily in tumors harboring MET/AXL alteration or aberrant protein expression, particularly in patients with non--small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In patients with NSCLC, the objective response rate was 25.9% in those with MET/AXL mutation or amplification and 30.0% in a subset with MET-activating mutations. All six partial responses occurred in patients with tumors carrying MET exon 14 deletion mutations. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile of single-agent glesatinib was acceptable. SDD 750 mg twice daily was selected as the preferred glesatinib formulation and dose based on clinical activity, safety, and PK data. Observations from this study led to initiation of a phase II study of glesatinib in patients with NSCLC stratified by type of MET alteration (NCT02544633). CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00697632; June 2008.

First-in-human phase 1/1b study to evaluate sitravatinib in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Sitravatinib (MGCD516), a spectrum-selective receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting TAM (TYRO3, AXL, MERTK) and split kinase family receptors, has demonstrated preclinical anti-tumor activity and modulation of tumor microenvironment. This first-in-human phase 1/1b study included sitravatinib dose exploration and anti-tumor activity evaluation in selected patients with advanced solid tumors. Primary objectives included assessment of safety, pharmacokinetics and clinical activity of sitravatinib. Secondary objectives included identifying doses for further investigation and exploring molecular markers for patient selection. In phase 1, 32 patients received 10-200 mg, while phase 1b dose expansion comprised 161 patients (150 mg n = 99, 120 mg n = 62). Maximum tolerated dose was determined as 150 mg daily. Dose-limiting toxicity was reported in 4/28 evaluable phase 1 patients (three at 200 mg, one at 80 mg). In phase 1b, 120 mg was defined as the recommended dose due to tolerability. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were experienced by 174/193 patients (90.2%); grade ≥ 3 TRAEs in 103 patients (53.4%). Most common TRAEs were diarrhea, fatigue, hypertension and nausea; TRAEs led to treatment discontinuation in 26 patients (13.5%) and death in one patient. Sitravatinib was steadily absorbed and declined from plasma with a terminal elimination half-life of 42.1-51.5 h following oral administration. Overall objective response rate was 11.8% in phase 1b, 13.2% in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and 4.2% in patients with NSCLC with prior checkpoint inhibitor experience. Sitravatinib demonstrated manageable safety and modest clinical activity in solid tumors. NCT02219711 (first posted August 14, 2014).

Adagrasib in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Harboring a KRASG12C Mutation.

BACKGROUND: Adagrasib, a KRASG12C inhibitor, irreversibly and selectively binds KRASG12C, locking it in its inactive state. Adagrasib showed clinical activity and had an acceptable adverse-event profile in the phase 1-1b part of the KRYSTAL-1 phase 1-2 study. METHODS: In a registrational phase 2 cohort, we evaluated adagrasib (600 mg orally twice daily) in patients with KRASG12C -mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy and anti-programmed death 1 or programmed death ligand 1 therapy. The primary end point was objective response assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included the duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: As of October 15, 2021, a total of 116 patients with KRASG12C -mutated NSCLC had been treated (median follow-up, 12.9 months); 98.3% had previously received both chemotherapy and immunotherapy. Of 112 patients with measurable disease at baseline, 48 (42.9%) had a confirmed objective response. The median duration of response was 8.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.2 to 13.8), and the median progression-free survival was 6.5 months (95% CI, 4.7 to 8.4). As of January 15, 2022 (median follow-up, 15.6 months), the median overall survival was 12.6 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 19.2). Among 33 patients with previously treated, stable central nervous system metastases, the intracranial confirmed objective response rate was 33.3% (95% CI, 18.0 to 51.8). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 97.4% of the patients - grade 1 or 2 in 52.6% and grade 3 or higher in 44.8% (including two grade 5 events) - and resulted in drug discontinuation in 6.9% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with previously treated KRASG12C -mutated NSCLC, adagrasib showed clinical efficacy without new safety signals. (Funded by Mirati Therapeutics; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03785249.).

Phase I Study of Glesatinib (MGCD265) in Combination with Erlotinib or Docetaxel in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Oncogenic drivers in solid tumors include aberrant activation of mesenchymal epithelial transition factor (MET) and AXL. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the safety and antitumor activity of glesatinib, a multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor that inhibits MET and AXL at clinically relevant doses, in combination with erlotinib or docetaxel. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The phase I portion of this open-label, multicenter study included two parallel arms in which ascending doses of oral glesatinib (starting dose 96 mg/m2) were administered with erlotinib or docetaxel (starting doses 100 mg once daily and 50 mg/m2, respectively) using a modified 3 + 3 design. Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) during the first 21-day treatment cycle. Enrollment focused on patients with solid tumor types typically associated with MET aberration and/or AXL overexpression. The primary objective was to determine the safety profile of the treatment combinations. Antitumor activity and pharmacokinetics (PK) were also assessed. RESULTS: Ten dose levels of glesatinib across three glycolate formulations (unmicronized, micronized, or micronized version 2 [V2] tablets) available during the course of the study were investigated in 14 dose-escalation cohorts (n = 126). MTDs of unmicronized glesatinib plus erlotinib or docetaxel, and micronized glesatinib plus erlotinib were not reached. Micronized glesatinib 96 mg/m2 plus docetaxel exceeded the MTD. Further dosing focused on glesatinib micronized V2: maximum administered dose (MAD) was 700 mg twice daily with erlotinib 150 mg once daily or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. DLTs, acceptable at lower glesatinib (micronized V2) dose levels, occurred in two of five and two of six patients at the MADs of glesatinib + erlotinib and glesatinib + docetaxel, respectively. Across all cohorts, the most frequent treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea (glesatinib + erlotinib: 84.1%; glesatinib + docetaxel: 45.6%), fatigue (46.4%, 70.4%), and nausea (30.4%, 35.1%). The objective response rate was 1.8% and 12.0% in all glesatinib + erlotinib and glesatinib + docetaxel cohorts, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile of glesatinib plus erlotinib or docetaxel was acceptable and there were no PK interactions. MADs of glesatinib 700 mg twice daily (micronized V2) with erlotinib 150 mg once daily or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks exceeded the MTD by a small margin. Modest signals of efficacy were observed with these treatment combinations in non-genetically selected patients with advanced solid tumors. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00975767; 11 September 2009.

High Mortality After Total Knee Arthroplasty Periprosthetic Joint Infection is Related to Preoperative Morbidity and the Disease Process but Not Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) mortality rate is approximately 20%. The etiology for high mortality remains unknown. The objective of this study was to determine whether mortality was associated with preoperative morbidity (frailty), sequalae of treatment, or the PJI disease process itself. METHODS: A multicenter observational study was completed comparing 184 patients treated with septic revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to a control group of 38 patients treated with aseptic revision TKA. Primary outcomes included time and the cause of death. Secondary outcomes included preoperative comorbidities and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCMI) measured preoperatively and at various postoperative timepoints. RESULTS: The septic revision TKA cohort experienced earlier mortality compared to the aseptic cohort, with a higher mortality rate at 90 days, 1, 2, and 3 years after index revision surgery (P = .01). There was no significant difference for any single cause of death (P > .05 for each). The mean preoperative CCMI was higher (P = .005) in the septic revision TKA cohort. Both septic and aseptic cohorts experienced a significant increase in CCMI from the preoperative to 3 years postoperative (P < .0001 and P = .002) and time of death (P < .0001 both) timepoints. The septic revision TKA cohort had a higher CCMI 3 years postoperatively (P = .001) and at time of death (P = .046), but not one year postoperatively (P = .119). CONCLUSION: Compared to mortality from aseptic revision surgery, septic revision TKA is associated with earlier mortality, but there is no single specific etiology. As quantified by changes in CCMI, PJI mortality was associated with both frailty and the PJI disease process, but not treatment.

First-in-Human Phase I/IB Dose-Finding Study of Adagrasib (MRTX849) in Patients With Advanced KRASG12C Solid Tumors (KRYSTAL-1).

PURPOSE: Adagrasib (MRTX849) is an oral, highly selective, small-molecule, covalent inhibitor of KRASG12C. We report results from a phase I/IB study of adagrasib in non-small-cell lung cancer, colorectal cancer, and other solid tumors harboring the KRASG12C mutation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced KRASG12C-mutant solid tumors were treated with adagrasib 150 mg orally once daily, 300 mg once daily, 600 mg once daily, 1,200 mg once daily, or 600 mg orally twice a day using an accelerated titration design, which transitioned to a modified toxicity probability interval design when a predefined degree of toxicity was observed or target adagrasib exposure was achieved. Safety, pharmacokinetics, and clinical activity were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of adagrasib. The recommended phase II dose (RP2D) was 600 mg twice a day on the basis of safety, tolerability, and observed pharmacokinetics properties. No maximum tolerated dose was formally defined. After a median follow-up of 19.6 months, eight of 15 patients (53.3%; 95% CI, 26.6 to 78.7) with RECIST-evaluable KRASG12C-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer treated at 600 mg twice a day achieved a confirmed partial response. The median duration of response was 16.4 months (95% CI, 3.1 to not estimable). The median progression-free survival was 11.1 months (95% CI, 2.6 to not estimable). One of two patients with KRASG12C-mutant colorectal cancer treated at 600 mg twice a day achieved a partial response (duration of response, 4.2 months). At the RP2D, the most common treatment-related adverse events (any grade) were nausea (80.0%), diarrhea (70.0%), vomiting (50.0%), and fatigue (45.0%). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse event was fatigue (15.0%). CONCLUSION: Adagrasib 600 mg twice a day was well tolerated and exhibited antitumor activity in patients with advanced solid tumors harboring the KRASG12C mutation.

The KRASG12C Inhibitor MRTX849 Provides Insight toward Therapeutic Susceptibility of KRAS-Mutant Cancers in Mouse Models and Patients.

Despite decades of research, efforts to directly target KRAS have been challenging. MRTX849 was identified as a potent, selective, and covalent KRASG12C inhibitor that exhibits favorable drug-like properties, selectively modifies mutant cysteine 12 in GDP-bound KRASG12C, and inhibits KRAS-dependent signaling. MRTX849 demonstrated pronounced tumor regression in 17 of 26 (65%) KRASG12C-positive cell line- and patient-derived xenograft models from multiple tumor types, and objective responses have been observed in patients with KRASG12C-positive lung and colon adenocarcinomas. Comprehensive pharmacodynamic and pharmacogenomic profiling in sensitive and partially resistant nonclinical models identified mechanisms implicated in limiting antitumor activity including KRAS nucleotide cycling and pathways that induce feedback reactivation and/or bypass KRAS dependence. These factors included activation of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTK), bypass of KRAS dependence, and genetic dysregulation of cell cycle. Combinations of MRTX849 with agents that target RTKs, mTOR, or cell cycle demonstrated enhanced response and marked tumor regression in several tumor models, including MRTX849-refractory models. SIGNIFICANCE: The discovery of MRTX849 provides a long-awaited opportunity to selectively target KRASG12C in patients. The in-depth characterization of MRTX849 activity, elucidation of response and resistance mechanisms, and identification of effective combinations provide new insight toward KRAS dependence and the rational development of this class of agents.See related commentary by Klempner and Hata, p. 20.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1.

Correction to: Phase II study of sunitinib in Japanese patients with unresectable or metastatic, well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor.

In the original publication of this article, the license subtype should be CC BY and not CC BY-NC.

Mocetinostat for patients with previously treated, locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma and inactivating alterations of acetyltransferase genes.

BACKGROUND: The authors evaluated mocetinostat (a class I/IV histone deacetylase inhibitor) in patients with urothelial carcinoma harboring inactivating mutations or deletions in CREB binding protein [CREBBP] and/or E1A binding protein p300 [EP300] histone acetyltransferase genes in a single-arm, open-label phase 2 study. METHODS: Eligible patients with platinum-treated, advanced/metastatic disease received oral mocetinostat (at a dose of 70 mg 3 times per week [TIW] escalating to 90 mg TIW) in 28-day cycles in a 3-stage study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02236195). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate. RESULTS: Genomic testing was feasible in 155 of 175 patients (89%). Qualifying tumor mutations were CREBBP (15%), EP300 (8%), and both CREBBP and EP300 (1%). A total of 17 patients were enrolled into stage 1 (the intent-to-treat population); no patients were enrolled in subsequent stages. One partial response was observed (11% [1 of 9 patients; the population that was evaluable for efficacy comprised 9 of the 15 planned patients]); activity was deemed insufficient to progress to stage 2 (null hypothesis: objective response rate of ≤15%). All patients experienced ≥1 adverse event, most commonly nausea (13 of 17 patients; 77%) and fatigue (12 of 17 patients; 71%). The median duration of treatment was 46 days; treatment interruptions (14 of 17 patients; 82%) and dose reductions (5 of 17 patients; 29%) were common. Mocetinostat exposure was lower than anticipated (dose-normalized maximum serum concentration [Cmax ] after TIW dosing of 0.2 ng/mL/mg). CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, the current study represents the first clinical trial using genomic-based selection to identify patients with urothelial cancer who are likely to benefit from selective histone deacetylase inhibition. Mocetinostat was associated with significant toxicities that impacted drug exposure and may have contributed to modest clinical activity in these pretreated patients. The efficacy observed was considered insufficient to warrant further investigation of mocetinostat as a single agent in this setting.

Phase I/II study of mocetinostat in combination with gemcitabine for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer and other advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of mocetinostat (a Class I/IV HDAC inhibitor) in combination with gemcitabine in patients with solid tumors, including pancreatic cancer. METHODS: In this open-label, non-randomized Phase I/II study (NCT00372437) sequential cohorts of patients with solid tumors received gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2, day 1 of three consecutive weeks, 4-week cycles) and oral mocetinostat [50-110 mg, three times per week (TIW)]. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) was determined based on dose-limiting toxicities in Cycle 1 (Phase I study). The MTD/RP2D was further evaluated in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (Phase II study) using a two-stage design. The Phase II primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were enrolled into the Phase I (n = 25) and Phase II (n = 23) studies. In the Phase I study, the MTD/RP2D was mocetinostat 90 mg TIW + gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were reported by 81% of all patients, the most frequent being fatigue (38%) and thrombocytopenia (19%). The ORR was 11% in the Phase I study (n = 2 patients with pancreatic cancer, responses lasting for 16.8 and 4.0 months, respectively). As no responses were seen in the Phase II cohort, the study was terminated. CONCLUSIONS: Mocetinostat TIW in combination with gemcitabine was associated with significant toxicities in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. The level of clinical activity of this treatment combination was not considered high enough to merit further testing in this setting.

Glesatinib Exhibits Antitumor Activity in Lung Cancer Models and Patients Harboring MET Exon 14 Mutations and Overcomes Mutation-mediated Resistance to Type I MET Inhibitors in Nonclinical Models.

Purpose:MET exon 14 deletion (METex14 del) mutations represent a novel class of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) driver mutations. We evaluated glesatinib, a spectrum-selective MET inhibitor exhibiting a type II binding mode, in METex14 del-positive nonclinical models and NSCLC patients and assessed its ability to overcome resistance to type I MET inhibitors.Experimental Design: As most MET inhibitors in clinical development bind the active site with a type I binding mode, we investigated mechanisms of acquired resistance to each MET inhibitor class utilizing in vitro and in vivo models and in glesatinib clinical trials.Results: Glesatinib inhibited MET signaling, demonstrated marked regression of METex14 del-driven patient-derived xenografts, and demonstrated a durable RECIST partial response in a METex14 del mutation-positive patient enrolled on a glesatinib clinical trial. Prolonged treatment of nonclinical models with selected MET inhibitors resulted in differences in resistance kinetics and mutations within the MET activation loop (i.e., D1228N, Y1230C/H) that conferred resistance to type I MET inhibitors, but remained sensitive to glesatinib. In vivo models exhibiting METex14 del/A-loop double mutations and resistance to type I inhibitors exhibited a marked response to glesatinib. Finally, a METex14 del mutation-positive NSCLC patient who responded to crizotinib but later relapsed, demonstrated a mixed response to glesatinib including reduction in size of a MET Y1230H mutation-positive liver metastasis and concurrent loss of detection of this mutation in plasma DNA.Conclusions: Together, these data demonstrate that glesatinib exhibits a distinct mechanism of target inhibition and can overcome resistance to type I MET inhibitors. Clin Cancer Res; 23(21); 6661-72. ©2017 AACR.

A phase 2 study of mocetinostat, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, in relapsed or refractory lymphoma.

Deregulation of histone deacetylase (HDAC) is important in the pathogenesis of follicular lymphoma (FL) and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Mocetinostat, an isotype-selective HDAC inhibitor, induces accumulation of acetylated histones, cell cycle arrest and apoptosis in several cancers. This phase 2 study evaluated mocetinostat in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) DLBCL and FL. Seventy-two patients received mocetinostat (starting doses: 70-110 mg TIW, 4-week cycles). The best overall response rate (95% CI) was 18·9% (7·2, 32·2) for the DLBCL cohort (n = 41), and 11·5% (1·7, 20·7) for the FL cohort (n = 31). Responses were durable (≥90 days in 7 of 10 responses). Overall, 54·1% and 73·1% of patients derived clinical benefit (response or stable disease) from mocetinostat in the DLBCL and FL cohorts, respectively. Progression-free survival ranged from 1·8 to 22·8 months and 11·8 to 26·3 months in responders with DLBCL and FL, respectively. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (75·0%), nausea (69·4%) and diarrhoea (61·1%). Although mocetinostat had limited single-agent activity in R/R DLBCL and FL, patients with clinical benefit had long-term disease control. The safety profile was acceptable. This drug class warrants further investigation, including identifying patients more likely to respond to this agent, or in combination with other agents.

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life with Sunitinib Versus Placebo for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Results From an International Phase III Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this analysis was to compare patient-reported outcomes and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in a pivotal phase III trial of sunitinib versus placebo in patients with progressive, well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NCT00428597). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received sunitinib 37.5 mg (n = 86) or placebo (n = 85) on a continuous daily-dosing schedule until disease progression, unacceptable adverse events (AEs), or death. Patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 at baseline, Day 1 of every 4-week cycle, and end of treatment or withdrawal. Changes ≥10 points on each scale or item were deemed clinically meaningful. RESULTS: Sunitinib had anti-tumor effects and improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo. The study was terminated early for this reason and because of more serious AEs and deaths with placebo. Baseline HRQoL scores were well balanced between study arms, and were generally maintained over time in both groups. In the first 10 cycles, there were no significant differences between groups in global HRQoL, cognitive, emotional, physical, role, and social functioning domains, or symptom scales, except for worsening diarrhea with sunitinib (p < 0.0001 vs. placebo). Insomnia also worsened with sunitinib (p = 0.0372 vs. placebo), but the difference was not clinically meaningful. CONCLUSION: With the exception of diarrhea (a recognized side effect), sunitinib had no impact on global HRQoL, functional domains, or symptom scales during the progression-free period. Hence, in patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, sunitinib provided a benefit in PFS without adversely affecting HRQoL.

Institutional implementation of clinical tumor profiling on an unselected cancer population.

BACKGROUND. Comprehensive genomic profiling of a patient's cancer can be used to diagnose, monitor, and recommend treatment. Clinical implementation of tumor profiling in an enterprise-wide, unselected cancer patient population has yet to be reported. METHODS. We deployed a hybrid-capture and massively parallel sequencing assay (OncoPanel) for all adult and pediatric patients at our combined cancer centers. Results were categorized by pathologists based on actionability. We report the results for the first 3,727 patients tested. RESULTS. Our cohort consists of cancer patients unrestricted by disease site or stage. Across all consented patients, half had sufficient and available (>20% tumor) material for profiling; once specimens were received in the laboratory for pathology review, 73% were scored as adequate for genomic testing. When sufficient DNA was obtained, OncoPanel yielded a result in 96% of cases. 73% of patients harbored an actionable or informative alteration; only 19% of these represented a current standard of care for therapeutic stratification. The findings recapitulate those of previous studies of common cancers but also identify alterations, including in AXL and EGFR, associated with response to targeted therapies. In rare cancers, potentially actionable alterations suggest the utility of a "cancer-agnostic" approach in genomic profiling. Retrospective analyses uncovered contextual genomic features that may inform therapeutic response and examples where diagnoses revised by genomic profiling markedly changed clinical management. CONCLUSIONS. Broad sequencing-based testing deployed across an unselected cancer cohort is feasible. Genomic results may alter management in diverse scenarios; however, additional barriers must be overcome to enable precision cancer medicine on a large scale. FUNDING. This work was supported by DFCI, BWH, and the National Cancer Institute (5R33CA155554 and 5K23CA157631).

Sunitinib combined with pemetrexed and carboplatin in patients with advanced solid malignancies--results of a phase I dose-escalation study.

OBJECTIVES: The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and overall safety of sunitinib plus pemetrexed and carboplatin was determined in patients with advanced solid malignancies. METHODS: In this phase I dose-escalation study, patients received oral sunitinib on a continuous daily dosing (CDD) schedule (37.5 mg/day) or Schedule 2/1 (2 weeks on treatment, 1 week off treatment; 37.5 or 50 mg/day). Pemetrexed (400-500 mg/m(2) IV) and carboplatin (AUC = 5 mg·min/ml IV) were administered q3w. At the MTD for the chosen schedule, a cohort of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or mesothelioma was further evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were enrolled on Schedule 2/1 (expansion cohort included) and 3 patients on the CDD schedule. The MTD on Schedule 2/1 was sunitinib 37.5 mg/day with pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC = 5 mg·min/ml; MTD on the CDD schedule was not established. Dose-limiting toxicities included grade 3/4 neutropenia, grade 3 thrombocytopenia, and grade 3 hand-foot syndrome. The most common grade 3/4 drug-related non-hematologic adverse events at Schedule 2/1 MTD were fatigue/asthenia and diarrhea (both n = 4). Grade 3/4 hematologic abnormalities included neutropenia (83%) and leukopenia (83%). Pharmacokinetic data revealed no clinically significant drug-drug interactions. Best response at the Schedule 2/1 MTD was stable disease ≥8 weeks in 3/5 evaluable patients (60%). CONCLUSIONS: With this combination, in patients with advanced solid malignancies, sunitinib MTD on Schedule 2/1 was 37.5 mg/day. Sunitinib plus pemetrexed and carboplatin were tolerable at the MTD, although sunitinib dose delays and reductions were often required due to myelosuppression.