ACTION: a randomized phase 3 study of ONC201 (dordaviprone) in patients with newly diagnosed H3 K27M-mutant diffuse glioma.

BACKGROUND: H3 K27M-mutant diffuse glioma primarily affects children and young adults, is associated with a poor prognosis, and no effective systemic therapy is currently available. ONC201 (dordaviprone) has previously demonstrated efficacy in patients with recurrent disease. This phase 3 trial evaluates ONC201 in patients with newly diagnosed H3 K27M-mutant glioma. METHODS: ACTION (NCT05580562) is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, international phase 3 study of ONC201 in newly diagnosed H3 K27M-mutant diffuse glioma. Patients who have completed standard frontline radiotherapy are randomized 1:1:1 to receive placebo, once-weekly dordaviprone, or twice-weekly dordaviprone on 2 consecutive days. Primary efficacy endpoints are overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS); PFS is assessed by response assessment in neuro-oncology high-grade glioma criteria (RANO-HGG) by blind independent central review. Secondary objectives include safety, additional efficacy endpoints, clinical benefit, and quality of life. Eligible patients have histologically confirmed H3 K27M-mutant diffuse glioma, a Karnofsky/Lansky performance status ≥70, and completed first-line radiotherapy. Eligibility is not restricted by age; however, patients must be ≥10 kg at time of randomization. Patients with a primary spinal tumor, diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma, leptomeningeal disease, or cerebrospinal fluid dissemination are not eligible. ACTION is currently enrolling in multiple international sites.

ONC201 (Dordaviprone) in Recurrent H3 K27M-Mutant Diffuse Midline Glioma.

PURPOSE: Histone 3 (H3) K27M-mutant diffuse midline glioma (DMG) has a dismal prognosis with no established effective therapy beyond radiation. This integrated analysis evaluated single-agent ONC201 (dordaviprone), a first-in-class imipridone, in recurrent H3 K27M-mutant DMG. METHODS: Fifty patients (pediatric, n = 4; adult, n = 46) with recurrent H3 K27M-mutant DMG who received oral ONC201 monotherapy in four clinical trials or one expanded access protocol were included. Eligible patients had measurable disease by Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) high-grade glioma (HGG) criteria and performance score (PS) ≥60 and were ≥90 days from radiation; pontine and spinal tumors were ineligible. The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR) by RANO-HGG criteria. Secondary end points included duration of response (DOR), time to response (TTR), corticosteroid response, PS response, and ORR by RANO low-grade glioma (LGG) criteria. Radiographic end points were assessed by dual-reader, blinded independent central review. RESULTS: The ORR (RANO-HGG) was 20.0% (95% CI, 10.0 to 33.7). The median TTR was 8.3 months (range, 1.9-15.9); the median DOR was 11.2 months (95% CI, 3.8 to not reached). The ORR by combined RANO-HGG/LGG criteria was 30.0% (95% CI, 17.9 to 44.6). A ≥50% corticosteroid dose reduction occurred in 7 of 15 evaluable patients (46.7% [95% CI, 21.3 to 73.4]); PS improvement occurred in 6 of 34 evaluable patients (20.6% [95% CI, 8.7 to 37.9]). Grade 3 treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TR-TEAEs) occurred in 20.0% of patients; the most common was fatigue (n = 5; 10%); no grade 4 TR-TEAEs, deaths, or discontinuations occurred. CONCLUSION: ONC201 monotherapy was well tolerated and exhibited durable and clinically meaningful efficacy in recurrent H3 K27M-mutant DMG.

Immunohistochemistry Detection of Histone H3 K27M Mutation in Human Glioma Tissue.

The presence of the histone 3 (H3) K27M mutation in diffuse midline glioma has implications for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment, making rapid and accurate H3 K27M characterization vital for optimal treatment. This study evaluated an immunohistochemical assay using a commercially available monoclonal anti-H3 K27M in human central nervous system tumors. H3 K27M-positive glioma specimens were obtained from clinical sites with prior H3 K27M testing using local methods; negative control glioblastoma tissue was obtained from a tissue library. Specimens were stained with a rabbit anti-H3 K27M monoclonal antibody; slides were evaluated for the proportion of H3 K27M-positive tumor cells and staining intensity by a board-certified pathologist. H-score was calculated for each sample. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, repeatability, and reproducibility were evaluated. Fifty-one central nervous system specimens were stained (H3 K27M, n=41; H3 wild type, n=10). All H3 K27M-mutant specimens had positive nuclear staining, and most specimens had an H-score ≥150 (31/40, 77.5%). No nuclear staining occurred in H3 wild-type specimens; all cores in the normal tissue microarray were negative. Results were 100% sensitive, specific, and accurate for H3 K27M detection relative to local methods. Repeatability and reproducibility analyses were 100%, with a high degree of concordance for staining intensity. H3 K27M antigen was stable for at least 12 months at ambient temperature. Immunohistochemistry using a commercially available anti-H3 K27M monoclonal antibody provides a highly sensitive, specific, and stable method of establishing H3 K27M status in human glioma; this method may facilitate diagnosis in cases where sequencing is not feasible or available.

Exposure-response relationship for ramucirumab from the randomized, double-blind, phase 3 REVEL trial (docetaxel versus docetaxel plus ramucirumab) in second-line treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Ramucirumab plus docetaxel improved survival in REVEL, a randomized phase 3 trial for patients with Stage IV non-small cell lung cancer after standard platinum-based chemotherapy. This exploratory analysis evaluated the exposure-response relationship of ramucirumab from REVEL. METHODS: Patients received ramucirumab (10 mg/kg) or placebo plus docetaxel (75 mg/m2) every 3 weeks. Pharmacokinetic samples were collected. A population pharmacokinetic analysis predicted ramucirumab minimum concentration after first-dose administration (Cmin,1) and average concentration at steady state (Cave,ss). Predicted Cmin,1 and Cave,ss were used to evaluate the relationship between ramucirumab exposure and efficacy and safety, respectively. Exposure-efficacy was assessed by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses; exposure-safety was assessed by ordered categorical analyses. RESULTS: Analyses included 376 patients treated with ramucirumab plus docetaxel and 366 patients treated with placebo plus docetaxel (364 for safety population). After adjusting for corresponding prognostic factors, the association between overall survival (OS) and Cmin,1 was statistically significant (p = 0.0110), although progression-free survival (PFS) showed a marginal association (p = 0.0515). At high ramucirumab exposures (Cmin,1), greater improvements (smaller hazard ratios) were seen for OS and PFS when stratified by Cmin,1 exposure quartiles. A statistically significant correlation was observed between ramucirumab Cave,ss and grade ≥ 3 febrile neutropenia and hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: An association was observed between ramucirumab exposure and efficacy. Higher ramucirumab exposure was associated with improved clinical outcomes and increased toxicity in this analysis. Two exposure-response prospective randomized trials are being conducted to address causation (NCT02443883 and NCT02514551), with encouraging preliminary results (Ajani et al. in Ann Oncol 28:abstr 698P, 2017).

Exposure-Response Analyses of Ramucirumab from Two Randomized, Phase III Trials of Second-line Treatment for Advanced Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer.

Ramucirumab is an IgG1 monoclonal antibody specific for the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2. Ramucirumab, 8 mg/kg every 2 weeks, administered as monotherapy (REGARD) or in combination with paclitaxel (RAINBOW), was safe and effective in patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. We evaluated exposure-efficacy and exposure-safety relationships of ramucirumab from two randomized, placebo-controlled phase III trials. Sparse pharmacokinetic samples were collected, and a population pharmacokinetic analysis was conducted to predict ramucirumab minimum trough concentration at steady state (Cmin,ss). Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the ramucirumab exposure (Cmin,ss)-efficacy relationship to overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate exposure-safety relationships. Analyses included 321 ramucirumab + paclitaxel and 335 placebo + paclitaxel patients from RAINBOW and 72 ramucirumab and 35 placebo patients from REGARD. Exposure-efficacy analysis showed ramucirumab Cmin,ss was a significant predictor of OS and PFS in both trials. Higher ramucirumab exposure was associated with longer OS and PFS. In RAINBOW, grade ≥3 hypertension, leukopenia, and neutropenia, but not febrile neutropenia, significantly correlated with Cmin,ss, with increased exposure leading to increased incidence. Exploratory exposure-response analyses suggest a positive relationship between efficacy and ramucirumab exposure with manageable toxicities at exposures generated from a dose of 8 mg/kg ramucirumab given every 2 weeks for patients with advanced gastric/GEJ cancer. These findings suggest an opportunity to further optimize benefit versus risk profiles of ramucirumab treatment in patients with gastric/GEJ cancer. Mol Cancer Ther; 16(10); 2215-22. ©2017 AACR.

Joint modeling of progression-free survival and overall survival by a Bayesian normal induced copula estimation model.

In cancer clinical trials, in addition to time to death (i.e., overall survival), progression-related measurements such as progression-free survival and time to progression are also commonly used to evaluate treatment efficacy. It is of scientific interest and importance to understand the correlations among these measurements. In this paper, we propose a Bayesian semi-competing risks approach to jointly model progression-related measurements and overall survival. This new model is referred to as the NICE model, which stands for the normal induced copula estimation model. Correlation among these variables can be directly derived from the joint model. In addition, when correlation exists, simulation shows that the joint model is able to borrow strength from correlated measurements, and as a consequence the NICE model improves inference on both variables. The proposed model is in a Bayesian framework that enables us to use it in various Bayesian contexts, such as Bayesian adaptive design and using posterior predictive samples to simulate future trials. We conducted simulation studies to demonstrate properties of the NICE model and applied this method to a data set from chemotherapy-naive patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer.

Evaluating health-related quality-of-life therapeutic effectiveness in a clinical trial with extensive nonignorable missing data and heterogeneous response: results from a phase III randomized trial of gemcitabine plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel monotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: This manuscript presents health-related quality of life (HRQL) results from a phase III trial of gemcitabine-paclitaxel (GT) versus paclitaxel (T) in metastatic breast cancer patients. METHODS: Patients completed the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) and Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) at baseline and at the end of each cycle. Sensitivity analyses for six longitudinal pattern mixture models (PMMs) assessed potential bias due to informative dropout. Cumulative probability plots with 50% confidence intervals indicated the proportion of patients whose HRQL was likely to improve, decline, or stay the same. RESULTS: Sensitivity analyses addressing nonignorable missing RSCL data included 351 patients. The mean RSCL global HRQL score for GT was significantly and consistently better than that for T (all PMMs P < 0.040). The slope estimate of 1.5 points (100-point scale) per cycle from one PMM translated to a clinically significant 9-point improvement over six cycles with GT versus T. For GT, ~25% of patients were more likely than not to have improved HRQL, whereas that proportion for T was ~5%. PMMs showed no consistent treatment arm differences for BPI or other RSCL outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Adding gemcitabine to paclitaxel for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer is more likely to improve global HRQL over time compared to monotherapy treatment.

Optimizing collection of adverse event data in cancer clinical trials supporting supplemental indications.

PURPOSE: Although much is known about the safety of an anticancer agent at the time of initial marketing approval, sponsors customarily collect comprehensive safety data for studies that support supplemental indications. This adds significant cost and complexity to the study but may not provide useful new information. The main purpose of this analysis was to assess the amount of safety and concomitant medication data collected to determine a more optimal approach in the collection of these data when used in support of supplemental applications. METHODS: Following a prospectively developed statistical analysis plan, we reanalyzed safety data from eight previously completed prospective randomized trials. RESULTS: A total of 107,884 adverse events and 136,608 concomitant medication records were reviewed for the analysis. Of these, four grade 1 to 2 and nine grade 3 and higher events were identified as drug effects that were not included in the previously established safety profiles and could potentially have been missed using subsampling. These events were frequently detected in subsamples of 400 patients or larger. Furthermore, none of the concomitant medication records contributed to labeling changes for the supplemental indications. CONCLUSION: Our study found that applying the optimized methodologic approach, described herein, has a high probability of detecting new drug safety signals. Focusing data collection on signals that cause physicians to modify or discontinue treatment ensures that safety issues of the highest concern for patients and regulators are captured and has significant potential to relieve strain on the clinical trials system.

Gemcitabine plus Paclitaxel versus Paclitaxel monotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer and prior anthracycline treatment.

PURPOSE: The objective of this phase III global study was to compare the efficacy of gemcitabine plus paclitaxel (GT) versus paclitaxel in patients with advanced breast cancer. It was designed as a pivotal study for the approval of G for a breast cancer treatment indication. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who relapsed after adjuvant anthracyclines were randomly assigned to gemcitabine,1,250 mg/m(2) days 1 and 8 plus paclitaxel, 175 mg/m(2) on day 1; or, to paclitaxel at same dose on day 1 (both arms administered every 21 days, unblinded). The primary end point was overall survival (OS) and secondary end points were time to progression (TTP), response rate (RR), progression-free survival, response duration, and toxicity. This final OS analysis was planned at 380 deaths. RESULTS: A total of 266 patients were randomly assigned to GT and 263 to paclitaxel. Median survival on GT was 18.6 months versus 15.8 months on paclitaxel (log-rank P = . 0489), with an adjusted Cox hazard ratio of 0.78 (95% CI, 0.64 to 0.96; P = .0187). The TTP was longer (6.14 v 3.98 months; log-rank P = .0002) and the RR was better (41.4% v 26.2%; P = .0002) on GT. There was more grade 3 to 4 neutropenia on GT and grade 2 to 4 fatigue and neuropathy were slightly more prevalent on GT. CONCLUSION: This phase III study documents a role for gemcitabine in advanced breast cancer after anthracycline-based adjuvant therapy. The results establish GT as a reasonable choice for women who require cytoreduction with manageable toxicities and validate ongoing testing of GT in the adjuvant setting.

Phase III double-blind trial of arzoxifene compared with tamoxifen for locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of arzoxifene with tamoxifen for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women with estrogen- or progesterone-receptor-positive breast cancer who had not received prior systemic therapy, or who had relapsed more than 12 months after stopping adjuvant hormonal therapy, were randomly assigned to receive 20 mg arzoxifene or 20 mg tamoxifen daily. Each treatment arm was to have 240 patients enrolled. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included other measures of tumor response, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Enrollment was stopped when a planned interim analysis of the first 200 patients suggested arzoxifene to be significantly inferior to tamoxifen. The median progression-free survival for the 352 patients who had been randomly assigned when enrollment was stopped was 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.4 to 5.6 months) for the arzoxifene group and 7.5 months (95% CI, 5.9 to 8.8 months) for the tamoxifen group. On-study progression-free survival (P = .011) and time to treatment failure (P = .029) also favored tamoxifen. Overall tumor response rate and median response duration were comparable between the groups. Adverse events were similar between the treatments, except for nausea (more frequent with arzoxifene) and vaginal discharge (more frequent with tamoxifen). CONCLUSION: Tamoxifen produced significantly longer progression-free survival and time to treatment failure compared with arzoxifene in the treatment of locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer. There were no significant differences between tumor response rate, clinical benefit rate, or median response duration.

A randomized, double-blind, phase II study of two doses of pemetrexed as first-line chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Pemetrexed has shown varied response rates in advanced breast cancer. This randomized, double-blind, phase II study was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of two doses of pemetrexed in a homogeneous population. A secondary objective was to identify molecular biomarkers correlating with response and toxicity. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with newly diagnosed metastatic breast cancer or locally recurrent breast cancer received 600 mg/m(2) (P600 arm) or 900 mg/m(2) (P900 arm) of pemetrexed on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. All patients received folic acid and vitamin B(12) supplementation. RESULTS: The P600 (47 patients) and P900 (45 patients) arms had response rates of 17.0% (95% confidence interval, 7.7-30.8%) and 15.6% (95% confidence interval, 6.5-29.5%) with approximately 50% stable disease per arm, median progression-free survival of 4.2 and 4.1 months, and median times to tumor progression of 4.2 and 4.6 months, respectively. Both arms exhibited minimal toxicity (grade 3/4 neutropenia <20%, leukopenia <9%, and other toxicities <5%). Tumor samples from 49 patients were assessed for the expression levels of 12 pemetrexed-related genes. Folylpolyglutamate synthetase and thymidine phosphorylase correlated with efficacy. Best response rates and median time to tumor progression for high versus low thymidine phosphorylase expression were 27.6% versus 6.3% (P = 0.023) and 5.4 versus 1.9 months (P = 0.076), and for folylpolyglutamate synthetase were 37.5% versus 10.0% (P = 0.115) and 8.6 versus 3.0 months (P = 0.019), respectively. gamma-Glutamyl hydrolase expression correlated with grade 3/4 toxicities: 78.6% for high versus 27.3% for low gamma-glutamyl hydrolase (P = 0.024). CONCLUSION: The two pemetrexed doses yielded similar efficacy and safety profiles. Exploratory biomarker analysis identified efficacy and toxicity correlations and warrants further evaluation.

Phase I trial and pharmacokinetic study of pemetrexed in children with refractory solid tumors: the Children's Oncology Group.

PURPOSE: We report results of a phase I trial and pharmacokinetic study of pemetrexed (LY231514) in children and adolescents with refractory solid tumors. Pemetrexed is a novel antifolate that inhibits multiple enzymes necessary for the biosynthesis of thymidine and purine nucleotides. The purpose of this study was to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and pharmacokinetic properties of pemetrexed in children. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Pemetrexed was administered as a 10-minute intravenous infusion every 21 days. Patients received vitamin B12 and folic acid supplementation as well as dexamethasone prophylaxis. Cohorts of three to six children were enrolled at dose levels of 400, 520, 670, 870, 1,130, 1,470, 1,910, and 2,480 mg/m2. Pharmacokinetic studies were performed during the first course of treatment. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients (31 assessable) with a median age of 12 years were enrolled. DLT occurred in one of six patients at 1,470 mg/m2 and two of four patients at 2,480 mg/m2. The MTD was 1,910 mg/m2. The primary DLTs were neutropenia and rash. No objective antitumor responses were seen. Mean plasma clearance, half-life, and steady-state volume of distribution values were 2.3 L/h/m2, 2.5 hours, and 5.4 L/m2, respectively. CONCLUSION: Pemetrexed is well-tolerated in children with refractory solid tumors at doses similar to the MTD in adults. The recommended dose for phase II studies is 1,910 mg/m2 administered every 21 days with dexamethasone, folic acid, and vitamin B12 supplementation.

Phase II study of pemetrexed in patients pretreated with an anthracycline, a taxane, and capecitabine for advanced breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: This phase II study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and health outcomes of pemetrexed treatment in heavily pretreated patients with advanced breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women with metastatic breast cancer, Karnofsky performance status > or = 70, and previous treatment with > or = 3 regimens containing anthracyclines, taxanes, and capecitabine were eligible. Pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 intravenous infusion was administered on day 1 of a 21-day treatment cycle. RESULTS: Eighty patients were enrolled, and 60 received concurrent folic acid and vitamin B12 supplements per protocol amendment to minimize possible pemetrexed-related toxicity. The median numbers of cycles delivered were 3 for vitamin-supplemented patients and 2 for non-vitamin-supplemented patients. Regardless of vitamin supplementation, the overall response rate was 8% (95% CI, 3%-16.6%), stable disease was exhibited in 36% of patients, median time to disease progression was 2.9 months, and median survival was 8.2 months. Improvements in patient-reported symptoms ranged from 16.2% for pain intensity to 32.1% for nausea. Major grade 3/4 toxicities were hematologic, with grade 4 neutropenia in 10% of patients and grade 3 toxicities consisting primarily of neutropenia (29%) and leukopenia (21%). There were no clear trends of the effect of supplementation on toxicity. CONCLUSION: Pemetrexed has modest antitumor activity and is well tolerated in heavily pretreated patients with breast cancer. Further evaluation of this multitargeted antifolate in advanced breast cancer is warranted.

Phase II, randomized, double-blind study of two dose levels of arzoxifene in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To select a daily dose of arzoxifene (LY353381), a selective estrogen receptor modulator, for use in future studies in women with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who are either potentially tamoxifen sensitive (TS) or tamoxifen refractory (TR). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This trial was a randomized, double-blind, phase II study of arzoxifene 20 mg (n = 55) and 50 mg (n = 57) in women with advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Patients were randomly assigned to balance for number of metastatic disease sites, prior tamoxifen therapy, and estrogen receptor status. The primary end point was tumor response rate (RR). Secondary end points included clinical benefit rate (CBR), time to progression (TTP), and toxicity. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients were TS and 63 were TR. According to independent review, among TS patients, RR was higher in the 20-mg arm than the 50-mg arm (26.1% v 8.0%), with a longer TTP (8.3 v 3.2 months; P >.05). Among the TR patients, response rate was the same in the 20-mg and 50-mg arms (10.3%) with similar TTP (2.7 and 2.8 months, respectively; P >.05). CBR was higher in the 20-mg arm than in the 50-mg arm among TS patients (39.1% v 20.0%) and TR patients (13.8% v 10.3%). Arzoxifene was well tolerated. Dose-dependent toxicity was not demonstrated. There were no deaths during study. CONCLUSION: Arzoxifene is effective in the treatment of TS and TR patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer at the 20-mg and 50-mg dose levels. Toxicities are minimal, and the therapy is tolerated. The 20-mg dose seems to be at least as effective as the 50-mg dose. Accordingly, arzoxifene 20 mg/d was selected for further study in patients with breast cancer.