Pralsetinib for RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ARROW): a multi-cohort, open-label, phase 1/2 study.

BACKGROUND: Oncogenic alterations in RET have been identified in multiple tumour types, including 1-2% of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and antitumour activity of pralsetinib, a highly potent, oral, selective RET inhibitor, in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC. METHODS: ARROW is a multi-cohort, open-label, phase 1/2 study done at 71 sites (community and academic cancer centres) in 13 countries (Belgium, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Netherlands, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, the UK, and the USA). Patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours, including RET fusion-positive NSCLC, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 (later limited to 0-1 in a protocol amendment) were enrolled. In phase 2, patients received 400 mg once-daily oral pralsetinib, and could continue treatment until disease progression, intolerance, withdrawal of consent, or investigator decision. Phase 2 primary endpoints were overall response rate (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1·1 and assessed by blinded independent central review) and safety. Tumour response was assessed in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC and centrally adjudicated baseline measurable disease who had received platinum-based chemotherapy or were treatment-naive because they were ineligible for standard therapy. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03037385, and enrolment of patients with treatment-naive RET fusion-positive NSCLC was ongoing at the time of this interim analysis. FINDINGS: Of 233 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC enrolled between March 17, 2017, and May 22, 2020 (data cutoff), 92 with previous platinum-based chemotherapy and 29 who were treatment-naive received pralsetinib before July 11, 2019 (efficacy enrolment cutoff); 87 previously treated patients and 27 treatment-naive patients had centrally adjudicated baseline measurable disease. Overall responses were recorded in 53 (61%; 95% CI 50-71) of 87 patients with previous platinum-based chemotherapy, including five (6%) patients with a complete response; and 19 (70%; 50-86) of 27 treatment-naive patients, including three (11%) with a complete response. In 233 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC, common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (43 patients [18%]), hypertension (26 [11%]), and anaemia (24 [10%]); there were no treatment-related deaths in this population. INTERPRETATION: Pralsetinib is a new, well-tolerated, promising, once-daily oral treatment option for patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC. FUNDING: Blueprint Medicines.

Pralsetinib for patients with advanced or metastatic RET-altered thyroid cancer (ARROW): a multi-cohort, open-label, registrational, phase 1/2 study.

BACKGROUND: Oncogenic alterations in RET represent important therapeutic targets in thyroid cancer. We aimed to assess the safety and antitumour activity of pralsetinib, a highly potent, selective RET inhibitor, in patients with RET-altered thyroid cancers. METHODS: ARROW, a phase 1/2, open-label study done in 13 countries across 71 sites in community and hospital settings, enrolled patients 18 years or older with RET-altered locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours, including RET-mutant medullary thyroid and RET fusion-positive thyroid cancers, and an Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 (later limited to 0-1 in a protocol amendment). Phase 2 primary endpoints assessed for patients who received 400 mg once-daily oral pralsetinib until disease progression, intolerance, withdrawal of consent, or investigator decision, were overall response rate (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1; masked independent central review) and safety. Tumour response was assessed for patients with RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer who had received previous cabozantinib or vandetanib, or both, or were ineligible for standard therapy and patients with previously treated RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer; safety was assessed for all patients with RET-altered thyroid cancer. This ongoing study is registered with clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03037385, and enrolment of patients with RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer was ongoing at the time of this interim analysis. FINDINGS: Between Mar 17, 2017, and May 22, 2020, 122 patients with RET-mutant medullary and 20 with RET fusion-positive thyroid cancers were enrolled. Among patients with baseline measurable disease who received pralsetinib by July 11, 2019 (enrolment cutoff for efficacy analysis), overall response rates were 15 (71%) of 21 (95% CI 48-89) in patients with treatment-naive RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer and 33 (60%) of 55 (95% CI 46-73) in patients who had previously received cabozantinib or vandetanib, or both, and eight (89%) of nine (95% CI 52-100) in patients with RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer (all responses confirmed for each group). Common (≥10%) grade 3 and above treatment-related adverse events among patients with RET-altered thyroid cancer enrolled by May 22, 2020, were hypertension (24 patients [17%] of 142), neutropenia (19 [13%]), lymphopenia (17 [12%]), and anaemia (14 [10%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in 21 patients (15%), the most frequent (≥2%) of which was pneumonitis (five patients [4%]). Five patients [4%] discontinued owing to treatment-related events. One (1%) patient died owing to a treatment-related adverse event. INTERPRETATION: Pralsetinib is a new, well-tolerated, potent once-daily oral treatment option for patients with RET-altered thyroid cancer. FUNDING: Blueprint Medicines.

Glembatumumab vedotin for patients with metastatic, gpNMB overexpressing, triple-negative breast cancer ("METRIC"): a randomized multicenter study.

The METRIC study (NCT#0199733) explored a novel antibody-drug conjugate, glembatumumab vedotin (GV), targeting gpNMB that is overexpressed in ~40% of patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and associated with poor prognosis. The study was a randomized, open-label, phase 2b study that evaluated progression-free survival (PFS) of GV compared with capecitabine in gpNMB-overexpressing TNBC. Patients who had previously received anthracycline and taxane-based therapy were randomized 2:1 to receive, GV (1.88 mg/kg IV q21 days) or capecitabine (2500 mg/m2 PO daily d1-14 q21 days). The primary endpoint was RECIST 1.1 PFS per independent, blinded central review. In all, 327 patients were randomized to GV (213 treated) or capecitabine (92 treated). Median PFS was 2.9 months for GV vs. 2.8 months for capecitabine. The most common grade ≥3 toxicities for GV were neutropenia, rash, and leukopenia, and for capecitabine were fatigue, diarrhea, and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia. The study did not meet the primary endpoint of improved PFS over capecitabine or demonstrate a relative risk/benefit improvement over capecitabine.

A Phase II Study of Glembatumumab Vedotin for Metastatic Uveal Melanoma.

Glembatumumab vedotin (CDX-011, GV) is a fully human Immunoglobulin G2 monoclonal antibody directed against glycoprotein NMB coupled via a peptide linker to monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE), a potent cytotoxic microtubule inhibitor. This phase II study evaluated the overall response rate and safety of GV, glycoprotein NMB (GPNMB) expression, and survival in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. Eligible patients with metastatic uveal melanoma who had not previously been treated with chemotherapy received GV 1.9 mg/kg every three weeks. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included GPNMB expression, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity analysis. GPNMB expression was assessed pre- and post-treatment via immunohistochemistry for patients with available tumor tissue. Out of 35 patients who received treatment, two patients had confirmed partial responses (PRs; 6%), and 18 patients had a stable disease (SD; 51%) as the best objective response. 38% of the patients had stable disease >100 days. The grade 3 or 4 toxicities that occurred in two or more patients were neutropenia, rash, hyponatremia, and vomiting. The median progression-free survival was 3.1 months (95% CI: 1.5-5.6), and the median overall survival was 11.9 months (95% CI 9.0-16.9) in the evaluable study population. GV is well-tolerated in metastatic uveal melanoma. The disease control rate was 57% despite a low objective response rate. Exploratory immune correlation studies are underway to provide insight into target saturation, combination strategies, and antigen release.

Rindopepimut with Bevacizumab for Patients with Relapsed EGFRvIII-Expressing Glioblastoma (ReACT): Results of a Double-Blind Randomized Phase II Trial.

PURPOSE: Rindopepimut is a vaccine targeting the tumor-specific EGF driver mutation, EGFRvIII. The ReACT study investigated whether the addition of rindopepimut to standard bevacizumab improved outcome for patients with relapsed, EGFRvIII-positive glioblastoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized, phase II study (NCT01498328) conducted at 26 hospitals in the United States, bevacizumab-naïve patients with recurrent EGFRvIII-positive glioblastoma were randomized to receive rindopepimut or a control injection of keyhole limpet hemocyanin, each concurrent with bevacizumab. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS6) by central review with a one-sided significance of 0.2. RESULTS: Between May 2012 and 2014, 73 patients were randomized (36 rindopepimut, 37 control). Rindopepimut toxicity included transient, low-grade local reactions. As primary endpoint, PFS6 was 28% (10/36) for rindopepimut compared with 16% (6/37) for control (P = 0.12, one-sided). Secondary and exploratory endpoints also favored the rindopepimut group including a statistically significant survival advantage [HR, 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.32-0.88; two-sided log-rank P = 0.01], a higher ORR [30% (9/30) vs. 18% (6/34; P = 0.38)], median duration of response [7.8 months (95% CI, 3.5-22.2) vs. 5.6 (95% CI, 3.7-7.4)], and ability to discontinue steroids for ≥6 months [33% (6/18) vs. 0% (0/19)]. Eighty percent of rindopepimut-treated patients achieved robust anti-EGFRvIII titers (≥1:12,800), which were associated with prolonged survival (HR = 0.17; 95% CI, 0.07-0.45; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Our randomized trial supports the potential for targeted immunotherapy among patients with GBM, but the therapeutic benefit requires validation due to the small sample size and potential heterogeneity of bevacizumab response among recurrent patients with GBM.See related commentary by Wick and Wagener, p. 1535.

A phase 2 study of glembatumumab vedotin, an antibody-drug conjugate targeting glycoprotein NMB, in patients with advanced melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Glembatumumab vedotin is an antibody-drug conjugate that produced preliminary clinical activity against advanced melanoma in a phase 1 dose-escalation trial. The objective of the current study was to investigate further the antitumor activity of glembatumumab vedotin at the recommended phase 2 dose in heavily pretreated patients with melanoma. METHODS: This single-arm, phase 2 study enrolled patients with stage IV melanoma who were refractory to checkpoint inhibition and to B-raf proto-oncogene, serine/threonine kinase (BRAF)/mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) inhibition (in the presence of a BRAF valine mutation at codon 600). Patients received 1.9 mg/kg glembatumumab vedotin intravenously every 3 weeks until they developed disease progression or intolerance. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), which was determined according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response, overall survival (OS), safety, and clinical efficacy versus tumor glycoprotein NMB (gpNMB) expression. Tumor expression of gpNMB was assessed using immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: In total, 62 patients received treatment. The ORR was 11% and the median response duration was 6.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1 months to not reached). The median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI, 2.6-5.5 months), and the median OS was 9.0 months (95% CI, 6.1-11.7 months). For patients who developed rash during the first cycle versus those who did not, the ORR was 21% versus 7%, respectively, and there was an overall improvement in PFS (hazard ratio, 0.43; P = .013) and OS (hazard ratio, 0.43; P = .017). The most frequent adverse events were alopecia, neuropathy, rash, fatigue, and neutropenia. With one exception, all evaluable tumors were positive for gpNMB, and 46 of 59 tumors (76%) had 100% gpNMB-positive epithelial cells. CONCLUSIONS: Glembatumumab vedotin had modest activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients with advanced melanoma who were refractory to checkpoint inhibitors and MEK/BRAF inhibition. Treatment-related rash may be associated with response.

Rindopepimut with temozolomide for patients with newly diagnosed, EGFRvIII-expressing glioblastoma (ACT IV): a randomised, double-blind, international phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Rindopepimut (also known as CDX-110), a vaccine targeting the EGFR deletion mutation EGFRvIII, consists of an EGFRvIII-specific peptide conjugated to keyhole limpet haemocyanin. In the ACT IV study, we aimed to assess whether or not the addition of rindopepimut to standard chemotherapy is able to improve survival in patients with EGFRvIII-positive glioblastoma. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years and older with glioblastoma from 165 hospitals in 22 countries. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed glioblastoma confirmed to express EGFRvIII by central analysis, and had undergone maximal surgical resection and completion of standard chemoradiation without progression. Patients were stratified by European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer recursive partitioning analysis class, MGMT promoter methylation, and geographical region, and randomly assigned (1:1) with a prespecified randomisation sequence (block size of four) to receive rindopepimut (500 µg admixed with 150 µg GM-CSF) or control (100 µg keyhole limpet haemocyanin) via monthly intradermal injection until progression or intolerance, concurrent with standard oral temozolomide (150-200 mg/m2 for 5 of 28 days) for 6-12 cycles or longer. Patients, investigators, and the trial funder were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival in patients with minimal residual disease (MRD; enhancing tumour <2 cm2 post-chemoradiation by central review), analysed by modified intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01480479. FINDINGS: Between April 12, 2012, and Dec 15, 2014, 745 patients were enrolled (405 with MRD, 338 with significant residual disease [SRD], and two unevaluable) and randomly assigned to rindopepimut and temozolomide (n=371) or control and temozolomide (n=374). The study was terminated for futility after a preplanned interim analysis. At final analysis, there was no significant difference in overall survival for patients with MRD: median overall survival was 20·1 months (95% CI 18·5-22·1) in the rindopepimut group versus 20·0 months (18·1-21·9) in the control group (HR 1·01, 95% CI 0·79-1·30; p=0·93). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events for all 369 treated patients in the rindopepimut group versus 372 treated patients in the control group were: thrombocytopenia (32 [9%] vs 23 [6%]), fatigue (six [2%] vs 19 [5%]), brain oedema (eight [2%] vs 11 [3%]), seizure (nine [2%] vs eight [2%]), and headache (six [2%] vs ten [3%]). Serious adverse events included seizure (18 [5%] vs 22 [6%]) and brain oedema (seven [2%] vs 12 [3%]). 16 deaths in the study were caused by adverse events (nine [4%] in the rindopepimut group and seven [3%] in the control group), of which one-a pulmonary embolism in a 64-year-old male patient after 11 months of treatment-was assessed as potentially related to rindopepimut. INTERPRETATION: Rindopepimut did not increase survival in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Combination approaches potentially including rindopepimut might be required to show efficacy of immunotherapy in glioblastoma. FUNDING: Celldex Therapeutics, Inc.

Evaluation of the effect of multiple doses of rifampin on the pharmacokinetics and safety of ponatinib in healthy subjects.

Ponatinib, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor with significant activity in heavily pretreated patients with chronic myeloid leukemia, is a CYP3A4 substrate. This open-label, nonrandomized, fixed-order crossover study evaluated the effect of multiple oral doses of rifampin, a strong CYP3A4 inducer, on the pharmacokinetics of ponatinib (45 mg, single dose). Twenty healthy adults received ponatinib on day 1, rifampin 600 mg alone on days 8-13, 15, and 16, and rifampin 600 mg with ponatinib on day 14. Rifampin decreased maximum plasma concentration (Cmax ) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) from time zero to time of last measurable concentration (AUC0-t ) and from time zero to infinity (AUC0-∞ ) of ponatinib by 42%, 59%, and 63%, respectively, with no effect on time to Cmax . The limits of the 90% confidence intervals of the estimated geometric mean ratios of ponatinib Cmax , AUC0-t , and AUC0-∞ did not fall within the 80-125% margins for equivalence, suggesting a statistically significant interaction. Coadministration of ponatinib with strong CYP3A4 inducers should be avoided unless the benefit outweighs the possible risk of ponatinib underexposure, because the safety of ponatinib dose increases has not been studied in this context.

Evaluation of pharmacokinetics and safety of ponatinib in subjects with chronic hepatic impairment and matched healthy subjects.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the effects of chronic hepatic impairment on the single-dose pharmacokinetics (PK) of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor ponatinib. METHODS: Subjects (n = 16) had Child-Pugh class A (mild, n = 6), B (moderate, n = 6), or C (severe, n = 4) hepatic impairment and were matched with healthy controls (n = 8). Each subject received a single oral dose of ponatinib 30 mg under fasting conditions, and PK parameters were assessed in blood samples collected through 96 h post-dose. RESULTS: Ponatinib maximum plasma concentrations (C max) were observed after 5-6 h in Child-Pugh A, Child-Pugh B, and healthy subjects, and after ~3 h in Child-Pugh C subjects. The estimated % geometric mean ratios for C max, area under the plasma concentration-time curves from time zero to last observation (AUC0-t ) and to infinity (AUC0-∞) suggested a slightly lower exposure in Child-Pugh B (61.4, 89.1, and 90.6%, respectively) and Child-Pugh C subjects (62.8, 77.1, and 79.4%) versus healthy subjects. Child-Pugh A subjects had similar estimated % geometric mean ratio for C max (106.7%), and slightly greater estimated % geometric mean ratios for AUC0-t (133.0%) and AUC0-∞ (122.8%), versus healthy subjects. Mean elimination half-life was extended in subjects with hepatic impairment (43-47 vs 36 h). Ponatinib was generally well tolerated. A single serious AE (pancreatitis) in the Child-Pugh C group resolved with treatment. DISCUSSION: As no major differences in ponatinib single-dose PK were observed in patients with hepatic impairment versus healthy subjects, a reduction of ponatinib starting dose in these patients is not necessary, but caution is recommended when administering ponatinib to these patients.

A phase II trial of a multi-agent oral antiangiogenic (metronomic) regimen in children with recurrent or progressive cancer.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical models show that an antiangiogenic regimen at low-dose daily (metronomic) dosing may be effective against chemotherapy-resistant tumors. We undertook a prospective, open-label, single-arm, multi-institutional phase II study to evaluate the efficacy of a "5-drug" oral regimen in children with recurrent or progressive cancer. PROCEDURE: Patients ≤21 years old with recurrent or progressive tumors were eligible. Treatment consisted of continuous oral celecoxib, thalidomide, and fenofibrate, with alternating 21-day cycles of low-dose cyclophosphamide and etoposide. Primary endpoint was to assess, within eight disease strata, activity of the 5-drug regimen over 27 weeks. Blood and urine angiogenesis markers were assessed. RESULTS: One hundred one patients were enrolled; 97 began treatment. Median age was 10 years (range: 191 days-21 years); 47 (49%) were female. Disease strata included high-grade glioma (HGG, 21 patients), ependymoma (19), low-grade glioma (LGG, 12), bone tumors (12), medulloblastoma/primitive neuroectodermal tumor (PNET, 8), leukemia (4), neuroblastoma (3), and miscellaneous tumors (18). Treatment was generally well tolerated; most common toxicities were hematologic. Twenty-four (25%) patients completed 27 weeks therapy without progression, including HGG: 1 (5%), ependymoma: 7 (37%), LGG: 7 (58%), medulloblastoma/PNET: 1, neuroblastoma: 1, and miscellaneous tumors: 7 (39%). Best response was complete response (one patient with medulloblastoma), partial response (12), stable disease (36), progressive disease (47), and inevaluable (1). Baseline serum thrombospondin levels were significantly higher in patients successfully completing therapy than in those who progressed (P = 0.009). CONCLUSION: The 5-drug regimen was well tolerated. Clinical activity was demonstrated in some but not all tumor strata.

A multicenter, first-in-pediatrics, phase 1, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of ridaforolimus in patients with refractory solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Ridaforolimus (MK-8669, AP23573) is a potent and selective mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor. Preclinically, ridaforolimus displays antiproliferative activity against a variety of human tumors in vitro and tumor xenograft models in vivo, with additive or synergistic activity when combined with other anticancer agents. Antitumor activity has been confirmed in adults. This phase I study determined the safety, pharmacological, biologic, and toxicity profiles of ridaforolimus in pediatric patients with refractory malignancies. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Eligible children ages 1 to 18 years with advanced solid tumors were enrolled in a 3 + 3 dose escalation design, to determine the safety, tolerability, and maximum tolerated dose (MTD)/dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of ridaforolimus. Toxicities, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics were characterized. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were treated. No DLT was observed at any dose level tested; therefore, an MTD was not identified. Most adverse events were mild to moderate; the most common grades 3 and 4 adverse events were hematologic, including thrombocytopenia and anemia. Nonhematologic adverse events were mostly electrolyte disturbances. The observed pharmacokinetic profile of ridaforolimus in children was consistent with that previously showed in adults. Pharmacodynamic confirms that the dose range tested has pharmacological/pharmacodynamic activity. Forty percent of patients achieved stable disease including four of six with central nervous system tumors and two of eight with sarcomas. CONCLUSIONS: This first-in-pediatrics study shows that the second-generation mTOR inhibitor ridaforolimus is well tolerated in heavily pretreated children with refractory solid tumors. No DLTs were observed over the dose range tested. Ridaforolimus may represent a therapeutic option for use in pediatric malignancies.

Analysis of the potential effect of ponatinib on the QTc interval in patients with refractory hematological malignancies.

PURPOSE: Cardiac dysfunction, particularly QT interval prolongation, has been observed with tyrosine kinase inhibitors approved to treat chronic myeloid leukemia. This study examines the effects of ponatinib on cardiac repolarization in patients with refractory hematological malignancies enrolled in a phase 1 trial. METHODS: Electrocardiograms (ECGs) were collected at 3 dose levels (30, 45, and 60 mg) at 6 time points. Electrocardiographic parameters, including QTc interval, were measured, and 11 morphological analyses were conducted. Central tendency analyses of ECG parameters were performed using time-point and time-averaged approaches. All patients with at least 2 baseline ECGs and 1 on-treatment ECG were included in the analyses. Patients with paired ECGs and plasma samples were included in the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis to examine the relationship between ponatinib plasma concentration and change from baseline in QT intervals. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients at the 30-, 45-, and 60-mg dose levels were included in the central tendency and morphological analyses. There was no significant effect on cardiac repolarization, as evidenced by non-clinically significant mean QTcF changes from baseline of -10.9, -3.6, and -5.0 ms for the 30-, 45-, and 60-mg dose levels, respectively. The morphological analysis revealed 2 patients with atrial fibrillation and 2 with T wave inversion. Seventy-five patients were included in the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis across all dose levels. The slope of the relationship for QTcF versus plasma ponatinib concentration was not positive (-0.0171), indicating no exposure-effect relationship. CONCLUSIONS: Ponatinib is associated with a low risk of QTc prolongation in patients with refractory hematological malignancies.

Ponatinib in refractory Philadelphia chromosome-positive leukemias.

BACKGROUND: Resistance to tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph-positive ALL) is frequently caused by mutations in the BCR-ABL kinase domain. Ponatinib (AP24534) is a potent oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor that blocks native and mutated BCR-ABL, including the gatekeeper mutant T315I, which is uniformly resistant to tyrosine kinase inhibitors. METHODS: In this phase 1 dose-escalation study, we enrolled 81 patients with resistant hematologic cancers, including 60 with CML and 5 with Ph-positive ALL. Ponatinib was administered once daily at doses ranging from 2 to 60 mg. Median follow-up was 56 weeks (range, 2 to 140). RESULTS: Dose-limiting toxic effects included elevated lipase or amylase levels and pancreatitis. Common adverse events were rash, myelosuppression, and constitutional symptoms. Among Ph-positive patients, 91% had received two or more approved tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and 51% had received all three approved tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Of 43 patients with chronic-phase CML, 98% had a complete hematologic response, 72% had a major cytogenetic response, and 44% had a major molecular response. Of 12 patients who had chronic-phase CML with the T315I mutation, 100% had a complete hematologic response and 92% had a major cytogenetic response. Of 13 patients with chronic-phase CML without detectable mutations, 100% had a complete hematologic response and 62% had a major cytogenetic response. Responses among patients with chronic-phase CML were durable. Of 22 patients with accelerated-phase or blast-phase CML or Ph-positive ALL, 36% had a major hematologic response and 32% had a major cytogenetic response. CONCLUSIONS: Ponatinib was highly active in heavily pretreated patients with Ph-positive leukemias with resistance to tyrosine kinase inhibitors, including patients with the BCR-ABL T315I mutation, other mutations, or no mutations. (Funded by Ariad Pharmaceuticals and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00660920.).

Ridaforolimus for patients with progressive or recurrent malignant glioma: a perisurgical, sequential, ascending-dose trial.

PURPOSE: This perisurgical phase 1 study evaluated the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor ridaforolimus in patients (N = 10) with progressive or recurrent primary grade IV malignant glioma, who failed standard therapy. The primary objective of the study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of ridaforolimus. METHODS: Treatment was administered intravenously at doses of 12.5 mg (N = 7) or 15 mg (N = 3) once daily for 4 days prior to surgical resection, then resumed for 5 consecutive days every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, following a postsurgical recovery period. RESULTS: The MTD was not determined because the trial was suspended early due to slower than expected patient accrual and postsurgical drug administration challenges. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses showed that ridaforolimus concentrations declined slowly during the 24-h dosing interval and remained detectable for 10 days after the last infusion in whole blood samples. In peripheral blood mononuclear cells, median levels of the mTOR downstream effector p4E-BP1 were reduced by >80% compared with baseline by 4 h after dosing. Resected brain specimens showed reduced levels of pS6, another mTOR downstream effector, while nuclear staining for p27(kip1), a protein that functions as a cell cycle inhibitor, increased after treatment. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed, and the reported adverse events were consistent with the previously established safety profile for ridaforolimus. One of 3 patients evaluable for efficacy had stable disease as best response. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that ridaforolimus can cross the blood-brain barrier in areas of tumor involvement, and may inhibit mTOR activity in advanced gliomas based on decreased pS6 levels. This perisurgical trial design should serve as a template for evaluating intratumoral pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of other targeted agents in this patient population.

Late effects of therapy for pediatric brain tumor survivors.

Approximately 2 of every 3 of all pediatric patients with brain tumors will be long-term survivors. However, there is a steep cost for pediatric brain tumor survivors, and the group as a whole faces significantly more late effects than many other survivors of pediatric cancers. Most of these effects can be attributed to direct neurologic damage to the developing brain caused by the tumor and its removal, the long-term toxicity of chemotherapy, or the effects of irradiation on the central nervous system. The late effects experienced by childhood brain tumor survivors involve multiple domains. This article will review the significant late effects that occur within the medical, neurocognitive, psychosocial, and economic domains of the survivorship experience. We conclude by discussing how the late effects in different domains often coexist and can create a complex set of obstacles that pose significant challenges for a survivor of a pediatric brain tumor on a daily basis.

Medical, psychological, cognitive and educational late-effects in pediatric low-grade glioma survivors treated with surgery only.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection is often the only treatment necessary for pediatric low-grade gliomas (LGGs) and is thought to define a population with an excellent long-term prognosis. The goal of this study was to describe the multidimensional late-effects of pediatric LGG survivors treated exclusively with surgery. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of "surgery-only" LGG survivors followed at Dana-Farber/Children's Hospital Cancer Care was undertaken. Patients had to be diagnosed with an LGG before the age of 22 years, treated with "surgery-only" and be at least 2 years from diagnosis. RESULTS: Sixty survivors were eligible with a median age at the time of review of 16.3 years and the median time since diagnosis of 8.4 years. Tumor locations were predominantly posterior fossa (47%) or cortical (33%). Eighty-five percent of patients had at least one ongoing late-effect, and 28% had three or more. The most common late-effects consisted of motor dysfunction (43%), visual problems (32%), anxiety (19%), social difficulties (19%), seizure disorders (17%), depression (15%), poor coordination/ataxia (14%), behavioral problems (13%), and endocrinopathies (10%). Nine patients had a history of suicidal ideation; two with suicide attempts. The mean full-scale IQ was normal, however, the number of survivors scoring one standard deviation below the mean was twice the expected number. Special education services were utilized by more than half of the survivors. CONCLUSIONS: "Surgery-only" LGG survivors may be more affected by their tumor and its resection than previously appreciated. A prospective study is needed to address this survivor population.