An olaparib window-of-opportunity trial in patients with early-stage endometrial carcinoma: POLEN study.

OBJECTIVE: Olaparib is a potent inhibitor of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP)-1, 2, and 3 with potential activity in endometrial cancer (EC). METHODS: In this window-of-opportunity trial, women with operable type 1 EC received olaparib oral tablets (300mg) twice daily for 28days before surgery. The primary objective was to evaluate the effects of olaparib on EC in tissue samples taken at baseline and at treatment completion. Signal of activity was defined as significant changes in the expression of the cell cycle-related proteins cyclin D1, Ki67, and cleaved caspase-3. RESULTS: A total of 31 patients were included in the biomarker analysis. The median time of olaparib exposure was 24 days (1-39). Significant inhibition was found for cyclin D1 (p < 0.01), but not for Ki67 and active caspase 3 immunostaining. PARP-1 levels positively correlated with cyclin D1 levels (rho = 0.661, p = 0.0001). Both PARP-1 and cyclin D1 levels were significantly lower (p = 0.022 and p = 0.004, respectively) in patients with ARID1A[-] tumors than ARID1A[+] tumors. A significant relationship between plasma olaparib concentrations and decreased GLUT1 activity was observed (r = -0.5885; p < 0.05). Drug-related toxicity consisted mostly of gastrointestinal and grade 1 or 2 adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Olaparib reduced expression of cyclin D1, which positively correlated with PARP-1 levels. This effect was more evident in ARID1A-deficient tumors. Olaparib further induced inhibition of GLUT1 plasma activity. Our findings could have noteworthy implications in predicting which patients with EC would benefit from olaparib-based strategies.

PECATI: A Multicentric, Open-Label, Single-Arm Phase II Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Pembrolizumab and Lenvatinib in Pretreated B3-Thymoma and Thymic Carcinoma Patients.

Thymic epithelial tumors are rare neoplastic proliferations of thymic epithelial cells. The aggressiveness of these malignancies increases as higher is the histologic subtype, being thymic carcinoma the most aggressive subtype, with a greater tendency to metastatic spread. In metastatic setting, there is no standard treatment after progression on platinum-based chemotherapy. In this scenario, monotherapy treatment either with lenvatinib, a multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor with antiangiogenic properties, or pembrolizumab, an immune-checkpoint inhibitor, has reported clinical activity. Potential combination of both agents may have synergistic activity as reported in other cancer types. PECATI trial is a single-arm, investigator-initiated phase II study aiming to assess the activity and safety of the combination of lenvatinib and pembrolizumab in 43 patients with advanced B3-thymoma or thymic carcinoma who progressed on or after at least one previous line of platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary endpoint of the trial is 5-month progression-free survival rate and the secondary endpoints include overall response rate, duration of response, and overall survival.

Challenging Endocrine Sensitivity of Hormone Receptor-Positive/HER2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer with the Combination of Eribulin and Endocrine Therapy: The REVERT Study.

BACKGROUND: Luminal advanced breast cancer (ABC) patients eventually progress on endocrine therapy. REVERT aimed to explore whether eribulin could restore endocrine sensitivity in a randomized, non-comparative phase II trial. METHODS: Aromatase inhibitor (AI)-resistant patients with luminal ABC were randomized 1:1 to receive eribulin +/- AI. Patients were stratified by prior cyclin-dependent kinases 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) treatment. The primary endpoint was an investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR) according to RECIST version 1.1 in the eribulin + AI arm. An interim analysis was planned with 11 evaluable patients according to a two-stage Simon design. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled (15 eribulin + AI arm; 7 eribulin arm). The trial was terminated early in March 2021, with eight (36.4%) patients still on treatment. ORR was 26.7% in the eribulin + AI arm (95% CI, 7.8-55.1%; p = 0.0541). In the eribulin arm, two (28.6%) patients had an objective response (95% CI, 3.7-71.0%). The difference between the study arms was not significant (p = 0.918). The addition of AI to eribulin also failed to show improvement in other efficacy endpoints. A significant interaction between the treatment arm and previous CDK4/6i treatment was observed for ORR (p = 0.018) and progression-free survival (p = 0.084). Overall, the toxicity profile was consistent with the known safety profile of eribulin. No treatment-related deaths were reported. CONCLUSION: Eribulin + AI does not seem to improve outcomes compared with eribulin monotherapy in patients with AI-resistant luminal ABC. This chemo-endocrine approach deserves further investigation after progression to CDK4/6i-based therapy.

First-line osimertinib in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer and with a coexisting low allelic fraction of Thr790Met.

AIM OF THE STUDY: The AZENT (NCT02841579) study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of first-line osimertinib in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor(EGFR)mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and with a coexisting low allelic fraction of Thr790Met. METHODS: In this multicentre, single-arm, open-label, phase IIa study, patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC harbouring centrally confirmedEGFR Thr790Met mutation received 80 mg osimertinib daily. The primary end-point was objective response rate (ORR). The secondary end-points included disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. Efficacy was assessed as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours, version 1.1. Blood samples collected at baseline, end of week 2 and disease progression were analysed using next-generation sequencing. As osimertinib was approved as a first-line therapy during the trial, this led to early termination of phase II; thus, analysis is considered exploratory. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled and received osimertinib. All 22 patients were included in the efficacy and safety analysis. At the data cutoff, 10 (50%) patients remained on treatment. The median duration of follow-up was 24.4 months (interquartile range 12.9 to 26.0). The ORR was 77.3% (17/22 [95% confidence interval {CI} 54.6 to 89.3]). The DCR was 86.4% (19/22, [95% CI 65.1 to 97.1]). The median PFS was 23.1 months (95% CI 14.1 to NE). The median OS was 28·4 months (95% CI 25.6 to NE). CONCLUSION: Despite early study termination, osimertinib first-line therapy yields an overall PFS of 23.1 months in EGFR-mutant patients harbouring a coexisting low allelic fraction of EGFR Thr790Met mutation.

Biomarker Discovery and Outcomes for Comprehensive Cell-Free Circulating Tumor DNA Versus Standard-of-Care Tissue Testing in Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Treatment guidelines for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) recommend broad molecular profiling for targeted therapy selection. This study prospectively assessed comprehensive next-generation sequencing (NGS) of cell-free circulating tumor DNA (cfDNA) compared with standard-of-care (SOC) tissue-based testing to identify guideline-recommended alterations in aNSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with treatment-naïve aNSCLC were tested using a well-validated NGS cfDNA panel, and results were compared with SOC tissue testing. The primary objective was noninferiority of cfDNA vs. tissue analysis for the detection of two guideline-recommended biomarkers (EGFR and ALK) and an additional six actionable biomarkers. Secondary analyses included tissue versus cfDNA biomarker discovery, overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) to targeted therapy, and positive predictive value (PPV) of cfDNA. RESULTS: The primary objective was met with cfDNA identifying actionable mutations in 46 patients versus 48 by tissue (P < .05). In total, 0/186 patients were genotyped for all eight biomarkers with tissue, compared with 90.8% using cfDNA. Targetable alterations or KRAS were identified in 80.7% when cfDNA was used first versus 57.1% when tissue was used first. PPV for cfDNA-detected EGFR was 100.0% (25/25). ORR and PFS in patients receiving targeted therapy based on tissue or cfDNA were similar to those previously reported. CONCLUSION: This prospective study confirms a previous report that comprehensive cfDNA testing is noninferior to SOC tissue testing in detecting aNSCLC-recommended biomarkers. Furthermore, cfDNA-based first-line therapy produced outcomes similar to tissue-based testing, demonstrating the clinical utility of comprehensive cfDNA genotyping as the initial genotyping modality in patients with treatment-naïve aNSCLC when tissue is insufficient or when all actionable biomarkers cannot be rapidly assessed.

MAF Amplification and Adjuvant Clodronate Outcomes in Early-Stage Breast Cancer in NSABP B-34 and Potential Impact on Clinical Practice.

Background: The Adjuvant Zoledronic Acid (ZA) study in early breast cancer (AZURE) showed correlation between a nonamplified MAF gene in the primary tumor and benefit from adjuvant ZA. Adverse ZA outcomes occurred in MAF-amplified patients. NSABP B-34 is a validation study. Methods: A retrospective analysis of MAF gene status in NSABP B-34 was performed. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to standard adjuvant systemic treatment plus 3 years oral clodronate (1600 mg/daily) or placebo. Tumors were tested for MAF gene amplification and analyzed for their relationship to clodronate for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in MAF nonamplified patients. All statistical tests were 2-sided . Results: MAF status was assessed in 2533 available primary tumor samples from 3311 patients. Of these, 37 withdrew consent; in 77 samples, no tumor was found; 536 assays did not meet quality standards, leaving 1883 (77.8%) evaluable for MAF assay by fluorescence in situ hybridization (947 from placebo and 936 from clodronate arms). At 5 years, in MAF nonamplified patients receiving clodronate, DFS improved by 30% (hazard ratio = 0.70, 95% confidence interval = 0.51 to 0.94; P = .02). OS improved at 5 years (hazard ratio = 0.59, 95% confidence interval = 0.37 to 0.93; P = .02) remaining statistically significant for clodronate throughout study follow-up. Conversely, adjuvant clodronate in women with MAF-amplified tumors was not associated with benefit but rather possible harm in some subgroups. Association between MAF status and menopausal status was not seen. Conclusions: Nonamplified MAF showed statistically significant benefits (DFS and OS) with oral clodronate, supporting validation of the AZURE study.

Phase II, Multicenter, Single-arm Trial of Eribulin as First-line Therapy for Patients With Aggressive Taxane-pretreated HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer: The MERIBEL Study.

BACKGROUND: Eribulin has efficacy in patients with progression after ≥ 1 chemotherapeutic regimen for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). A short disease-free interval (DFI) and previous use of taxanes in the neoadjuvant or adjuvant setting have been associated with worse outcomes for patients receiving first-line chemotherapy for HER2-negative MBC. The aim of the present trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of eribulin as first-line therapy for patients with HER2-negative MBC with these poor prognostic factors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eribulin monotherapy was administered until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The principal selection criteria were HER2 negativity without previous chemotherapy for MBC, the previous use of taxanes for early-stage breast cancer, and a DFI of < 36 months (subsequently amended to 48 months). The primary endpoint was the investigator-assessed time to progression. The secondary endpoints included overall survival, progression-free survival, objective response rate, clinical benefit rate, duration of response, and toxicity profile. A total of 53 patients were enrolled and received ≥ 1 dose of eribulin. RESULTS: The median patient age was 47 years (range, 23-82.8 years). The median DFI was 15.7 months (range, 0.1-46.4 months). The median investigator-assessed time to progression was 4.1 months (range, 0.2-27.8 months; 95% confidence interval, 3.2-6.2 months). The objective response and clinical benefit rate was 20.8% and 26.4%, respectively. All-grade and grade 3/4 adverse events developed in 96.2% and 69.8% of patients, respectively. The most common treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia, leukopenia, alopecia, nausea, and anemia. CONCLUSION: Eribulin is effective and safe as first-line therapy for aggressive taxane-pretreated HER2-negative MBC.

A prognostic factor index for overall survival in patients receiving first-line chemotherapy for HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: an analysis of the ATHENA trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based definitions of 'poor-prognosis' or 'aggressive' advanced breast cancer are lacking. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We developed a prognostic factor index using data from 2203 patients treated with first-line chemotherapy plus bevacizumab for HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. RESULTS: The risk factors most closely associated with worse OS were: disease-free interval ≤24 months; liver metastases or ≥3 involved organ sites; prior anthracycline and/or taxane therapy; triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC); and performance status 2 or prior analgesic/corticosteroid treatment. Risk of death was increased threefold in patients with ≥3 versus ≤1 risk factors (hazard ratio 3.0 [95% CI 2.6-3.4; p < 0.001]; median 16.0 vs 38.8 months, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This prognostic index may enable identification of patients with a poorer prognosis in whom more intensive systemic regimens may be appropriate. The index may also be considered in designing new trials, although it requires validation in other datasets before extrapolation to non-bevacizumab-containing therapy. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00448591.