A plain language summary exploring a new treatment combination for untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer: enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary provides the results of a study of two treatments for cancer, enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab, that were studied together against locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (la/mUC), a cancer that occurs most commonly in the bladder. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: In the 45 patients studied, around 16% did have serious side effects, but most side effects were manageable. Twenty-four percent of patients, however, stopped the study treatment because of their side effects. Within about 2 months of starting treatment, most patients' (73%) tumors were smaller and stayed smaller, on average, for more than 2 years. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: The combination of enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab is a new treatment option for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer when they cannot receive the typical treatment, cisplatin. Advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer is a type of cancer where the cancer has already spread outside of the bladder or urinary tract.

Enfortumab Vedotin Plus Pembrolizumab in Previously Untreated Advanced Urothelial Cancer.

PURPOSE: Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy remains the standard of care for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (la/mUC); however, toxicity is substantial, responses are rarely durable, and many patients with la/mUC are ineligible. Each enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab have shown a survival benefit versus chemotherapy in UC, are not restricted by cisplatin eligibility, and warrant investigation as a first-line (1L) combination therapy in patients ineligible for cisplatin. METHODS: In this ongoing phase Ib/II, multicenter, open-label study, 1L cisplatin-ineligible patients with la/mUC received enfortumab vedotin 1.25 mg/kg once daily on days 1 and 8 and pembrolizumab 200 mg (day 1) intravenously once daily in 3-week cycles. The primary end point was safety. Key secondary end points included confirmed objective response rate, duration of response (DOR), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Forty-five patients received enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab. The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were peripheral sensory neuropathy (55.6%), fatigue (51.1%), and alopecia (48.9%). Twenty-nine patients (64.4%) had grade 3 or higher TRAEs; the most common were increased lipase (17.8%), maculopapular rash (11.1%), and fatigue (11.1%). One death (2.2%) was classified as a TRAE. The confirmed objective response rate after a median of nine cycles was 73.3% with a complete response rate of 15.6%. The median DOR and median OS were 25.6 months and 26.1 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab showed a manageable safety profile. Most patients experienced tumor shrinkage. The median DOR and median OS exceeding 2 years in a cisplatin-ineligible patient population make this a promising combination currently under investigation in a phase III study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04223856).

A multicenter phase II study of sepantronium bromide (YM155) plus rituximab in patients with relapsed aggressive B-cell Non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

This phase II study evaluated YM155, a novel small-molecule survivin suppressant, in combination with rituximab in patients with relapsed aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) who failed or were not candidates for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). During 14-day cycles, 41 patients received YM155 (5mg/m(2)/d) by continuous intravenous (IV) infusion for 168 hours (day 1-7), and rituximab (375mg/m(2)) IV on days 1 and 8 during cycles 1-4 and repeated for 4 cycles every 10 cycles. Forty patients (97.6%) had prior rituximab and 15 patients (36.6%) prior ASCT. Most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (19.5%) and thrombocytopenia (12.2%). In the per-protocol set (n = 34), objective response rate was 50% and median progression-free survival 17.9 months. Median overall survival was not reached at study termination (median follow-up, 23 months). YM155 in combination with rituximab was tolerable with encouraging antitumor activity and durable responses in relapsed aggressive B-cell NHL patients.

BATON-CRC: A Phase II Randomized Trial Comparing Tivozanib Plus mFOLFOX6 with Bevacizumab Plus mFOLFOX6 in Stage IV Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: Tivozanib, a selective inhibitor of VEGFR-1, -2, and -3, plus mFOLFOX6 in an advanced gastrointestinal cancer phase Ib study had encouraging antineoplastic activity and a tolerable safety profile. This randomized, open-label, phase II trial of tivozanib/mFOLFOX6 versus bevacizumab/mFOLFOX6 in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) evaluated tivozanib activity versus bevacizumab. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Treatment-naïve patients received mFOLFOX6 every 2 weeks of each 28-day cycle plus either tivozanib orally 1.5 mg once daily for 21 days or bevacizumab intravenously 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary endpoint; some secondary endpoints included safety, overall survival, overall response rate (ORR), duration of response, time to treatment failure, and biomarker subgroup analyses. RESULTS: A prespecified interim futility analysis demonstrated that the futility boundary for superiority of tivozanib/mFOLFOX6 over bevacizumab/mFOLFOX6 for PFS in the intent-to-treat population was crossed; median PFS was 9.4 versus 10.7 months [HR = 1.091; confidence interval (CI), 0.693-1.718; P = 0.706]. Tivozanib/mFOLFOX6 resulted in PFS and ORR comparable with bevacizumab/mFOLFOX6; interim analyses biomarker results revealed no significant PFS association. Post hoc final analyses demonstrated a potential difference in tivozanib-specific PFS in patients with low neuropilin-1 (NRP-1), but not in patients with high NRP-1. Tivozanib/mFOLFOX6 was tolerable and adverse events were comparable with both bevacizumab/mFOLFOX6 and previous tivozanib studies. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of tivozanib/mFOLFOX6 was comparable with but not superior to bevacizumab/mFOLFOX6 in patients with previously untreated mCRC. Since data from the prespecified interim analysis did not demonstrate superiority, this resulted in discontinuation of the study. The safety and tolerability profile of tivozanib/mFOLFOX6 was consistent with other tivozanib trials. NRP-1 is a potential predictive biomarker for tivozanib activity, but these results require further validation. Clin Cancer Res; 22(20); 5058-67. ©2016 AACR.

Isavuconazole treatment for mucormycosis: a single-arm open-label trial and case-control analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mucormycosis is an uncommon invasive fungal disease with high mortality and few treatment options. Isavuconazole is a triazole active in vitro and in animal models against moulds of the order Mucorales. We assessed the efficacy and safety of isavuconazole for treatment of mucormycosis and compared its efficacy with amphotericin B in a matched case-control analysis. METHODS: In a single-arm open-label trial (VITAL study), adult patients (≥18 years) with invasive fungal disease caused by rare fungi, including mucormycosis, were recruited from 34 centres worldwide. Patients were given isavuconazole 200 mg (as its intravenous or oral water-soluble prodrug, isavuconazonium sulfate) three times daily for six doses, followed by 200 mg/day until invasive fungal disease resolution, failure, or for 180 days or more. The primary endpoint was independent data review committee-determined overall response-ie, complete or partial response (treatment success) or stable or progressive disease (treatment failure)-according to prespecified criteria. Mucormycosis cases treated with isavuconazole as primary treatment were matched with controls from the FungiScope Registry, recruited from 17 centres worldwide, who received primary amphotericin B-based treatment, and were analysed for day-42 all-cause mortality. VITAL is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00634049. FungiScope is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01731353. FINDINGS: Within the VITAL study, from April 22, 2008, to June 21, 2013, 37 patients with mucormycosis received isavuconazole for a median of 84 days (IQR 19-179, range 2-882). By day 42, four patients (11%) had a partial response, 16 (43%) had stable invasive fungal disease, one (3%) had invasive fungal disease progression, three (8%) had missing assessments, and 13 (35%) had died. 35 patients (95%) had adverse events (28 [76%] serious). Day-42 crude all-cause mortality in seven (33%) of 21 primary-treatment isavuconazole cases was similar to 13 (39%) of 33 amphotericin B-treated matched controls (weighted all-cause mortality: 33% vs 41%; p=0·595). INTERPRETATION: Isavuconazole showed activity against mucormycosis with efficacy similar to amphotericin B. Isavuconazole can be used for treatment of mucormycosis and is well tolerated. FUNDING: Astellas Pharma Global Development, Basilea Pharmaceutica International.