Probing single electrons across 300-mm spin qubit wafers.

Building a fault-tolerant quantum computer will require vast numbers of physical qubits. For qubit technologies based on solid-state electronic devices1-3, integrating millions of qubits in a single processor will require device fabrication to reach a scale comparable to that of the modern complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) industry. Equally important, the scale of cryogenic device testing must keep pace to enable efficient device screening and to improve statistical metrics such as qubit yield and voltage variation. Spin qubits1,4,5 based on electrons in Si have shown impressive control fidelities6-9 but have historically been challenged by yield and process variation10-12. Here we present a testing process using a cryogenic 300-mm wafer prober13 to collect high-volume data on the performance of hundreds of industry-manufactured spin qubit devices at 1.6 K. This testing method provides fast feedback to enable optimization of the CMOS-compatible fabrication process, leading to high yield and low process variation. Using this system, we automate measurements of the operating point of spin qubits and investigate the transitions of single electrons across full wafers. We analyse the random variation in single-electron operating voltages and find that the optimized fabrication process leads to low levels of disorder at the 300-mm scale. Together, these results demonstrate the advances that can be achieved through the application of CMOS-industry techniques to the fabrication and measurement of spin qubit devices.

Vimseltinib versus placebo for tenosynovial giant cell tumour (MOTION): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Tenosynovial giant cell tumour (TGCT) is a locally aggressive neoplasm for which few systemic treatment options exist. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of vimseltinib, an oral, switch-control, CSF1R inhibitor, in patients with symptomatic TGCT not amenable to surgery. METHODS: MOTION is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done in 35 specialised hospitals in 13 countries. Eligible patients were adults (aged ≥18 years) with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of TGCT for which surgical resection could potentially worsen functional limitation or cause severe morbidity. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) with interactive response technology to vimseltinib (30 mg orally twice weekly) or placebo, administrated in 28-day cycles for 24 weeks. Patients and site personnel were masked to treatment assignment until week 25, unless progressive disease was confirmed earlier. The primary endpoint was objective response rate by independent radiological review using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST) at week 25 in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received the study drug. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05059262, and enrolment is complete. FINDINGS: Between Jan 21, 2022, and Feb 21, 2023, 123 patients were randomly assigned (83 to vimseltinib and 40 to placebo). 73 (59%) patients were female and 50 (41%) were male. Nine (11%) of 83 patients assigned to vimseltinib and five (13%) of 40 patients assigned to placebo discontinued treatment before week 25; one patient in the placebo group did not receive any study drug. Objective response rate per RECIST was 40% (33 of 83 patients) in the vimseltinib group vs 0% (none of 40) in the placebo group (difference 40% [95% CI 29-51]; p<0·0001). Most treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were grade 1 or 2; the only grade 3 or 4 TEAE that occurred in more than 5% of patients receiving vimseltinib was increased blood creatine phosphokinase (eight [10%] of 83). One patient in the vimseltinib group had a treatment-related serious TEAE of subcutaneous abscess. No evidence of cholestatic hepatotoxicity or drug-induced liver injury was noted. INTERPRETATION: Vimseltinib produced a significant objective response rate and clinically meaningful functional and symptomatic improvement in patients with TGCT, providing an effective treatment option for these patients. FUNDING: Deciphera Pharmaceuticals.

Distribution and Rate of Myxoid Liposarcoma Spine Metastases: Impact on Surveillance Imaging.

BACKGROUND: Myxoid liposarcoma (LPS) has a unique tendency to spread to extrapulmonary sites, including osseous sites such as the spine, and adjacent sites such as the paraspinous tissue. No clear consensus exists to guide the approach to imaging in these patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the rate and distribution of spine metastases in patients with myxoid LPS and detection modality. METHODS: Records of all patients with myxoid LPS evaluated at our sarcoma center were retrospectively reviewed. Disease patterns and imaging modality utilization were analyzed. RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2020, 164 patients with myxoid LPS were identified. The majority (n = 148, 90%) presented with localized disease, with half (n = 82, 50%) of all patients developing metastases or recurrence during their disease course. With a median follow-up of 69.2 months, spine/paraspinous metastases developed in 38 patients (23%), of whom 35 (92%) already had synchronous, non-spine metastases. Spine disease was only visible on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as opposed to other imaging modalities, for over one-quarter of patients with spine metastases (n = 10). For patients with metastatic disease, spine metastases were associated with worse median overall survival (2.1 vs. 8.7 years, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Spine metastases occurred in nearly one-quarter of patients with myxoid LPS and represented an advanced disease state, as they primarily presented in the setting of synchronous, non-spine metastases, and were associated with worse overall survival. Routine surveillance with spine MRI in patients with localized disease likely provides no benefit but may be considered in those with known metastatic disease.

Datasets for the reporting of primary tumour in bone: recommendations from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Bone tumours are relatively rare and, as a consequence, treatment in a centre with expertise is required. Current treatment guidelines also recommend review by a specialised pathologist. Here we report on international consensus-based datasets for the pathology reporting of biopsy and resection specimens of bone sarcomas. The datasets were produced under the auspices of the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR), a global alliance of major (inter-)national pathology and cancer organisations. METHODS AND RESULTS: According to the ICCR's process for dataset development, an international expert panel consisting of pathologists, an oncologic orthopaedic surgeon, a medical oncologist, and a radiologist produced a set of core and noncore data items for biopsy and resection specimens based on a critical review and discussion of current evidence. All professionals involved were bone tumour experts affiliated with tertiary referral centres. Commentary was provided for each data item to explain the rationale for selecting it as a core or noncore element, its clinical relevance, and to highlight potential areas of disagreement or lack of evidence, in which case a consensus position was formulated. Following international public consultation, the documents were finalised and ratified, and the datasets, including a synoptic reporting guide, were published on the ICCR website. CONCLUSION: These first international datasets for bone sarcomas are intended to promote high-quality, standardised pathology reporting. Their widespread adoption will improve the consistency of reporting, facilitate multidisciplinary communication, and enhance comparability of data, all of which will help to improve management of bone sarcoma patients.

Datasets for reporting of soft-tissue sarcoma: recommendations from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR).

AIMS: Soft-tissue tumours are rare and both accurate diagnosis and proper treatment represent a global challenge. Current treatment guidelines also recommend review by specialised pathologists. Here we report on international consensus-based datasets for the pathology reporting of biopsy and resection specimens of soft-tissue sarcomas. The datasets were produced under the auspices of the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR), a global alliance of international pathology and cancer organisations. METHODS AND RESULTS: According to the ICCR's guidelines for dataset development, an international expert panel consisting of pathologists, a surgical oncologist, and a medical oncologist produced a set of core and noncore data items for biopsy and resection specimens based on a critical review and discussion of current evidence. All professionals involved were subspecialised soft-tissue sarcoma experts and affiliated with tertiary referral centres. Commentary was provided for each data item to explain the rationale for selecting it as a core or noncore element, its clinical relevance, and to highlight potential areas of disagreement or lack of evidence, in which case a consensus position was formulated. Following international public consultation, the documents were finalised and ratified, and the datasets, which included a synoptic reporting guide, were published on the ICCR website. CONCLUSION: These first international datasets for soft-tissue sarcomas are aimed to promote high-quality, standardised pathology reporting. Their adoption will improve consistency of reporting, facilitate multidisciplinary communication, and enhance comparability of data, all of which will help to improve patient's management.

Pexidartinib Provides Modest Pain Relief in Patients With Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumor: Results From ENLIVEN.

BACKGROUND: The double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 study of orally administered PLX3397 in patients with pigmented villonodular synovitis or giant cell tumor of the tendon sheath (ENLIVEN) showed that pexidartinib provides a robust objective tumor response in adults with tenosynovial giant cell tumors (TGCT) not amenable to improvement with surgery. Based on these results, in 2019, pexidartinib received accelerated approval in the United States in this population as a breakthrough therapy under an orphan drug designation. However, the ability of pexidartinib to relieve pain in ENLIVEN was not fully detailed, and the relationship between pain relief and objective tumor response was not described. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What level of pain relief was achieved by pexidartinib treatment in ENLIVEN? (2) How was pain relief related to objective tumor responses? (3) How durable was pain relief? METHODS: The current study included planned primary and exploratory assessments of patient-assessed worst pain at the site of the tumor in the ENLIVEN trial. ENLIVEN was a phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial in which adults with TGCT not amenable to improvement with surgery received pexidartinib or placebo for 24 weeks, after which eligible patients could receive open-label pexidartinib. Of 174 patients assessed for eligibility, 121 were randomized (50% [60] to placebo, 50% [61] to pexidartinib), and 120 were given either placebo or pexidartinib (59 received placebo and 61 received pexidartinib) and were included in an intent-to-treat analysis. Fifty-nine percent (71 of 120) of the overall treated population was female, and 88% (106 of 120) were White. Mean age was 45 ± 13 years. Tumors were mostly in the lower extremities (92% [110 of 120]), most commonly in the knee (61% [73 of 120]) and ankle (18% [21 of 120]). As a secondary outcome, patients scored worst pain at the site of the tumor in the past 24 hours on an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS). The primary definition of a pain response was a decrease of at least 30% in the weekly mean worst-pain NRS score and increase of less than 30% in narcotic analgesic use between baseline and week 25. Planned exploratory assessments of pain included the frequency of a pain response using alternative thresholds, including a decrease in worst-pain NRS score of 50% or more and a decrease of at least 2 points (minimum clinically important difference [MCID]), the magnitude of pain reduction between baseline and week 25, correlation between worst-pain NRS score and tumor shrinkage by RECIST 1.1 criteria, and the durability of the pain response during the open-label extension. Pain responses during the randomized portion of the trial were compared according to intention-to-treat analysis, with a one-sided threshold of p < 0.025 to reduce the risk of false-positive results. Pain assessment was complete for 59% (35 of 59) of patients in the placebo group and 54% (33 of 61) of patients in the pexidartinib group. Demographic and disease characteristics did not differ between the two treatment groups. RESULTS: A difference in the primary assessment of a pain response was not detected between pexidartinib and placebo (response percentage 31% [19 of 61] [95% CI 21% to 44%] versus 15% [9 of 59] [95% CI 8% to 27%]; one-sided p = 0.03). In the exploratory analyses, pexidartinib provided a modest improvement in pain (response percentage 26% [16 of 61] [95% CI 17% to 38%] versus 10% [6 of 59] [95% CI 5% to 20%]; one-sided p = 0.02 using the 50% threshold and 31% [19 of 61] [95% CI 21% to 44%] versus 14% [8 of 59] [95% CI 7% to 25%]; one-sided p = 0.02 using the MCID threshold). The least-squares mean change in the weekly mean worst-pain NRS score between baseline and week 25 was larger in patients treated with pexidartinib than placebo (-2.5 [95% CI -3.0 to -1.9] versus -0.3 [95% CI -0.9 to 0.3]; p < 0.001), although the mean difference between the two groups (-2.2 [95% CI -3.0 to -1.4]) was just over the MCID. Improvement in the weekly mean worst-pain NRS score correlated with the reduction in tumor size (r = 0.44; p < 0.001) and tumor volume score (r = 0.61; p < 0.001). For patients in the open-label extension, the change in the worst-pain NRS score from baseline was similar to the change at the end of the randomized portion and just above the MCID (mean -2.7 ± 2.2 after 25 weeks and -3.3 ± 1.7 after 50 weeks of receiving pexidartinib). CONCLUSION: Based on the current study, a modest reduction in pain, just larger than the MCID, may be an added benefit of pexidartinib in these patients, although the findings are insufficient to justify the routine use of pexidartinib for pain relief. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study.

Management of Locally Recurrent Retroperitoneal Sarcoma in the Adult: An Updated Consensus Approach from the Transatlantic Australasian Retroperitoneal Sarcoma Working Group.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS), but local recurrence is common. Biologic behavior and recurrence patterns differ significantly among histologic types of RPS, with implications for management. The Transatlantic Australasian RPS Working Group (TARPSWG) published a consensus approach to primary RPS, and to complement this, one for recurrent RPS in 2016. Since then, additional studies have been published, and collaborative discussion is ongoing to address the clinical challenges of local recurrence in RPS. METHODS: An extensive literature search was performed, and the previous consensus statements for recurrent RPS were updated after review by TARPSWG members. The search included the most common RPS histologic types: liposarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, solitary fibrous tumor, undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma, and malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor. RESULTS: Recurrent RPS management was evaluated from diagnosis to follow-up evaluation. For appropriately selected patients, resection is safe. Nomograms currently are available to help predict outcome after resection. These and other new findings have been combined with expert recommendations to provide 36 statements, each of which is attributed a level of evidence and grade of recommendation. In this updated document, more emphasis is placed on histologic type and clarification of the intent for surgical treatment, either curative or palliative. Overall, the fundamental tenet of optimal care for patients with recurrent RPS remains individualized treatment after multidisciplinary discussion by an experienced team with expertise in RPS. CONCLUSIONS: Updated consensus recommendations are provided to help guide decision-making for treatment of locally recurrent RPS and better selection of patients who would potentially benefit from surgery.

CSF1 receptor inhibition of tenosynovial giant cell tumor using novel disease-specific MRI measures of tumor burden.

Aim: Monitoring treatment of tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) is complicated by the irregular shape and asymmetrical growth of the tumor. We compared responses to pexidartinib by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 with those by tumor volume score (TVS) and modified RECIST (m-RECIST). Materials & methods: MRIs acquired every two cycles were assessed centrally using RECIST 1.1, m-RECIST and TVS and tissue damage score (TDS). Results: Thirty-one evaluable TGCT patients were treated with pexidartinib. From baseline to last visit, 94% of patients (29/31) showed a decrease in tumor size (median change: -60% [RECIST], -66% [m-RECIST], -79% [TVS]). All methods showed 100% disease control rate. For TDS, improvements were seen in bone erosion (32%), bone marrow edema (58%) and knee effusion (46%). Conclusion: TVS and m-RECIST offer potentially superior alternatives to conventional RECIST for monitoring disease progression and treatment response in TGCT. TDS adds important information about joint damage associated with TGCT.

Long-term outcomes of pexidartinib in tenosynovial giant cell tumors.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to report on the long-term effects of pexidartinib on tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT). METHODS: This was a pooled analysis encompassing 3 pexidartinib-treated TGCT cohorts: 1) a phase 1 extension study (NCT01004861; 1000 mg/d; n = 39), 2) ENLIVEN patients randomized to pexidartinib (1000 mg/d for 2 weeks and then 800 mg/d; n = 61), and 3) ENLIVEN crossover patients (NCT02371369; 800 mg/d; n = 30). Eligible patients were 18 years old or older and had a histologically confirmed TGCT that was unresectable and symptomatic. Efficacy endpoints included the best overall response (complete or partial response) and the duration of response (DOR) by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and the tumor volume score (TVS). The safety assessment included the frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and hepatic laboratory abnormalities (aminotransferase elevations and mixed/cholestatic hepatotoxicity). The data cutoff was May 31, 2019. RESULTS: One hundred thirty patients with TGCT received pexidartinib (median treatment duration, 19 months; range, 1 to 76+ months); 54 (42%) remained on treatment at the end of the analysis (26 months after initial data cut of March 2017). The RECIST overall response rate (ORR) was 60%; the TVS ORR was 65%. The median times to response were 3.4 (RECIST) and 2.8 months (TVS), with 48 of the responding patients (62%) achieving a RECIST partial response by 6 months and with 72 (92%) doing so by 18 months. The median DOR was reached for TVS (46.8 months). Reported TEAEs were mostly low-grade, with hair color changes being most frequent (75%). Most liver abnormalities (92%) were aminotransferase elevations; 4 patients (3%) experienced mixed/cholestatic hepatotoxicity (all within the first 2 months of treatment), which was reversible in all cases (recovery spanned 1-7 months). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the prolonged efficacy and tolerability of long-term pexidartinib treatment for TGCT.

Pexidartinib Long-Term Hepatic Safety Profile in Patients with Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Pexidartinib is approved in the U.S. for tenosynovial giant cell tumors (TGCTs). Herein, we assessed the hepatic safety profile of pexidartinib across patients with TGCTs receiving pexidartinib. MATERIALS, AND METHODS: Hepatic adverse reactions (ARs) were assessed by type and magnitude of liver test abnormalities, classified as (a) isolated aminotransferase elevations (alanine [ALT] or aspartate [AST], without significant alkaline phosphatase [ALP] or bilirubin elevations), or (b) mixed or cholestatic hepatotoxicity (increase in ALP with or without ALT/AST and bilirubin elevations, based on adjudication). Median follow-up from initial pexidartinib treatment was 39 months (range, 32-82) in 140 patients with TGCTs across clinical studies NCT01004861, NCT02371369, NCT02734433, and NCT03291288. RESULTS: In total, 95% of patients with TGCTs (133/140) treated with pexidartinib (median duration of exposure, 19 months [range, 1-76]), experienced a hepatic AR. A total of 128 patients (91%) had reversible, low-grade dose-dependent isolated AST/ALT elevations without significant ALP elevations. Five patients (4%) experienced serious mixed or cholestatic injury. No case met Hy's law criteria. Onset of hepatic ARs was predominantly in the first 2 months. All five serious hepatic AR cases recovered 1-7 months following pexidartinib discontinuation. Five patients from the non-TGCT population (N = 658) experienced serious hepatic ARs, two irreversible cases. CONCLUSION: This pooled analysis provides information to help form the basis for the treating physician's risk assessment for patients with TCGTs, a locally aggressive but typically nonmetastatic tumor. In particular, long-term treatment with pexidartinib has a predictable effect on hepatic aminotransferases and unpredictable risk of serious cholestatic or mixed liver injury. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This is the first long-term pooled analysis to report on the long-term hepatic safety of pexidartinib in patients with tenosynovial giant cell tumors associated with severe morbidity or functional limitations and not amenable to improvement with surgery. These findings extend beyond what has been previously published, describing the observed instances of hepatic toxicity following pexidartinib treatment across the clinical development program. This information is highly relevant for medical oncologists and orthopedic oncologists and provides guidance for its proper use for appropriate patients within the Pexidartinib Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Safety program.

Health-related quality of life and pain with selinexor in patients with advanced dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

Objective: Compare health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of selinexor versus placebo in patients with dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Materials & methods: HRQoL was assessed at baseline and day 1 of each cycle using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-item core quality of life questionnaire. Results were reported from baseline to day 169 (where exposure to treatment was maximized while maintaining adequate sample size). Results: Pain scores worsened for placebo versus selinexor across all postbaseline visits, although differences in HRQoL at some visits were not significant. Other domains did not exhibit significant differences between arms; however, scores in both arms deteriorated over time. Conclusion: Patients treated with selinexor reported lower rates and slower worsening of pain compared with patients who received placebo.

Lay abstract The goal of this study was to compare the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with advanced unresectable dedifferentiated liposarcoma treated with selinexor compared with those treated with placebo. HRQoL was measured prior to treatment initiation and at the first day of each cycle of their treatment using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-item core quality of life questionnaire. Pain scores worsened for placebo compared with selinexor across all visits after treatment, but differences at some visits were not significant. Other domains did not exhibit significant differences between arms; however, scores in both arms worsened over time reflecting the progressive disease burden in this patient population. As pain is one of the most devastating symptoms associated with advanced and progressing cancers, the significant reduction in pain in the selinexor arm, according to patient perception, represent a relevant added value of this drug in dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

Pexidartinib improves physical functioning and stiffness in patients with tenosynovial giant cell tumor: results from the ENLIVEN randomized clinical trial.

Background and purpose - The ENLIVEN trial showed that, after 25 weeks, pexidartinib statistically significantly reduced tumor size more than placebo in patients with symptomatic, advanced tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) for whom surgery was not recommended. Here, we detail the effect of pexidartinib on patient-reported physical function and stiffness in ENLIVEN.Patients and methods - This was a planned analysis of patient-reported outcome data from ENLIVEN, a double-blinded, randomized phase 3 trial of adults with symptomatic, advanced TGCT treated with pexidartinib or placebo. Physical function was assessed using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-physical function (PF), and worst stiffness was assessed using a numerical rating scale (NRS). A mixed model for repeated measures was used to compare changes in PROMIS-PF and worst stiffness NRS scores from baseline to week 25 between treatment groups. Response rates for the PROMIS-PF and worst stiffness NRS at week 25 were calculated based on threshold estimates from reliable change index and anchor-based methods.Results - Between baseline and week 25, greater improvements in physical function and stiffness were experienced by patients receiving pexidartinib than patients receiving placebo (change in PROMIS-PF = 4.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.8-6.3] vs. -0.9 [CI -3.0 to 1.2]; change in worst stiffness NRS = -2.5 [CI -3.0 to -1.9] vs. -0.3 [CI -0.9 to 0.3]). Patients receiving pexidartinib had higher response rates than patients receiving placebo for meaningful improvements in physical function and stiffness. Improvements were sustained after 50 weeks of pexidartinib treatment.Interpretation - Pexidartinib treatment provided sustained, meaningful improvements in physical function and stiffness for patients with symptomatic, advanced TGCT.

Systemic treatments in MDM2 positive intimal sarcoma: A multicentre experience with anthracycline, gemcitabine, and pazopanib within the World Sarcoma Network.

BACKGROUND: Intimal sarcoma (InS) is an exceedingly rare neoplasm with an unfavorable prognosis, for which new potentially active treatments are under development. We report on the activity of anthracycline-based regimens, gemcitabine-based regimens, and pazopanib in patients with InS. METHODS: Seventeen sarcoma reference centers in Europe, the United States, and Japan contributed data to this retrospective analysis. Patients with MDM2-positive InS who were treated with anthracycline-based regimens, gemcitabine-based regimens, or pazopanib between October 2001 and January 2018 were selected. Local pathological review was performed to confirm diagnosis. Response was assessed by RECIST1.1. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were computed by Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were included (66 anthracycline-based regimens; 26 gemcitabine-based regimens; 12 pazopanib). In the anthracycline-based group, 24 (36%) patients were treated for localized disease, and 42 (64%) patients were treated for advanced disease. The real-world overall response rate (rwORR) was 38%. For patients with localized disease, the median RFS was 14.6 months. For patients with advanced disease, the median PFS was 7.7 months. No anthracycline-related cardiac toxicity was reported in patients with cardiac InS (n = 26). For gemcitabine and pazopanib, the rwORR was 8%, and the median PFS was 3.2 and 3.7 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: This retrospective series shows the activity of anthracycline-based regimens in InS. Of note, anthracyclines were used in patients with cardiac InS with no significant cardiac toxicity. The prognosis in patients with InS remains poor, and new active drugs and treatment strategies are needed.

Pexidartinib versus placebo for advanced tenosynovial giant cell tumour (ENLIVEN): a randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Tenosynovial giant cell tumour (TGCT), a rare, locally aggressive neoplasm, overexpresses colony-stimulating factor 1 (CSF1). Surgery is standard with no approved systemic therapy. We aimed to evaluate pexidartinib, a CSF1 receptor inhibitor, in patients with TGCT to provide them with a viable systemic treatment option, especially in cases that are not amenable to surgical resection. METHODS: This phase 3 randomised trial had two parts. Part one was a double-blind study in which patients with symptomatic, advanced TGCT for whom surgery was not recommended were randomly assigned via an integrated web response system (1:1) to the pexidartinib or placebo group. Individuals in the pexidartinib group received a loading dose of 1000 mg pexidartinib per day orally (400 mg morning; 600 mg evening) for the first 2 weeks, followed by 800 mg per day (400 mg twice a day) for 22 weeks. Part two was an open-label study of pexidartinib for all patients. The primary endpoint, assessed in all intention-to-treat patients, was overall response at week 25, and was centrally reviewed by RECIST, version 1.1. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02371369. FINDINGS: Between May 11, 2015, and Sept 30, 2016, of 174 patients assessed for eligibility, 120 patients were randomly assigned to, and received, pexidartinib (n=61) or placebo (n=59). There were 11 dropouts in the placebo group and nine in the pexidartinib group. Emergence of mixed or cholestatic hepatotoxicity caused the data monitoring committee to stop enrolment six patients short of target. The proportion of patients who achieved overall response was higher for pexidartinib than placebo at week 25 by RECIST (24 [39%] of 61 vs none of 59; absolute difference 39% [95% CI 27-53]; p<0·0001). Serious adverse events occurred in eight (13%) of 61 patients in the pexidartinib group and one (2%) of 59 patients in the placebo group. Hair colour changes (67%), fatigue (54%), aspartate aminotransferase increase (39%), nausea (38%), alanine aminotransferase increase (28%), and dysgeusia (25%) were the most frequent pexidartinib-associated adverse events. Three patients given pexidartinib had aminotransferase elevations three or more times the upper limit of normal with total bilirubin and alkaline phosphatase two or more times the upper limit of normal indicative of mixed or cholestatic hepatotoxicity, one lasting 7 months and confirmed by biopsy. INTERPRETATION: Pexidartinib is the first systemic therapy to show a robust tumour response in TGCT with improved patient symptoms and functional outcomes; mixed or cholestatic hepatotoxicity is an identified risk. Pexidartinib could be considered as a potential treatment for TGCT associated with severe morbidity or functional limitations in cases not amenable to improvement with surgery. FUNDING: Daiichi Sankyo.

Phase 1 study of the MDM2 inhibitor AMG 232 in patients with advanced P53 wild-type solid tumors or multiple myeloma.

Background This open-label, first-in-human, phase 1 study evaluated AMG 232, an oral selective MDM2 inhibitor in patients with TP53 wild-type (P53WT), advanced solid tumors or multiple myeloma (MM). Methods In the dose escalation (n = 39), patients with P53WT refractory solid tumors enrolled to receive once-daily AMG 232 (15, 30, 60, 120, 240, 480, and 960 mg) for seven days every 3 weeks (Q3W). In the dose expansion (n = 68), patients with MDM2-amplified (well-differentiated and de-differentiated liposarcomas [WDLPS and DDLPS], glioblastoma multiforme [GBM], or other solid tumors [OST]), MDM2-overexpressing ER+ breast cancer (BC), or MM received AMG 232 at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and efficacy were assessed. Results AMG 232 had acceptable safety up to up to 240 mg. Three patients had dose-limiting toxicities of thrombocytopenia (n = 2) and neutropenia (n = 1). Due to these and other delayed cytopenias, AMG 232 240 mg Q3W was determined as the highest tolerable dose assessed in the dose expansion. Adverse events were typically mild/moderate and included diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, decreased appetite, and anemia. AMG 232 plasma concentrations increased dose proportionally. Increases in serum macrophage inhibitor cytokine-1 from baseline were generally dose dependent, indicating p53 pathway activation. Per local review, there were no responses. Stable disease (durability in months) was observed in patients with WDLPS (3.9), OST (3.3), DDLPS (2.0), GBM (1.8), and BC (1.4-2.0). Conclusions In patients with P53WT advanced solid tumors or MM, AMG 232 showed acceptable safety and dose-proportional pharmacokinetics, and stable disease was observed.

Effect of Doxorubicin Plus Olaratumab vs Doxorubicin Plus Placebo on Survival in Patients With Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcomas: The ANNOUNCE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) have a median overall survival of less than 2 years. In a phase 2 study, an overall survival benefit in this population was observed with the addition of olaratumab to doxorubicin over doxorubicin alone. Objective: To determine the efficacy of doxorubicin plus olaratumab in patients with advanced/metastatic STS. Design, Setting, and Participants: ANNOUNCE was a confirmatory, phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial conducted at 110 sites in 25 countries from September 2015 to December 2018; the final date of follow-up was December 5, 2018. Eligible patients were anthracycline-naive adults with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic STS, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1, and cardiac ejection fraction of 50% or greater. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive doxorubicin, 75 mg/m2 (day 1), combined with olaratumab (n = 258), 20 mg/kg in cycle 1 and 15 mg/kg in subsequent cycles, or placebo (n = 251) on days 1 and 8 for up to 8 21-day cycles, followed by olaratumab/placebo monotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Dual primary end points were overall survival with doxorubicin plus olaratumab vs doxorubicin plus placebo in total STS and leiomyosarcoma (LMS) populations. Results: Among the 509 patients randomized (mean age, 56.9 years; 58.2% women; 46.0% with LMS), all were included in the primary analysis and had a median length of follow-up of 31 months. No statistically significant difference in overall survival was observed between the doxorubicin plus olaratumab group vs the doxorubicin plus placebo group in either population (total STS: hazard ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.84-1.30], P = .69, median overall survival, 20.4 months vs 19.7 months; LMS: hazard ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.69-1.31], P = .76, median overall survival, 21.6 months vs 21.9 months). Adverse events of grade 3 or greater reported in 15% or more of total patients with STS were neutropenia (46.3% vs 49.0%), leukopenia (23.3% vs 23.7%), and febrile neutropenia (17.5% vs 16.5%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this phase 3 clinical trial of patients with advanced STS, treatment with doxorubicin plus olaratumab vs doxorubicin plus placebo resulted in no significant difference in overall survival. The findings did not confirm the overall survival benefit observed in the phase 2 trial. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02451943.

A phase 1 and randomized controlled phase 2 trial of the safety and efficacy of the combination of gemcitabine and docetaxel with ontuxizumab (MORAb-004) in metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas.

BACKGROUND: Ontuxizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody, targets endosialin (tumor endothelial marker 1 [TEM-1] or CD248), which is expressed on sarcoma cells and is believed to be involved in tumor angiogenesis. This is the first trial to evaluate ontuxizumab in patients with sarcoma. METHODS: Part 1 was an open-label, dose-finding, safety lead-in: 4, 6, or 8 mg/kg with gemcitabine and docetaxel (G/D; 900 mg/m2 gemcitabine on days 1 and 8 and 75 mg/m2 docetaxel on day 8). In part 2, patients were randomized in a double-blind fashion in 2:1 ratio to ontuxizumab (8 mg/kg) or a placebo with G/D. Randomization was stratified by 4 histological cohorts. RESULTS: In part 2 with 209 patients, no significant difference in progression-free survival between ontuxizumab plus G/D (4.3 months; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.7-6.3 months) and the placebo plus G/D (5.6 months; 95% CI, 2.6-8.3 months) was observed (P = .67; hazard ratio [HR], 1.07; 95% CI, 0.77-1.49). Similarly, there was no significant difference in median overall survival between the 2 groups: 18.3 months for the ontuxizumab plus G/D group (95% CI, 16.2-21.1 months) and 21.1 months for the placebo plus G/D group (95% CI, 14.2 months to not reached; P = .32; HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.82-1.82). No significant differences between the treatment groups occurred for any efficacy parameter by sarcoma cohort. The combination of ontuxizumab plus G/D was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Ontuxizumab plus G/D showed no enhanced activity over chemotherapy alone in soft-tissue sarcomas, whereas the safety profile of the combination was consistent with G/D alone.

Perceptions of Oncologists About Sharing Clinic Notes with Patients.

In a large survey (n = 809) conducted to understand how oncologists differ from nononcologists regarding routinely sharing visit notes with patients, oncologists were less likely to agree patient safety would improve (p = .03) or that patients would be offended after reading notes (p = .01); however, they agreed with nononcologists that sharing notes would lead to less candid documentation (69% vs. 73%; p = .39). Oncologists share a high level of worry about the impact of sharing notes on documentation practices, a concern that will need to be addressed as the practice of sharing visit notes expands to cancer care.

Characteristics of mismatch repair deficiency in sarcomas.

Due to the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy in tumors with deficient mismatch repair, there has been a surge in demand for mismatch repair deficiency testing in various tumor types. Mismatch repair deficiency is not known to play a significant role in the pathogenesis of sarcomas, and the utility of testing these tumor types is not established. This study aimed to determine the frequency, pattern, and clinicopathologic correlates of mismatch repair deficiency in sarcomas. Three hundred and four sarcomas were profiled using a genomic platform that employs massively parallel sequencing to interrogate 447 cancer-associated genes. Mismatch repair status was evaluated by determining the number of small insertion/deletion events occurring in homopolymer regions per megabase of exonic sequence data across all genes.  Molecular characteristics of mismatch repair-deficient sarcomas were compared to mismatch repair-deficient carcinomas (n = 70) also identified using the sequencing panel. Seven sarcomas (2.3%) were classified as mismatch repair-deficient: four unclassified sarcomas, and one each of pleomorphic rhabdomyosarcoma, epithelioid leiomyosarcoma and malignant PEComa. One patient had an established diagnosis of Lynch syndrome. In the remaining patients, the mismatch repair gene mutation was confirmed or suspected to be somatic. Mismatch repair immunohistochemistry confirmed the mismatch repair-deficiency status of all cases with alterations in the tested proteins. As expected, mismatch repair-deficient sarcomas showed a significantly elevated tumor mutation burden relative to mismatch repair-proficient sarcomas (median 16 versus 4.6, p < 0.001). However, in comparison to mismatch repair-deficient carcinomas, mismatch repair-deficient sarcomas showed a lower tumor mutation burden (median 28 versus 16, p = 0.006) and a significantly greater degree of chromosomal instability. Among mismatch repair-deficient sarcomas, PD-L1 was variably expressed on tumor-associated macrophages but not on tumor cells. Three patients received pembrolizumab: two progressed and one has stable disease with five months follow-up. Mismatch repair deficiency in histologically classifiable sarcomas is rare (1%) and is more common in unclassified sarcomas (10%). Additional study is required to determine the predictive role of mismatch repair-deficiency in sarcomas for immunotherapy.

Structure-Guided Blockade of CSF1R Kinase in Tenosynovial Giant-Cell Tumor.

BACKGROUND: Expression of the colony-stimulating factor 1 (CSF1) gene is elevated in most tenosynovial giant-cell tumors. This observation has led to the discovery and clinical development of therapy targeting the CSF1 receptor (CSF1R). METHODS: Using x-ray co-crystallography to guide our drug-discovery research, we generated a potent, selective CSF1R inhibitor, PLX3397, that traps the kinase in the autoinhibited conformation. We then conducted a multicenter, phase 1 trial in two parts to analyze this compound. In the first part, we evaluated escalations in the dose of PLX3397 that was administered orally in patients with solid tumors (dose-escalation study). In the second part, we evaluated PLX3397 at the chosen phase 2 dose in an extension cohort of patients with tenosynovial giant-cell tumors (extension study). Pharmacokinetic and tumor responses in the enrolled patients were assessed, and CSF1 in situ hybridization was performed to confirm the mechanism of action of PLX3397 and that the pattern of CSF1 expression was consistent with the pathological features of tenosynovial giant-cell tumor. RESULTS: A total of 41 patients were enrolled in the dose-escalation study, and an additional 23 patients were enrolled in the extension study. The chosen phase 2 dose of PLX3397 was 1000 mg per day. In the extension study, 12 patients with tenosynovial giant-cell tumors had a partial response and 7 patients had stable disease. Responses usually occurred within the first 4 months of treatment, and the median duration of response exceeded 8 months. The most common adverse events included fatigue, change in hair color, nausea, dysgeusia, and periorbital edema; adverse events rarely led to discontinuation of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of tenosynovial giant-cell tumors with PLX3397 resulted in a prolonged regression in tumor volume in most patients. (Funded by Plexxikon; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01004861.).