Nodal staging convergence for HPV- and HPV+ oropharyngeal carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Modern disease staging systems have restructured human papillomavirus (HPV)-negative (HPV-) and HPV-positive (HPV+) oropharyngeal carcinoma (OPC) into distinct pathologic nodal systems. Given that quantitative lymph node (LN) burden is the dominant prognostic factor in most head and neck cancers, we investigated whether HPV- and HPV+ OPC warrant divergent pathologic nodal classification. METHODS: Multivariable Cox regression models of OPC surgical patients identified via U.S. cancer registry data were constructed to determine associations between survival and nodal characteristics. Nonlinear associations between metastatic LN number and survival were modeled with restricted cubic splines. Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was used to derive unbiased nodal schema. RESULTS: Mortality risk escalated continuously with each successive positive LN in both OPC subtypes, with analogous slope. Survival hazard increased by 18.5% (hazard ratio [HR], 1.19 [95% CI, 1.16-1.21]; P < .001) and 19.1% (HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.17-1.21]; P < .001), with each added positive LN for HPV- and HPV+ OPC, respectively, up to identical change points of 5 positive LNs. Extranodal extension (ENE) was an independent predictor of HPV- OPC (HR, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.20-1.99]; P < .001) and HPV+ OPC (HR 1.73 [95% CI, 1.36-2.20]; P < .001) mortality. In RPA for both diseases, metastatic LN was the principal nodal covariate driving survival, with ENE as a secondary determinant. Given the similarities across analyses, we propose a concise, unifying HPV-/HPV+ OPC pathologic nodal classification schema: N1, 1-5 LN+/ENE-; N2, 1-5 LN+/ENE+; N3, >5 LN+. CONCLUSION: HPV- and HPV+ OPC exhibit parallel relationships between nodal characteristics and relative mortality. In both diseases, metastatic LN number represents the principal nodal covariate governing survival, with ENE being an influential secondary element. A consolidated OPC pathologic nodal staging system that is based on these covariates may best convey prognosis. LAY SUMMARY: The current nodal staging system for oropharyngeal carcinoma (OPC) has divided human papillomavirus (HPV)-negative (HPV-) and HPV-positive (HPV+) OPC into distinct systems that rely upon criteria that establish them as separate entities, a complexity that may undermine the core objective of staging schema to clearly communicate prognosis. Our large-scale analysis revealed that HPV- and HPV+ pathologic nodal staging systems in fact mirror each other. Multiple analyses produced conspicuously similar nodal staging systems, with metastatic lymph node number and extranodal extension delineating the highest risk groups that shape prognosis. We propose unifying HPV- and HPV+ nodal systems to best streamline prognostication and maximize staging accuracy.

Stage I HPV-positive oropharyngeal cancer: Should all patients receive similar treatments?

BACKGROUND: Patients with clinical stage I human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer (OPSCC) according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) eighth edition classification comprise a heterogeneous group formerly classified as stage I to stage IVA according to the seventh edition of the AJCC classification. These patients historically were treated with disparate treatment regimens, particularly with respect to the use of concurrent chemotherapy. METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base was queried for patients with AJCC eighth edition clinical stage I HPV-positive OPSCC (AJCC seventh edition stage T1-2N0-2bM0) who were diagnosed from 2010 to 2014 and underwent definitive radiotherapy. Concurrent chemotherapy with definitive radiotherapy was defined as chemotherapy administered within 7 days of the initiation of radiotherapy. RESULTS: The current analysis included 4473 patients with HPV-positive stage I OPSCC with a median follow-up of 36.3 months. A total of 3127 patients (69.9%) received concurrent chemotherapy. Concurrent chemotherapy was found to be associated with improved overall survival on multivariable analyses (hazard ratio [HR], 0.782; 95% CI, 0.645-0.948 [P = .012]). The effect of chemotherapy on survival varied based on lymph node involvement (P for interaction = .001). Specifically, chemotherapy was associated with improved survival for patients with lymph node-positive stage I disease (stage III-IVA according to the AJCC seventh edition: HR, 0.682; 95% CI, 0.557-0.835 [P < .001]), but not for patients with N0 disease (stage I-II according to the AJCC seventh edition: HR, 1.646; 95% CI, 1.011-2.681 [P = .05]). Similar results were noted among propensity score-matched cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with concurrent chemotherapy was associated with improved overall survival for patients with lymph node-positive, but not lymph node-negative, AJCC eighth edition stage I HPV-positive OPSCC undergoing definitive radiotherapy, thereby supporting different treatment paradigms for these patients.

Bromodomain inhibitors a decade later: a promise unfulfilled?

Over the last decade, bromodomain inhibitors have emerged as a promising class of anticancer drugs. However, the clinical progress of these agents has faced significant obstacles, which precluded their regulatory approval. This editorial will review the challenges and opportunities associated with the development of bromodomain inhibitors.

Two phase I, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic studies of DFP-10917, a novel nucleoside analog with 14-day and 7-day continuous infusion schedules.

Purpose DFP-10917 is a novel deoxycytidine analog with a unique mechanism of action. Brief exposure to high concentrations of DFP-10917 inhibits DNA polymerase resulting in S-phase arrest, while prolonged exposure to DFP-10917 at low concentration causes DNA fragmentation, G2/M-phase arrest, and apoptosis. DFP-10917 demonstrated activity in tumor xenografts resistant to other deoxycytidine analogs. Experimental design Two phase I studies assessed the safety, pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and preliminary efficacy of DFP-10917. Patients with refractory solid tumors received DFP-10917 continuous infusion 14-day on/7-day off and 7-day on/7-day off. Enrollment required age > 18 years, ECOG Performance Status 0-2 and adequate organ function. Results 29 patients were dosed in both studies. In 14-day infusion, dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) consisting of febrile neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurred at 4.0 mg/m2/day. At 3.0 mg/m2/day, 3 patients experienced neutropenia in cycle 2. The dose of 2.0 mg/m2/day was well tolerated in 6 patients. In 7-day infusion, grade 4 neutropenia was DLT at 4.0 mg/m2/day. The maximum tolerated dose was 3 mg/m2/day. Other toxicities included nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, neutropenia, and alopecia. Eight patients had stable disease for >12 weeks. Paired comet assays performed for 7 patients showed an increase in DNA strand breaks at day 8. Pharmacokinetic data showed dose-proportionality for steady-state concentration and AUC of DFP-10917 and its primary metabolite. Conclusion Continuous infusion of DFP-10917 is feasible and well tolerated with myelosuppression as main DLT. The recommended doses are 2.0 mg/m2/day and 3.0 mg/m2/day on the 14-day and 7-day continuous infusion schedules, respectively. Preliminary activity was suggested. Pharmacodynamic data demonstrate biological activity at the tested doses.

Treatment at high-volume facilities and academic centers is independently associated with improved survival in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of head and neck cancers is complex and associated with significant morbidity, requiring multidisciplinary care and physician expertise. Thus, facility characteristics, such as clinical volume and academic status, may influence outcomes. METHODS: The current study included 46,567 patients taken from the National Cancer Data Base who were diagnosed with locally advanced invasive squamous cell carcinomas of the oropharynx, larynx, and hypopharynx and were undergoing definitive radiotherapy. High-volume facilities (HVFs) were defined as the top 1% of centers by the number of patients treated from 2004 through 2012. Multivariable Cox regression and propensity score matching were performed to account for imbalances in covariates. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 55.1 months. Treatment at a HVF (hazard ratio, 0.798; 95% confidence interval, 0.753-0.845 [P<.001]) and treatment at an academic facility (hazard ratio, 0.897; 95% confidence interval, 0.871-0.923 [P<.001]) were found to be independently associated with improved overall survival in multivariable analysis. In propensity score-matched cohorts, the 5-year overall survival rate was 61.6% versus 55.5% for patients treated at an HVF versus lower-volume facilities, respectively (P<.001). Similarly, the 5-year overall survival rate was 52.3% versus 49.7% for patients treated at academic versus nonacademic facilities (P<.001). Analysis of facility volume as a continuous variable demonstrated continual improvement in survival with an increased number of patients treated. The impact of facility volume and academic designation on survival was observed when using a variety of thresholds to define HVF, and across the vast majority of subgroups, including both oropharyngeal and nonoropharyngeal subsites. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma who are undergoing curative radiotherapy at HVFs and academic centers appear to have improved survival. Cancer 2017;123:3933-42. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Combined high-intensity local treatment and systemic therapy in metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: An analysis of the National Cancer Data Base.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence that primary tumor ablation can improve survival for some cancer patients with distant metastases. This may be particularly applicable to head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) because of its tropism for locoregional progression. METHODS: This study included patients with metastatic HNSCC undergoing systemic therapy identified in the National Cancer Data Base. High-intensity local treatment was defined as radiation doses ≥ 60 Gy or oncologic resection of the primary tumor. Multivariate Cox regression, propensity score matching, landmark analysis, and subgroup analysis were performed to account for imbalances in covariates, including adjustments for the number and location of metastatic sites in the subset of patients with this information available. RESULTS: In all, 3269 patients were included (median follow-up, 51.5 months). Patients undergoing systemic therapy with local treatment had improved survival in comparison with patients receiving systemic therapy alone in propensity score-matched cohorts (2-year overall survival, 34.2% vs 20.6%; P < .001). Improved survival was associated only with patients receiving high-intensity local treatment, whereas those receiving lower-intensity local treatment had survival similar to that of patients receiving systemic therapy without local treatment. The impact of high-intensity local therapy was time-dependent, with a stronger impact within the first 6 months after the diagnosis (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.255; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.210-0.309; P < .001) in comparison with more than 6 months after the diagnosis (AHR, 0.622; 95% CI, 0.561-0.689; P < .001) in the multivariate analysis. A benefit was seen in all subgroups, in landmark analyses of 1-, 2-, and 3-year survivors, and when adjusting for the number and location of metastatic sites. CONCLUSIONS: Aggressive local treatment warrants prospective evaluation for select patients with metastatic HNSCC. Cancer 2017;123:4583-4593. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Phase 1 safety, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor dinaciclib administered every three weeks in patients with advanced malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Dinaciclib is a potent inhibitor of cell cycle and transcriptional cyclin-dependent kinases. This Phase 1 study evaluated the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of various dosing schedules of dinaciclib in advanced solid tumour patients and assessed pharmacodynamic and preliminary anti-tumour activity. METHODS: In part 1, patients were enrolled in escalating cohorts of 2-h infusions administered once every 3 weeks, utilising an accelerated titration design until a recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) was defined. In part 2, 8- and 24-h infusions were evaluated. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined for all schedules. Pharmacodynamic effects were assessed with an ex vivo stimulated lymphocyte proliferation assay performed in whole blood.Effects of dinaciclib on retinoblastoma (Rb) phosphorylation and other CDK targets were evaluated in skin and tumour biopsies. In addition to tumour size, metabolic response was evaluated by 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were enrolled to parts 1 and 2. The RP2Ds were 50, 7.4 and 10.4 mg m-2 as 2- 8- and 24-hour infusions, respectively. Dose-limiting toxicities included pancytopenia, neutropenic fever, elevated transaminases, hyperuricemia and hypotension. Pharmacokinetics demonstrated rapid distribution and a short plasma half-life. Dinaciclib suppressed proliferation of stimulated lymphocytes. In skin and tumour biopsies, dinaciclib reduced Rb phosphorylation at CDK2 phospho-sites and modulated expression of cyclin D1 and p53, suggestive of CDK9 inhibition. Although there were no RECIST responses, eight patients had prolonged stable disease and received between 6 and 30 cycles. Early metabolic responses occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Dinaciclib is tolerable at doses demonstrating target engagement in surrogate and tumour tissue.

Pharmacokinetic study of aldoxorubicin in patients with solid tumors.

Introduction Aldoxorubicin, a prodrug of doxorubicin, binds covalently to serum albumin in the bloodstream and accumulates in tumors. Aldoxorubicin can be administered at doses several-fold higher than doxorubicin can, without associated acute cardiotoxicity. Purpose This study fully evaluated the pharmacokinetic profile of aldoxorubicin (serum and urine). Methods Eighteen patients with advanced solid tumors received aldoxorubicin 230 or 350 mg/m(2) (equivalent in drug load to doxorubicin at doses of 170 or 260 mg/m(2), respectively) once every 21 days. Blood samples were taken in cycle 1 before aldoxorubicin infusion, and at 5, 15, 30, and 60 min, and at 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 48, and 72 h after infusion. Urine samples were taken in cycle 1 at 24, 48, and 72 h after infusion. Limited blood sampling was done in cycle 3, before aldoxorubicin infusion, and at 60 min and at 2, 4, and 8 h after infusion. Results The long mean half-life (20.1-21.1 h), narrow mean volume of distribution (3.96-4.08 L/m(2)), and slow mean clearance rate (0.136-0.152 L/h/m(2)) suggest that aldoxorubicin is stable in circulation and does not accumulate readily in body compartments outside of the bloodstream. Very little doxorubicin and its major metabolite doxorubicinol, which has been implicated in doxorubicin-associated cardiotoxicity, are excreted in urine. This might explain the lack of cardiotoxicity observed thus far with aldoxorubicin. Conclusions Our findings support dosing and administration schemas used in an ongoing phase 3 clinical study of aldoxorubicin in soft tissue sarcoma, and phase 2 clinical studies in small cell lung cancer, glioblastoma, and Kaposi's sarcoma.

Relative bioavailability of a prototype oral solution of the Aurora A kinase inhibitor alisertib (MLN8237) in patients with advanced solid tumors.

OBJECTIVES: Alisertib (MLN8237) is an investigational, oral, small-molecule, selective inhibitor of Aurora A kinase. Phase I/II studies of powder-in-capsule (PIC) and enteric-coated tablet formulations of alisertib have determined the recommended phase II dose and have demonstrated anti-tumor activity. This phase I relative bioavailability study characterized the pharmacokinetics of a prototype oral solution (OS) of alisertib (developed for patients unable to swallow solid dosage forms) in reference to the PIC formulation in adult cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A safety evaluation was undertaken first following a 3+3 design (OS starting dose, 15 mg). The relative bioavailability of alisertib OS vs. PIC was then evaluated following single dose administration of alisertib OS 25 mg and PIC 50 mg, using a 2-way crossover study design. RESULTS: The relative bioavailability (geometric mean dose-normalized AUCinf ratio) of alisertib OS vs. PIC formulation was 1.26 (90% confidence interval (CI): 1.09-1.47 (OS, n=17; PIC, n=18 evaluable patients)). These results support a distinguishable difference in bioavailability of alisertib between the two formulations (lower bound of 90% CI>1), with an estimated 26% higher total systemic exposure with alisertib OS vs. PIC. Alisertib absorption from OS was faster than from PIC, with a shorter median tmax (OS, 1 hour; PIC, 2 hours) and a geometric mean dose-normalized Cmax ratio (OS vs. PIC) of 1.90 (90% CI: 1.52 - 2.37). CONCLUSIONS: These findings inform the starting dose of alisertib OS to support further clinical evaluation of alisertib in patients unable to swallow solid dosage forms.

Antitumor activity and safety of combination therapy with the Toll-like receptor 9 agonist IMO-2055, erlotinib, and bevacizumab in advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer patients who have progressed following chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: IMO-2055 is a Toll-like receptor 9 (TLR9) agonist that potentially enhances the efficacy of antitumor agents through immune stimulation. The objective of this phase Ib dose-escalation trial (3 + 3 design) was to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of IMO-2055 when combined with erlotinib and bevacizumab in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients with stage 3/4 NSCLC and progressive disease (PD) following chemotherapy received IMO-2055 0.08, 0.16, 0.32, or 0.48 mg/kg once weekly plus erlotinib 150 mg daily and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Patients could receive treatment until PD or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients were enrolled; 35 received at least one treatment dose. Two dose-limiting toxicities were observed across the dose range (Grade 3 dehydration and fatigue) with neither suggestive of a consistent toxicity pattern. IMO-2055 0.32 mg/kg was adopted as RP2D based on clinical and pharmacodynamic data. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were diarrhea (74 %), nausea (51 %), fatigue (51 %), rash (51 %), and injection-site reactions (49 %). Four patients experienced serious TEAEs considered to be study drug related. Five patients died, all due to PD. High-grade neutropenia and electrolyte disturbances previously reported with TLR9 agonists combined with platinum-based therapy were not observed in this study. Five of 33 patients evaluable for response (15 %) achieved partial response; another 20 (61 %) had stable disease, including 13 with stable disease ≥4 months. CONCLUSIONS: IMO-2055 demonstrated good tolerability and possible antitumor activity in combination with erlotinib and bevacizumab in heavily pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC.

Phase I dose-escalation study of cabazitaxel administered in combination with cisplatin in patients with advanced solid tumors.

INTRODUCTION: Cabazitaxel is a second-generation taxane with in vivo activity against taxane-sensitive and -resistant tumor cell lines and tumor xenografts. Cabazitaxel/cisplatin have therapeutic synergism in tumor-bearing mice, providing a rationale for assessing this combination in patients with solid tumors. METHODS: The primary objectives of this study were to determine dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of a cabazitaxel/cisplatin combined regimen (Part 1) and to assess antitumor activity at the MTD (Part 2). Safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) were also examined. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled (10 in Part 1; 15 in Part 2). In Part 1, two dose levels were evaluated; the MTD for cabazitaxel/cisplatin (given Q3W) was 15/75 mg/m(2). DLTs occurring during Cycle 1 at the maximum administered dose (20/75 mg/m(2); acute renal failure and febrile neutropenia) and the MTD (febrile neutropenia and hypersensitivity despite pre-medication) were as expected for taxane/platinum combinations. For the 18 patients treated at the MTD, the most frequent possibly related non-hematologic treatment-emergent adverse events (Grade ≥ 3) were nausea (16.7%), fatigue, acute renal failure and decreased appetite (each 11.1%). Neutropenia was the most frequent treatment-emergent Grade ≥ 3 hematologic laboratory abnormality at the MTD (77.8%). The best overall response at the MTD was stable disease, observed in 66.7% of patients. PK results of the combination did not appear to differ from single-agent administration for each agent. CONCLUSION: Combination treatment with cabazitaxel/cisplatin had a manageable safety profile; no PK interactions were evident. The recommended Phase II dose for this combination is cabazitaxel/cisplatin 15/75 mg/m(2) administered every 3 weeks. Antitumor activity findings suggest that further evaluation of this combination in disease-specific trials is warranted.

Patient perceptions underlying ctDNA molecular surveillance for HPV(+) oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Circulating tumor DNA assays have robust potential as molecular surveillance tools. They may also exacerbate patient distress without improving outcomes. We investigate patient acceptability of a validated ctHPVDNA assay (NavDx) during cancer surveillance for HPV(+) oropharyngeal cancer (OPC). METHODS: Consented HPV(+) OPC participants completed the NCCN Distress Thermometer, the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS), and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scale both (1) before NavDx blood draw, and (2) after results were provided. Patients then completed a series of focused questions related to their perceptions of the assay. RESULTS: Overall, 55 patients completed the study, with 98.2 % showing no recurrence. For the NCCN Distress Thermometer, median patient distress decreased (2.0 (IQR 1-5) vs. 1.0 (IQR 0-3)) (p < 0.001) in association with NavDx. Using scores ≥ 4 as a cutoff point to define clinically elevated distress, scores also improved (36.4 % vs. 18.2 %, p = 0.031). For HADS, anxiety significantly improved (5.0 (IQR 2.0-7.0) vs. 3.0 (IQR 1.0-6.5)) (p = 0.037), but not depression (3.0 (IQR 1.0-7.0) vs. 3.0 (IQR 1.0-6.5)) (p = 0.870). FACT-G scores showed no substantial differences. On survey questionnaires, 95.5 % of patients believed the test to be helpful, and 100 % felt "somewhat" or "extremely" confident in the assay as a monitoring tool. While 59.1 % felt that it reduced anxiety, 88.4 % concordantly felt that it did not introduce anxiety. CONCLUSION: ctHPVDNA as a molecular surveillance tool reduced distress levels in HPV(+) OPC patients, with notably high patient confidence in the approach. Further investigation is warranted to judiciously incorporate this emerging modality in surveillance guidelines.

Phase II Study of Erdafitinib in Patients With Tumors With Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor Mutations or Fusions: Results From the NCI-MATCH ECOG-ACRIN Trial (EAY131) Subprotocol K2.

PURPOSE: Subprotocol K2 (EAY131-K2) of the NCI-MATCH platform trial was an open-label, single-arm, phase II study designed to evaluate the antitumor efficacy of the oral FGFR1-4 inhibitor, erdafitinib, in patients with tumors harboring FGFR1-4 mutations or fusions. METHODS: Central confirmation of tumor FGFR1-4 mutations or fusions was required for outcome analysis. Patients with urothelial carcinoma were excluded. Enrolled subjects received oral erdafitinib at a starting dose of 8 mg daily continuously until intolerable toxicity or disease progression. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) with key secondary end points of safety, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were enrolled, and 25 patients were included in the primary efficacy analysis as prespecified in the protocol. The median age was 61 years, and 52% of subjects had received ≥3 previous lines of therapy. The confirmed ORR was 16% (4 of 25 [90% CI, 5.7 to 33.0], P = .034 against the null rate of 5%). An additional seven patients experienced stable disease as best-confirmed response. Four patients had a prolonged PFS including two with recurrent WHO grade IV, IDH1-/2-wildtype glioblastoma. The median PFS and OS were 3.6 months and 11.0 months, respectively. Erdafitinib was manageable with no new safety signals. CONCLUSION: This study met its primary end point in patients with several pretreated solid tumor types harboring FGFR1-3 mutations or fusions. These findings support advancement of erdafitinib for patients with fibroblast growth factor receptor-altered tumors outside of currently approved indications in a potentially tumor-agnostic manner.

Phase II Study of Erdafitinib in Patients With Tumors With FGFR Amplifications: Results From the NCI-MATCH ECOG-ACRIN Trial (EAY131) Subprotocol K1.

PURPOSE: Despite fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors being approved in tumor types with select FGFR rearrangements or gene mutations, amplifications of FGFR represent the most common FGFR alteration across malignancies. Subprotocol K1 (EAY131-K1) of the National Cancer Institute-MATCH platform trial was designed to evaluate the antitumor efficacy of the oral FGFR1-4 inhibitor, erdafitinib, in patients with tumors harboring FGFR1-4 amplification. METHODS: EAY131-K1 was an open-label, single-arm, phase II study with central confirmation of presence of FGFR1-4 amplification in tumors. Patients with urothelial carcinoma were excluded. Enrolled patients received oral erdafitinib at a starting dose of 8 mg once daily continuously with escalation to 9 mg once daily continuously, on the basis of predefined time point assessments of phosphate levels, until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary end point was centrally assessed objective response rate (ORR), with key secondary end points being 6-month progression-free survival (PFS6), PFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were enrolled into this study with 18 included in the prespecified primary efficacy analysis. The median age of the 18 patients was 60 years, and 78% had received ≥3 previous lines of therapy. There were no confirmed responses to erdafitinib; however, five patients experienced stable disease (SD) as best response. One patient with an FGFR1-amplified breast cancer had a prolonged PFS >168 days (5.5 months). The median PFS was 1.7 months (90% CI, 1.1 to 1.8 months) and the median OS was 4.2 months (90% CI, 2.3 to 9.3 months). The estimated PFS6 rate was 13.8% (90% CI, 3.3 to 31.6). The majority of toxicities were grade 1 to 2 in nature, although there was one grade 5 treatment-related adverse event. CONCLUSION: Erdafitinib did not meet its primary end point of efficacy as determined by ORR in treatment-refractory solid tumors harboring FGFR1-4 amplifications. Our findings support that rearrangements and gene mutations, but not amplifications, of FGFR remain the established FGFR alterations with approved indications for FGFR inhibition.

Predicting Pathologic Lymph Node Positivity in cN0 Pharynx and Larynx Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Elective neck dissection is a standard of care for pharynx and most larynx cancer patients undergoing surgery, based largely on historical series. It is unclear if this is necessary for all patients in the modern era. METHODS: Patients with cN0 oropharynx, larynx, and hypopharynx cancers diagnosed from 2010-2015 undergoing primary surgery were identified in the National Cancer Data Base. RESULTS: Inclusion criteria were met by 4117 cN0 patients. The presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI) was the strongest independent predictor of pN+ (odds ratio [OR] = 4.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.56-4.93, p < 0.001). Histologic grade strongly predicted pN+ (OR 2.58, 95% CI 1.88-3.59, p < 0.001). A nomogram predicted less than 10% of cN0 patients had pN+ risk <15%. CONCLUSION: LVI and grade are the strongest predictors of pN+ among patients with cN0 pharynx and larynx cancer. Even in the modern era, pN+ rates warrant neck dissection for cN0 patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 133:1660-1666, 2023.

Comparative impact of grade on mortality across salivary cancers: A novel, unifying staging system.

BACKGROUND: The comparative impact of histologic variants and grade has not been well described. METHODS: Salivary cancer histologies were profiled using hospital and population-based cancer registries. Multivariable models were employed to assess relationships between histology, grade, and survival. RESULTS: On univariate analysis, histologic variants exhibited a wide spectrum of mortality risk (5-year overall survival (OS): 86% (acinic cell carcinoma), 78% (mucoepidermoid carcinoma), 72% (adenoid cystic carcinoma), 64% (carcinoma ex-pleomorphic adenoma), 52% (adenocarcinoma NOS), and 47% (salivary duct carcinoma) (p < 0.001). However, on multivariable analysis these differences largely vanished. Worsening grade corresponded with deteriorating survival (5-year OS: 89% [low-grade], 81% [intermediate-grade], 45% [high-grade]; p < 0.001), which was upheld on multivariable analysis and propensity score matching. Recursive partitioning analysis generated TNM + G schema (c-index 0.75) superior to the existing system (c-index 0.73). CONCLUSION: Grade represents a primary determinant of salivary cancer prognosis. Integrating grade into stage strengthens current staging systems.

A Phase Ib Study Assessing the Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of the First-in-Class Wee1 Inhibitor Adavosertib (AZD1775) as Monotherapy in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Adavosertib (AZD1775) is a first-in-class, selective, small-molecule inhibitor of Wee1. OBJECTIVE: The safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of adavosertib monotherapy were evaluated in patients with various solid-tumor types and molecular profiles. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had the following: confirmed diagnosis of ovarian cancer (OC), triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), or small-cell lung cancer (SCLC); previous treatment for metastatic/recurrent disease; and measurable disease. Patients were grouped into six matched cohorts based on tumor type and presence/absence of biomarkers and received oral adavosertib 175 mg twice a day on days 1-3 and 8-10 of a 21-day treatment cycle. RESULTS: Eighty patients received treatment in the expansion phase; median total treatment duration was 2.4 months. The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (56.3%), nausea (42.5%), fatigue (36.3%), vomiting (18.8%), and decreased appetite (12.5%). Treatment-related grade ≥ 3 AEs and serious AEs were reported in 32.5% and 10.0% of patients, respectively. AEs led to dose interruptions in 22.5%, reductions in 11.3%, and discontinuations in 16.3% of patients. One patient died following serious AEs of deep vein thrombosis (treatment related) and respiratory failure (not treatment related). Objective response rate, disease control rate, and progression-free survival were as follows: 6.3%, 68.8%, 4.5 months (OC BRCA wild type); 3.3%, 76.7%, 3.9 months (OC BRCA mutation); 0%, 69.2%, 3.1 months (TNBC biomarker [CCNE1/MYC/MYCL1/MYCN] non-amplified [NA]); 0%, 50%, 2 months (TNBC biomarker amplified); 8.3%, 33.3%, 1.3 months (SCLC biomarker NA); and 0%, 33.3%, 1.2 months (SCLC biomarker amplified). CONCLUSION: Adavosertib monotherapy was tolerated and demonstrated some antitumor activity in patients with advanced solid tumors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02482311; registered June 2015.

Low booster uptake in cancer patients despite health benefits.

Patients with cancer are at increased risk of death from COVID-19 and have reduced immune responses to SARS-CoV2 vaccines, necessitating regular boosters. We performed comprehensive chart reviews, surveys of patients attitudes, serology for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and T-cell receptor (TCR) ß sequencing for cellular responses on a cohort of 982 cancer patients receiving active cancer therapy accrued between November-3-2020 and Mar-31-2023. We found that 92·3% of patients received the primer vaccine, 70·8% received one monovalent booster, but only 30·1% received a bivalent booster. Booster uptake was lower under age 50, and among African American or Hispanic patients. Nearly all patients seroconverted after 2+ booster vaccinations (>99%) and improved cellular responses, demonstrating that repeated boosters could overcome poor response to vaccination. Receipt of booster vaccinations was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR=0·61, P=0·024). Booster uptake in high-risk cancer patients remains low and strategies to encourage booster uptake are needed. Highlights: COVID-19 booster vaccinations increase antibody levels and maintain T-cell responses against SARS-CoV-2 in patients receiving various anti-cancer therapiesBooster vaccinations reduced all-cause mortality in patientsA significant proportion of patients remain unboosted and strategies are needed to encourage patients to be up-to-date with vaccinations.

Quantitative Nodal Burden and Mortality Across Solid Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Nodal staging systems vary substantially across solid tumors, implying heterogeneity in the behavior of nodal variables in various contexts. We hypothesized, in contradiction to this, that metastatic lymph node (LN) number is a universal and dominant predictor of outcome across solid tumors. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of 1 304 498 patients in the National Cancer Database undergoing surgery between 2004 and 2015 across 16 solid cancer sites. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were constructed using restricted cubic splines to model the association between nodal number and mortality. Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was used to derive nodal classification systems for each solid cancer based on metastatic LN count. The reproducibility of these findings was assessed in 1 969 727 patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry. Two-sided tests were used for all statistical analyses. RESULTS: Consistently across disease sites, mortality risk increased continuously with increasing number of metastatic LNs (P < .001 for all spline segments). Each RPA-derived nodal classification system produced multiple prognostic groups spanning a wide spectrum of mortality risk (P < .001). Multivariable models using these RPA-derived nodal classifications demonstrated improved concordance with mortality compared with models using American Joint Committee on Cancer staging in sites where nodal classification is not based on metastatic LN count. Each RPA-derived nodal classification system was reproducible in a large validation cohort for all-cause and cause-specific mortality (P < .001). High quantitative nodal burden was the single strongest tumor-intrinsic variable associated with mortality in 12 of 16 disease sites. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative metastatic LN burden is a fundamental driver of mortality across solid cancers and should serve as a foundation for pathologic nodal staging across solid tumors.

Variations in the association of grade with survival across the head and neck cancer landscape.

BACKGROUND: Although pathologic tumor grade is a well-established prognostic risk factor that impacts staging and treatment decisions across multiple cancer types, its role in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is less certain. METHODS: HNSCC patients diagnosed from 2010 to 2015 and undergoing primary surgery in the National Cancer Data Base were identified. Propensity score matching and multivariable Cox regression were performed. RESULTS: Among 27 041 HNSCC patients, 13 941 had oral cavity cancers (OCC). Intermediate-grade (hazard ratio [HR] 1.16, 95% CI 1.07-1.26, P < .001) and high-grade (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.26-1.52, P < .001) tumors had worse survival than low-grade tumors. This magnitude was comparable to other well-established prognostic factors, including margin positivity, extranodal extension, and lymphovascular invasion. By contrast, there was no association between grade and survival in larynx/hypopharynx or HPV(-) oropharynx cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The prognostic impact of pathologic grade is highly variable across head and neck subsites and is the strongest among OCC patients.