Atezolizumab for Advanced Alveolar Soft Part Sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Alveolar soft part sarcoma (ASPS) is a rare soft-tissue sarcoma with a poor prognosis and no established therapy. Recently, encouraging responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors have been reported. METHODS: We conducted an investigator-initiated, multicenter, single-group, phase 2 study of the anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) agent atezolizumab in adult and pediatric patients with advanced ASPS. Atezolizumab was administered intravenously at a dose of 1200 mg (in patients ≥18 years of age) or 15 mg per kilogram of body weight with a 1200-mg cap (in patients <18 years of age) once every 21 days. Study end points included objective response, duration of response, and progression-free survival according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, as well as pharmacodynamic biomarkers of multistep drug action. RESULTS: A total of 52 patients were evaluated. An objective response was observed in 19 of 52 patients (37%), with 1 complete response and 18 partial responses. The median time to response was 3.6 months (range, 2.1 to 19.1), the median duration of response was 24.7 months (range, 4.1 to 55.8), and the median progression-free survival was 20.8 months. Seven patients took a treatment break after 2 years of treatment, and their responses were maintained through the data-cutoff date. No treatment-related grade 4 or 5 adverse events were recorded. Responses were noted despite variable baseline expression of programmed death 1 and PD-L1. CONCLUSIONS: Atezolizumab was effective at inducing sustained responses in approximately one third of patients with advanced ASPS. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03141684.).

Nirogacestat, a γ-Secretase Inhibitor for Desmoid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Desmoid tumors are rare, locally aggressive, highly recurrent soft-tissue tumors without approved treatments. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, international, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of nirogacestat in adults with progressing desmoid tumors according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive the oral γ-secretase inhibitor nirogacestat (150 mg) or placebo twice daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: From May 2019 through August 2020, a total of 70 patients were assigned to receive nirogacestat and 72 to receive placebo. Nirogacestat had a significant progression-free survival benefit over placebo (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.15 to 0.55; P<0.001); the likelihood of being event-free at 2 years was 76% with nirogacestat and 44% with placebo. Between-group differences in progression-free survival were consistent across prespecified subgroups. The percentage of patients who had an objective response was significantly higher with nirogacestat than with placebo (41% vs. 8%; P<0.001), with a median time to response of 5.6 months and 11.1 months, respectively; the percentage of patients with a complete response was 7% and 0%, respectively. Significant between-group differences in secondary patient-reported outcomes, including pain, symptom burden, physical or role functioning, and health-related quality of life, were observed (P≤0.01). Frequent adverse events with nirogacestat included diarrhea (in 84% of the patients), nausea (in 54%), fatigue (in 51%), hypophosphatemia (in 42%), and maculopapular rash (in 32%); 95% of adverse events were of grade 1 or 2. Among women of childbearing potential receiving nirogacestat, 27 of 36 (75%) had adverse events consistent with ovarian dysfunction, which resolved in 20 women (74%). CONCLUSIONS: Nirogacestat was associated with significant benefits with respect to progression-free survival, objective response, pain, symptom burden, physical functioning, role functioning, and health-related quality of life in adults with progressing desmoid tumors. Adverse events with nirogacestat were frequent but mostly low grade. (Funded by SpringWorks Therapeutics; DeFi ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03785964.).

Afamitresgene autoleucel for advanced synovial sarcoma and myxoid round cell liposarcoma (SPEARHEAD-1): an international, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Afamitresgene autoleucel (afami-cel) showed acceptable safety and promising efficacy in a phase 1 trial (NCT03132922). The aim of this study was to further evaluate the efficacy of afami-cel for the treatment of patients with HLA-A*02 and MAGE-A4-expressing advanced synovial sarcoma or myxoid round cell liposarcoma. METHODS: SPEARHEAD-1 was an open-label, non-randomised, phase 2 trial done across 23 sites in Canada, the USA, and Europe. The trial included three cohorts, of which the main investigational cohort (cohort 1) is reported here. Cohort 1 included patients with HLA-A*02, aged 16-75 years, with metastatic or unresectable synovial sarcoma or myxoid round cell liposarcoma (confirmed by cytogenetics) expressing MAGE-A4, and who had received at least one previous line of anthracycline-containing or ifosfamide-containing chemotherapy. Patients received a single intravenous dose of afami-cel (transduced dose range 1·0 × 109-10·0 × 109 T cells) after lymphodepletion. The primary endpoint was overall response rate in cohort 1, assessed by a masked independent review committee using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1) in the modified intention-to-treat population (all patients who received afami-cel). Adverse events, including those of special interest (cytokine release syndrome, prolonged cytopenia, and neurotoxicity), were monitored and are reported for the modified intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04044768; recruitment is closed and follow-up is ongoing for cohorts 1 and 2, and recruitment is open for cohort 3. FINDINGS: Between Dec 17, 2019, and July 27, 2021, 52 patients with cytogenetically confirmed synovial sarcoma (n=44) and myxoid round cell liposarcoma (n=8) were enrolled and received afami-cel in cohort 1. Patients were heavily pre-treated (median three [IQR two to four] previous lines of systemic therapy). Median follow-up time was 32·6 months (IQR 29·4-36·1). Overall response rate was 37% (19 of 52; 95% CI 24-51) overall, 39% (17 of 44; 24-55) for patients with synovial sarcoma, and 25% (two of eight; 3-65) for patients with myxoid round cell liposarcoma. Cytokine release syndrome occurred in 37 (71%) of 52 of patients (one grade 3 event). Cytopenias were the most common grade 3 or worse adverse events (lymphopenia in 50 [96%], neutropenia 44 [85%], leukopenia 42 [81%] of 52 patients). No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Afami-cel treatment resulted in durable responses in heavily pre-treated patients with HLA-A*02 and MAGE-A4-expressing synovial sarcoma. This study shows that T-cell receptor therapy can be used to effectively target solid tumours and provides rationale to expand this approach to other solid malignancies. FUNDING: Adaptimmune.

A phase 2 study of a brachyury-targeting vaccine in combination with radiation therapy for the treatment of advanced chordoma.

BACKGROUND: This was a single-arm, phase 2 clinical trial of Bavarian Nordic (BN)-Brachyury vaccine plus radiotherapy (RT) designed to determine the objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety of the combination in chordoma. METHODS: A total of 29 adult patients with advanced chordoma were treated with two subcutaneous priming vaccine doses of modified vaccinia Ankara-Bavarian Nordic (MVA-BN)-Brachyury and one vaccine dose of fowlpox virus (FPV)-Brachyury before RT. After RT, booster vaccinations were given with FPV-Brachyury every 4 weeks for 4 doses, then every 12 weeks (week 110). A minimum RT dose of >8 Gy in one fraction for each target was required. Response was evaluated by modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 (mRECIST), where only radiated lesions were considered targets, and by standard RECIST 1.1 in a subset of patients. RESULTS: Two of 26 evaluable patients experienced durable partial response (PR) (ORR of 7.7%; 90% confidence interval [CI], 2.6-20.8]) by mRECIST 1.1. A total of 21 patients (80.8%; 90% CI, 65.4-90.3) had stable disease, and three patients (11.5%; 90% CI, 4.7-25.6) had progressive disease as best response per mRECIST 1.1. Median PFS was not reached during the study. CONCLUSIONS: This trial confirms the safety of BN-Brachyury and RT. Although the study did not meet the predefined study goal of four responses in 29 patients, we did observe two PRs and a PFS of greater than 2 years. For a vaccine-based study in chordoma, an ultra-rare disease where response rates are low, a randomized study or novel trial designs may be required to confirm activity.

Relapsed Synovial Sarcoma: Treatment Options.

OPINION STATEMENT: Synovial sarcoma (SS) is a fusion-driven subtype of sarcoma that is a more chemo-sensitive subtype of soft tissue sarcoma. While chemotherapy options are currently standard of care, our fundamental understanding of the biology of SS is driving new therapies. We will review the current standard of care, as well as the current therapies showing promise in a clinical trial. It is our hope that by encouraging participation in clinical trials, the fundamental therapies available for SS will change the current treatment paradigm.

What Clinical Trials Are Needed for Treatment of Leiomyosarcoma?

OPINION STATEMENT: Leiomyosarcoma is one of the most common subtypes of soft tissue sarcomas accounting for approximately 20% of sarcomas. As leiomyosarcoma patients frequently develop metastatic disease, effective systemic therapies are needed to improve clinical outcomes. The overall activity of the currently available conventional systemic therapies and the prognosis of patients with advanced and/or metastatic disease are poor. As such, the treatment of this patient population remains challenging. As a result, there is a clear unmet medical need, and designing and performing meaningful clinical studies are of utmost importance to improve the prognosis of this patient group. Therefore, the aim of this review is to briefly summarize state-of-the-art treatments for leiomyosarcoma patients and to describe trial characteristics needed for informative clinical studies.

Real-world outcomes of patients with locally advanced or metastatic epithelioid sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on the real-world effectiveness and safety of systemic therapies for advanced (surgically unresectable and/or metastatic) epithelioid sarcoma (ES). METHODS: A retrospective medical records review was conducted in patients with advanced ES who were initiating first-line or ≥2 lines of systemic therapy (2000-2017) at 5 US cancer centers. The real-world overall response rate (rwORR), the duration of response (rwDOR), the disease control rate (rwDCR) (defined as stable disease for ≥32 weeks or any duration of response), and progression-free survival (rwPFS) were assessed by radiology reports. Overall survival (OS), rwDOR, and rwPFS were estimated from the time therapy was initiated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Serious adverse events were assessed. RESULTS: Of 74 patients (median age at diagnosis, 33 years; range, 10.6-76.3 years), 72% were male, and 85% had metastatic disease. The median number of lines of therapy was 2 (range, 1-7 lines of therapy), and 46 patients (62%) received ≥2 lines of systemic therapy. First-line regimens were usually anthracycline-based (54%) or gemcitabine-based (24%). For patients receiving first-line systemic therapy, the rwORR was 15%, the rwDCR was 20%, the median rwDOR was 3.3 months (95% CI, 2.1-5.2 months), the median rwPFS was 2.5 months (95% CI, 1.7, 6.9 months), and the median OS was 15.2 months (95% CI, 11.4-21.7 months). For those who received ≥2 lines of systemic therapy, the rwORR was 9%, the rwDCR was 20%, the median rwDOR was 4.5 months (95% CI, 0.7-5.6 months), and the median rwPFS was 6.0 months (95% CI, 3.2-7.4 months). Over one-half of patients (51.4%) experienced an adverse event, most frequently febrile neutropenia (14%), pain (10%), anemia, dyspnea, fever, thrombocytopenia, or transaminitis (5% each). CONCLUSIONS: Systemic therapies demonstrate limited efficacy in patients with advanced ES and have associated toxicities.

Phase II study of pazopanib with oral topotecan in patients with metastatic and non-resectable soft tissue and bone sarcomas.

BACKGROUND: Pazopanib is active in refractory soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) and significantly prolongs PFS. Prior studies of combinations of metronomic topotecan with pazopanib have indicated preclinical evidence of response in patients with sarcoma. METHODS: This prospective, single arm, phase II study evaluated the efficacy of the combination of pazopanib with topotecan in patients with metastatic or unresectable non-adipocytic STS. Furthermore, it incorporated exploratory arms for osteosarcoma and liposarcoma. The primary endpoint was progression-free rate at 12 weeks in the non-adipocytic STS cohort. RESULTS: 57.5% of patients in the non-adipocytic STS cohort were progression free at 12 weeks, which did not meet the primary endpoint of the study (66%). The exploratory osteosarcoma cohort exceeded previously established phase II trial comparator data benchmark of 12% with a PFR at 12 weeks of 69.55%. Treatment with the combination of pazopanib and topotecan was accompanied by a grade 3 or 4 toxicities in most patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective trial in refractory metastatic or unresectable STS and osteosarcoma, the combination of pazopanib with topotecan did not meet its primary endpoint of progression-free rate at 12 weeks. The combination of pazopanib with topotecan was associated with a high degree of toxicity.

Sorafenib for Advanced and Refractory Desmoid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Desmoid tumors (also referred to as aggressive fibromatosis) are connective tissue neoplasms that can arise in any anatomical location and infiltrate the mesentery, neurovascular structures, and visceral organs. There is no standard of care. METHODS: In this double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 87 patients with progressive, symptomatic, or recurrent desmoid tumors to receive either sorafenib (400-mg tablet once daily) or matching placebo. Crossover to the sorafenib group was permitted for patients in the placebo group who had disease progression. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival; rates of objective response and adverse events were also evaluated. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 27.2 months, the 2-year progression-free survival rate was 81% (95% confidence interval [CI], 69 to 96) in the sorafenib group and 36% (95% CI, 22 to 57) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.31; P<0.001). Before crossover, the objective response rate was 33% (95% CI, 20 to 48) in the sorafenib group and 20% (95% CI, 8 to 38) in the placebo group. The median time to an objective response among patients who had a response was 9.6 months (interquartile range, 6.6 to 16.7) in the sorafenib group and 13.3 months (interquartile range, 11.2 to 31.1) in the placebo group. The objective responses are ongoing. Among patients who received sorafenib, the most frequently reported adverse events were grade 1 or 2 events of rash (73%), fatigue (67%), hypertension (55%), and diarrhea (51%). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with progressive, refractory, or symptomatic desmoid tumors, sorafenib significantly prolonged progression-free survival and induced durable responses. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02066181 .).

Tazemetostat in advanced epithelioid sarcoma with loss of INI1/SMARCB1: an international, open-label, phase 2 basket study.

BACKGROUND: Epithelioid sarcoma is a rare and aggressive soft-tissue sarcoma subtype. Over 90% of tumours have lost INI1 expression, leading to oncogenic dependence on the transcriptional repressor EZH2. In this study, we report the clinical activity and safety of tazemetostat, an oral selective EZH2 inhibitor, in patients with epithelioid sarcoma. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 2 basket study, patients were enrolled from 32 hospitals and clinics in Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Taiwan, the USA, and the UK into seven cohorts of patients with different INI1-negative solid tumours or synovial sarcoma. Patients eligible for the epithelioid sarcoma cohort (cohort 5) were aged 16 years or older with histologically confirmed, locally advanced or metastatic epithelioid sarcoma; documented loss of INI1 expression by immunohistochemical analysis or biallelic SMARCB1 (the gene that encodes INI1) alterations, or both; and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-2. Patients received 800 mg tazemetostat orally twice per day in continuous 28-day cycles until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate measured according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Secondary endpoints were duration of response, disease control rate at 32 weeks, progression-free survival, overall survival, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses (primary results reported elsewhere). Time to response was also assessed as an exploratory endpoint. Activity and safety were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (ie, patients who received one or more doses of tazemetostat). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02601950, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Dec 22, 2015, and July 7, 2017, 62 patients with epithelioid sarcoma were enrolled in the study and deemed eligible for inclusion in this cohort. All 62 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Nine (15% [95% CI 7-26]) of 62 patients had an objective response at data cutoff (Sept 17, 2018). At a median follow-up of 13·8 months (IQR 7·8-19·0), median duration of response was not reached (95% CI 9·2-not estimable). 16 (26% [95% CI 16-39]) patients had disease control at 32 weeks. Median time to response was 3·9 months (IQR 1·9-7·4). Median progression-free survival was 5·5 months (95% CI 3·4-5·9), and median overall survival was 19·0 months (11·0-not estimable). Grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events included anaemia (four [6%]) and weight loss (two [3%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in two patients (one seizure and one haemoptysis). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Tazemetostat was well tolerated and showed clinical activity in this cohort of patients with advanced epithelioid sarcoma characterised by loss of INI1/SMARCB1. Tazemetostat has the potential to improve outcomes in patients with advanced epithelioid sarcoma. A phase 1b/3 trial of tazemetostat plus doxorubicin in the front-line setting is currently underway (NCT04204941). FUNDING: Epizyme.

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.

Palbociclib and cetuximab in platinum-resistant and in cetuximab-resistant human papillomavirus-unrelated head and neck cancer: a multicentre, multigroup, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Most head and neck squamous-cell carcinomas (HNSCCs) are driven by p16INK4A inactivation and cyclin D1 overexpression that results in hyperactivation of cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6), rather than by the human papillomavirus (HPV). Deregulated cyclin D1 expression also causes resistance to EGFR inhibitors. We previously reported that palbociclib (a selective CDK4/6 inhibitor) given with cetuximab (an EGFR inhibitor) was safe. The aim of this study was to establish the proportion of patients achieving an objective response with palbociclib and cetuximab in recurrent or metastatic HNSCC. METHODS: We did a multicentre, multigroup, phase 2 trial to evaluate the activity of palbociclib and cetuximab in platinum-resistant (group 1) and cetuximab-resistant (group 2) HPV-unrelated HNSCC. The study was done across eight university sites in the USA. Eligibility required measurable disease (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1·1 [RECIST 1·1]), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2, age of 18 years or older, and disease progression on platinum but cetuximab-naive (group 1) or disease progression on cetuximab (group 2). All patients received palbociclib orally (125 mg/day, on days 1-21) and intravenous cetuximab (400 mg/m2 on cycle one, day 1, then 250 mg/m2 once per week) in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was objective response (complete responses and partial responses per RECIST 1·1). Analyses were done per protocol. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02101034, and is ongoing, but both groups are closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Oct 19, 2015, and Nov 7, 2018, 62 patients were enrolled onto the trial: 30 patients were enrolled in group 1 and 32 in group 2. Median follow-up was 5·4 months (IQR 4·4-12·1) for group 1 and 5·5 months (4·3-8·3) for group 2. In group 1, of 28 evaluable patients, an objective response was achieved by 11 (39%; 95% CI 22-59). In group 2, of 27 evaluable patients, an objective response was achieved by five (19%; 6-38) in group 2. The most common grade 3-4 palbociclib-related adverse event was neutropenia (in 21 [34%] of 62 patients). No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: In patients with platinum-resistant or cetuximab-resistant HPV-unrelated HNSCC, palbociclib and cetuximab results in promising activity outcomes. Further studies of CDK4/6 inhibitors are warranted in HPV-unrelated HNSCC. FUNDING: Pfizer.

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.

Nivolumab with or without ipilimumab treatment for metastatic sarcoma (Alliance A091401): two open-label, non-comparative, randomised, phase 2 trials.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic sarcoma have limited treatment options. Nivolumab and ipilimumab are monoclonal antibodies targeting PD-1 and CTLA-4, respectively. We investigated the activity and safety of nivolumab alone or in combination with ipilimumab in patients with locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic sarcoma. METHODS: We did a multicentre, open-label, non-comparative, randomised, phase 2 study that enrolled patients aged 18 years or older and had central pathology confirmation of sarcoma with at least one measurable lesion by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1, evidence of metastatic, locally advanced or unresectable disease, an ECOG performance status of 0-1, and received at least one previous line of systemic therapy. Patients were assigned to treatment in an unblinded manner, as this trial was conducted as two independent, non-comparative phase 2 trials. Enrolled patients were assigned (1:1) via a dynamic allocation algorithm to intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses. Thereafter, all patients received nivolumab monotherapy (3 mg/kg) every 2 weeks for up to 2 years. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic soft tissue sarcoma achieving a confirmed objective response. Analysis was per protocol. This study is ongoing although enrolment is closed. It is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02500797. FINDINGS: Between Aug 13, 2015, and March 17, 2016, 96 patients from 15 sites in the USA underwent central pathology review for eligibility and 85 eligible patients, including planned over-enrolment, were allocated to receive either nivolumab monotherapy (43 patients) or nivolumab plus ipilimumab (42 patients). The primary endpoint analysis was done according to protocol specifications in the first 76 eligible patients (38 patients per group). The number of confirmed responses was two (5% [92% CI 1-16] of 38 patients) in the nivolumab group and six (16% [7-30] of 38 patients) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were anaemia (four [10%] patients), decreased lymphocyte count (three [7%]), and dehydration, increased lipase, pain, pleural effusion, respiratory failure, secondary benign neoplasm, and urinary tract obstruction (two [5%] patients each) among the 42 patients in the nivolumab group and anaemia (eight [19%] patients), hypotension (four [10%] patients), and pain and urinary tract infection (three [7%] patients each) among the 42 patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group. Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in eight (19%) of 42 patients receiving monotherapy and 11 (26%) of 42 patients receiving combination therapy, and included anaemia, anorexia, dehydration, decreased platelet count, diarrhoea, fatigue, fever, increased creatinine, increased alanine aminotransferase, increased aspartate aminotransferase, hyponatraemia, pain, pleural effusion, and pruritus. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Nivolumab alone does not warrant further study in an unselected sarcoma population given the limited efficacy. Nivolumab combined with ipilimumab demonstrated promising efficacy in certain sarcoma subtypes, with a manageable safety profile comparable to current available treatment options. The combination therapy met its predefined primary study endpoint; further evaluation of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in a randomised study is warranted. FUNDING: Alliance Clinical Trials in Oncology, National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cycle for Survival.

A Phase II Study of Tumor Ablation in Patients with Metastatic Sarcoma Stable on Chemotherapy.

LESSONS LEARNED: Ablation therapy appears to be a reasonably safe and effective approach to obtain a significant treatment-free interval for a subset of patients with limited sites of metastatic disease for which systemic control can be obtained with six cycles of chemotherapy. BACKGROUND: Metastatic sarcoma often becomes resistant to treatment by chemotherapy. There is sometimes prolonged stable disease from active chemotherapy that provides a window of opportunity for an intervention to prolong disease-free survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a phase II study in patients with metastatic sarcoma who had been stable on six cycles of chemotherapy who then received ablation therapy to their residual disease. Histologies captured in this study included leiomyosarcoma, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor, pleiomorphic rhabdomyosarcoma, and myxoid liposarcoma. Sites ablated included lung metastases and retroperitoneal metastatic deposits. In this study, up to three lesions were ablated in any given interventional radiology session. After ablation, patients were not treated with any further therapy but were followed by surveillance imaging to determine progression-free rate (PFR). RESULTS: Although terminated early because of slow accrual, this study demonstrated a 3-month PFR of 75% for this cohort of eight patients treated with ablation performed after completion of six cycles of chemotherapy with stable disease. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 19.74 months, and the median overall survival (OS) was not reached. CONCLUSION: Our data are the first prospective study to suggest that ablation therapy in selected patients who are stable on chemotherapy can provide a significant progression-free interval off therapy and warrants further study in a randomized trial.

Long-term effects of crizotinib in ALK-positive tumors (excluding NSCLC): A phase 1b open-label study.

Crizotinib, an inhibitor of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), MET, and ROS1, is approved for treatment of patients with ALK-positive or ROS1-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, ALK rearrangements are also implicated in other malignancies, including anaplastic large-cell lymphoma and inflammatory myofibroblastic tumors (IMTs). In this ongoing, multicenter, single-arm, open-label phase 1b study (PROFILE 1013; NCT01121588), patients with ALK-positive advanced malignancies other than NSCLC were to receive a starting dose of crizotinib 250 mg twice daily. Primary endpoints were safety and objective responses based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 or National Cancer Institute International Response Criteria. Forty-four patients were enrolled (lymphoma, n = 18; IMT, n = 9; other tumors, n = 17). The objective response rate was 53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 28-77) for lymphoma, with 8 complete responses (CRs) and 1 partial response (PR); 67% (95% CI, 30-93) for IMTs, with 1 CR and 5 PRs; and 12% (95% CI, 2-36) for other tumors, with 2 PRs in patients affected by colon carcinoma and medullary thyroid cancer, respectively. The median duration of treatment was almost 3 years for patients with lymphoma and IMTs, with 2-year progression-free survival of 63% and 67%, respectively. The most common treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea (45.5%) and vision disorders (45.5%), mostly grade 1. These findings indicate strong and durable activity of crizotinib in ALK-positive lymphomas and IMTs. The safety profile was consistent with the known safety profile of crizotinib even with long-term treatment.

Whole-genome analysis informs breast cancer response to aromatase inhibition.

To correlate the variable clinical features of oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer with somatic alterations, we studied pretreatment tumour biopsies accrued from patients in two studies of neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy by massively parallel sequencing and analysis. Eighteen significantly mutated genes were identified, including five genes (RUNX1, CBFB, MYH9, MLL3 and SF3B1) previously linked to haematopoietic disorders. Mutant MAP3K1 was associated with luminal A status, low-grade histology and low proliferation rates, whereas mutant TP53 was associated with the opposite pattern. Moreover, mutant GATA3 correlated with suppression of proliferation upon aromatase inhibitor treatment. Pathway analysis demonstrated that mutations in MAP2K4, a MAP3K1 substrate, produced similar perturbations as MAP3K1 loss. Distinct phenotypes in oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer are associated with specific patterns of somatic mutations that map into cellular pathways linked to tumour biology, but most recurrent mutations are relatively infrequent. Prospective clinical trials based on these findings will require comprehensive genome sequencing.

Doxorubicin plus evofosfamide versus doxorubicin alone in locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma (TH CR-406/SARC021): an international, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Evofosfamide is a hypoxia-activated prodrug of bromo-isophosphoramide mustard. We aimed to assess the benefit of adding evofosfamide to doxorubicin as first-line therapy for advanced soft-tissue sarcomas. METHODS: We did this international, open-label, randomised, phase 3, multicentre trial (TH CR-406/SARC021) at 81 academic or community investigational sites in 13 countries. Eligible patients were aged 15 years or older with a diagnosis of an advanced unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma, of intermediate or high grade, for which no standard curative therapy was available, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive doxorubicin alone (75 mg/m2 via bolus injection administered over 5-20 min or continuous intravenous infusion for 6-96 h on day 1 of every 21-day cycle for up to six cycles) or doxorubicin (given via the same dose procedure) plus evofosfamide (300 mg/m2 intravenously for 30-60 min on days 1 and 8 of every 21-day cycle for up to six cycles). After six cycles of treatment, patients in the single-drug doxorubicin group were followed up expectantly whereas patients with stable or responsive disease in the combination group were allowed to continue with evofosfamide monotherapy until documented disease progression. A web-based central randomisation with block sizes of two and four was stratified by extent of disease, doxorubicin administration method, and previous systemic therapy. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in all patients who received any amount of study drug. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01440088. FINDINGS: Between Sept 26, 2011, and Jan 22, 2014, 640 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (317 to doxorubicin plus evofosfamide and 323 to doxorubicin alone), all of whom were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The overall survival endpoint was not reached (hazard ratio 1·06, 95% CI 0·88-1·29; p=0·527), with a median overall survival of 18·4 months (95% CI 15·6-22·1) with doxorubicin plus evofosfamide versus 19·0 months (16·2-22·4) with doxorubicin alone. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in both groups were haematological, including anaemia (150 [48%] of 313 patients in the doxorubicin plus evofosfamide group vs 65 [21%] of 308 in the doxorubicin group), neutropenia (47 [15%] vs 92 [30%]), febrile neutropenia (57 [18%] vs 34 [11%]), leucopenia (22 [7%] vs 17 [6%]), decreased neutrophil count (31 [10%] vs 41 [13%]), and decreased white blood cell count (39 [13%] vs 33 [11%]). Grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia was more common in the combination group (45 [14%]) than in the doxorubicin alone group (four [1%]), as was grade 3-4 stomatitis (26 [8%] vs seven [2%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 145 (46%) of 313 patients in the combination group and 99 (32%) of 308 in the doxorubicin alone group. Five (2%) patients died from treatment-related causes in the combination group (sepsis [n=2], septic shock [n=1], congestive cardiac failure [n=1], and unknown cause [n=1]) versus one (<1%) patient in the doxorubicin alone group (lactic acidosis [n=1]). INTERPRETATION: The addition of evofosfamide to doxorubicin as first-line therapy did not improve overall survival compared with single-drug doxorubicin in patients with locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic soft-tissue sarcomas and so this combination cannot be recommended in this setting. FUNDING: Threshold Pharmaceuticals.

Pembrolizumab in advanced soft-tissue sarcoma and bone sarcoma (SARC028): a multicentre, two-cohort, single-arm, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced sarcomas have a poor prognosis and few treatment options that improve overall survival. Chemotherapy and targeted therapies offer short-lived disease control. We assessed pembrolizumab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, for safety and activity in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma or bone sarcoma. METHODS: In this two-cohort, single-arm, open-label, phase 2 study, we enrolled patients with soft-tissue sarcoma or bone sarcoma from 12 academic centres in the USA that were members of the Sarcoma Alliance for Research through Collaboration (SARC). Patients with soft-tissue sarcoma had to be aged 18 years or older to enrol; patients with bone sarcoma could enrol if they were aged 12 years or older. Patients had histological evidence of metastatic or surgically unresectable locally advanced sarcoma, had received up to three previous lines of systemic anticancer therapy, had at least one measurable lesion according to the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1, and had at least one lesion accessible for biopsy. All patients were treated with 200 mg intravenous pembrolizumab every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response. Patients who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab were included in the safety analysis and patients who progressed or reached at least one scan assessment were included in the activity analysis. Accrual is ongoing in some disease cohorts. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02301039. FINDINGS: Between March 13, 2015, and Feb 18, 2016, we enrolled 86 patients, 84 of whom received pembrolizumab (42 in each disease cohort) and 80 of whom were evaluable for response (40 in each disease cohort). Median follow-up was 17·8 months (IQR 12·3-19·3). Seven (18%) of 40 patients with soft-tissue sarcoma had an objective response, including four (40%) of ten patients with undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma, two (20%) of ten patients with liposarcoma, and one (10%) of ten patients with synovial sarcoma. No patients with leiomyosarcoma (n=10) had an objective response. Two (5%) of 40 patients with bone sarcoma had an objective response, including one (5%) of 22 patients with osteosarcoma and one (20%) of five patients with chondrosarcoma. None of the 13 patients with Ewing's sarcoma had an objective response. The most frequent grade 3 or worse adverse events were anaemia (six [14%]), decreased lymphocyte count (five [12%]), prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time (four [10%]), and decreased platelet count (three [7%]) in the bone sarcoma group, and anaemia, decreased lymphocyte count, and prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time in the soft-tissue sarcoma group (three [7%] each). Nine (11%) patients (five [12%] in the bone sarcoma group and four [10%] in the soft-tissue sarcoma group) had treatment-emergent serious adverse events (SAEs), five of whom had immune-related SAEs, including two with adrenal insufficiency, two with pneumonitis, and one with nephritis. INTERPRETATION: The primary endpoint of overall response was not met for either cohort. However, pembrolizumab showed encouraging activity in patients with undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma or dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Enrolment to expanded cohorts of those subtypes is ongoing to confirm and characterise the activity of pembrolizumab. FUNDING: Merck, SARC, Sarcoma Foundation of America, QuadW Foundation, Pittsburgh Cure Sarcoma, and Ewan McGregor.

Olaratumab and doxorubicin versus doxorubicin alone for treatment of soft-tissue sarcoma: an open-label phase 1b and randomised phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment with doxorubicin is a present standard of care for patients with metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma and median overall survival for those treated is 12-16 months, but few, if any, novel treatments or chemotherapy combinations have been able to improve these poor outcomes. Olaratumab is a human antiplatelet-derived growth factor receptor α monoclonal antibody that has antitumour activity in human sarcoma xenografts. We aimed to assess the efficacy of olaratumab plus doxorubicin in patients with advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma. METHODS: We did an open-label phase 1b and randomised phase 2 study of doxorubicin plus olaratumab treatment in patients with unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma at 16 clinical sites in the USA. For both the phase 1b and phase 2 parts of the study, eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had a histologically confirmed diagnosis of locally advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma not previously treated with an anthracycline, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2, and available tumour tissue to determine PDGFRα expression by immunohistochemistry. In the phase 2 part of the study, patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either olaratumab (15 mg/kg) intravenously on day 1 and day 8 plus doxorubicin (75 mg/m(2)) or doxorubicin alone (75 mg/m(2)) on day 1 of each 21-day cycle for up to eight cycles. Randomisation was dynamic and used the minimisation randomisation technique. The phase 1b primary endpoint was safety and the phase 2 primary endpoint was progression-free survival using a two-sided α level of 0.2 and statistical power of 0.8. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01185964. FINDINGS: 15 patients were enrolled and treated with olaratumab plus doxorubicin in the phase 1b study, and 133 patients were randomised (66 to olaratumab plus doxorubicin; 67 to doxorubicin alone) in the phase 2 trial, 129 (97%) of whom received at least one dose of study treatment (64 received olaratumab plus doxorubicin, 65 received doxorubicin). Median progression-free survival in phase 2 was 6.6 months (95% CI 4.1-8.3) with olaratumab plus doxorubicin and 4.1 months (2.8-5.4) with doxorubicin (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0.67; 0.44-1.02, p=0.0615). Median overall survival was 26.5 months (20.9-31.7) with olaratumab plus doxorubicin and 14.7 months (9.2-17.1) with doxorubicin (stratified HR 0.46, 0.30-0.71, p=0.0003). The objective response rate was 18.2% (9.8-29.6) with olaratumab plus doxorubicin and 11.9% (5.3-22.2) with doxorubicin (p=0.3421). Steady state olaratumab serum concentrations were reached during cycle 3 with mean maximum and trough concentrations ranging from 419 µg/mL (geometric coefficient of variation in percentage [CV%] 26.2) to 487 µg/mL (CV% 33.0) and from 123 µg/mL (CV% 31.2) to 156 µg/mL (CV% 38.0), respectively. Adverse events that were more frequent with olaratumab plus doxorubicin versus doxorubicin alone included neutropenia (37 [58%] vs 23 [35%]), mucositis (34 [53%] vs 23 [35%]), nausea (47 [73%] vs 34 [52%]), vomiting (29 [45%] vs 12 [18%]), and diarrhoea (22 [34%] vs 15 [23%]). Febrile neutropenia of grade 3 or higher was similar in both groups (olaratumab plus doxorubicin: eight [13%] of 64 patients vs doxorubicin: nine [14%] of 65 patients). INTERPRETATION: This study of olaratumab with doxorubicin in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma met its predefined primary endpoint for progression-free survival and achieved a highly significant improvement of 11.8 months in median overall survival, suggesting a potential shift in the treatment of soft-tissue sarcoma. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.