Mechanisms and therapeutic implications of hypermutation in gliomas.

A high tumour mutational burden (hypermutation) is observed in some gliomas1-5; however, the mechanisms by which hypermutation develops and whether it predicts the response to immunotherapy are poorly understood. Here we comprehensively analyse the molecular determinants of mutational burden and signatures in 10,294 gliomas. We delineate two main pathways to hypermutation: a de novo pathway associated with constitutional defects in DNA polymerase and mismatch repair (MMR) genes, and a more common post-treatment pathway, associated with acquired resistance driven by MMR defects in chemotherapy-sensitive gliomas that recur after treatment with the chemotherapy drug temozolomide. Experimentally, the mutational signature of post-treatment hypermutated gliomas was recapitulated by temozolomide-induced damage in cells with MMR deficiency. MMR-deficient gliomas were characterized by a lack of prominent T cell infiltrates, extensive intratumoral heterogeneity, poor patient survival and a low rate of response to PD-1 blockade. Moreover, although bulk analyses did not detect microsatellite instability in MMR-deficient gliomas, single-cell whole-genome sequencing analysis of post-treatment hypermutated glioma cells identified microsatellite mutations. These results show that chemotherapy can drive the acquisition of hypermutated populations without promoting a response to PD-1 blockade and supports the diagnostic use of mutational burden and signatures in cancer.

Sequence analyses of relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphomas unravel three genetic subgroups of patients and the GNA13 mutant as poor prognostic biomarker, results of LNH-EP1 study.

Advances in molecular profiling of newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) have recently refine genetic subgroups. Genetic subgroups remain undetermined at the time of relapse or refractory (RR) disease. This study aims to decipher genetic subgroups and search for prognostic molecular biomarkers in patients with RR-DLBCL. From 2015 to 2021, targeted next-generation sequencing analyses of germline-matched tumor samples and fresh tissue from RR-DLBCL patients were performed. Unsupervised clustering of somatic mutations was performed and correlations with patient outcome were sought. A number of 120 patients with RR-DLBCL were included in LNH-EP1 study and a molecular tumor landscape was successfully analyzed in 87% of patients (104/120 tumor samples). The median age was 67.5 years (range 27.4-87.4), median number of previous treatments was 2 (range 1-9). The most frequently mutated genes were TP53 (n = 53 mutations; 42% of samples), CREBBP (n = 39; 32%), BCL2 (n = 86; 31%), KMT2D (n = 39; 28%) and PIM1 (n = 54; 22%). Unsupervised clustering separated three genetic subgroups entitled BST (enriched in BCL2, SOCS1, and TNFRSF14 mutations); TKS (enriched in TP53, KMT2D, and STAT6 mutations); and PCM (enriched in PIM1, CD79B, and MYD88 mutations). Median overall survival (OS) was 11.0 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.1-12.6) months. OS was not significantly different between the three genetic subgroups. GNA13 mutant was significantly associated with an increased risk of death (hazard ratio: 6.6 [95% CI: 2.1-20.6]; p = .0011) and shorter OS (p = .0340). At the time of relapse or refractory disease, three genetic subgroups of DLBCL patients were delineated, which could help advance precision molecular medicine programs.

Evaluation of supportive care needs, sexuality and quality of life in phase 1 trials: a prospective monocentric study.

PURPOSE: Patients enrolled in oncology phase 1 trials (ph1) usually have advanced heavily pre-treated cancers with few therapeutic options. Quality of life (QoL) is one of the key cancer-treatment outcome measures, especially in ph1, and sexuality is an important part of Qol but rarely explored. This prospective study aims to assess supportive care needs, QoL and sexuality in ph1. METHODS: Between September 2020 and June 2021, we prospectively recruited patients enrolled in ph1 at Gustave Roussy in France. Supportive care needs, QoL (EORTC QLQ-C30) and sexuality (female sexual function index for women, male sexual health questionnaire [MSHQ] for men) were assessed at baseline, one, three and 5 months. We performed multivariate analyses to identify associations between clinical characteristics, QoL and quality of sexual life over time. RESULTS: At baseline, we analyzed 187 patients (45% women (n = 84) and 55% men (n = 103)). Patients expressed the need for consultations in pain management, nutrition, psychology and sexology in 28%, 26%, 19% and 9%, respectively. Lower global QoL was independently associated with Royal Marsden Hospital score (p = 0.012), urogenital location tumor (p = 0.021), elevated CRP levels (p = 0.014) and pain intensity (p = 0.005). Ninety-two percent of women had sexual dysfunction. In men, a lower MSHQ score was independently associated with urogenital location tumor (p = 0.021), ECOG Performance Status (p = 0.006), comorbidity at risk (p = 0.024) and pain intensity (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: There are significant needs for supportive care in ph1, especially in some subgroups of patients. New models of care should be developed to improve early phase pathways.

Patterns of progression in patients treated for immuno-oncology antibodies combination.

BACKGROUND: New patterns of progression under immune-oncology (IO) antibodies (mAb) have been described such as pseudoprogression. Except for melanoma, variations between studies reveal difficulties to establish their prevalence. METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled patients participating in IO phase I trials at Gustave Roussy cancer center for solid tumors excluding melanoma. Radiological assessment according to iRECIST was correlated with prospectively registered patient characteristics and outcomes. Pseudoprogression (PsPD) was defined as RECIST-defined progression followed by stabilization or decrease at the next imaging, and dissociated response (DisR) as concomitant decrease in some tumor lesions and increase in others at a same timepoint. RESULTS: Among 360 patients included, 74% received IO mAb combination: 45% with another IO mAb, 20% with targeted therapy and 10% with radiotherapy. The overall response rate was 19.7%. PsPD were observed in 10 (2.8%) patients and DisR in 12 (3.3%) patients. Atypical responses (AR), including PsPD and DisR, were not associated with any patient's baseline characteristics. Compare with typical responder patients, patients experiencing AR presented a shorter iPFS (HR 0.34; p < 0.001) and OS (HR 0.27; p = 0.026). Among the 203 patients who progressed in 12 weeks, 80 (39.4%) patients were treated beyond progression. PD was confirmed in 80% of cases, while 10% of patients presented a response. CONCLUSION: Pseudoprogression and dissociated response are uncommon patterns of progression. Their prevalence should be balanced with the rate of real progressing patients treated beyond progression. Prognosis or on-treatment biomarkers are needed to identify early patients who will benefit from immunotherapy.

Phase 1 study of 2 high dose intensity schedules of the pan-Notch inhibitor crenigacestat (LY3039478) in combination with prednisone in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer.

Background Crenigacestat is a potent Notch inhibitor that decreases Notch signaling and its downstream biological effects. Here, we report the results from Part F of study 16F-MC-JJCA designed to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and antitumor activity of crenigacestat with prednisone in advanced or metastatic cancer. The combination was planned to mitigate gastrointestinal toxicities. Methods Eligible patients (Study Part F) received crenigacestat loading dose (75 mg, escalating to 150 mg) administered thrice weekly (TIW) (F1) or twice weekly (BIW) (F2) for 2 weeks during Cycle 1, followed by 50 mg TIW from week 3 onwards. Prednisone was co-administered for 2 weeks in Cycle 1. Results Twenty-eight patients were enrolled; 11 in F1 (median age, 63 years), 17 in F2 (median age, 50 years). Dose-limiting toxicities were Grade 3 increased serum amylase and Grade 2 fatigue in F1, and Grade 4 hypophosphatemia and Grade 3 rash maculo-papular in F2. The maximum tolerated dose was 75 mg in F1 and 100 mg in F2. Best overall response was stable disease (F1, 6 [54.5%] patients; F2, 11 [64.7%] patients). Pharmacokinetic was dose proportional. Prednisone did not modify PK of crenigacestat, and both F1 and F2 achieved pharmacodynamics effects on evaluable tumor tissue samples. Conclusions This study demonstrated the potential use of prednisone to reduce gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities of a Notch inhibitor without affecting its PK. The safety profile observed was consistent with Notch pathway inhibitors, and the maximum tolerated dose was 75 mg TIW and 100 mg BIW in F1 and F2, respectively. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01695005.

Systemic Therapy of Common Tumours in Older Patients: Challenges and Opportunities. A Young International Society of Geriatric Oncology Review Paper.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Decision-making for systemic treatments in older patients with cancer is difficult because of concerns for decreased organ function, risk of toxicity, limited life expectancy due to comorbidities and the lack of evidence available to guide its management in this population. Here, we review the data on the role of systemic agents for the treatment of common malignancies in this age group. RECENT FINDINGS: Evidence on the use of systemic treatments for older patients with cancer is increasing, especially for newer options including immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted agents that provide comparable benefit in older and younger patients. Nonetheless, the risks for short- and long-term toxicities need to be considered. More research is warranted and represents a unique opportunity to increase the knowledge on cancer treatment for older adults. Healthy, older individuals should be considered for standard systemic treatment options, whereas those at risk based on geriatric assessments require adjusted plans. Geriatric assessments are key for decision-making.

Clinical consideration for choosing combination therapies in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: age, Eastern Cooperative Organization performance status 2, steroids and antibiotics.

Immune checkpoint inhibition completely changed our approach of cancer therapeutics and led to interesting response rate in a wide spectrum of tumors. However, only a portion of patients benefits from immune checkpoint blockers. To improve response rates, monoclonal antibodies targeting costimulatory receptors called PD-1 or CTLA-4 are combined together or with different therapies such as chemotherapy or antiangiogenic drugs. Some of these combinations are already approved and used in daily practice, but the safety and efficacy in particular populations such as older patients, Eastern Cooperative Organization performance status 2 or patients taking corticosteroids or antibiotics remain unclear. This special report focuses on the data available for these populations with a focus on non-small-cell lung cancer.

Time to progression ratio in cancer patients enrolled in early phase clinical trials: time for new guidelines?

BACKGROUND: Reliable evaluation of treatment benefit in early phase clinical trials is necessary. The time to progression ratio (TTPr), which compares successive TTP in a single patient, is a powerful criteria for determining targeted or immune therapies efficacy. METHODS: We evaluated 205 TTPr in a large cohort of 177 advanced cancer patients enrolled in at least two Phase 1/1b trials (out of 2827 phase 1/1b-treated patients) at Gustave Roussy. RESULTS: This first wide description of TTPr showed that, under the hypothesis of overall absence of treatment line effect, the median TTPr was 0.7 and that 25% of patients presented a TTPr above the conventional efficacy threshold of 1.3. CONCLUSIONS: A higher median TTPr and a larger proportion of patients above the 1.3 threshold should therefore be achieved to conclude to drug efficacy. New guidelines for TTPr interpretation and calibration are proposed, which warrant independent prospective validation.

Outcomes and prognostic factors for relapsed or refractory lymphoma patients in phase I clinical trials.

Background Although safety and prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) have been extensively studied in Phase I clinical trials on patients with solid tumours, data on lymphoma trials are scarce. Here, we investigated safety, outcomes and prognostic factors in relapsed or refractory lymphoma patients included in a series of Phase I trials. Method and patients All consecutive adult patients with recurrent/refractory lymphoma enrolled in 26 Phase I trials at a single cancer centre in France between January 2008 and June 2016 were retrospectively assessed. Results 133 patients (males: 65%) were included in the analysis. The median (range) age was 65 (23-86). Aggressive non-Hodgkin, indolent non-Hodgkin and Hodgkin types accounted for 64%, 25% and 11% of the patients, respectively. The patients had received a median (range) of 3 (1-13) lines of treatment prior to trial entry. The median [95% confidence interval] progression-free survival and OS times were 3.0 [1.8-3.6] and 17.8 [12.7-30.4] months, respectively. High-grade toxicity (grade 3 or higher, according to the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events classification) was experienced by 56 of the 133 patients (42%) and was related to the investigational drug in 44 of these cases (79%). No toxicity-related deaths occurred. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was encountered in 11 (9%) of the 116 evaluable patients. High-grade toxicity occurred during the DLT period for 34 of the 56 patients (61%) and after the DLT period in the remaining 22 (39%). The main prognostic factors for poor OS were the histological type (i.e. tumour aggressiveness), an elevated serum LDH level, and a low serum albumin level. Early withdrawal from a trial was correlated with the performance status score, the histological type and the serum LDH level. The overall objective response and disease control rates were 24% and 57%, respectively. Conclusion Performance status, LDH, albumin and histological type (tumour aggressiveness) appear to be the most relevant prognostic factors for enrolling Phase I participants with relapsed or refractory lymphoma. 39% of the patients experienced a first high-grade toxic event after the dose-limiting toxicity period, suggesting that the conventional concept of dose-limiting toxicity (designed for chemotherapy) should be redefined in the era of modern cancer therapies.

Prognostic factors and outcome of patients with hematological malignancies in phase I trials: the Gustave Roussy scoring system.

Despite considerable progress in hematological malignancies (HM) biology during the last decades, translation into clinical benefit remains a major challenge. To improve patient selection and identify patients most likely to benefit from phase I trials, we designed and validated, in an independent cohort, a simple prognostic score. Treatment outcome, toxicity, and survival data from 82 consecutive patients enrolled in 14 phase I trials were reviewed (January 2008-February 2012). We validated these results on a prospectively collected cohort (17 phase I trials, February 2012-May 2014, 88 patients). Within a median follow-up of 19.1 months (range: 2.1-43.8 months), the median progression-free and overall survival (OS) were, respectively, 4.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.0-5.3] and 19.8 months (95% CI: 16.1-36.8). Best overall response and disease control rates were similar to HM salvage regimens (28 and 64%, respectively). Through multivariate analysis of independent prognostic factors, we designed and prospectively validated a simple prognostic score based on histological subtype, performance status, and albumin. Patients with a low-risk score experienced significantly better OS compared with patients with an intermediate or a high score (median OS: 37 vs. 17 vs. 5 months; hazard ratio=11.68, 95% CI: 4.09-33.3). Our data indicate the safety and efficacy of phase I trials in a significant number of relapsed/refractory HM patients, with clinical benefit achieved in more than half of patients. Our simple scoring system offers a valuable selection tool encouraging HM patient inclusions in phase I trials.

Reactions and adverse events induced by T-cell engagers as anti-cancer immunotherapies, a comprehensive review.

T-cell engagers (TCE) are cancer immunotherapies that have recently demonstrated meaningful benefit for patients with hematological malignancies and solid tumors. The anticipated widespread use of T cell engagers poses implementation challenges and highlights the need for guidance to anticipate, mitigate, and manage adverse events. By mobilizing T-cells directly at the contact of tumor cells, TCE mount an obligatory and immediate anti-tumor immune response that could result in diverse reactions and adverse events. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) is the most common reaction and is largely confined to the first drug administrations during step-up dosage. Cytokine release syndrome should be distinguished from infusion related reaction by clinical symptoms, timing to occurrence, pathophysiological aspects, and clinical management. Other common reactions and adverse events with TCE are immune effector Cell-Associated Neurotoxicity Syndrome (ICANS), infections, tumor flare reaction and cytopenias. The toxicity profiles of TCE and CAR-T cells have commonalities and distinctions that we sum-up in this review. As compared with CAR-T cells, TCE are responsible for less frequently severe CRS or ICANS. This review recapitulates terminology, pathophysiology, severity grading system and management of reactions and adverse events related to TCE.

Toxicity of immunotherapy combinations with chemotherapy across tumor indications: Current knowledge and practical recommendations.

Chemotherapy associated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors is currently the standard of care in several tumor indications. This combination approach improves progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and complete pathological response (pCR) in several cancer types both in the early and metastatic approaches. However, the distinct spectrum of toxicities between cytotoxic side effects and immune related adverse events (irAEs) with similar clinical presentations and different management strategies remains a challenge in daily practice for healthcare professionals. This review summarizes the most common toxicities reported in the randomized clinical trials that led to the subsequent FDA approval of these combinations, across tumor indications. We cite in particular: non-small cell lung cancer, small cell lung cancer, triple negative breast cancer, squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, gastric carcinoma, esophageal carcinoma, cervical carcinoma and biliary tract carcinoma. We found that the combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy was associated with an increased incidence of all grade adverse events (RR 1.11 [1.09; 1.12]) without an excess in treatment related mortality when compared to chemotherapy alone. We report also an increase in the incidence of serious adverse events (grade ≥ 3) (RR 1.16 [1.10;1.24]); in particular: high grade diarrhea, dyspnea, fatigue, rash and elevated liver enzymes. Together with the collaboration of our institutional network of organ specialists with expertise in irAEs, we propose practical recommendations for physicians to enhance clinical care and management of patients undergoing treatment with combined ICI immunotherapy and chemotherapy.

Targeted Inhibition of CYP11A1 in Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is regulated by steroid hormones, even in castration-resistant disease. ODM-208, a novel inhibitor of cytochrome P450 11A1 (which catalyzes the first step of steroid-hormone biosynthesis), was investigated in patients with heavily pretreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). METHODS: CYPIDES is a first-in-human phase 1 (3 + 3 design) and phase 2 study. We administered ODM-208 twice daily with glucocorticoid/mineralocorticoid replacement and ongoing androgen deprivation therapy to adults with previously treated mCRPC, regardless of androgen receptor gene (AR) ligand-binding domain mutations (phase 1) and with activating AR ligand-binding domain mutations (ARmut; phase 2). Safety, pharmacokinetics, steroid-hormone pharmacodynamics, and preliminary efficacy were the key outcomes. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients received one or more doses of ODM-208: 47 in phase 1 (20 [42.6%] with ARmut) and 45 in phase 2 (all ARmut). A dose of ODM-208 of 5 mg twice a day with dexamethasone 1 mg/fludrocortisone 0.1 mg provided a balance between decreased steroidogenesis and toxicity. Treatment-related adrenal insufficiency was the most common toxicity in phase 1 (n=17, 36.2%; necessitating ODM-208 discontinuation in one patient); this toxicity occurred in six patients (13.3%) at 5 mg twice a day in phase 2. Median circulating testosterone levels declined from 3.0 ng/dl (interquartile range, 1.3 to 6.2 ng/dl) at baseline to undetectable levels within the first week of ODM-208 5 mg twice a day treatment in 46 of 53 (87%) patients. A decrease in prostate-specific antigen levels of 50% or more occurred in 14 of 19 (73.7%) patients with ARmut and 2 of 23 (8.7%) patients with AR wild type in phase 1 and in 24 of 45 (53.3%) patients with ARmut in phase 2. CONCLUSIONS: ODM-208 potently inhibited steroid-hormone biosynthesis with the expected toxicity of adrenal insufficiency. Evidence of antitumor activity was observed in this heavily pretreated mCRPC population, especially in those with ARmut. (Funded by Orion Pharma; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03436485.)

Impact of Clonal Hematopoiesis-Associated Mutations in Phase I Patients Treated for Solid Tumors: An Analysis of the STING Trial.

PURPOSE: With liquid biopsy's widespread adoption in oncology, an increased number of clonal hematopoiesis-associated mutations (CHm) have been identified in patients with solid tumors. However, its impact on patient outcomes remains unclear. This study aimed to analyze and describe CHm in a cohort of phase I patients. METHODS: Retrospective data collection from medical records and molecular profiles (Foundation One Liquid CDx Assay) was performed before first study drug administration at the Drug Development Department of Gustave Roussy (France) within the STING trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04932525). CHm prevalence was assessed using any and ≥1% variant allele frequency (VAF) in epigenetic modifier genes (DNMT3A, TET2, and ASXL1). RESULTS: From January 2021 to December 2022, 255 patients were enrolled in a phase I clinical trial. A total of 55% were male, with a median age of 62 years (24-86). Principal tumor locations were GI (27%) and genitourinary (21%). Overall, 104 patients (41%) had at least one CHm in liquid biopsy, with 55 patients (22%) having a VAF of ≥ 1%. The most frequent mutation was DNMT3A 73% at any VAF (n = 76) and 22% at 1% VAF (n = 23). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 3.8 months (m) for the CHm group versus 3.2 m for nonclonal hematopoiesis (CH; P = .08) and 18.26 m CHm versus 15.8 m non-CH (P = .9), respectively. PFS increased in the CHm population treated with targeted therapy (hazard ratio, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.84]; P = .004). CONCLUSION: CHm was commonly found in patients with solid tumors treated in phase I trials, with a prevalence of 41% in our cohort. The most frequently mutated gene was DNMT3A. The presence of CHm had no impact on the population of patients treated in the phase I trials.

Antibody drug conjugates in older patients: State of the art.

More than half of cancer cases occur in patients aged 65 years or older. The efficacy and safety of antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) in older patients remains an unclear subject as available evidence is limited. Geriatric population is underrepresented in clinical trials. Consequently, most of our knowledge regarding innovative therapeutics was studied on a younger population. In this review of published literature, we report the available information on efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of FDA approved ADCs for hematologic malignancies and solid tumors in the geriatric population. We explore the results of clinical trials dedicated for older individuals as well as subgroup analyses of the geriatric population in major trials evaluating these drugs. Available data suggest a similar efficacy in older adults as compared to general population. However, older patients might be prone to a higher rate of adverse events in incidence with a potential impact on quality of life. We lack data to support primary dose reductions or schedule modifications in this category of patients. No pharmacokinetic differences were reported between age groups. It is crucial to encourage the development of clinical trials dedicated to older patients with geriatric parameters (G8 score, G-CODE…) so that results can be more representative of this population outside of clinical trials.

Enrolment of older adults with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in first-line clinical trials in the multicentre ESME cohort.

INTRODUCTION: There is a great need for data based on clinical trials for the older population in order to improve treatment. Historically, the inclusion rate of older adults in clinical trials has been low, but the rate specific to lung cancer is unknown, as are the factors associated with enrolment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the national Epidemio-Strategy and Medical Economics Advanced or Metastatic Lung Cancer (AMLC) Data Platform, a multicentre real-life database. Inclusion criteria were patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (AMNSCLC) aged 70 years or older, with at least one line of systemic treatment from 01 January 2015 to 31 December 2018. The primary objective was to evaluate the proportion of older adults enrolled in clinical trials. Secondary objectives were to identify factors associated with enrolment in clinical trials for older patients and to compare the overall survival of older adults included in trials versus those not included. RESULTS: There were 3488 patients aged ≥70 years (median age at AMNSCLC 75 years). Among older patients, 234 (6.7%) were enrolled in a clinical trial in the first-line setting. Significant factors associated with enrolment in the multivariable analysis in older patients were: good Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status (PS 0) (p < 0.001), de novo versus recurrent presentation at diagnosis (p < 0.001), and non-central nervous system (CNS) metastases versus advanced setting or CNS metastases (p < 0.001). Medical history was associated with fewer inclusions (odds ratio [OR] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.56; 0.99]). Among older patients, being enrolled in a trial in the first-line setting was not associated with better overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.03; 95%CI 0.86-1.22) in the multivariable analysis. DISCUSSION: In this large database, few older AMNSCLC patients were enrolled in a trial. Factors associated with enrolment were: good ECOG PS, absence of medical history, de novo AMNSCLC, and presentation with non-CNS metastases.

Safety and efficacy of immunotherapy according to the age threshold of 80 years.

BACKGROUND: To compare safety and efficacy of ICIs among patients<80 and those ≥80 years of age. METHODS: A single-center retrospective observational cohort study comparing patients<80 and ≥80 years of age matched for cancer site (lung vs others) and participation in a clinical trial. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: grade ≥2 toxicity during the first three months of ICI therapy. The two groups were compared using univariate and multivariate regression. RESULTS: Two hundred and ten consecutive patients were recruited, with the following characteristics: mean age: 66.5±16.8, 20% aged ≥80 years, 75% male, 97% ECOG-PS ≤ 2, 78% G8-index ≤ 14/17, 80% lung or kidney cancer, and 97% metastatic cancer. The grade ≥2 toxicity rate during the first three months of ICI therapy was 68%. Patients aged ≥80 years of age had a more significant (P<0.05) proportion of grade ≥2 non-hematological toxicities (64% vs 45%) than those aged<80 years: rash (14% vs 4%), arthralgia (7.1% vs 0.6%), colitis (4.7% vs 0.6%), cytolysis (7.1% vs 1.2%), gastrointestinal bleeding (2.4% vs 0%), onycholysis (2.4% vs 0%), oral mucositis (2.4% vs 0%), psoriasis (2.4% vs 0%), or other skin toxicities (25% vs 3%). Efficacy among patients ≥80 and<80 years of age was comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Although non-hematological toxicities affected 20% more patients aged ≥80 years, hematological toxicities and efficacy were comparable between patients aged ≥80 and<80 years with advanced cancer and treated with ICIs.

Profile and outcome of cancer patients enrolled in contemporary phase I trials.

BACKGROUND: Phase I trials historically involved heavily pretreated patients (pts) with no more effective therapeutic options available and with poor expected outcomes. There are scare data regarding profile and outcomes of pts enrolled into modern phase I trials. Here, we sought to provide an overview of pts' profile and outcome into phase I trials at Gustave Roussy (GR). METHODS: This is a monocentric retrospective study, including all pts enrolled into phase I trials at GR from 2017 to 2021. Data regarding pts' demographics, tumour types, investigational treatments and survival outcomes were collected. RESULTS: In total, 9482 pts were referred for early phase trials; 2478 pts were screened, among which 449 (18.1%) failed screening; 1693 pts finally received at least one treatment dose as part of a phase I trial. Median age of pts was 59 years old (range, 18-88) and most common tumour types included gastrointestinal (25.3%), haematological (15%), lung (13.6%), genitourinary (10.5%) and gynaecologic cancers (9.4%). Amongst all pts treated and evaluable for response (1634 pts), objective response rate was 15.9% and disease control rate was 45.4%. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were, respectively, 2.6 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.3; 2.8) and 12.4 months (95% CI, 11.7; 13.6). CONCLUSION: As compared with historical data, our study shows that outcomes of pts included into modern phase I trials have improved and that these trials constitute nowadays a valid and safe therapeutic option. These updated data provide facts for adapting the methodology, role and place of phase I trials over the next years.