A phase I dose escalation and expansion trial of the next-generation oral SERD camizestrant in women with ER-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: SERENA-1 monotherapy results.

BACKGROUND: SERENA-1 (NCT03616587) is a phase I, multi-part, open-label study of camizestrant in pre- and post-menopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer. Parts A and B aim to determine the safety and tolerability of camizestrant monotherapy and define doses for clinical evaluation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women aged ≥18 years with metastatic or recurrent ER+, HER2- breast cancer, refractory (or intolerant) to therapy, were assigned 25 mg up to 450 mg once daily (QD; escalation) or 75, 150, or 300 mg QD (expansion). Safety and tolerability, antitumor efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and impact on mutations in the estrogen receptor gene (ESR1m) circulating tumor (ct)DNA levels were assessed. RESULTS: By 9 March 2021, 108 patients received camizestrant monotherapy at 25-450 mg doses. Of these, 93 (86.1%) experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), 82.4% of which were grade 1 or 2. The most common TRAEs were visual effects (56%), (sinus) bradycardia (44%), fatigue (26%), and nausea (15%). There were no TRAEs grade 3 or higher, or treatment-related serious adverse events at doses ≤150 mg. Median tmax was achieved ∼2-4 h post-dose at all doses investigated, with an estimated half-life of 20-23 h. Efficacy was observed at all doses investigated, including in patients with prior cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) and/or fulvestrant treatment, with and without baseline ESR1 mutations, and with visceral disease, including liver metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Camizestrant is a next-generation oral selective ER antagonist and degrader (SERD) and pure ER antagonist with a tolerable safety profile. The pharmacokinetics profile supports once-daily dosing, with evidence of pharmacodynamic and clinical efficacy in heavily pre-treated patients, regardless of ESR1m. This study established 75-, 150-, and 300-mg QD doses for phase II testing (SERENA-2, NCT04214288 and SERENA-3, NCT04588298).

Association between PD1 mRNA and response to anti-PD1 monotherapy across multiple cancer types.

Background: We hypothesized that the abundance of PD1 mRNA in tumor samples might explain the differences in overall response rates (ORR) observed following anti-PD1 monotherapy across cancer types. Patients and methods: RNASeqv2 data from 10 078 tumor samples representing 34 different cancer types was analyzed from TCGA. Eighteen immune-related gene signatures and 547 immune-related genes, including PD1, were explored. Correlations between each gene/signature and ORRs reported in the literature following anti-PD1 monotherapy were calculated. To translate the in silico findings to the clinical setting, we analyzed the expression of PD1 mRNA using the nCounter platform in 773 formalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) tumor samples across 17 cancer types. To test the direct relationship between PD1 mRNA, PDL1 immunohistochemistry (IHC), stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) and ORR, we evaluated an independent FFPE-based dataset of 117 patients with advanced disease treated with anti-PD1 monotherapy. Results: In pan-cancer TCGA, PD1 mRNA expression was found strongly correlated (r > 0.80) with CD8 T-cell genes and signatures and the proportion of PD1 mRNA-high tumors (80th percentile) within a given cancer type was variable (0%-84%). Strikingly, the PD1-high proportions across cancer types were found strongly correlated (r = 0.91) with the ORR following anti-PD1 monotherapy reported in the literature. Lower correlations were found with other immune-related genes/signatures, including PDL1. Using the same population-based cutoff (80th percentile), similar proportions of PD1-high disease in a given cancer type were identified in our in-house 773 tumor dataset as compared with TCGA. Finally, the pre-established PD1 mRNA FFPE-based cutoff was found significantly associated with anti-PD1 response in 117 patients with advanced disease (PD1-high 51.5%, PD1-intermediate 26.6% and PD1-low 15.0%; odds ratio between PD1-high and PD1-intermediate/low = 8.31; P < 0.001). In this same dataset, PDL1 tumor expression by IHC or percentage of sTILs was not found associated with response. Conclusions: Our study provides a clinically applicable assay that links PD1 mRNA abundance, activated CD8 T-cells and anti-PD1 efficacy.

Results of the phase IIa RADICAL trial of the FGFR inhibitor AZD4547 in endocrine resistant breast cancer.

We conducted a phase IIa, multi-centre, open label, single arm study (RADICAL; NCT01791985) of AZD4547 (a potent and selective inhibitor of Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor (FGFR)-1, 2 and 3 receptor tyrosine kinases) administered with anastrozole or letrozole in estrogen receptor positive metastatic breast cancer patients who had become resistant to aromatase inhibitors. After a safety run-in study to assess safety and tolerability, we recruited 52 patients. The primary endpoint was change in tumour size at 12 weeks, and secondary endpoints were to assess response at 6 weeks, 20 weeks and every 8 weeks thereafter and tolerability of the combined treatment. Two partial responses (PR) and 19 stable disease (SD) patients were observed at the 12-week time point. At 28 weeks, according to centrally reviewed Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) criteria, five PR and 8 SD patients were observed in 50 assessable cases. Overall, objective response rate (5 PR) was of 10%, meeting the pre-specified endpoint. Fourteen patients discontinued due to adverse events. Eleven patients had retinal pigment epithelial detachments which was asymptomatic and reversible in all but one patient. Exploratory ribonucleic acid sequencing (RNA-Seq) analysis was done on patients' samples: 6 differentially-expressed-genes could distinguish those who benefited from the addition of AZD4547.

Electronic health records and patient registries in medical oncology departments in Spain.

PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the current situation of electronic health records (EHRs) and patient registries in the oncology departments of hospitals in Spain. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study conducted from December 2018 to September 2019. The survey was designed ad hoc by the Outcomes Evaluation and Clinical Practice Section of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) and was distributed to all head of medical oncology department members of SEOM. RESULTS: We invited 148 heads of oncology departments, and 81 (54.7%) questionnaires were completed, with representation from all 17 Spanish autonomous communities. Seventy-seven (95%) of the respondents had EHRs implemented at their hospitals; of them, over 80% considered EHRs to have a positive impact on work organization and clinical practice, and 73% considered that EHRs improve the quality of patient care. In contrast, 27 (35.1%) of these respondents felt that EHRs worsened the physician-patient relationship and conveyed an additional workload (n = 29; 37.6%). Several drawbacks in the implementation of EHRs were identified, including the limited inclusion of information on both outpatients and inpatients, information recorded in free text data fields, and the availability of specific informed consent. Forty-six (56.7%) respondents had patient registries where they recorded information from all patients seen in the department. CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that EHRs are almost universally implemented in the hospitals surveyed and are considered to have a positive impact on work organization and clinical practice. However, EHRs currently have several drawbacks that limit their use for investigational purposes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

An extended phase Ib study of epertinib, an orally active reversible dual EGFR/HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Dose-escalation of epertinib (S-222611), a new potent oral EGFR/HER2 inhibitor, has established a recommended daily dose of 800 mg in patients with solid tumours. In this study, we have recruited a larger number of patients to assess further the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PKs) and antitumour activity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with solid tumours expressing EGFR or HER2 received a single dose of epertinib at 800 mg on Day 1 to assess PK over 7 days, followed by continuous once-daily dosing from Day 8. RESULTS: We treated 76 patients with breast (n = 27), upper gastrointestinal (GI; n = 30), head and neck (n = 12) or renal cancers (n = 7). Epertinib was well-tolerated with mostly grade I and II adverse events (AEs). The most frequent AE was diarrhoea, which was generally manageable with loperamide. The objective response rate (ORR) in patients with heavily pretreated breast and upper GI cancers was 16.0% (4 PRs) and 8.3% (1CR, 1PR), respectively. All six responding patients had HER2-positive tumours; the ORR for HER2-positive breast and upper GI cancer populations was 19.0% and 20.0%. Partial response in the brain disease of one breast cancer patient lasted 7.5 months. CONCLUSION: Once-daily dosing of epertinib at 800 mg was well-tolerated and demonstrated promising antitumour activity in patients with heavily pretreated HER2-positive breast and upper GI cancer, including those with brain metastases. EUDRACT NUMBER: 2009-017817-31.