Dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with relapsed/refractory BRAF V600E mutation-positive hairy cell leukemia.

BRAF V600E is the key oncogenic driver mutation in hairy cell leukemia (HCL). We report the efficacy and safety of dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with relapsed/refractory BRAF V600E mutation-positive HCL. This open-label, phase 2 study enrolled patients with BRAF V600E mutation-positive HCL refractory to first-line treatment with a purine analog or relapsed after ≥2 prior lines of treatment. Patients received dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily plus trametinib 2 mg once daily until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per criteria adapted from National Comprehensive Cancer Network-Consensus Resolution guidelines. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Fifty-five patients with BRAF V600E mutation-positive HCL were enrolled. The investigator-assessed ORR was 89.0% (95% confidence interval, 77.8%-95.9%); 65.5% of patients had a complete response (without minimal residual disease [MRD]: 9.1% [negative immunohistochemistry of bone marrow {BM} biopsy], 12.7% [negative BM aspirate flow cytometry {FC}], 16.4% [negative immunohistochemistry and/or FC results]; with MRD, 49.1%), and 23.6% had a partial response. The 24-month DOR was 97.7% with 24-month PFS and OS rates of 94.4% and 94.5%, respectively. The most common treatment-related adverse events were pyrexia (58.2%), chills (47.3%), and hyperglycemia (40.0%). Dabrafenib plus trametinib demonstrated durable responses with a manageable safety profile consistent with previous observations in other indications and should be considered as a rituximab-free therapeutic option for patients with relapsed/refractory BRAF V600E mutation-positive HCL. This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02034110.

Capmatinib in MET exon 14-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer: final results from the open-label, phase 2 GEOMETRY mono-1 trial.

BACKGROUND: Capmatinib has previously shown activity in treatment-naive and previously treated patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a MET exon 14-skipping mutation (METex14). Here, we report the final outcomes from the phase 2 GEOMETRY mono-1 study with an aim to provide further evidence for the activity of capmatinib. METHODS: In this non-randomised, multi-cohort, open-label, phase 2 trial conducted in 152 centres and hospitals in 25 countries, with patients treated in 95 centres in 20 countries, eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) with MET-dysregulated, EGFR wild-type, and ALK rearrangement-negative advanced NSCLC (stage IIIB/IV) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were assigned to cohorts (1a, 1b, 2, 3, 4, 5a, 5b, 6 and 7) based on their MET status (METex14 or MET amplification) and previous therapy lines. Patients received capmatinib (400 mg orally twice daily) in 21-day treatment cycles. The primary endpoint was overall response rate by blinded independent central review per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1 and was performed on the full analysis set (all patients who received at least one dose of capmatinib). Previous reports of this study had published interim or primary data for cohorts 1-7. Here, we report the final clinical outcomes from all METex14 cohorts (4, 5b, 6, and 7) and safety from all study cohorts (1-7). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02414139, and has been completed. FINDINGS: Of 373 treated patients enrolled from June 11, 2015, to March 12, 2020, 160 (97 [61%] female) patients had METex14 NSCLC and were enrolled in four cohorts: 60 treatment-naive (cohorts 5b and 7) and 100 previously treated (cohorts 4 and 6). The overall median study follow-up was 46·4 months (IQR 41·8-65·4) for the treatment-naïve patients and 66·9 months (56·7-73·9) for previously treated patients, respectively. Overall responses were recorded in 41 (68%; 95% CI 55·0-79·7) of 60 treatment-naive patients and 44 (44%; 95% CI 34·1-54·3) of 100 previously treated patients. In all 373 treated patients, the most common treatment-related adverse events were peripheral oedema (n=174; 47%), nausea (n=130; 35%), increased blood creatinine (n=78; 21%), and vomiting (n=74; 20%). Grade 3-4 serious adverse events occurred in 164 (44%) patients, dyspnoea being the most common (18 patients [5%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in four (1%) patients (one each of cardiac arrest, hepatitis, organising pneumonia, and pneumonitis). No new safety signals were reported. INTERPRETATION: These long-term results support METex14 as a targetable oncogenic driver in NSCLC and add to the evidence supporting capmatinib as a targeted treatment option for treatment-naive and previously treated patients with METex14 NSCLC. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

The development of brain metastases in patients with different therapeutic strategies for metastatic renal cell cancer.

A diagnosis of brain metastasis (BM) significantly affects quality of life in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). Although systemic treatments have shown efficacy in mRCC, active surveillance (AS) is still commonly used in clinical practice. In this single-center cohort study, we assessed the impact of different initial treatment strategies for metastatic RCC (mRCC) on the development of BM. All consecutive patients diagnosed with mRCC between 2011 and 2022 were included at the Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, the Netherlands, and a subgroup of patients with BM was selected. In total, 381 patients with mRCC (ECM, BM, or both) were identified. Forty-six patients had BM of whom 39 had metachronous BM (diagnosed ≥1 month after ECM). Twenty-five (64.1%) of these 39 patients with metachronous BM had received prior systemic treatment for ECM and 14 (35.9%) patients were treatment naive at BM diagnosis. The median BM-free survival since ECM diagnosis was significantly longer (p = .02) in previously treated patients (29.0 [IQR 12.6-57.0] months) compared to treatment naive patients (6.8 [IQR 1.0-7.0] months). In conclusion, patients with mRCC who received systemic treatment for ECM prior to BM diagnosis had a longer BM-free survival as compared to treatment naïve patients. These results emphasize the need for careful evaluation of treatment strategies, and especially AS, for patients with mRCC.

Patient values in patient-provider communication about participation in early phase clinical cancer trials: a qualitative analysis before and after implementation of an online value clarification tool intervention.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced cancer who no longer have standard treatment options available may decide to participate in early phase clinical trials (i.e. experimental treatments with uncertain outcomes). Shared decision-making (SDM) models help to understand considerations that influence patients' decision. Discussion of patient values is essential to SDM, but such communication is often limited in this context and may require new interventions. The OnVaCT intervention, consisting of a preparatory online value clarification tool (OnVaCT) for patients and communication training for oncologists, was previously developed to support SDM. This study aimed to qualitatively explore associations between patient values that are discussed between patients and oncologists during consultations about potential participation in early phase clinical trials before and after implementation of the OnVaCT intervention. METHODS: This study is part of a prospective multicentre nonrandomized controlled clinical trial and had a between-subjects design: pre-intervention patients received usual care, while post-intervention patients additionally received the OnVaCT. Oncologists participated in the communication training between study phases. Patients' initial consultation on potential early phase clinical trial participation was recorded and transcribed verbatim. Applying a directed approach, two independent coders analysed the transcripts using an initial codebook based on previous studies. Steps of continuous evaluation and revision were repeated until data saturation was reached. RESULTS: Data saturation was reached after 32 patient-oncologist consultations (i.e. 17 pre-intervention and 15 post-intervention). The analysis revealed the values: hope, perseverance, quality or quantity of life, risk tolerance, trust in the healthcare system/professionals, autonomy, social adherence, altruism, corporeality, acceptance of one's fate, and humanity. Patients in the pre-intervention phase tended to express values briefly and spontaneously. Oncologists acknowledged the importance of patients' values, but generally only gave 'contrasting' examples of why some accept and others refuse to participate in trials. In the post-intervention phase, many oncologists referred to the OnVaCT and/or asked follow-up questions, while patients used longer phrases that combined multiple values, sometimes clearly indicating their weighing. CONCLUSIONS: While all values were recognized in both study phases, our results have highlighted the different communication patterns around patient values in SDM for potential early phase clinical trial participation before and after implementation of the OnVaCT intervention. This study therefore provides a first (qualitative) indication that the OnVaCT intervention may support patients and oncologists in discussing their values. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry: NL7335, registered on July 17, 2018.

Capmatinib in MET Exon 14-Mutated or MET-Amplified Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), MET exon 14 skipping mutations occur in 3 to 4% and MET amplifications occur in 1 to 6%. Capmatinib, a selective inhibitor of the MET receptor, has shown activity in cancer models with various types of MET activation. METHODS: We conducted a multiple-cohort, phase 2 study evaluating capmatinib in patients with MET-dysregulated advanced NSCLC. Patients were assigned to cohorts on the basis of previous lines of therapy and MET status (MET exon 14 skipping mutation or MET amplification according to gene copy number in tumor tissue). Patients received capmatinib (400-mg tablet) twice daily. The primary end point was overall response (complete or partial response), and the key secondary end point was response duration; both end points were assessed by an independent review committee whose members were unaware of the cohort assignments. RESULTS: A total of 364 patients were assigned to the cohorts. Among patients with NSCLC with a MET exon 14 skipping mutation, overall response was observed in 41% (95% confidence interval [CI], 29 to 53) of 69 patients who had received one or two lines of therapy previously and in 68% (95% CI, 48 to 84) of 28 patients who had not received treatment previously; the median duration of response was 9.7 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 13.0) and 12.6 months (95% CI, 5.6 to could not be estimated), respectively. Limited efficacy was observed in previously treated patients with MET amplification who had a gene copy number of less than 10 (overall response in 7 to 12% of patients). Among patients with MET amplification and a gene copy number of 10 or higher, overall response was observed in 29% (95% CI, 19 to 41) of previously treated patients and in 40% (95% CI, 16 to 68) of those who had not received treatment previously. The most frequently reported adverse events were peripheral edema (in 51%) and nausea (in 45%); these events were mostly of grade 1 or 2. CONCLUSIONS: Capmatinib showed substantial antitumor activity in patients with advanced NSCLC with a MET exon 14 skipping mutation, particularly in those not treated previously. The efficacy in MET-amplified advanced NSCLC was higher in tumors with a high gene copy number than in those with a low gene copy number. Low-grade peripheral edema and nausea were the main toxic effects. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals; GEOMETRY mono-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02414139.).

Efficacy, safety and biomarker analysis of durvalumab in patients with mismatch-repair deficient or microsatellite instability-high solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: In this study we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab across various mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) or microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumours in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP). This is a clinical study in which patients are treated with drugs outside their labeled indication, based on their tumour molecular profile. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with dMMR/MSI-H solid tumours who had exhausted all standard of care options were eligible. Patients were treated with durvalumab. The primary endpoints were clinical benefit ((CB): objective response (OR) or stable disease ≥16 weeks) and safety. Patients were enrolled using a Simon like 2-stage model, with 8 patients in stage 1, up to 24 patients in stage 2 if at least 1/8 patients had CB in stage 1. At baseline, fresh frozen biopsies were obtained for biomarker analyses. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients with 10 different cancer types were included. Two patients (2/26, 8%) were considered as non-evaluable for the primary endpoint. CB was observed in 13 patients (13/26, 50%) with an OR in 7 patients (7/26, 27%). The remaining 11 patients (11/26, 42%) had progressive disease. Median progression-free survival and median overall survival were 5 months (95% CI, 2-not reached) and 14 months (95% CI, 5-not reached), respectively. No unexpected toxicity was observed. We found a significantly higher structural variant (SV) burden in patients without CB. Additionally, we observed a significant enrichment of JAK1 frameshift mutations and a significantly lower IFN-γ expression in patients without CB. CONCLUSION: Durvalumab was generally well-tolerated and provided durable responses in pre-treated patients with dMMR/MSI-H solid tumours. High SV burden, JAK1 frameshift mutations and low IFN-γ expression were associated with a lack of CB; this provides a rationale for larger studies to validate these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registration: NCT02925234. First registration date: 05/10/2016.

Eftozanermin alfa (ABBV-621) monotherapy in patients with previously treated solid tumors: findings of a phase 1, first-in-human study.

Eftozanermin alfa (eftoza), a second-generation tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand receptor (TRAIL-R) agonist, induces apoptosis in tumor cells by activation of death receptors 4/5. This phase 1 dose-escalation/dose-optimization study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary activity of eftoza in patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients received eftoza 2.5-15 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 or day 1/day 8 every 21 days in the dose-escalation phase, and 1.25-7.5 mg/kg once-weekly (QW) in the dose-optimization phase. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were evaluated during the first treatment cycle to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Pharmacodynamic effects were evaluated in circulation and tumor tissue. A total of 105 patients were enrolled in the study (dose-escalation cohort, n = 57; dose-optimization cohort, n = 48 patients [n = 24, colorectal cancer (CRC); n = 24, pancreatic cancer (PaCA)]). In the dose-escalation cohort, seven patients experienced DLTs. MTD and RP2D were not determined. Most common treatment-related adverse events were increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase levels, nausea, and fatigue. The one treatment-related death occurred due to respiratory failure. In the dose-optimization cohort, three patients (CRC, n = 2; PaCA, n = 1) had a partial response. Target engagement with regard to receptor saturation, and downstream apoptotic pathway activation in circulation and tumor were observed. Eftoza had acceptable safety, evidence of pharmacodynamic effects, and preliminary anticancer activity. The 7.5-mg/kg QW regimen was selected for future studies on the basis of safety findings, pharmacodynamic effects, and biomarker modulations. (Trial registration number: NCT03082209 (registered: March 17, 2017)).

Core values of patients with advanced cancer considering participation in an early-phase clinical trial: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: This article identifies the core values that play a role in patients' decision-making process about participation in early-phase clinical cancer trials. METHODS: Face-to-face, semi-structured serial interviews (n = 22) were performed with thirteen patients with advanced cancer recruited in two Dutch specialized cancer centers. In a cyclic qualitative analysis process, open and axial coding of the interviews finally led to an overview of the values that are woven into patients' common language about cancer and clinical trials. RESULTS: Six core values were described, namely, acceptance creates room for reconsideration of values, reconciliation with one's fate, hope, autonomy, body preservation, and altruism. Previously found values in advanced cancer, such as acceptance, hope, autonomy, and altruism, were further qualified. Reconciliation with one's fate and body preservation were highlighted as new insights for early-phase clinical cancer trial literature. CONCLUSIONS: This article furthers the understanding of core values that play a role in the lives and decision-making of patients with advanced cancer who explore participation in early-phase clinical cancer trials. These values do not necessarily have to be compatible with one another, making tragic choices necessary. Understanding the role of core values can contribute to professional sensitivity regarding what motivates patients' emotions, thoughts, and decisions and help patients reflect on and give words to their values and preferences. It supports mutual understanding and dialog from which patients can make decisions according to their perspectives on a good life for themselves and their fellows in the context of participation in an early-phase clinical cancer trial.

Phase 1 study of single-agent WNT974, a first-in-class Porcupine inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: This Phase 1 study assessed the safety and efficacy of the Porcupine inhibitor, WNT974, in patients with advanced solid tumours. METHODS: Patients (n = 94) received oral WNT974 at doses of 5-30 mg once-daily, plus additional dosing schedules. RESULTS: The maximum tolerated dose was not established; the recommended dose for expansion was 10 mg once-daily. Dysgeusia was the most common adverse event (50% of patients), likely resulting from on-target Wnt pathway inhibition. No responses were seen by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1; 16% of patients had stable disease (median duration 19.9 weeks). AXIN2 expression by RT-PCR was reduced in 94% of paired skin biopsies (n = 52) and 74% of paired tumour biopsies (n = 35), confirming inhibition of the Wnt pathway. In an exploratory analysis, an inverse association was observed between AXIN2 change and immune signature change in paired tumour samples (n = 8). CONCLUSIONS: Single-agent WNT974 treatment was generally well tolerated. Biomarker analyses suggest that WNT974 may influence immune cell recruitment to tumours, and may enhance checkpoint inhibitor activity. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01351103.

A first-in-man phase 1 study of the DNA-dependent protein kinase inhibitor peposertib (formerly M3814) in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: This open-label, phase 1 trial (NCT02316197) aimed to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and/or recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of peposertib (formerly M3814), a DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PK) inhibitor in patients with advanced solid tumours. Secondary/exploratory objectives included safety/tolerability, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles and clinical activity. METHODS: Adult patients with advanced solid tumours received peposertib 100-200 mg once daily or 150-400 mg twice daily (BID) in 21-day cycles. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were included (median age 66 years, 61% male). One dose-limiting toxicity, consisting of mainly gastrointestinal, non-serious adverse events (AEs) and long recovery duration, was reported at 300 mg BID. The most common peposertib-related AEs were nausea, vomiting, fatigue and pyrexia. The most common peposertib-related Grade 3 AEs were maculopapular rash and nausea. Peposertib was quickly absorbed systemically (median Tmax 1.1-2.5 h). The p-DNA-PK/t-DNA-PK ratio decreased consistently in peripheral blood mononuclear cells 3-6 h after doses ≥100 mg. The best overall response was stable disease (12 patients), lasting for ≥12 weeks in seven patients. CONCLUSIONS: Peposertib was well-tolerated and demonstrated modest efficacy in unselected tumours. The MTD was not reached; the RP2D was declared as 400 mg BID. Further studies, mainly with peposertib/chemo-radiation, are ongoing. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02316197.

A Phase I study of the safety, pharmacokinetics and efficacy of navitoclax plus docetaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Aim: This Phase I study investigated safety of navitoclax and docetaxel in patients (n = 41) with advanced solid tumors. Patients & methods: Two navitoclax plus docetaxel dosing schedules (21 and 28 days) were evaluated. Maximum tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicities and preliminary antitumor activity were assessed. Results: Ten (24%) patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities; dose-escalation cohorts: n = 7 (21-day schedule: n = 5; 28-day schedule: n = 2) and 21-day expanded safety cohort: n = 3. Navitoclax 150-mg days 1-5 every 21 days with docetaxel 75 mg/m2 day 1 was the maximum tolerated dose and optimal schedule. Adverse events included thrombocytopenia (63%), fatigue (61%), nausea (59%) and neutropenia (51%). Four confirmed partial responses occurred. Conclusion: Navitoclax 150-mg orally once/day was safely administered with docetaxel. Myelosuppression limited dose escalation; antitumor activity was observed. Clinical trial registration: NCT00888108 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Phase I study of continuous olaparib capsule dosing in combination with carboplatin and/or paclitaxel (Part 1).

Background The PARP inhibitor olaparib has shown acceptable toxicity at doses of up to 400 mg twice daily (bid; capsule formulation) with encouraging signs of antitumor activity. Based on its mode of action, olaparib may sensitize tumor cells to DNA-damaging agents. This Phase I trial (NCT00516724) evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and preliminary efficacy of olaparib combined with carboplatin and/or paclitaxel. Methods Patients with advanced solid tumors received olaparib (capsule bid) plus carboplatin (Part A), carboplatin and paclitaxel (Part B), or paclitaxel (Part C). In each part of the study, different drug doses were given to define the most appropriate dose/drug combination to use in further studies. Safety assessments included evaluation of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs; cycle 1 only), adverse events (AEs) and physical examinations. PK assessments of olaparib, carboplatin and paclitaxel were performed. Tumor responses (RECIST) were assessed every two cycles. Results Fifty-seven patients received treatment. DLTs were reported in two patients (both receiving olaparib 100 mg bid and carboplatin AUC 4; Part A, cohort 2): grade 1 thrombocytopenia with grade 2 neutropenia lasting for 16 days, and grade 2 neutropenia lasting for 7 days. Non-hematologic AEs were predominantly grade 1-2 and included fatigue (70%) and nausea (40%). Bone marrow suppression, mainly neutropenia (51%) and thrombocytopenia (25%), frequently led to dose modifications. Conclusions Olaparib in combination with carboplatin and/or paclitaxel resulted in increased hematologic toxicities, making it challenging to establish a dosing regimen that could be tolerated for multiple cycles without dose modifications.

Phase I study of intermittent olaparib capsule or tablet dosing in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel (part 2).

Background In the first part of this extensive phase I study (NCT00516724), continuous olaparib twice daily (bid) with carboplatin and/or paclitaxel resulted in myelosuppression and dose modifications. Here, we report the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of intermittent olaparib dosing combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel. Methods Patients with advanced solid tumors (part D) and enriched for ovarian and breast cancer (part E) received olaparib (capsule and tablet formulations) using intermittent schedules (2 to 10 days of a 21-day cycle) combined with carboplatin/paclitaxel. Safety assessments included evaluation of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs; cycle 1 only), adverse events (AEs), and physical examinations. Pharmacokinetic assessments of olaparib capsule and tablet combined with carboplatin/paclitaxel were performed. Tumor responses (RECIST) were assessed every 2 cycles. Results In total, 132 heavily pre-treated patients were included. One DLT of grade 3 elevated alanine aminotransferase lasting for 8 days was reported (olaparib tablet 100 mg bid days 3-12, carboplatin area under the curve 4 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2). The most common hematological AEs were neutropenia (47%) and thrombocytopenia (39%), which frequently led to dose modifications. Non-hematological AEs were predominantly grade 1-2, including alopecia (89%) and fatigue (84%). Overall objective response rate was 46%. Conclusions Discontinuous dosing of olaparib resulted in significant myelosuppression leading to dose interruptions and/or delays. Anti-tumor activity was encouraging in patients enriched with BRCA-mutated breast and ovarian cancer. The most appropriate olaparib tablet dose for use in further studies evaluating olaparib in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel is 50 mg bid (days 1-5).

A phase I study of the HDM2 antagonist SAR405838 combined with the MEK inhibitor pimasertib in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: This phase I, open-label, dose-escalation study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of combination therapy with the HDM2 inhibitor SAR405838 and the MEK1/2 inhibitor pimasertib administered orally once daily (QD) or twice daily (BID) in locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours (NCT01985191). METHODS: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours with documented wild-type TP53 and RAS or RAF mutations were enroled. A 3 + 3 dose-escalation design was employed. The primary objective was to assess maximum tolerated dose (MTD). RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were treated with SAR405838 200 or 300 mg QD plus pimasertib 60 mg QD or 45 mg BID. The MTD was SAR405838 200 mg QD plus pimasertib 45 mg BID. The most common dose-limiting toxicity was thrombocytopenia. The most frequently occurring treatment-related adverse events were diarrhoea (81%), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (77%), nausea (62%) and vomiting (62%). No significant drug-drug interactions were observed. The biomarkers MIC-1 and pERK were, respectively, upregulated and downregulated in response to study treatment. In 24 efficacy-evaluable patients, one patient (4%) had a partial response and 63% had stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile of SAR405838 and pimasertib combined was consistent with the safety profiles of both drugs. Preliminary antitumour activity was observed.

53BP1 as a potential predictor of response in PARP inhibitor-treated homologous recombination-deficient ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have shown substantial activity in homologous recombination- (HR-) deficient ovarian cancer and are undergoing testing in other HR-deficient tumors. For reasons that are incompletely understood, not all patients with HR-deficient cancers respond to these agents. Preclinical studies have demonstrated that changes in alternative DNA repair pathways affect PARP inhibitor (PARPi) sensitivity in ovarian cancer models. This has not previously been assessed in the clinical setting. METHODS: Clonogenic and plasmid-based HR repair assays were performed to compare BRCA1-mutant COV362 ovarian cancer cells with or without 53BP1 gene deletion. Archival biopsies from ovarian cancer patients in the phase I, open-label clinical trial of PARPi ABT-767 were stained for PARP1, RAD51, 53BP1 and multiple components of the nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) DNA repair pathway. Modified histochemistry- (H-) scores were determined for each repair protein in each sample. HRD score was determined from tumor DNA. RESULTS: 53BP1 deletion increased HR in BRCA1-mutant COV362 cells and decreased PARPi sensitivity in vitro. In 36 women with relapsed ovarian cancer, responses to the PARPi ABT-767 were observed exclusively in cancers with HR deficiency. In this subset, 7 of 18 patients (39%) had objective responses. The actual HRD score did not further correlate with change from baseline tumor volume (r = 0.050; p = 0.87). However, in the HR-deficient subset, decreased 53BP1 H-score was associated with decreased antitumor efficacy of ABT-767 (r = -0.69, p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Differences in complementary repair pathways, particularly 53BP1, correlate with PARPi response of HR-deficient ovarian cancers.

Realizing better doctor-patient dialogue about choices in palliative care and early phase clinical trial participation: towards an online value clarification tool (OnVaCT).

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced cancer for whom standard systemic treatment is no longer available may be offered participation in early phase clinical trials. In the decision making process, both medical-technical information and patient values and preferences are important. Since patients report decisional conflict after deciding on participation in these trials, improving the decision making process is essential. We aim to develop and evaluate an Online Value Clarification Tool (OnVaCT) to assist patients in clarifying their values around this end-of-life decision. This improved sharing of values is hypothesized to support medical oncologists in tailoring their information to individual patients' needs and, consequently, to support patients in taking decisions in line with their values and reduce decisional conflict. METHODS: In the first part, patients' values and preferences and medical oncologists' views hereupon will be explored in interviews and focus groups to build a first prototype OnVaCT using digital communication (serious gaming). Next, we will test feasibility during think aloud sessions, to deliver a ready-to-implement OnVaCT. In the second part, the OnVaCT, with accompanied training module, will be evaluated in a pre-test (12-18 months before implementation) post-test (12-18 months after implementation) study in three major Dutch cancer centres. We will include 276 patients (> 18 years) with advanced cancer for whom standard systemic therapy is no longer available, and who are referred for participation in early phase clinical trials. The first consultation will be recorded to analyse patient-physician communication regarding the discussion of patients' values and the decision making process. Three weeks afterwards, decisional conflict will be measured. DISCUSSION: This project aims to support the discussion of patient values when considering participation in early phase clinical trials. By including patients before their first appointment with the medical oncologist and recording that consultation, we are able to link decisional conflict to the decision making process, e.g. the communication during consultation. The study faces challenges such as timely including patients within the short period between referral and first consultation. Furthermore, with new treatments being developed rapidly, molecular stratification may affect the patient populations included in the pre-test and post-test periods. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry number: NTR7551 (prospective; July 17, 2018).

A phase 1 study of PARP-inhibitor ABT-767 in advanced solid tumors with BRCA1/2 mutations and high-grade serous ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer.

Purpose This phase 1 study examined safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and efficacy of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor ABT-767 in patients with advanced solid tumors and BRCA1/2 mutations or with high-grade serous ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. Methods Patients received ABT-767 monotherapy orally until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Dose was escalated from 20 mg once daily to 500 mg twice daily (BID). Dose-limiting toxicities, recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), food effect, objective response rate, and biomarkers predicting response were determined. Results Ninety-three patients were treated with ABT-767; 80 had a primary diagnosis of ovarian cancer. ABT-767 demonstrated dose-proportional PK up to 500 mg BID and half-life of ~2 h. Food had no effect on ABT-767 bioavailability. Most common grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were nausea, fatigue, decreased appetite, and anemia. Anemia showed dose-dependent increase. RP2D was 400 mg BID. Objective response rate by RECIST 1.1 was 21% (17/80) in all evaluable patients and 20% (14/71) in evaluable patients with ovarian cancer. Response rate by RECIST 1.1 and/or CA-125 was 30% (24/80) in patients with ovarian cancer. Mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2, homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), and platinum sensitivity were associated with tumor response. Median progression-free survival was longer for HRD positive (6.7 months) versus HRD negative patients (1.8 months) with ovarian cancer. Conclusions ABT-767 had an acceptable safety profile up to the established RP2D of 400 mg BID and dose-proportional PK. Patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, HRD positivity, and platinum sensitivity were more sensitive to ABT-767.

Understanding how coping strategies and quality of life maintain hope in patients deliberating phase I trial participation.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand how hope and motivation of patients considering phase I trial participation are affected by psychological factors such as coping strategies and locus of control (LoC) and general well-being as measured by the quality of life (QoL). METHODS: An exploratory cross-sectional study was performed in patients with incurable cancer (N = 135) referred to our phase I unit for the first time. Patients were potentially eligible for phase I trial participation and participated in our study while deliberating phase I trial participation. We used questionnaires on hope, motivation to participate, coping, LoC, and QoL. To investigate the nature and magnitude of the relationships between the scales, a structural equation modeling (SEM) was fitted to the data. RESULTS: Hope significantly predicted the motivation to participate in phase I trials. Predictors of hope were a combination of flexible and tenacious goal pursuit (both P < .01), internal LoC (P < .01), and QoL (P < .01). The SEM showed an exact fit to the data, using a null hypothesis significance test: chi-square (8) = 9.30, P = .32. CONCLUSIONS: Patients considering phase I trial participation seem to use a pact of tenacious and flexible coping and control to stay hopeful. Furthermore, hope and QoL positively affected each other. The psychological pact may promote an adaptation enabling them to adjust to difficult circumstances by unconsciously ignoring information, called dissonance reduction. This mechanism may impair their ability to provide a valid informed consent. We suggest including a systematic exploration of patients' social context and values before proposing a phase I trial.

Self-reported quality of life and hope in phase-I trial participants: An observational prospective cohort study.

For advanced cancer patients deliberating early clinical trial participation, adequate information about expected effect on quality of life (HRQoL) and hope, may support decision making. The aim was to assess the potential relation of HRQoL to eligibility for phase-I trial participation, and to observe the variations in patient-reported outcomes. Patients completed questionnaires at preconsent (n = 124), baseline (n = 96), and after first evaluation of a phase-I trial (n = 76). The Mann-Whitney U test was used to test differences between eligible and ineligible patients. Univariate logistic regression was performed for eligibility. Factorial repeated-measures ANOVA compared the outcomes of patients continuing vs. stopping participation after first evaluation over time. Eligibility is associated with significant better global health OR = 0.946, 95% CI [0.918, 0.975], p = 0.001, physical functioning OR = 0.959, 95% CI [0.933, 0.985], p = 0.002, role functioning OR = 0.974, 95% CI [0.957, 0.991] and better appetite OR = 1.114 95% CI [1.035, 1.192]. HRQoL outcomes like global health, social functioning and appetite decline in all patients and differ between patients continuing or having to end participation. Over time, hope and tenacity decline in all patients and coping strategies alter in patients stopping participation. Trial participation influences patient-reported outcomes. Global health may predict for eligibility and trial continuation. Informing patients could affect patients' decision making.

Implementation of a Multicenter Biobanking Collaboration for Next-Generation Sequencing-Based Biomarker Discovery Based on Fresh Frozen Pretreatment Tumor Tissue Biopsies.

BACKGROUND: The discovery of novel biomarkers that predict treatment response in advanced cancer patients requires acquisition of high-quality tumor samples. As cancer evolves over time, tissue is ideally obtained before the start of each treatment. Preferably, samples are freshly frozen to allow analysis by next-generation DNA/RNA sequencing (NGS) but also for making other emerging systematic techniques such as proteomics and metabolomics possible. Here, we describe the first 469 image-guided biopsies collected in a large collaboration in The Netherlands (Center for Personalized Cancer Treatment) and show the utility of these specimens for NGS analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Image-guided tumor biopsies were performed in advanced cancer patients. Samples were fresh frozen, vital tumor cellularity was estimated, and DNA was isolated after macrodissection of tumor-rich areas. Safety of the image-guided biopsy procedures was assessed by reporting of serious adverse events within 14 days after the biopsy procedure. RESULTS: Biopsy procedures were generally well tolerated. Major complications occurred in 2.1%, most frequently consisting of pain. In 7.3% of the percutaneous lung biopsies, pneumothorax requiring drainage occurred. The majority of samples (81%) contained a vital tumor percentage of at least 30%, from which at least 500 ng DNA could be isolated in 91%. Given our preset criteria, 74% of samples were of sufficient quality for biomarker discovery. The NGS results in this cohort were in line with those in other groups. CONCLUSION: Image-guided biopsy procedures for biomarker discovery to enable personalized cancer treatment are safe and feasible and yield a highly valuable biobank. The Oncologist 2017;22:33-40Implications for Practice: This study shows that it is safe to perform image-guided biopsy procedures to obtain fresh frozen tumor samples and that it is feasible to use these biopsies for biomarker discovery purposes in a Dutch multicenter collaboration. From the majority of the samples, sufficient DNA could be yielded to perform next-generation sequencing. These results indicate that the way is paved for consortia to prospectively collect fresh frozen tumor tissue.