Epigenetic targeting of PGBD5-dependent DNA damage in SMARCB1-deficient sarcomas.

Despite the potential of targeted epigenetic therapies, most cancers do not respond to current epigenetic drugs. The Polycomb repressive complex EZH2 inhibitor tazemetostat was recently approved for the treatment of SMARCB1-deficient epithelioid sarcomas, based on the functional antagonism between PRC2 and loss of SMARCB1. Through the analysis of tazemetostat-treated patient tumors, we recently defined key principles of their response and resistance to EZH2 epigenetic therapy. Here, using transcriptomic inference from SMARCB1-deficient tumor cells, we nominate the DNA damage repair kinase ATR as a target for rational combination EZH2 epigenetic therapy. We show that EZH2 inhibition promotes DNA damage in epithelioid and rhabdoid tumor cells, at least in part via its induction of the transposase-derived PGBD5. We leverage this collateral synthetic lethal dependency to target PGBD5-dependent DNA damage by inhibition of ATR but not CHK1 using elimusertib. Consequently, combined EZH2 and ATR inhibition improves therapeutic responses in diverse patient-derived epithelioid and rhabdoid tumors in vivo. This advances a combination epigenetic therapy based on EZH2-PGBD5 synthetic lethal dependency suitable for immediate translation to clinical trials for patients.

Overcoming Clinical Resistance to EZH2 Inhibition Using Rational Epigenetic Combination Therapy.

Epigenetic dependencies have become evident in many cancers. On the basis of antagonism between BAF/SWI-SNF and PRC2 in SMARCB1-deficient sarcomas, we recently completed the clinical trial of the EZH2 inhibitor tazemetostat. However, the principles of tumor response to epigenetic therapy in general, and tazemetostat in particular, remain unknown. Using functional genomics and diverse experimental models, we define molecular mechanisms of tazemetostat resistance in SMARCB1-deficient tumors. We found distinct acquired mutations that converge on the RB1/E2F axis and decouple EZH2-dependent differentiation and cell-cycle control. This allows tumor cells to escape tazemetostat-induced G1 arrest, suggests a general mechanism for effective therapy, and provides prospective biomarkers for therapy stratification, including PRICKLE1. On the basis of this, we develop a combination strategy to circumvent tazemetostat resistance using bypass targeting of AURKB. This offers a paradigm for rational epigenetic combination therapy suitable for translation to clinical trials for epithelioid sarcomas, rhabdoid tumors, and other epigenetically dysregulated cancers. SIGNIFICANCE: Genomic studies of patient epithelioid sarcomas and rhabdoid tumors identify mutations converging on a common pathway for response to EZH2 inhibition. Resistance mutations decouple drug-induced differentiation from cell-cycle control. We identify an epigenetic combination strategy to overcome resistance and improve durability of response, supporting its investigation in clinical trials. See related commentary by Paolini and Souroullas, p. 903. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 897.

Therapy-Induced Senescence Contributes to the Efficacy of Abemaciclib in Patients with Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma.

PURPOSE: We conducted research on CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) simultaneously in the preclinical and clinical spaces to gain a deeper understanding of how senescence influences tumor growth in humans. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We coordinated a first-in-kind phase II clinical trial of the CDK4/6i abemaciclib for patients with progressive dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLS) with cellular studies interrogating the molecular basis of geroconversion. RESULTS: Thirty patients with progressing DDLS enrolled and were treated with 200 mg of abemaciclib twice daily. The median progression-free survival was 33 weeks at the time of the data lock, with 23 of 30 progression-free at 12 weeks (76.7%, two-sided 95% CI, 57.7%-90.1%). No new safety signals were identified. Concurrent preclinical work in liposarcoma cell lines identified ANGPTL4 as a necessary late regulator of geroconversion, the pathway from reversible cell-cycle exit to a stably arrested inflammation-provoking senescent cell. Using this insight, we were able to identify patients in which abemaciclib induced tumor cell senescence. Senescence correlated with increased leukocyte infiltration, primarily CD4-positive cells, within a month of therapy. However, those individuals with both senescence and increased TILs were also more likely to acquire resistance later in therapy. These suggest that combining senolytics with abemaciclib in a subset of patients may improve the duration of response. CONCLUSIONS: Abemaciclib was well tolerated and showed promising activity in DDLS. The discovery of ANGPTL4 as a late regulator of geroconversion helped to define how CDK4/6i-induced cellular senescence modulates the immune tumor microenvironment and contributes to both positive and negative clinical outcomes. See related commentary by Weiss et al., p. 649.

PDGFRß Signaling Cooperates with ß-Catenin to Modulate c-Abl and Biologic Behavior of Desmoid-Type Fibromatosis.

PURPOSE: This study sought to identify ß-catenin targets that regulate desmoid oncogenesis and determine whether external signaling pathways, particularly those inhibited by sorafenib (e.g., PDGFRß), affect these targets to alter natural history or treatment response in patients. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In vitro experiments utilized primary desmoid cell lines to examine regulation of ß-catenin targets. Relevance of results was assessed in vivo using Alliance trial A091105 correlative biopsies. RESULTS: CTNNB1 knockdown inhibited hypoxia-regulated gene expression in vitro and reduced levels of HIF1α protein. ChIP-seq identified ABL1 as a ß-catenin transcriptional target that modulated HIF1α and desmoid cell proliferation. Abrogation of either CTNNB1 or HIF1A inhibited desmoid cell-induced VEGFR2 phosphorylation and tube formation in endothelial cell co-cultures. Sorafenib inhibited this activity directly but also reduced HIF1α protein expression and c-Abl activity while inhibiting PDGFRß signaling in desmoid cells. Conversely, c-Abl activity and desmoid cell proliferation were positively regulated by PDGF-BB. Reduction in PDGFRß and c-Abl phosphorylation was commonly observed in biopsy samples from patients after treatment with sorafenib; markers of PDGFRß/c-Abl pathway activation in baseline samples were associated with tumor progression in patients on the placebo arm and response to sorafenib in patients receiving treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The ß-catenin transcriptional target ABL1 is necessary for proliferation and maintenance of HIF1α in desmoid cells. Regulation of c-Abl activity by PDGF signaling and targeted therapies modulates desmoid cell proliferation, thereby suggesting a reason for variable biologic behavior between tumors, a mechanism for sorafenib activity in desmoids, and markers predictive of outcome in patients.

Immune-related Adverse Events after Immune Checkpoint Blockade-based Therapy Are Associated with Improved Survival in Advanced Sarcomas.

The association between immune-related AEs (irAE) and outcome in patients with sarcoma is not known. We retrospectively reviewed a cohort of patients with advanced sarcoma treated with immune checkpoint blockade (ICB)-based therapy. Association of irAEs with survival was assessed using a Cox regression model that incorporated irAE occurrence as a time-dependent covariate. Tumor samples with available RNA sequencing data were stratified by presence of an irAE to identify patterns of differential gene expression. A total of 131 patients were included. Forty-two (32%) had at least one irAE of any grade and 16 (12%) had at least one grade ≥ 3 irAE. The most common irAEs were hypothyroidism (8.3%), arthralgias (5.3%), pneumonitis (4.6%), allergic reaction (3.8%), and elevated transaminases (3.8%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from the time of study entry were 11.4 [95% confidence interval (CI), 10.7-15.0) and 74.6 weeks (CI, 44.9-89.7), respectively. On Cox analysis adjusting for clinical covariates that were significant in the univariate setting, the HR for an irAE (HR, 0.662; CI, 0.421-1.041) approached, but did not reach statistical significance for PFS (P = 0.074). Patients had a significantly lower HR for OS (HR, 0.443; CI, 0.246-0.798; P = 0.007) compared with those without or before an irAE. Gene expression profiling on baseline tumor samples found that patients who had an irAE had higher numbers of tumor-infiltrating dendritic cells, CD8+ T cells, and regulatory T cells as well as upregulation of immune and inflammatory pathways. SIGNIFICANCE: irAE after ICB therapy was associated with an improved OS; it also approached statistical significance for improved PFS. Patients who had an irAE were more likely to have an inflamed tumor microenvironment at baseline.

GOunder/Desmoid Tumor Research Foundation DEsmoid Symptom/Impact Scale (GODDESS©): psychometric properties and clinically meaningful thresholds as assessed in the Phase 3 DeFi randomized controlled clinical trial.

PURPOSE: The GODDESS© tool was developed to assess Desmoid Tumor/Aggressive Fibromatosis (DT/AF) symptom severity and impact on patients' lives. This study evaluated GODDESS©'s cross-sectional and longitudinal measurement properties. METHODS: The Phase 3, randomized placebo-controlled, DeFi study (NCT03785964) of nirogacestat in DT/AF was used to assess GODDESS©'s reliability, construct validity, responsiveness, and estimate of meaningful change thresholds (MCTs). Other patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures included Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGIS) in DT/AF symptoms, EORTC QLQ-C30, Brief Pain Inventory Short Form, and PROMIS Physical Function short-form 10a v2.0 plus 3 items. RESULTS: DeFi participants (N = 142) had a median age of 34 years (range: 18-76) and were mostly female (64.8%), with extra-abdominal (76.8%) or intra-abdominal tumors (23.2%). The GODDESS© symptom/impact scales showed internal consistency at baseline, cycles 4 and 7 (Cronbach's α > 0.70) and test-retest reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient > 0.85). GODDESS© scales correlated moderately to highly with PRO measures capturing similar content and differentiated among PGIS and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group groups. GODDESS© scales detected improvement over time. For the total symptom score, a 1.30-point decrease was estimated as the within-person MCT and a 1.00-point decrease as the between-group MCT. For the physical functioning impact score, estimated within- and between-group MCTs were 0.60-point and 0.50-point decreases, respectively. Few participants exhibited symptom worsening. CONCLUSION: GODDESS© was found to be reliable, valid, responsive, and interpretable as a clinical trial endpoint in the pooled sample of DT/AF patients. Estimated MCTs can be used to define responders and assess group-level differences in future, unblinded, efficacy analyses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND REGISTRATION DATE: NCT03785964; December 24, 2018.

The MDM2-p53 Antagonist Brigimadlin (BI 907828) in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Solid Tumors: Results of a Phase Ia, First-in-Human, Dose-Escalation Study.

Brigimadlin (BI 907828) is an oral MDM2-p53 antagonist that has shown encouraging antitumor activity in vivo. We present phase Ia results from an open-label, first-in-human, phase Ia/Ib study investigating brigimadlin in patients with advanced solid tumors (NCT03449381). Fifty-four patients received escalating doses of brigimadlin on day 1 of 21-day cycles (D1q3w) or days 1 and 8 of 28-day cycles (D1D8q4w). Based on dose-limiting toxicities during cycle 1, the maximum tolerated dose was selected as 60 mg for D1q3w and 45 mg for D1D8q4w. The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) were nausea (74.1%) and vomiting (51.9%); the most common grade ≥3 TRAEs were thrombocytopenia (25.9%) and neutropenia (24.1%). As evidence of target engagement, time- and dose-dependent increases in growth differentiation factor 15 levels were seen. Preliminary efficacy was encouraging (11.1% overall response and 74.1% disease control rates), particularly in patients with well-differentiated or dedifferentiated liposarcoma (100% and 75% disease control rates, respectively). SIGNIFICANCE: We report phase Ia data indicating that the oral MDM2-p53 antagonist brigimadlin has a manageable safety profile and shows encouraging signs of efficacy in patients with solid tumors, particularly those with MDM2-amplified advanced/metastatic well-differentiated or dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Further clinical investigation of brigimadlin is ongoing. See related commentary by Italiano, p. 1765. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1749.

A Phase II Study of Epacadostat and Pembrolizumab in Patients with Advanced Sarcoma.

PURPOSE: Epacadostat, an indole 2,3 dioxygenase 1 (IDO1) inhibitor, proposed to shift the tumor microenvironment toward an immune-stimulated state, showed early promise in melanoma but has not been studied in sarcoma. This study combined epacadostat with pembrolizumab, which has modest activity in select sarcoma subtypes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase II study enrolled patients with advanced sarcoma into five cohorts including (i) undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS)/myxofibrosarcoma, (ii) liposarcoma (LPS), (iii) leiomyosarcoma (LMS), (iv) vascular sarcoma, including angiosarcoma and epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE), and (v) other subtypes. Patients received epacadostat 100 mg twice daily plus pembrolizumab at 200 mg/dose every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was best objective response rate (ORR), defined as complete response (CR) and partial response (PR), at 24 weeks by RECIST v.1.1. RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled [60% male; median age 54 years (range, 24-78)]. The best ORR at 24 weeks was 3.3% [PR, n = 1 (leiomyosarcoma); two-sided 95% CI, 0.1%-17.2%]. The median PFS was 7.6 weeks (two-sided 95% CI, 6.9-26.7). Treatment was well tolerated. Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 23% (n = 7) of patients. In paired pre- and post-treatment tumor samples, no association was found between treatment and PD-L1 or IDO1 tumor expression or IDO-pathway-related gene expression by RNA sequencing. No significant changes in serum tryptophan or kynurenine levels were observed after baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Combination epacadostat and pembrolizumab was well tolerated and showed limited antitumor activity in sarcoma. Correlative analyses suggested that inadequate IDO1 inhibition was achieved.

A First-in-Human Phase I Study of Milademetan, an MDM2 Inhibitor, in Patients With Advanced Liposarcoma, Solid Tumors, or Lymphomas.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary efficacy of milademetan, a small-molecule murine double minute-2 (MDM2) inhibitor, in patients with advanced cancers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this first-in-human phase I study, patients with advanced solid tumors or lymphomas received milademetan orally once daily as extended/continuous (days 1-21 or 1-28 every 28 days) or intermittent (days 1-7, or days 1-3 and 15-17 every 28 days) schedules. The primary objective was to determine the recommended phase II dose and schedule. Secondary objectives included tumor response according to standard evaluation criteria. Predefined analyses by tumor type were performed. Safety and efficacy analyses included all patients who received milademetan. RESULTS: Between July 2013 and August 2018, 107 patients were enrolled and received milademetan. The most common grade 3/4 drug-related adverse events were thrombocytopenia (29.0%), neutropenia (15.0%), and anemia (13.1%). Respective rates at the recommended dose and schedule (260 mg once daily on days 1-3 and 15-17 every 28 days, ie, 3/14 days) were 15.0%, 5.0%, and 0%. Across all cohorts (N = 107), the disease control rate was 45.8% (95% CI, 36.1 to 55.7) and median progression-free survival was 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.4 to 5.7). In the subgroup with dedifferentiated liposarcomas, the disease control rate and median progression-free survival were 58.5% (95% CI, 44.1 to 71.9) and 7.2 months overall (n = 53), and 62.0% (95% CI, 35.4 to 84.8) and 7.4 months with the recommended intermittent schedule (n = 16), respectively. CONCLUSION: An intermittent dosing schedule of 3/14 days of milademetan mitigates dose-limiting hematologic abnormalities while maintaining efficacy. Notable single-agent activity with milademetan in dedifferentiated liposarcomas has prompted a randomized phase III trial (MANTRA).

Retrospective observational studies in ultra-rare sarcomas: A consensus paper from the Connective Tissue Oncology Society (CTOS) community of experts on the minimum requirements for the evaluation of activity of systemic treatments.

BACKGROUND: In ultra-rare sarcomas (URS) the conduction of prospective, randomized trials is challenging. Data from retrospective observational studies (ROS) may represent the best evidence available. ROS implicit limitations led to poor acceptance by the scientific community and regulatory authorities. In this context, an expert panel from the Connective Tissue Oncology Society (CTOS), agreed on the need to establish a set of minimum requirements for conducting high-quality ROS on the activity of systemic therapies in URS. METHODS: Representatives from > 25 worldwide sarcoma reference centres met in November 2020 and identified a list of topics summarizing the main issues encountered in ROS on URS. An online survey on these topics was distributed to the panel; results were summarized by descriptive statistics and discussed during a second meeting (November 2021). RESULTS: Topics identified by the panel included the use of ROS results as external control data, the criteria for contributing centers selection, modalities for ensuring a correct pathological diagnosis and radiologic assessment, consistency of surveillance policies across centers, study end-points, risk of data duplication, results publication. Based on the answers to the survey (55 of 62 invited experts) and discussion the panel agreed on 18 statements summarizing principles of recommended practice. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations will be disseminated by CTOS across the sarcoma community and incorporated in future ROS on URS, to maximize their quality and favor their use as control data when results from prospective studies are unavailable. These recommendations could help the optimal conduction of ROS also in other rare tumors.

Clinical genomic profiling in the management of patients with soft tissue and bone sarcoma.

There are more than 70 distinct sarcomas, and this diversity complicates the development of precision-based therapeutics for these cancers. Prospective comprehensive genomic profiling could overcome this challenge by providing insight into sarcomas' molecular drivers. Through targeted panel sequencing of 7494 sarcomas representing 44 histologies, we identify highly recurrent and type-specific alterations that aid in diagnosis and treatment decisions. Sequencing could lead to refinement or reassignment of 10.5% of diagnoses. Nearly one-third of patients (31.7%) harbor potentially actionable alterations, including a significant proportion (2.6%) with kinase gene rearrangements; 3.9% have a tumor mutational burden ≥10 mut/Mb. We describe low frequencies of microsatellite instability (<0.3%) and a high degree of genome-wide loss of heterozygosity (15%) across sarcomas, which are not readily explained by homologous recombination deficiency (observed in 2.5% of cases). In a clinically annotated subset of 118 patients, we validate actionable genetic events as therapeutic targets. Collectively, our findings reveal the genetic landscape of human sarcomas, which may inform future development of therapeutics and improve clinical outcomes for patients with these rare cancers.

Clinical sequencing of soft tissue and bone sarcomas delineates diverse genomic landscapes and potential therapeutic targets.

The genetic, biologic, and clinical heterogeneity of sarcomas poses a challenge for the identification of therapeutic targets, clinical research, and advancing patient care. Because there are > 100 sarcoma subtypes, in-depth genetic studies have focused on one or a few subtypes. Herein, we report a comparative genetic analysis of 2,138 sarcomas representing 45 pathological entities. This cohort is prospectively analyzed using targeted sequencing to characterize subtype-specific somatic alterations in targetable pathways, rates of whole genome doubling, mutational signatures, and subtype-agnostic genomic clusters. The most common alterations are in cell cycle control and TP53, receptor tyrosine kinases/PI3K/RAS, and epigenetic regulators. Subtype-specific associations include TERT amplification in intimal sarcoma and SWI/SNF alterations in uterine adenosarcoma. Tumor mutational burden, while low compared to other cancers, varies between and within subtypes. This resource will improve sarcoma models, motivate studies of subtype-specific alterations, and inform investigations of genetic factors and their correlations with treatment response.

Transarterial Chemoembolization with Doxorubicin Eluting Beads for Extra-Abdominal Desmoid Tumors: Initial Experience.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of doxorubicin-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization (DEB-TACE) as an alternative local treatment for extra-abdominal desmoid tumors (DTs). METHODS: Eleven adult female patients (mean age = 40.1 years) with symptomatic, progressively enlarging extra-abdominal DTs were determined ineligible for cryoablation after failing observation or systemic therapy and treated with a single session doxorubicin DEB-TACE. Six rectus sheath, one chest wall, three axilla, and one upper extremity DTs were included. The median follow-up was 155.0 ± 52.3 days. Treatment response was assessed by MRIs and maximum visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: All procedures were technically successful without immediate complications. The average size of treated DT was 161.8 ml (range: 28.3-420.0 ml). The mean doxorubicin dose was 13.3 mg/m2. All patients experienced skin changes which improved over time without treatments. No higher-grade adverse events were observed. Initial one-month follow-up MRI demonstrated partial to near-complete tumor necrosis, ranging from 1.4 to 97.6% (mean: 36.4%). Additional follow-up revealed a further reduction of overall tumor volume (mean: - 38.1%, p < 0.0001) and maximum VAS (mean: - 2.6, p = 0.0026) in 10 out of 11 patients (90.9%). After the first month, the residual tumors exhibited continued volume reduction in 10 out of 11 patients (mean: - 16.5%, p = 0.0230). There was also a significant decrease of T2 signal intensity within residual tumor on the latest follow-up (mean: - 29.6%, p = 0.0217), suggesting a reduction in tumor cellularity. CONCLUSION: DEB-TACE may be a safe and effective local treatment alternative in DT patients.

Clinical, genomic, and transcriptomic correlates of response to immune checkpoint blockade-based therapy in a cohort of patients with angiosarcoma treated at a single center.

BACKGROUND: Angiosarcoma is a histologically and molecularly heterogeneous vascular neoplasm with aggressive clinical behavior. Emerging data suggests that immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) is efficacious against some angiosarcomas, particularly cutaneous angiosarcoma of the head and neck (CHN). METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed angiosarcoma treated with ICB-based therapy at a comprehensive cancer center were retrospectively identified. Clinical characteristics and the results of targeted exome sequencing, transcriptome sequencing, and immunohistochemistry analyses were examined for correlation with clinical benefit. Durable clinical benefit was defined as a progression-free survival (PFS) of ≥16 weeks. RESULTS: For the 35 patients included in the analyses, median PFS and median overall survival (OS) from the time of first ICB-based treatment were 11.9 (95% CI 7.4 to 31.9) and 42.5 (95% CI 19.6 to 114.2) weeks, respectively. Thirteen patients (37%) had PFS ≥16 weeks. Clinical factors associated with longer PFS and longer OS in multivariate analyses were ICB plus other therapy regimens, CHN disease, and white race. Three of 10 patients with CHN angiosarcoma evaluable for tumor mutational burden (TMB) had a TMB ≥10. Five of six patients with CHN angiosarcoma evaluable for mutational signature analysis had a dominant mutational signature associated with ultraviolet (UV) light. No individual gene or genomic pathway was significantly associated with PFS or OS; neither were TMB or UV signature status. Analyses of whole transcriptomes from nine patient tumor samples found upregulation of angiogenesis, inflammatory response, and KRAS signaling pathways, among others, in patients with PFS ≥16 weeks, as well as higher levels of cytotoxic T cells, dendritic cells, and natural killer cells. Patients with PFS <16 weeks had higher numbers of cancer-associated fibroblasts. Immunohistochemistry findings for 12 patients with baseline samples available suggest that neither PD-L1 expression nor presence of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes at baseline appears necessary for a response to ICB-based therapy. CONCLUSIONS: ICB-based therapy benefits only a subset of angiosarcoma patients. Patients with CHN angiosarcoma are more likely to have PFS ≥16 weeks, a dominant UV mutational signature, and higher TMB than angiosarcomas arising from other primary sites. However, clinical benefit was seen in other angiosarcomas also and was not restricted to tumors with a high TMB, a dominant UV signature, PD-L1 expression, or presence of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes at baseline.

Selinexor in Advanced, Metastatic Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma: A Multinational, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Antitumor activity in preclinical models and a phase I study of patients with dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DD-LPS) was observed with selinexor. We evaluated the clinical benefit of selinexor in patients with previously treated DD-LPS whose sarcoma progressed on approved agents. METHODS: SEAL was a phase II-III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients age 12 years or older with advanced DD-LPS who had received two-five lines of therapy were randomly assigned (2:1) to selinexor (60 mg) or placebo twice weekly in 6-week cycles (crossover permitted). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included for safety analysis (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02606461). RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-five patients were enrolled (selinexor, n = 188; placebo, n = 97). PFS was significantly longer with selinexor versus placebo: hazard ratio (HR) 0.70 (95% CI, 0.52 to 0.95; one-sided P = .011; medians 2.8 v 2.1 months), as was time to next treatment: HR 0.50 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.66; one-sided P < .0001; medians 5.8 v 3.2 months). With crossover, no difference was observed in overall survival. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade versus grade 3 or 4 with selinexor were nausea (151 [80.7%] v 11 [5.9]), decreased appetite (113 [60.4%] v 14 [7.5%]), and fatigue (96 [51.3%] v 12 [6.4%]). Four (2.1%) and three (3.1%) patients died in the selinexor and placebo arms, respectively. Exploratory RNA sequencing analysis identified that the absence of CALB1 expression was associated with longer PFS with selinexor compared with placebo (median 6.9 v 2.2 months; HR, 0.19; P = .001). CONCLUSION: Patients with advanced, refractory DD-LPS showed improved PFS and time to next treatment with selinexor compared with placebo. Supportive care and dose reductions mitigated side effects of selinexor. Prospective validation of CALB1 expression as a predictive biomarker for selinexor in DD-LPS is warranted.

Sorafenib in Dupuytren and Ledderhose Disease.

Palmar and plantar fibromatosis are benign proliferative processes which present as a diffuse thickening or nodules of the hands and/or feet and may lead to flexion contractures, pain, and functional impairment known as Dupuytren and Ledderhose diseases, respectively. Current treatments are noncurative and associated with significant morbidity. Here, we report on the outcomes of 5 patients with advanced disease, no longer surgical candidates, treated with sorafenib. Sorafenib exhibited an expected safety profile. All 5 patients demonstrated objective responses as evaluated by a decrease in tumor size and/or tumor cellularity from baseline and all 5 patients reported subjective pain relief and/or functional improvement. Mechanistically, immunohistochemistry revealed patchy positivity for PDGFRß, a known target of sorafenib. The outcomes of these 5 patients suggest the safety and efficacy of a relatively well-tolerated oral agent in the treatment of Dupuytren and Ledderhose diseases and suggest the need for future controlled studies.

Phase Ib Trial of the Combination of Imatinib and Binimetinib in Patients with Advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.

PURPOSE: This phase Ib trial was designed to evaluate the safety and early efficacy signal of the combination of imatinib and binimetinib in patients with imatinib-resistant advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This trial used a standard 3 + 3 design to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Additional patients were enrolled on an expansion cohort at the RP2D enriching for succinate dehydrogenase (SDH)-deficient GISTs to explore potential efficacy. RESULTS: The trial enrolled nine patients in the dose-escalation cohort and 14 in the dose-expansion cohort including six with SDH-deficient GISTs. Imatinib 400 mg daily with binimetinib 45 mg twice daily was established as the RP2D. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was asymptomatic grade 4 creatinine phosphokinase (CPK) elevation. The most common non-DLT grade 3/4 toxicity was asymptomatic CPK elevation (69.6%). Other common ≥grade 2 toxicities included peripheral edema (17.4%), acneiform rash (21.7%), anemia (30.4%), hypophosphatemia (39.1%), and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) increase (17.4%). Two serious adverse events occurred (grade 2 dropped head syndrome and grade 3 central retinal vein occlusion). No unexpected toxicities were observed. Limited clinical activity was observed in KIT-mutant GIST. For SDH-deficient GISTs, one of five had confirmed RECIST1.1 partial response (PR). The median progression-free survival (mPFS) in patients with SDH-deficient GIST was 45.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 15.8-not estimable (NE)]; the median overall survival (mOS) was not reached (95% CI, 31.6 months-NE). One patient with a refractory metastatic SDH-deficient GIST had an exceptional pathologic response and durable clinical benefit. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of imatinib and binimetinib is safe with manageable toxicity and has encouraging activity in SDH-deficient but not imatinib-refractory KIT/PDGFRA-mutant GISTs. The observed clinical benefits provide a motivation for a larger trial of the combination strategy in SDH-deficient GISTs.

A Phase Ib/II Randomized Study of RO4929097, a Gamma-Secretase or Notch Inhibitor with or without Vismodegib, a Hedgehog Inhibitor, in Advanced Sarcoma.

PURPOSE: Because the Hedgehog and Notch pathways are often overexpressed in mesenchymal malignancies, we evaluated the efficacy of concurrent inhibition of Notch and Hedgehog signaling using the gamma-secretase inhibitor (GSI) RO4929097 and the smoothened antagonist vismodegib in unresectable or metastatic sarcoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this investigator-initiated trial, phase Ib used standard 3+3 dose escalation in which patients first received vismodegib once daily for 21 days, followed by the combination of RO4929097 concurrently with vismodegib in 21-day cycles. In phase II, patients were randomized to RO4929097 alone or in combination with vismodegib. RESULTS: Nine patients were treated in phase Ib with no dose-limiting toxicities. RO4929097 at 15 mg daily in combination with 150 mg daily of vismodegib was declared the recommended phase II dose. Most adverse events were grade ≤ 2. In phase II (closed early due to discontinuation of RO4929097 evaluation), 34 patients were randomized to RO4929097 alone and 33 to RO4929097 plus vismodegib. RO4929097 did not interfere with the steady-state concentration of vismodegib, while vismodegib reduced the plasma concentration of RO492909. No patients had an objective response. Neither progression-free nor overall survival differed significantly between treatment arms. Paired tumor biopsies from a subset of patients demonstrated inhibition of cleaved Notch. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of RO4929097 plus vismodegib was generally well tolerated. Although accrual to this study was not completed, vismodegib did not meaningfully enhance the clinical efficacy of RO4929097 in an unplanned analysis. GSIs and GSIs plus vismodegib can inhibit intratumoral Notch and downstream phosphorylated Akt signaling.

Phase II Trial of Imatinib Plus Binimetinib in Patients With Treatment-Naive Advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor.

PURPOSE: Dual targeting of the gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) lineage-specific master regulators, ETV1 and KIT, by MEK and KIT inhibitors were synergistic preclinically and may enhance clinical efficacy. This trial was designed to test the efficacy and safety of imatinib plus binimetinib in first-line treatment of GIST. METHODS: In this trial (NCT01991379), treatment-naive adult patients with confirmed advanced GISTs received imatinib (400 mg once daily) plus binimetinib (30 mg twice daily), 28-day cycles. The primary end point was RECIST1.1 best objective response rate (ORR; complete response plus partial response [PR]). The study was designed to detect a 20% improvement in the ORR over imatinib alone (unacceptable rate of 45%; acceptable rate of 65%), using an exact binomial test, one-sided type I error of 0.08 and type II error of 0.1, and a planned sample size of 44 patients. Confirmed PR or complete response in > 24 patients are considered positive. Secondary end points included Choi and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Response Rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), pathologic responses, and toxicity. RESULTS: Between September 15, 2014, and November 15, 2020, 29 of 42 evaluable patients with advanced GIST had confirmed RECIST1.1 PR. The best ORR was 69.0% (two-sided 95% CI, 52.9 to 82.4). Thirty-nine of 41 (95.1%) had Choi PR approximately 8 weeks. Median PFS was 29.9 months (95% CI, 24.2 to not estimable); median OS was not reached (95% CI, 50.4 to not estimable). Five of eight patients with locally advanced disease underwent surgery after treatment and achieved significant pathologic response (≥ 90% treatment effect). There were no unexpected toxicities. Grade 3 and 4 toxicity included asymptomatic creatinine phosphokinase elevation (79.1%), hypophosphatemia (14.0%), neutrophil decrease (9.3%), maculopapular rash (7.0%), and anemia (7.0%). CONCLUSION: The study met the primary end point. The combination of imatinib and binimetinib is effective with manageable toxicity and warrants further evaluation in direct comparison with imatinib in frontline treatment of GIST.

Long-term Follow-up and Patterns of Response, Progression, and Hyperprogression in Patients after PD-1 Blockade in Advanced Sarcoma.

PURPOSE: Programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) blockade can mediate objective responses in advanced sarcomas, but their durability has not been established and it is unclear if hyperprogressive disease (HPD) occurs in sarcomas treated with PD-1 inhibitors. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We pooled patients who were treated prospectively with nivolumab or pembrolizumab as monotherapy or with bempegaldesleukin, epacadostat, ipilimumab, or talimogene laherparepvec. We did a new independent assessment for HPD and analyzed clinical, pathologic, and genomic data from baseline tumor biopsies. Our primary endpoint was the incidence of HPD; secondary endpoints were clinical or genomic correlates of response or HPD. RESULTS: We treated 134 patients with advanced sarcoma from 2015 to 2019. Twenty-one patients (16%) had a complete or partial response (CR/PR), and 30% of responses were durable for over 2 years. Forty-eight (36%) patients had stable disease (SD), 45 (34%) had progressive disease without HPD (PD), and 15 (11%) had HPD. Five patients (4%) were not evaluable for HPD. The sarcoma subtypes, sites of metastasis, clinical course, and genomic alterations in patients with PD and HPD were similar, except HPD tumors were smaller at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced sarcoma, PD-1 blockade can mediate durable responses. HPD occurs in sarcoma at an incidence that is similar to what has been reported in other solid tumors, but patients with HPD were clinically and biologically similar to those who had PD. Further research is required to establish whether HPD is a biologically distinct phenomenon and whether a theoretical risk of HPD should influence patient management.