Pharmacological Interventions for Sialorrhoea in People with Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background/objectives: Sialorrhoea is a common non motor complication experienced by people with Parkinson's disease (PD). Despite its prevalence there is conflicting evidence on how to effectively treat it. Our aim was to establish the efficacy and safety outcomes of pharmacological interventions used to treat sialorrhoea in people with idiopathic PD. Methods: We registered and conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42016042470). We searched seven electronic databases from inception until July 2022. Quantitative synthesis was performed where data allowed using random effects models. Results: From 1374 records we included 13 studies (n = 405 participants). Studies were conducted in Europe, North America and China. There was marked heterogeneity in the interventions used, follow up times and outcome measures investigated. The main source of risk of bias identified was reporting bias. Five studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. Summary estimates showed administration of botulinum toxin significantly reduced saliva production, improved patient reported functional outcomes and was associated with an increase in adverse events. Conclusion: Sialorrhoea in PD is an important condition, but current data does not allow for strong recommendations on optimal pharmacological treatments. There is significant heterogeneity in outcomes measures used to evaluate the burden of sialorrhoea with lack of consensus on what constitutes clinically meaningful change. More research is required to better understand the underlying mechanism and potential treatments of sialorrhoea in idiopathic PD.

Order of patient entry and outcomes in phase II clinical trials: A meta-analysis of individual patient data.

BACKGROUND: Prior meta-analysis of stem-cell transplantation trials for renal-cell carcinoma observed that clinical outcomes vary by subjects' order of entry, specifically their quartile of accrual. We test this hypothesis using meta-analysis of individual patient data from diverse Phase II trials conducted by an oncology consortium. METHODS: Eligible were all Phase II trials in hematologic or solid tumors opened and closed by California Cancer Consortium during 2005-2020. Excluded were trials closed in first quartile or currently embargoed pending publication and subjects ineligible per protocol or untreated on study. The primary risk factor was entry by quartile of planned sample size. As a cross-protocol endpoint, primary outcome was time to discontinuation of intervention. One-stage meta-analysis used a shared frailty model with trial as random effect. As covariates, stepwise selection retained tumor type, obesity, their interaction, calendar year, entry at least 3 years post-diagnosis, and performance status but rejected age, sex, randomized design, and class of drug. RESULTS: Twenty trials (including 8 terminated early, 2 not published) included n = 923 subjects. Most (90.6%) subjects discontinued intervention, usually for disease progression or toxicity. Independently of covariates, risk of discontinuation increased (p < 0.0001) with each quartile of entry (Hazards Ratio 1.13, 95% CI 1.06-1.22), culminating at Quartile 4 (HR 1.46, 1.36-1.57). The 95% prediction interval for the Hazards Ratio in future trials was (1.04-1.24). Progression-free survival similarly worsened by quartile of entry. CONCLUSION: In Phase II trials, clinical outcome worsens with quartile of entry. This finding merits independent replication, and the cause of this phenomenon merits investigation.

Effect of Cisplatin and Gemcitabine With or Without Berzosertib in Patients With Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Preclinical studies suggest that inhibition of single-stranded DNA repair by ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3 (ATR) may enhance the cytotoxicity of cisplatin, gemcitabine, and other chemotherapeutic agents. Cisplatin with gemcitabine remains the standard up-front therapy for treatment in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of the selective ATR inhibitor, berzosertib, could augment the activity of cisplatin with gemcitabine. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In a phase 2 randomized clinical trial, 87 patients across 23 centers in the National Cancer Institute Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network were randomized to receive either cisplatin with gemcitabine alone (control arm) or cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib (experimental arm). Key eligibility criteria included confirmed metastatic urothelial cancer, no prior cytotoxic therapy for metastatic disease, 12 months or more since perioperative therapy, and eligibility for cisplatin receipt based on standard criteria. The study was conducted from January 27, 2017, to December 15, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: In the control arm, cisplatin, 70 mg/m2, was given on day 1 and gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m2, was given on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. In the experimental arm, cisplatin, 60 mg/m2, was given on day 1; gemcitabine, 875 mg/m2, on days 1 and 8; and berzosertib, 90 mg/m2, on days 2 and 9 of a 21-day cycle. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point of the study was progression-free survival. The analysis was on all patients who started therapy. RESULTS: Of the total of 87 patients randomized, 41 patients received cisplatin with gemcitabine alone and 46 received cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib. Median age was 67 (range, 32-84) years, and 68 patients (78%) were men. Median progression-free survival was 8.0 months for both arms (Bajorin risk-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.72-2.08). Median overall survival was shorter with cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib compared with cisplatin with gemcitabine alone (14.4 vs 19.8 months; Bajorin risk-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.76-2.68). Higher rates of grade 3 vs grade 4 thrombocytopenia (59% vs 39%) and neutropenia (37% vs 27%) were observed with cisplatin with gemcitabine and berzosertib compared with cisplatin with gemcitabine alone; consequently, more dose reductions were needed in the experimental arm. Patients in the experimental arm received a median cisplatin dose of 250 mg/m2, which was significantly lower than the median dose of 370 mg/m2 in the control arm (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The addition of berzosertib to cisplatin with gemcitabine did not prolong progression-free survival relative to cisplatin with gemcitabine alone in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer, and a trend toward inferior survival was observed with this combination. Berzosertib plus cisplatin with gemcitabine was associated with significantly higher hematologic toxicities despite attenuated dosing of cisplatin with gemcitabine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02567409.

Erlotinib and Onalespib Lactate Focused on EGFR Exon 20 Insertion Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC): A California Cancer Consortium Phase I/II Trial (NCI 9878).

BACKGROUND: Onalespib is a novel heat shock protein 90 inhibitor (HSP90i). Previous preclinical and clinical studies with HSP90i have demonstrated activity in EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study sought to determine the safety and tolerability of onalespib plus erlotinib in EGFR-mutant NSCLC and to evaluate the preliminary efficacy of the combination in epidermal growth factor receptor exon 20 insertion (EGFRex20ins) NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Standard 3+3 dose escalation was followed by a phase II expansion in EGFRex20ins. The phase II component targeted a response rate of 25% versus a background rate of 5%. Prospective next-generation sequencing (NGS) of 70 cancer-related genes, including EGFR, via plasma circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) was performed. Toxicity was graded by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4, and response was determined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) 1.1. RESULTS: Eleven patients were treated (nine dose escalation, two dose expansion). Two dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurred in dose level (DL) 0 and zero in DL -1 (minus). In 10 EGFRex20ins patients, no responses were observed, median progression-free survival was 5.4 months (95% confidence interval, 0.9-5.7), and the disease control rate (DCR) was 40% (median, 3.5 months). EGFRex20ins was detected in nine of 10 ctDNA samples at baseline; on-treatment ctDNA clearance was not observed. Grade 3 diarrhea was the predominant toxicity in 45% of patients. The recommended phase II dose is DL -1 (minus): erlotinib 150 mg orally every morning and onalespib 120 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days. CONCLUSION: Overlapping toxicities of erlotinib and onalespib, mainly diarrhea, limited the tolerability of this combination, and limited clinical activity was observed, so the trial was closed early. Plasma EGFRex20ins ctDNA was detected in the majority of patients; failure to clear ctDNA was consistent with lack of tumor response (NCT02535338).

A phase I study of intravenous fenretinide (4-HPR) for patients with malignant solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Fenretinide is a synthetic retinoid that can induce cytotoxicity by several mechanisms. Achieving effective systemic exposure with oral formulations has been challenging. An intravenous lipid emulsion fenretinide formulation was developed to overcome this barrier. We conducted a study to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), preliminary efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of intravenous lipid emulsion fenretinide in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Twenty-three patients with advanced solid tumors refractory to standard treatments received fenretinide as a continuous infusion for five consecutive days in 21-day cycles. Five different dose cohorts were evaluated between doses of 905 mg/m2 and 1414 mg/m2 per day using a 3 + 3 dose escalation design. A priming dose of 600 mg/m2 on day 1 was introduced in an attempt to address the asymptomatic serum triglyceride elevations related to the lipid emulsion. RESULTS: The treatment-related adverse events occurring in ≥ 20% of patients were anemia, hypertriglyceridemia, fatigue, aspartate aminotransferase (AST)/alanine aminotransferase (ALT) increase, thrombocytopenia, bilirubin increase, and dry skin. Five evaluable patients had stable disease as best response, and no patients had objective responses. Plasma steady-state concentrations of the active metabolite were significantly higher than with previous capsule formulations. CONCLUSION: Fenretinide emulsion intravenous infusion had a manageable safety profile and achieved higher plasma steady-state concentrations of the active metabolite compared to previous capsule formulations. Single-agent activity was minimal but combinatorial approaches are under evaluation.

Phase II study of the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat (Suberoylanilide Hydroxamic Acid; SAHA) in recurrent or metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium - an NCI-CTEP sponsored: California Cancer Consortium trial, NCI 6879.

BACKGROUND: Until the advent of T cell check point inhibitors standard second-line therapy for patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) was undefined. Histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi) have anti-cancer activity in a variety of tumor models including modulation of apoptosis in bladder cancer cell lines. We evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of the HDACi vorinostat in patients with mUC failing first-line platinum-based therapy either in the adjuvant/neoadjuvant setting or for recurrent/advanced disease. METHODS: Vorinostat was given orally 200 mg twice daily continuously until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was RECIST response rate (RR); a RR > 20% was deemed interesting in a 2-stage design requiring one response in the first 12 patients to proceed to 2nd stage for a total of 37 subjects. CT or MRI scan imaging occurred every 6 weeks. RESULTS: Fourteen patients were accrued characterized by: median age 66 years (43-84); Caucasian (79%); males (86%); and Karnofsky performance status ≥90 (50%). Accrual was terminated in the first stage as no responses were observed. Best response was stable disease (3 patients). Progression was observed in 8 patients. Two patients came off therapy prior to re-imaging and a 3rd patient died while on treatment and was not assessed for response. Median number of cycles was 2 (range 1-11). Median disease-free survival and overall survival times were 1.1 (0.8, 2.1) & 3.2 (2.1, 14.5) months, respectively. Toxicities were predominantly cytopenias and thrombocytopenic bleeding. Two pts. had grade 5 toxicity unlikely related to treatment. Two pts. had grade 4 and 6 had grade 3 toxicities observed. Two patients with stable disease remained on therapy for 6+ cycles. CONCLUSIONS: Vorinostat on this dose-schedule had limited efficacy and significant toxicity resulting in a unfavorable risk:benefit ratio in patients with mUC. NCT00363883.

Epidemiological and cohort study finds no association between COVID-19 and Guillain-Barré syndrome.

Reports of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) have emerged during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This epidemiological and cohort study sought to investigate any causative association between COVID-19 infection and GBS. The epidemiology of GBS cases reported to the UK National Immunoglobulin Database was studied from 2016 to 2019 and compared to cases reported during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were stratified by hospital trust and region, with numbers of reported cases per month. UK population data for COVID-19 infection were collated from UK public health bodies. In parallel, but separately, members of the British Peripheral Nerve Society prospectively reported incident cases of GBS during the pandemic at their hospitals to a central register. The clinical features, investigation findings and outcomes of COVID-19 (definite or probable) and non-COVID-19 associated GBS cases in this cohort were compared. The incidence of GBS treated in UK hospitals from 2016 to 2019 was 1.65-1.88 per 100 000 individuals per year. GBS incidence fell between March and May 2020 compared to the same months of 2016-19. GBS and COVID-19 incidences during the pandemic also varied between regions and did not correlate with one another (r = 0.06, 95% confidence interval: -0.56 to 0.63, P = 0.86). In the independent cohort study, 47 GBS cases were reported (COVID-19 status: 13 definite, 12 probable, 22 non-COVID-19). There were no significant differences in the pattern of weakness, time to nadir, neurophysiology, CSF findings or outcome between these groups. Intubation was more frequent in the COVID-19 affected cohort (7/13, 54% versus 5/22, 23% in COVID-19-negative) attributed to COVID-19 pulmonary involvement. Although it is not possible to entirely rule out the possibility of a link, this study finds no epidemiological or phenotypic clues of SARS-CoV-2 being causative of GBS. GBS incidence has fallen during the pandemic, which may be the influence of lockdown measures reducing transmission of GBS inducing pathogens such as Campylobacter jejuni and respiratory viruses.

Phase 1 Trial of MLN0128 (Sapanisertib) and CB-839 HCl (Telaglenastat) in Patients With Advanced NSCLC (NCI 10327): Rationale and Study Design.

INTRODUCTION: There are currently no approved targeted therapies for lung squamous-cell carcinoma (LSCC) and KRAS-mutant lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). About 30% of LSCC and 25% of KRAS-mutant LUAD exhibit hyperactive NRF2 pathway activation through mutations in NFE2L2 (the gene encoding NRF2) or its negative regulator, KEAP1. Preclinical data demonstrate that these tumors are uniquely sensitive to dual inhibition of glycolysis and glutaminolysis via mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) and glutaminase inhibitors. This phase 1 study was designed to assess safety and preliminary activity of the mTOR inhibitor MLN0128 (sapanisertib) in combination with the glutaminase inhibitor CB-839 HCl. METHODS: Phase 1 dose finding will use the queue-based variation of the 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme with the primary endpoint of identifying the recommended expansion dose. To confirm the acceptable tolerability of the recommended expansion dose, patients will subsequently enroll onto 1 of 4 expansion cohorts (n = 14 per cohort): (1) LSCC harboring NFE2L2 or (2) KEAP1 mutations, or (3) LUAD harboring KRAS/(KEAP1 or NFE2L2) coalterations, or (4) LSCC wild type for NFE2L2 and KEAP1. The primary endpoint of the dose expansion is to determine the preliminary efficacy of MLN0128/CB-839 combination therapy. CONCLUSION: This phase 1 study will determine the recommended expansion dose and preliminary efficacy of MLN0128 and CB-839 in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with a focus on subsets of LSCC and KRAS-mutant LUAD harboring NFE2L2 or KEAP1 mutations.

Untenable dosing: A common pitfall of modern DLT-targeting Phase I designs in oncology.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing use of Phase I statistical designs to find a dose that causes rapidly emerging and particularly concerning severe or life-threatening toxicities (dose-limiting toxicities, DLTs) in a specified percent of patients most commonly 25%. While a convenient statistical framework, the foundation for selecting any specified target DLT rate, and its relevance to the recommended Phase II dose is generally lacking. METHOD: We surveyed 78 medical oncologists, most (69%) with experience as a principal investigator on a Phase I study, to ascertain their opinions related to this approach to Phase I studies and the targets often chosen. RESULTS: Eighty-seven percent of respondents preferred severe toxicities in only 5%-10% of patients, consistent with 58% of respondents noting that 10% or fewer patients experience severe toxicities in the first cycle with standard outpatient treatments. The survey also documented in an example that the majority (62%) of physicians modify their patient selection during the conduct of the study based on observed toxicity and 78% note that higher toxicity is acceptable in patients where a cure is more likely. CONCLUSION: DLT-target rate designs search for a single target that is rarely well-supported in a patient population that is not stable. The most common target used is inconsistent with the toxicity of most clinically used drugs and investigator preference and can lead to the pursuit of unacceptable doses. Use of Phase I trial designs with a target DLT rate should be limited to settings with a well-justified target and should specify how the target relates to the recommended Phase II dose.

Model of a Queuing Approach for Patient Accrual in Phase 1 Oncology Studies.

Importance: Phase 1 cancer studies, which guide dose selection for subsequent studies, are almost 3 times more prevalent than phase 3 studies and have a median study duration considerably longer than 2 years, which constitutes a major component of drug development time. Objective: To discern a method to reduce the duration of phase 1 studies in adult and pediatric cancer studies without violating risk limits by better accommodating the accrual and evaluation process (or queue). Design: The process modeled, the phase 1 queue (IQ), includes patient interarrival time, screening, and dose-limiting toxicity evaluation. For this proof of principle, the rules of the 3 + 3 and rolling 6 phase 1 designs were modified to improve patient flow through the queue without exceeding the maximum risk permitted in the parent designs. The resulting designs, the IQ 3 + 3 and the IQ rolling 6, were each compared with their parent design by simulations in 12 different scenarios. Main Outcomes and Measures: (1) The time from study opening to determination of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), (2) the number of patients treated to determine the MTD, and (3) the association of the design with the dose selected as the MTD. Results: Based on 800 simulations, for all 12 scenarios considered, the IQ 3 + 3 and the IQ rolling 6 designs were associated with reduced expected study durations compared with the parent design. The expected IQ 3 + 3 reduction ranged from 1.6 to 10.4 months (with 3.7 months for the standard scenario), and the expected reduction associated with IQ rolling 6 ranged from 0.4 to 10.5 months (with 3.4 months for the standard scenario). The increase in the mean number of patients treated in the IQ 3 + 3 compared with the 3 + 3 ranged from 0.6 to 3.2 patients. No increase in the number of patients was associated with the IQ rolling 6 compared with the rolling 6 design. The probability of selecting a dose level as the MTD changed by less than 3% for all dose levels and scenarios in both parent designs. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that IQ designs were associated with reduced mean duration of phase 1 studies compared with their parent designs without changing the risk limits or MTD selection operating characteristics. These approaches have been successfully implemented in both hematology and solid tumor phase 1 studies.

Intravenous 5-fluoro-2'-deoxycytidine administered with tetrahydrouridine increases the proportion of p16-expressing circulating tumor cells in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Following promising responses to the DNA methyltransferase (DNMT) inhibitor 5-fluoro-2'-deoxycytidine (FdCyd) combined with tetrahydrouridine (THU) in phase 1 testing, we initiated a non-randomized phase 2 study to assess response to this combination in patients with advanced solid tumor types for which tumor suppressor gene methylation is potentially prognostic. To obtain pharmacodynamic evidence for DNMT inhibition by FdCyd, we developed a novel method for detecting expression of tumor suppressor protein p16/INK4A in circulating tumor cells (CTCs). METHODS: Patients in histology-specific strata (breast, head and neck [H&N], or non-small cell lung cancers [NSCLC] or urothelial transitional cell carcinoma) were administered FdCyd (100 mg/m2) and THU (350 mg/m2) intravenously 5 days/week for 2 weeks, in 28-day cycles, and progression-free survival (PFS) rate and objective response rate (ORR) were evaluated. Blood specimens were collected for CTC analysis. RESULTS: Ninety-three eligible patients were enrolled (29 breast, 21 H&N, 25 NSCLC, and 18 urothelial). There were three partial responses. All strata were terminated early due to insufficient responses (H&N, NSCLC) or slow accrual (breast, urothelial). However, the preliminary 4-month PFS rate (42%) in the urothelial stratum exceeded the predefined goal-though the ORR (5.6%) did not. An increase in the proportion of p16-expressing cytokeratin-positive CTCs was detected in 69% of patients evaluable for clinical and CTC response, but was not significantly associated with clinical response. CONCLUSION: Further study of FdCyd + THU is potentially warranted in urothelial carcinoma but not NSCLC or breast or H&N cancer. Increase in the proportion of p16-expressing cytokeratin-positive CTCs is a pharmacodynamic marker of FdCyd target engagement.

Emergency presentations of movement disorders.

Movement disorders are typically perceived as being gradually progressive conditions that are managed in outpatient settings. However, they may manifest de novo with an acute severe phenotype or an acute decompensation. A movement disorder becomes an emergency when it evolves acutely or subacutely over hours to days; delays in its diagnosis and treatment may cause significant morbidity and mortality. Here we address the clinical presentation, diagnosis and management of those movement disorder emergencies that are principally encountered in emergency departments, in acute receiving units or in intensive care units. We provide practical guidance for management in the acute setting where there are several treatable causes not to be missed. The suggested medication doses are predominantly based on expert opinion due to limited higher-level evidence. In spite of the rarity of movement disorder emergencies, neurologists need to be familiar with the phenomenology, potential causes and treatments of these conditions. Movement disorder emergencies divide broadly into two groups: hypokinetic and hyperkinetic, categorised according to their phenomenology. Most acute presentations are hyperkinetic and some are mixed.

Inhibition of MDR1 Overcomes Resistance to Brentuximab Vedotin in Hodgkin Lymphoma.

PURPOSE: In classical Hodgkin lymphoma, the malignant Reed-Sternberg cells express the cell surface marker CD30. Brentuximab vedotin is an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) that selectively delivers a potent cytotoxic agent, monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE), to CD30-positive cells. Although brentuximab vedotin elicits a high response rate (75%) in relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma, most patients who respond to brentuximab vedotin eventually develop resistance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We developed two brentuximab vedotin-resistant Hodgkin lymphoma cell line models using a pulsatile approach and observed that resistance to brentuximab vedotin is associated with an upregulation of multidrug resistance-1 (MDR1). We then conducted a phase I trial combining brentuximab vedotin and cyclosporine A (CsA) in patients with relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma. RESULTS: Here, we show that competitive inhibition of MDR1 restored sensitivity to brentuximab vedotin in our brentuximab vedotin-resistant cell lines by increasing intracellular MMAE levels, and potentiated brentuximab vedotin activity in brentuximab vedotin-resistant Hodgkin lymphoma tumors in a human xenograft mouse model. In our phase I trial, the combination of brentuximab vedotin and CsA was tolerable and produced an overall and complete response rate of 75% and 42% in a population of patients who were nearly all refractory to brentuximab vedotin. CONCLUSIONS: This study may provide a new therapeutic strategy to combat brentuximab vedotin resistance in Hodgkin lymphoma. This is the first study reporting an effect of multidrug resistance modulation on the therapeutic activity of an ADC in humans. The expansion phase of the trial is ongoing and enrolling patients who are refractory to brentuximab vedotin to confirm clinical activity in this population with unmet need.

Phase 1 study of the Aurora kinase A inhibitor alisertib (MLN8237) combined with the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat in lymphoid malignancies.

Alisertib, an Aurora kinase A inhibitor, was evaluated in a Phase 1 study in combination with the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat, in patients with relapsed/refractory lymphoid malignancies (N = 34; NCT01567709). Patients received alisertib plus vorinostat in 21-day treatment cycles with escalating doses of alisertib following a continuous or an intermittent schedule. All dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were hematologic and there were no study-related deaths. The recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of the combination was 20 mg bid of alisertib and 200 mg bid of vorinostat on the intermittent schedule. A 13-patient expansion cohort was treated for a total of 18 patients at the RP2D. There were no DLTs at the RP2D, and toxicities were mainly hematologic. Two patients with DLBCL achieved a durable complete response, and two patients with HL achieved partial response. Alisertib plus vorinostat showed encouraging clinical activity with a manageable safety profile in heavily pretreated patients with advanced disease.

Phase I trial of belinostat in combination with 13-cis-retinoic acid in advanced solid tumor malignancies: a California Cancer Consortium NCI/CTEP sponsored trial.

PURPOSE: The reported maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of single-agent belinostat is 1000 mg/m2 given days 1-5, every 21 days. Pre-clinical evidence suggests histone deacetylase inhibitors enhance retinoic acid signaling in a variety of solid tumors. We conducted a phase I study of belinostat combined with 50-100 mg/m2/day 13-cis-retinoic acid (13-cRA) in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Belinostat was administered days 1-5 and 13-cRA days 1-14, every 21 days. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as cycle 1 hematologic toxicity grade ≥ 3 not resolving to grade ≤ 1 within 1 week or non-hematologic toxicity grade ≥ 3 (except controlled nausea and vomiting and transient liver function abnormalities) attributable to belinostat. RESULTS: Among 51 patients, two DLTs were observed: grade 3 hypersensitivity with dizziness and hypoxia at 1700 mg/m2/day belinostat with 100 mg/m2/day 13-cRA, and grade 3 allergic reaction at 2000 mg/m2/day belinostat with 100 mg/m2/day 13-cRA. The MTD was not reached. Pharmacokinetics of belinostat may be non-linear at high doses. Ten patients had stable disease, including one with neuroendocrine pancreatic cancer for 56 cycles, one with breast cancer for 12 cycles, and one with lung cancer for 8 cycles. Partial responses included a patient with keratinizing squamous cell carcinoma of the tonsils, and a patient with lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of belinostat 2000 mg/m2 days 1-5 and 13-cRA 100 mg/m2 days 1-14, every 21 days, was well-tolerated and an MTD was not reached despite doubling the established single-agent MTD of belinostat.

A Phase I Study of the Combination of Rituximab and Ipilimumab in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory B-Cell Lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Based on the potential for ipilimumab (I) to augment T-cell activation, we hypothesize that ipilimumab would augment the efficacy of rituximab (R) in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) CD20+non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). This phase I study aimed to identify a recommended phase 2 dose, document toxicities, and preliminarily assess efficacy and potential predictive biomarkers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-three patients with R/R CD20+B-cell lymphoma received R at 375 mg/m2weekly for 4 weeks and I at 3 mg/kg on day 1 and every 3 weeks for four doses. Responding patients went on to maintenance with each agent given every 12 weeks. To facilitate correlative analysis, the expansion phase randomized patients to simultaneous R+I versus R with I delayed 2 weeks. RESULTS: Toxicity was manageable; no dose-limiting toxicity was observed at the doses studied. When considering the entire cohort, efficacy was modest, with an objective response rate (ORR) of 24% and median progression-free survival (PFS) of 2.6 months. However, in follicular lymphoma patients, the ORR was 58% with a median PFS of 5.6 months. The randomized comparison of R with R+I demonstrated that R+I resulted in more effective B-cell depletion (BCD). Both B-cell depletion and the ratio of CD45RA-regulatory T cell (Treg) to Treg were associated with response at all time points. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of R+I has manageable toxicity and encouraging efficacy in R/R follicular lymphoma. The ratio of CD45RA-Tregs to total Tregs, and peripheral BCD should be studied further as potential predictors of response.

Phase II California Cancer Consortium Trial of Gemcitabine-Eribulin Combination in Cisplatin-Ineligible Patients With Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: Final Report (NCI-9653).

PURPOSE: Patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma are often ineligible for cisplatin-based treatments. A National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program-sponsored trial assessed the tolerability and efficacy of a gemcitabine-eribulin combination in this population. METHODS: Patients with treatment-naïve advanced or recurrent metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the bladder, ureter, or urethra not amenable to curative surgery and not candidates for cisplatin-based therapy were eligible. Cisplatin ineligibility was defined as creatinine clearance less than 60 mL/min (but ≥ 30 mL/min), grade 2 neuropathy, or grade 2 hearing loss. Treatment was gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 intravenously followed by eribulin 1.4 mg/m2, both on days 1 and 8, repeated in 21-day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity. A Simon two-stage phase II trial design was used to distinguish between Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 objective response rates of 20% versus 50%. RESULTS: Between June 2015 and March 2017, 24 eligible patients with a median age of 73 years (range, 62 to 88 years) underwent therapy. Performance status of 0, 1, or 2 was seen in 11, 11, and two patients, respectively. Sites of disease included: lymph nodes, 16; lungs, nine; liver, seven; bladder, five; bones, two. Median number of cycles received was four (range, one to 16). Of 24 patients, 12 were confirmed responders; the observed objective response rate was 50% (95% CI, 29% to 71%). Median overall survival was 11.9 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 20.4 months), and median progression-free survival was 5.3 months (95% CI, 4.5 to 6.7 months). The most common treatment-related any-grade toxicities were fatigue (83% of patients), neutropenia (79%), anemia (63%), alopecia (50%), elevated AST (50%), and constipation, nausea, and thrombocytopenia (42% each). CONCLUSION: Gemcitabine-eribulin treatment response and survival for cisplatin-ineligible patients compare favorably to other regimens. Additional research is needed.

Phase II Trial of Cabozantinib Plus Erlotinib in Patients With Advanced Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-Mutant Non-small Cell Lung Cancer With Progressive Disease on Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Therapy: A California Cancer Consortium Phase II Trial (NCI 9303).

Introduction: Mesenchymal epidermal transition and vascular endothelial growth factor pathways are important in mediating non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumorigenesis and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) resistance. We hypothesized that treatment with cabozantinib plus erlotinib in EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC following progression on EGFR TKI therapy may allow tumors to overcome this resistance or restore sensitivity to therapy regardless of T790M status. Methods: Patients with advanced NSCLC, known EGFR mutation and progressive disease on an EGFR TKI immediately prior to enrollment without intervening therapy were enrolled. Patients received erlotinib 150 mg and cabozantinib 40 mg daily. The primary endpoint was evaluation of efficacy by objective response rate. Secondary endpoints included assessment of progression free survival (PFS), overall survival, change in tumor growth rate, safety and toxicity, and the evaluation of specific EGFR mutations and MET amplification in pre-treatment tissue and plasma. Results: Thirty-seven patients were enrolled at 4 centers. Four patients had partial response (10.8%) and 21 had stable disease (59.5%). A greater than 30% increase in tumor doubling time was observed in 79% of assessable patients (27/34). Median PFS was 3.6 months for all patients. Diarrhea (32%) was the most common grade 3 adverse event; 3 patients had asymptomatic grade 4 elevation of amylase and lipase. Conclusions: Combination erlotinib and cabozantinib demonstrates activity in a highly pretreated population of patients with EGFR mutation and progression on EGFR TKI. Further elucidation of beneficial patient subsets is warranted. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT01866410.