Oncology phase I trial design and conduct: time for a change - MDICT Guidelines 2022.

In 2021, the Food and Drug Administration Oncology Center of Excellence announced Project Optimus focusing on dose optimization for oncology drugs. The Methodology for the Development of Innovative Cancer Therapies (MDICT) Taskforce met to review and discuss the optimization of dosage for oncology trials and to develop a practical guide for oncology phase I trials. Defining a single recommended phase II dose based on toxicity may define doses that are neither the most effective nor the best tolerated. MDICT recommendations address the need for robust non-clinical data which are needed to inform trial design, as well as an expert team including statisticians and pharmacologists. The protocol must be flexible and adaptive, with clear definition of all endpoints. Health authorities should be consulted early and regularly. Strategies such as randomization, intrapatient dose escalation, and real-world eligibility criteria are encouraged whereas serial tumor sampling is discouraged in the absence of a strong rationale and appropriately validated assay. Endpoints should include consideration of all longitudinal toxicity. The phase I dose escalation trial should define the recommended dose range for later testing in randomized phase II trials, rather than a single recommended phase II dose, and consider scenarios where different populations may require different dosages. The adoption of these recommendations will improve dosage selection in early clinical trials of new anticancer treatments and ultimately, outcomes for patients.

Methodology of clinical trials evaluating the incorporation of new drugs in the first-line treatment of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL): a critical review.

Background: The first-line treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the combination of rituximab with CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) chemotherapy, curing approximately 60% of patients. Many clinical trials have been carried out over the last 10 years trying to improve the results of this treatment, but the appropriateness of their planning strategies could be rediscussed. Patients and methods: Reports of phase III trials evaluating the addition of molecularly targeted agents or new monoclonal antibodies to the classic R-CHOP backbone in first-line induction or maintenance treatment were reviewed. The trial design, primary end point, number of patients enrolled, patient selection criteria, treatment schedule and results were registered for each one. In addition, the phases I and II trials which preceded these phase III trials were also reviewed. Results: Among six phase III trials with results, only one trial evaluating lenalidomide maintenance after response to R-CHOP induction was positive and reached its primary end point. The other five trials did not show an improved outcome with the addition of the new agent. The preceding phases I and II trials were very heterogeneous in their end points and design. Even though most of these trials were considered positive, thus encouraging further investigation, so far they failed to predict the results of the subsequent phase III trials. Conclusion: The standard of care for DLBCL is still R-CHOP. Phase I/II trials failed to predict the results of subsequent phase III trials evaluating non-chemotherapeutic agents added to R-CHOP. The methodology of phase II trials evaluating new agents in DLBCL needs to be better defined in the future.

Phase I trial of the oral smoothened inhibitor sonidegib in combination with paclitaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Purpose To establish a recommended phase II dose (RP2D) for the oral smoothened inhibitor sonidegib in combination with paclitaxel; secondary objectives include evaluation of safety, tolerability, markers of Hedgehog (Hh) signaling and preliminary antitumor activity. Methods Patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled in cohorts of escalating sonidegib dose levels (400mg, 600mg and 800mg orally, once daily on days 1-28) in combination with paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15 in 4-weekly cycles. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were assessed using CTCAE v4. Once the RP2D was defined, patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma were treated at this dose level in an expansion phase. Biomarkers of Hh signaling were assessed by immunohistochemistry in archival tissue and antitumor activity evaluated using RECIST 1.1. Results 18 patients were treated: 3 at 400 mg, 3 at 600 mg and 12 at 800 mg sonidegib. Only one patient treated at 800 mg presented a DLT (prolonged neutropenia resulting in failure to receive 75% of the planned sonidegib dose). However, 4 of 12 patients treated at 800 mg had their sonidegib dose reduced for toxicity after cycle 1. Hh biomarker (SHH, Patched, SMO and GLI1) staining did not correlate with clinical activity. Best response was partial response in 3 patients (2 ovarian, 1 breast cancer) and stable disease >4 cycles in 3 patients (2 ovarian, 1 anal cancer). Conclusions The combination of sonidegib and paclitaxel is tolerable and evidence of antitumor activity was identified. The RP2D of sonidegib was 800 mg in combination with paclitaxel 80mg/m2.

Combination of the MEK inhibitor pimasertib with BTK or PI3K-delta inhibitors is active in preclinical models of aggressive lymphomas.

BACKGROUND: Lymphomas are among the most common human cancers and represent the cause of death for still too many patients. The B-cell receptor with its downstream signaling pathways represents an important therapeutic target for B-cell lymphomas. Here, we evaluated the activity of the MEK1/2 inhibitor pimasertib as single agent and in combination with other targeted drugs in lymphoma preclinical models. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cell lines derived mature B-cell lymphomas were exposed to increasing doses of pimasertib alone. Immunoblotting and gene expression profiling were performed. Combination of pimasertib with idelalisib or ibrutinib was assessed. RESULTS: Pimasertib as single agent exerted a dose-dependent antitumor activity across a panel of 23 lymphoma cell lines, although at concentrations higher than reported for solid tumors. Strong synergism was observed with pimasertib combined with the PI3K inhibitor idelalisib and the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib in cell lines derived from diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and mantle cell lymphoma. The data were confirmed in an in vivo experiment treating DLBCL xenografts with pimasertib and ibrutinib. CONCLUSION: The data presented here provide the basis for further investigation of regimens including pimasertib in relapsed and refractory lymphomas.

The new therapeutical scenario of Hodgkin lymphoma.

Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) remains one of the most curable human cancers, as modern combination chemotherapy and radiation therapy cure ∼ 80% of patients. Over the last two decades, the major efforts were focused on the development of more intensive front-line regimens for patients with advanced stage HL, decreasing the number of chemotherapy cycles and radiation therapy field and doses for patients with early-stage HL and incorporating positron emission tomography imaging in diagnostic, prognostic, and treatment planning. More recently, the improved knowledge of the molecular biology of the disease led to the development of highly active new agents, including the antibody-drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Accordingly, the current efforts are focusing on incorporating these new agents into standard of care regimens, aiming at further improving cure rates, while reducing treatment-related toxicity. In this review, we will focus on the current status of HL therapy and how the development of new agents is re-shaping standard of care regimens.

Designs of preoperative biomarkers trials in oncology: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: The identification of predictive and pharmacodynamics (PD) biomarkers of efficacy of anticancer-targeted therapies is not always straightforward. To address this problem, preoperative trials have been set up. The present study aimed at evaluating how these trials are designed. DESIGN: We retrieved all preoperative oncology trials, defined as preoperative trials having a PD end point. RESULTS: Only 56 trials met our selection criteria. Of these, 27 trials (48%) were randomized. Forty-nine trials (88%) evaluated at least a noncytotoxic agent. In 37 trials (66%), a single agent was administered. The most prevalent tumor type was breast cancer (59%). Median duration of accrual was 28 months (range: 9-98). In these trials, there was a mean of two patients included per month (range: 0-7). The date of surgery was fixed before study entry in 35 trials (62%), while surgery was set up after preoperative therapy in the remaining 21 trials (38%). In the former trials, median duration of preoperative therapy was 17 days (range: 1-112), whereas in the latter trials it ranged from 4 to 29 weeks. The primary end point was a PD end point in 26 of the 45 trials (58%) in which it was mentioned. One percent of patients could not undergo surgery as per protocol due to an adverse event. Statistically significant predictive and PD biomarkers were identified in 17 (30%) and 27 trials (48%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Preoperative biomarkers trials are infrequent but safe and feasible. These trials often permit the identification of predictive and PD biomarkers.

Histologic transformation in marginal zone lymphomas†.

BACKGROUND: Histologic transformation (HT) is a poorly understood event in patients with marginal zone lymphoma (MZL). The aim of this study was to analyze incidence and risk factors for HT in a large series of MZL patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The studied cohort included 340 MZL patients diagnosed and treated between 1995 and 2012: 157 extranodal MZLs [mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphoma, 46%], 85 splenic MZLs (SMZLs, 25%) and 37 nodal MZLs (NMZLs, 11%). Sixty-one patients (18%) had bone marrow infiltration at presentation, with or without detectable involvement of peripheral blood, but without other involved sites; they were considered clonal B-cell lymphocytosis of marginal zone origin (CBL-MZ). RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 4.8 years, the median overall survival and progression-free survival of the whole population were 14.5 and 5 years, respectively. HT was observed in 13 cases [3.8%, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 2%-6.5%]. Elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) at diagnosis was associated with the risk of HT (P = 0.019). HT occurred in 5% of SMZLs, 4% of MALT lymphomas, 3% of NMZLs and 3% of CBL-MZ (P = 0.974). The risk of HT was 5% (95% CI 3-9%) at 5 and 10 years after diagnosis and 10% (95% CI 5%-20%) at 12 years. At the time of HT, most patients had high LDH and B symptoms. At a median follow-up of 12 months after HT, 4 of 13 patients died, all for lymphoma-related causes, with a 2-year post-transformation survival rate of 57% (95% CI 13%-86%). CONCLUSIONS: In this large retrospective series, the risk of HT across all MZL types appeared lower than the one reported for follicular lymphoma.

In vivo RAF signal transduction as a potential biomarker for sorafenib efficacy in patients with neuroendocrine tumours.

BACKGROUND: Targeted therapies elicit anticancer activity by exerting pharmacodynamic effects on specific molecular targets. Currently, there is limited use of pharmacodynamic assessment to guide drug administration in the routine oncology setting. METHODS: We developed a phosphoshift (pShift) flow cytometry-based test that measures RAF signal transduction capacity in peripheral blood cells, and evaluated it in a phase II clinical trial of oral sorafenib plus low-dose cyclophosphamide in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumours (NETs), in order to predict clinical course and/or guide individual dose-titration. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3 months (95% CI 2-10.7), and one patient had a partial response. PFS was longer among five patients who demonstrated an increase in pShift after 7 days of sorafenib compared with those who did not (14.9 months vs 2.8 months; P=0.047). However, pShift did not add value to toxicity-based dose-titration. CONCLUSION: The pharmacodynamic assessment of RAF transduction may identify selected patients with advanced NETs most likely to benefit from the combination of sorafenib plus cyclophosphamide. Further investigation of this test as a potential biomarker is warranted.

New agents for the treatment of lymphoma.

Despite improvements in the diagnosis and management of lymphomas, many patients remain incurable with available treatments. advances in preclinical research and a better understanding of the molecular biology of lymphomas have allowed the development of a high number of therapeutic agents with innovative mechanisms of action. Many of these new agents have shown activity in patients not responding to standard treatments and there is optimism that their incorporation into the standard of care can result in improved treatment outcomes. Here we review new monoclonal antibodies and small molecules that have recently entered clinical evaluation for patients with lymphomas.

A systematic review of contemporary phase I trials in patients with lymphoma.

We performed a systematic review of phase I trials specifically designed for lymphoma patients. PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were searched using (lymphoma*) AND (phase 1) and publication date 2015-2020 to identify phase I dose-finding trials including a majority of lymphoma patients. Eighty-two trials (n = 3289 lymphoma patients) were included: 46 (55%) enrolled only lymphoma patients, 34 (41%) included also other hematologic malignancies, 2 (2%) solid tumors. Forty-six trials (56%) evaluated a combination (in 25 addition of experimental drug to standard therapy). Seven trials (9%) enrolled untreated patients. Among trials reporting activity in lymphoma patients, 74% (n = 57) reported an overall response rate ≥ 30%. All trials reported grade ≥ 3 adverse events; however, rates were not comparable across trials. Thirty-one treatment-related deaths in lymphoma patients were reported (overall treatment-related grade 5 adverse events rate 0.94%). Phase I trials designed for lymphoma patients were generally safe and the majority reported overall response rate ≥ 30%.

A systematic review of phase II trials exploring anti-PD-1/PD-L1 combinations in patients with solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: A high number of combinations of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with other anti-cancer therapies are in clinical development. The usefulness of phase II trials in evaluating their efficacy and safety is unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a systematic search on PubMed and Cochrane Library for phase II trials of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in combination with other anti-cancer therapies (systemic therapy and/or radiotherapy) published between January 1st 2018 and December 31st 2020. Study design, primary endpoint and main outcomes were registered for each paper. RESULTS: 119 articles reporting on 65 regimens were included in our analysis. Backbone agents were more frequently PD-1 inhibitors (pembrolizumab = 47, nivolumab = 41, camrelizumab = 3) followed by anti-PD-L1 (durvalumab = 19, atezolizumab = 6, avelumab = 3). Therapeutic partners were other immunotherapeutic agents (n = 46), targeted therapies (n = 40), chemotherapy (n = 22) or radiotherapy (n = 11). The majority of articles reported on single-arm trials (n = 87, 73%) and response rate was the most frequent primary endpoint (n = 69, 58%). Objective responses, registered in 109 (92%) articles, ranged between 0% and 91%. The incidence of grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events, clearly reported in 97 (82%) articles, spanned from 0 to 100%. Five combinations received regulatory approval by Food and Drug Administration or European Medicine Agency for 9 different indications, based on the results of a phase II trial (n = 3) or on a confirmatory phase III trial (n = 6). CONCLUSIONS: The landscape of phase II trials evaluating PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with other anticancer therapies is heterogeneous. Combinations of two immunotherapeutic agents have been the most investigated. Only a minority of indications (8%) granted regulatory approval.

Long-term outcome following Helicobacter pylori eradication in a retrospective study of 105 patients with localized gastric marginal zone B-cell lymphoma of MALT type.

BACKGROUND: Treatment aimed at eradicating Helicobacter pylori infection results in lymphoma remission in most localized gastric mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphomas. The aim of this survey is to investigate the long-term effect of this therapeutic approach in a large series of patients. METHODS: One hundred and five patients with localized gastric MALT lymphoma were initially treated only with H. pylori eradication regimens. Lymphoma responses were graded using the Wotherspoon score. RESULTS: Helicobacter pylori, detected by histology in 81% of cases, was eradicated in all positive patients. Histological regression of the lymphoma was achieved in 78 of 102 assessable patients [76%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 67% to 84%] with complete remission (score 0-2) in 66 and partial remission (score 3) in 12. At a median follow-up time of 6.3 years, histological remission was consistently confirmed in 33 of 74 assessable patients, while 25 had score fluctuations (from 0 to 4) and 13 presented a lymphoma relapse (score 5). Only one patient had a distant progression. Transformation to a large-cell lymphoma was seen in two cases. The 5- and 10-year overall survival is 92% (95% CI: 84% to 96%) and 83% (95% CI: 70% to 91%), respectively. Only one patient died of lymphoma after transformation to a high-grade lymphoma. CONCLUSIONS: Helicobacter pylori eradication resulted in complete lymphoma remission in the majority of cases. Long-term clinical disease control was achieved in most patients. A watch and wait policy appears to be safe in patients with minimal residual disease or histological-only local relapse.

A Rare Case of Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma Diagnosed 10 Years after Liver Transplant.

Posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLD) represent a rare and potentially life-threatening complication after liver transplantation. Classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL), with an incidence of approximately 1.8-3.4% of all PTLD cases, represents a minority of PTLD, mainly presenting as a late transplant complication. The main risk factors for the development of PTLD are Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection and intensive immunosuppression. However, other risk factors like hepatitis C virus may, together with EBV infection, contribute to the development of PTLD. Here we present a case of late-onset EBV-positive cHL that occurred 10 years after an unrelated donor liver transplantation. To our knowledge, this is the first report of cHL occurring with such a long interval after liver transplantation. Given the low incidence of cHL PTLD, there is little information regarding pathology, clinical characteristics, and management of this disease. The development of individual, risk-adapted treatments may improve the long-term outcome of cHL PTLD.

Macroprolactinemia. Is treatment necessary?

A 26-year old symptom-free woman was admitted to our Clinic for evaluation of hyperprolactinemia. The patient, who had normal menstrual cycles, was found accidentally to have a cystic adnexal mass and was placed on oral contraceptives (OC) for 3 months. During the first OC-cycle a bilateral breast nipple discharge was noticed and an elevated serum prolactin (PRL) was detected (2.7 nmol/l). The OC was discontinued and bromocriptine therapy was started. Serum PRL levels were restored and spontaneous menses resumed. The Pituitary magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the anterior pituitary function, assessed by dynamic tests, and the thyroid hormone levels were normal. Upon bromocriptine discontinuation, PRL levels increased to 13.8 nmol/l. Poly-ethylene-glycol precipitation of the patient's serum, in two consecutive measurements, demonstrated the presence of macroprolactinemia. Since the patient was asymptomatic, a dopamine agonist was not resumed. Macroprolactinemia is characterized by most authors, as a benign condition with no clinical implications. However, a number of investigators challenge this view, suggesting that in some cases mild symptomatology is present possibly requiring therapeutic intervention.