Silmitasertib plus gemcitabine and cisplatin first-line therapy in locally advanced/metastatic cholangiocarcinoma: A Phase 1b/2 study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study aimed to investigate safety and efficacy of silmitasertib, an oral small molecule casein kinase 2 inhibitor, plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (G+C) versus G+C in locally advanced/metastatic cholangiocarcinoma. APPROACH AND RESULTS: This work is a Phase 1b/2 study (S4-13-001). In Phase 2, patients received silmitasertib 1000 mg twice daily for 10 days with G+C on Days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. Primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in the modified intent-to-treat population (defined as patients who completed at least one cycle of silmitasertib without dose interruption/reduction) from both phases (silmitasertib/G+C n = 55, G+C n = 29). The response was assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. The median PFS was 11.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.6, 14.7) versus 5.8 months (95% CI, 3.1, not evaluable [NE]) ( p  = 0.0496); 10-month PFS was 56.1% (95% CI, 38.8%, 70.2%) versus 22.2% (95% CI, 1.8%, 56.7%); and median overall survival was 17.4 months (95% CI, 13.4, 25.7) versus 14.9 months (95% CI, 9.9, NE) with silmitasertib/G+C versus G+C. Overall response rate was 34.0% versus 30.8%; the disease control rate was 86.0% versus 88.5% with silmitasertib/G+C versus G+C. Almost all silmitasertib/G+C (99%) and G+C (93%) patients reported at least one treatment emergent adverse event (TEAE). The most common TEAEs (all grades) with silmitasertib/G+C versus G+C were diarrhea (70% versus 13%), nausea (59% vs. 30%), fatigue (47% vs. 47%), vomiting (39% vs. 7%), and anemia (39% vs. 30%). Twelve patients (10%) discontinued treatment because of TEAEs during the study. CONCLUSIONS: Silmitasertib/G+C demonstrated promising preliminary evidence of efficacy for the first-line treatment of patients with locally advanced/metastatic cholangiocarcinoma.

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in patients with either treatment-naive or previously treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (Study 111/KEYNOTE-146): a phase 1b/2 study.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), there is an unmet need for options to address disease progression during or after treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Pembrolizumab and lenvatinib are active as monotherapies in RCC; thus, we aimed to evaluate the combination of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in these patients. METHODS: We report results of the metastatic RCC cohort from an open-label phase 1b/2 study of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in patients aged at least 18 years with selected solid tumours and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1. Oral lenvatinib at 20 mg was given once daily along with intravenous pembrolizumab at 200 mg once every 3 weeks. Patients remained on study drug treatment until disease progression, development of unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. Efficacy was analysed in patients with clear cell metastatic RCC receiving study drug by previous therapy grouping: treatment naive, previously treated ICI naive (previously treated with at least one line of therapy but not with an anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 ICI), and ICI pretreated (ie, anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1) patients. Safety was analysed in all enrolled and treated patients. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate at week 24 per immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (irRECIST) by investigator assessment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02501096) and with the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT2017-000300-26), and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between July 21, 2015, and Oct 16, 2019, 145 patients were enrolled in the study. Two patients had non-clear cell RCC and were excluded from the efficacy analysis (one in the treatment-naive group and one in the ICI-pretreated group); thus, the population evaluated for efficacy comprised 143 patients (n=22 in the treatment-naive group, n=17 in the previously treated ICI-naive group, and n=104 in the ICI-pretreated group). All 145 enrolled patients were included in the safety analysis. The median follow-up was 19·8 months (IQR 14·3-28·4). The number of patients with an objective response at week 24 by irRECIST was 16 (72·7%, 95% CI 49·8-89·3) of 22 treatment-naive patients, seven (41·2%, 18·4-67·1) of 17 previously treated ICI-naive patients, and 58 (55·8%, 45·7-65·5) of 104 ICI-pretreated patients. Of 145 patients, 82 (57%) had grade 3 treatment-related adverse events and ten (7%) had grade 4 treatment-related adverse events. The most common grade 3 treatment-related adverse event was hypertension (30 [21%] of 145 patients). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 36 (25%) patients, and there were three treatment-related deaths (upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage, sudden death, and pneumonia). INTERPRETATION: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab showed encouraging antitumour activity and a manageable safety profile and might be an option for post-ICI treatment of metastatic RCC. FUNDING: Eisai and Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Phase Ib clinical trial of the anti-frizzled antibody vantictumab (OMP-18R5) plus paclitaxel in patients with locally advanced or metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Vantictumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds to frizzled (FZD) receptors and inhibits canonical WNT signaling. This phase Ib dose escalation study enrolled patients with locally recurrent or metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer who were treated with weekly paclitaxel in combination with escalating doses of vantictumab. METHODS: Patients were enrolled in dose escalation cohorts treated with weekly paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15 in combination with vantictumab 3.5-14 mg/kg days 1 and 15 or 3-8 mg/kg day 1 of every 28-day cycle. Primary endpoints were safety, dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetics, efficacy and an exploratory biomarker analysis. RESULTS: Forty-eight female patients with a mean age of 54 were enrolled. The majority (66.6%) received prior chemotherapy for recurrent or metastatic disease; 45.8% were hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative and 54.2% triple-negative. The most frequent adverse events related to any study treatment were nausea (54.2%), alopecia (52.1%), fatigue (47.9%), and peripheral neuropathy (43.8%). No DLTs occurred; however, 6 patients experienced fractures outside of the DLT window. The overall response rate was 31.3% and the clinical benefit rate was 68.8%. A 6-gene WNT pathway signature showed significant association with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the biomarker high versus biomarker low groups (PFS: p = 0.029 and OS: p = 0.00045, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of vantictumab and weekly paclitaxel was generally well tolerated with promising efficacy; however, the incidence of fractures limits future clinical development of this particular WNT inhibitor in metastatic breast cancer. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT01973309.

Trilaciclib plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Trilaciclib is an intravenous cell-cycle inhibitor that transiently maintains immune cells and haemopoietic stem and progenitor cells in G1 arrest. By protecting the immune cells and bone marrow from chemotherapy-induced damage, trilaciclib has the potential to optimise antitumour activity while minimising myelotoxicity. We report safety and activity data for trilaciclib plus gemcitabine and carboplatin chemotherapy in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 2 study, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with evaluable, biopsy-confirmed, locally recurrent or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer who had no more than two previous lines of chemotherapy were recruited from 26 sites in the USA, three in Serbia, two in North Macedonia, one in Croatia, and one in Bulgaria; sites were academic and community hospitals. Availability of diagnostic samples of tumour tissue confirming triple-negative breast cancer was a prerequisite for enrolment. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by an interactive web-response system, stratified by number of previous lines of systemic therapy and the presence of liver metastases, to receive intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 and intravenous carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve 2 µg × h/mL) on days 1 and 8 (group 1), gemcitabine and carboplatin plus intravenous trilaciclib 240 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 (group 2), or gemcitabine and carboplatin on days 2 and 9 plus trilaciclib on days 1, 2, 8, and 9 (group 3) of 21-day cycles. Patients continued treatment until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or discontinuation by the investigator. The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of combining trilaciclib with gemcitabine and carboplatin chemotherapy. The primary endpoints were duration of severe neutropenia during cycle 1 and the occurrence of severe neutropenia during the treatment period. Overall survival was included as a key secondary endpoint. Analyses were in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with EudraCT, 2016-004466-26, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02978716, and is ongoing but closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Feb 7, 2017, and May 15, 2018, 142 patients were assessed for eligibility and 102 were randomly assigned to group 1 (n=34), group 2 (n=33), or group 3 (n=35). Of all patients, 38 (37%) had received one or two lines of previous chemotherapy in the metastatic setting. Median follow-up was 8·4 months (IQR 3·8-13·6) for group 1, 12·7 months (5·5-17·4) for group 2, and 12·9 months (6·7-16·8) for group 3. Data cutoff for myelosuppression endpoints was July 30, 2018, and for antitumour activity endpoints was May 17, 2019. During cycle 1, mean duration of severe neutropenia was 0·8 day (SD 2·4) in group 1, 1·5 days (3·5) in group 2, and 1·0 day (2·6) in group 3 (group 3 vs group 1 one-sided adjusted p=0·70). Severe neutropenia occurred in nine (26%) of 34 patients in group 1, 12 (36%) of 33 patients in group 2, and eight (23%) of 35 patients in group 3 (p=0·70). Overall survival was 12·6 months (IQR 5·8-15·6) in group 1, 20·1 months (9·4-not reached) in group 2, and 17·8 months (8·8-not reached) in group 3 (group 3 vs group 1 two-sided p=0·0023). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (22 [73%] of 34), neutropenia (21 [70%]), and thrombocytopenia (18 [60%]) in group 1; neutropenia (27 [82%] of 33), thrombocytopenia (18 [55%]) and anaemia (17 [52%]) in group 2; and neutropenia (23 [66%] of 35), thrombocytopenia (22 [63%]), and nausea (17 [49%]) in group 3. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: No significant differences were observed in myelosuppression endpoints with trilaciclib plus gemcitabine and carboplatin in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer; however, the regimen was generally well tolerated and overall survival results were encouraging. Further studies of trilaciclib in this setting are warranted. FUNDING: G1 Therapeutics.

Whole blood FPR1 mRNA expression predicts both non-small cell and small cell lung cancer.

While long-term survival rates for early-stage lung cancer are high, most cases are diagnosed in later stages that can negatively impact survival rates. We aim to design a simple, single biomarker blood test for early-stage lung cancer that is robust to preclinical variables and can be readily implemented in the clinic. Whole blood was collected in PAXgene tubes from a training set of 29 patients, and a validation set of 260 patients, of which samples from 58 patients were prospectively collected in a clinical trial specifically for our study. After RNA was extracted, the expressions of FPR1 and a reference gene were quantified by an automated one-step Taqman RT-PCR assay. Elevated levels of FPR1 mRNA in whole blood predicted lung cancer status with a sensitivity of 55% and a specificity of 87% on all validation specimens. The prospectively collected specimens had a significantly higher 68% sensitivity and 89% specificity. Results from patients with benign nodules were similar to healthy volunteers. No meaningful correlation was present between our test results and any clinical characteristic other than lung cancer diagnosis. FPR1 mRNA levels in whole blood can predict the presence of lung cancer. Using this as a reflex test for positive lung cancer screening computed tomography scans has the potential to increase the positive predictive value. This marker can be easily measured in an automated process utilizing off-the-shelf equipment and reagents. Further work is justified to explain the source of this biomarker.

A phase II study to evaluate LY2603618 in combination with gemcitabine in pancreatic cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine whether checkpoint kinase 1 inihibitor (CHK1), LY2603618, and gemcitabine prolong overall survival (OS) compared to gemcitabine alone in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Patients with Stage II-IV locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer were randomized (2:1) to either 230 mg of LY2603618/1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine combined or 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine alone. OS was assessed using both a Bayesian augment control model and traditional frequentist analysis for inference. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), duration of response, pharmacokinetics (PK), and safety (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [AEs] v 3.0) were also evaluated. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients (n = 65, LY2603618/gemcitabine; n = 34, gemcitabine) were randomized (intent-to-treat population). The median OS (months) was 7.8 (range, 0.3-18.9) with LY2603618/gemcitabine and 8.3 (range, 0.8-19.1+) with gemcitabine. Similarly, in a Bayesian analysis, the study was not positive since the posterior probability that LY2603618/gemcitabine was superior to gemcitabine in improving OS was 0.3, which did not exceed the prespecified threshold of 0.8. No significant improvements in PFS, ORR, or duration of response were observed. Drug-related treatment-emergent AEs in both arms included nausea, thrombocytopenia, fatigue, and neutropenia. The severity of AEs with LY2603618/gemcitabine was comparable to gemcitabine. The LY2603618 exposure targets (AUC(0-∞) ≥21,000 ng∙hr/mL and Cmax ≥2000 ng/mL) predicted for maximum pharmacodynamic response were achieved after 230 mg of LY2603618. CONCLUSIONS: LY2603618/gemcitabine was not superior to gemcitabine for the treatment of patients with pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00839332 . Clinicaltrials.gov. Date of registration: 6 February 2009.

A phase II trial of trabectedin in triple-negative and HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer.

Trabectedin is an alkylating agent that binds to the minor groove of DNA. Early studies with trabectedin suggested efficacy in triple-negative and HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The efficacy and safety of trabectedin in pretreated patients with these tumors were evaluated in this parallel-cohort phase II trial. Patients received a 3-h infusion of trabectedin 1.3 mg/m(2) intravenously every 3 weeks until progression or unmanageable/unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy using the objective response rate (ORR) as per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST). Secondary objectives comprised time-to-event endpoints and safety assessed with the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) v.3.0. Patients with heavily pretreated triple-negative (n = 50) or HER2-overexpressing (n = 37) MBC were enrolled. No confirmed responses were found in triple-negative MBC patients, with median progression-free survival (PFS) of 2.2 months (95 % CI 1.3-2.7 months). Confirmed partial responses occurred in 4 of 34 evaluable HER2-overexpressing MBC patients (ORR = 12 %; 95 % CI 3-27 %) and lasted a median of 12.5 months (95 % CI, 6.2-14.7 months); median PFS was 3.8 months (95 % CI, 1.8-5.5 months). Most trabectedin-related adverse events were mild or moderate, and the most frequent were fatigue, nausea, vomiting, constipation, and anorexia. Severe neutropenia and transaminase increases were non-cumulative and transient and were mostly managed by infusion delays or dose reductions. Single-agent trabectedin is well tolerated in aggressive MBC and has moderate activity in HER2-overexpressing tumors. Further studies are warranted to evaluate trabectedin combined with HER2-targeted treatments in this subtype.

Phase II evaluation of LY2603618, a first-generation CHK1 inhibitor, in combination with pemetrexed in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

Introduction LY2603618 is a selective inhibitor of checkpoint kinase 1 (CHK1) protein kinase, a key regulator of the DNA damage checkpoint, and is predicted to enhance the effects of antimetabolites, such as pemetrexed. This phase II trial assessed the overall response rate, safety, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of LY2603618 and pemetrexed in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods In this open-label, single-arm trial, patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC progressing after a prior first-line treatment regimen (not containing pemetrexed) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤2 received pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2), day 1) and LY2603618 (150 mg/m(2), day 2) every 21 days until disease progression. Safety was assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0. Serial blood samples were collected for PK analysis after LY2603618 and pemetrexed administration. Expression of p53, as measured by immunohistochemistry and genetic variant analysis, was assessed as a predictive biomarker of response. Results Fifty-five patients were enrolled in the study. No patients experienced a complete response; a partial response was observed in 5 patients (9.1 %; 90 % CI, 3.7-18.2) and stable disease in 20 patients (36.4 %). The median progression-free survival was 2.3 months (range, 0-27.1). Safety and PK of LY2603618 in combination with pemetrexed were favorable. No association between p53 status and response was observed. Conclusions There was no significant clinical activity of LY2603618 and pemetrexed combination therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. The results were comparable with historical pemetrexed single-agent data, with similar safety and PK profiles being observed.

Phase I Study of CHK1 Inhibitor LY2603618 in Combination with Gemcitabine in Patients with Solid Tumors.

OBJECTIVE: LY2603618, a selective inhibitor of checkpoint kinase 1 (CHK1) and key regulator of the DNA damage checkpoint, may enhance the effects of antimetabolites. This phase I study defined the recommended phase II dose of LY2603618 combined with gemcitabine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced/metastatic disease were administered doses of LY2603618 (70-250 mg/m2 or flat-fixed doses of 200 or 230 mg) after gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2). Safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) were assessed. RESULTS: Among the 50 patients enrolled, frequent adverse events possibly related to study drug treatment included fatigue (44%), decreased platelets (42%), decreased neutrophils (32%), nausea (26%), and decreased hemoglobin (20%). Systemic exposure of LY2603618 increased dose dependently, while clearance was relatively dose independent. The mean LY2603618 half-life varied; however, the durations were still suitable for maintaining human exposures while minimizing accumulation. LY2603618 PK were not altered by gemcitabine administration. Plasma exposures that correlate with the maximal pharmacodynamic effect in nonclinical models were achieved for all doses. One patient with non-small cell lung cancer carcinoma achieved a partial response; 22 patients had stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: The maximum tolerated dose of LY2603618 combined with gemcitabine was 200 mg/m2, but a fixed LY2603618 dose of 230 mg combined with gemcitabine was selected as the recommended phase II dose.

R.A.P.I.D. (Root Aggregated Prioritized Information Display): A single screen display for efficient digital triaging of medical reports.

OBJECTIVE: The timely acknowledgement of critical patient clinical reports is vital for the delivery of safe patient care. With current EHR systems, critical reports reside on different screens. This leads to treatment delays and inefficient work flows. As a remedy, the R.A.P.I.D. (Root Aggregated Prioritized Information Display) system represents all data on a single screen, and its simple and intuitive "button" array structure allows triaged sign-off/sign-out of critical and non-critical reports. MATERIALS AND METHODS: With 100 hematology and chemistry reports from each of two EHR systems Meditech (Westwood, MA) and Orchard Labs, Inc. (Carmel, IN), we generated files of the reports in their individual standard display formats (enhanced Meditech-EM and enhanced Orchard-EO). We also displayed the same 200 reports in the R.A.P.I.D. FORMAT: We then conducted a randomized trial to compare the time and accuracy of acknowledgement of critical and non-critical results. RESULTS: The sign-off times for reviewing the results for physician and non-physician providers, respectively, in seconds (with 95% confidence intervals) were for EM 1.78 (1.40-2.26) and 1.99 (1.72-2.30), for EO 2.69 (2.12-3.42) and 2.78 (2.40-3.21), and for R.A.P.I.D. 0.83 (0.70-0.98) and 1.58 (1.43-1.76). Non-physician providers reassigned system-defined non-critical results as critical with a frequency of 15.2% for EM, 18.4% for EO, and 7.83% for R.A.P.I.D., and critical results as non-critical with a frequency of 14.7%, 5.6%, and 5.8% respectively. DISCUSSION: The new display system was superior to two standard EHR systems that were significantly enhanced by first collecting the reports from their usual distributed locations and then by creating for each of the two standard EHRs a single file of reports for acknowledgement. CONCLUSIONS: From a single screen display of all reports, the new display system enables timely acknowledgement of critical reports for patient safety and non-critical report triage for improved provider work flows.

An innovative, multi-arm, complete phase 1b study of the novel anti-cancer agent tasisulam in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: This phase Ib study used a parallel, multi-arm design to examine tasisulam-sodium (hereafter tasisulam), a drug with complex pharmacology, combined with standard chemotherapies in patients with advanced solid tumors, with the ultimate goal of accelerating drug development. METHODS: Patients received escalating doses of tasisulam (3 + 3 schema; target Cmax 300-400 µg/mL) every 28 days plus 1,000 mg/m(2) gemcitabine HCl (days 1 and 15), 60 mg/m(2) docetaxel, 200 mg/m(2)/day temozolomide, 75 mg/m(2) cisplatin, or 150 mg/day erlotinib. Following dose-escalation, patients were enrolled into specific tumor subtype arms, chosen based on the established activity of the standard agent. Because tasisulam is highly albumin-bound, patients in the tumor-specific confirmation arms were dosed targeting specific albumin-corrected exposure ranges (AUCalb) identified during dose-escalation (3,500 h*µg/mL [75th percentile] for docetaxel, temozolomide, and cisplatin; 4,000 h*µg/mL for gemcitabine and erlotinib). RESULTS: A total of 234 patients were enrolled. The safety profile of tasisulam with standard chemotherapies was sufficient to allow enrollment into the dose-confirmation phase in all arms. The primary dose-limiting toxicities were hematologic (thrombocytopenia and neutropenia). The most common grade ≥3 drug-related treatment-emergent adverse event was neutropenia, with the highest incidence in the docetaxel arm. CONCLUSIONS: The multi-arm design allowed the efficient determination of the maximum tolerated dose of tasisulam across multiple combinations, and a preliminary characterization of pharmacokinetics, safety, and potential efficacy. Although enrollment into all planned groups was not completed due to termination of compound development, these data support the feasibility of this approach for accelerated cancer drug development, even for drugs with complex pharmacology.

Ibrutinib as initial therapy for elderly patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma: an open-label, multicentre, phase 1b/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Chemoimmunotherapy has led to improved numbers of patients achieving disease response, and longer overall survival in young patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia; however, its application in elderly patients has been restricted by substantial myelosuppression and infection. We aimed to assess safety and activity of ibrutinib, an orally administered covalent inhibitor of Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK), in treatment-naive patients aged 65 years and older with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. METHODS: In our open-label phase 1b/2 trial, we enrolled previously untreated patients at clinical sites in the USA. Eligible patients were aged at least 65 years, and had symptomatic chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma requiring therapy. Patients received 28 day cycles of once-daily ibrutinib 420 mg or ibrutinib 840 mg. The 840 mg dose was discontinued after enrolment had begun because comparable activity of the doses has been shown. The primary endpoint was the safety of the dose-fixed regimen in terms of frequency and severity of adverse events for all patients who received treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01105247. FINDINGS: Between May 20, 2010, and Dec 18, 2012, we enrolled 29 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and two patients with small lymphocytic lymphoma. Median age was 71 years (range 65-84), and 23 (74%) patients were at least 70 years old. Toxicity was mainly of mild-to-moderate severity (grade 1-2). 21 (68%) patients had diarrhoea (grade 1 in 14 [45%] patients, grade 2 in three [10%] patients, and grade 3 in four [13%] patients). 15 (48%) patients developed nausea (grade 1 in 12 [39%] patients and grade 2 in three [10%] patients). Ten (32%) patients developed fatigue (grade 1 in five [16%] patients, grade 2 in four [13%] patients, and grade 3 in one [3%] patient). Three (10%) patients developed grade 3 infections, although no grade 4 or 5 infections occurred. One patient developed grade 3 neutropenia, and one developed grade 4 thrombocytopenia. After a median follow-up of 22.1 months (IQR 18.4-23.2), 22 (71%) of 31 patients achieved an objective response (95% CI 52.0-85.8); four patients (13%) had a complete response, one patient (3%) had a nodular partial response, and 17 (55%) patients had a partial response. INTERPRETATION: The safety and activity of ibrutinib in elderly, previously untreated patients with symptomatic chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, or small lymphocytic lymphoma is encouraging, and merits further investigation in phase 3 trials. FUNDING: Pharmacyclics, Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, D Warren Brown Foundation, Mr and Mrs Michael Thomas, Harry Mangurian Foundation, P50 CA140158 to Prof J C Byrd MD.

Antitumor activity and safety of combination therapy with the Toll-like receptor 9 agonist IMO-2055, erlotinib, and bevacizumab in advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer patients who have progressed following chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: IMO-2055 is a Toll-like receptor 9 (TLR9) agonist that potentially enhances the efficacy of antitumor agents through immune stimulation. The objective of this phase Ib dose-escalation trial (3 + 3 design) was to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of IMO-2055 when combined with erlotinib and bevacizumab in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients with stage 3/4 NSCLC and progressive disease (PD) following chemotherapy received IMO-2055 0.08, 0.16, 0.32, or 0.48 mg/kg once weekly plus erlotinib 150 mg daily and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Patients could receive treatment until PD or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients were enrolled; 35 received at least one treatment dose. Two dose-limiting toxicities were observed across the dose range (Grade 3 dehydration and fatigue) with neither suggestive of a consistent toxicity pattern. IMO-2055 0.32 mg/kg was adopted as RP2D based on clinical and pharmacodynamic data. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were diarrhea (74 %), nausea (51 %), fatigue (51 %), rash (51 %), and injection-site reactions (49 %). Four patients experienced serious TEAEs considered to be study drug related. Five patients died, all due to PD. High-grade neutropenia and electrolyte disturbances previously reported with TLR9 agonists combined with platinum-based therapy were not observed in this study. Five of 33 patients evaluable for response (15 %) achieved partial response; another 20 (61 %) had stable disease, including 13 with stable disease ≥4 months. CONCLUSIONS: IMO-2055 demonstrated good tolerability and possible antitumor activity in combination with erlotinib and bevacizumab in heavily pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC.

Axitinib and/or bevacizumab with modified FOLFOX-6 as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: In this multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 2 trial, the authors evaluated the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor axitinib, bevacizumab, or both in combination with chemotherapy as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: Patients with previously untreated mCRC were randomized 1:1:1 to receive continuous axitinib 5 mg twice daily, bevacizumab 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or axitinib 5 mg twice daily plus bevacizumab 2 mg/kg every 2 weeks, each in combination with modified 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX-6). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: In all, 126 patients were enrolled from August 2007 to September 2008. The ORR was numerically inferior in the axitinib arm (n = 42) versus the bevacizumab arm (n = 43; 28.6% vs 48.8%; 1-sided P = .97). Progression-free survival (PFS) (11.0 months vs 15.9 months; 1-sided P = .57) and overall survival (OS) (18.1 months vs 21.6 months; 1-sided P = .69) also were numerically inferior in the axitinib arm. Similarly, efficacy endpoints for the axitinib/bevacizumab arm (n = 41) were numerically inferior (ORR, 39%; PFS, 12.5 months; OS, 19.7 months). The patients who received axitinib had fewer treatment cycles compared with other arms. Common all-grade adverse events across all 3 treatment arms were fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea (all ≥49%). Hypertension and headache were more frequent in the patients who received axitinib. Patients in the bevacizumab arm had the longest treatment exposures and the highest rates of peripheral neuropathy. CONCLUSIONS: Neither the addition of continuous axitinib nor the axitinib/bevacizumab combination to FOLFOX-6 improved ORR, PFS, or OS compared with bevacizumab as first-line treatment of mCRC.

Performance of a Cell-Free DNA-Based Multi-cancer Detection Test in Individuals Presenting With Symptoms Suspicious for Cancers.

PURPOSE: A multi-cancer detection test using a targeted methylation assay and machine learning classifiers was validated and optimized for screening in prospective, case-controlled Circulating Cell-free Genome Atlas (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02889978) substudy 3. Here, we report test performance in a subgroup of participants with symptoms suspicious for cancer to assess the test's ability to potentially facilitate efficient diagnostic evaluation in symptomatic individuals. METHODS: We evaluated test performance (sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of cancer signal origin [CSO] prediction accuracy) in participants with clinically presenting cancers (CPCs) and noncancer with underlying medical conditions and among two subgroups (65 years and older and GI cancers). Overall survival (OS) of participants who had a cancer signal detected/not detected was compared with SEER-based expected survival. RESULTS: A total of 2,036 cancer and 1,472 noncancer participants were included. Specificity was high in all noncancer participants (99.5% [95% CI, 98.4 to 99.8]). In participants with CPCs, the overall sensitivity was 64.3% (95% CI, 62.2 to 66.4) and the overall accuracy of CSO prediction in true positives was 90.3%. For GI cancers, the overall sensitivity was 84.1% (95% CI, 80.6 to 87.1). In participants 65 years and older, test performance was similar to that of all participants. Individuals with cancers not detected had a significantly better OS than that expected from SEER (P < .01). CONCLUSION: This test detected a cancer signal with high specificity and CSO prediction accuracy and moderate sensitivity in symptomatic individuals, with especially high performance in participants with GI cancers. The survival analysis implied that the cancers not detected were less clinically aggressive than cancers detected by the test, providing prognostic insights to physicians. This multi-cancer detection test could facilitate efficient workup and stratify cancer risk in symptomatic individuals.

Hemodynamic Gain Index and Exercise Capacity in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.

Decreased exercise capacity portends a poor prognosis in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The hemodynamic gain index (HGI) is an integrated marker of hemodynamic reserve measured during exercise stress testing and is associated with survival. The goal of this study was to establish the association of HGI with exercise capacity, serum biomarkers, and echocardiography features in subjects with HFpEF. In 209 subjects with HFpEF enrolled in the RELAX (Phosphodiesterase-5 Inhibition to Improve Clinical Status and Exercise Capacity in Diastolic Heart Failure) trial who underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing, we calculated the HGI ([peak heart rate [HR] × peak systolic blood pressure [SBP]-[HR at rest × SBP at rest])/(HR at rest × SBP at rest) and tested associations with outcomes of interest. The median (interquartile range) HGI was 0.94 (0.5 to 1.3) beats per min/mm Hg. In multivariable-adjusted linear regression, higher HGI was associated with greater peak oxygen consumption (VO2), VO2 at anaerobic threshold, peak minute ventilation, and 6-minute walk distance (all p <0.001). Higher HGI was associated with lower serum high-sensitivity troponin I, pro-collagen III, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and creatinine (all p <0.05) and with longer deceleration time, lower E/A ratio, and lower left atrial volume index by echocardiography (all p <0.05). In conclusion, higher HGI in stable HFpEF was associated with greater exercise capacity, a biomarker profile indicating less myocardial injury and fibrosis and less kidney dysfunction, and with less severe diastolic dysfunction. These results suggest that HGI, an easily calculated metric from routine exercise testing, is a marker of functional capacity and disease severity in HFpEF and may serve as a surrogate for VO2 parameters for use in treadmill testing without gas exchange capability.

MRTX-500 Phase 2 Trial: Sitravatinib With Nivolumab in Patients With Nonsquamous NSCLC Progressing On or After Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy or Chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Sitravatinib, a receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting TYRO3, AXL, MERTK receptors, and vascular epithelial growth factor receptor 2, can shift the tumor microenvironment toward an immunostimulatory state. Combining sitravatinib with checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) may augment antitumor activity. METHODS: The phase 2 MRTX-500 study evaluated sitravatinib (120 mg daily) with nivolumab (every 2 or 4 wk) in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC who progressed on or after previous CPI (CPI-experienced) or chemotherapy (CPI-naive). CPI-experienced patients had a previous clinical benefit (PCB) (complete response, partial response, or stable disease for at least 12 weeks then disease progression) or no PCB (NPCB) from CPI. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR); secondary objectives included safety and secondary efficacy end points. RESULTS: Overall, 124 CPI-experienced (NPCB, n = 35; PCB, n = 89) and 32 CPI-naive patients were treated. Investigator-assessed ORR was 11.4% in patients with NPCB, 16.9% with PCB, and 25.0% in CPI-naive. The median progression-free survival was 3.7, 5.6, and 7.1 months with NPCB, PCB, and CPI-naive, respectively; the median overall survival was 7.9 and 13.6 months with NPCB and PCB, respectively (not reached in CPI-naive patients; median follow-up 20.4 mo). Overall, (N = 156), any grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 93.6%; grade 3/4 in 58.3%. One grade 5 TRAE occurred in a CPI-naive patient. TRAEs led to treatment discontinuation in 14.1% and dose reduction or interruption in 42.9%. Biomarker analyses supported an immunostimulatory mechanism of action. CONCLUSIONS: Sitravatinib with nivolumab had a manageable safety profile. Although ORR was not met, this combination exhibited antitumor activity and encouraged survival in CPI-experienced patients with nonsquamous NSCLC.

A Phase III trial of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab vs. pentostatin, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab in B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled studies comparing pentostatin (P), cyclophosphamide (C), and rituximab (R) (PCR) to fludarabine plus C+R (FCR) suggest similar efficacy with fewer infectious complications with PCR. We compared FCR and PCR in previously-untreated or minimally-treated B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). TREATMENT: FCR (F 20 mg/m(2) Days 1-5, C 600 mg/m(2) Day 1, R 375 mg/m(2) Day 1) (28-day cycles) or PCR (P 4 mg/m(2) Day 1, C 600 mg/m(2) Day 1, R 375 mg/m(2) Day 1) (21-day cycles). Dose 1 of R: 100 mg/m(2) was given on Day 8 Cycle 1 and the remainder on Day 9; in subsequent cycles the entire dose was given on Day 1. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients were randomly assigned to each group (N = 184). Groups were balanced; ~20% had received prior chemotherapy. The infection rate (FCR/PCR) was 31%/36%, the infective event rate was 38%/45%; 30 (35%)/37 (44%) patients were hospitalized; total hospitalization days was 271/404. 12 (14%)/6 (7%) patients achieved complete remissions (CR); the overall response rate (ORR) including CR+nodular PR (nPR)+PR was 59%/49%. Grade 3-4 treatment related AEs: neutropenia (69%/57%), leukopenia (34%/17%), thrombocytopenia (13%/6%). Grade 3-4 infections: febrile neutropenia (8%/6%), fever (2%/6%), infection (1%/3%), urinary tract infection (1%/0%), pneumonia (3%/1%), and sepsis (1%/2%); 5 deaths (1 FCR/4 PCR) were treatment-related. CONCLUSIONS: PCR and FCR have significant activity in CLL and can be given safely in the community setting despite significant toxicity. ORRs were lower than expected; the CR rate was higher (NS) with FCR. This trial did not demonstrate a lower infection rate with PCR.

A phase I trial of PX-12, a small-molecule inhibitor of thioredoxin-1, administered as a 72-hour infusion every 21 days in patients with advanced cancers refractory to standard therapy.

PURPOSE: This phase I trial assessed the safety, dose limiting toxicity (DLT) and pharmacodynamics of PX-12 in adult patients with advanced refractory cancers. METHODS: PX-12 was administered to sequential cohorts as a 72-h infusion utilizing a portable infusion pump on days 1, 2, and 3 of a 21-day cycle at a starting dose level of 300 mg/m(2)/day and escalating dose levels till DLT was observed. Plasma thioredoxin (Trx-1), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and FGF-2 (fibroblast growth factor) levels were measured predose and during infusion of PX-12. RESULTS: Patients (n = 14) were enrolled to the following dose cohorts, 300 mg/m(2) (n = 3), 400 mg/m(2) (n = 10) and 500 mg/m(2) (n = 1). Common grade 1/2 toxicities included fatigue, taste alteration and odor caused by expired drug metabolite. DLTs were one episode each of grade 3 hypoxia at the 400 mg/m(2) and grade 3 reversible pneumonitis at the 500 mg/m(2) dose levels. Best response was stable disease in a patient with rectal cancer. Predose Trx-1 levels (n = 12) ranged from 5.1 to 30.0 ng/mL (median 12.6 ng/mL). CONCLUSION: PX-12 administered at 400 mg/m(2)/day by 72-hour infusion appears safe and tolerable. Inhibition of thioredoxin is a strategy worth evaluation with next generation of inhibitors.

Trilaciclib Prior to Chemotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Final Efficacy and Subgroup Analysis from a Randomized Phase II Study.

PURPOSE: We report final antitumor efficacy results from a phase II study of trilaciclib, an intravenous cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor, administered prior to gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GCb) in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (NCT02978716). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to group 1 [GCb (days 1, 8); n = 34], group 2 [trilaciclib prior to GCb (days 1, 8); n = 33], or group 3 [trilaciclib (days 1, 8) and trilaciclib prior to GCb (days 2, 9); n = 35]. Subgroup analyses were performed according to CDK4/6 dependence, level of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, and RNA-based immune signatures using proportional hazards regression. T-cell receptor (TCR) ß CDR3 regions were amplified and sequenced to identify, quantify, and compare the abundance of each unique TCRß CDR3 at baseline and on treatment. RESULTS: Median overall survival (OS) was 12.6 months in group 1, not reached in group 2 (HR = 0.31; P = 0.0016), 17.8 months in group 3 (HR = 0.40; P = 0.0004), and 19.8 months in groups 2 and 3 combined (HR = 0.37; P < 0.0001). Efficacy outcomes were comparable regardless of cancer CDK4/6 dependence status and immune signatures. Administering trilaciclib prior to GCb prolonged OS irrespective of PD-L1 status but had greater benefit in the PD-L1-positive population. T-cell activation was enhanced in patients receiving trilaciclib. CONCLUSIONS: Administering trilaciclib prior to GCb enhanced antitumor efficacy, with significant improvements in OS. Efficacy outcomes in immunologic subgroups and enhancements in T-cell activation suggest these improvements may be mediated via immunologic mechanisms.