A phase 2 trial exploring the significance of homologous recombination status in patients with platinum sensitive or platinum resistant relapsed ovarian cancer receiving combination cediranib and olaparib.

OBJECTIVE: Combination cediranib/olaparib has reported activity in relapsed ovarian cancer. This phase 2 trial investigated the activity of cediranib/olaparib in relapsed ovarian cancer and its association with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). METHODS: Seventy patients were enrolled to cohorts of either platinum-sensitive or platinum-resistant ovarian cancer and received olaparib tablets 200 mg twice daily and cediranib tablets 30 mg once daily under a continuous dosing schedule. HRD testing was performed on pre-treatment, on-treatment and archival biopsies by sequencing key homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes and by genomic LOH analysis. The primary objective for the platinum-sensitive cohort was the association of HRD, defined as presence of HRR gene mutation, with progression-free survival (PFS). The primary objective for the platinum-resistant cohort was objective response rate (ORR), with a key secondary endpoint evaluating the association of HRD status with activity. RESULTS: In platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (N = 35), ORR was 77.1% (95% CI 59.9-89.6%) and median PFS was 16.4 months (95% CI 13.2-18.6). Median PFS in platinum-sensitive HRR-HRD cancers (N = 22) was 16.8 months (95% CI 11.3-18.6), and 16.4 months (95% CI 9.4-NA) in HRR-HR proficient cancers (N = 13; p = 0.57). In platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (N = 35), ORR was 22.9% (95% CI 10.4-40.1%) with median PFS 6.8 months (95% CI 4.2-9.1). Median PFS in platinum-resistant HRR-HRD cancers (N = 7) was 10.5 months (95% CI 3.6-NA) and 5.6 months (95% CI 3.6-7.6) in HRR-HR proficient cancers (N = 18; p = 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: Cediranib/olaparib had clinical activity in both platinum-sensitive and -resistant ovarian cancer. Presence of HRR gene mutations was not associated with cediranib/olaparib activity in either setting.

Early drug development in solid tumours: analysis of National Cancer Institute-sponsored phase 1 trials.

BACKGROUND: The low expectation of clinical benefit from phase 1 cancer therapeutics trials might negatively affect patient and physician participation, study reimbursement, and slow the progress of oncology research. Advances in cancer drug development, meanwhile, might have favourably improved treatment responses; however, little comprehensive data exist describing the response and toxicity associated with phase 1 trials across solid tumours. The aim of the study is to evaluate the trend of toxicity and response in phase 1 trials for solid tumours over time. METHODS: We analysed patient-level data from the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program of the National Cancer Institute-sponsored investigator-initiated phase 1 trials for solid tumours, from Jan 1, 2000, to May 31, 2019. We assessed risks of treatment-related death (grade 5 toxicity ratings possibly, probably, or definitely attributable to treatment), all on-treatment deaths (deaths during protocol treatment regardless of attribution), grade 3-4 toxicity, and proportion of overall response (complete response and partial response) and complete response rate in the study periods of 2000-05, 2006-12, and 2013-2019, and evaluated their trends over time. We also analysed cancer type-specific and investigational agent-specific response, and analysed the trend of response in each cancer type over time. Univariate associations of overall response rates with patients' baseline characteristics (age, sex, performance status, BMI, albumin concentration, and haemoglobin concentration), enrolment period, investigational agents, and trial design were assessed using risk ratio based on the modified Poisson regression model. FINDINGS: We analysed 465 protocols that enrolled 13 847 patients using 261 agents. 144 (31%) trials used a monotherapy and 321 (69%) used combination therapies. The overall treatment-related death rate was 0·7% (95% CI 0·5-0·8) across all periods. Risks of treatment-related deaths did not change over time (p=0·52). All on-treatment death risk during the study period was 8·0% (95% CI 7·6-8·5). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were haematological; grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 2336 (16·9%) of 13 847 patients, lymphopenia in 1230 (8·9%), anaemia in 894 (6·5%), and thrombocytopenia in 979 (7·1%). The overall response rate for all trials during the study period was 12·2% (95% CI 11·5-12·8; 1133 of 9325 patients) and complete response rate was 2·7% (2·4-3·0; 249 of 9325). Overall response increased from 9·6% (95% CI 8·7-10·6) in 2000-05 to 18·0% (15·7-20·5) in 2013-19, and complete response rates from 2·5% (2·0-3·0) to 4·3% (3·2-5·7). Overall response rates for combination therapy were substantially higher than for monotherapy (15·8% [15·0-16·8] vs 3·5% [2·8-4·2]). The overall response by class of agents differed across diseases. Anti-angiogenesis agents were associated with higher overall response rate for bladder, colon, kidney and ovarian cancer. DNA repair inhibitors were associated with higher overall response rate in ovarian and pancreatic cancer. The rates of overall response over time differed markedly by disease; there were notable improvements in bladder, breast, and kidney cancer and melanoma, but no change in the low response of pancreatic and colon cancer. INTERPRETATION: During the past 20 years, the response rate in phase 1 trials nearly doubled without an increase in the treatment-related death rate. However, there is significant heterogeneity in overall response by various factors such as cancer type, investigational agent, and trial design. Therefore, informed decision making is crucial for patients before participating in phase 1 trials. This study provides updated encouraging outcomes of modern phase 1 trials in solid tumours. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute.

A phase 1 study of veliparib (ABT-888) plus weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel in advanced solid malignancies, with an expansion cohort in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) (ETCTN 8620).

BACKGROUND: Veliparib is a poly-ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, and it has clinical activity with every 3 weeks carboplatin and paclitaxel. In breast cancer, weekly paclitaxel is associated with improved overall survival. We aimed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of veliparib with weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel as well as safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary clinical activity in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). METHODS: Patients with locally advanced/metastatic solid tumors and adequate organ function were eligible. A standard 3 + 3 dose-escalation design was followed by a TNBC expansion cohort. Veliparib doses ranging from 50 to 200 mg orally bid were tested with carboplatin (AUC 2) and paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) given weekly in a 21-day cycle. Adverse events (AE) were evaluated by CTCAE v4.0, and objective response rate (ORR) was determined by RECIST 1.1. RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled, of whom 22 had TNBC. Two dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The RP2D was determined to be 150 mg PO bid veliparib with weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel 2 weeks on, 1 week off, based on hematologic toxicity requiring dose reduction in the first 5 cycles of treatment. The most common grade 3/4 AEs included neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia. PK parameters of veliparib were comparable to single-agent veliparib. In 23 patients with evaluable disease, the ORR was 65%. In 19 patients with TNBC with evaluable disease, the ORR was 63%. CONCLUSION: Veliparib can be safely combined with weekly paclitaxel and carboplatin, and this triplet combination has promising clinical activity.

Phase 2 study of ibrutinib in classic and variant hairy cell leukemia.

Hairy cell leukemia (HCL) is a rare B-cell malignancy, and there is a need for novel treatments for patients who do not benefit from purine analogs. Ibrutinib, an oral agent targeting Bruton tyrosine kinase in the B-cell receptor signaling pathway, is highly effective in several malignancies. Its activity in HCL was unknown, so we conducted a multisite phase 2 study of oral ibrutinib in patients with either relapsed classic or variant hairy cell leukemia. The primary outcome measure was the overall response rate (ORR) at 32 weeks, and we also assessed response at 48 weeks and best response during treatment. Key secondary objectives were characterization of toxicity and determination of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Thirty-seven patients were enrolled at 2 different doses (24 at 420 mg, 13 at 840 mg). The median duration of follow-up was 3.5 years (range, 0-5.9 years). The ORR at 32 weeks was 24%, which increased to 36% at 48 weeks. The best ORR was 54%. The estimated 36-month PFS was 73% and OS was 85%. The most frequent adverse events were diarrhea (59%), fatigue (54%), myalgia (54%), and nausea (51%). Hematologic adverse events were common: anemia (43%), thrombocytopenia (41%), and neutropenia (35%). Ibrutinib can be safely administered to patients with HCL with objective responses and results in prolonged disease control. Although the initial primary outcome objective of the study was not met, the observation of objective responses in heavily pretreated patients coupled with a favorable PFS suggests that ibrutinib may be beneficial in these patients. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01841723.

Combined PARP and HSP90 inhibition: preclinical and Phase 1 evaluation in patients with advanced solid tumours.

PURPOSE: PARP inhibitor resistance may be overcome by combinatorial strategies with agents that disrupt homologous recombination repair (HRR). Multiple HRR pathway components are HSP90 clients, so that HSP90 inhibition leads to abrogation of HRR and sensitisation to PARP inhibition. We performed in vivo preclinical studies of the HSP90 inhibitor onalespib with olaparib and conducted a Phase 1 combination study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Tolerability and efficacy studies were performed in patient-derived xenograft(PDX) models of ovarian cancer. Clinical safety, tolerability, steady-state pharmacokinetics and preliminary efficacy of olaparib and onalespib were evaluated using a standard 3 + 3 dose-escalation design. RESULTS: Olaparib/onalespib exhibited anti-tumour activity against BRCA1-mutated PDX models with acquired PARPi resistance and PDX models with RB-pathway alterations(CDKN2A loss and CCNE1 overexpression). Phase 1 evaluation revealed that dose levels up to olaparib 300 mg/onalespib 40 mg and olaparib 200 mg/onalespib 80 mg were safe without dose-limiting toxicities. Coadministration of olaparib and onalespib did not appear to affect the steady-state pharmacokinetics of either agent. There were no objective responses, but disease stabilisation ≥24 weeks was observed in 7/22 (32%) evaluable patients including patients with BRCA-mutated ovarian cancers and acquired PARPi resistance and patients with tumours harbouring RB-pathway alterations. CONCLUSIONS: Combining onalespib and olaparib was feasible and demonstrated preliminary evidence of anti-tumour activity.

Effect of removing race from glomerular filtration rate-estimating equations on anticancer drug dosing and eligibility: a retrospective analysis of National Cancer Institute phase 1 clinical trial participants.

BACKGROUND: Kidney function assessment by estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equations, such as the Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation, is important to determine dosing and eligibility for anticancer drugs. Inclusion of race in eGFR equations calculates a higher eGFR at a given serum creatinine concentration for Black patients versus non-Black patients. We aimed to characterise the effect of removing race from the CKD-EPI equation on dosing and eligibility of anticancer drugs with kidney function cutoffs. METHODS: We did a retrospective analysis of patients enrolled in phase 1 studies sponsored by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program between January, 1995, and October, 2010. eGFR based on creatinine (eGFRCr) was calculated by the CKD-EPI equation and a version of the CKD-EPI equation without the race term (CKD-EPIwithout race). Estimated creatinine clearance (eClCr) was calculated by the Cockcroft-Gault equation. Dosing simulations based on each assessment of kidney function were done for ten anticancer drugs with kidney function cutoffs for dosing (oxaliplatin, capecitabine, etoposide, topotecan, fludarabine, and bleomycin) or eligibility (cisplatin, pemetrexed, bendamustine, and mitomycin) based on labelling approved by the US Food and Drug Administration or consensus guidelines. The absolute proportion of patients eligible or in each renal dosing range was calculated for each drug. Eligibility and dosing discordance rates were also calculated. FINDINGS: Demographics and laboratory values from 340 Black patients (172 men and 168 women) were used. Median age was 57 years (IQR 47-64), median bodyweight was 78·1 kg (67·0-89·8), median body surface area was 1·91 m2 (1·77-2·09), and median serum creatinine concentration was 0·9 mg/dL (0·8-1·1). Median eGFRCr or eClCr was 103 mL/min (85-122) calculated by CKD-EPI, 89 mL/min (73-105) by CKD-EPIwithout race, and 90 mL/min (72-120) by Cockcroft-Gault. Black patients were recommended to receive dose reductions or were rendered ineligible to receive drug more frequently when using CKD-EPIwithout race than when using CKD-EPI, but at a similar rate as when using Cockcroft-Gault. The number of patients ineligible for therapy or recommended to receive any renal dose adjustment when CKD-EPIwithout race versus CKD-EPI was used increased by 72% (from 25 of 340 to 43 of 340 patients) for cisplatin, by 120% (from five to 11) for pemetrexed, by 67% (from three to five) for bendamustine, by 150% (from ten to 25) for capecitabine, by 150% (from ten to 25) for etoposide, by 67% (from three to five) for topotecan, by 61% (from 74 to 119) for fludarabine, and by 163% (from eight to 21) for bleomycin. Up to 18% of patients had discordant recommendations using CKD-EPIwithout race versus CKD-EPI. INTERPRETATION: Removing race from the CKD-EPI equation will calculate a lower eGFR for Black patients and exclude more patients from receiving anticancer therapy, which could lead to undertreatment of Black patients with cancer and adversely affect their outcomes. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health.

Outcomes of Pregnancy During Immunotherapy Treatment for Cancer: Analysis of Clinical Trials Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute.

Despite expanding indications for immunotherapeutic agents, there is limited understanding about their clinical effects on pregnancy outcomes. Generally, pregnant patients with cancer are excluded from clinical trials, and inadvertent pregnancies on trial result in patients being taken off because of concerns for fetal toxicity. To answer this question of pregnancy outcomes on immunotherapy-based trials, we performed a retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP)-Adverse Event Reporting System for unexpected pregnancies during NCI-CTEP-sponsored immunotherapy clinical trials between 2011 and 2020. We identified nine female patients who had unexpected pregnancies, of whom seven chose to take their pregnancies to term. All seven pregnancies resulted in vaginal births of apparently normal infants. This is the first report of pregnancy outcomes in multiple female patients exposed to immunotherapy. Our data suggest the need for further research to better evaluate and define contraception recommendations during immunotherapy treatment for cancer.

Clinical Activity and Safety of Cediranib and Olaparib Combination in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma without BRCA Mutation.

LESSONS LEARNED: Cediranib and olaparib combination did not result in clinically meaningful activity in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma without known BRCA mutation. BACKGROUND: Cediranib, a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor, suppresses expression of BRCA1/2 and RAD51 inducing homologous recombination DNA repair deficiency (HRD) in several cancer cell lines and xenograft models [1]. Olaparib provides a clinical benefit in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) with germline BRCA mutation (gBRCAmt) [2]. We hypothesized that cediranib induces HRD in the absence of gBRCAmt and synergizes with olaparib, resulting in an objective response in patients with mPDAC. METHODS: Patients with mPDAC with at least one prior systemic chemotherapy were enrolled. Patients with known gBRCAmt were excluded. Patients took cediranib 30 mg daily and olaparib 200 mg twice daily, orally. The primary endpoint was objective response (OR) rate. RESULTS: Nineteen patients received the study drugs. Seven patients came off treatment before the first restaging scan: six because of clinical progression and one because of an adverse event. No OR was observed. Six patients had stable disease (SD) as a best overall response. The median duration of SD was 3.1 months. The median overall survival was 3.4 months. Common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue, hypertension, and diarrhea. CONCLUSION: Cediranib and olaparib combination did not result in clinically meaningful activity in patients with mPDAC without gBRCAmt.

Evaluation of toxicities related to novel therapy in clinical trials for women with gynecologic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Women with gynecologic cancer may be at increased risk for adverse events (AEs) due to peritoneal disease burden and prior treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, and pelvic radiotherapy). This study compared the toxicity profiles of patients with and without gynecologic cancer enrolled in phase 1 trials. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Institute phase 1 database for all trials enrolling 1 or more patients with gynecologic cancer over 2 decades (1995-2015). Clinical parameters collected included demographics, cancer history, trial information, AEs, and responses. AEs (according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) were documented for each patient during treatment, and they were counted once and analyzed on the basis of the highest grade and drug attribution. Multiple regression models were used to compare AEs at the baseline and during treatment. RESULTS: A total of 4269 patients enrolled in 150 trials were divided into 3 groups: 1) women with gynecologic cancer (n = 685), 2) women with nongynecologic cancer (n = 1698), and 3) men with cancer (n = 1886). The median age was 58 years. The mean number of total AEs reported during treatment was highest for women with gynecologic cancer (17.1 vs 14.7 vs 13.5; P < .001), even though they were similar at the baseline (7.0 vs 7.4 vs 7.0; P = .09). The mean number of drug-related AEs was also highest for women with gynecologic cancer (8.3 vs 6.9 vs 6.2; P < .001). Grade 3 to 5 AEs were similar (2.3 vs 2.3 vs 2.1); however, grade 2 AEs were more frequent in women with gynecologic cancer (4.6 vs 3.9 vs 3.5). Treatment discontinuations due to AEs were similar (9% vs 9% vs 10%). CONCLUSIONS: Women with gynecologic cancer experienced more frequent low-grade AEs during treatment, and this warrants attention to support their symptom burden. Study dose management should be considered for recurrent grade 2 AEs, particularly during continuous therapy.

Phase II, Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Docetaxel plus Prednisone with or Without Cediranib in Men with Chemotherapy-Naive Metastatic Castrate-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: The negative results are consistent with the negative results of large phase III trials in which docetaxel plus antiangiogenic agents were used in patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).The negative data underscore that, despite a sound biological rationale and supportive early-phase clinical results, adding antiangiogenic agents to docetaxel for mCRPC is a great challenge. BACKGROUND: Inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signaling abrogates tumor-induced angiogenesis to constrain tumor growth, and can be exploited therapeutically by using cediranib, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor of VEGF receptor signaling. Our preliminary phase I trial data showed that adding cediranib to docetaxel plus prednisone (DP) was safe and feasible, with early evidence for efficacy in patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). METHODS: This multicenter phase II trial assessed whether adding cediranib to DP improves efficacy of DP in patients with mCRPC. Chemotherapy-naive patients with mCRPC were randomly assigned to receive either docetaxel (75 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks) with prednisone (5 mg twice daily) plus cediranib (30 mg once daily; the DP+C arm) or DP only (the DP arm). The primary endpoint was to compare 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate between the two arms. Secondary endpoints included 6-month overall survival (OS), objective tumor and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rates, biomarkers, and adverse events. RESULTS: The 6-month PFS rate in a total of 58 patients was only numerically higher in the DP+C arm (61%) compared with the DP arm (57%). Similarly, the 6-month OS rate, objective tumor and PSA response rates, and biomarkers were not significantly different between the two arms. Increased baseline levels of interleukin 6 (IL-6), however, were significantly associated with increased risk of progression. Neutropenia was the only grade 4 toxicity (38% in the DP+C arm vs. 18% in the DP arm). CONCLUSION: Combining cediranib with docetaxel + prednisone failed to demonstrate superior efficacy, compared with docetaxel + prednisone, and added toxicity. Our data do not support pursuing the combination further in patients with mCRPC.

Beyond the dose-limiting toxicity period: Dermatologic adverse events of patients on phase 1 trials of the Cancer Therapeutics Evaluation Program.

BACKGROUND: Dermatologic adverse events (AEs) can be key determinants of overall drug tolerability and of the maximum tolerated and recommended phase 2 doses in phase 1 trials. The authors present the largest dedicated analysis of dermatologic AEs on phase 1 trials to date. METHODS: Data from a prospectively maintained database of patients with solid tumors who were enrolled onto Cancer Therapeutics Evaluation Program (CTEP)-sponsored phase 1 trials of cytotoxic or molecularly targeted agents (MTAs) from 2000 to 2010 were analyzed. Cumulative incidence, site, and type of drug-related dermatologic AEs were described and compared. The timing of worst drug-related dermatologic AEs was summarized. RESULTS: In total, 3517 patients with solid tumors and 6165 unique, drug-related dermatologic AEs were analyzed, including 1545 patients on MTA-only trials, 671 on cytotoxic-only trials, and 1392 on combination MTA and cytotoxic trials. Of 1270 patients who had drug-related dermatologic events, the timing of the worst AE was as follows: 743 (cycle 1), 303 (cycle 2), and 224 (cycle 3 or later). Although the cumulative incidence of grade ≥3 drug-related AEs increased to 2.4% by cycle 6, it was only 1.6% at the end of cycle 1. The cumulative incidence of drug-related AEs was highest in patients who received MTA-only therapy (P < .001) and differed by dose level (P < .001). In patients who received MTA-only therapy, drug-related AEs were most common for combination kinase inhibitor-containing therapy (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of drug-related dermatologic AEs occur after the traditional dose-limiting toxicity monitoring period of phase 1 clinical trials. Future designs should account for late toxicities.

Improved tumor oxygenation and survival in glioblastoma patients who show increased blood perfusion after cediranib and chemoradiation.

Antiangiogenic therapy has shown clear activity and improved survival benefit for certain tumor types. However, an incomplete understanding of the mechanisms of action of antiangiogenic agents has hindered optimization and broader application of this new therapeutic modality. In particular, the impact of antiangiogenic therapy on tumor blood flow and oxygenation status (i.e., the role of vessel pruning versus normalization) remains controversial. This controversy has become critical as multiple phase III trials of anti-VEGF agents combined with cytotoxics failed to show overall survival benefit in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (nGBM) patients and several other cancers. Here, we shed light on mechanisms of nGBM response to cediranib, a pan-VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, using MRI techniques and blood biomarkers in prospective phase II clinical trials of cediranib with chemoradiation vs. chemoradiation alone in nGBM patients. We demonstrate that improved perfusion occurs only in a subset of patients in cediranib-containing regimens, and is associated with improved overall survival in these nGBM patients. Moreover, an increase in perfusion is associated with improved tumor oxygenation status as well as with pharmacodynamic biomarkers, such as changes in plasma placenta growth factor and sVEGFR2. Finally, treatment resistance was associated with elevated plasma IL-8 and sVEGFR1 posttherapy. In conclusion, tumor perfusion changes after antiangiogenic therapy may distinguish responders vs. nonresponders early in the course of this expensive and potentially toxic form of therapy, and these results may provide new insight into the selection of glioblastoma patients most likely to benefit from anti-VEGF treatments.

A phase II study of single-agent RO4929097, a gamma-secretase inhibitor of Notch signaling, in patients with recurrent platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer: A study of the Princess Margaret, Chicago and California phase II consortia.

PURPOSE: A phase II study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of single-agent RO4929097 (a gamma-secretase inhibitor) in patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Women with progressive platinum-resistant ovarian cancer treated with ≤2 chemotherapy regimens for recurrent disease were enrolled in this trial. Patients received oral RO4929097 at 20 mg once daily, 3 days on/4 days off each week in a three week cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) rate at the end of 4 cycles. Secondary objectives included assessment of the safety of RO4929097 and exploration of molecular correlates of outcome in archival tumor tissue and serum. RESULTS: Of 45 patients enrolled, 40 were evaluable for response. Thirty-seven (82%) patients had high-grade ovarian cancer. No objective responses were observed. Fifteen patients (33%) had stable disease as their best response, with a median duration of 3.1 months. The median PFS for the whole group was 1.3 months (1.2-2.5). Treatment was generally well tolerated with 10% of patients discontinuing treatment due to an adverse event. In high grade serous ovarian cancer patients, the median PFS trended higher when the expression of intracellular Notch (NICD) protein by immunohistochemistry was high versus low (3.3 versus 1.3 months, p=0.09). No clear relationship between circulating angiogenic factors and PFS was found despite a suggestion of an improved outcome with higher baseline VEGFA levels. CONCLUSIONS: RO4929097 has insufficient activity as a single-agent in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer to warrant further study as monotherapy. Future studies are needed to explore the potential for cohort enrichment using NICD expression.

Combination cediranib and olaparib versus olaparib alone for women with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer: a randomised phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib is a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor and cediranib is an anti-angiogenic agent with activity against VEGF receptor (VEGFR) 1, VEGFR2, and VEGFR3. Both oral agents have antitumour activity in women with recurrent ovarian cancer, and their combination was active and had manageable toxicities in a phase 1 trial. We investigated whether this combination could improve progression-free survival (PFS) compared with olaparib monotherapy in women with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. METHODS: In our randomised, open-label, phase 2 study, we recruited women (aged ≥18 years) who had measurable platinum-sensitive, relapsed, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer, or those with deleterious germline BRCA1/2 mutations from nine participating US academic medical centres. We randomly allocated participants (1:1) according to permuted blocks, stratified by germline BRCA status and previous anti-angiogenic therapy, to receive olaparib capsules 400 mg twice daily or the combination at the recommended phase 2 dose of cediranib 30 mg daily and olaparib capsules 200 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival analysed in the intention-to-treat population. The phase 2 trial is no longer accruing patients. An interim analysis was conducted in November, 2013, after 50% of expected events had occurred and efficacy results were unmasked. The primary analysis was performed on March 31, 2014, after 47 events (66% of those expected). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01116648. FINDINGS: Between Oct 26, 2011, and June 3, 2013, we randomly allocated 46 women to receive olaparib alone and 44 to receive the combination of olaparib and cediranib. Median PFS was 17·7 months (95% CI 14·7-not reached) for the women treated with cediranib plus olaparib compared with 9·0 months (95% CI 5·7-16·5) for those treated with olaparib monotherapy (hazard ratio 0·42, 95% CI 0·23-0·76; p=0·005). Grade 3 and 4 adverse events were more common with combination therapy than with monotherapy, including fatigue (12 patients in the cediranib plus olaparib group vs five patients in the olaparib monotherapy group), diarrhoea (ten vs none), and hypertension (18 vs none). INTERPRETATION: Cediranib plus olaparib seems to improve PFS in women with recurrent platinum-sensitive high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer, and warrants study in a phase 3 trial. The side-effect profile suggests such investigations should include assessments of quality of life and patient-reported outcomes to understand the effects of a continuing oral regimen with that of intermittent chemotherapy. FUNDING: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (3 U01 CA062490-16S2); Intramural Program of the Center for Cancer Research; and the Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, NIH.

A phase I study of the oral gamma secretase inhibitor R04929097 in combination with gemcitabine in patients with advanced solid tumors (PHL-078/CTEP 8575).

PURPOSE: To establish the recommended phase II dose of the oral γ-secretase inhibitor RO4929097 (RO) in combination with gemcitabine; secondary objectives include the evaluation of safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, biomarkers of Notch signaling and preliminary anti-tumor activity. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled in cohorts of escalating RO dose levels (DLs). Tested RO DLs were 20 mg, 30 mg, 45 mg and 90 mg. RO was administered orally, once daily on days 1-3, 8-10, 15-17, 22-24. Gemcitabine was administered at 1,000 mg/m(2) on d1, 8, and 15 in 28 d cycles. Dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were assessed by CTCAE v4. Serial plasma was collected for RO (total and unbound) and gemcitabine pharmacokinetic analysis. Biomarkers of Notch signaling were assessed by immunohistochemistry in archival tissue. Antitumor activity was evaluated (RECIST 1.1). RESULTS: A total of 18 patients were enrolled to establish the recommended phase II dose. Of these, 3 patients received 20 mg RO, 7 patients received 30 mg RO, 6 patients received 45 mg RO and 2 patients received 90 mg RO. DLTs were grade 3 transaminitis (30 mg RO), grade 3 transaminitis and maculopapular rash (45 mg RO), and grade 3 transaminitis and failure to receive 75 % of planned RO doses secondary to prolonged neutropenia (90 mg); all were reversible. The maximum tolerated dose was exceeded at 90 mg RO. Pharmacokinetic analysis of both total and free RO confirmed the presence of autoinduction at 45 and 90 mg. Median levels of Notch3 staining were higher in individuals who received fewer than 4 cycles (p = 0.029). Circulating angiogenic factor levels did not correlate with time to progression or ≥ grade 3 adverse events. Best response (RECIST 1.1) was partial response (nasopharyngeal cancer) and stable disease > 4 months was observed in 3 patients (pancreas, tracheal, and breast primary cancers). CONCLUSIONS: RO and gemcitabine can be safely combined. The recommended phase II dose of RO was 30 mg in combination with gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2). Although RO exposure was limited by the presence of autoinduction, RO levels achieved exceeded the area under the concentration-time curve for 0-24 h (AUC(0-24)) predicted for efficacy in preclinical models using daily dosing. Evidence of clinical antitumor activity and prolonged stable disease were identified.

A randomized phase II study of cediranib alone versus cediranib in combination with dasatinib in docetaxel resistant, castration resistant prostate cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Activation of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and the oncogenic Src pathway has been implicated in the development of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) in preclinical models. Cediranib and dasatinib are multi-kinase inhibitors targeting VEGFR and Src respectively. Phase II studies of cediranib and dasatinib in CRPC have shown single agent activity. METHODS: Docetaxel-pretreated CRPC patients were randomized to arm A: cediranib alone (20 mg/day) versus arm B: cediranib (20 mg/day) plus dasatinib (100 mg/day) given orally on 4-week cycles. Primary endpoint was 12-week progression-free survival (PFS) as per the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group (PCWG2). Patient reported outcomes were evaluated using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) and Present Pain Intensity (PPI) scales. Correlative studies of bone turnover markers (BTM), including bone alkaline phosphate (BAP) and serum beta-C telopeptide (B-CTx) were serially assayed. Results A total of 22 patients, 11 per arm, were enrolled. Baseline demographics were similar in both arms. Median number of cycles =4 in arm A (range 1-12) and 2 in arm B (range 1-9). Twelve-week PFS was 73 % in arm A versus 18 % in arm B (p = 0.03). Median PFS in months (arm A versus B) was: 5.2 versus 2.6 (95 % CI: 1.9-6.5 versus 1.4-not reached). Most common grade 3 toxicities were hypertension, anemia and thrombocytopenia in arm A and hypertension, diarrhea and fatigue in arm B. One treatment-related death (retroperitoneal hemorrhage) was seen in arm A. FACT-P and PPI scores did not significantly change in either arm. No correlation between BTM and PFS was seen in either arm. CONCLUSIONS: Although limited by small numbers, this randomized study showed that the combination of VEGFR and Src targeted therapy did not result in improved efficacy and may be associated with a worse outcome than VEGFR targeted therapy alone in patients with CRPC. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01260688.

A phase II trial of sequential ribonucleotide reductase inhibition in aggressive myeloproliferative neoplasms.

Myeloproliferative neoplasms are a varied group of disorders that can have prolonged chronic phases, but eventually accelerate and can transform into a secondary acute myeloid leukemia that is ultimately fatal. Triapine is a novel inhibitor of the M2 subunit of ribonucleotide reductase. Sequential inhibition of ribonucleotide reductase with triapine and an M1 ribonucleotide reductase inhibitor (fludarabine) was noted to be safe, and led to a 29% complete plus partial response rate in myeloproliferative neoplasms. This article reports the findings of a phase II trial of triapine (105 mg/m(2)/day) followed by fludarabine (30 mg/m(2)/day) daily for 5 consecutive days in 37 patients with accelerated myeloproliferative neoplasms and secondary acute myeloid leukemia. The overall response rate was 49% (18/37), with a complete remission rate of 24% (9/37). Overall response rates and complete remissions were seen in all disease subsets, including secondary acute myeloid leukemia, in which the overall response rate and complete remission rate were 48% and 33%, respectively. All patients with known JAK2 V617F mutations (6/6) responded. The median overall survival of the entire cohort was 6.9 months, with a median overall survival of both overall responders and complete responders of 10.6 months. These data further demonstrate the promise of sequential inhibition of ribonucleotide reductase in patients with accelerated myeloproliferative neoplasms and secondary acute myeloid leukemia. This study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00381550).

Impact of the 2021 CKD-EPI equation on anticancer pharmacotherapy in black and non-black cancer patients.

Cancer and kidney disease disproportionately impact Black patients. The CKD-EPI2021 equation was developed to estimate glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) without using race. We assessed the impact of using CKD-EPI2021 instead of CKD-EPI2009 or Cockcroft-Gault (CG) on dosing and eligibility of anticancer drugs in Black and non-Black patients. Utilizing the National Cancer Institute Theradex database, deindexed eGFR (mL/min) was calculated for 3931 patients (8.6 % Black) using CKD-EPI2021, CKD-EPI2009, and CG. Dosing simulations based on each eGFR were performed for ten anticancer drugs with kidney function-based eligibility or dosing cutoffs. eGFR differences using CKD-EPI2021 versus CKD-EPI2009 varied between Black and non-Black patients (p < 0.001); on average, Black patients had 10.3 mL/min lower eGFR and non-Black patients had 4.2 mL/min higher eGFR using CKD-EPI2021. This corresponded to a difference in relative odds of cisplatin ineligibility using CKD-EPI2021 versus CKD-EPI2009; Black patients had 48 % higher odds of ineligibility and non-Black patients had 27 % lower odds of ineligibility using CKD-EPI2021 (p < 0.001). When using CKD-EPI2021 versus CG, eGFR differences were similar between Black and non-Black patients (p = 0.679) and relative difference in odds of cisplatin ineligibility did not vary. Using CKD-EPI2021 versus CKD-EPI2009 differentially impacts Black versus non-Black cancer patients; Black patients have lower calculated eGFR and are less likely to receive full doses of drug using CKD-EPI2021. From the historical default of CG, adopting CKD-EPI2021 would not disparately impact patients based on race, but would result in Black patients being less likely to receive full doses of drug than if CKD-EPI2009 were used.

Circulating Tumor DNA Dynamics Fail to Predict Efficacy of Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase/VEGFR Inhibition in Patients With Heavily Pretreated Advanced Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: Cell-free circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has shown its potential as a quantitative biomarker for longitudinal monitoring of response to anticancer therapies. However, ctDNA dynamics have not been studied in patients with heavily pretreated, advanced solid tumors, for whom therapeutic responses can be weak. We investigated whether changes in ctDNA could predict clinical outcomes in such a cohort treated with combined poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase/vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), or non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) received up to 7 days of cediranib 30 mg orally once daily monotherapy lead-in followed by addition of olaparib 200 mg orally twice daily. Patients had progressed on a median of three previous lines of therapy. Plasma samples were collected before and after cediranib monotherapy lead-in and on combination therapy at 7 days, 28 days, and every 28 days thereafter. ctDNA was quantified from plasma samples using a multigene mutation-based assay. Radiographic assessment was performed every 8 weeks. RESULTS: ctDNA measurements were evaluable in 63 patients. The median baseline ctDNA variant allele fractions (VAFs) were 20%, 28%, 27%, and 34% for PDAC, TNBC, SCLC, and NSCLC, respectively. No association was observed between baseline VAF and radiographic response, progression-free survival, or overall survival (OS). Similarly, no association was found between ctDNA decline and radiographic response or survival. However, an increase in ctDNA at 56 days of combination therapy was associated with disease progression and inferior OS in a landmark analysis. CONCLUSION: ctDNA levels or dynamics did not correlate with radiographic response or survival outcomes in patients with advanced metastatic malignancies treated with olaparib and cediranib.

Phase II Study of Erdafitinib in Patients With Tumors With Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor Mutations or Fusions: Results From the NCI-MATCH ECOG-ACRIN Trial (EAY131) Subprotocol K2.

PURPOSE: Subprotocol K2 (EAY131-K2) of the NCI-MATCH platform trial was an open-label, single-arm, phase II study designed to evaluate the antitumor efficacy of the oral FGFR1-4 inhibitor, erdafitinib, in patients with tumors harboring FGFR1-4 mutations or fusions. METHODS: Central confirmation of tumor FGFR1-4 mutations or fusions was required for outcome analysis. Patients with urothelial carcinoma were excluded. Enrolled subjects received oral erdafitinib at a starting dose of 8 mg daily continuously until intolerable toxicity or disease progression. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) with key secondary end points of safety, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were enrolled, and 25 patients were included in the primary efficacy analysis as prespecified in the protocol. The median age was 61 years, and 52% of subjects had received ≥3 previous lines of therapy. The confirmed ORR was 16% (4 of 25 [90% CI, 5.7 to 33.0], P = .034 against the null rate of 5%). An additional seven patients experienced stable disease as best-confirmed response. Four patients had a prolonged PFS including two with recurrent WHO grade IV, IDH1-/2-wildtype glioblastoma. The median PFS and OS were 3.6 months and 11.0 months, respectively. Erdafitinib was manageable with no new safety signals. CONCLUSION: This study met its primary end point in patients with several pretreated solid tumor types harboring FGFR1-3 mutations or fusions. These findings support advancement of erdafitinib for patients with fibroblast growth factor receptor-altered tumors outside of currently approved indications in a potentially tumor-agnostic manner.