A Phase I Study of sequences of the CDK4/6 Inhibitor, Ribociclib Combined with Gemcitabine in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

Background: Based on preclinical data showing addition of CDK4/6 inhibitors to gemcitabine is synergistic, ribociclib was evaluated in combination with gemcitabine to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose limiting toxicities (DLT). Methods: In this single arm multicohort phase I trial, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of Ribociclib plus Gemcitabine in patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients received Gemcitabine intravenously on days 1 and 8 followed by Ribociclib days 8-14, with treatment repeated every 3 weeks. Results: The study enrolled 43 patients between October 2017 and September 2019. The escalation phase (19 patients) determined the MTD and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) to be ribociclib 800mg daily and gemcitabine 1000mg/m2 for the expansion phase (24 patients). One patient experienced Grade 4 thrombocytopenia. Eleven patients experienced Grade 3 adverse events (AE), the most common being neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia. No partial or complete responses were observed. 15/22 (68%) of efficacy evaluable patients who received the MTD achieved best response of stable disease. Conclusions: The addition of Ribociclib to Gemcitabine was tolerated well and yielded stability of tumors in both cohorts. Ribociclib and gemcitabine could have synergistic activity in certain tumor types, and our data provides support for the combination. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03237390.

A Phase I Study of the Oral Dual-Acting Pan-PI3K/mTOR Inhibitor Bimiralisib in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Bimiralisib is a pan-PI3K/mTOR inhibitor demonstrating antitumor efficacy in preclinical models. The objectives of this study were to identify a maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics (PK), a dosing schedule, and adverse events (AEs) in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received oral bimiralisib to determine the MTD of one continuous (once daily) and two intermittent schedules (A: Days 1, 2 weekly; B: Days 1, 4 weekly) until progression or unacceptable AEs occurred. RESULTS: The MTD for the continuous schedule was 80 mg, with grade three fatigue as the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). No MTD was reached with intermittent schedules, with only one DLT in schedule B. PK analysis suggested that 140 mg (schedule A) was within the biologically active dose range and was selected for further exploration. The most frequent treatment-emergent AEs were hyperglycemia (76.2%) in the continuous schedule, and nausea (56-62.5%) in schedules A and B. The most frequent treatment-emergent > grade three AE for all schedules combined was hyperglycemia (28.6%, continuous schedule; 12.0%, schedule A; 12.5%, schedule B). There was one partial response in a head and neck squamous cancer patient with a NOTCH1T1997M mutation. CONCLUSIONS: Bimiralisib demonstrated a manageable AE profile consistent with this compound class. Intermittent schedules had fewer > grade three AEs, while also maintaining favorable PK profiles. Intermittent schedule A is proposed for further development in biomarker-selected patient populations.

Phase 1 trial of navitoclax and sorafenib in patients with relapsed or refractory solid tumors with hepatocellular carcinoma expansion cohort.

Navitoclax (ABT-263) is an oral BCL2 homology-3 mimetic that binds with high affinity to pro-survival BCL2 proteins, resulting in apoptosis. Sorafenib, an oral multi kinase inhibitor also promotes apoptosis and inhibits tumor angiogenesis. The efficacy of either agent alone is limited; however, preclinical studies demonstrate synergy with the combination of navitoclax and sorafenib. In this phase 1 study, we evaluated the combination of navitoclax and sorafenib in a dose escalation cohort of patients with refractory solid tumors, with an expansion cohort in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was determined using the continual reassessment method. Navitoclax and sorafenib were administered continuously on days 1 through 21 of 21-day cycles. Ten patients were enrolled in the dose escalation cohort and 15 HCC patients were enrolled in the expansion cohort. Two dose levels were tested, and the MTD was navitoclax 150 mg daily plus sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. Among all patients, the most common grade 3 toxicity was thrombocytopenia (5 patients, 20%): there were no grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Patients received a median of 2 cycles (range 1-36 cycles) and all patients were off study treatment at data cut off. Six patients in the expansion cohort had stable disease, and there were no partial or complete responses. Drug-drug interaction between navitoclax and sorafenib was not observed. The combination of navitoclax and sorafenib did not increase induction of apoptosis compared with navitoclax alone. Navitoclax plus sorafenib is tolerable but showed limited efficacy in the HCC expansion cohort. These findings do not support further development of this combination for the treatment of advanced HCC. This phase I trial was conducted under ClinicalTrials.gov registry number NCT01364051.

Bintrafusp Alfa With CCRT Followed by Bintrafusp Alfa Versus Placebo With CCRT Followed by Durvalumab in Patients With Unresectable Stage III NSCLC: A Phase 2 Randomized Study.

INTRODUCTION: Preclinical evaluation of bintrafusp alfa (BA) combined with radiotherapy revealed greater antitumor effects than BA or radiotherapy alone. In a phase 1 study, BA exhibited encouraging clinical activity in patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC who had received previous treatment. METHODS: This multicenter, double-blind, controlled phase 2 study (NCT03840902) evaluated the safety and efficacy of BA with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) followed by BA (BA group) versus placebo with cCRT followed by durvalumab (durvalumab group) in patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC. The primary end point was progression-free survival according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 as assessed by the investigator. On the basis of the recommendation of an independent data monitoring committee, the study was discontinued before the maturity of overall survival data (secondary end point). RESULTS: A total of 153 patients were randomized to either BA (n = 75) or durvalumab groups (n = 78). The median progression-free survival was 12.8 months versus 14.6 months (stratified hazard ratio = 1.48 [95% confidence interval: 0.69-3.17]), in the BA and durvalumab groups, respectively. Trends for overall response rate (29.3% versus 32.1%) and disease control rate (66.7% versus 70.5%) were similar between the two groups. Any-grade treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 94.6% versus 96.1% of patients in the BA versus durvalumab groups, respectively. Bleeding events in the BA group were mostly grade 1 (21.6%) or 2 (9.5%). CONCLUSIONS: BA with cCRT followed by BA exhibited no efficacy benefit over placebo with cCRT followed by durvalumab in patients with stage III unresectable NSCLC.

A phase 2 and pharmacological study of sapanisertib in patients with relapsed and/or refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Despite recent approval of several new agents, relapsed acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) remains challenging to treat. Sapanisertib (MLN0128/TAK-228) is an oral TORC1/2 inhibitor that exhibited preclinical activity against ALL. METHODS: We conducted a single-arm multi-center Phase II study of sapanisertib monotherapy (3 mg orally daily of the milled formulation for 21 days every 28 days) in patients with ALL through the Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network (NCI-9775). RESULTS: Sixteen patients, 15 of whom were previously treated (median 3 prior lines of therapy), were enrolled. Major grade 3-4 non-hematologic toxicities included mucositis (3 patients) and hyperglycemia (2 patients) as well as hepatic failure, seizures, confusion, pneumonitis, and anorexia (1 patient each). Grade >2 hematological toxicity included leukopenia (3), lymphopenia (2), thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia (1). The best response was stable disease in 2 patients (12.5%), while only 3 patients (19%) were able to proceed to Cycle 2. Pharmacokinetic analysis demonstrated drug exposures similar to those observed in solid tumor patients. Immunoblotting in serially collected samples indicated limited impact of treatment on phosphorylation of mTOR pathway substrates such as 4EBP1, S6, and AKT. CONCLUSION: In summary, single-agent sapanisertib had a good safety profile but limited target inhibition or efficacy in ALL as a single agent. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02484430.

Bintrafusp Alfa Versus Pembrolizumab in Patients With Treatment-Naive, Programmed Death-Ligand 1-High Advanced NSCLC: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 3 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Bintrafusp alfa, a first-in-class bifunctional fusion protein composed of the extracellular domain of TGF-ßRII (a TGF-ß "trap") fused to a human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody blocking programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), has exhibited clinical activity in a phase 1 expansion cohort of patients with PD-L1-high advanced NSCLC. METHODS: This adaptive phase 3 trial (NCT03631706) compared the efficacy and safety of bintrafusp alfa versus pembrolizumab as first-line treatment in patients with PD-L1-high advanced NSCLC. Primary end points were progression-free survival according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 per independent review committee and overall survival. RESULTS: Patients (N = 304) were randomized one-to-one to receive either bintrafusp alfa or pembrolizumab (n = 152 each). The median follow-up was 14.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 13.1-16.0 mo) for bintrafusp alfa and 14.5 months (95% CI: 13.1-15.9 mo) for pembrolizumab. Progression-free survival by independent review committee was not significantly different between bintrafusp alfa and pembrolizumab arms (median = 7.0 mo [95% CI: 4.2 mo-not reached (NR)] versus 11.1 mo [95% CI: 8.1 mo-NR]; hazard ratio = 1.232 [95% CI: 0.885-1.714]). The median overall survival was 21.1 months (95% CI: 21.1 mo-NR) for bintrafusp alfa and 22.1 months (95% CI: 20.4 mo-NR) for pembrolizumab (hazard ratio = 1.201 [95% CI: 0.796-1.811]). Treatment-related adverse events were higher with bintrafusp alfa versus pembrolizumab; grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 42.4% versus 13.2% of patients, respectively. The study was discontinued at an interim analysis as it was unlikely to meet the primary end point. CONCLUSIONS: First-line treatment with bintrafusp alfa did not exhibit superior efficacy compared with pembrolizumab in patients with PD-L1-high, advanced NSCLC.

T-Cell Engagers in Solid Cancers-Current Landscape and Future Directions.

Monoclonal antibody treatment initially heralded an era of molecularly targeted therapy in oncology and is now widely applied in modulating anti-cancer immunity by targeting programmed cell receptors (PD-1, PD-L1), cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) and, more recently, lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG3). Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T) recently proved to be a valid approach to inducing anti-cancer immunity by directly modifying the host's immune cells. However, such cell-based therapy requires extensive resources such as leukapheresis, ex vivo modification and expansion of cytotoxic T-cells and current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP) laboratories and presents significant logistical challenges. Bi-/trispecific antibody technology is a novel pharmaceutical approach to facilitate the engagement of effector immune cells to potentially multiple cancer epitopes, e.g., the recently approved blinatumomab. This opens the opportunity to develop 'off-the-shelf' anti-cancer agents that achieve similar and/or complementary anti-cancer effects as those of modified immune cell therapy. The majority of bi-/trispecific antibodies target the tumor-associated antigens (TAA) located on the extracellular surface of cancer cells. The extracellular antigens represent just a small percentage of known TAAs and are often associated with higher toxicities because some of them are expressed on normal cells (off-target toxicity). In contrast, the targeting of intracellular TAAs such as mutant RAS and TP53 may lead to fewer off-target toxicities while still achieving the desired antitumor efficacy (on-target toxicity). Here, we provide a comprehensive review on the emerging field of bi-/tri-specific T-cell engagers and potential therapeutic opportunities.

A Clinician's Guide to Bioinformatics for Next-Generation Sequencing.

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies are high-throughput methods for DNA sequencing and have become a widely adopted tool in cancer research. The sheer amount and variety of data generated by NGS assays require sophisticated computational methods and bioinformatics expertise. In this review, we provide background details of NGS technology and basic bioinformatics concepts for the clinician investigator interested in cancer research applications, with a focus on DNA-based approaches. We introduce the general principles of presequencing library preparation, postsequencing alignment, and variant calling. We also highlight the common variant annotations and NGS applications for other molecular data types. Finally, we briefly discuss the revealed utility of NGS methods in NSCLC research and study design considerations for research studies that aim to leverage NGS technologies for clinical care.

Culture media composition influences patient-derived organoid ability to predict therapeutic responses in gastrointestinal cancers.

BACKGROUNDA patient-derived organoid (PDO) platform may serve as a promising tool for translational cancer research. In this study, we evaluated PDO's ability to predict clinical response to gastrointestinal (GI) cancers.METHODSWe generated PDOs from primary and metastatic lesions of patients with GI cancers, including pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, colorectal adenocarcinoma, and cholangiocarcinoma. We compared PDO response with the observed clinical response for donor patients to the same treatments.RESULTSWe report an approximately 80% concordance rate between PDO and donor tumor response. Importantly, we found a profound influence of culture media on PDO phenotype, where we showed a significant difference in response to standard-of-care chemotherapies, distinct morphologies, and transcriptomes between media within the same PDO cultures.CONCLUSIONWhile we demonstrate a high concordance rate between donor tumor and PDO, these studies also showed the important role of culture media when using PDOs to inform treatment selection and predict response across a spectrum of GI cancers.TRIAL REGISTRATIONNot applicable.FUNDINGThe Joan F. & Richard A. Abdoo Family Fund in Colorectal Cancer Research, GI Cancer program of the Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic SPORE in Pancreatic Cancer, Center of Individualized Medicine (Mayo Clinic), Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology (Mayo Clinic), Incyte Pharmaceuticals and Mayo Clinic Hepatobiliary SPORE, University of Minnesota-Mayo Clinic Partnership, and the Early Therapeutic program (Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic).

Cox Proportional Hazard Ratios Overestimate Survival Benefit of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Cox-TEL Adjustment and Meta-Analyses of Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Expression and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Survival Benefit.

INTRODUCTION: Survival benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy in lung cancer is not fully understood. METHODS: PubMed-cataloged publications through February 14, 2022, were queried for randomized controlled trials of ICI in lung cancer, and identified publications were reviewed for inclusion. Reported Cox hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival were transformed to Cox-TEL HR for ICI short-term survivors (ST-HR) and difference in proportions for patients with long-term survival (LT-DP). Meta-analyses were performed using a frequentist random-effect model. Outcomes of interest were pooled overall survival Cox HR, ST-HR, and LT-DP in NSCLC, stratified by programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) level (primary outcome) and ICI treatment line (secondary). RESULTS: A total of nine publications representing eight clinical trials were selected for meta-analysis. Primary analysis yielded the following metrics for patients with PD-L1 expression less than 1%, more than or equal to 1%, and more than or equal to 50%, respectively: pooled Cox HR, 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.82), 0.74 (95% CI: 0.68-0.82), and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.54-0.70); pooled ST-HR, 0.91 (95% CI: 0.79-1.05), 0.88 (95% CI: 0.82-0.94), and 0.70 (95% CI: 0.60-0.83); and pooled LT-DP, 0.10 (95% CI: 0.00-0.20), 0.09 (95% CI: 0.06-0.12), and 0.11 (95% CI: 0.05-0.17). Results of secondary analysis revealed LT-DP of approximately 10% across treatment lines. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals an approximately 10% long-term survival probability increment in ICI long-term survivors across PD-L1-positive subpopulations in both ICI treatment lines. Furthermore, ST-HR was consistently poorer than Cox HR. For patients with PD-L1 less than 1%, neither LT-DP nor ST-HR achieved statistical significance. The analysis provides greater insight into the treatment effect of ICI in published trials.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated remarkable efficacy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, only a minority of NSCLC patients benefit from ICIs, and whether the magnitude of benefit is specific factor-dependent remains unclear. We performed a systematic review to improve our understanding of clinicopathologic and biomolecular features associated with improved survival upon treatment with ICIs for NSCLC. Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus from database inception to August 31, 2021, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing overall survival (OS) in NSCLC treated with ICIs vs control therapies. We calculated the pooled OS hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI in subgroups using a random-effects model, and assessed the heterogeneity between the paired estimates using an interaction test. Results: A total of 23 RCTs involving 15,829 patients were included. We found that wild-type EGFR, high PD-L1 expression, and high bTMB were associated with a significant OS benefit from ICIs, but not mutant EGFR, low PD-L1 expression, and low bTMB. The differences of OS benefit between wild-type and mutant EGFR (HR=1.53, 95%CI 1.13-2.08), high and low PD-L1 (HR=1.35; 95%CI 1.14-1.61), high and low bTMB (HR=1.71; 95%CI 1.17-2.52) were statistically significant. OS benefit was found in all subgroups regardless of sex, age, ECOG PS, histology, smoking history, baseline brain metastasis, race, and region, and the interaction test demonstrated no significant difference of the OS benefit between these opposed subgroups (e.g. male vs female). Conclusions: Wild-type EGFR, high PD-L1 expression, and high bTMB are associated with a greater magnitude of efficacy from ICIs vs control therapies in NSCLC. However, the administration of ICIs should not be restricted to other clinicopathological factors (sex, smoking history, race, etc.).

Targeting PIM2 by JP11646 results in significant antitumor effects in solid tumors.

Proviral integration of Moloney virus 2 (PIM2) is a pro­survival factor of cancer cells and a possible therapeutic target in hematological malignancies. However, the attempts at inhibiting PIM2 have yielded underwhelming results in early clinical trials on hematological malignancies. Recently, a novel pan­PIM inhibitor, JP11646, was developed. The present study examined the utility of targeting PIM2 in multiple solid cancers and investigated the antitumor efficacy and the mechanisms of action of JP11646. When PIM2 expression was compared between normal and cancer tissues in publicly available datasets, PIM2 was found to be overexpressed in several types of solid cancers. PIM2 ectopic overexpression promoted tumor growth in in vivo xenograft breast cancer mouse models. The pan­PIM inhibitor, JP11646, suppressed in vitro cancer cell proliferation in a concentration­dependent manner in multiple types of cancers; a similar result was observed with siRNA­mediated PIM2 knockdown, as well as an increased in cell apoptosis. By contrast, another pan­PIM inhibitor, AZD1208, suppressed the expression of downstream PIM2 targets, but not PIM2 protein expression, corresponding to no apoptosis induction. As a mechanism of PIM2 protein degradation, it was found that the proteasome inhibitor, bortezomib, reversed the apoptosis induced by JP11646, suggesting that PIM2 degradation by JP11646 is proteasome­dependent. JP11646 exhibited significant anticancer efficacy with minimal toxicities at the examined doses and schedules in multiple in vivo mice xenograft solid cancer models. On the whole, the present study demonstrates that PIM2 promotes cancer progression in solid tumors. JP11646 induces apoptosis at least partly by PIM2 protein degradation and suppresses cancer cell proliferation in vitro and in vivo. JP11646 may thus be a possible treatment strategy for multiple types of solid cancers.

A phase Ib study of Oraxol (oral paclitaxel and encequidar) in patients with advanced malignancies.

PURPOSE: Oraxol is an oral formulation of paclitaxel administered with a novel, minimally absorbed P-glycoprotein inhibitor encequidar (HM30181A). This phase Ib study was conducted to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of Oraxol administered at a fixed dose for up to 5 consecutive days in patients with advanced malignancies. METHODS: Part 1 of this study utilized a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design to determine the MTD of oral paclitaxel 270 mg plus oral encequidar 15 mg administered daily. Dose escalation was achieved by increasing the number of consecutive dosing days per week (from 2 to 5 days per week). Dosing occurred for 3 consecutive weeks out of a 4-week cycle. Part 2 treated additional patients at the MTD to determine tolerability and recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Adverse events, tumor responses, and pharmacokinetic profiles were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 34 patients (n = 24 in Part 1, n = 10 in Part 2) received treatment. The MTD of Oraxol was determined to be 270 mg daily × 5 days per week per protocol definition and this was declared the RP2D. The most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue, neutropenia, and nausea/vomiting. Hypersensitivity-type reactions were not observed. Of the 28 patients evaluable for response, 2 (7.1%) achieved partial response and 18 (64.3%) achieved stable disease. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed rapid absorption of paclitaxel when administered orally following encequidar. Paclitaxel daily exposure was comparable following 2-5 days dose levels. CONCLUSION: The oral administration of encequidar with paclitaxel was safe, achieved clinically relevant paclitaxel levels, and showed evidence of anti-tumor activity.

Unmet Needs in Oncology Clinical Research and Treatment in Africa: Focus on Ghana.

Cancer incidence is increasing worldwide and is a major cause of mortality. The relative magnitude of the increase is remarkably high in low human development index (HDI; 95%) and medium HDI (64%) countries. On the African continent, a corresponding increase in cancer burden is predicted, particularly for sub-Saharan Africa. Current epidemiologic data indicate that mortality rates of certain cancers, such as breast and cervical cancers, in sub-Saharan Africa are the highest in the world, and the cancer risks are broadly comparable to the risks in high-income countries, such as the United States and Europe. Although emerging data alludes to the unique genetic profile of cancer in African populations, most cancer therapies are introduced to Africa without confirmatory clinical trials. Therefore, there is an increasing need for clinical trials directed toward prevention, screening, diagnosis, and identification of innovative treatments in the African context. This review will discuss the increasing cancer burden in Africa, with a particular focus on Ghana, unmet clinical needs in cancer, current medical systems, clinical trial regulatory systems, and challenges to clinical trial recruitment.

Dual checkpoint targeting of B7-H3 and PD-1 with enoblituzumab and pembrolizumab in advanced solid tumors: interim results from a multicenter phase I/II trial.

BACKGROUND: Availability of checkpoint inhibitors has created a paradigm shift in the management of patients with solid tumors. Despite this, most patients do not respond to immunotherapy, and there is considerable interest in developing combination therapies to improve response rates and outcomes. B7-H3 (CD276) is a member of the B7 family of cell surface molecules and provides an alternative immune checkpoint molecule to therapeutically target alone or in combination with programmed cell death-1 (PD-1)-targeted therapies. Enoblituzumab, an investigational anti-B7-H3 humanized monoclonal antibody, incorporates an immunoglobulin G1 fragment crystallizable (Fc) domain that enhances Fcγ receptor-mediated antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity. Coordinated engagement of innate and adaptive immunity by targeting distinct members of the B7 family (B7-H3 and PD-1) is hypothesized to provide greater antitumor activity than either agent alone. METHODS: In this phase I/II study, patients received intravenous enoblituzumab (3-15 mg/kg) weekly plus intravenous pembrolizumab (2 mg/kg) every 3 weeks during dose-escalation and cohort expansion. Expansion cohorts included non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; checkpoint inhibitor [CPI]-naïve and post-CPI, programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1] <1%), head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC; CPI-naïve), urothelial cancer (post-CPI), and melanoma (post-CPI). Disease was assessed using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 after 6 weeks and every 9 weeks thereafter. Safety and pharmacokinetic data were provided for all enrolled patients; efficacy data focused on HNSCC and NSCLC cohorts. RESULTS: Overall, 133 patients were enrolled and received ≥1 dose of study treatment. The maximum tolerated dose of enoblituzumab with pembrolizumab at 2 mg/kg was not reached. Intravenous enoblituzumab (15 mg/kg) every 3 weeks plus pembrolizumab (2 mg/kg) every 3 weeks was recommended for phase II evaluation. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 116 patients (87.2%) and were grade ≥3 in 28.6%. One treatment-related death occurred (pneumonitis). Objective responses occurred in 6 of 18 (33.3% [95% CI 13.3 to 59.0]) patients with CPI-naïve HNSCC and in 5 of 14 (35.7% [95% CI 12.8 to 64.9]) patients with CPI-naïve NSCLC. CONCLUSIONS: Checkpoint targeting with enoblituzumab and pembrolizumab demonstrated acceptable safety and antitumor activity in patients with CPI-naïve HNSCC and NSCLC. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02475213.

Population Pharmacokinetics of Z-Endoxifen in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors.

The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a population pharmacokinetic model for Z-endoxifen in patients with advanced solid tumors and to identify clinical variables that influence pharmacokinetic parameters. Z-endoxifen-HCl was administered orally once a day on a 28-day cycle (±3 days) over 11 dose levels ranging from 20 to 360 mg. A total of 1256 Z-endoxifen plasma concentration samples from 80 patients were analyzed using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling to develop a population pharmacokinetic model for Z-endoxifen. A 2-compartment model with oral depot and linear elimination adequately described the data. The estimated apparent total clearance, apparent central volume of distribution, and apparent peripheral volume of distribution were 4.89 L/h, 323 L, and 39.7 L, respectively, with weight-effect exponents of 0.75, 1, and 1, respectively. This model was used to explore the effects of clinical and demographic variables on Z-endoxifen pharmacokinetics. Weight, race on clearance, and aspartate aminotransferase on the absorption rate constant were identified as significant covariates in the final model. This novel population pharmacokinetic model provides insight regarding factors that may affect the pharmacokinetics of Z-endoxifen and may assist in the design of future clinical trials.