First-In-Human Phase I Study of Tinengotinib (TT-00420), a Multiple Kinase Inhibitor, as a Single Agent in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: This first-in-human phase I dose-escalation study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of tinengotinib (TT-00420), a multi-kinase inhibitor targeting fibroblast growth factor receptors 1-3 (FGFRs 1-3), Janus kinase 1/2, vascular endothelial growth factor receptors, and Aurora A/B, in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received tinengotinib orally daily in 28-day cycles. Dose escalation was guided by Bayesian modeling using escalation with overdose control. The primary objective was to assess dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and dose recommended for dose expansion (DRDE). Secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics and efficacy. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were enrolled (dose escalation, n = 40; dose expansion, n = 8). MTD was not reached; DRDE was 12 mg daily. DLTs were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (8 mg, n = 1) and hypertension (15 mg, n = 2). The most common treatment-related adverse event was hypertension (50.0%). In 43 response-evaluable patients, 13 (30.2%) achieved partial response (PR; n = 7) or stable disease (SD) ≥ 24 weeks (n = 6), including 4/11 (36.4%) with FGFR2 mutations/fusions and cholangiocarcinoma (PR n = 3; SD ≥ 24 weeks n = 1), 3/3 (100.0%) with hormone receptor (HR)-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer (PR n = 2; SD ≥ 24 weeks n = 1), 2/5 (40.0%) with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC; PR n = 1; SD ≥ 24 weeks n = 1), and 1/1 (100.0%) with castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC; PR). Four of 12 patients (33.3%; HR-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer, TNBC, prostate cancer, and cholangiocarcinoma) treated at DRDE had PRs. Tinengotinib's half-life was 28-34 hours. CONCLUSIONS: Tinengotinib was well tolerated with favorable pharmacokinetic characteristics. Preliminary findings indicated potential clinical benefit in FGFR inhibitor-refractory cholangiocarcinoma, HER2-negative breast cancer (including TNBC), and CRPC. Continued evaluation of tinengotinib is warranted in phase II trials.

The Cholangiocarcinoma in the Young (CITY) Study: Tumor Biology, Treatment Patterns, and Survival Outcomes in Adolescent Young Adults With Cholangiocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Increased awareness of the distinct tumor biology for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer has led to improvement in outcomes for this population. However, in cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), a paucity of data exist on the AYA population. To our knowledge, we present the largest study to date on AYA disease biology, treatment patterns, and survival outcomes in CCA. METHODS: A multi-institutional cohort of patients with CCA diagnosed with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) or extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) was used for analysis. Retrospective chart review was conducted on patients who were 50 years old and younger (young; n = 124) and older than 50 years (older; n = 723). RESULTS: Among 1,039 patients screened, 847 patients met eligibility (72% ICC, 28% ECC). Young patients had a larger median tumor size at resection compared with older patients (4.2 v 3.6 cm; P = .048), more commonly had N1 disease (65% v 43%; P = .040), and were more likely to receive adjuvant therapy (odds ratio, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.64 to 9.74). Tumors of young patients were more likely to harbor an FGFR2 fusion, BRAF mutation, or ATM mutation (P < .05 for each). Young patients were more likely to receive palliative systemic therapy (96% v 69%; P < .001), targeted therapy (23% v 8%; P < .001), and treatment on a clinical trial (31% v 19%; P = .004). Among patients who presented with advanced disease, young patients had a higher median overall survival compared with their older counterparts (17.7 v 13.5 months; 95% CI, 12.6 to 22.6 v 11.4 to 14.8; P = .049). CONCLUSION: Young patients with CCA had more advanced disease at resection, more commonly received both adjuvant and palliative therapies, and demonstrated improved survival compared with older patients. Given the low clinical trial enrollment and poor outcomes among some AYA cancer populations, data to the contrary in CCA are highly encouraging.

NEO-GAP: A Single-Arm, Phase II Feasibility Trial of Neoadjuvant Gemcitabine, Cisplatin, and Nab-Paclitaxel for Resectable, High-Risk Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Most patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCC) develop recurrence after resection. Adjuvant capecitabine remains the standard of care for resected IHCC. A combination of gemcitabine, cisplatin, and nab-paclitaxel (GAP) was associated with a 45% response rate and 20% conversion rate among patients with unresectable biliary tract cancers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of delivering GAP in the neoadjuvant setting for resectable, high-risk IHCC. METHODS: A multi-institutional, single-arm, phase II trial was conducted for patients with resectable, high-risk IHCC, defined as tumor size > 5 cm, multiple tumors, presence of radiographic major vascular invasion, or lymph node involvement. Patients received preoperative GAP (gemcitabine 800 mg/m2, cisplatin 25 mg/m2, and nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle) for a total of 4 cycles prior to an attempt at curative-intent surgical resection. The primary endpoint was completion of both preoperative chemotherapy and surgical resection. Secondary endpoints were adverse events, radiologic response, recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Thirty evaluable patients were enrolled. Median age was 60.5 years. Median follow-up for all patients was 17 months. Ten patients (33%) experienced grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events, the most common being neutropenia and diarrhea; 50% required ≥ 1 dose reduction. The disease control rate was 90% (progressive disease: 10%, partial response: 23%, stable disease: 67%). There was zero treatment-related mortality. Twenty-two patients (73%, 90% CI 57-86; p = 0.008) completed all chemotherapy and surgery. Two patients (9%) who successfully underwent resection had minor postoperative complications. Median length of hospital stay was 4 days. Median RFS was 7.1 months. Median OS for the entire cohort was 24 months and was not reached in patients who underwent surgical resection. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant treatment with gemcitabine, cisplatin, and nab-paclitaxel is feasible and safe prior to resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and does not adversely impact perioperative outcomes.

Effects of a Pragmatic Home-based Exercise Program Concurrent With Neoadjuvant Therapy on Physical Function of Patients With Pancreatic Cancer: The PancFit Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of a preoperative, home-based exercise program on fitness and physical function in patients with pancreatic cancer. BACKGROUND: We previously established a well-tolerated preoperative exercise program after finding a high frequency of sarcopenia and frailty in patients with pancreatic cancer. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled trial (NCT03187951), patients with pancreatic cancer were randomized to Arm A: enhanced usual care or Arm B: prescribed aerobic and resistance exercise during neoadjuvant therapy. Patients received nutrition counseling and activity trackers. The primary endpoint was a 6-minute walk distance (6MWD; ≥14 meters improvement was clinically meaningful). Secondary endpoints included additional physical function tests, health-related quality of life, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one patients were randomized. Objectively measured weekly activity (153.2±135.6 and 159.8±122.8 min in Arm A and B, respectively, P =0.62) and self-reported weekly moderate-to-strenuous physical activity (107.4±160.4 and 129.6±161.6 min in Arm A and Arm B, respectively, P =0.49) were similar, but weekly strength training sessions increased more in Arm B (by 1.8±1.8 vs 0.1±2.4 sessions, P <0.001). 6MWD improved in both Arm A (mean change 18.6±56.8 m, P =0.01) and Arm B (27.3±68.1 m, P =0.002). Quality of life and clinical outcomes did not significantly differ between arms. Pooling patients in both study groups, exercise, and physical activity was favorably associated with physical performance and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial of prescribed exercise versus enhanced usual care during neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer, a high volume of physical activity and increased exercise capacity were observed in both arms, highlighting the importance of activity among patients preparing for surgery.

Molecular profiling and treatment pattern differences between intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Treatment patterns for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) differ, but limited studies exist comparing them. This study examines differences in molecular profiling rates and treatment patterns in these populations, focusing on use of adjuvant, liver-directed, targeted, and investigational therapies. METHODS: This multicenter collaboration included patients with ICC or ECC treated at 1 of 8 participating institutions. Retrospective data were collected on risk factors, pathology, treatments, and survival. Comparative statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Among 1039 patients screened, 847 patients met eligibility (ICC = 611, ECC = 236). Patients with ECC were more likely than those with ICC to present with early stage disease (53.8% vs 28.0%), undergo surgical resection (55.1% vs 29.8%), and receive adjuvant chemoradiation (36.5% vs 4.2%) (all P < .00001). However, they were less likely to undergo molecular profiling (50.3% vs 64.3%) or receive liver-directed therapy (17.9% vs 35.7%), targeted therapy (4.7% vs 18.9%), and clinical trial therapy (10.6% vs 24.8%) (all P < .001). In patients with recurrent ECC after surgery, the molecular profiling rate was 64.5%. Patients with advanced ECC had a shorter median overall survival than those with advanced ICC (11.8 vs 15.1 months; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced ECC have low rates of molecular profiling, possibly in part because of insufficient tissue. They also have low rates of targeted therapy use and clinical trial enrollment. While these rates are higher in advanced ICC, the prognosis for both subtypes of cholangiocarcinoma remains poor, and a pressing need exists for new effective targeted therapies and broader access to clinical trials.

Phase 2 trial of bintrafusp alfa as second-line therapy for patients with locally advanced/metastatic biliary tract cancers.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Biliary tract cancers are rare, heterogeneous cancers with poor prognoses. 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 IgG1 monoclonal antibody blocking programmed death ligand 1, was evaluated in patients with locally advanced/metastatic chemorefractory biliary tract cancers. APPROACH AND RESULTS: This multicenter, single-arm, open-label, phase 2 study (NCT03833661) enrolled adults with locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer that was intolerant to or had failed first-line systemic platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients received 1200 mg bintrafusp alfa intravenously Q2W. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 assessed by IRC. Secondary endpoints included duration of response, durable response rate, safety, progression-free survival, and overall survival.Between March 2019 and January 2020, 159 patients were enrolled. Median follow-up was 16.1 (range, 0.0-19.3) months; 17 patients (10.7%; 95% CI: 6.4%-16.6%) achieved an objective response. Median duration of response was 10.0 (range, 1.9-15.7) months; 10 patients (6.3%; 95% CI: 3.1%-11.3%) had a durable response (≥6 mo). Median progression-free survival was 1.8 months (95% CI: 1.7-1.8 mo); median overall survival was 7.6 months (95% CI: 5.8-9.7 mo). Overall survival rates were 57.9% (6 mo) and 38.8% (12 mo). Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 26.4% of patients, including one treatment-related death (hepatic failure). Frequent grade ≥3 adverse events included anemia (3.8%), pruritus (1.9%), and increased alanine aminotransferase (1.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Although this study did not meet its prespecified primary endpoint, bintrafusp alfa demonstrated clinical activity as second-line treatment in this hard-to-treat cancer, with durable responses and a manageable safety profile.

A phase 1/2a safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy study of the novel nucleoside analog FF-10502-01 for the treatment of advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: The nucleoside FF-10502-01, structurally similar to but with different biologic effects than gemcitabine, shows promising activity both alone and combined with cisplatin in preclinical gemcitabine-resistant tumor models. We conducted an open-label, single-arm, 3 + 3 first-in-human trial to explore the safety, tolerability, and antitumor activity of FF-10502-01 in patients with solid tumors. METHODS: Patients with inoperable metastatic tumors refractory to standard therapies were enrolled. Escalating intravenous FF-10502-01 doses (8-135 mg/m2 ) were administered weekly for 3 weeks in 28-day cycles until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity was observed. Three expansion cohorts were subsequently evaluated. RESULTS: A phase 2 dose of 90 mg/m2 was determined after evaluating 40 patients. Dose-limiting toxicities included hypotension and nausea. Phase 2a enrolled patients with cholangiocarcinoma (36), gallbladder cancer (10), and pancreatic/other tumors (20). Common adverse events were grade 1-2 rash, pruritus, fever, and fatigue. Grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicities were observed at low incidences, including thrombocytopenia (5.1%) and neutropenia (2%). Confirmed partial responses (PRs) occurred in five patients with gemcitabine-refractory tumors, including three with cholangiocarcinoma and one each with gallbladder and urothelial cancer. Median progression-free and overall survival rates in patients with cholangiocarcinoma were 24.7 and 39.1 weeks, respectively. Prolonged progression-free survival in patients with cholangiocarcinoma was associated with BAP1 and PBRM1 mutations. CONCLUSION: FF-10502-01 was well tolerated with manageable side effects and limited hematologic toxicity. Durable PRs and disease stabilizations were observed in heavily pretreated biliary tract patients who had received prior gemcitabine. FF-10502-01 is distinct from gemcitabine and may represent an effective therapy.

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: The role of liver transplantation, adjunctive treatments, and prognostic biomarkers.

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is a primary epithelial cell malignancy of the liver with rising incidence rate globally. Its insidious presentation, heterogeneous and aggressive biology, and recalcitrance to current therapies results in unacceptably high morbidity and mortality. This has spurred research efforts in the last decade to better characterize it molecularly with translation to improved diagnostic tools and treatments. Much of this has been driven by patient advocacy. This has renewed interest in orthotopic liver transplantation (LT) with adjunctive therapies for iCCA, which was historically disparaged due to poor recipient outcomes and donor organ scarcity. However, the optimal use of LT as a treatment for iCCA care remains unclear. Here, we review the epidemiology of iCCA, the history of LT as a treatment modality, alternative approaches to iCCA local control, the evidence for peri-operative systemic therapies, and the potential roles of biomarkers and targeted agents. In doing so, we hope to prioritize areas for continued research and identify areas where multidisciplinary care can improve outcomes.

Validation and Characterization of FGFR2 Rearrangements in Cholangiocarcinoma with Comprehensive Genomic Profiling.

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a heterogeneous biliary tract cancer with a poor prognosis. Approximately 30% to 50% of patients harbor actionable alterations, including FGFR2 rearrangements. Pemigatinib, a potent, selective fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) FGFR1-3 inhibitor, is approved for previously treated, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic CCA harboring FGFR2 fusions/rearrangements, as detected by a US Food and Drug Administration-approved test. The next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based FoundationOneCDx (F1CDx) was US Food and Drug Administration approved for detecting FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements. The precision and reproducibility of F1CDx in detecting FGFR2 rearrangements in CCA were examined. Analytical concordance between F1CDx and an externally validated RNA-based NGS (evNGS) test was performed. Identification of FGFR2 rearrangements in the screening population from the pivotal FIGHT-202 study (NCT02924376) was compared with F1CDx. The reproducibility and repeatability of F1CDx were 90% to 100%. Adjusted positive, negative, and overall percentage agreements were 87.1%, 99.6%, and 98.3%, respectively, between F1CDx and evNGS. Compared with evNGS, F1CDx had a positive predictive value of 96.2% and a negative predictive value of 98.5%. The positive percentage agreement, negative percentage agreement, overall percentage agreement, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 100% for F1CDx versus the FIbroblast Growth factor receptor inhibitor in oncology and Hematology Trial-202 (FIGHT-202) clinical trial assay. Of 6802 CCA samples interrogated, 9.2% had FGFR2 rearrangements. Cell lines expressing diverse FGFR2 fusions were sensitive to pemigatinib. F1CDx demonstrated sensitivity, reproducibility, and high concordance with clinical utility in identifying patients with FGFR2 rearrangements who may benefit from pemigatinib treatment.

Outcomes of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer who progress on first restaging imaging.

BACKGROUND: Objective responses to first-line systemic chemotherapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer patients are seen in less than one third of cases. Unfortunately, a significant amount will have disease progression (PD) on their first restaging imaging. With patients' short life expectancy, it is crucial for clinicians to be prudent when deciding whom and when to treat. Our study aimed to evaluate outcomes of patients that progressed on their first restaging imaging on 1st line therapy. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients diagnosed between 2010-2017 whose first restaging imaging demonstrated PD. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) from metastatic diagnosis date to death. Patients who were lost to follow-up were excluded. RESULTS: Out of 262 total patients reviewed, 98 patients (37%) were included. Sixty-five (66%) received 2nd line therapy, and 33 (34%) did not. Reasons patients did not pursue 2nd line therapy were performance status (PS) decline, organ dysfunction, or patient choice for alternative therapy. Median ages for patients who did and did not receive 2nd line therapy were 61 and 67, respectively (P<0.001). More patients had a poor PS at the time of initial diagnosis in the non-2nd line therapy group (7.5% vs. 31.0%, P=0.021). Median OS for those receiving 2nd line therapy was 9 months (95% CI: 7-11 months) compared to 4 months (95% CI: 3-5 months) for those not receiving 2nd-line therapy (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Although likely biased due to better performance status and younger age, our patients who progressed rapidly on 1st line therapy showed an OS benefit if they received 2nd line therapy. These results suggest that patients maintaining a good PS after immediate progression on 1st line therapy should be offered 2nd line therapy.

Adopting Consensus Terms for Testing in Precision Medicine.

Despite the well-understood benefits of biomarker and genetic testing in precision medicine, uptake remains low, particularly for patients with low socioeconomic status and minority ethnic backgrounds. Patients report having limited familiarity with testing terminology and may not be able to accurately explain testing's role in treatment decisions. Patient confusion and lack of understanding is exacerbated by a multiplicity of overlapping terms used in communicating about testing. A LUNGevity Foundation-led working group composed of five professional societies, 23 patient advocacy groups, and 19 industry members assessed and recommended specific terms for communicating with patients on testing for tumor characteristics and germline mutations. METHODS: Members completed a precision oncology testing framework analysis (biomarkers, germline variants, testing modalities, biospecimen, and commonly used testing terms) for nine solid tumors and blood cancers. The evaluation was segmented into terms that distinguish between somatic and germline testing. Additional data were captured in a comprehensive survey (1,650 respondents) led by FORCE (Facing Our Risk of Cancer Empowered) on patient preferences on germline testing terms. RESULTS: Thirty-three terms were noted in patient education related to biomarker, genetic, and genomic testing. Biomarker testing was selected as the preferred term for testing for somatic (acquired) alterations and other biomarkers. Genetic testing for an inherited mutation and genetic testing for inherited cancer risk were selected as the preferred terms for testing for germline variants. CONCLUSION: Democratizing comprehension about precision oncology testing through intentional use of plain language and common umbrella terminology by oncology health care providers and others in the oncology ecosystem may help improve understanding and communication, and facilitate shared decision making about the role of appropriate testing in treatment decisions and other aspects of oncology care.

Genomic Profiling of Combined Hepatocellular Cholangiocarcinoma Reveals Genomics Similar to Either Hepatocellular Carcinoma or Cholangiocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) is a rare, aggressive primary liver carcinoma, with morphologic features of both hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC) and liver cholangiocarcinomas (CCA). METHODS: The genomic profiles of 4,975 CCA, 1,470 HCC, and 73 cHCC-CCA cases arising from comprehensive genomic profiling in the course of clinical care were reviewed for genomic alterations (GA), tumor mutational burden, microsatellite instability status, genomic loss of heterozygosity, chromosomal aneuploidy, genomic ancestry, and hepatitis B virus status. RESULTS: In cHCC-CCA, GA were most common in TP53 (65.8%), TERT (49.3%), and PTEN (9.6%), and 24.6% cHCC-CCA harbored potentially targetable GA. Other GA were predominantly associated with either HCC or CCA, including, but not limited to, TERT, FGFR2, IDH1, and presence of hepatitis B virus. On the basis of these features, a machine learning (ML) model was trained to classify a cHCC-CCA case as CCA-like or HCC-like. Of cHCC-CCA cases, 16% (12/73) were ML-classified as CCA-like and 58% (42/73) cHCC-CCA were ML-classified as HCC-like. The ML model classified more than 70% of cHCC-CCA as CCA-like or HCC-like on the basis of genomic profiles, without additional clinico-pathologic input. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate the use of ML for classification as based on a targeted exome panel used during routine clinical care. Classification of cHCC-CCA by genomic features alone creates insights into the biology of the disease and warrants further investigation for relevance to clinical care.

Final Overall Survival Efficacy Results of Ivosidenib for Patients With Advanced Cholangiocarcinoma With IDH1 Mutation: The Phase 3 Randomized Clinical ClarIDHy Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) variations occur in up to approximately 20% of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. In the ClarIDHy trial, progression-free survival as determined by central review was significantly improved with ivosidenib vs placebo. OBJECTIVE: To report the final overall survival (OS) results from the ClarIDHy trial, which aimed to demonstrate the efficacy of ivosidenib (AG-120)-a first-in-class, oral, small-molecule inhibitor of mutant IDH1-vs placebo for patients with unresectable or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical phase 3 trial was conducted from February 20, 2017, to May 31, 2020, at 49 hospitals across 6 countries among patients aged 18 years or older with cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation whose disease progressed with prior therapy. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive ivosidenib, 500 mg, once daily or matched placebo. Crossover from placebo to ivosidenib was permitted if patients had disease progression as determined by radiographic findings. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was progression-free survival as determined by blinded independent radiology center (reported previously). Overall survival was a key secondary end point. The primary analysis of OS followed the intent-to-treat principle. Other secondary end points included objective response rate, safety and tolerability, and quality of life. RESULTS: Overall, 187 patients (median age, 62 years [range, 33-83 years]) were randomly assigned to receive ivosidenib (n = 126; 82 women [65%]; median age, 61 years [range, 33-80 years]) or placebo (n = 61; 37 women [61%]; median age, 63 years [range, 40-83 years]); 43 patients crossed over from placebo to ivosidenib. The primary end point of progression-free survival was reported elsewhere. Median OS was 10.3 months (95% CI, 7.8-12.4 months) with ivosidenib vs 7.5 months (95% CI, 4.8-11.1 months) with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.56-1.12]; 1-sided P = .09). When adjusted for crossover, median OS with placebo was 5.1 months (95% CI, 3.8-7.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.34-0.70]; 1-sided P < .001). The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse event (≥5%) reported in both groups was ascites (11 patients [9%] receiving ivosidenib and 4 patients [7%] receiving placebo). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events considered ivosidenib related were reported in 3 patients (2%). There were no treatment-related deaths. Patients receiving ivosidenib reported no apparent decline in quality of life compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This randomized clinical trial found that ivosidenib was well tolerated and resulted in a favorable OS benefit vs placebo, despite a high rate of crossover. These data, coupled with supportive quality of life data and a tolerable safety profile, demonstrate the clinical benefit of ivosidenib for patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02989857.

Antibiotic use influences outcomes in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients.

Recent studies defined a potentially important role of the microbiome in modulating pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and responses to therapies. We hypothesized that antibiotic usage may predict outcomes in patients with PDAC. We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of patients with resectable or metastatic PDAC seen at MD Anderson Cancer from 2003 to 2017. Demographic, chemotherapy regimen and antibiotic use, duration, type, and reason for indication were recorded. A total of 580 patients with PDAC were studied, 342 resected and 238 metastatic patients, selected retrospectively from our database. Antibiotic use, for longer than 48 hrs, was detected in 209 resected patients (61%) and 195 metastatic ones (62%). On resectable patients, we did not find differences in overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS), based on antibiotic intake. However, in the metastatic cohort, antibiotic consumption was associated with a significantly longer OS (13.3 months vs. 9.0 months, HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34-0.7, p = 0.0001) and PFS (4.4 months vs. 2 months, HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34-0.68, p = <0.0001). In multivariate analysis, the impact of ATB remained significant for PFS (HR 0.59, p = 0.005) and borderline statistically significant for OS (HR 0.69, p = 0.06). When we analyzed by chemotherapy regimen, we found that patients who received gemcitabine-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy (n = 118) had significantly prolonged OS (HR 0.4, p 0.0013) and PFS (HR 0.55, p 0.02) if they received antibiotics, while those receiving 5FU-based chemotherapy (n = 98) had only prolonged PFS (HR 0.54, p = 0.03). Antibiotics-associated modulation of the microbiome is associated with better outcomes in patients with metastatic PDAC.

Modified gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel regimen in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine (GEM) plus nab-paclitaxel (NabP) (GEM 1000 mg/m2 IV over 30 minutes + NabP 125 mg/m2 IV given days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days) is one of the two standard of care combination therapies for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Our cancer center has utilized GEM-NabP given every two-weeks due to tolerability and patient convenience. Here, we review the safety and efficacy of this modified regimen. METHODS: Metastatic PDAC patients (pts) who initiated front-line or second-line GEM-NabP during 2013-2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Primary objective was overall survival. Secondary objectives were disease control rate, progression-free survival, and the incidence of dose delays and/or adjustments. RESULTS: From a total of 235 patients, 140 pts received GEM-NabP front-line while 95 pts received GEM-NabP second-line. Median dosing was 600 mg/m2 at fixed-dose rate for GEM and 125 mg/m2 for NabP given predominantly (~90%) every two-weeks. Eastern Cooperative Group performance status of 0 and 1 pts had front-line OS of 12.7 and 9.6 months and when given second-line had OS of 8 months and 7.3 months, respectively. ECOG 0 and 1 pts had front-line progression-free survival (PFS) of 5.3 months and 2.8 months and second-line PFS was 3.5 months and 2.4 months, respectively. Treatment was well tolerated with limited dose modifications. CONCLUSION: Our analysis revealed safety with every two-week low dose GEM-NabP while maintaining efficacy. Patient schedule convenience should factor into metastatic incurable malignancies. We suggest the use of every two-week GEM-NabP particularly in patients desiring a modified schedule.

Ivosidenib in IDH1-mutant, chemotherapy-refractory cholangiocarcinoma (ClarIDHy): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutations occur in approximately 13% of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, a relatively uncommon cancer with a poor clinical outcome. The aim of this international phase 3 study was to assess the efficacy and safety of ivosidenib (AG-120)-a small-molecule targeted inhibitor of mutated IDH1-in patients with previously treated IDH1-mutant cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study included patients from 49 hospitals in six countries aged at least 18 years with histologically confirmed, advanced, IDH1-mutant cholangiocarcinoma who had progressed on previous therapy, and had up to two previous treatment regimens for advanced disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and a measurable lesion as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) with a block size of 6 and stratified by number of previous systemic treatment regimens for advanced disease to oral ivosidenib 500 mg or matched placebo once daily in continuous 28-day cycles, by means of an interactive web-based response system. Placebo to ivosidenib crossover was permitted on radiological progression per investigator assessment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by independent central review. The intention-to-treat population was used for the primary efficacy analyses. Safety was assessed in all patients who had received at least one dose of ivosidenib or placebo. Enrolment is complete; this study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02989857. FINDINGS: Between Feb 20, 2017, and Jan 31, 2019, 230 patients were assessed for eligibility, and as of the Jan 31, 2019 data cutoff date, 185 patients were randomly assigned to ivosidenib (n=124) or placebo (n=61). Median follow-up for progression-free survival was 6·9 months (IQR 2·8-10·9). Progression-free survival was significantly improved with ivosidenib compared with placebo (median 2·7 months [95% CI 1·6-4·2] vs 1·4 months [1·4-1·6]; hazard ratio 0·37; 95% CI 0·25-0·54; one-sided p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse event in both treatment groups was ascites (four [7%] of 59 patients receiving placebo and nine [7%] of 121 patients receiving ivosidenib). Serious adverse events were reported in 36 (30%) of 121 patients receiving ivosidenib and 13 (22%) of 59 patients receiving placebo. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Progression-free survival was significantly improved with ivosidenib compared with placebo, and ivosidenib was well tolerated. This study shows the clinical benefit of targeting IDH1 mutations in advanced, IDH1-mutant cholangiocarcinoma. FUNDING: Agios Pharmaceuticals.

Dose-modified gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel front-line in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with baseline hyperbilirubinemia.

BACKGROUND: Von Hoff et al. demonstrated survival improvement with gemcitabine (GEM) + nab-paclitaxel (NabP) for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) compared to GEM alone. GEM + NabP resulted in a median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of 8.5 and 5.5 months, respectively. Patients with baseline hyperbilirubinemia were excluded. Primary objective was OS. Secondary objectives included time on treatment (TOT), disease control rate, dosing practices, delays/admissions, and adverse effects. METHODS: Patients with borderline resectable, locally advanced, or metastatic PDAC who initiated front-line GEM-NabP during July 01, 2013-July 01, 2017 were reviewed. Patients with a baseline total bilirubin ≥2 mg/dL were included. RESULTS: Twelve patients total were included. Median age was 71 years old. Median baseline total bilirubin was 2.4 mg/dL (range, 2.1-5.2 mg/dL). 58% had metastatic disease. Median doses were NabP 100 mg/m2 + GEM 600 mg/m2 IV with a fixed-dose rate infusion (10 mg/m2/min). GEM-NabP was given biweekly or 3 weeks on 1 week off. Median OS, TOT, and disease control rate were 13.9, 5.2 months, and 58%, respectively. Fifty percent of patients required a dose delay. Metastatic patients only (n=7) had median OS and TOT of 6.9 and 2.1 months, respectively. No admissions related to toxicity were found. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis revealed safety with NabP (median dose =100 mg/m2) + GEM (median dose =600 mg/m2 at fixed-dose rate) given predominately biweekly in patients with a baseline elevated total bilirubin (≥2 mg/dL).

Modified FOLFIRINOX in pancreatic cancer patients Age 75 or older.

BACKGROUND: Although FOLFIRINOX (5-Fluorouracil + leucovorin + irinotecan + oxaliplatin) is now the standard of care for patients (pts) with metastatic pancreatic cancer (PC) based on the 2011 study by Conroy et al. which demonstrated improved median overall survival (mOS), pts > 75 yrs old were excluded from this study. The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) in this population. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed unresectable PC pts, age ≥ 75, treated with mFOLFIRINOX at MD Anderson from 2011 to 2017. Primary outcome was rate of grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicity (HT). RESULTS: 24 pts were included. Grade 3 or 4 HT occurred in 11 pts 6 pts required hospitalization for any toxicity, and 10 stopped mFOLFIRINOX due to toxicity. The most frequently used starting doses of infusional 5-FU, irinotecan and oxaliplatin were 2400, 150 and 75 mg/m2, respectively. Median PFS was 3.7 months (95% CI: 3.0-5.7) with a median OS of 11.6 months (95% CI: 6.14-15.7). For first line pts, median PFS and OS were 5.1 (95% CI: 2.0-12.8) and 12.2 months (95% CI: 4.8-30.8), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center retrospective analysis of unresectable PC pts age 75 or older given mFOLFIRINOX, toxicities and survival outcomes were similar to those reported in the initial study. These data indicate that the use of modified dosing FOLFIRINOX in advanced PC pts older than 75 appears to maintain similar toxicity and efficacy when compared to younger pts.