Trastuzumab Deruxtecan versus Trastuzumab Emtansine for Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Trastuzumab emtansine is the current standard treatment for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer whose disease progresses after treatment with a combination of anti-HER2 antibodies and a taxane. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, multicenter, open-label, randomized trial to compare the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab deruxtecan (a HER2 antibody-drug conjugate) with those of trastuzumab emtansine in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer previously treated with trastuzumab and a taxane. The primary end point was progression-free survival (as determined by blinded independent central review); secondary end points included overall survival, objective response, and safety. RESULTS: Among 524 randomly assigned patients, the percentage of those who were alive without disease progression at 12 months was 75.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 69.8 to 80.7) with trastuzumab deruxtecan and 34.1% (95% CI, 27.7 to 40.5) with trastuzumab emtansine (hazard ratio for progression or death from any cause, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.37; P<0.001). The percentage of patients who were alive at 12 months was 94.1% (95% CI, 90.3 to 96.4) with trastuzumab deruxtecan and 85.9% (95% CI, 80.9 to 89.7) with trastuzumab emtansine (hazard ratio for death, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.86; prespecified significance boundary not reached). An overall response (a complete or partial response) occurred in 79.7% (95% CI, 74.3 to 84.4) of the patients who received trastuzumab deruxtecan and in 34.2% (95% CI, 28.5 to 40.3) of those who received trastuzumab emtansine. The incidence of drug-related adverse events of any grade was 98.1% with trastuzumab deruxtecan and 86.6% with trastuzumab emtansine, and the incidence of drug-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 was 45.1% and 39.8%, respectively. Adjudicated drug-related interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis occurred in 10.5% of the patients in the trastuzumab deruxtecan group and in 1.9% of those in the trastuzumab emtansine group; none of these events were of grade 4 or 5. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer previously treated with trastuzumab and a taxane, the risk of disease progression or death was lower among those who received trastuzumab deruxtecan than among those who received trastuzumab emtansine. Treatment with trastuzumab deruxtecan was associated with interstitial lung disease and pneumonitis. (Funded by Daiichi Sankyo and AstraZeneca; DESTINY-Breast03 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03529110.).

Camizestrant, a next-generation oral SERD, versus fulvestrant in post-menopausal women with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (SERENA-2): a multi-dose, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Resistance to endocrine therapies in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer is challenging. We aimed to assess the next-generation oral selective oestrogen receptor degrader (SERD) and complete oestrogen receptor antagonist, camizestrant, versus the first-approved SERD, fulvestrant, in post-menopausal women with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer. METHODS: SERENA-2 is an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial that is being conducted at 74 study centres across Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and North America. Female patients aged 18 years or older who were post-menopausal with histologically or cytologically confirmed metastastic or locoregional oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group or WHO performance status of 0 or 1, and disease recurrence or progression on at least one line of endocrine therapy, and no more than one previous endocrine therapy in the advanced setting. Patients were initially randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive oral camizestrant once daily at 75 mg, 150 mg, or 300 mg (until the 300 mg group was closed), or fulvestrant intramuscularly at 500 mg (per label). Randomisation was managed through an interactive web-based system and stratified by previous treatment with CDK4/6 inhibitors and presence of liver and/or lung metastases. The primary objective was to determine clinical efficacy of camizestrant versus fulvestrant at each dose level using the primary endpoint of investigator-assessed progression-free survival, per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1), assessed by intention to treat in all randomly assigned patients (full analysis set). No formal statistical comparison for the efficacy analysis of the camizestrant 300 mg dose versus fulvestrant was to be performed. Safety analyses included all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04214288, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between May 11, 2020, and Aug 10, 2021, 240 patients were randomly assigned to receive camizestrant 75 mg (n=74), 150 mg (n=73), 300 mg (n=20), or fulvestrant (n=73), and were included in the full analysis set. All patients received at least one dose of study drug. Median follow-up was 16·6 months (IQR 12·9-19·4) for the camizestrant 75 mg group, 16·3 months (12·9-18·3) for the camizestrant 150 mg group, and 14·7 months (12·7-20·1) for the fulvestrant 500 mg group. Median progression-free survival was 7·2 months (90% CI 3·7-10·9) with camizestrant 75 mg, 7·7 months (5·5-12·9) with camizestrant 150 mg, and 3·7 months (2·0-6·0) with fulvestrant. The hazard ratio for camizestrant 75 mg versus fulvestrant was 0·59 (90% CI 0·42-0·82; p=0·017), and the hazard ratio for camizestrant 150 mg versus fulvestrant was 0·64 (0·46-0·89; p=0·0090). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 39 (53%) of 74 patients in the camizestrant 75 mg group, 49 (67%) of 73 patients in the camizestrant 150 mg group, 14 (70%) of 20 patients in the camizestrant 300 mg group, and 13 (18%) of 73 patients in the fulvestrant group. No single grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse event occurred in more than two (3%) patients in any group. Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in six (8%) patients in the camizestrant 75 mg group, seven (10%) patients in the camizestrant 150 mg group, two (10%) patients in the camizestrant 300 mg group, and four (5%) patients in the fulvestrant group. No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Camizestrant at 75 and 150 mg showed a significant benefit in progression-free survival versus fulvestrant. These results support further development of camizestrant for the treatment of oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Trastuzumab deruxtecan versus trastuzumab emtansine in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: updated results from DESTINY-Breast03, a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: An improvement in progression-free survival was shown with trastuzumab deruxtecan versus trastuzumab emtansine in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer in the progression-free survival interim analysis of the DESTINY-Breast03 trial. The aim of DESTINY-Breast03 was to compare the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab deruxtecan versus trastuzumab emtansine. METHODS: This open-label, randomised, multicentre, phase 3 trial was done in 169 study centres in North America, Asia, Europe, Australia, and South America. Eligible patients were aged 18 or older, had HER2-positive unresectable or metastatic breast cancer previously treated with trastuzumab and a taxane, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, and at least one measurable lesion per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive trastuzumab deruxtecan 5·4 mg/kg or trastuzumab emtansine 3·6 mg/kg, both administered by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by hormone receptor status, previous treatment with pertuzumab, and history of visceral disease, and was managed through an interactive web-based system. Within each stratum, balanced block randomisation was used with a block size of four. Patients and investigators were not masked to the treatment received. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by blinded independent central review. The key secondary endpoint was overall survival and this prespecified second overall survival interim analysis reports updated overall survival, efficacy, and safety results. Efficacy analyses were performed using the full analysis set. Safety analyses included all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03529110. FINDINGS: Between July 20, 2018, and June 23, 2020, 699 patients were screened for eligibility, 524 of whom were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive trastuzumab deruxtecan (n=261) or trastuzumab emtansine (n=263). Median duration of study follow-up was 28·4 months (IQR 22·1-32·9) with trastuzumab deruxtecan and 26·5 months (14·5-31·3) with trastuzumab emtansine. Median progression-free survival by blinded independent central review was 28·8 months (95% CI 22·4-37·9) with trastuzumab deruxtecan and 6·8 months (5·6-8·2) with trastuzumab emtansine (hazard ratio [HR] 0·33 [95% CI 0·26-0·43]; nominal p<0·0001). Median overall survival was not reached (95% CI 40·5 months-not estimable), with 72 (28%) overall survival events, in the trastuzumab deruxtecan group and was not reached (34·0 months-not estimable), with 97 (37%) overall survival events, in the trastuzumab emtansine group (HR 0·64; 95% CI 0·47-0·87]; p=0·0037). The number of grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events was similar in patients who received trastuzumab deruxtecan versus trastuzumab emtansine (145 [56%] patients versus 135 [52%] patients). Adjudicated drug-related interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis occurred in 39 (15%) patients treated with trastuzumab deruxtecan and eight (3%) patients treated with trastuzumab emtansine, with no grade 4 or 5 events in either group. INTERPRETATION: Trastuzumab deruxtecan showed a significant improvement in overall survival versus trastuzumab emtansine in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, as well as the longest reported median progression-free survival, reaffirming trastuzumab deruxtecan as the standard of care in the second-line setting. A manageable safety profile of trastuzumab deruxtecan was confirmed with longer treatment duration. FUNDING: Daiichi Sankyo and AstraZeneca.

Vaccination with folate receptor-alpha peptides in patients with ovarian cancer following response to platinum-based therapy: A randomized, multicenter clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: Folate receptor alpha (FRα) is overexpressed on >90% of high-grade epithelial ovarian cancers (EOC). Targeting FRα with antibody-drug conjugates has proven utility in the platinum-resistant setting. It is also a potential therapeutic target for immuno-oncologic agents, such as peptide vaccines that work primarily via adaptive and humoral immunity. We tested the hypothesis that FRα peptide immunization could improve outcomes in patients with EOC following response to platinum-based therapy. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase II study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of TPIV200 (a multi-epitope FRα peptide vaccine admixed with GM-CSF) versus GM-CSF alone in 120 women who did not have disease progression after at least 4 cycles of first-line platinum-based therapy. Patients were vaccinated intradermally once every 4 weeks up to 6 times, followed by a boosting period of 6 vaccinations at 12-week intervals. Primary endpoints included safety, tolerability, and progression free survival (PFS). RESULTS: At study termination with a median follow-up of 15.2 months (range 1.2-28.4 months), 68 of 119 intention-to-treat patients had disease progression (55% in TPIV200 + GM-CSF arm and 59% in GM-CSF alone arm). The median PFS was 11.1 months (95% CI 8.3-16.6 months) with no significant difference between the treatment groups (10.9 months with TPIV200 + GM-CSF versus 11.1 months with GM-CSF, HR, 0.85; upper 90% CI 1.17]. No patient experienced a ≥ grade 3 drug-related adverse event. CONCLUSION: TPIV200 was well tolerated but was not associated with improved PFS. Additional studies are required to uncover potential synergies using multiepitope vaccines targeting FRα. Trial Registration NLM/NCBI Registry, NCT02978222, https://clinicaltrials.gov/search?term=NCT02978222.

Long-term follow-up of efficacy and safety of selinexor maintenance treatment in patients with TP53wt advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer: A subgroup analysis of the ENGOT-EN5/GOG-3055/SIENDO study.

OBJECTIVE: To report long-term efficacy and safety of selinexor maintenance therapy in adults with TP53 wild-type (TP53wt) stage IV or recurrent endometrial cancer (EC) who achieved partial remission (PR) or complete remission (CR) following chemotherapy. METHODS: Analysis of the prespecified, exploratory subgroup of patients with TP53wt EC from the phase 3 SIENDO study was performed. Progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in patients with TP53wt EC and across other patient subgroups were exploratory endpoints. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 263 patients enrolled in the SIENDO trial, 113 patients had TP53wt EC; 70/113 (61.9%) had TP53wt/proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) EC, and 29/113 (25.7%) had TP53wt/deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) EC. As of April 1, 2024, the median PFS (mPFS) for TP53wt patients who received selinexor compared with placebo was 28.4 versus 5.2 months (36.8-month follow-up, HR 0.44; 95% CI 0.27-0.73). A benefit in mPFS was seen with selinexor versus placebo regardless of MMR status (patients with TP53wt/pMMR EC: 39.5 vs 4.9 months, HR 0.36; 95% CI 0.19-0.71; patients with TP53wt/dMMR EC: 13.1 vs 3.7 months, HR 0.49; 95% CI 0.18-1.34). Selinexor treatment was generally manageable, with no new safety signals identified. CONCLUSION: In the phase 3 SIENDO study, selinexor maintenance therapy showed a promising efficacy signal and a manageable safety profile in the prespecified subgroup of patients with TP53wt EC who achieved a PR or CR following chemotherapy. These results are being further evaluated in an ongoing randomized phase 3 trial (NCT05611931).

VERITAC-2: a Phase III study of vepdegestrant, a PROTAC ER degrader, versus fulvestrant in ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer.

Vepdegestrant (ARV-471) is an oral PROTAC ER degrader that binds an E3 ubiquitin ligase and ER to directly trigger ubiquitination of ER and its subsequent proteasomal degradation. In a first-in-human Phase I/II study, vepdegestrant monotherapy was well tolerated with clinical activity in pretreated patients with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. The global, randomized Phase III VERITAC-2 study compares efficacy and safety of vepdegestrant versus fulvestrant in adults with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer after treatment with a CDK4/6 inhibitor plus endocrine therapy. Progression-free survival by blinded independent central review (primary end point) will be assessed in the intention-to-treat population and ESR1 mutation-positive subpopulation. Secondary end points include overall survival, tumor response, safety, pharmacokinetics, patient-reported outcomes, and circulating tumor DNA biomarkers.Clinical trial registration: NCT05654623 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

VERITAC-2 is a clinical trial comparing vepdegestrant, a new drug that degrades estrogen receptors, to an existing treatment called fulvestrant in patients with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer: Estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer grows in response to estrogen, a hormone in the body, and has low levels or no HER2 protein. People living with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer that has grown, spread to another part of the body, or cannot be removed by surgery are often treated with cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors and endocrine therapies, but their cancer may get worse on these treatments and new treatments are needed. Fulvestrant, an endocrine therapy that attaches to estrogen receptors, lowers estrogen's effect on tumors and can slow or stop cancer growth. Vepdegestrant, a new medicine being tested for ER+ breast cancer, is a PROteolysis TArgeting Chimera (PROTAC) protein degrader that attaches to estrogen receptors and causes them to be tagged for removal by the cell's natural protein disposal system. By removing estrogen receptors, vepdegestrant may cause tumors to stop growing or shrink.This paper describes the Phase III VERITAC-2 clinical study comparing vepdegestrant versus fulvestrant in people living with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer previously treated with a CDK4/6 inhibitor and endocrine therapy.Patients will be randomly assigned to receive vepdegestrant (a pill taken once daily by mouth) or fulvestrant (a shot given into the muscle). The purpose of the study is to find out how long people live without their cancer getting worse with vepdegestrant or fulvestrant. VERITAC-2 will also look at how long people live during the study, side effects people may experience, and the overall well-being of people throughout the study.

TROPION-Breast01: Datopotamab deruxtecan vs chemotherapy in pre-treated inoperable or metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer.

Improving the prognosis for patients with metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer remains an unmet need. Patients with tumors that have progressed on endocrine therapy and/or are not eligible for endocrine therapy had limited treatment options beyond chemotherapy. Antibody-drug conjugates are a novel and promising treatment class in this setting. Datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) consists of a TROP2-directed humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody attached via a serum-stable cleavable linker to a topoisomerase I inhibitor payload. TROPION-Breast01 is an ongoing phase III study that is evaluating the efficacy and safety of Dato-DXd compared with investigator's choice of standard-of-care chemotherapy in patients with inoperable or metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer who have received one or two prior lines of systemic chemotherapy in the inoperable or metastatic setting. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05104866 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Antibody-drug conjugates are a type of drug with two parts: an antibody that directs the drug to the cancer cells and a cancer-cell killing toxic payload. By binding to cancer cells before releasing the payload, treatment is directed to the site of action so there are fewer side effects in the rest of the body. Datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) is an antibody-drug conjugates made up of datopotamab (antibody) and DXd (payload) which are joined together via a stable linker. Datopotamab binds to a protein found on cancer cells called TROP2; it then goes inside and releases the DXd payload to kill the tumor cells. DXd may leak out to surrounding cancer cells and kill those as well. The TROPION-Breast01 study is comparing Dato-DXd with standard-of-care chemotherapy. Around 700 patients will take part, who have: Tumors that cannot be surgically removed. Tumors that are hormone receptor-positive and do not have HER2 overexpression. Had one or two lines of previous chemotherapy (after the tumor could not be surgically removed, or had spread). Had tumor growth despite hormonal therapy or are ineligible for hormonal therapy. Patients who meet the entry criteria will be randomly assigned to a treatment group in equal numbers to either Dato-DXd or an appropriate chemotherapy, out of four options chosen by the treating doctor. At the end of the study, researchers will look at whether the patients who receive Dato-DXd live longer without their breast cancer getting worse, compared with patients who receive chemotherapy. This study is also looking at how the treatment affects patients' quality of life.

Phase 1b study of pan-AKT inhibitor vevorisertib alone or with paclitaxel or fulvestrant in PIK3CA/AKT/PTEN-mutated advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: In this first-in-human phase 1b study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02761694) of advanced solid tumors with PIK3CA/AKT/PTEN mutations, the authors investigated the safety and efficacy of the pan-AKT inhibitor vevorisertib (MK-4440; ARQ 751) as monotherapy or with paclitaxel or fulvestrant. METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed, advanced or recurrent, PIK3CA/AKT/PTEN-mutated solid tumors, measurable disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1 received vevorisertib (dose range, 5-100 mg) alone or with paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 or fulvestrant 500 mg. The primary end point was safety and tolerability. Secondary end points included pharmacokinetics and the objective response rate according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. RESULTS: Of 78 patients enrolled, 58 received vevorisertib monotherapy, 10 received vevorisertib plus paclitaxel, and nine received vevorisertib plus fulvestrant. Dose-limiting toxicity occurred in three patients (vevorisertib monotherapy, n = 2 [grade 3 pruritic and maculopapular rashes]; vevorisertib plus paclitaxel, n = 1 [grade 1 asthenia]). Across doses, treatment-related AEs occurred in 46 patients (79%) with vevorisertib monotherapy, in 10 patients (100%) with vevorisertib plus paclitaxel, and in nine patients (100%) with vevorisertib plus fulvestrant; and grade 3 treatment-related AEs occurred in 13 (22%), 7 (70%), and 3 (33%) patients, respectively. No grade 4/5 treatment-related AEs occurred. Maximum vevorisertib concentrations were reached 1-4 hours after dosing; the elimination half-life ranged from 8.8 to 19.3 hours. The objective response rate was 5% with vevorisertib monotherapy (three partial responses), 20% with vevorisertib plus paclitaxel (two partial responses), and 0% with vevorisertib plus fulvestrant. CONCLUSIONS: Vevorisertib alone or with paclitaxel or fulvestrant had a manageable safety profile, and vevorisertib alone or with paclitaxel had minimal to modest antitumor activity in this patient population with PIK3CA/AKT/PTEN-mutated advanced solid tumors. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02761694.

Tucatinib, Trastuzumab, and Capecitabine for HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer who have disease progression after therapy with multiple HER2-targeted agents have limited treatment options. Tucatinib is an investigational, oral, highly selective inhibitor of the HER2 tyrosine kinase. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer previously treated with trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and trastuzumab emtansine, who had or did not have brain metastases, to receive either tucatinib or placebo, in combination with trastuzumab and capecitabine. The primary end point was progression-free survival among the first 480 patients who underwent randomization. Secondary end points, assessed in the total population (612 patients), included overall survival, progression-free survival among patients with brain metastases, confirmed objective response rate, and safety. RESULTS: Progression-free survival at 1 year was 33.1% in the tucatinib-combination group and 12.3% in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42 to 0.71; P<0.001), and the median duration of progression-free survival was 7.8 months and 5.6 months, respectively. Overall survival at 2 years was 44.9% in the tucatinib-combination group and 26.6% in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio for death, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.88; P = 0.005), and the median overall survival was 21.9 months and 17.4 months, respectively. Among the patients with brain metastases, progression-free survival at 1 year was 24.9% in the tucatinib-combination group and 0% in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.69; P<0.001), and the median progression-free survival was 7.6 months and 5.4 months, respectively. Common adverse events in the tucatinib group included diarrhea, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, nausea, fatigue, and vomiting. Diarrhea and elevated aminotransferase levels of grade 3 or higher were more common in the tucatinib-combination group than in the placebo-combination group. CONCLUSIONS: In heavily pretreated patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, including those with brain metastases, adding tucatinib to trastuzumab and capecitabine resulted in better progression-free survival and overall survival outcomes than adding placebo; the risks of diarrhea and elevated aminotransferase levels were higher with tucatinib. (Funded by Seattle Genetics; HER2CLIMB ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02614794.).

A dose escalation/expansion study evaluating dose, safety, and efficacy of the novel tyrosine kinase inhibitor surufatinib, which inhibits VEGFR 1, 2, & 3, FGFR 1, and CSF1R, in US patients with neuroendocrine tumors.

Surufatinib, is a potent inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1-3; fibroblast growth factor receptor-1; colony-stimulating factor 1 receptor. This Phase 1/1b escalation/expansion study in US patients with solid tumors evaluated 5 once daily (QD) surufatinib doses (3 + 3 design) to identify maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D), and evaluate safety and efficacy at the RP2D in 4 disease-specific expansion cohorts including pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors [pNET] and extrapancreatic NETs [epNET]. MTD and RP2D were 300 mg QD (escalation [n = 35]); 5 patients (15.6%) (Dose Limiting Toxicity [DLT] Evaluable Set [n = 32]) had DLTs. Pharmacokinetics were dose proportional. Estimated progression-free survival (PFS) rates at 11 months were 57.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 28.7, 78.2) and 51.1% (95% CI: 12.8, 80.3) for pNET and epNET expansion cohorts, respectively. Median PFS was 15.2 (95% CI: 5.2, not evaluable) and 11.5 (95% CI: 6.5,11.5) months. Response rates were 18.8% and 6.3%. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (both cohorts) were fatigue (46.9%), hypertension (43.8%), proteinuria (37.5%), diarrhea (34.4%). Pharmacokinetics, safety, and antitumor efficacy of 300 mg QD oral surufatinib in US patients with pNETs and epNETs are consistent with previously reported studies in China and may support applicability of earlier surufatinib studies in US patients. Clinical trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02549937.

DKK1 is a predictive biomarker for response to DKN-01: Results of a phase 2 basket study in women with recurrent endometrial carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Dickkopf-1 (DKK1) is a Wnt signaling modulator promoting tumor growth, metastasis, angiogenesis, and immunosuppression by regulating innate immunity. DKK1 is over-expressed in gynecologic cancers and is associated with shortened survival. DKN-01 is a humanized monoclonal antibody with DKK1 neutralizing activity that may provide clinical benefit to patients whose tumors have overexpression of DKK1 or Wnt genetic alterations. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, Phase 2 basket study with 2-stage design in patients with endometrial carcinoma (EC) and platinum-resistant/refractory epithelial ovarian cancer. DKN-01 was administered either as monotherapy or in combination with weekly paclitaxel at investigator's discretion. All patients underwent NGS testing prior to enrollment; tumor tissue was also tested for DKK1 expression by RNAscope pre-treatment and after cycle 1 if available. At least 50% of patients were required to have a Wnt signaling alteration either directly or tangentially. This publication reports results from the EC population overall and by DKK1-expression. RESULTS: DKN-01 monotherapy and in combination with paclitaxel was more effective in patients with high DKK1-expressing tumors compared to low-expressing tumors. DKN-01 monotherapy demonstrated an objective response rate [ORR] of 25.0% vs. 0%; disease control rate [DCR] of 62.5% vs. 6.7%; median progression-free survival [PFS] was 4.3 vs. 1.8 months, and overall survival [OS] was 11.0 vs. 8.2 months in DKK1-high vs DKK1-low patients. Similarly, DKN-01 in combination with paclitaxel demonstrated greater clinical activity in patients with DKK1-high tumors compared to DKK1-low tumors: DCR was 55% vs. 44%; median PFS was 5.4 vs. 1.8 months; and OS was 19.1 vs. 10.1 months. Wnt activating mutations correlated with higher DKK1 expression. DKN-01 was well tolerated as a monotherapy and in combination with paclitaxel. CONCLUSIONS: Collectively, data demonstrates promising clinical activity of a well-tolerated drug, DKN-01, in EC patients with high tumoral DKK1 expression which frequently corresponded to the presence of a Wnt activating mutation. Future development will focus on using DKN-01 in DKK1-high EC patients in combination with immunotherapy.

Novel Estrogen Receptor-Targeted Agents for Breast Cancer.

OPINION STATEMENT: It has become clear that patients whose cancers have progressed post-CDK4/6 inhibitor therapy (CDK4/6i) are not deriving the same magnitude of benefit to subsequent standard endocrine therapy as historical studies would suggest. For example, anticipated duration of benefit to fulvestrant prior to CDK4/6i historically was ~ 5-6 months, and data from the VERONICA and EMERALD trials report less than 2 months. This has magnified our need for novel endocrine agents. Some have argued that patients post-CDK4/6i may just have more endocrine-resistant tumors and perhaps should just receive chemotherapy. While this may be appropriate for some, we do not currently have an assay that reliably predicts whose cancers remain endocrine sensitive and whose are endocrine resistant. ESR1 mutations can enrich for patients whose tumors are more likely to be heavily dependent on estrogen, but this is certainly not the whole answer and many patients without ESR1 mutations continue to derive benefit from subsequent endocrine agents. Most patients would strongly prefer the side effect profile of endocrine agents compared to chemotherapy, and thus, premature use of cytotoxic agents when subsequent ER targeting can control disease is not preferred. These novel ER targeting agents (PROTAC, SERD, SERCA, CERAN) hold great promise to not only outperform standard agents like fulvestrant, but also offer the promise of agents with a different side effect profile that may be more advantageous when compared to menopausal symptoms, hot flashes, arthralgias, and sexual side effects so commonly seen with AIs. We also are likely to see these novel agents move to earlier lines, whether that be 1st line in combination with CDK4/6i or even adjuvant disease.

Zanidatamab, a novel bispecific antibody, for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic HER2-expressing or HER2-amplified cancers: a phase 1, dose-escalation and expansion study.

BACKGROUND: HER2-targeted therapies have substantially improved outcomes for patients with HER2-positive breast and gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancers. Several other cancers exhibit HER2 expression or amplification, suggesting that HER2-targeted agents can have broader therapeutic impact. Zanidatamab is a humanised, bispecific monoclonal antibody directed against two non-overlapping domains of HER2. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and anti-tumour activity of zanidatamab across a range of solid tumours with HER2 expression or amplification. METHODS: This first-in-human, multicentre, phase 1, dose-escalation and expansion trial included patients aged 18 years and older, with a life expectancy of at least 3 months, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and locally advanced or metastatic, HER2-expressing or HER2-amplified solid tumours of any kind who had received all available approved therapies. The primary objectives of part 1 were to identify the maximum tolerated dose, optimal biological dose, or recommended dose of zanidatamab; all patients were included in the primary analyses. Part 1 followed a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design, including different intravenous doses (from 5 mg/kg to 30 mg/kg) and intervals (every 1, 2, or 3 weeks). The primary objective of part 2 was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of zanidatamab monotherapy in solid tumours. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02892123), and parts 1 and 2 of the trial are complete. Part 3 of the study evaluates the use of zanidatamab in combination with chemotherapy and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Recruitment took place between Sept 1, 2016, and March 13, 2021. In Part 1 (n=46), no dose-limiting toxicities were detected and the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. The recommended dose for part 2 (n=22 for biliary tract cancer; n=28 for colorectal cancer; and n=36 for other HER2-expressing or HER2-amplified cancers excluding breast or gastro-oesophageal cancers; total n=86) was 20 mg/kg every 2 weeks. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events in part 1 of the study were diarrhoea (24 [52%] of 46 patients; all grade 1-2) and infusion reactions (20 [43%] of 46 patients; all grade 1-2). The most frequent treatment-related adverse events in part 2 of the study were diarrhoea (37 [43%] of 86 patients; all grade 1-2 except for one patient) and infusion reactions (29 [34%] of 86 patients; all grade 1-2). A total of six grade 3 treatment-related adverse events were reported in four (3%) of 132 patients. In part 2, 31 (37%; 95% CI 27·0-48·7) of 83 evaluable patients had a confirmed objective response. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: These results support that HER2 is an actionable target in various cancer histologies, including biliary tract cancer and colorectal cancer. Evaluation of zanidatamab continues in ongoing studies. FUNDING: Zymeworks.

Ovarian Function Suppression: A Deeper Consideration of the Role in Early Breast Cancer and its Potential Impact on Patient Outcomes: A Consensus Statement from an International Expert Panel.

It has been suggested that the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) early breast cancer may be related, at least in part, to CT-induced ovarian function suppression (OFS) in this subgroup of patients. Although this hypothesis has not been directly tested in large randomized clinical trials, the observations from prospective studies have been remarkably consistent in showing a late benefit of CT among the subgroup of patients who benefit (ie, women who were close to menopause). The hypothesis has important clinical implications, as it may be possible to spare the associated adverse effects of adjuvant CT in a select group of women with early breast cancer, in favor of optimizing OFS and endocrine therapy (ET), without compromising clinical outcomes. Such an approach has the added benefit of preserving the key quality of life outcomes in premenopausal women, particularly by preventing the irreversible loss of ovarian function that may result from CT use. For this reason, we convened an international panel of clinical experts in breast cancer treatment to discuss the key aspects of the available data in this area, as well as the potential clinical implications for patients. This article summarizes the results of these discussions and presents the consensus opinion of the panel regarding optimizing the use of OFS for premenopausal women with HR+, HER2- early breast cancer.

nextMONARCH Phase 2 randomized clinical trial: overall survival analysis of abemaciclib monotherapy or in combination with tamoxifen in patients with endocrine-refractory HR + , HER2- metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Resistance to endocrine therapy poses a major clinical challenge for patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR +), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We present the preplanned 24-month final overall survival (OS) results, alongside updated progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) results. METHODS: nextMONARCH is an open-label, controlled, randomized, Phase 2 study of abemaciclib alone or in combination with tamoxifen in women with endocrine-refractory HR + , HER2- MBC previously treated with chemotherapy. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to: abemaciclib 150 mg and tamoxifen 20 mg (A + T), abemaciclib 150 mg (A-150), or abemaciclib 200 mg and prophylactic loperamide (A-200). OS was the main prespecified secondary endpoint. PFS, ORR, and safety at 24 months were compared to previously reported primary analysis results. RESULTS: Of the 234 patients enrolled, 12 were receiving study treatment at data cutoff (28Jun2019). Median follow-up was 27.2 months. Median OS was 24.2 months in the A + T arm, 20.8 months in A-150, and 17.0 months in A-200 (A + T versus A-200: HR 0.62; 95%CI [0.40, 0.97], P = 0.03 and A-150 versus A-200: HR 0.96; 95%CI [0.64, 1.44], P = 0.83). PFS and ORR results at 24 months were consistent with the primary analysis. The safety profile corresponded with previous reports. CONCLUSION: The addition of tamoxifen to abemaciclib demonstrated greater OS benefit than monotherapy. This study confirmed the single-agent activity of abemaciclib in heavily pretreated women with endocrine-refractory HR + , HER2- MBC, as well as the previously reported primary PFS and ORR results, with no new safety signals observed. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02747004.

Analysis of patients without and with an initial triple-negative breast cancer diagnosis in the phase 3 randomized ASCENT study of sacituzumab govitecan in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) is an antibody-drug conjugate composed of an anti-Trop-2 antibody coupled to SN-38 via a proprietary hydrolyzable linker. In the ASCENT study, SG improved survival versus single-agent treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in pre-treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). Hormone/HER2 receptor changes are common, particularly at relapse/metastasis. This subanalysis assessed outcomes in patients who did/did not have TNBC at initial diagnosis, before enrollment. METHODS: TNBC diagnosis was only required at study entry. Patients with mTNBC refractory/relapsing after ≥ 2 prior chemotherapies were randomized 1:1 to receive SG or TPC. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in patients without brain metastases. RESULTS: Overall, 70/235 (30%) and 76/233 (33%) patients who received SG and TPC, respectively, did not have TNBC at initial diagnosis. Clinical benefit with SG versus TPC was observed in this subset. Median PFS was 4.6 versus 2.3 months (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.32-0.72), median overall survival was 12.4 versus 6.7 months (HR 0.44; 95% CI 0.30-0.64), and objective response rate (ORR) was 31% versus 4%; those who also received prior CDK4/6 inhibitors had ORRs of 21% versus 5%. Efficacy and safety for patients with TNBC at initial diagnosis were generally similar to those who did not present with TNBC at initial diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Patients without TNBC at initial diagnosis had improved clinical outcomes and a manageable safety profile with SG, supporting SG as a treatment option for mTNBC regardless of subtype at initial diagnosis. Subtype reassessment in advanced breast cancer allows for optimal treatment. Clinical trial registration number NCT02574455, registered October 12, 2015.

A real-world retrospective study of the use of Ki-67 testing and treatment patterns in patients with HR+, HER2- early breast cancer in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends that patients with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer be considered for adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) after primary treatment like surgical excision. Adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) use primarily depends on risk of recurrence. Biomarkers such as Ki-67 potentially have most value in patients with intermediate risk factors, such as involvement of 1-3 positive nodes. This study evaluated the use of Ki-67 testing and treatment patterns in patients with HR+, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer. METHODS: This was an observational retrospective cohort study of patients with electronic medical records from January 2010 to August 2018 treated for HR+, HER2- early breast cancer at Sarah Cannon sites in the United States (US). Overall, 567 patients were randomly selected after using the eligibility criteria: female or male ≥18 years, without distant metastases, and with available physician and pathology reports. Multivariable logistic regression was used to investigate factors predicting Ki-67 testing and test results. Descriptive analyses were applied to treatment patterns. RESULTS: Multivariable logistic regression analyses found no clinical or pathological factors that predicted whether Ki-67 testing had been ordered by physicians. Of all tested patients (N = 130), having Grade-2 tumors (OR, 7.95 [95% CI: 2.05, 30.9]; p = 0.0027) or Grade-3 tumors (OR, 95.3 [95% CI, 11.9, 760.7]; p < 0.001) at initial diagnosis was a predictor of high Ki-67 expression (≥20%). Ki-67 expression was tested in 23.6% (61/258) of patients with 1-3 positive nodes; 54.1% of them (33/61) had high Ki-67 expression (≥20%). While having a higher grade tumor predicted high Ki-67 (≥20%), 28.6% of patients with Grade-1 tumors also had high Ki-67 expression. Neo-adjuvant therapy was received by 16.0% of patients (91/567), most of whom (66/91; 72.5%) received CT alone. Adjuvant therapy, either endocrine and/or chemotherapy, was received by 92.6% (525/567) of patients and by 67.0% (61/91) of those who received neo-adjuvant therapy. Most (428/525, 81.5%) received ET in the adjuvant treatment setting. CONCLUSIONS: High grade tumors predicted high Ki-67 (≥20%) expression, but Ki-67 testing was not widely used in these US patients. Most HR+, HER2- early breast cancers were treated with adjuvant ET, with or without CT.

OVARIO phase II trial of combination niraparib plus bevacizumab maintenance therapy in advanced ovarian cancer following first-line platinum-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab.

OBJECTIVE: To assess safety and efficacy of niraparib + bevacizumab as a first-line maintenance therapy for patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer. METHODS: This multicenter, phase II, single-arm, open-label study enrolled adult patients with stage IIIB to IV ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer (NCT03326193). Patients were required to have an attempt at debulking surgery and have a complete response, partial response, or no evidence of disease following first-line, platinum-based chemotherapy with ≥3 cycles of bevacizumab. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 18 months. Secondary endpoints included PFS, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Among the 105 evaluable patients, the PFS rate at 18 months was 62% (95% CI 52-71%) in the overall population and 76% (95% CI 61-87) in the homologous recombination deficient (HRd), 47% (95% CI 31-64%) in the HR proficient (HRp), and 56% (95% CI 31-79%) in the HR not determined (HRnd) subgroups (December 24, 2020, cutoff). After a median follow-up time of 28.7 months (IQR, 23.9-32.5 months), median PFS was 19.6 months (95% CI 16.5-25.1) in the overall population (N = 105) and 28.3 months (95% CI 19.9-NE), 14.2 months (95% CI 8.6-16.8), and 12.1 months (95% CI 8.0-NE) in the HRd, HRp, and HRnd subgroups, respectively (June 16, 2021, cutoff). The most common any-grade treatment-related adverse events (related to niraparib and/or bevacizumab) were thrombocytopenia (74/105), fatigue (60/105), and anemia (55/105; December 24, 2020, cutoff). CONCLUSION: Niraparib + bevacizumab first-line maintenance therapy displayed promising PFS results. Safety was consistent with the known safety profiles of niraparib and bevacizumab as monotherapy.

Tamrintamab pamozirine (SC-003) in patients with platinum-resistant/refractory ovarian cancer: Findings of a phase 1 study.

OBJECTIVE: Epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC) is diagnosed at advanced stage in the majority of women and, despite being initially chemosensitive, eventually recurs and develops resistance to known therapies. SC-003 is a pyrrolobenzodiazepine-based antibody-drug conjugate targeting dipeptidase 3 (DPEP3), a membrane-bound dipeptidase associated with tumor-initiating cells in patient-derived EOC xenograft models. This first-in-human phase 1a/1b study evaluated the safety/tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity of SC-003 alone or in combination with budigalimab (formerly ABBV-181), an antibody targeting PD-1, in patients with platinum-resistant/refractory EOC (NCT02539719). METHODS: Patients received SC-003 at 1 of 6 dose levels (0.025-0.4 mg/kg) every 3 weeks (Q3W), utilizing a standard 3 + 3 design (dose-limiting toxicity [DLT] period: 21 days). Patients with DPEP3-positive tumors were enrolled in the dose-expansion phase of the study and treated with SC-003 monotherapy or in combination with budigalimab. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients (n = 29, dose escalation; n = 45, dose expansion; n = 3 budigalimab combination) were enrolled and received ≥1 dose of study drug. One DLT occurred (grade 3 ileus) but was considered unrelated to study drug. The MTD for the Q3W schedule was 0.3 mg/kg and the SC-003 doses selected for the dose-expansion phase of the study were 0.3 mg/kg and 0.2 mg/kg. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue, nausea, decreased appetite, pleural effusion, abdominal pain, and peripheral edema. The overall response rate was low (4%), and responses were not durable. Post-hoc examination of antitumor activity suggested a higher response rate in patients with higher DPEP3 expression. CONCLUSIONS: SC-003 lacked the requisite safety profile and antitumor activity to warrant further development.

Phase 1b study of anti-NaPi2b antibody-drug conjugate lifastuzumab vedotin (DNIB0600A) in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the safety and tolerability of lifastuzumab vedotin (DNIB0600A) (LIFA), an antibody-drug conjugate, in patients with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (PSOC). METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter phase 1b study, LIFA was administered intravenously once every 3 weeks (Q3W) with starting dose 1.2 mg/kg in a 3 + 3 dose-escalation scheme. All patients received carboplatin at dose AUC 6 mg/mL·min (AUC6) Q3W for up to 6 cycles. Dose expansion cohorts were enrolled ± bevacizumab 15 mg/kg Q3W. RESULTS: Patients received LIFA at 1.2, 1.8, and 2.4 mg (n = 4, 5, and 20, respectively) with carboplatin. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached. The recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) was LIFA 2.4 mg/kg + carboplatin AUC6 (cycles 1-6), with or without bevacizumab 15 mg/kg. Twelve patients received RP2D with bevacizumab. All patients experienced ≥1 adverse event (AE). The most common treatment-related AEs were neutropenia, peripheral neuropathy, thrombocytopenia, nausea, fatigue, anemia, diarrhea, vomiting, hypomagnesaemia, aspartate aminotransferase increased, alanine aminotransferase increased, and alopecia. Thirty-four (83%) patients experienced grade ≥ 3 AEs, the most frequent of which were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Nine (22%) patients experienced serious AEs. Pulmonary toxicities (34%), considered a potential risk of LIFA, included one patient who discontinued study treatment due to grade 2 pneumonitis. The median duration of progression-free survival was 10.71 months (95% CI: 8.54, 13.86) with confirmed complete/partial responses in 24 (59%) patients. Pharmacokinetics of mono-therapy LIFA was similar in combination therapy. CONCLUSION: LIFA in combination with carboplatin ± bevacizumab demonstrated acceptable safety and encouraging activity in PSOC patients.