Activity of eftozanermin alfa plus venetoclax in preclinical models and patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

Activation of apoptosis in malignant cells is an established strategy for controlling cancer and is potentially curative. To assess the impact of concurrently inducing the extrinsic and intrinsic apoptosis-signaling pathways in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), we evaluated activity of the TRAIL receptor agonistic fusion protein eftozanermin alfa (eftoza; ABBV-621) in combination with the B-cell lymphoma protein-2 selective inhibitor venetoclax in preclinical models and human patients. Simultaneously stimulating intrinsic and extrinsic apoptosis-signaling pathways with venetoclax and eftoza, respectively, enhanced their activities in AML cell lines and patient-derived ex vivo/in vivo models. Eftoza activity alone or plus venetoclax required death receptor 4/5 (DR4/DR5) expression on the plasma membrane but was independent of TP53 or FLT3-ITD status. The safety/tolerability of eftoza as monotherapy and in combination with venetoclax was demonstrated in patients with relapsed/refractory AML in a phase 1 clinical trial. Treatment-related adverse events were reported in 2 of 4 (50%) patients treated with eftoza monotherapy and 18 of 23 (78%) treated with eftoza plus venetoclax. An overall response rate of 30% (7/23; 4 complete responses [CRs], 2 CRs with incomplete hematologic recovery, and 1 morphologic leukemia-free state) was reported in patients who received treatment with eftoza plus venetoclax and 67% (4/6) in patients with myoblasts positive for DR4/DR5 expression; no tumor responses were observed with eftoza monotherapy. These data indicate that combination therapy with eftoza plus venetoclax to simultaneously activate the extrinsic and intrinsic apoptosis-signaling pathways may improve clinical benefit compared with venetoclax monotherapy in relapsed/refractory AML with an acceptable toxicity profile. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03082209.

Author Correction: HER kinase inhibition in patients with HER2- and HER3-mutant cancers.

The 'Competing interests' statement of this Article has been updated; please see the accompanying Amendment. The original Article has not been corrected online.

HER kinase inhibition in patients with HER2- and HER3-mutant cancers.

Somatic mutations of ERBB2 and ERBB3 (which encode HER2 and HER3, respectively) are found in a wide range of cancers. Preclinical modelling suggests that a subset of these mutations lead to constitutive HER2 activation, but most remain biologically uncharacterized. Here we define the biological and therapeutic importance of known oncogenic HER2 and HER3 mutations and variants of unknown biological importance by conducting a multi-histology, genomically selected, 'basket' trial using the pan-HER kinase inhibitor neratinib (SUMMIT; clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01953926). Efficacy in HER2-mutant cancers varied as a function of both tumour type and mutant allele to a degree not predicted by preclinical models, with the greatest activity seen in breast, cervical and biliary cancers and with tumours that contain kinase domain missense mutations. This study demonstrates how a molecularly driven clinical trial can be used to refine our biological understanding of both characterized and new genomic alterations with potential broad applicability for advancing the paradigm of genome-driven oncology.

Pharmacokinetics and Safety of Lurbinectedin Administrated with Itraconazole in Cancer Patients: A Drug-Drug Interaction Study.

This open-label, two-part, phase Ib drug-drug interaction study investigated whether the pharmacokinetic (PK) and safety profiles of lurbinectedin (LRB), a marine-derived drug, are affected by co-administration of itraconazole (ITZ), a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor, in adult patients with advanced solid tumors. In Part A, three patients were sequentially assigned to Sequence 1 (LRB 0.8 mg/m2, 1-h intravenous [IV] + ITZ 200 mg/day oral in Cycle 1 [C1] and LRB alone 3.2 mg/m2, 1 h, IV in Cycle 2 [C2]). In Part B, 11 patients were randomized (1:1) to receive either Sequence 1 (LRB at 0.9 mg/m2 + ITZ in C1 and LRB alone in C2) or Sequence 2 (LRB alone in C1 and LRB + ITZ in C2). Eleven patients were evaluable for PK analysis: three in Part A and eight in Part B (four per sequence). The systemic total exposure of LRB increased with ITZ co-administration: 15% for Cmax, area under the curve (AUC) 2.4-fold for AUC0-t and 2.7-fold for AUC0-∞. Co-administration with ITZ produced statistically significant modifications in the unbound plasma LRB PK parameters. The LRB safety profile was consistent with the toxicities described in previous studies. Co-administration with multiple doses of ITZ significantly altered LRB systemic exposure. Hence, to avoid LRB overexposure when co-administered with strong CYP3A4 inhibitors, an LRB dose reduction proportional to CL reduction should be applied.

In Silico Transcriptomic Expression of MSR1 in Solid Tumors Is Associated with Responses to Anti-PD1 and Anti-CTLA4 Therapies.

Immuno-oncology has gained momentum with the approval of antibodies with clinical activities in different indications. Unfortunately, for anti-PD (L)1 agents in monotherapy, only half of the treated population achieves a clinical response. For other agents, such as anti-CTLA4 antibodies, no biomarkers exist, and tolerability can limit administration. In this study, using publicly available genomic datasets, we evaluated the expression of the macrophage scavenger receptor-A (SR-A) (MSR1) and its association with a response to check-point inhibitors (CPI). MSR1 was associated with the presence of macrophages, dendritic cells (DCs) and neutrophils in most of the studied indications. The presence of MSR1 was associated with macrophages with a pro-tumoral phenotype and correlated with TIM3 expression. MSR1 predicted favorable overall survival in patients treated with anti-PD1 (HR: 0.56, FDR: 1%, p = 2.6 × 10-5), anti PD-L1 (HR: 0.66, FDR: 20%, p = 0.00098) and anti-CTLA4 (HR: 0.37, FDR: 1%, p = 4.8 × 10-5). When specifically studying skin cutaneous melanoma (SKCM), we observed similar effects for anti-PD1 (HR: 0.65, FDR: 50%, p = 0.0072) and anti-CTLA4 (HR: 0.35, FDR: 1%, p = 4.1 × 10-5). In a different dataset of SKCM patients, the expression of MSR1 predicted a clinical response to anti-CTLA4 (AUC: 0.61, p = 2.9 × 10-2). Here, we describe the expression of MSR1 in some solid tumors and its association with innate cells and M2 phenotype macrophages. Of note, the presence of MSR1 predicted a response to CPI and, particularly, anti-CTLA4 therapies in different cohorts of patients. Future studies should prospectively explore the association of MSR1 expression and the response to anti-CTLA4 strategies in solid tumors.

Clinical and Immunologic Characteristics of Colorectal Cancer Tumors Expressing LY6G6D.

The identification of targets that are expressed on the cell membrane is a main goal in cancer research. The Lymphocyte Antigen 6 Family Member G6D (LY6G6D) gene codes for a protein that is mainly present on the surface of colorectal cancer (CRC) cells. Therapeutic strategies against this protein like the development of T cell engagers (TCE) are currently in the early clinical stage. In the present work, we interrogated public genomic datasets including TCGA to evaluate the genomic and immunologic cell profile present in tumors with high expression of LY6G6D. We used data from TCGA, among others, and the Tumor Immune Estimation Resource (TIMER2.0) platform for immune cell estimations and Spearman correlation tests. LY6G6D expression was exclusively present in CRC, particularly in the microsatellite stable (MSS) subtype, and was associated with left-side tumors and the canonical genomic subgroup. Tumors with mutations of APC and p53 expressed elevated levels of LY6G6D. This protein was expressed in tumors with an inert immune microenvironment with an absence of immune cells and co-inhibitory molecules. In conclusion, we described clinical, genomic and immune-pathologic characteristics that can be used to optimize the clinical development of agents against this target. Future studies should be performed to confirm these findings and potentially explore the suggested clinical development options.

Genomic and Immunologic Correlates in Prostate Cancer with High Expression of KLK2.

The identification of surfaceome proteins is a main goal in cancer research to design antibody-based therapeutic strategies. T cell engagers based on KLK2, a kallikrein specifically expressed in prostate cancer (PRAD), are currently in early clinical development. Using genomic information from different sources, we evaluated the immune microenvironment and genomic profile of prostate tumors with high expression of KLK2. KLK2 was specifically expressed in PRAD but it was not significant associated with Gleason score. Additionally, KLK2 expression did not associate with the presence of any immune cell population and T cell activating markers. A mild correlation between the high expression of KLK2 and the deletion of TMPRSS2 was identified. KLK2 expression associated with high levels of surface proteins linked with a detrimental response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) including CHRNA2, FAM174B, OR51E2, TSPAN1, PTPRN2, and the non-surface protein TRPM4. However, no association of these genes with an outcome in PRAD was observed. Finally, the expression of these genes in PRAD did not associate with an outcome in PRAD and any immune populations. We describe the immunologic microenvironment on PRAD tumors with a high expression of KLK2, including a gene signature linked with an inert immune microenvironment, that predicts the response to ICIs in other tumor types. Strategies targeting KLK2 with T cell engagers or antibody-drug conjugates will define whether T cell mobilization or antigen release and stimulation of immune cell death are sufficient effects to induce clinical activity.

A Phase 1/2 study of the PD-L1 inhibitor, BGB-A333, alone and in combination with the PD-1 inhibitor, tislelizumab, in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Many patients do not respond or eventually relapse on treatment with programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) checkpoint inhibitors due to secondary or acquired resistance; therefore, there is a need to investigate novel PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. METHODS: This open-label, non-randomised study investigated the safety and anti-tumour activity of BGB-A333, a PD-L1 inhibitor, alone and in combination with tislelizumab in patients with advanced solid tumours with progression during/after standard therapy. The primary objectives were to determine the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D), safety and tolerability for BGB-A333 alone and in combination with tislelizumab (Phase 1a/1b) and to determine the overall response rate (ORR) with BGB-A333 plus tislelizumab (Phase 2). RESULTS: Overall, 39 patients across Phase 1a (N = 15), 1b (N = 12) and 2 (N = 12) were enroled. In Phase 1a, an RP2D of 1350 mg was determined. In Phase 1a and 1b/2, serious treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in five and eight patients, respectively. Two patients experienced TEAEs that led to death. In Phase 2, the ORR was 41.7% (n = 5/12; 95% confidence interval: 15.17%, 72.33%). CONCLUSIONS: TEAEs reported with BGB-A333 were consistent with other PD-L1 inhibitors. Encouraging preliminary anti-tumour activity was observed with BGB-A333 in combination with tislelizumab. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03379259.

Phase 1 study of GSK3368715, a type I PRMT inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: GSK3368715, a first-in-class, reversible inhibitor of type I protein methyltransferases (PRMTs) demonstrated anticancer activity in preclinical studies. This Phase 1 study (NCT03666988) evaluated safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary efficacy of GSK3368715 in adults with advanced-stage solid tumors. METHODS: In part 1, escalating doses of oral once-daily GSK3368715 (50, 100, and 200 mg) were evaluated. Enrollment was paused at 200 mg following a higher-than-expected incidence of thromboembolic events (TEEs) among the first 19 participants, resuming under a protocol amendment starting at 100 mg. Part 2 (to evaluate preliminary efficacy) was not initiated. RESULTS: Dose-limiting toxicities were reported in 3/12 (25%) patients at 200 mg. Nine of 31 (29%) patients across dose groups experienced 12 TEEs (8 grade 3 events and 1 grade 5 pulmonary embolism). Best response achieved was stable disease, occurring in 9/31 (29%) patients. Following single and repeat dosing, GSK3368715 maximum plasma concentration was reached within 1 h post dosing. Target engagement was observed in the blood, but was modest and variable in tumor biopsies at 100 mg. CONCLUSION: Based on higher-than-expected incidence of TEEs, limited target engagement at lower doses, and lack of observed clinical efficacy, a risk/benefit analysis led to early study termination. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03666988.

A phase 1 study of intravenous mitazalimab, a CD40 agonistic monoclonal antibody, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Mitazalimab is an agonistic human monoclonal antibody targeting CD40, a target for anti-tumor immunotherapy. This phase 1, dose-escalation study evaluated the safety, dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile of mitazalimab. Adults with advanced solid malignancies received mitazalimab intravenously once every-2-weeks. Dose-escalation was pursued with and without pre-infusion corticosteroids for mitigation of infusion-related reactions (IRRs). In all, 95 patients were enrolled in 7 cohorts (n = 50, 75-2000 µg/kg) with corticosteroids and in 5 cohorts (n = 45, 75-1200 µg/kg) without corticosteroids. Two patients experienced DLTs (transient Grade-3 headache; Grade-3 drug-induced liver injury [Hy's law]). The most frequently reported (≥ 25%) treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (44.2%), pyrexia (38.9%), pruritus (38.9%), chills (27.4%), and headache (26.3%). IRRs were reported in 51.6% of patients; pruritus (30.5%; with corticosteroids [36.0%], without corticosteroids [24.4%]) was the most frequent. Following the first infusions of 600 µg/kg and 2000 µg/kg, mitazalimab was rapidly cleared from the systemic circulation with mean terminal half-life of 11.9 and 24.1 h, respectively. Pharmacokinetics appeared to exhibit target-mediated drug disposition at the tested doses. Mitazalimab treatment induced higher levels of selected chemokines and transient reduction of B-cells, T-cells, and NK cells. One patient (renal cell carcinoma) displayed partial response lasting 5.6 months. Stable disease was reported by 35 (36.8%) patients, persisting for ≥ 6 months in 9 patients. Mitazalimab has a manageable safety profile with acceptable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties. Future clinical development will evaluate combination with existing treatment options. Trial registration NCT02829099 (ClinicalTrials.gov; July 7, 2016).

First-in-human phase 1 study of budigalimab, an anti-PD-1 inhibitor, in patients with non-small cell lung cancer and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Budigalimab is a humanized, recombinant immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1). We present the safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetic (PK), and pharmacodynamic data from patients enrolled in the head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) expansion cohorts of the phase 1 first-in-human study of budigalimab monotherapy (NCT03000257; registered 15 December 2016). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with recurrent/metastatic HNSCC or locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC naive to PD-1/PD-1-ligand inhibitors were enrolled; patients were not selected on the basis of oncogene driver mutations or PD-L1 status. Budigalimab was administered at 250 mg intravenously Q2W or 500 mg intravenously Q4W until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoints were safety and PK; the secondary endpoint was efficacy. Exploratory endpoints included biomarker assessments. RESULTS: In total, 81 patients were enrolled (HNSCC: N = 41 [PD-L1 positive: n = 19]; NSCLC: N = 40 [PD-L1 positive: n = 16]); median treatment duration was 72 days (range, 1-617) and 71 days (range, 1-490) for the HNSCC and NSCLC cohorts, respectively. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse event was anemia (HNSCC: n = 9, 22%; NSCLC: n = 5, 13%). Both dosing regimens had comparable drug exposure and increased interferon gamma-induced chemokines, monokine induced by gamma interferon, and interferon-gamma-inducible protein 10. Objective response rates were 13% (90% CI, 5.1-24.5) in the HNSCC cohort and 19% (90% CI, 9.2-32.6) in the NSCLC cohort. Median progression-free survival was 3.6 months (95% CI, 1.7-4.7) and 1.9 months (95% CI, 1.7-3.7) in the HNSCC and NSCLC cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The safety, efficacy and biomarker profiles of budigalimab are similar to other PD-1 inhibitors. Development of budigalimab in combination with novel anticancer agents is ongoing.

Phase I study of lurbinectedin in combination with weekly paclitaxel with or without bevacizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Lurbinectedin and paclitaxel showed synergism in preclinical studies and have non-completely overlapping toxicity profiles. This phase I trial evaluated a combination of paclitaxel and lurbinectedin with/without bevacizumab in advanced tumors. This trial was divided into Group A, which evaluated weekly paclitaxel (60 or 80 mg) plus lurbinectedin (3.0-5.0 mg flat dose [FD] or 2.2 mg/m2) every 3 weeks in advanced solid tumors; and Group B, which evaluated bevacizumab (BEV, 15 mg/kg) added to the recommended dose (RD) defined in Group A in advanced epithelial ovarian or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). 67 patients (A, n = 55; B, n = 12) were treated. The RD was paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 on Day (D)1,D8 plus lurbinectedin 2.2 mg/m2 on D1. At this RD, myelotoxicity was reversible and manageable, and most non-hematological toxicities were mild/moderate. Adding BEV did not notably change tolerability. Twenty-five confirmed responses were observed: 20/51 evaluable patients in Group A (overall response rate [ORR] = 39% at all dose levels and at the RD), and 5/10 evaluable patients in Group B (ORR = 50%). Most responders had breast (n = 7/12 patients), small cell lung (SCLC) (n = 5/7), epithelial ovarian (n = 3/9) and endometrial cancer (n = 3/11) in Group A, and epithelial ovarian (n = 3/4) and NSCLC (n = 2/6) in Group B. Clinical benefit rate was 61% in Group A (58% at the RD), and 90% in Group B. No major pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions were observed. Paclitaxel/lurbinectedin and paclitaxel/lurbinectedin/BEV are feasible combinations. Further development is warranted of paclitaxel/lurbinectedin in SCLC, breast, and endometrial cancer, and of paclitaxel/lurbinectedin/BEV in epithelial ovarian cancer.

Eftozanermin alfa (ABBV-621) monotherapy in patients with previously treated solid tumors: findings of a phase 1, first-in-human study.

Eftozanermin alfa (eftoza), a second-generation tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand receptor (TRAIL-R) agonist, induces apoptosis in tumor cells by activation of death receptors 4/5. This phase 1 dose-escalation/dose-optimization study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary activity of eftoza in patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients received eftoza 2.5-15 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 or day 1/day 8 every 21 days in the dose-escalation phase, and 1.25-7.5 mg/kg once-weekly (QW) in the dose-optimization phase. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were evaluated during the first treatment cycle to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Pharmacodynamic effects were evaluated in circulation and tumor tissue. A total of 105 patients were enrolled in the study (dose-escalation cohort, n = 57; dose-optimization cohort, n = 48 patients [n = 24, colorectal cancer (CRC); n = 24, pancreatic cancer (PaCA)]). In the dose-escalation cohort, seven patients experienced DLTs. MTD and RP2D were not determined. Most common treatment-related adverse events were increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase levels, nausea, and fatigue. The one treatment-related death occurred due to respiratory failure. In the dose-optimization cohort, three patients (CRC, n = 2; PaCA, n = 1) had a partial response. Target engagement with regard to receptor saturation, and downstream apoptotic pathway activation in circulation and tumor were observed. Eftoza had acceptable safety, evidence of pharmacodynamic effects, and preliminary anticancer activity. The 7.5-mg/kg QW regimen was selected for future studies on the basis of safety findings, pharmacodynamic effects, and biomarker modulations. (Trial registration number: NCT03082209 (registered: March 17, 2017)).

A first-in-human phase 1 and pharmacological study of TAS-119, a novel selective Aurora A kinase inhibitor in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: This is a first-in-human study with TAS-119, an Aurora A kinase (AurA) inhibitor. METHODS: Patients with advanced, refractory, solid tumours were enrolled into 5 dose escalation cohorts (70-300 mg BID, 4 days on/3 days off, 3 out of 4 weeks or 4 out of 4 weeks). The expansion part consisted of patients with small-cell lung cancer, HER2-negative breast cancer, MYC-amplified/ß-catenin-mutated (MT) tumours or other (basket cohort). RESULTS: In the escalation part (n = 34 patients), dose-limiting toxicities were one grade 3 nausea, two grade 2 and one grade 3 ocular toxicity and a combination of fatigue, ocular toxicity and nausea in one patient (all grade 2) at dose levels of 150, 200, 250 and 300 mg, respectively. Most frequent treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (32%), diarrhoea (24%) and ocular toxicity (24%). Toxicity grade ≥3 in ≥10% of patients were diarrhoea (15%) and increased lipase (12%). The maximum tolerated dose was 250 mg BID. Due to one additional grade 1 ocular toxicity, the RP2D was set at 200 mg BID (4 days on/3 days off, 3 out of 4 weeks), which was further explored in the expansion part (n = 40 patients). Target inhibition in paired skin biopsies was shown. CONCLUSIONS: TAS-119 has a favourable and remarkably distinct safety profile from other AurA inhibitors. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02448589.

Phase I Trial of Cemiplimab, Radiotherapy, Cyclophosphamide, and Granulocyte Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor in Patients with Recurrent or Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

LESSONS LEARNED: Cemiplimab in combination with radiation therapy, cyclophosphamide, and granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor did not demonstrate efficacy above what can be achieved with other PD-1 inhibitor monotherapies in patients with refractory and metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. The safety profile of cemiplimab combination therapy was consistent with previously reported safety profiles of cemiplimab monotherapy. No new safety signal was observed. BACKGROUND: Refractory and metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) generally does not respond to PD-1 inhibitor monotherapy. Cemiplimab is a human anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody. An expansion cohort enrolled patients with R/M HNSCC in a phase I study combining cemiplimab plus radiation therapy (RT), cyclophosphamide, and granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF). METHODS: Patients with R/M HNSCC refractory to at least first-line therapy and for whom palliative RT is clinically indicated received cemiplimab plus RT, cyclophosphamide, and GM-CSF. The co-primary objectives were the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of cemiplimab plus RT, cyclophosphamide, and GM-CSF in 15 patients with R/M HNSCC. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were enrolled. Patients discontinued treatment due to progression of disease. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of any grade were fatigue (40.0%), constipation (26.7%), and asthenia, dyspnea, maculo-papular rash, and pneumonia (each 20%). The only grade ≥3 TEAE that occurred in two patients was pneumonia (13.3%). By investigator assessment, there was one partial response (6.7%); disease control rate was 40.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.3-67.7; five patients with stable disease); seven patients had progressive disease, and two were not evaluable. Median progression-free survival by investigator assessment was 1.8 months (95% CI, 1.7-4.7). CONCLUSION: The regimen demonstrated tolerability but not efficacy above that which can be achieved with anti-PD-1 inhibitor monotherapy for R/M HNSCC.

Toxicity and antitumor activity of novel agents in elderly patients with cancer included in phase 1 studies.

Introduction The number of cancer cases among the elderly continue to increase as the worldwide population ages. This patient subset is underrepresented in clinical trials, partly because of unresolved uncertainties about age-associated tolerabilities and antitumor activities. We reviewed phase 1 trial data to study tolerance and efficacy of novel agents used for treatment of elderly patients with cancer. Methods Data from 773 consecutive evaluable patients in 85 phase 1 clinical trials (2008-2016) at START Madrid-CIOCC were analyzed according to age, with respect to objective response, survival, and toxicity. Results The mean age was 58.7 (range: 18-87) years; 260 (33.6%) patients were >65 y (elderly group). One hundred thirty-seven (17.8%) patients received immunotherapy drugs, 308 (39.8%) received targeted agents, and 328 (42.4%) received chemotherapy. No statistically significant differences in overall survival, objective response, or severe toxicity rates were found according to treatment type. Similar toxicities and clinical activities were found between the two age subgroups; 18.8% of the elderly and 20.7% of the younger patients experienced severe hematological toxicity (p=0.5), and 30.2% and 32.7%, respectively, experienced severe non-hematological toxicity (p=0.4). Regarding antitumor activity, 12.4% of the elderly and 15% of the younger patients achieved objective responses (p=0.41). There were no significant between-group differences in overall survival (9.7 versus 11.5 months, respectively, p=0.1) or progression-free survival (2.3 versus 2.2 months, respectively, p=0.7). Conclusions This retrospective study found that elderly and younger populations had comparable antitumor activities and toxicity profiles. These results support including elderly patients with cancer in early-phase trials.

Efficacy and safety of lurbinectedin and doxorubicin in relapsed small cell lung cancer. Results from an expansion cohort of a phase I study.

Background A phase I study found remarkable activity and manageable toxicity for doxorubicin (bolus) plus lurbinectedin (1-h intravenous [i.v.] infusion) on Day 1 every three weeks (q3wk) as second-line therapy in relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC). An expansion cohort further evaluated this combination. Patients and methods Twenty-eight patients with relapsed SCLC after no more than one line of cytotoxic-containing chemotherapy were treated: 18 (64%) with sensitive disease (chemotherapy-free interval [CTFI] ≥90 days) and ten (36%) with resistant disease (CTFI <90 days; including six with refractory disease [CTFI ≤30 days]). Results Ten patients showed confirmed response (overall response rate [ORR] = 36%); median progression-free survival (PFS) = 3.3 months; median overall survival (OS) = 7.9 months. ORR was 50% in sensitive disease (median PFS = 5.7 months; median OS = 11.5 months) and 10% in resistant disease (median PFS = 1.3 months; median OS = 4.6 months). The main toxicity was transient and reversible myelosuppression. Treatment-related non-hematological events (fatigue, nausea, decreased appetite, vomiting, alopecia) were mostly mild or moderate. Conclusion Doxorubicin 40 mg/m2 and lurbinectedin 2.0 mg/m2 on Day 1 q3wk has shown noteworthy activity in relapsed SCLC and a manageable safety profile. The combination is being evaluated as second-line therapy for SCLC in an ongoing, randomized phase III trial. Clinical trial registration www.ClinicalTrials.gov code: NCT01970540. Date of registration: 22 October, 2013.

A Predictive Score of Antitumour Activity of Novel Agents in Cancer Patients Treated in Early Phase Studies.

INTRODUCTION: Phase I trials aim to determine the maximum-tolerated dose of a particular drug while minimizing the number of patients exposed to either sub-therapeutic doses or severe toxicity. Thus, patient selection for phase I trials is a key component of any clinical trial design. Though several studies have been made to address this issue, patient selection still represents a major clinical challenge that needs further investigation. METHODS: Twenty-nine baseline clinical and analytical characteristics of 773 consecutive patients treated in phase I trials between 2008 and 2016 in START Madrid-CIOCC were analysed and correlated to objective response (OR), progression-free survival, median overall survival, toxicity, and treatment type. The ones associated to OR in the univariate analysis were included in the stepwise logistic regression multivariate and Cox analysis. The statistically significant ones were included in a predictive score (named here as the Madrid score) of antitumour activity. RESULTS: Body mass index (BMI) >25 (p = 0.027), two or less previous lines of treatment (p = 0.007), and normal levels of alkaline phosphatase (ALP) (p = 0.007) were found to positively correlate to radiological response. A Madrid score was generated using these three factors as predictive parameters: compared to a score of 2-3 (where 2 or 3 of these variables are altered), a score of 0-1 is associated with longer survival time (11.6 vs. 8.6 months; p = 0.005) and overall response (17 vs. 7.6%; p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The predictive Madrid score, based on the BMI, number of prior lines of treatment, and ALP levels, might be helpful to accurately select patients who would benefit from oncology phase I clinical trials.

New approach to cancer therapy based on a molecularly defined cancer classification.

Translational and clinical cancer research, as well as clinical trials and treatment of cancer, are essentially structured based on the organ in which tumors originate. However, the recent explosion of knowledge about the molecular characteristics of tumors is opening a new way to tackle cancer. This article proposes a different approach to the classification of cancer with important implications for treatment and for basic, translational, and clinical research. The authors postulate that cancers from diverse organs of origin with similar molecular traits should be managed together. The common molecular features observed in different tumors determine clinical actions in a better way than organ-based classification. Thus, comparisons between tumors residing in different locations but with shared molecular characteristics will improve the therapeutic approach and the understanding of the biology of cancer.

Doxorubicin plus lurbinectedin in patients with advanced endometrial cancer: results from an expanded phase I study.

OBJECTIVE: Second-line treatment of endometrial cancer is an unmet medical need. We conducted a phase I study evaluating lurbinectedin and doxorubicin intravenously every 3 weeks in patients with solid tumors. The aim of this study was to characterise the efficacy and safety of lurbinectedin and doxorubicin for patients with endometrial cancer. METHODS: Thirty-four patients were treated: 15 patients in the escalation phase (doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 and lurbinectedin 3.0-5.0 mg) and 19 patients in the expansion cohort (doxorubicin 40 mg/m2 and lurbinectedin 2.0 mg/m2). All histological subtypes were eligible and patients had received one to two prior lines of chemotherapy for advanced disease. Antitumor activity was evaluated every two cycles according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Adverse events were graded according to the National Cancer Institute-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4. RESULTS: Median age (range) was 65 (51-78) years. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status was up to 1 in 97% of patients. In the escalation phase, 4 (26.7%) of 15 patients had confirmed response: two complete and two partial responses (95% CI 7.8% to 55.1%). Median duration of response was 19.5 months. Median progression-free survival was 7.3 (2.5 to 10.1) months. In the expansion cohort, confirmed partial response was reported in 8 (42.1%) of 19 patients (95% CI 20.3% to 66.5%). Median duration of response was 7.5 (6.4 to not reached) months, median progression-free survival was 7.7 (2.0 to 16.7) months and median overall survival was 14.2 (4.5 to not reached) months. Fatigue (26.3% of patients), and transient and reversible myelosuppression (neutropenia, 78.9%; febrile neutropenia, 21.1%; thrombocytopenia, 15.8%) were the main grade 3 and higher toxicities in the expanded cohort. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with recurrent advanced endometrial cancer treated with doxorubicin and lurbinectedin, response rates (42%) and duration of response (7.5 months) were favorable. Further evaluation of doxorubicin and lurbinectedin is warranted in this patient population.