A Randomized Phase II Open-Label Multi-Institution Study of the Combination of Bevacizumab and Erlotinib Compared to Sorafenib in the First-Line Treatment of Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the clinical efficacy and tolerability of the combination of bevacizumab (B) and erlotinib (E) compared to sorafenib (S) as first-line treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: A total of 90 patients with advanced HCC, Child-Pugh class A-B7 cirrhosis, and no prior systemic therapy were randomly assigned (1: 1) to receive either 10 mg/kg B intravenously every 14 days and 150 mg E orally daily (n = 47) (B+E) or 400 mg S orally twice daily (n = 43). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included event-free survival (EFS), objective response rate based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1), time to progression, and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: The median OS was 8.55 months (95% CI: 7.00-13.9) for patients treated with B+E and 8.55 months (95% CI: 5.69-12.2) for patients receiving S. The hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.57-1.47). The median EFS was 4.37 months (95% CI: 2.99-7.36) for patients receiving B+E and 2.76 months (95% CI: 1.84-4.80) for patients receiving S. The HR for EFS was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.42-1.07; p = 0.09), favoring B+E over S. When OS was assessed among patients who were Child-Pugh class A, the median OS was 11.4 months (95% CI: 7.5-15.7) for patients treated with B+E (n = 39) and 10.26 months (95% CI: 5.9-13.0) for patients treated with S (n = 38) (HR = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.53-1.46). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in efficacy between the B+E and S arms, although the safety and tolerability profile tended to favor B+E over S based on competing risk analysis.

Quantifying the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer center clinical trial operations.

BACKGROUND: Oncology clinical trials are complex, and the COVID-19 pandemic caused major disruptions in 2020. METHODS: Using its networking and sharing of best practices, the Association of American Cancer Institutes, comprising 105 cancer centers, solicited a longitudinal series of voluntary surveys from members to assess how clinical trial office operations were affected. The surveys showed that centers were able to keep oncology trials available to patients while maintaining safety. Data were collected regarding interventional clinical trial accruals for the calendar years 2019, 2020, and 2021. RESULTS: Data demonstrated a sizeable decrease in interventional treatment trial accruals in both 2020 and 2021 compared with prepandemic figures in 2019. No cancer center reported an increase in interventional treatment trial accruals in 2020 compared with 2019, with most centers reporting a moderate decrease. In mid-2022, 15% of respondents reported an increasing trend, 31% reported no significant change, and 54% continued to report a decrease. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic necessitated rapid adoption of trial operations, with the emergence of several best practices, including remote monitoring, remote consenting, electronic research charts, and work-from-home strategies for staff. The national infrastructure to conduct trials was significantly affected by the pandemic, with noteworthy resiliency, evidenced by improvements in efficiencies and patient-centered care delivery but with residual capacity challenges that will be evident for the foreseeable future.

Clinical Trial Metrics: The Complexity of Conducting Clinical Trials in North American Cancer Centers.

PURPOSE: Cancer clinical trials offices (CTOs) support the investigation of cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment at cancer centers across North America. CTOs are a centralized resource for clinical trial conduct and typically use research staff with expertise in four functional areas of clinical research: finance, regulatory, clinical, and data operations. To our knowledge, there are no publicly available benchmark data sets that characterize the size, cost, volume, and efficiency of these offices, nor whether the metrics differ by National Cancer Institute (NCI) designation. The Association of American Cancer Institutes (AACI) Clinical Research Innovation (CRI) steering committee developed a survey to address this knowledge gap. METHODS: An 11-question survey that addressed CTO budget, accrual and trial volume, full-time equivalents (FTEs), staff turnover, and activation timelines was developed by the AACI CRI steering committee and sent to 92 academic cancer research centers in North America (n = 90 in the United States; n = 2 in Canada), with 79 respondents completing the survey (86% completion rate). RESULTS: The number of FTE employees working in the CTOs ranged from 4.5 to 811 (median, 104). The median number of analytic cases (ie, newly diagnosed or received first course of treatment) reported by the main center was 3,856. Annual CTO budgets ranged from $250,000 to $23,900,000 (median, $8.2 million). The median trial activation time, based on 61 centers, was 167 days. The median number of accruals per center was 480 (range, 5-6,271) and median number of trials per center was 282 (range, 31-1,833). Budget and FTE ranges varied by NCI designation. CONCLUSION: The response rate to the survey was high. These data will allow cancer centers to evaluate their CTO infrastructure, funding, portfolio, and/or accrual goals as compared with peers. A wide range in each of the outcomes was noted, in keeping with the wide variation in size and scope of cancer center CTOs across the United States and Canada. These variations may warrant additional investigation.

A Phase I Study of ABC294640, a First-in-Class Sphingosine Kinase-2 Inhibitor, in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

Purpose: Sphingosine kinases (SK1 and SK2) regulate tumor growth by generating the mitogenic and proinflammatory lipid sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P). This phase I study investigated the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity of ABC294640, a first-in-class orally available inhibitor of SK2.Experimental Design: Escalating doses of ABC294640 were administered orally to patients with advanced solid tumors in sequential cohorts at the following dose levels: 250 mg qd, 250 mg bid, 500 mg bid, and 750 mg bid, continuously in cycles of 28 days. Serial blood samples were obtained to measure ABC294640 concentrations and sphingolipid profiles.Results: Twenty-two patients were enrolled, and 21 received ABC294640. The most common drug-related toxicities were nausea, vomiting, and fatigue. Among the 4 patients at 750 mg bid, one had dose-limiting grade 3 nausea and vomiting, and 2 were unable to complete cycle 1 due to diverse drug-related toxicities. The 500 mg bid dose level was established as the recommended phase II dose. ABC294640 administration resulted in decreases in S1P levels over the first 12 hours, with return to baseline at 24 hours. The best response was a partial response in a patient with cholangiocarcinoma at 250 mg qd, and stable disease was observed in 6 patients with various solid tumors across dose levels.Conclusions: At 500 mg bid, ABC294640 is well tolerated and achieves biologically relevant plasma concentrations. Changes in plasma sphingolipid levels may provide a useful pharmacodynamic biomarker for ABC294640. Clin Cancer Res; 23(16); 4642-50. ©2017 AACR.

Patient participation in cancer clinical trials: A pilot test of lay navigation.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials (CT) represent an important treatment option for cancer patients. Unfortunately, patients face challenges to enrolling in CTs, such as logistical barriers, poor CT understanding and complex clinical regimens. Patient navigation is a strategy that may help to improve the delivery of CT education and support services. We examined the feasibility and initial effect of one navigation strategy, use of lay navigators. METHODS: A lay CT navigation intervention was evaluated in a prospective cohort study among 40 lung and esophageal cancer patients. The intervention was delivered by a trained lay navigator who viewed a 17-minute CT educational video with each patient, assessed and answered their questions about CT participation and addressed reported barriers to care and trial participation. RESULTS: During this 12-month pilot project, 85% (95% CI: 72%-93%) of patients eligible for a therapeutic CT consented to participate in the CT navigation intervention. Among navigated patients, CT understanding improved between pre- and post-test (means 3.54 and 4.40, respectively; p-value 0.004), and 95% (95% CI: 82%-98%) of navigated patients consented to participate in a CT. Navigated patients reported being satisfied with patient navigation services and CT participation. CONCLUSIONS: In this formative single-arm pilot project, initial evidence was found for the potential effect of a lay navigation intervention on CT understanding and enrollment. A randomized controlled trial is needed to examine the efficacy of the intervention for improving CT education and enrollment.

Sequential ofatumumab and lenalidomide for the treatment of relapsed and refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia and small lymphocytic lymphoma.

Ofatumumab is a fully human anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody with enhanced antibody dependent and complement dependent cytotoxicity. Lenalidomide induces T cell and natural killer (NK) cell activation and in vitro enhances clearance of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) cells by monoclonal antibodies. We performed a multi-center, phase 2 trial of sequential treatment with ofatumumab and lenalidomide in patients with advanced, relapsed and refractory (R/R) CLL, consisting of ofatumumab 2000 mg intravenously on day 1 and lenalidomide 10 mg on days 8-28, for up to six cycles. Twenty-one subjects were included with median age of 63 years and two prior lines of therapy. The overall response rate was 47.6% and 23.8% had stable disease. Median overall survival was 21.5 months. Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were the most frequent adverse events. Tumor flare reaction occurred in 43% of subjects. Intracycle sequential ofatumumab plus lenalidomide is active in high-risk R/R CLL and well tolerated except for frequent cytopenias.