A phase 1 study of triple-targeted therapy with BRAF, MEK, and AKT inhibitors for patients with BRAF-mutated cancers.

BACKGROUND: Aberrant PI3K/AKT signaling in BRAF-mutant cancers contributes to resistance to BRAF inhibitors. The authors examined dual MAPK and PI3K pathway inhibition in patients who had BRAF-mutated solid tumors (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01902173). METHODS: Patients with BRAF V600E/V600K-mutant solid tumors received oral dabrafenib at 150 mg twice daily with dose escalation of oral uprosertib starting at 50 mg daily, or, in the triplet cohorts, with dose escalation of both oral trametinib starting at 1.5 mg daily and oral uprosertib starting at 25 mg daily. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were assessed within the first 56 days of treatment. Radiographic responses were assessed at 8-week intervals. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients (22 evaluable) were enrolled in parallel doublet and triplet cohorts. No DLTs were observed in the doublet cohorts (N = 7). One patient had a DLT at the maximum administered dose of triplet therapy (dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily and trametinib 2 mg daily plus uprosertib 75 mg daily). Three patients in the doublet cohorts had partial responses (including one who had BRAF inhibitor-resistant melanoma). Two patients in the triplet cohorts had a partial response, and one patient had an unconfirmed partial response. Pharmacokinetic data suggested reduced dabrafenib and dabrafenib metabolite exposure in patients who were also exposed to both trametinib and uprosertib, but not in whose who were exposed to uprosertib without trametinib. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant inhibition of both the MAPK and PI3K-AKT pathways for the treatment of BRAF-mutated cancers was well tolerated, leading to objective responses, but higher level drug-drug interactions affected exposure to dabrafenib and its metabolites.

The PD-1- and LAG-3-targeting bispecific molecule tebotelimab in solid tumors and hematologic cancers: a phase 1 trial.

Tebotelimab, a bispecific PD-1×LAG-3 DART molecule that blocks both PD-1 and LAG-3, was investigated for clinical safety and activity in a phase 1 dose-escalation and cohort-expansion clinical trial in patients with solid tumors or hematologic malignancies and disease progression on previous treatment. Primary endpoints were safety and maximum tolerated dose of tebotelimab when administered as a single agent (n = 269) or in combination with the anti-HER2 antibody margetuximab (n = 84). Secondary endpoints included anti-tumor activity. In patients with advanced cancer treated with tebotelimab monotherapy, 68% (184/269) experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs; 22% were grade ≥3). No maximum tolerated dose was defined; the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) was 600 mg once every 2 weeks. There were tumor decreases in 34% (59/172) of response-evaluable patients in the dose-escalation cohorts, with objective responses in multiple solid tumor types, including PD-1-refractory disease, and in LAG-3+ non-Hodgkin lymphomas, including CAR-T refractory disease. To enhance potential anti-tumor responses, we tested margetuximab plus tebotelimab. In patients with HER2+ tumors treated with tebotelimab plus margetuximab, 74% (62/84) had TRAEs (17% were grade ≥3). The RP2D was 600 mg once every 3 weeks. The confirmed objective response rate in these patients was 19% (14/72), including responses in patients typically not responsive to anti-HER2/anti-PD-1 combination therapy. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03219268 .

Randomized Phase 2 Clinical Trial of Olaratumab in Combination with Gemcitabine and Docetaxel in Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcomas.

Gemcitabine plus docetaxel is an effective treatment regimen for advanced soft tissue sarcomas (STSs). However, the prognosis for patients remains poor, and thus there is an urgent medical need for novel and effective therapies to improve long-term outcomes. The aim of the ANNOUNCE 2 trial was to explore the addition of olaratumab (O) to gemcitabine (G) and docetaxel (D) for advanced STS. Adults with unresectable locally advanced/metastatic STS, ≤2 prior lines of systemic therapy, and ECOG PS 0-1 were eligible. In Phase 2, patients were randomized 1:1 from two cohorts (O-naïve and O-pretreated) to 21-day cycles of olaratumab (20 mg/kg Cycle 1 and 15 mg/kg other cycles, Days 1 and 8), gemcitabine (900 mg/m2, Days 1 and 8), and docetaxel (75 mg/m2, Day 8). The primary objective was overall survival (OS) in the O-naïve population (α level = 0.20). Secondary endpoints included OS (O-pretreated), other efficacy parameters, patient-reported outcomes, safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. A total of 167 and 89 patients were enrolled in the O-naïve and O-pretreated cohorts, respectively. Baseline patient characteristics were well balanced. No statistically significant difference in OS was observed between the investigational vs. control arm for either cohort (O-naïve cohort: HR = 0.95 (95% CI: 0.64-1.40), p = 0.78, median OS, 16.8 vs. 18.0 months; O-pretreated cohort: HR = 0.67 (95% CI: 0.39-1.16), p = 0.15, median OS 19.8 vs. 17.3 months). Safety was manageable across treatment arms. There was no statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint of OS between the two arms in the O-naïve population, and therefore based on hierarchical evaluation no other outcomes in this study can be considered statistically significant. No new safety signals were observed.

Three-Year Overall Survival with Tebentafusp in Metastatic Uveal Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Tebentafusp, a T-cell receptor-bispecific molecule that targets glycoprotein 100 and CD3, is approved for adult patients who are positive for HLA-A*02:01 and have unresectable or metastatic uveal melanoma. The primary analysis in the present phase 3 trial supported a long-term survival benefit associated with the drug. METHODS: We report the 3-year efficacy and safety results from our open-label, phase 3 trial in which HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with previously untreated metastatic uveal melanoma were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive tebentafusp (tebentafusp group) or the investigator's choice of therapy with pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, or dacarbazine (control group), with randomization stratified according to the lactate dehydrogenase level. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: At a minimum follow-up of 36 months, median overall survival was 21.6 months in the tebentafusp group and 16.9 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.54 to 0.87). The estimated percentage of patients surviving at 3 years was 27% in the tebentafusp group and 18% in the control group. The most common treatment-related adverse events of any grade in the tebentafusp group were rash (83%), pyrexia (76%), pruritus (70%), and hypotension (38%). Most tebentafusp-related adverse events occurred early during treatment, and no new adverse events were observed with long-term administration. The percentage of patients who discontinued treatment because of adverse events continued to be low in both treatment groups (2% in the tebentafusp group and 5% in the control group). No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: This 3-year analysis supported a continued long-term benefit of tebentafusp for overall survival among adult HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with previously untreated metastatic uveal melanoma. (Funded by Immunocore; IMCgp100-202 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03070392; EudraCT number, 2015-003153-18.).

Ipilimumab with or without nivolumab in PD-1 or PD-L1 blockade refractory metastatic melanoma: a randomized phase 2 trial.

In this randomized phase 2 trial, blockade of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte protein 4 (CTLA-4) with continuation of programmed death protein 1 (PD-1) blockade in patients with metastatic melanoma who had received front-line anti-PD-1 or therapy against programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 and whose tumors progressed was tested in comparison with CTLA-4 blockade alone. Ninety-two eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 3:1 ratio to receive the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab, or ipilimumab alone. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints included the difference in CD8 T cell infiltrate among responding and nonresponding tumors, objective response rate, overall survival and toxicity. The combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab resulted in a statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival over ipilimumab (hazard ratio = 0.63, 90% confidence interval (CI) = 0.41-0.97, one-sided P = 0.04). Objective response rates were 28% (90% CI = 19-38%) and 9% (90% CI = 2-25%), respectively (one-sided P = 0.05). Grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events occurred in 57% and 35% of patients, respectively, which is consistent with the known toxicity profile of these regimens. The change in intratumoral CD8 T cell density observed in the present analysis did not reach statistical significance to support the formal hypothesis tested as a secondary endpoint. In conclusion, primary resistance to PD-1 blockade therapy can be reversed in some patients with the combination of CTLA-4 and PD-1 blockade. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03033576 .

The landscape of drug sensitivity and resistance in sarcoma.

Sarcomas are a family of rare malignancies composed of over 100 distinct histological subtypes. The rarity of sarcoma poses significant challenges in conducting clinical trials to identify effective therapies, to the point that many rarer subtypes of sarcoma do not have standard-of-care treatment. Even for established regimens, there can be substantial heterogeneity in responses. Overall, novel, personalized approaches for identifying effective treatments are needed to improve patient out-comes. Patient-derived tumor organoids (PDTOs) are clinically relevant models representative of the physiological behavior of tumors across an array of malignancies. Here, we use PDTOs as a tool to better understand the biology of individual tumors and characterize the landscape of drug resistance and sensitivity in sarcoma. We collected n=194 specimens from n=126 sarcoma patients, spanning 24 distinct subtypes. We characterized PDTOs established from over 120 biopsy, resection, and metastasectomy samples. We leveraged our organoid high-throughput drug screening pipeline to test the efficacy of chemotherapeutics, targeted agents, and combination therapies, with results available within a week from tissue collection. Sarcoma PDTOs showed patient-specific growth characteristics and subtype-specific histopathology. Organoid sensitivity correlated with diagnostic subtype, patient age at diagnosis, lesion type, prior treatment history, and disease trajectory for a subset of the compounds screened. We found 90 biological pathways that were implicated in response to treatment of bone and soft tissue sarcoma organoids. By comparing functional responses of organoids and genetic features of the tumors, we show how PDTO drug screening can provide an orthogonal set of information to facilitate optimal drug selection, avoid ineffective therapies, and mirror patient outcomes in sarcoma. In aggregate, we were able to identify at least one effective FDA-approved or NCCN-recommended regimen for 59% of the specimens tested, providing an estimate of the proportion of immediately actionable information identified through our pipeline. Highlights: Standardized organoid culture preserve unique sarcoma histopathological featuresDrug screening on patient-derived sarcoma organoids provides sensitivity information that correlates with clinical features and yields actionable information for treatment guidanceHigh-throughput screenings provide orthogonal information to genetic sequencingSarcoma organoid response to treatment correlates with patient response to therapyLarge scale, functional precision medicine programs for rare cancers are feasible within a single institution.

Neoantigen-targeted CD8+ T cell responses with PD-1 blockade therapy.

Neoantigens are peptides derived from non-synonymous mutations presented by human leukocyte antigens (HLAs), which are recognized by antitumour T cells1-14. The large HLA allele diversity and limiting clinical samples have restricted the study of the landscape of neoantigen-targeted T cell responses in patients over their treatment course. Here we applied recently developed technologies15-17 to capture neoantigen-specific T cells from blood and tumours from patients with metastatic melanoma with or without response to anti-programmed death receptor 1 (PD-1) immunotherapy. We generated personalized libraries of neoantigen-HLA capture reagents to single-cell isolate the T cells and clone their T cell receptors (neoTCRs). Multiple T cells with different neoTCR sequences (T cell clonotypes) recognized a limited number of mutations in samples from seven patients with long-lasting clinical responses. These neoTCR clonotypes were recurrently detected over time in the blood and tumour. Samples from four patients with no response to anti-PD-1 also demonstrated neoantigen-specific T cell responses in the blood and tumour to a restricted number of mutations with lower TCR polyclonality and were not recurrently detected in sequential samples. Reconstitution of the neoTCRs in donor T cells using non-viral CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing demonstrated specific recognition and cytotoxicity to patient-matched melanoma cell lines. Thus, effective anti-PD-1 immunotherapy is associated with the presence of polyclonal CD8+ T cells in the tumour and blood specific for a limited number of immunodominant mutations, which are recurrently recognized over time.

Neoadjuvant-Adjuvant or Adjuvant-Only Pembrolizumab in Advanced Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Whether pembrolizumab given both before surgery (neoadjuvant therapy) and after surgery (adjuvant therapy), as compared with pembrolizumab given as adjuvant therapy alone, would increase event-free survival among patients with resectable stage III or IV melanoma is unknown. METHODS: In a phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned patients with clinically detectable, measurable stage IIIB to IVC melanoma that was amenable to surgical resection to three doses of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab, surgery, and 15 doses of adjuvant pembrolizumab (neoadjuvant-adjuvant group) or to surgery followed by pembrolizumab (200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for a total of 18 doses) for approximately 1 year or until disease recurred or unacceptable toxic effects developed (adjuvant-only group). The primary end point was event-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Events were defined as disease progression or toxic effects that precluded surgery; the inability to resect all gross disease; disease progression, surgical complications, or toxic effects of treatment that precluded the initiation of adjuvant therapy within 84 days after surgery; recurrence of melanoma after surgery; or death from any cause. Safety was also evaluated. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 14.7 months, the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group (154 patients) had significantly longer event-free survival than the adjuvant-only group (159 patients) (P = 0.004 by the log-rank test). In a landmark analysis, event-free survival at 2 years was 72% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64 to 80) in the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group and 49% (95% CI, 41 to 59) in the adjuvant-only group. The percentage of patients with treatment-related adverse events of grades 3 or higher during therapy was 12% in the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group and 14% in the adjuvant-only group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with resectable stage III or IV melanoma, event-free survival was significantly longer among those who received pembrolizumab both before and after surgery than among those who received adjuvant pembrolizumab alone. No new toxic effects were identified. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and Merck Sharp and Dohme; S1801 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03698019.).

Eganelisib, a First-in-Class PI3Kγ Inhibitor, in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors: Results of the Phase 1/1b MARIO-1 Trial.

PURPOSE: Eganelisib (IPI-549) is a first-in-class, orally administered, highly selective PI3Kγ inhibitor with antitumor activity alone and in combination with programmed cell death protein 1/ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitors in preclinical studies. This phase 1/1b first-in-human, MAcrophage Reprogramming in Immuno-Oncology-1 (NCT02637531) study evaluated the safety and tolerability of once-daily eganelisib as monotherapy and in combination with nivolumab in patients with solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Dose-escalation cohorts received eganelisib 10-60 mg as monotherapy (n = 39) and 20-40 mg when combined with nivolumab (n = 180). Primary endpoints included incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) and adverse events (AE). RESULTS: The most common treatment-related grade ≥3 toxicities with monotherapy were increased alanine aminotransferase (ALT; 18%), aspartate aminotransferase (AST; 18%), and alkaline phosphatase (5%). No DLTs occurred in the first 28 days; however, toxicities meeting DLT criteria (mostly grade 3 reversible hepatic enzyme elevations) occurred with eganelisib 60 mg in later treatment cycles. In combination, the most common treatment-related grade ≥3 toxicities were increased AST (13%) and increased ALT and rash (10%). Treatment-related serious AEs occurred in 5% of monotherapy patients (grade 4 bilirubin and hepatic enzyme increases in one patient each) and 13% in combination (pyrexia, rash, cytokine release syndrome, and infusion-related reaction in ≥2 patients each). Antitumor activity was observed in combination, including patients who had progressed on PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the observed safety profile, eganelisib doses of 30 and 40 mg once daily in combination with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors were chosen for phase 2 study.

Lifelong Imaging Surveillance is Indicated for Patients with Primary Retroperitoneal Liposarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Surveillance imaging of patients with retroperitoneal liposarcoma (RP-LPS) after surgical resection is based on a projected risk of locoregional and distant recurrence. The duration of surveillance is not well defined because the natural history of RP-LPS after treatment is poorly understood. This study evaluated the long-term risk of recurrence and disease-specific survival (DSS) for a cohort of patients with at least 10 years of progression-free survival (10yr-PFS) from their primary resection. METHODS: The prospective University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Sarcoma Database identified RP-LPS patients with 10yr-PFS after initial resection. The patients in the 10yr-PFS cohort were subsequently evaluated for recurrence and DSS. The time intervals start at date of initial surgical resection. Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine factors associated with recurrence and DSS. RESULTS: From 1972 to 2010, 76 patients with RP-LPS had at least 10 years of follow-up evaluation. Of these 76 patients, 39 (51%) demonstrated 10yr-PFS. The median follow-up period was 15 years (range 10-33 years). Among the 10yr-PFS patients, 49% (19/39) experienced a recurrence at least 10 years after surgery. Of those who experienced recurrence, 42% (8/19) died of disease. Neither long-term recurrence nor DSS were significantly associated with age, sex, tumor size, LPS subtype, surgical margin, or perioperative treatment with radiation or chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Patients who have primary RP-LPS treated with surgical resection ± multimodality therapy face a long-term risk of recurrence and disease-specific death unacknowledged by current surveillance imaging guidelines. Among the patients with 10yr-PFS, 49% experienced a recurrence, and 42% of those died of disease. These findings suggest a need for lifelong surveillance imaging for patients with RP-LPS.

Non-viral precision T cell receptor replacement for personalized cell therapy.

T cell receptors (TCRs) enable T cells to specifically recognize mutations in cancer cells1-3. Here we developed a clinical-grade approach based on CRISPR-Cas9 non-viral precision genome-editing to simultaneously knockout the two endogenous TCR genes TRAC (which encodes TCRα) and TRBC (which encodes TCRß). We also inserted into the TRAC locus two chains of a neoantigen-specific TCR (neoTCR) isolated from circulating T cells of patients. The neoTCRs were isolated using a personalized library of soluble predicted neoantigen-HLA capture reagents. Sixteen patients with different refractory solid cancers received up to three distinct neoTCR transgenic cell products. Each product expressed a patient-specific neoTCR and was administered in a cell-dose-escalation, first-in-human phase I clinical trial ( NCT03970382 ). One patient had grade 1 cytokine release syndrome and one patient had grade 3 encephalitis. All participants had the expected side effects from the lymphodepleting chemotherapy. Five patients had stable disease and the other eleven had disease progression as the best response on the therapy. neoTCR transgenic T cells were detected in tumour biopsy samples after infusion at frequencies higher than the native TCRs before infusion. This study demonstrates the feasibility of isolating and cloning multiple TCRs that recognize mutational neoantigens. Moreover, simultaneous knockout of the endogenous TCR and knock-in of neoTCRs using single-step, non-viral precision genome-editing are achieved. The manufacture of neoTCR engineered T cells at clinical grade, the safety of infusing up to three gene-edited neoTCR T cell products and the ability of the transgenic T cells to traffic to the tumours of patients are also demonstrated.

Preclinical and Clinical Trial Results Using Talazoparib and Low-Dose Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: On the basis of preclinical data, we hypothesized that low doses of chemotherapy (10% of therapeutic doses) with full dose of a PARP inhibitor could have improved efficacy and tolerability. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this phase I dose-escalation study, patients with BRCA-normal advanced malignancies were assigned to either talazoparib/temozolomide or talazoparib/irinotecan. Talazoparib was dose-escalated from 500 mcg to 1 mg daily before dose escalation of temozolomide/irinotecan. The starting dose of temozolomide was 25 mg/m2/day orally on days 1 to 5 and irinotecan was 25 mg/m2/day intravenously on days 1 and 15. The primary objectives of this trial were safety and tolerability, dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), and maximum tolerated dose (MTD). RESULTS: Of 40 patients enrolled, 18 (mean: 7 prior therapies) were enrolled in talazoparib + temozolomide and 22 in talazoparib + irinotecan. DLTs were hematologic in both arms, but all hematologic adverse events resolved with either treatment interruption and/or dose reductions of talazoparib. The MTDs were talazoparib 1 mg + temozolomide 37.5 mg/m2 and talazoparib 1 mg + irinotecan 37.5 mg/m2. There were four partial responses in the talazoparib + temozolomide arm and five in the talazoparib + irinotecan arm for a response rate of 23% (9/40). The pharmacokinetic profiles of talazoparib + temozolomide/irinotecan were similar to that of talazoparib monotherapy. Responses were seen independent of homologous recombination (HR) status and HR deficiency score. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that talazoparib with low-dose temozolomide or irinotecan is reasonably well tolerated and demonstrates clinical activity in a wide range of cancers. Randomized trials of talazoparib with or without low-dose chemotherapy are ongoing in small cell lung cancer and ovarian cancer.

Combination Dabrafenib and Trametinib Versus Combination Nivolumab and Ipilimumab for Patients With Advanced BRAF-Mutant Melanoma: The DREAMseq Trial-ECOG-ACRIN EA6134.

PURPOSE: Combination programmed cell death protein 1/cytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-4-blockade and dual BRAF/MEK inhibition have each shown significant clinical benefit in patients with BRAFV600-mutant metastatic melanoma, leading to broad regulatory approval. Little prospective data exist to guide the choice of either initial therapy or treatment sequence in this population. This study was conducted to determine which initial treatment or treatment sequence produced the best efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a phase III trial, patients with treatment-naive BRAFV600-mutant metastatic melanoma were randomly assigned to receive either combination nivolumab/ipilimumab (arm A) or dabrafenib/trametinib (arm B) in step 1, and at disease progression were enrolled in step 2 to receive the alternate therapy, dabrafenib/trametinib (arm C) or nivolumab/ipilimumab (arm D). The primary end point was 2-year overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were 3-year OS, objective response rate, response duration, progression-free survival, crossover feasibility, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 265 patients were enrolled, with 73 going onto step 2 (27 in arm C and 46 in arm D). The study was stopped early by the independent Data Safety Monitoring Committee because of a clinically significant end point being achieved. The 2-year OS for those starting on arm A was 71.8% (95% CI, 62.5 to 79.1) and arm B 51.5% (95% CI, 41.7 to 60.4; log-rank P = .010). Step 1 progression-free survival favored arm A (P = .054). Objective response rates were arm A: 46.0%; arm B: 43.0%; arm C: 47.8%; and arm D: 29.6%. Median duration of response was not reached for arm A and 12.7 months for arm B (P < .001). Crossover occurred in 52% of patients with documented disease progression. Grade ≥ 3 toxicities occurred with similar frequency between arms, and regimen toxicity profiles were as anticipated. CONCLUSION: Combination nivolumab/ipilimumab followed by BRAF and MEK inhibitor therapy, if necessary, should be the preferred treatment sequence for a large majority of patients.

A randomised phase II trial of a trivalent ganglioside vaccine targeting GM2, GD2 and GD3 combined with immunological adjuvant OPT-821 versus OPT-821 alone in metastatic sarcoma patients rendered disease-free by surgery.

BACKGROUND: Recurrence after resection of metastatic sarcoma is common. The gangliosides GM2, GD2 and GD3 are strongly expressed across sarcoma subtypes. We hypothesised that generation of anti-ganglioside antibodies would control micrometastases and improve outcomes in sarcoma patients who were disease-free after metastasectomy. METHODS: We conducted a randomised phase II trial of the immunological adjuvant OPT-821 with a KLH-conjugated ganglioside vaccine targeting GM2, GD2 and GD3, versus OPT-821 alone in patients with metastatic sarcoma following complete metastasectomy. Patients received 10 subcutaneous injections at Weeks 1, 2, 3, 8, 16, 28, 40, 52, 68 and 84 and were followed for evidence of recurrent disease. The primary end-point was relapse-free survival. Secondary end-points included overall survival and serologic response. RESULTS: A total of 136 patients were randomised, 68 to each arm. The mean age was 51.2, 52.2% were male, 90.4% had relapsed disease, 86.8% had high-grade tumours and 14% had ≥4 metastases resected. Histologies included leiomyosarcoma (33%), spindle cell sarcoma (14%), undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (13%), osteosarcoma (10%), synovial sarcoma (9%), liposarcoma (9%) and others (12%). Most adverse events were Grade ≤2 (83.8% and 70.6% in the vaccine and adjuvant arms, respectively). The most common (≥20% of patients) were injection site reaction (89.7%), fatigue (44.1%) and pyrexia (27.9%) on the vaccine arm, and injection site reaction (69.1%) on the adjuvant only arm. The 1-year relapse-free survival rate (34.5% and 34.8% in the vaccine and OPT-821 monotherapy arm, respectively) did not differ between arms (P = 0.725). One-year overall survival rates were 93.1% and 91.5% in the vaccine and OPT-821 monotherapy arm, respectively (P = 0.578). Serologic responses at week 9 were more frequent on the vaccine arm (96.5% of patients) than in the adjuvant arm (32.8%), and the difference between groups was durable. CONCLUSIONS: A sustained serologic response to vaccination was induced with the vaccine, but no difference in recurrence-free or overall survival was observed between treatment arms. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT01141491.

Selinexor in Advanced, Metastatic Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma: A Multinational, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Antitumor activity in preclinical models and a phase I study of patients with dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DD-LPS) was observed with selinexor. We evaluated the clinical benefit of selinexor in patients with previously treated DD-LPS whose sarcoma progressed on approved agents. METHODS: SEAL was a phase II-III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients age 12 years or older with advanced DD-LPS who had received two-five lines of therapy were randomly assigned (2:1) to selinexor (60 mg) or placebo twice weekly in 6-week cycles (crossover permitted). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included for safety analysis (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02606461). RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-five patients were enrolled (selinexor, n = 188; placebo, n = 97). PFS was significantly longer with selinexor versus placebo: hazard ratio (HR) 0.70 (95% CI, 0.52 to 0.95; one-sided P = .011; medians 2.8 v 2.1 months), as was time to next treatment: HR 0.50 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.66; one-sided P < .0001; medians 5.8 v 3.2 months). With crossover, no difference was observed in overall survival. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade versus grade 3 or 4 with selinexor were nausea (151 [80.7%] v 11 [5.9]), decreased appetite (113 [60.4%] v 14 [7.5%]), and fatigue (96 [51.3%] v 12 [6.4%]). Four (2.1%) and three (3.1%) patients died in the selinexor and placebo arms, respectively. Exploratory RNA sequencing analysis identified that the absence of CALB1 expression was associated with longer PFS with selinexor compared with placebo (median 6.9 v 2.2 months; HR, 0.19; P = .001). CONCLUSION: Patients with advanced, refractory DD-LPS showed improved PFS and time to next treatment with selinexor compared with placebo. Supportive care and dose reductions mitigated side effects of selinexor. Prospective validation of CALB1 expression as a predictive biomarker for selinexor in DD-LPS is warranted.

Retrospective analysis of adjuvant treatment for localized, operable uterine leiomyosarcoma.

OBJECTIVE: Currently, there is no standard adjuvant treatment protocol for localized uterine leiomyosarcoma (uLMS) as clinical trials to address this question have been retrospective, underpowered, or undermined by slow accrual rates. The aim of this study is to determine the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for uLMS. METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of localized uLMS patients who had underwent adjuvant therapy after upfront surgery between 2000 and 2020. The cases were blinded for review. We evaluated the influence of various clinical characteristics and different types of adjuvant therapies on specific outcomes. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients (median age: 50 years) were included for analysis. Forty of 68 (58.8%) patients received adjuvant chemotherapy +/- radiation therapy and 25 patients (38.6%) did not receive any adjuvant therapy. At a median follow-up time of 43.3 months, 45 patients (66.1%) had relapsed disease. The median disease-free survival (mDFS) for all patients was 23.1 months. Patients who received any adjuvant treatment (chemotherapy and/or radiation) trended toward a longer mDFS compared with those who did not receive any adjuvant therapy (29.7 vs. 14.1 months, p = 0.26). Patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy alone had a longer, but nonstatistically significant mDFS compared with those who did not receive any adjuvant treatment (22.2 vs. 14.1 months, p = 0.18). Additionally, univariate analysis found that tumor size large than 10 cm, and a mitotic rate >10/10hpf were independent prognostic factors for worse DFS. CONCLUSIONS: Though DFS was more favorable among those who received adjuvant therapy, it was not statistically significant, and thus based on this data adjuvant therapy for resected uLMS is still in question.

CSF1 receptor inhibition of tenosynovial giant cell tumor using novel disease-specific MRI measures of tumor burden.

Aim: Monitoring treatment of tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) is complicated by the irregular shape and asymmetrical growth of the tumor. We compared responses to pexidartinib by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 with those by tumor volume score (TVS) and modified RECIST (m-RECIST). Materials & methods: MRIs acquired every two cycles were assessed centrally using RECIST 1.1, m-RECIST and TVS and tissue damage score (TDS). Results: Thirty-one evaluable TGCT patients were treated with pexidartinib. From baseline to last visit, 94% of patients (29/31) showed a decrease in tumor size (median change: -60% [RECIST], -66% [m-RECIST], -79% [TVS]). All methods showed 100% disease control rate. For TDS, improvements were seen in bone erosion (32%), bone marrow edema (58%) and knee effusion (46%). Conclusion: TVS and m-RECIST offer potentially superior alternatives to conventional RECIST for monitoring disease progression and treatment response in TGCT. TDS adds important information about joint damage associated with TGCT.

Results from Phase I Extension Study Assessing Pexidartinib Treatment in Six Cohorts with Solid Tumors including TGCT, and Abnormal CSF1 Transcripts in TGCT.

PURPOSE: To assess the response to pexidartinib treatment in six cohorts of adult patients with advanced, incurable solid tumors associated with colony-stimulating factor 1 receptor (CSF1R) and/or KIT proto-oncogene receptor tyrosine kinase activity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From this two-part phase I, multicenter study, pexidartinib, a small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets CSF1R, KIT, and FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3), was evaluated in six adult patient cohorts (part 2, extension) with advanced solid tumors associated with dysregulated CSF1R. Adverse events, pharmacokinetics, and tumor responses were assessed for all patients; patients with tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) were also evaluated for tumor volume score (TVS) and patient-reported outcomes (PRO). CSF1 transcripts and gene expression were explored in TGCT biopsies. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients were treated: TGCT patients (n = 39) had a median treatment duration of 511 days, while other solid tumor patients (n = 52) had a median treatment duration of 56 days. TGCT patients had response rates of 62% (RECIST 1.1) and 56% (TVS) for the full analysis set. PRO assessments for pain showed improvement in patient symptoms, and 76% (19/25) of TGCT tissue biopsy specimens showed evidence of abnormal CSF1 transcripts. Pexidartinib treatment of TGCT resulted in tumor regression and symptomatic benefit in most patients. Pexidartinib toxicity was manageable over the entire study. CONCLUSIONS: These results offer insight into outcome patterns in cancers whose biology suggests use of a CSF1R inhibitor. Pexidartinib results in tumor regression in TGCT patients, providing prolonged control with an acceptable safety profile.

A Randomized Phase II Study of Nivolumab Monotherapy or Nivolumab Combined with Ipilimumab in Patients with Advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.

PURPOSE: Most gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) are driven by KIT/PDGFRa mutations. Tyrosine kinase inhibitor benefit is progressively less after imatinib failure. This phase II trial analyzed the efficacy of nivolumab (N) or nivolumab + ipilimumab (N + I) in patients with refractory GIST. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced/metastatic GIST refractory to at least imatinib were randomized 1:1 in a noncomparative, parallel group, unblinded phase II trial of N (240 mg every 2 weeks) or N + I (240 mg every 2 weeks + 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate of N alone or N+I by RECIST 1.1 in the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: A total of 36 patients with a median of 3 (1-6) prior lines of therapies were enrolled. Ten of 19 (52.6%) patients had stable disease (SD) for a clinical benefit rate (CBR) of 52.6% in the N arm and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11.7 weeks [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.0-17.4]. In the N+I arm, 1 of 16 (6.7%) patients had a complete response (CR) and 4/16 (25.0%) had SD for a CBR of 31.3% and a median PFS of 8.3 weeks (95% CI, 5.6-22.2). The 4- and 6-month PFS were 42.1% and 26.3%, respectively for N, and 31.3% and 18.8%, respectively for N+I. The most common adverse events (AE) attributed to N and N+I were fatigue: 13.9% and 22.2%, respectively. There were nine total attributable grade 3-4 AEs. CONCLUSIONS: The primary endpoint of response rate > 15% was not observed for N or N + I. In a heavily pretreated GIST population, responses and long-term disease control with both N and N+I were observed. No new safety signals have been observed.