Transforming patient-centered cancer care using telehealth: the MATCHES Center.

Modern cancer care is costly and logistically burdensome for patients and their families despite an expansion of technology and medical advances that create the opportunity for novel approaches to care. Therefore, there is a growing appreciation for the need to leverage these innovations to make cancer care more patient centered and convenient. The Memorial Sloan Kettering Making Telehealth Delivery of Cancer Care at Home Efficient and Safe Telehealth Research Center is a National Cancer Institute-designated and funded Telehealth Research Center of Excellence poised to generate the evidence necessary to inform the appropriate use of telehealth as a strategy to improve access to cancer services that are convenient for patients. The center will evaluate telehealth as a strategy to personalize cancer care delivery to ensure that it is not only safe and effective but also convenient and efficient. In this article, we outline this new center's research strategy, as well as highlight challenges that exist in further integrating telehealth into standard oncology practice based on early experiences.

A Phase 1 Safety Study of Avelumab Plus Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma.

Introduction: Single-agent monoclonal antibody therapy against programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) has modest effects in malignant pleural mesothelioma. Radiation therapy can enhance the antitumor effects of immunotherapy. Nevertheless, the safety of combining anti-PD-L1 therapy with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is unknown. We present the results of a phase 1 trial to evaluate the safety of the anti-PD-L1 antibody avelumab plus SBRT in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Methods: This was a single-arm, investigator-initiated trial in patients who progressed on prior chemotherapy. Avelumab was delivered every other week, and SBRT was delivered to one lesion in three to five fractions (minimum of 30 Gy) followed by continuation of avelumab up to 24 months or until disease progression. The primary end point of the study was safety on the basis of grade 3+ nonhematologic adverse events (AEs) within 3 months of SBRT. Results: Thirteen assessable patients received a median of seven cycles (range: 2-26 cycles) of avelumab. There were 27 grade 1, 17 grade 2, four grade 3, and no grade 4 or 5 avelumab-related AEs. The most common were infusion-related allergic reactions (n = 6), anorexia or weight loss (n = 6), fatigue (n = 6), thyroid disorders (n = 5), diarrhea (n = 3), and myalgia or arthralgias (n = 3). There were 10 grade 1, four grade 2, one grade 3, and no grade 4 or 5 SBRT-related AEs. The most common were diarrhea (n = 3), chest pain/myalgia (n = 2), fatigue (n = 2), cough (n = 2), dyspnea (n = 2), and nausea/vomiting (n = 2). Conclusions: Combination avelumab plus SBRT seems tolerable on the basis of the prespecified toxicity end points of the first stage of this Simon two-stage design phase 1 study.

Pilot Study of Dacomitinib for Patients With Metastatic EGFR-Mutant Lung Cancers With Disease Progression After Initial Treatment With Osimertinib.

Patients with EGFR-mutant lung cancer have no approved targeted therapies after disease progression on first-line osimertinib, a third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). Preclinical studies suggest that tumors with both EGFR-sensitizing alteration and acquired second-site EGFR resistance alterations after treatment with osimertinib retain sensitivity to second-generation EGFR TKIs. We hypothesized that dacomitinib, a pan-human epidermal growth factor receptor TKI, may be effective in this setting. METHODS: In this phase II study, patients who had progressed on first-line osimertinib were treated with dacomitinib 45 mg orally daily until disease progression or intolerability. The primary end point was objective response rate. RESULTS: We enrolled 12 patients. Two partial responses were documented (17% objective response rate; 95% CI, 5 to 45). The median progression-free survival was 1.8 months (95% CI, 1.6 to not reached). One patient with an original sensitizing EGFR G719A mutation and one patient without molecular testing available had partial responses, whereas 0 of the 3 patients with second-site acquired EGFR resistance mutations (two C797S and one G724S) met the response criteria. The patient with EGFR G719A has an ongoing response at 17 months, which exceeds prior time on osimertinib (11 months). CONCLUSION: In the first trial evaluating a second-generation EGFR TKI after first-line third-generation osimertinib, we found that dacomitinib after disease progression on osimertinib has limited benefit.

Novel Preclinical Patient-Derived Lung Cancer Models Reveal Inhibition of HER3 and MTOR Signaling as Therapeutic Strategies for NRG1 Fusion-Positive Cancers.

INTRODUCTION: NRG1 rearrangements produce chimeric ligands that subvert the ERBB pathway to drive tumorigenesis. A better understanding of the signaling networks that mediate transformation by NRG1 fusions is needed to inform effective therapeutic strategies. Unfortunately, this has been hampered by a paucity of patient-derived disease models that faithfully recapitulate this molecularly defined cancer subset. METHODS: Patient-derived xenograft (PDX) and cell line models were established from NRG1-rearranged lung adenocarcinoma samples. Transcriptomic, proteomic, and biochemical analyses were performed to identify activated pathways. Efficacy studies were conducted to evaluate HER3- and MTOR-directed therapies. RESULTS: We established a pair of PDX and cell line models of invasive mucinous lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) (LUAD-0061AS3, SLC3A2-NRG1), representing the first reported paired in vitro and in vivo model of NRG1-driven tumors. Growth of LUAD-0061AS3 models was reduced by the anti-HER3 antibody GSK2849330. Transcriptomic profiling revealed activation of the MTOR pathway in lung tumor samples with NRG1 fusions. Phosphorylation of several MTOR effectors (S6 and 4EBP1) was higher in LUAD-0061AS3 cells compared with human bronchial epithelial cells and the breast cancer cell line MDA-MB-175-VII (DOC4-NRG1 fusion). Accordingly, LUAD-0061AS3 cells were more sensitive to MTOR inhibitors than MDA-MB-175-VII cells and targeting the MTOR pathway with rapamycin blocked growth of LUAD-0061AS3 PDX tumors in vivo. In contrast, MDA-MB-175-VII breast cancer cells had higher MAPK pathway activation and were more sensitive to MEK inhibition. CONCLUSIONS: We identify the MTOR pathway as a candidate vulnerability in NRG1 fusion-positive lung adenocarcinoma that may warrant further preclinical evaluation, with the eventual goal of finding additional therapeutic options for patients in whom ERBB-directed therapy fails. Moreover, our results uncover heterogeneity in downstream oncogenic signaling among NRG1-rearranged cancers, possibly tumor type-dependent, the therapeutic significance of which requires additional investigation.