Afamitresgene autoleucel for advanced synovial sarcoma and myxoid round cell liposarcoma (SPEARHEAD-1): an international, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Afamitresgene autoleucel (afami-cel) showed acceptable safety and promising efficacy in a phase 1 trial (NCT03132922). The aim of this study was to further evaluate the efficacy of afami-cel for the treatment of patients with HLA-A*02 and MAGE-A4-expressing advanced synovial sarcoma or myxoid round cell liposarcoma. METHODS: SPEARHEAD-1 was an open-label, non-randomised, phase 2 trial done across 23 sites in Canada, the USA, and Europe. The trial included three cohorts, of which the main investigational cohort (cohort 1) is reported here. Cohort 1 included patients with HLA-A*02, aged 16-75 years, with metastatic or unresectable synovial sarcoma or myxoid round cell liposarcoma (confirmed by cytogenetics) expressing MAGE-A4, and who had received at least one previous line of anthracycline-containing or ifosfamide-containing chemotherapy. Patients received a single intravenous dose of afami-cel (transduced dose range 1·0 × 109-10·0 × 109 T cells) after lymphodepletion. The primary endpoint was overall response rate in cohort 1, assessed by a masked independent review committee using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1) in the modified intention-to-treat population (all patients who received afami-cel). Adverse events, including those of special interest (cytokine release syndrome, prolonged cytopenia, and neurotoxicity), were monitored and are reported for the modified intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04044768; recruitment is closed and follow-up is ongoing for cohorts 1 and 2, and recruitment is open for cohort 3. FINDINGS: Between Dec 17, 2019, and July 27, 2021, 52 patients with cytogenetically confirmed synovial sarcoma (n=44) and myxoid round cell liposarcoma (n=8) were enrolled and received afami-cel in cohort 1. Patients were heavily pre-treated (median three [IQR two to four] previous lines of systemic therapy). Median follow-up time was 32·6 months (IQR 29·4-36·1). Overall response rate was 37% (19 of 52; 95% CI 24-51) overall, 39% (17 of 44; 24-55) for patients with synovial sarcoma, and 25% (two of eight; 3-65) for patients with myxoid round cell liposarcoma. Cytokine release syndrome occurred in 37 (71%) of 52 of patients (one grade 3 event). Cytopenias were the most common grade 3 or worse adverse events (lymphopenia in 50 [96%], neutropenia 44 [85%], leukopenia 42 [81%] of 52 patients). No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Afami-cel treatment resulted in durable responses in heavily pre-treated patients with HLA-A*02 and MAGE-A4-expressing synovial sarcoma. This study shows that T-cell receptor therapy can be used to effectively target solid tumours and provides rationale to expand this approach to other solid malignancies. FUNDING: Adaptimmune.

Impact on costs and outcomes of multi-gene panel testing for advanced solid malignancies: a cost-consequence analysis using linked administrative data.

Background: To date, economic analyses of tissue-based next generation sequencing genomic profiling (NGS) for advanced solid tumors have typically required models with assumptions, with little real-world evidence on overall survival (OS), clinical trial enrollment or end-of-life quality of care. Methods: Cost consequence analysis of NGS testing (555 or 161-gene panels) for advanced solid tumors through the OCTANE clinical trial (NCT02906943). This is a longitudinal, propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada using linked administrative data. Patients enrolled in OCTANE at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre from August 2016 until March 2019 were matched with contemporary patients without large gene panel testing from across Ontario not enrolled in OCTANE. Patients were matched according to 19 patient, disease and treatment variables. Full 2-year follow-up data was available. Sensitivity analyses considered alternative matched cohorts. Main Outcomes were mean per capita costs (2019 Canadian dollars) from a public payer's perspective, OS, clinical trial enrollment and end-of-life quality metrics. Findings: There were 782 OCTANE patients with 782 matched controls. Variables were balanced after matching (standardized difference <0.10). There were higher mean health-care costs with OCTANE ($79,702 vs. $59,550), mainly due to outpatient and specialist visits. Publicly funded drug costs were less with OCTANE ($20,015 vs. $24,465). OCTANE enrollment was not associated with improved OS (restricted mean survival time [standard error]: 1.50 (±0.03) vs. 1.44 (±0.03) years, log-rank p = 0.153), varying by tumor type. In five tumor types with ≥35 OCTANE patients, OS was similar in three (breast, colon, uterus, all p > 0.40), and greater in two (ovary, biliary, both p < 0.05). OCTANE was associated with greater clinical trial enrollment (25.4% vs. 9.5%, p < 0.001) and better end-of-life quality due to less death in hospital (10.2% vs. 16.4%, p = 0.003). Results were robust in sensitivity analysis. Interpretation: We found an increase in healthcare costs associated with multi-gene panel testing for advanced cancer treatment. The impact on OS was not significant, but varied across tumor types. OCTANE was associated with greater trial enrollment, lower publicly funded drug costs and fewer in-hospital deaths suggesting important considerations in determining the value of NGS panel testing for advanced cancers. Funding: T.P H holds a research grant provided by the Ontario Institute for Cancer Research through funding provided by the Government of Ontario (#IA-035 and P.HSR.158) and through funding of the Canadian Network for Learning Healthcare Systems and Cost-Effective 'Omics Innovation (CLEO) via Genome Canada (G05CHS).

Early changes in tumor-naive cell-free methylomes and fragmentomes predict outcomes in pembrolizumab-treated solid tumors.

Early kinetics of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in plasma predict response to pembrolizumab, but typically requires sequencing of matched tumor tissue or fixed gene panels. We analyzed genome-wide methylation and fragment length profiles using cell-free methylated DNA immunoprecipitation and sequencing (cfMeDIP-seq) in 204 plasma samples from 87 patients before and during treatment with pembrolizumab from a pan-cancer phase II investigator-initiated trial (INSPIRE). We trained a pan-cancer methylation signature using independent methylation array data from The Cancer Genome Atlas to quantify a cancer-specific methylation (CSM) and fragment length score (FLS) for each sample. CSM and FLS are strongly correlated with tumor-informed ctDNA levels. Early kinetics of CSM predict overall survival and progression-free survival, independently of tumor type, PD-L1, and tumor mutation burden. Early kinetics of FLS are associated with overall survival independently of CSM. Our tumor-naïve mutation-agnostic ctDNA approach integrating methylomics and fragmentomics could predict outcomes in patients treated with pembrolizumab.

Safety, Immunologic, and Clinical Activity of Durvalumab in Combination with Olaparib or Cediranib in Advanced Leiomyosarcoma: Results of the DAPPER Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: Non-inflamed (cold) tumors such as leiomyosarcoma do not benefit from immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) monotherapy. Combining ICB with angiogenesis or PARP inhibitors may increase tumor immunogenicity by altering the immune cell composition of the tumor microenvironment (TME). The DAPPER phase II study evaluated the safety, immunologic, and clinical activity of ICB-based combinations in pretreated patients with leiomyosarcoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive durvalumab 1,500 mg IV every 4 weeks with either olaparib 300 mg twice a day orally (Arm A) or cediranib 20 mg every day orally 5 days/week (Arm B) until unacceptable toxicity or disease progression. Paired tumor biopsies, serial radiologic assessments and stool collections were performed. Primary endpoints were safety and immune cell changes in the TME. Objective responses and survival were correlated with transcriptomic, radiomic, and microbiome parameters. RESULTS: Among 30 heavily pretreated patients (15 on each arm), grade ≥ 3 toxicity occurred in 3 (20%) and 2 (13%) on Arms A and B, respectively. On Arm A, 1 patient achieved partial response (PR) with increase in CD8 T cells and macrophages in the TME during treatment, while 4 had stable disease (SD) ≥ 6 months. No patients on Arm B achieved PR or SD ≥ 6 months. Transcriptome analysis showed that baseline M1-macrophage and B-cell activity were associated with overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Durvalumab plus olaparib increased immune cell infiltration of TME with clinical benefit in some patients with leiomyosarcoma. Baseline M1-macrophage and B-cell activity may identify patients with leiomyosarcoma with favorable outcomes on immunotherapy and should be further evaluated.

A tailored phase I-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) survey to capture the patient experience of symptomatic adverse events.

BACKGROUND: Patient perspectives are fundamental to defining tolerability of investigational anti-neoplastic therapies in clinical trials. Phase I trials present a unique challenge in designing tools for efficiently collecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) given the difficulty of anticipating adverse events of relevance. However, phase I trials also offer an opportunity for investigators to optimize drug dosing based on tolerability for future larger-scale trials and in eventual clinical practice. Existing tools for comprehensively capturing PROs are generally cumbersome and are not routinely used in phase I trials. METHODS: Here, we describe the creation of a tailored survey based on the National Cancer Institute's PRO-CTCAE for collecting patients' perspectives on symptomatic adverse events in phase I trials in oncology. RESULTS: We describe our stepwise approach to condensing the original 78-symptom library into a modified 30 term core list of symptoms which can be efficiently applied. We further show that our tailored survey aligns with phase I trialists' perspectives on symptoms of relevance. CONCLUSIONS: This tailored survey represents the first PRO tool developed specifically for assessing tolerability in the phase I oncology population. We provide recommendations for future work aimed at integrating this survey into clinical practice.

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.

Tumor-Naïve Circulating Tumor DNA as an Early Response Biomarker for Patients Treated With Immunotherapy in Early Phase Clinical Trials.

PURPOSE: To evaluate early circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) kinetics using a tumor-naïve assay and correlate it with clinical outcomes in early phase immunotherapy (IO) trials. METHODS: Plasma samples were analyzed using a 425-gene next-generation sequencing panel at baseline and before cycle 2 (3-4 weeks) in patients with advanced solid tumors treated with investigational IO agents. Variant allele frequency (VAF) for mutations in each gene, mean VAF (mVAF) from all mutations, and change in mVAF between both time points were calculated. Hyperprogression (HyperPD) was measured using Matos and Caramella criteria. RESULTS: A total of 162 plasma samples were collected from 81 patients with 27 different tumor types. Patients were treated in 37 different IO phase I/II trials, 72% of which involved a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor. ctDNA was detected in 122 plasma samples (75.3%). A decrease in mVAF from baseline to precycle 2 was observed in 24 patients (37.5%) and was associated with longer progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.77; P < .01) and overall survival (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.3 to 0.96; P = .03) compared with an increase. These differences were more marked if there was a >50% decrease in mVAF for both progression-free survival (HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.62; P < .001) and overall survival (HR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.6; P = .001). No differences in mVAF changes were observed between the HyperPD and progressive disease patients. CONCLUSION: A decrease in ctDNA within 4 weeks of treatment was associated with treatment outcomes in patients in early phase IO trials. Tumor-naïve ctDNA assays may be useful for identifying early treatment benefits in phase I/II IO trials.

A Phase 1B open-label study of gedatolisib (PF-05212384) in combination with other anti-tumour agents for patients with advanced solid tumours and triple-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: This Phase 1b study (B2151002) evaluated the PI3K/mTOR inhibitor gedatolisib (PF-05212384) in combination with other anti-tumour agents in advanced solid tumours. METHODS: Patients with various malignancies were administered gedatolisib (90‒310 mg intravenously every week [QW]) plus docetaxel (arm A) or cisplatin (arm B) (each 75 mg/m2 intravenously Q3W) or dacomitinib (30 or 45 mg/day orally). The safety and tolerability of combination therapies were assessed during dose escalation; objective response (OR) and safety were assessed during dose expansion. RESULTS: Of 110 patients enrolled, 107 received gedatolisib combination treatment. Seven of 70 (10.0%) evaluable patients had dose-limiting toxicities; the most common was grade 3 oral mucositis (n = 3). Based upon reprioritisation of the sponsor's portfolio, dose expansion focused on arm B, gedatolisib (180 mg QW) plus cisplatin in patients (N = 22) with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). OR (95% CI) was achieved in four of ten patients in first-line (overall response rate 40.0% [12.2-73.8%]) and four of 12 in second/third-line (33.3% [9.9-65.1%]) settings. One patient in each TNBC arm (10%, first-line; 8.3%, second/third-line) achieved a complete response. CONCLUSIONS: Gedatolisib combination therapy showed an acceptable tolerability profile, with clinical activity at the recommended Phase 2 dose in patients with TNBC. CLINICAL TRIAL: ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01920061.

Evaluation of the patient experience of symptomatic adverse events on Phase I clinical trials using PRO-CTCAE.

BACKGROUND: Adverse event (AE) reporting in early-phase clinical trials is essential in determining the tolerability of experimental anticancer therapies. The patient-reported outcome version of the CTCAE (PRO-CTCAE) evaluates AE components such as severity and interference in daily life. The aim of this study was to correlate the grade of clinician-reported AEs with patients' reported experience of these toxicities using PRO-CTCAE. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumours enrolled on Phase I clinical trials were surveyed using the PRO-CTCAE. Symptomatic AEs were recorded by physicians using the CTCAE. A logistic regression model was used to assess associations between CTCAE grade and PRO responses. RESULTS: Of 219 evaluable patients, 81 experienced a high-grade (3/4) clinician-reported symptom, and of these, only 32 (40%) and 26 (32%) patients concordantly reported these as either severe or very severe, and interfering with daily life either 'quite a bit' or 'very much', respectively. Of the 137 patients who experienced a low-grade (1/2) clinician-reported AE as their worst symptom, 98 (72%) and 118 (86%) patients concordantly reported these as either mild-moderate severity and minimally interfering with daily life, respectively. There was a statistically significant association between clinician-reported AE grade and interference. Interference scores were also associated with dose reductions. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to explore patient-reported severity and interference from symptomatic toxicities and compare clinician grading of the same toxicities. The study provided further evidence to support the added value of the PRO-CTCAE in Phase I oncology trials, which would make AE reporting patient-centred. Further work is needed to determine how this would affect the assessment of tolerability.

Leiomyosarcoma: Current Clinical Management and Future Horizons.

Leiomyosarcomas are soft tissue tumors that are derived from smooth muscle mainly in the pelvis and retroperitoneum. Percutaneous biopsy is paramount to confirm diagnosis. Imaging is necessary to complete clinical staging. Multimodal treatment should be directed by expert sarcoma multidisciplinary teams that see a critical volume of these rare tumors. Surgery is the mainstay of curative intent treatment; however due to its high metastatic progression, there may be a benefit for neoadjuvant systemic treatment. Adjuvant systemic treatment has no proven disease-free survival, and its main role is in the palliative setting to potentially prolong overall survival.

Quality of life of patients with soft tissue sarcoma treated with doxorubicin in the ANNOUNCE phase III clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including health-related quality of life, are recommended to be routinely collected in clinical trials, but data are limited from trials of sarcoma patients. In this analysis, pooled PRO data are reported from patients with advanced or metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS) enrolled to the ANNOUNCE phase III trial of doxorubicin-based therapy. METHODS: ANNOUNCE was a phase III trial that randomized 509 patients with STS to receive up to eight cycles of doxorubicin with olaratumab or placebo, followed by single-agent olaratumab or placebo. Dexrazoxane was allowed at any cycle of treatment. Participants completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30, which is scored 0-100), and Brief Pain Inventory Short Form Modified (mBPI-sf, scored from 0-10) at each treatment cycle. A descriptive analysis of the longitudinal data was conducted overall and by cumulative dose of doxorubicin received to inform the clinical care of patients with STS. Worsening on the QLQ-C30 was defined as a change of 10 points or more at any post-baseline assessment. Worsening on the mPBI-sf was defined as an increase of ≥2 points from baseline. RESULTS: The majority of participants completed the baseline and at least one subsequent PRO assessment within the trial (n = 460, 90.4% EORTC QLQ-C30; n = 454, 89.2%, mBPI-sf). Patients with STS enrolled to the ANNOUNCE trial had clinically meaningful problems with physical function and pain before initiating doxorubicin. Overall, those with fewer symptoms or better function at baseline received higher cumulative doxorubicin dose throughout the study. At baseline, mean QLQ-C30 fatigue was 29.9 with a median time to first worsening of 0.9 months, and mean nausea/vomiting was 6.5 with 1.4 months until worsening; mean physical function was 78.3 with median time to worsening of 2.1 months and mean health status was 66.8 with median time to first worsening of 1.6 months. Median time to worsening of pain was 7.9 months. CONCLUSION: Patients with advanced or metastatic sarcoma reported a relatively rapid decline in PROs during doxorubicin-based treatment, with patients with poorer symptoms at baseline (specifically fatigue), subsequently receiving less doxorubicin therapy. The availability of detailed summary data from the patient perspective during doxorubicin-based treatment may inform future care of these patients and can provide a resource for the development of PRO endpoints in future trials.

A Phase 2 Trial of Afatinib in Patients with Solid Tumors that Harbor Genomic Aberrations in the HER family: The MOBILITY3 Basket Study.

BACKGROUND: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)- and human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)2-targeted therapies are approved for the treatment of breast, gastric/gastrointestinal junction (GEJ), and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with specific molecular aberrations affecting HER family members. Over 10 % of other cancers harbor genomic aberrations affecting HER family members, but their role remains undefined. OBJECTIVE: The MOBILITY3 trial evaluated the antitumor activity of afatinib, an oral pan-HER tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) in HER-aberrant tumors outside of the licensed indications. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this single-center basket trial, patients with advanced solid tumors that harbor mutations and/or amplifications of any of the HER family members (EGFR, ERBB2, ERBB3, ERBB4) were enrolled. The EGFR-mutated NSCLC and HER2-positive breast cancers were excluded. Participants were treated with oral afatinib 40 mg daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) were primary and secondary endpoints, respectively. RESULTS: The study enrolled 12 patients with 6 tumor types (NSCLC, sarcoma, salivary gland, gastric/GEJ, breast and pancreatic cancer). Objective response rate was 8 % (95 % CI 0.2-38%) and median PFS was 11.4 weeks (95% CI 4.6-33.3 weeks). All 3 patients with salivary gland cancers and 1 patient with ERBB2-mutant NSCLC had clinical benefit (stable disease or partial response lasting > 24 weeks). Due to slow accrual and a lower-than-expected response rate, trial recruitment was terminated before the target of 30 patients were enrolled. CONCLUSIONS: In the MOBILITY3 study (NCT02506517), afatinib demonstrated modest activity in tumors that possess EGFR and ERBB2 aberrations. Clinical benefit seen in all 3 salivary gland cancers supports the growing evidence for the utility of HER-targeted therapies in the treatment of this specific tumor type.

Co-Targeting of MDM2 and CDK4/6 with Siremadlin and Ribociclib for the Treatment of Patients with Well-Differentiated or Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma: Results from a Proof-of-Concept, Phase Ib Study.

PURPOSE: Well-differentiated (WDLPS) and dedifferentiated (DDLPS) liposarcoma are characterized by co-amplification of the murine double minute-2 (MDM2) and cyclin-dependent kinase-4 (CDK4) oncogenes. Siremadlin, a p53-MDM2 inhibitor, was combined with ribociclib, a CDK4/6 inhibitor, in patients with locally advanced/metastatic WDLPS or DDLPS who had radiologically progressed on, or despite, prior systemic therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this proof-of-concept, phase Ib, dose-escalation study, patients received siremadlin and ribociclib across different regimens until unacceptable toxicity, disease progression, and/or treatment discontinuation: Regimen A [4-week cycle: siremadlin once daily (QD) and ribociclib QD (2 weeks on, 2 weeks off)], Regimen B [3-week cycle: siremadlin once every 3 weeks; ribociclib QD (2 weeks on, 1 week off)], and Regimen C [4-week cycle: siremadlin once every 4 weeks; ribociclib QD (2 weeks on, 2 weeks off)]. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and/or recommended dose for expansion (RDE) of siremadlin plus ribociclib in one or more regimens. RESULTS: As of October 16, 2019 (last patient last visit), 74 patients had enrolled. Median duration of exposure was 13 (range, 1-174) weeks. Dose-limiting toxicities occurred in 10 patients, most of which were Grade 3/4 hematologic events. The RDE was siremadlin 120 mg every 3 weeks plus ribociclib 200 mg QD (Regimen B). Three patients achieved a partial response, and 38 achieved stable disease. One patient (Regimen C) died as a result of treatment-related hematotoxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Siremadlin plus ribociclib demonstrated manageable toxicity and early signs of antitumor activity in patients with advanced WDLPS or DDLPS.

Canadian consensus on TRK-inhibitor therapy for NTRK fusion-positive sarcoma.

Malignant sarcomas are rare accounting for <1% of all adult solid malignancies and approximately 11% to 13% of all pediatric malignancies. TRK-inhibitors have demonstrated robust and long-lasting responses in patients with NTRK fusion-positive solid tumors, including sarcoma. Access to these agents in many jurisdictions such as Canada remains limited. We undertook a modified Delphi consensus to articulate and convey the clinical importance of these agents for the Canadian sarcoma community. A systematic search of published and presented literature was conducted to identify clinical trials reporting outcomes on the use of TRK-inhibitors in relapsed/refractory NTRK fusion-positive sarcoma. Three main consensus questions were identified: (a) is there currently an unmet clinical need for systemic therapy options in relapsed/refractory sarcoma? (b) do TRK-inhibitors confer a clinical benefit to patients with NTRK fusion-positive sarcoma? (c) do phase I/II basket trials provide sufficient evidence to justify funding of TRK-inhibitors in NTRK fusion-positive sarcoma? Response rates to the first and second surveys were 57% (n = 30) and 42% (n = 22), respectively. There was strong agreement among the Canadian sarcoma community that there was unmet clinical need for effective systemic therapy options in relapsed/refractory sarcoma, that TRK-inhibitors are a safe and effective treatment option for patients with NTRK fusion-positive sarcoma, and that available phase I/II basket trials provide sufficient evidence to support funding of these agents in relapsed/refractory NTRK fusion-positive sarcoma. TRK-inhibitors are a safe and effective systemic therapy option for patients with relapsed/refractory NTRK fusion-positive sarcoma.

Pharmacokinetics of Selinexor: The First-in-Class Selective Inhibitor of Nuclear Export.

The functionality of many tumor suppressor proteins (TSPs) and oncoprotein transcript RNAs largely depend on their location within the cell. The exportin 1 complex (XPO1) transports many of these molecules from the nucleus into the cytoplasm, thereby inactivating TSPs and activating oncoprotein transcript RNAs. Aberrations of these molecules or XPO1 can increase this translocation process, leading to oncogenesis. Selinexor is a selective inhibitor of nuclear export and is an active agent in various malignancies. It is currently approved for relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma as well as multiple myeloma. Following oral administration, selinexor exhibits linear and time-independent pharmacokinetics (PK) across a wide dose range, with moderately rapid absorption (time to reach maximum concentration [Tmax] 2-4 h) and moderate elimination (half-life [t½] 6-8 h). Selinexor PK observed among patients with various solid tumors and hematologic malignancies is consistent irrespective of disease. Population PK analyses demonstrated the PK of selinexor is well-described by a two-compartment model, with significant relationships for body weight on apparent clearance and apparent central volume of distribution, and sex on apparent clearance, which result in clinically non-relevant changes in exposure. These analyses also suggested selinexor PK are not significantly impacted by various concomitant medications and organ dysfunction (hepatic/renal). The time course of selinexor PK appears similar between pediatric and adult patients, although higher exposures have been observed among pediatric patients relative to adults administered similar milligrams per meter squared (mg/m2) doses of selinexor.

Health-related quality of life and pain with selinexor in patients with advanced dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

Objective: Compare health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of selinexor versus placebo in patients with dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Materials & methods: HRQoL was assessed at baseline and day 1 of each cycle using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-item core quality of life questionnaire. Results were reported from baseline to day 169 (where exposure to treatment was maximized while maintaining adequate sample size). Results: Pain scores worsened for placebo versus selinexor across all postbaseline visits, although differences in HRQoL at some visits were not significant. Other domains did not exhibit significant differences between arms; however, scores in both arms deteriorated over time. Conclusion: Patients treated with selinexor reported lower rates and slower worsening of pain compared with patients who received placebo.

Lay abstract The goal of this study was to compare the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with advanced unresectable dedifferentiated liposarcoma treated with selinexor compared with those treated with placebo. HRQoL was measured prior to treatment initiation and at the first day of each cycle of their treatment using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 30-item core quality of life questionnaire. Pain scores worsened for placebo compared with selinexor across all visits after treatment, but differences at some visits were not significant. Other domains did not exhibit significant differences between arms; however, scores in both arms worsened over time reflecting the progressive disease burden in this patient population. As pain is one of the most devastating symptoms associated with advanced and progressing cancers, the significant reduction in pain in the selinexor arm, according to patient perception, represent a relevant added value of this drug in dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

The Future of Clinical Trial Design in Oncology.

Clinical trials represent a fulcrum for oncology drug discovery and development to bring safe and effective medicines to patients in a timely manner. Clinical trials have shifted from traditional studies evaluating cytotoxic chemotherapy in largely histology-based populations to become adaptively designed and biomarker-driven evaluations of molecularly targeted agents and immune therapies in selected patient subsets. This review will discuss the scientific, methodological, practical, and patient-focused considerations to transform clinical trials. A call to action is proposed to establish the framework for next-generation clinical trials that strikes an optimal balance of operational efficiency, scientific impact, and value to patients. SIGNIFICANCE: The future of cancer clinical trials requires a framework that can efficiently transform scientific discoveries to clinical utility through applications of innovative technologies and dynamic design methodologies. Next-generation clinical trials will offer individualized strategies which ultimately contribute to globalized knowledge and collective learning, through the joint efforts of all key stakeholders including investigators and patients.

Underreporting of Symptomatic Adverse Events in Phase I Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Clinician reporting of symptomatic adverse events (AEs) in phase I trials uses the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). The utility of the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) version of the CTCAE (PRO-CTCAE) in this setting is unknown. This prospective, observational study compared patient- and clinician-reported symptomatic AEs in phase I patients. METHODS: Phase I study-eligible patients at Princess Margaret were surveyed with the PRO-CTCAE full-item library (78 symptomatic AEs) at baseline (BL), mid-cycle 1, and mid-cycle 2 (C2). Patient and trial characteristics, best response, and survival data were collected. Presence or absence of patient- (PRO-CTCAE) or clinician-reported symptomatic AEs were compared (kappa) at defined timepoints and overall (BL+ mid-cycle 1 + C2). RESULTS: Of 292 patients approached from May 2017 to January 2019, a total of 265 (90.8%) were consented, with 243 (91.7%) evaluable and 552 PRO-CTCAE surveys (completion rate = 98.7%) included in analyses. Evaluation of overall patient-reported symptomatic AEs identified 50 PRO-CTCAE and 11 CTCAE items with 10% or greater reporting frequency. Nineteen CTCAE items were reported as 1% or less despite matched PRO-CTCAE items reporting as 10% or greater. Underreported categories included sexual health, bodily emissions, and cognition. Clinician- relative to patient-reporting frequency (ratio) demonstrated 9 symptomatic AEs with a 50-fold or more lower clinician reporting rate. Overall patient-clinician agreement for individual symptomatic AEs ranged from poor (κ = 0.00-0.19) to moderate (κ = 0.40-0.59), with discordance driven by lack of clinician reporting. Dyspnea (κ = 0.54) and peripheral neuropathy (κ = 0.63) at BL and limb edema (κ = 0.55) at C2 demonstrated the highest patient-clinician agreement. CONCLUSIONS: Poor to moderate patient-clinician agreement for symptomatic AEs suggests clinician underreporting in phase I trials. Analyses of severity and interference PRO categories are ongoing.

The role of Denosumab in joint preservation for patients with giant cell tumour of bone.

AIMS: Local recurrence remains a challenging and common problem following curettage and joint-sparing surgery for giant cell tumour of bone (GCTB). We previously reported a 15% local recurrence rate at a median follow-up of 30 months in 20 patients with high-risk GCTB treated with neoadjuvant Denosumab. The aim of this study was to determine if this initial favourable outcome following the use of Denosumab was maintained with longer follow-up. METHODS: Patients with GCTB of the limb considered high-risk for unsuccessful joint salvage, due to minimal periarticular and subchondral bone, large soft tissue mass, or pathological fracture, were treated with Denosumab followed by extended intralesional curettage with the goal of preserving the joint surface. Patients were followed for local recurrence, metastasis, and secondary sarcoma. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients with a mean age of 33.8 years (18 to 67) with high-risk GCTB received median six cycles of Denosumab before surgery. Tumours occurred most commonly around the knee (17/25, 68%). The median follow-up was 57 months (interquartile range (IQR) 13 to 88). The joint was salvaged in 23 patients (92%). Two required knee arthroplasty due to intra-articular fracture and arthritis. Local recurrence developed in 11 patients (44%) at a mean of 32.5 months (3 to 75) following surgery, of whom four underwent repeat curettage and joint salvage. One patient developed secondary osteosarcoma and another benign GCT lung metastases. CONCLUSION: The use of Denosumab for joint salvage was associated with a higher than expected rate of local recurrence at 44%. Neoadjuvant Denosumab for joint-sparing procedures should be considered with caution in light of these results. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(1):184-191.