Impact of COVID-19 on Management and Outcomes of Oncology Patients: Results of MENA COVID-19 and Cancer Registry (MCCR).

Introduction: Despite extensive studies of the impact of COVID-19 on patients with cancer, there is a dearth of information from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Our study aimed to report pertinent MENA COVID-19 and Cancer Registry (MCCR) findings on patient management and outcomes. Methods: MCCR was adapted from the American Society of Clinical Oncology COVID-19 Registry to collect data specifically from patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 infection from 12 centers in eight countries including Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Egypt, Algeria, United Arab Emirates, and Morocco. The Registry included data on patients and disease characteristics, treatment, and patient outcomes. Logistic regression was used to assess associations with mortality. Results: Between November 29, 2020, and June 8, 2021, data were captured on 2008 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from the beginning of the pandemic. Median age was 56 years (16-98), 56.4% were females, and 26% were current or ex-smokers. Breast cancer (28.5%) was the leading diagnosis and 50.5% had metastatic disease. Delays of planned treatment (>14 days) occurred in 80.3% for surgery, 48.8% for radiation therapy, and 32.9% for systemic therapy. Significant reduction in the delays of all three treatment modalities occurred after June 1, 2020. All-cause mortality rates at 30 and 90 days were 17.1% and 23.4%, respectively. All-cause mortality rates at 30 days did not change significantly after June 1, 2020; however, 90-day mortality increased from 33.4% to 42.9% before and after that date (p = 0.015). Multivariable regression analysis showed the following predictors of higher 30- and 90-day mortality: age older than 70 years, having metastatic disease, disease progression, and being off chemotherapy. Conclusion: Patients with cancer in the MENA region experienced similar risks and outcome of COVID-19 as reported in other populations. Although there were fewer treatment delays after June 1, 2020, 90-day mortality increased, which may be attributed to other risk factors such as disease progression or new patients who presented with more advanced disease.

Pertuzumab Plus Trastuzumab in Patients With Biliary Tract Cancer With ERBB2/3 Alterations: Results From the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study.

PURPOSE: Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry is a phase II basket trial evaluating the antitumor activity of commercially available targeted agents in patients with advanced cancer and genomic alterations known to be drug targets. Results of a cohort of patients with biliary tract cancer (BTC) with ERBB2/3 amplification, overexpression, or mutation treated with pertuzumab plus trastuzumab are reported. METHODS: Eligible patients had advanced BTC, measurable disease (RECIST v1.1), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, adequate organ function, tumors with ERBB2/3 alterations, and a lack of standard treatment options. Simon's two-stage design was used with a primary end point of disease control (DC), defined as objective response (OR) or stable disease of at least 16+ weeks duration (SD16+) according to RECIST v1.1. Secondary end points included OR, progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, duration of stable disease, and safety. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients were enrolled from February 2017 to January 2022, and all had advanced BTC with an ERBB2/3 alteration. One patient was not evaluable for efficacy. One complete response, eight partial responses, and two SD16+ were observed for DC and OR rates of 40% (90% CI, 27 to 100) and 32% (95% CI, 16 to 52), respectively. The null hypothesis of 15% DC rate was rejected (P = .0015). Four patients had at least one grade 3 adverse event (AE) or serious AE at least possibly related to treatment: anemia, diarrhea, infusion-related reaction, and fatigue. CONCLUSION: Pertuzumab plus trastuzumab met prespecified criteria to declare a signal of activity in patients with BTC and ERBB2/3 amplification, overexpression, or mutation.

Regorafenib in Patients With Solid Tumors With BRAF Alterations: Results From the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) Study.

PURPOSE: Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry is a phase II basket trial evaluating the antitumor activity of commercially available targeted agents in patients with advanced cancer with genomic alterations known to be drug targets. Results of a cohort of patients with solid tumors with BRAF alterations treated with regorafenib are reported. METHODS: Eligible patients had measurable disease (RECIST v.1.1), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, adequate organ function, and no standard treatment options. The primary end point was disease control (DC), defined as investigator assessment of patients with complete or partial response (PR) or stable disease of at least 16-weeks duration (SD16+). Low accruing histology-specific cohorts with BRAF alterations treated with regorafenib were collapsed into a single histology-pooled cohort for this analysis. The results were evaluated on the basis of a one-sided exact binomial test with a null DC rate of 15% versus 35% (power, 0.84; α, .10). Secondary end points were objective response (OR), progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, duration of stable disease, and safety. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients with 12 tumor types with BRAF alterations were enrolled from June 2016 to June 2021. All patients were evaluable for efficacy. Two patients with PR and four with SD16+ were observed for DC and OR rates of 21% (90% CI, 12 to 100) and 7% (95% CI, 1 to 24), respectively. The null hypothesis of 15% DC rate was not rejected (P = .24). Eight patients had at least one grade 3 adverse event or serious adverse event at least possibly related to regorafenib. CONCLUSION: Regorafenib did not meet prespecified criteria to declare a signal of activity in patients with solid tumors with BRAF alterations.

Critical importance of correctly defining and reporting secondary endpoints when assessing the ethics of research biopsies.

This article reviews the implementation challenges to the American Society of Clinical Oncology's ethical framework for including research biopsies in oncology clinical trials. The primary challenges to implementation relate to the definitions of secondary endpoints, the scientific and regulatory framework, and the incentive structure that encourages inclusion of biopsies. Principles of research stewardship require that the clinical trials community correctly articulate the scientific goals of any research biopsies, especially those that are required for the patient to enroll on a trial and receive an investigational agent. Furthermore, it is important to sufficiently justify the characterization of secondary (as distinguished from exploratory) endpoints, protect the interest of research participants, and report accurate and complete information to ClinicalTrials.gov and the published literature.

Current issues in dose-finding designs: A response to the US Food and Drug Adminstrations's Oncology Center of Excellence Project Optimus.

With the advent of targeted agents and immunological therapies, the medical research community has become increasingly aware that conventional methods for determining the best dose or schedule of a new agent are inadequate. It has been well established that conventional phase I designs cannot reliably identify safe and effective doses. This problem applies, generally, for cytotoxic agents, radiation therapy, targeted agents, and immunotherapies. To address this, the US Food and Drug Administration's Oncology Center of Excellence initiated Project Optimus, with the goal "to reform the dose optimization and dose selection paradigm in oncology drug development." As a response to Project Optimus, the articles in this special issue of Clinical Trials review recent advances in methods for choosing the dose or schedule of a new agent with an overall objective of informing clinical trialists of these innovative designs. This introductory article briefly reviews problems with conventional methods, the regulatory changes that encourage better dose optimization designs, and provides brief summaries of the articles that follow in this special issue.

Concordance in Molecular Tumor Board Case Reviews in the ASCO TAPUR Study.

PURPOSE: With the advent of precision medicine, molecular tumor boards (MTBs) were established to interpret genomic results and guide decision making for targeted therapy in oncology patients. There are currently no universal guidelines for how MTBs should operate and thus variance can be seen depending on which MTB is reviewing the case. This study assesses the concordance of MTB recommendations when a participant case is reviewed by two different MTBs, establishes potential reasons for discordance, and advocates for the establishment of standard MTB operating guidelines. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Participants with advanced cancer, who had exhausted all standard treatment options were screened for the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) Study. Cases were submitted for MTB review if the treatment proposal was outside the protocol genomic matching rules, or if multiple treatment options were identified. Of the 306 cases submitted for review by the TAPUR MTB from 2016 to 2018, 107 were randomly selected for secondary review by a different MTB group. Recommendations from the original review were not disclosed. Concordance between MTB group recommendations was assessed. Concordance was defined as agreement between MTB reviews on the genomic alteration and study drug match proposed by the clinical site. Thematic qualitative analysis was conducted for the discordant cases to assess reasons for discordance. RESULTS: Complete or partial concordance was observed in 79% of cases (95% CI, 70 to 86; one-sided P = .25). Most discordant analyses were due to disagreements on the strength of evidence regarding efficacy of the proposed treatment (32%). CONCLUSION: When presented with identical participant cases, different MTB review groups make the same or similar treatment recommendations approximately 80% of the time.

Sunitinib in Patients With Breast Cancer With FGFR1 or FGFR2 Amplifications or Mutations: Results From the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study.

PURPOSE: The Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study is a phase II basket trial evaluating the antitumor activity of commercially available targeted agents in patients with advanced cancer and genomic alterations known to be drug targets. Results from cohorts of patients with metastatic breast cancer (BC) with FGFR1 and FGFR2 alterations treated with sunitinib are reported. METHODS: Eligible patients had measurable disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, adequate organ function, and no standard treatment options. Simon's two-stage design was used with a primary end point of disease control (DC), defined as objective response (OR) or stable disease of at least 16 weeks duration (SD16+) according to RECIST v1.1. Secondary end points included OR, progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, duration of stable disease, and safety. RESULTS: Forty patients with BC with FGFR1 (N = 30; amplification only n = 26, mutation only n = 1, both n = 3) or FGFR2 (N = 10; amplification only n = 2, mutation only n = 6, both n = 2) alterations were enrolled. Three patients in the FGFR1 cohort were not evaluable for efficacy; all patients in the FGFR2 cohort were evaluable. For the FGFR1 cohort, two patients with partial response and four with SD16+ were observed for DC and OR rates of 27% (90% CI, 13 to 100) and 7% (95% CI, 1 to 24), respectively. The null hypothesis of 15% DC rate was not rejected (P = .169). No patients achieved DC in the FGFR2 cohort (P = 1.00). Thirteen of the 40 total patients across both cohorts had at least one grade 3-4 adverse event or serious adverse event at least possibly related to sunitinib. CONCLUSION: Sunitinib did not meet prespecified criteria to declare a signal of antitumor activity in patients with BC with either FGFR1 or FGFR2 alterations. Other treatments and clinical trials should be considered for these patient populations.

Cobimetinib Plus Vemurafenib in Patients With Solid Tumors With BRAF Mutations: Results From the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study.

PURPOSE: The Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study is a phase II basket study evaluating antitumor activity of commercially available targeted agents in patients with advanced cancers with genomic alterations known to be drug targets. The results in a cohort of patients with solid tumors with BRAF mutations treated with cobimetinib plus vemurafenib are reported. METHODS: Eligible patients had measurable disease (RECIST v.1.1), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, adequate organ function, and no standard treatment options. The primary end point was disease control (DC), defined as complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) or stable disease of at least 16-weeks duration (SD16+). Low-accruing histology-specific cohorts with BRAF mutations treated with cobimetinib plus vemurafenib were collapsed into a single histology-pooled cohort for this analysis. The results were evaluated on the basis of a one-sided exact binomial test with a null DC rate of 15% versus 35% (power, .82; α, .10). The secondary end points were objective response (OR), progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, duration of stable disease, and safety. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients with solid tumors with BRAF mutations were enrolled. Twenty-eight patients were evaluable for efficacy. Patients had tumors with BRAF V600E (n = 26), K601E (n = 2), or other (n = 3) mutations. Two patients with CR (breast and ovarian cancers; V600E), 14 with PR (13 V600E, one N581I), and three with SD16+ (two V600E, one T599_V600insT) were observed with a DC rate of 68% (P < .0001; one-sided 90% CI, 54 to 100) and an OR rate of 57% (95% CI, 37 to 76). Nineteen patients experienced ≥one drug-related grade 3-5 adverse event or serious adverse event including one death attributed to treatment-related kidney injury. CONCLUSION: Cobimetinib plus vemurafenib showed antitumor activity in patients with advanced solid tumors with BRAF V600E mutations; additional study is warranted to confirm the antitumor activity in tumors with non-V600E BRAF mutations.

Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Patients With Solid Tumors With ATM Mutations: Results From the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) Study.

PURPOSE: The Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study is a phase II basket study evaluating the antitumor activity of commercially available targeted agents in patients with advanced cancers with genomic alterations known to be drug targets. Results of a cohort of patients with solid tumors with ATM mutations treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab are reported. METHODS: Eligible patients had measurable disease (RECIST v.1.1), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, adequate organ function, and no standard treatment options. Primary end point was disease control (DC), defined as complete (CR) or partial (PR) response or stable disease (SD) of at least 16 weeks duration (SD16+). Low-accruing histology-specific cohorts with ATM mutations treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab were collapsed into a single histology-pooled cohort for this analysis. The results were evaluated based on a one-sided exact binomial test with a null DC rate of 15% versus 35% (power = .84; α = .10). Secondary end points were objective response (OR), progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, duration of SD, and safety. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients with 10 tumor types with ATM mutations were enrolled from January 2018 to May 2020. One patient was not evaluable for efficacy. One CR, three PR, and three SD16+ were observed for DC and OR rates of 24% (P = .13; one-sided 90% CI: 14 to 100) and 14% (95% CI: 4 to 32), respectively. The null hypothesis of 15% DC rate was not rejected. Eleven patients had one treatment-related grade 3 adverse event (AE) or serious AE. There were two treatment-related patient deaths including immune-related encephalitis and respiratory failure. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab did not meet prespecified criteria to declare a signal of activity in patients with solid tumors with ATM mutations.

Pembrolizumab in Patients With Tumors With High Tumor Mutational Burden: Results From the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study.

PURPOSE: The Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) Study is a pragmatic basket trial evaluating antitumor activity of approved targeted agents in patients with advanced cancers harboring potentially actionable genomic alterations. Data from cohorts of patients with high tumor mutational burden (HTMB, defined as ≥9 mutations per megabase) with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) and other advanced cancers treated with pembrolizumab are reported. METHODS: Eligible patients were 18 years and older with measurable tumors and a lack of standard treatment options, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and adequate organ function. The primary end point was disease control (DC), defined as complete or partial response or stable disease (SD) of at least 16-weeks duration. For the CRC cohort, Simon's two-stage design with a null DC rate of 15% versus 35% (power = 0.85; α = .10) was used. Low accruing histology-specific cohorts were collapsed into one histology-pooled (HP) cohort. For the HP cohort, the null hypothesis of a DC rate of 15% was rejected if the lower limit of a one-sided 90% CI was >15%. Secondary end points included objective response (OR), safety, progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, and duration of SD. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients with HTMB with CRC (n = 28) or advanced cancers (n = 49) were treated with pembrolizumab. For the CRC cohort, the DC rate was 31% (P = .04) and the OR rate was 11%. For the HP cohort, the DC rate was 45% (one-sided 90% CI, 35 to 100) and the OR rate was 26%. The null hypothesis of a 15% DC rate was rejected for both cohorts. Twelve of 77 patients experienced treatment-related grade 3 adverse events (AEs) or serious AEs, including two deaths. CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab demonstrated antitumor activity in pretreated patients with advanced cancers and HTMB.

Sponsor Perspectives on the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Interventional Cancer Clinical Trial Protocols and Data Quality.

PURPOSE: The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic created major disruptions in the conduct of cancer clinical trials. In response, regulators and sponsors allowed modifications to traditional trial processes to enable clinical research and care to continue. We systematically evaluated how these mitigation strategies affected data quality and overall trial conduct. METHODS: This study used surveys and live interviews. Forty-one major industry and National Cancer Institute Network groups (sponsors) overseeing anticancer treatment trials open in the United States from January 2015 to May 2022 were invited to participate. Descriptive statistics were used for survey data summaries. Key themes from interviews were identified. RESULTS: Twenty sponsors (48.8%; 15 industry and five Network groups) completed the survey; 11/20 (55.0%) participated in interviews. Sponsors predominantly (n = 12; 60.0%) reported large (≥11 trials) portfolios of phase II and/or phase III trials. The proportion of sponsors reporting a moderate (9) or substantial (8) increase in protocol deviations in the initial pandemic wave versus the pre-pandemic period was 89.5% (17/19); the proportion reporting a substantial increased dropped from 42.1% (n = 8/19) in the initial wave to 15.8% (n = 3/19) thereafter. The most commonly adopted mitigation strategies were remote distribution of oral anticancer therapies (70.0%), remote adverse event monitoring (65.0%), and remote consenting (65.0%). Most respondents (15/18; 83.3%) reported that the pandemic had minimal (n = 14) or no impact (n = 1) on overall data integrity. CONCLUSION: Despite nearly all sponsors observing a temporary increase in protocol deviations, most reported the pandemic had minimal/no impact on overall data integrity. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated an emerging trend toward greater flexibility in trial conduct, with potential benefits of reduced burden on trial participants and sites and improved patient access to research.

The Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study: A pragmatic clinical trial.

The conceptual framework of pragmatism in clinical trials is explored using the American Society of Clinical Oncology's pragmatic, non-randomized, phase II, multi-center basket clinical trial, the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study (NCT02693535) as a model. The Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study aims to identify signals of drug activity when Food and Drug Administration approved drugs are matched to pre-specified genomic targets in patients with advanced cancer outside of their approved indication(s). The objectives of the study are to generate evidence of potential signals of activity in targeted therapies prescribed in an off-label setting as well as to expose and educate community cancer centers to genomic testing and precision medicine through the study protocol. The principles of pragmatic trial design can be applied across a broad spectrum of evidence-generation strategies, from explanatory trials to real-world evidence studies, and are briefly discussed. American Society of Clinical Oncology's Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study falls closer to the pragmatic end of this spectrum as it seeks to assess the efficacy of Food and Drug Administration approved drugs used outside their approved indications under usual care conditions, yielding results generalizable to the population that would likely receive the intervention in practice, while still adhering to rigorous data quality standards. The Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study's pragmatic objectives, characteristics, strengths, and limitations in its implementation are discussed and demonstrate that a large, multi-center, precision medicine basket trial can be mounted in the context of community practice and can generate clinically useful information with minimal burden to patients and clinical trial sites.

Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points in Neoadjuvant Breast Cancer Clinical Trials: NeoSTEEP.

PURPOSE: The Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points (STEEP) criteria, established in 2007 and updated in 2021 (STEEP 2.0), provide standardized definitions of adjuvant breast cancer (BC) end points. STEEP 2.0 identified a need to separately address end points for neoadjuvant clinical trials. The multidisciplinary NeoSTEEP working group of experts was convened to critically evaluate and align neoadjuvant BC trial end points. METHODS: The NeoSTEEP working group concentrated on neoadjuvant systemic therapy end points in clinical trials with efficacy outcomes-both pathologic and time-to-event survival end points-particularly for registrational intent. Special considerations for subtypes and therapeutic approaches, imaging, nodal staging at surgery, bilateral and multifocal diseases, correlative tissue collection, and US Food and Drug Administration regulatory considerations were contemplated. RESULTS: The working group recommends a preferred definition of pathologic complete response (pCR) as the absence of residual invasive cancer in the complete resected breast specimen and all sampled regional lymph nodes (ypT0/Tis ypN0 per AJCC staging). Residual cancer burden should be a secondary end point to facilitate future assessment of its utility. Alternative end points are needed for hormone receptor-positive disease. Time-to-event survival end point definitions should pay particular attention to the measurement starting point. Trials should include end points originating at random assignment (event-free survival and overall survival) to capture presurgery progression and deaths as events. Secondary end points adapted from STEEP 2.0, which are defined from starting at curative-intent surgery, may also be appropriate. Specification and standardization of biopsy protocols, imaging, and pathologic nodal evaluation are also crucial. CONCLUSION: End points in addition to pCR should be selected on the basis of clinical and biologic aspects of the tumor and the therapeutic agent investigated. Consistent prespecified definitions and interventions are paramount for clinically meaningful trial results and cross-trial comparison.

Pertuzumab Plus Trastuzumab in Patients With Lung Cancer With ERBB2 Mutation or Amplification: Results From the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study.

PURPOSE: The Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry Study is a pragmatic basket trial evaluating antitumor activity of commercially available targeted agents in patients with advanced cancers harboring potentially actionable genomic alterations. Data from a cohort of patients with lung cancer and ERBB2 mutation or amplification treated with pertuzumab plus trastuzumab (P + T) are reported. METHODS: Eligible patients had advanced lung cancer of any histology, no standard treatment options, measurable disease (RECIST v1.1), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, adequate organ function, and tumors with ERBB2 mutation or amplification. Simon's two-stage design was used with a primary end point of disease control (DC), defined as objective response (OR) per RECIST v. 1.1 or stable disease (SD) of at least 16 weeks duration (SD16+). Secondary end points included safety, duration of response, duration of SD, progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients with lung cancer (27 non-small-cell, 1 small-cell) and ERBB2 mutation (n = 15), ERBB2 amplification (n = 12), or both (n = 1) were enrolled from November 2016 to July 2020. All patients were evaluable for efficacy and toxicity. Three patients with partial response (two ERBB2 mutation; one both mutation and amplification) and seven patients with SD16+ (five ERBB2 mutation; two amplification) were observed for a DC rate of 37% (95% CI, 21 to 50; P = .005) and OR rate of 11% (95% CI, 2 to 28). Five patients had one or more grade 3 or 4 adverse or serious adverse events at least possibly related to P + T. CONCLUSION: Combination P + T showed evidence of antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with non-small-cell lung cancer and ERBB2 mutation or amplification, particularly those with ERBB2 exon 20 insertion mutations.

Pertuzumab Plus Trastuzumab in Patients With Endometrial Cancer With ERBB2/3 Amplification, Overexpression, or Mutation: Results From the TAPUR Study.

PURPOSE: The TAPUR Study is a pragmatic basket trial evaluating antitumor activity of commercially available targeted agents in patients with advanced cancers harboring potentially actionable genomic alterations. Data from a cohort of patients with endometrial cancer (EC) with ERBB2 or ERBB3 (ERBB2/3) amplification, overexpression, or mutation treated with pertuzumab plus trastuzumab (P + T) are reported. METHODS: Eligible patients had advanced EC, no standard treatment options, measurable disease (RECIST v1.1), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, adequate organ function, and tumors with ERBB2/3 amplification, overexpression, or mutation. Simon's two-stage design was used with a primary end point of disease control (DC), defined as objective response (OR) or stable disease (SD) of at least 16 weeks (SD16+) duration. Secondary end points include safety, duration of response, duration of SD, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients were enrolled from March 2017 to November 2019; all patients were evaluable for efficacy and toxicity. Seventeen patients had tumors with ERBB2/3 amplification and/or overexpression, eight with both ERBB2 amplification and ERBB2/3 mutations, and three with only ERBB2 mutations. Ten patients had DC (two partial response and eight SD16+); all 10 had ERBB2 amplification, and 6 of the 10 patients with DC had >1 ERBB2/3 alteration. DC and OR rates were 37% (95% CI, 21 to 50) and 7% (95% CI, 1 to 24), respectively; the median PFS and median OS were 16 weeks (95% CI, 10-28) and 61 weeks (95% CI, 24-105), respectively. One patient experienced a grade 3 serious adverse event (muscle weakness) at least possibly related to P + T. CONCLUSION: P + T has antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with EC with ERBB2 amplification and warrants additional study.

Rate of COVID-19 vaccination among patients with cancer who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2: Analysis of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Registry.

BACKGROUND: The availability of safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines has enabled protections against serious COVID-19 outcomes, which are particularly important for patients with cancer. The American Society of Clinical Oncology Registry enabled the study of COVID-19 vaccine uptake in patients with cancer who were positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2. METHODS: Medical oncology practices entered data on patients who were in cancer treatment. The cohort included patients who had severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 infection in 2020 and had visits and vaccine data after December 31, 2020. The primary end point was the time to first vaccination from January 1, 2021. Cumulative incidence estimates and Cox regression with death as a competing risk were used to describe the time to vaccine uptake and factors associated with vaccine receipt. RESULTS: The cohort included 1155 patients from 56 practices. Among 690 patients who received the first vaccine dose, 92% received the second dose. The median time to vaccine was 99 days. After adjustment, older patients were associated with a higher likelihood of vaccination compared with patients younger than 50 years in January through March 2021, and age exhibited a linear effect, with older patients showing higher rates of vaccination. Metastatic solid tumors (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.98) or non-B-cell hematologic malignancies (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.54-0.93) compared with nonmetastatic solid tumors, and any comorbidity (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73-0.95) compared with no comorbidity, were associated with lower vaccination rates. Area-level social determinants of health (lower education attainment and higher unemployment rates) were associated with lower vaccination rates. CONCLUSIONS: Patient age, cancer type, comorbidity, area-level education attainment, and unemployment rates were associated with differential vaccine uptake rates. These findings should inform strategies to communicate about vaccine safety and efficacy to patients with cancer.

Olaparib in Patients With Metastatic Prostate Cancer With BRCA1/2 Mutation: Results From the TAPUR Study.

PURPOSE: The TAPUR Study is a phase II basket trial that aims to evaluate activity of approved targeted agents in patients with advanced cancers with potentially actionable genomic variants. Data from a cohort of patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and BRCA1/2 mutations treated with olaparib are reported. METHODS: Eligible patients with measurable mCRPC were matched to treatment according to protocol-specified genomic matching rules. Patients had no remaining standard treatment options, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, and adequate organ function. Simon's two-stage design was used with a primary end point of disease control, defined as objective response or stable disease of at least 16-week duration. Secondary end points include radiographic progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, duration of stable disease, and safety. RESULTS: Thirty patients with mCRPC with BRCA1/2 mutations were treated with olaparib. The disease control rate was 69% (95% CI, 51 to 81), and the objective response rate was 58% (95% CI, 37 to 77). The median radiographic progression-free survival and the median overall survival were 38.4 (95% CI, 16.3 to 52.1) weeks and 76.4 (95% CI, 49.3 to 106.0) weeks, respectively. Six of 30 (20%) patients experienced grade 3-4 adverse or serious adverse events including anemia, aspiration, decreased WBC count, and fatigue. CONCLUSION: Olaparib has antitumor activity in patients with mCRPC with BRCA1/2 mutations and warrants further study to determine how to best integrate it into the standard treatment of patients with BRCA1/2-mutated prostate cancer.

Increasing Racial and Ethnic Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Cancer Treatment Trials: Evaluation of an ASCO-Association of Community Cancer Centers Site Self-Assessment.

Clinical trial participants do not reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of people with cancer. ASCO and the Association of Community Cancer Centers collaborated on a quality improvement study to enhance racial and ethnic equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) in cancer clinical trials. The groups conducted a pilot study to examine the feasibility, utility, and face validity of a two-part clinical trial site self-assessment to enable diverse types of research sites in the United States to (1) review internal data to assess racial and ethnic disparities in screening and enrollment and (2) review their policies, programs, procedures to identify opportunities and strategies to improve EDI. Overall, 81% of 62 participating sites were satisfied with the assessment; 82% identified opportunities for improvement; and 63% identified specific strategies and 74% thought the assessment had potential to help their site increase EDI. The assessment increased awareness about performance (82%) and helped identify specific strategies (63%) to increase EDI in trials. Although most sites (65%) were able to provide some data on the number of patients that consented, only two sites were able to provide all requested trial screening, offering, and enrollment data by race and ethnicity. Documenting and evaluating such data are critical steps toward improving EDI and are key to identifying and addressing disparities more broadly. ASCO and Association of Community Cancer Centers will partner with sites to better understand their processes and the feasibility of collecting screening, offering, and enrollment data in systematic and automated ways.