Prevalence of mutations in common tumour types in Northern England and comparable utility of national and international Trial Finders.

PURPOSE: Tumour genomic profiling is of increasing importance in early phase trials to match patients to targeted therapeutics. Mutations vary by demographic group; however, regional differences are not characterised. This was investigated by comparing mutation prevalence for common cancers presenting to Newcastle Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (ECMC) to The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and utility of trial matching modalities. METHODS: Detailed clinicogenomic data were obtained for patients presenting September 2017-December 2020. Prevalence of mutations in lung, colorectal, breast and prostate cancer was compared to TCGA GDC Data Portal. Experimental Cancer (EC) Trial Finder utility in matching trials was compared to a Molecular Tumour Board (MTB) and commercial sequencing reports. RESULTS: Of 311 patients with advanced cancer, this consisted of lung (n = 131, 42.1%), colorectal (n = 44, 14.1%), breast (n = 36, 11.6%) and prostate (n = 18, 5.6%). More than one mutation was identified in the majority (n = 260, 84%). Significant prevalence differences compared to TCGA were identified, including a high prevalence of EGFR in lung (P = 0.001); RB1 in breast (P = 0.0002); and multiple mutations in prostate cancer. EC Trial Finder demonstrated significantly different utility than sequencing reports in identifying trials (P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Regional differences in mutations may exist with advanced stage accounting for prevalence of specific mutations. A national Trial Finder shows utility in finding targeted trials whilst commercial sequencing reports may over-report 'actionable' mutations. Understanding local prevalence and trial availability could increase enrolment onto matched early phase trials.

Oncology phase I trial design and conduct: time for a change - MDICT Guidelines 2022.

In 2021, the Food and Drug Administration Oncology Center of Excellence announced Project Optimus focusing on dose optimization for oncology drugs. The Methodology for the Development of Innovative Cancer Therapies (MDICT) Taskforce met to review and discuss the optimization of dosage for oncology trials and to develop a practical guide for oncology phase I trials. Defining a single recommended phase II dose based on toxicity may define doses that are neither the most effective nor the best tolerated. MDICT recommendations address the need for robust non-clinical data which are needed to inform trial design, as well as an expert team including statisticians and pharmacologists. The protocol must be flexible and adaptive, with clear definition of all endpoints. Health authorities should be consulted early and regularly. Strategies such as randomization, intrapatient dose escalation, and real-world eligibility criteria are encouraged whereas serial tumor sampling is discouraged in the absence of a strong rationale and appropriately validated assay. Endpoints should include consideration of all longitudinal toxicity. The phase I dose escalation trial should define the recommended dose range for later testing in randomized phase II trials, rather than a single recommended phase II dose, and consider scenarios where different populations may require different dosages. The adoption of these recommendations will improve dosage selection in early clinical trials of new anticancer treatments and ultimately, outcomes for patients.

CXD101 and nivolumab in patients with metastatic microsatellite-stable colorectal cancer (CAROSELL): a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with microsatellite stable (MSS) colorectal carcinoma (CRC) do not respond to immune checkpoint inhibitors. Preclinical models suggested synergistic anti-tumour activity combining CXD101 and anti-programmed cell death protein 1 treatment; therefore, we assessed the clinical combination of CXD101 and nivolumab in heavily pre-treated patients with MSS metastatic CRC (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This single-arm, open-label study enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-confirmed MSS CRC; at least two lines of systemic anticancer therapies (including oxaliplatin and irinotecan); at least one measurable lesion; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 1 or 2; predicted life expectancy above 3 months; and adequate organ and bone marrow function. Nine patients were enrolled in a safety run-in study to define a tolerable combination schedule of CXD101 and nivolumab, followed by 46 patients in the efficacy assessment phase. Patients in the efficacy assessment cohort were treated orally with 20 mg CXD101 twice daily for 5 consecutive days every 3 weeks, and intravenously with 240 mg nivolumab every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was immune disease control rate (iDCR). RESULTS: Between 2018 and 2020, 55 patients were treated with CXD101 and nivolumab. The combination therapy was well tolerated with the most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events being neutropenia (18%) and anaemia (7%). Immune-related adverse reactions commonly ascribed to checkpoint inhibitors were surprisingly rare although we did see single cases of pneumonitis, hypothyroidism and hypopituitarism. There were no treatment-related deaths. Of 46 patients assessable for efficacy, 4 (9%) achieved partial response and 18 (39%) achieved stable disease, translating to an immune disease control rate of 48%. The median overall survival (OS) was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval 5.13-10.22 months). CONCLUSIONS: The primary endpoint was met in this phase II study, which showed that the combination of CXD101 and nivolumab, at full individual doses in the treatment of advanced or metastatic MSS CRC, was both well tolerated and efficacious.

Results of the phase IIa RADICAL trial of the FGFR inhibitor AZD4547 in endocrine resistant breast cancer.

We conducted a phase IIa, multi-centre, open label, single arm study (RADICAL; NCT01791985) of AZD4547 (a potent and selective inhibitor of Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor (FGFR)-1, 2 and 3 receptor tyrosine kinases) administered with anastrozole or letrozole in estrogen receptor positive metastatic breast cancer patients who had become resistant to aromatase inhibitors. After a safety run-in study to assess safety and tolerability, we recruited 52 patients. The primary endpoint was change in tumour size at 12 weeks, and secondary endpoints were to assess response at 6 weeks, 20 weeks and every 8 weeks thereafter and tolerability of the combined treatment. Two partial responses (PR) and 19 stable disease (SD) patients were observed at the 12-week time point. At 28 weeks, according to centrally reviewed Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) criteria, five PR and 8 SD patients were observed in 50 assessable cases. Overall, objective response rate (5 PR) was of 10%, meeting the pre-specified endpoint. Fourteen patients discontinued due to adverse events. Eleven patients had retinal pigment epithelial detachments which was asymptomatic and reversible in all but one patient. Exploratory ribonucleic acid sequencing (RNA-Seq) analysis was done on patients' samples: 6 differentially-expressed-genes could distinguish those who benefited from the addition of AZD4547.

Cutaneous immune-related adverse events in patients with melanoma treated with checkpoint inhibitors.

Checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) therapy has vastly improved long-term outcomes in metastatic malignant melanoma (MMM). Therapy takes the form of monoclonal antibody infusions that target immune cell checkpoint proteins, such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA4) and programmed death 1/programmed death ligand 1 (PD1/PDL1). Cutaneous immune-related adverse effects (IrAEs) are frequent in patients with MMM treated with CPIs. Our aim was to review the clinical presentations of cutaneous IrAEs associated with CPI therapy in adult patients with MMM. We carried out a literature review of clinical trials, case series and case reports of patients with melanoma and those with other cancers treated with anti-CTLA4, anti-PD1/PDL1, or a combination of these therapies. Diverse clinical presentations of cutaneous IrAEs are recognized. Anti-CTLA4 therapy has a higher associated rate of cutaneous IrAEs than anti-PD1/PDL1 therapies. Low-grade cutaneous IrAEs are common and are usually managed supportively while continuing CPI therapy. Delayed presentations arising after established use of CPIs can make therapy-associated cutaneous IrAEs difficult to distinguish from coincidental dermatological disease. Vitiligo-like depigmentation is a good prognostic indicator of outcome in patients with melanoma. Life-threatening adverse events including toxic epidermal necrolysis are rare. The identification of predictive biomarkers that highlight patients at risk of life-threatening IrAEs remains an unmet need. The involvement of dermatologists in the multidisciplinary assessment of cutaneous IrAEs is increasingly pertinent in the management and care of CPI-treated patients with melanoma.

Long-term efficacy and safety of sonidegib in patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma: 42-month analysis of the phase II randomized, double-blind BOLT study.

BACKGROUND: Basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) exhibit aberrant activation of the hedgehog pathway. Sonidegib is a hedgehog pathway inhibitor approved for the treatment of locally advanced BCC (laBCC) and metastatic BCC (mBCC) based on primary results of the BOLT study [Basal Cell Carcinoma Outcomes with LDE225 (sonidegib) Treatment]. OBJECTIVES: This is the final 42-month analysis of the BOLT study, evaluating the efficacy and safety of sonidegib. METHODS: Adults with no prior hedgehog pathway inhibitor therapy were randomized in a 1 : 2 ratio to sonidegib 200 mg or 800 mg once daily. Treatment continued for up to 42 months or until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, study termination or withdrawal of consent. The primary efficacy end point was the objective response rate (ORR) by central review, assessed at baseline; weeks 5, 9 and 17; then subsequently every 8 or 12 weeks during years 1 or 2, respectively. Safety end points included adverse event monitoring and reporting. RESULTS: The study enrolled 230 patients, 79 and 151 in the 200-mg and 800-mg groups, respectively, of whom 8% and 3.3% remained on treatment by the 42-month cutoff, respectively. The ORRs by central review were 56% [95% confidence interval (CI) 43-68] for laBCC and 8% (95% CI 0·2-36) for mBCC in the 200-mg group and 46·1% (95% CI 37·2-55·1) for laBCC and 17% (95% CI 5-39) for mBCC in the 800-mg group. No new safety concerns emerged. CONCLUSIONS: Sonidegib demonstrated sustained efficacy and a manageable safety profile. The final BOLT results support sonidegib as a viable treatment option for laBCC and mBCC. What's already known about this topic? Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is usually treatable with surgery or radiation therapy, but there are limited treatment options for patients with advanced BCC. Sonidegib, a hedgehog pathway inhibitor approved for the treatment of advanced BCC, demonstrated clinically relevant efficacy and manageable safety in prior analyses of the phase II randomized, double-blind BOLT study [Basal Cell Carcinoma Outcomes with LDE225 (sonidegib) Treatment]. What does this study add? This final 42-month analysis of BOLT is the longest follow-up available for a hedgehog pathway inhibitor. Clinically relevant efficacy results were sustained from prior analyses, with objective response rates by central review of the approved 200-mg daily dose of 56% in locally advanced BCC and 8% in metastatic BCC. No new safety concerns were raised. The results confirmed sonidegib as a viable long-term treatment option for patients with advanced BCC.

Harnessing autophagy to overcome mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase inhibitor-induced resistance in metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with malignant melanoma often relapse after treatment with BRAF and/or mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) inhibitors (MEKi) owing to development of drug resistance. OBJECTIVES: To establish the temporal pattern of CD271 regulation during development of resistance by melanoma to trametinib, and determine the association between development of resistance to trametinib and induction of prosurvival autophagy. METHODS: Immunohistochemistry for CD271 and p62 was performed on human naevi and primary malignant melanoma tumours. Western blotting was used to analyse expression of CD271, p62 and LC3 in melanoma subpopulations. Flow cytometry and immunofluorescence microscopy was used to evaluate trametinib-induced cell death and CD271 expression. MTS viability assays and zebrafish xenografts were used to evaluate the effect of CD271 and autophagy modulation on trametinib-resistant melanoma cell survival and invasion, respectively. RESULTS: CD271 and autophagic signalling are increased in stage III primary melanomas vs. benign naevi. In vitro studies demonstrate MEKi of BRAF-mutant melanoma induced cytotoxic autophagy, followed by the emergence of CD271-expressing subpopulations. Trametinib-induced CD271 reduced autophagic flux, leading to activation of prosurvival autophagy and development of MEKi resistance. Treatment of CD271-expressing melanoma subpopulations with RNA interference and small-molecule inhibitors to CD271 reduced the development of MEKi resistance, while clinically applicable autophagy modulatory agents - including Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol and Vps34 - reduced survival of MEKi-resistant melanoma cells. Combined MEK/autophagy inhibition also reduced the invasive and metastatic potential of MEKi-resistant cells in an in vivo zebrafish xenograft. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight a novel mechanism of MEKi-induced drug resistance and suggest that targeting autophagy may be a translatable approach to resensitize drug-resistant melanoma cells to the cytotoxic effects of MEKi.

An extended phase Ib study of epertinib, an orally active reversible dual EGFR/HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Dose-escalation of epertinib (S-222611), a new potent oral EGFR/HER2 inhibitor, has established a recommended daily dose of 800 mg in patients with solid tumours. In this study, we have recruited a larger number of patients to assess further the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PKs) and antitumour activity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with solid tumours expressing EGFR or HER2 received a single dose of epertinib at 800 mg on Day 1 to assess PK over 7 days, followed by continuous once-daily dosing from Day 8. RESULTS: We treated 76 patients with breast (n = 27), upper gastrointestinal (GI; n = 30), head and neck (n = 12) or renal cancers (n = 7). Epertinib was well-tolerated with mostly grade I and II adverse events (AEs). The most frequent AE was diarrhoea, which was generally manageable with loperamide. The objective response rate (ORR) in patients with heavily pretreated breast and upper GI cancers was 16.0% (4 PRs) and 8.3% (1CR, 1PR), respectively. All six responding patients had HER2-positive tumours; the ORR for HER2-positive breast and upper GI cancer populations was 19.0% and 20.0%. Partial response in the brain disease of one breast cancer patient lasted 7.5 months. CONCLUSION: Once-daily dosing of epertinib at 800 mg was well-tolerated and demonstrated promising antitumour activity in patients with heavily pretreated HER2-positive breast and upper GI cancer, including those with brain metastases. EUDRACT NUMBER: 2009-017817-31.

Epiploic Appendagitis Mimicking Recurrent Diverticulitis.

Here, we report a case in which a patient with an extensive history of diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon presented with left lower quadrant abdominal pain similar to her previous episodes of diverticulitis. An initial diagnosis of diverticulitis was made based on her history and exam, intravenous antibiotics were given, and an elective surgical resection was considered. However, a subsequent CT scan revealed epiploic appendagitis with no evidence of diverticulitis. Though uncommon, in patients with a history of recurrent diverticulitis, alternative causes of left lower quadrant abdominal pain such as epiploic appendagitis should be considered as this may alter future treatment decisions.

Long-term efficacy and safety of sonidegib in patients with locally advanced and metastatic basal cell carcinoma: 30-month analysis of the randomized phase 2 BOLT study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma (laBCC) or metastatic BCC (mBCC), two difficult-to-treat populations, have had limited treatment options. Sonidegib, a hedgehog pathway inhibitor (HPI), was approved in laBCC based on results from the BOLT trial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term efficacy and safety of sonidegib in laBCC and mBCC in the BOLT 18- and 30-month analyses. METHODS: BOLT (NCT01327053, ClinicalTrials.gov), a double-blind phase 2 study, enrolled patients from July 2011 until January 2013. Eligible HPI-treatment-naïve patients with laBCC not amenable to curative surgery/radiotherapy or mBCC were randomized 1 : 2 to sonidegib 200 mg (laBCC, n = 66; mBCC, n = 13) or 800 mg (laBCC, n = 128; mBCC, n = 23). Tumour response was assessed per central and investigator review. RESULTS: With 30 months of follow-up, among patients treated with sonidegib 200 mg (approved dose), objective response rates were 56.1% (central) and 71.2% (investigator) in laBCC and 7.7% (central) and 23.1% (investigator) in mBCC. Tumour responses were durable as follows: median duration of response was 26.1 months (central) and 15.7 months (investigator) in laBCC and 24.0 months (central) and 18.1 months (investigator) in mBCC. Five patients with laBCC and three with mBCC in the 200-mg arm died. Median overall survival was not reached in either population; 2-year overall survival rates were 93.2% (laBCC) and 69.3% (mBCC). In laBCC, efficacy was similar regardless of aggressive or non-aggressive histology. Sonidegib 200 mg continued to have a better safety profile than 800 mg, with lower rates of grade 3/4 adverse events (43.0% vs. 64.0%) and adverse events leading to discontinuation (30.4% vs. 40.0%). CONCLUSION: Sonidegib continued to demonstrate long-term efficacy and safety in these populations. These data support the use of sonidegib 200 mg per local treatment guidelines.

A phase I, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of GSK2256098, a focal adhesion kinase inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Focal adhesion kinase (FAK) is important in cancer growth, survival, invasion, and migration. The purpose of this study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics (PD) of the FAK inhibitor, GSK2256098, in cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The dose of GSK2256098 was escalated, in cohorts of patients with advanced cancer, from 80 to 1500 mg, oral twice daily (BID), until the MTD was determined. Serial blood samples were obtained from all patients, and the PK was determined. Paired tumor biopsies were obtained in select patients, and the level of phospho-FAK (pFAK) was determined. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients (39 males, 23 females; median age 61 y.o., range 21-84) received GSK2256098. Dose-limiting toxicities of grade 2 proteinuria (1000 mg BID), grade 2 fatigue, nausea, vomiting (1250 mg BID), and grade 3 asthenia and grade 2 fatigue (1500 mg BID) were reported with the MTD identified as 1000 mg BID. The most frequent adverse events (AEs) were nausea (76%), diarrhea (65%), vomiting (58%), and decreased appetite (47%) with the majority of AEs being grades 1-2. The PK was generally dose proportional with a geometric mean elimination half-life range of 4-9 h. At the 750, 1000, and 1500 mg BID dose levels evaluated, the pFAK, Y397 autophosphorylation site, was reduced by ∼80% from baseline. Minor responses were observed in a patient with melanoma (-26%) and three patients with mesothelioma (-13%, -15%, and -17%). In the 29 patients with recurrent mesothelioma, the median progression-free survival was 12 weeks with 95% CI 9.1, 23.4 weeks (23.4 weeks merlin negative, n = 14; 11.4 weeks merlin positive, n = 9; 10.9 weeks merlin status unknown, n = 6). CONCLUSIONS: GSK2256098 has an acceptable safety profile, has evidence of target engagement at doses at or below the MTD, and has clinical activity in patients with mesothelioma, particularly those with merlin loss.

The prognostic significance and impact of the CXCR4-CXCR7-CXCL12 axis in primary cutaneous melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Expression of the chemokine receptor CXCR4 is known to regulate melanoma metastasis to distant sites with high expression of the CXCL12 ligand. However, the prognostic impact of CXCR4 expression and potential for autocrine-mediated activation of prosurvival mitogen-activated protein kinase signalling remains enigmatic. Furthermore, expression of the decoy receptor CXCR7 within the local cutaneous melanoma microenvironment remains undefined. OBJECTIVES: To define the contribution and prognostic impact of CXCR4-CXCR7-CXCL12 signalling in primary cutaneous melanomas and the immediate tumour microenvironment. METHODS: Immunohistochemical/immunofluorescent expression of CXCR4, CXCR7 or CXC12 was analysed in human metastatic melanoma cell lines, primary cutaneous cell types and a retrospective cohort of primary melanomas/benign naevi. CXCL12 secretion by melanoma/cutaneous cells was evaluated by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and autocrine CXCR4-CXCL12 signalling was investigated by addition of a CXCL12-neutralizing antibody. RESULTS: CXCR4 expression was significantly higher in primary melanomas that subsequently metastasized after 7 years (P = 0·037). Stratification for American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage II disease revealed significantly decreased disease-free survival in patients with > 50% CXCR4 expression (P = 0·036), while comparative analysis of CXCL12 expression in the adjacent epidermis of all AJCC stage melanomas revealed increased CXCL12 correlated with prolonged time to metastasis (P = 0·014). CXCR7 was expressed within the primary melanoma microenvironment but was absent on primary tumours. Addition of anti-CXCL12 to BRAF-mutant melanoma cells resulted in downregulation of phospho-CXCR4 and phospho-extracellular signal-related kinase, indicating autocrine CXCR4-CXCL12 signalling. CONCLUSIONS: CXCR4 expression defines a potential prognostic biomarker for AJCC stage II melanoma. Moreover, targeting the CXCR4-CXCR7-CXCL12 axis may represent a novel therapeutic strategy to prevent early melanoma progression.

An Adaptive Study to Determine the Optimal Dose of the Tablet Formulation of the PARP Inhibitor Olaparib.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib is poorly soluble, requiring advanced drug delivery technologies for adequate bioavailability. Sixteen capsules/day are required for the approved 400 mg twice-daily dose; a tablet formulation was developed to reduce pill burden. This clinical trial evaluated the optimal dose and administration schedule of the tablet formulation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two stages of sequentially enrolled cohorts: stage 1, pharmacokinetic properties of tablet and capsule formulations were compared in patients with advanced solid tumours; stage 2, tablet dose escalation with expansion cohorts at doses/schedules of interest in patients with solid tumours and BRCAm breast/ovarian cancers. RESULTS: Olaparib 200 mg tablets displayed similar Cmax,ss, but lower AUCss and Cmin,ss than 400 mg capsules. Following multiple dosing, steady-state exposure with tablets ≥300 mg matched or exceeded that of 400 mg capsules. After dose escalation, while 400 mg twice daily was the tablet maximum tolerated dose based on haematological toxicity, 65 % of patients in the randomized expansion phase eventually required dose reduction to 300 mg. Intermittent tablet administration did not significantly improve tolerability. Tumour shrinkage was similar for 300 and 400 mg tablet and 400 mg capsule cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The recommended monotherapy dose of olaparib tablet for Phase III trials was 300 mg twice daily, simplifying drug administration from 16 capsules to four tablets per day. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT00777582 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

A phase I, dose escalation, pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, and food-effect study of α2 integrin inhibitor E7820 in patients with advanced solid tumors.

UNLABELLED: Introduction E7820 is an orally administered sulfonamide that inhibits alfa-2-integrin mRNA expression. Pre-clinically E7820 showed tumor anti-angiogenic effects in various tumor cell lines and xenograft mouse models. Human daily dosing of 100 mg QD had previously been shown to be safe and tolerable. Methods The study consisted of two parts: Part A (food effect) and Part B (determination of maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for bi-daily (BID) dosing). E7820 dosing started at 50 mg BID with planned escalation to 60, 80 and 100 mg BID every 28 days. Results Fifteen patients were enrolled in Part A and 26 in Part B. The most frequent adverse events of all grades were constipation, diarrhea, nausea, and fatigue while anemia, neutropenia, and fatigue were most frequent grade ≥3 toxicities. At dose-level 60 mg BID, two patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities (grade 3 neutropenic sepsis and grade 4 neutropenia). Therefore the recommended dose (RD) was 50 mg BID. Food had no effect on E7820 exposure. E7820 exposure following twice daily administration was dose-proportional. Expression of platelet integrin-α2 measured as a response biomarker in Part B, generally decreased by a median 7.7 % from baseline following treatment with 50 mg BID E7820. Reduction was most pronounced within 1-week post treatment. The median duration of treatment was median 54, range 20-111 days. The best overall response in any treatment group was stable disease (SD): 23.1 % in Part A (100 mg QD); at the RD 66.7 % (12 of 18 patients) and 40 % in the 60 mg BID group in Part B. CONCLUSIONS: Food had no effect on E7820 exposure. A dose of 50 mg BID was considered the MTD. Treatment with E7820 is safe and tolerable with 2/3 of patients (66.7 %) at MTD having SD as their best response.

Policy Transfer Among Regional-Level Organizations: Insights from Source Water Protection in Ontario.

Organizations at the local and regional scales often face the challenge of developing policy mechanisms rapidly and concurrently, whether in response to expanding mandates, newly identified threats, or changes in the political environment. In the Canadian Province of Ontario, rapid, concurrent policy development was considered desirable by 19 regional organizations tasked with developing policies for protection of drinking water sources under very tight and highly prescribed mandates. An explicit policy transfer approach was used by these organizations. Policy transfer refers to using knowledge of policies, programs, and institutions in one context in the development of policies, programs, and institutions in another. This paper assesses three online mechanisms developed to facilitate policy transfer for source water protection in Ontario. Insights are based on a survey of policy planners from the 19 regional organizations who used the three policy transfer tools, supplemented by an analysis of three policies created and transferred among the 19 regional source water protection organizations. Policy planners in the study indicated they had used policy transfer to develop source protection policies for their regions-a finding confirmed by analysis of the text of policies. While the online policy transfer tools clearly facilitated systematic policy transfer, participants still preferred informal, direct exchanges with their peers in other regions over the use of the internet-based policy transfer mechanisms created on their behalf.

Randomized phase II study evaluating veliparib (ABT-888) with temozolomide in patients with metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Veliparib (ABT-888) is a potent, orally bioavailable, small-molecule inhibitor of the DNA repair enzymes poly ADP-ribose polymerase-1 and -2. Veliparib enhances the efficacy of temozolomide (TMZ) and other cytotoxic agents in preclinical tumor models. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind trial, adults with unresectable stage III or IV metastatic melanoma were randomized 1:1:1 to TMZ plus veliparib 20 or 40 mg, or placebo twice daily. Efficacy end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Patients (N = 346) were randomized between February 2009 and January 2010. Median [95% confidence interval (CI)] PFS was 3.7 (3.0-5.5), 3.6 (1.9-4.1), and 2 (1.9-3.7) months in the 20-mg, 40-mg, and placebo arms, respectively. Median (95% CI) OS was 10.8 (9.0-13.1), 13.6 (11.4-15.9), and 12.9 (9.8-14.3) months, respectively; ORR was 10.3%, 8.7%, and 7.0%. Exploratory analyses showed patients with low ERCC1 expression had longer PFS when TMZ was combined with veliparib. Toxicities were as expected for TMZ. The frequencies of thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and leukopenia were significantly increased in the veliparib groups. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events, mainly hematologic toxicities, were seen in 55%, 63%, and 41% of patients in the 20-mg, 40-mg, and placebo arms, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Median PFS with 20 and 40 mg veliparib almost doubled numerically compared with placebo, but the improvements did not reach statistical significance. OS was not increased with veliparib. Toxicities were similar to TMZ monotherapy, but with increased frequency.

Phase 1 dose-escalation study of S-222611, an oral reversible dual tyrosine kinase inhibitor of EGFR and HER2, in patients with solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: S-222611 is a reversible inhibitor of EGFR, HER2 and HER4 with preclinical activity in models expressing these proteins. We have performed a Phase 1 study to determine safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetic profile (PK) and efficacy in patients with solid tumours expressing EGFR or HER2. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Subjects had advanced tumours not suitable for standard treatment, expressing EGFR or HER2, and/or with amplified HER2. Daily oral doses of S-222611 were escalated from 100mg to 1600 mg. Full plasma concentration profiles for drug and metabolites were obtained. RESULTS: 33 patients received S-222611. It was well tolerated, and the most common toxicities, almost all mild (grade 1 or 2), were diarrhoea, fatigue, rash and nausea. Only two dose-limiting toxicities occurred (diarrhoea and rash), which resolved on interruption. MTD was not reached. Plasma exposure increased with dose up to 800 mg, exceeding levels eliciting pre-clinical responses. The plasma terminal half-life was more than 24h, supporting once daily dosing. Responses were seen over a wide range of doses in oesophageal, breast and renal tumours, including a complete clinical response in a patient with HER2-positive breast carcinoma previously treated with lapatinib and trastuzumab. Four patients have remained on treatment for more than 12 months. Downregulation of pHER3 was seen in paired tumour biopsies from a responding patient. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous daily oral S-222611 is well tolerated, modulates oncogenic signalling, and has significant antitumour activity. The recommended Phase 2 dose, based on PK and efficacy, is 800 mg/day.