Myelopreservation with the CDK4/6 inhibitor trilaciclib in patients with small-cell lung cancer receiving first-line chemotherapy: a phase Ib/randomized phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced damage of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPC) causes multi-lineage myelosuppression. Trilaciclib is an intravenous CDK4/6 inhibitor in development to proactively preserve HSPC and immune system function during chemotherapy (myelopreservation). Preclinically, trilaciclib transiently maintains HSPC in G1 arrest and protects them from chemotherapy damage, leading to faster hematopoietic recovery and enhanced antitumor immunity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a phase Ib (open-label, dose-finding) and phase II (randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled) study of the safety, efficacy and PK of trilaciclib in combination with etoposide/carboplatin (E/P) therapy for treatment-naive extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer patients. Patients received trilaciclib or placebo before E/P on days 1-3 of each cycle. Select end points were prespecified to assess the effect of trilaciclib on myelosuppression and antitumor efficacy. RESULTS: A total of 122 patients were enrolled, with 19 patients in part 1 and 75 patients in part 2 receiving study drug. Improvements were seen with trilaciclib in neutrophil, RBC (red blood cell) and lymphocyte measures. Safety on trilaciclib+E/P was improved with fewer ≥G3 adverse events (AEs) in trilaciclib (50%) versus placebo (83.8%), primarily due to less hematological toxicity. No trilaciclib-related ≥G3 AEs occurred. Antitumor efficacy assessment for trilaciclib versus placebo, respectively, showed: ORR (66.7% versus 56.8%, P = 0.3831); median PFS [6.2 versus 5.0 m; hazard ratio (HR) 0.71; P = 0.1695]; and OS (10.9 versus 10.6 m; HR 0.87; P = 0.6107). CONCLUSION: Trilaciclib demonstrated an improvement in the patient's tolerability of chemotherapy as shown by myelopreservation across multiple hematopoietic lineages resulting in fewer supportive care interventions and dose reductions, improved safety profile, and no detriment to antitumor efficacy. These data demonstrate strong proof-of-concept for trilaciclib's myelopreservation benefits. CLINICAL TRAIL NUMBER: NCT02499770.

RET fusions in a small subset of advanced colorectal cancers at risk of being neglected.

Background: Recognition of rare molecular subgroups is a challenge for precision oncology and may lead to tissue-agnostic approval of targeted agents. Here we aimed to comprehensively characterize the clinical, pathological and molecular landscape of RET rearranged metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients and methods: In this case series, we compared clinical, pathological and molecular characteristics of 24 RET rearranged mCRC patients with those of a control group of 291 patients with RET negative tumors. RET rearranged and RET negative mCRCs were retrieved by systematic literature review and by taking advantage of three screening sources: (i) Ignyta's phase 1/1b study on RXDX-105 (NCT01877811), (ii) cohorts screened at two Italian and one South Korean Institutions and (iii) Foundation Medicine Inc. database. Next-generation sequencing data were analyzed for RET rearranged cases. Results: RET fusions were more frequent in older patients (median age of 66 versus 60 years, P = 0.052), with ECOG PS 1-2 (90% versus 50%, P = 0.02), right-sided (55% versus 32%, P = 0.013), previously unresected primary tumors (58% versus 21%, P < 0.001), RAS and BRAF wild-type (100% versus 40%, P < 0.001) and MSI-high (48% versus 7%, P < 0.001). Notably, 11 (26%) out of 43 patients with right-sided, RAS and BRAF wild-type tumors harbored a RET rearrangement. At a median follow-up of 45.8 months, patients with RET fusion-positive tumors showed a significantly worse OS when compared with RET-negative ones (median OS 14.0 versus 38.0 months, HR: 4.59; 95% CI, 3.64-32.66; P < 0.001). In the multivariable model, RET rearrangements were still associated with shorter OS (HR: 2.97; 95% CI, 1.25-7.07; P = 0.014), while primary tumor location, RAS and BRAF mutations and MSI status were not. Conclusions: Though very rare, RET rearrangements define a new subtype of mCRC that shows poor prognosis with conventional treatments and is therefore worth of a specific management.

Endomembrane trafficking of ras: the CAAX motif targets proteins to the ER and Golgi.

We show that Nras is transiently localized in the Golgi prior to the plasma membrane (PM). Moreover, green fluorescent protein (GFP)-tagged Nras illuminated motile, peri-Golgi vesicles, and prolonged BFA treatment blocked PM expression. GFP-Hras colocalized with GFP-Nras, but GFP-Kras4B revealed less Golgi and no vesicular fluorescence. Whereas a secondary membrane targeting signal was required for PM expression, the CAAX motif alone was necessary and sufficient to target proteins to the endomembrane where they were methylated, a modification required for efficient membrane association. Thus, prenylated CAAX proteins do not associate directly with the PM but instead associate with the endomembrane and are subsequently transported to the PM, a process that requires a secondary targeting motif.

Bcl-2 blocks degranulation but not fas-based cell-mediated cytotoxicity.

The ability of bcl-2 in target cells to block cell-mediated cytotoxicity by allospecific CTL was tested. The blocking effect was variable. Because killing by CTL involves two different pathways, degranulation (perforin plus granzymes) and fas, we examined the effect of bcl-2 on these pathways independently. Bcl-2 in target cells blocked apoptotic cell death induced either by cytotoxic granule extracts or by CTL killing under conditions in which the fas pathway is blocked. On the other hand, bcl-2 had no effect on target cell-killing either by Fas-specific mAb or by CTL capable of killing only via the fas pathway. These data suggest bcl-2 may block apoptotic lysis induced by perforin plus granzymes, but not apoptotic lysis induced via the fas pathway. Thus, any analysis of the effect of bcl-2 on apoptotic cell death in target cells killed by CTL must take into account the relative contributions of the degranulation vs fas pathways.