Long term activity of vemurafenib in cancers with BRAF mutations: the ACSE basket study for advanced cancers other than BRAFV600-mutated melanoma.

BACKGROUND: BRAF inhibitors are approved in BRAFV600-mutated metastatic melanoma, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD), and thyroid cancer. We report here the efficacy, safety, and long-term results of single-agent vemurafenib given in the AcSé vemurafenib basket study to patients with various BRAF-mutated advanced tumours other than BRAFV600-mutated melanoma and NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced tumours other than BRAFV600E melanoma and progressing after standard treatment were eligible for inclusion in nine cohorts (including a miscellaneous cohort) and received oral vemurafenib 960 mg two times daily. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) estimated with a Bayesian design. The secondary outcomes were disease control rate, duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and vemurafenib safety. RESULTS: A total of 98 advanced patients with various solid or haematological cancers, 88 with BRAFV600 mutations and 10 with BRAFnonV600 mutations, were included. The median follow-up duration was 47.7 months. The Bayesian estimate of ORR was 89.7% in hairy cell leukaemias (HCLs), 33.3% in the glioblastomas cohort, 18.2% in cholangiocarcinomas, 80.0% in ECD, 50.0% in ovarian cancers, 50.0% in xanthoastrocytomas, 66.7% in gangliogliomas, and 60.0% in sarcomas. The median PFS of the whole series was 8.8 months. The 12-, 24-, and 36-month PFS rates were 42.2%, 23.8%, and 17.9%, respectively. Overall, 54 patients died with a median OS of 25.9 months, with a projected 4-year OS of 40%. Adverse events were similar to those previously reported with vemurafenib. CONCLUSION: Responses and prolonged PFS were observed in many tumours with BRAF mutations, including HCL, ECD, ovarian carcinoma, gliomas, ganglioglioma, and sarcomas. Although not all cancer types responded, vemurafenib is an agnostic oncogene therapy of cancers.

Inequality factors in access to early-phase clinical trials in oncology in France: results of the EGALICAN-2 study.

BACKGROUND: Investigation of the disparities in the access to experimental treatment in early-phase clinical trials is lacking. The objective of the EGALICAN-2 study was to identify the factors underpinning such inequalities. METHODS: A national prospective survey was conducted in 11 early-phase clinical trial centers (CLIP2) certified by the French National Cancer Institute. Sociodemographic, socioeconomic and medical data were collected. Univariate logistic regression models were carried out to estimate odds ratios and 90% confidence intervals associated with the effect of each study variable. A multivariate logistic regression model was built to explore the independent factors associated with the administration of the experimental treatment (C1D1). A post hoc analysis was carried out excluding female cancer patients. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2016, 1355 patients referred from 11 CLIP2 centers in France were included in the study. Eight hundred and forty-eight patients received C1D1 (73%) and 320 patients (27%) were screening failure. Median age was 58 years (range 17-97 years) and 667 patients (54%) were female. Most patients had a metastatic disease (n = 751, 87%). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the significant independent factors associated with C1D1 were male sex, initial care received in a hospital with an early-phase unit and living in wealthy metropolitan areas (P values <0.05). In the post hoc analysis, the sex factor was no longer significant [odds ratio = 1.21 (95% confidence interval 0.86-1.70), P value = 0.271]. CONCLUSIONS: This study investigated the factors producing social inequalities in the context of early-phase clinical trials in oncology. Our research highlights factors of sex, care pathway and geographic location. Gynecological cancer was found to impact C1D1 significantly, unlike breast cancer. The results of this study should contribute to improve patient access to early-phase clinical trials.

Biases in study design, implementation, and data analysis that distort the appraisal of clinical benefit and ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) scoring.

BACKGROUND: The European Society for Medical Oncology-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) is a validated, widely used tool developed to score the clinical benefit from cancer medicines reported in clinical trials. ESMO-MCBS scores assume valid research methodologies and quality trial implementation. Studies incorporating flawed design, implementation, or data analysis may generate outcomes that exaggerate true benefit and are not generalisable. Failure to either indicate or penalise studies with bias undermines the intention and diminishes the integrity of ESMO-MCBS scores. This review aimed to evaluate the adequacy of the ESMO-MCBS to address bias generated by flawed design, implementation, or data analysis and identify shortcomings in need of amendment. METHODS: As part of a refinement of the ESMO-MCBS, we reviewed trial design, implementation, and data analysis issues that could bias the results. For each issue of concern, we reviewed the ESMO-MCBS v1.1 approach against standards derived from Helsinki guidelines for ethical human research and guidelines from the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, the Food and Drugs Administration, the European Medicines Agency, and European Network for Health Technology Assessment. RESULTS: Six design, two implementation, and two data analysis and interpretation issues were evaluated and in three, the ESMO-MCBS provided adequate protections. Seven shortcomings in the ability of the ESMO-MCBS to identify and address bias were identified. These related to (i) evaluation of the control arm, (ii) crossover issues, (iii) criteria for non-inferiority, (iv) substandard post-progression treatment, (v) post hoc subgroup findings based on biomarkers, (vi) informative censoring, and (vii) publication bias against quality-of-life data. CONCLUSION: Interpretation of the ESMO-MCBS scores requires critical appraisal of trials to understand caveats in trial design, implementation, and data analysis that may have biased results and conclusions. These will be addressed in future iterations of the ESMO-MCBS.

Phase I study of emactuzumab single agent or in combination with paclitaxel in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors reveals depletion of immunosuppressive M2-like macrophages.

BACKGROUND: Emactuzumab is a monoclonal antibody against the colony-stimulating factor-1 receptor and targets tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs). This study assessed the safety, clinical activity, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of emactuzumab, as monotherapy and in combination with paclitaxel, in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This open-label, phase Ia/b study comprised two parts (dose escalation and dose expansion), each containing two arms (emactuzumab, every 2 or 3 weeks, as monotherapy or in combination with paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 weekly). The dose-escalation part explored the maximum tolerated dose and optimal biological dose (OBD). The dose-expansion part extended the safety assessment and investigated the objective response rate. A PK/PD analysis of serial blood, skin and tumor biopsies was used to explore proof of mechanism and confirm the OBD. RESULTS: No maximum tolerated dose was reached in either study arm, and the safety profile of emactuzumab alone and in combination does not appear to preclude its use. No patients receiving emactuzumab monotherapy showed an objective response; the objective response rate for emactuzumab in combination with paclitaxel was 7% across all doses. Skin macrophages rather than peripheral blood monocytes or circulating colony-stimulating factor-1 were identified as an optimal surrogate PD marker to select the OBD. Emactuzumab treatment alone and in combination with paclitaxel resulted in a plateau of immunosuppressive TAM reduction at the OBD of 1000 mg administered every 2 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Emactuzumab showed specific reduction of immunosuppressive TAMs at the OBD in both treatment arms but did not result in clinically relevant antitumor activity alone or in combination with paclitaxel. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01494688).

[Treatment of patients with brain metastases from a melanoma]. / Prise en charge des patients atteints de métastases cérébrales de mélanome.

Whereas immune checkpoint inhibitors of serine/threonine protein kinase B-raf therapy dramatically changed metastatic outcomes of patients with melanoma, they remain at high risk of brain extension. Additional local treatment can be offered in this situation such as surgery and or stereotactic radiotherapy. In this review article, we describe the different options with published data and their optimal timing.

Phase I study of temsirolimus in combination with cetuximab in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies suggest synergistic antitumour effects of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor such as temsirolimus combined with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody such as cetuximab. METHODS: Temsirolimus (T) and cetuximab (C) were combined and escalated in cohorts of patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumours, respectively from 15 to 25 mg and 150-250 mg/m2, until the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was determined. Effort was made in the expansion cohort to enrol patients harbouring a molecular aberration in the human epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and/or phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) pathways. Paired biopsies were optional to evaluate pathway modulation. RESULTS: Among 39 patients enrolled, three experienced dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs): pulmonary embolism (C200 + T20), stomatitis (C250 + T20) and acneiform rash (C250 + T25). The weekly C 250 mg/m2 and T 25 mg dose level was selected as the MTD. The most common treatment-related adverse events were: acneiform rash (97%), oral mucositis (82%), fatigue (59%), nausea (41%) and diarrhoea (36%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were respectively 2.0 months [95% CI: 1.8, 3.5] and 7.5 months [95% CI: 5.5, 11.9]. Among all patients, partial responses (PRs) and stable diseases (SDs) were observed in 2 (5.1%) and 18 patients (46.2%), respectively. The objective response rate (ORR) in patients with a molecular aberration was 2/14 (14%), versus 0/24 in those without molecular aberration. CONCLUSIONS: Combination of T + C showed significant but manageable toxicities. Due to modest clinical activity, further evaluation is not recommended. Molecular selection could potentially increase the objective response rate and should be implemented during drug development.

Safety and antitumor activity of the anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab in patients with recurrent carcinoma of the anal canal.

Background: Safety and efficacy of pembrolizumab, a humanized programmed death 1 monoclonal antibody, was assessed in KEYNOTE-028, a multicohort, phase Ib trial for patients with programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive advanced solid tumors. We report results for the cohort of patients with advanced anal carcinoma. Patients and methods: Patients with PD-L1-positive tumors (≥1%) received intravenous pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg once every 2 weeks for up to 2 years or until confirmed progression or unacceptable toxicity. Response was assessed every 8 weeks for the first 6 months and every 12 weeks thereafter per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Primary endpoints were safety and overall response rate per investigator review. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, overall survival, and response duration. Data cutoff date was 1 July 2015. Results: Of the 43 patients with advanced anal carcinoma evaluable for PD-L1 expression, 32 (74%) had PD-L1-positive tumors as assessed with the 22C3 prototype assay, of whom 25 were enrolled between April and September 2014. Sixteen patients (64%) experienced treatment-related adverse events; the most common ones were diarrhea and fatigue in four patients (16%) each and nausea in three patients (12%). There were no treatment-related deaths or discontinuations as of the data cutoff date. Among the 24 patients with squamous cell carcinoma histology, four had confirmed partial response, for an overall response rate of 17% [95% confidence interval (CI), 5%-37%) and 10 (42%) had confirmed stable disease, for a disease control rate of 58%. One additional patient with non-squamous histology had confirmed stable disease. Conclusion: In this population of patients with PD-L1-positive advanced squamous cell anal carcinoma, pembrolizumab demonstrated a manageable safety profile and encouraging antitumor activity. These data support further study of pembrolizumab for this patient population. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02054806.

Debio0932, a second-generation oral heat shock protein (HSP) inhibitor, in patients with advanced cancer-results of a first-in-man dose-escalation study with a fixed-dose extension phase.

BACKGROUND: Objective was to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended dose (RD) and schedule, safety, pharmacokinetic (PK) profile, pharmacodynamic (PD) effects, and antitumor activity of Debio0932, a new second-generation oral heat shock protein (HSP) inhibitor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, uncontrolled, open-label, nonrandomized, dose-escalation study in adults with treatment-resistant advanced cancer. Groups of three patients received oral Debio0932 either daily or every other day. The starting dose of 50 mg was escalated until the MTD was reached, i.e. dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) occurred in ≥2 patients. Further 9 patients and an extension cohort of 30 patients were treated at the next lower dose (=RD). Adverse events (AEs), tumor response, PK, and HSP70 levels in peripheral blood mononuclear cells were recorded over 30 days. RESULTS: Fifty patients were treated with doses up to 1600 mg, at which level three DLT occurred (febrile neutropenia, diarrhea, asthenia). In total, 39 patients were then treated at the RD of 1000 mg daily. Most common drug-related AEs were asthenia and gastrointestinal events. No ocular toxicities were observed. Debio0932 was rapidly absorbed and metabolized. Plasma steady state was reached within 9 days. Volume of distribution was high and elimination half-life was 9-11 h. Food had no effect on PK. PD showed large interpatient variability, but no dose-effect relationship. Partial tumor response was observed in 2 patients (NSCLC and breast cancer), stable disease (SD) in 12 patients (5 of 8 NSCLC patients). In the extension cohort, 9 patients had SD, and 1 patient a partial metabolic tumor response. CONCLUSION: Debio0932 has limited clinical activity, together with manageable toxicity. Further development as adjunct treatment of NSCLC at daily doses of 1000 mg is warranted. CLINICAL TRIAL: NCT01168752.

Outcome of patients with sarcoma and other mesenchymal tumours participating in phase I trials: a subset analysis of a European Phase I database.

BACKGROUND: Although sarcomas account for only 1% of all solid tumours, patients with sarcomas comprise a larger proportion of patients entering phase I trials, due to the limited number of registered or active drugs for these diseases. To help in patient selection, we evaluated the utility of the predictive Royal Marsden Score which had been derived in carcinoma patients. In addition, we analysed efficacy and toxicity regarding the sarcoma population enrolled in phase I trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used data from a European Database comprising 2182 patients treated in phase I trials in 14 European institutions between 2005 and 2007. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-eight patients diagnosed with advanced sarcoma or other mesenchymal tumours were identified and accounted for 217 phase I trial participations during the study period. Histological type, class of drug, number of metastatic sites, high serum lactate dehydrogenase activity (LDH), low albumin and high white blood cell count were independent prognostic factors. Poor performance status (PS), liver metastases and high leucocyte count were associated with increased risk of early death. The class of drug used was the strongest predictor of progression-free survival (PFS) duration, inhibitors of angiogenesis and histone deacetylase giving the best results. Poor PS, high serum LDH and low lymphocyte count correlated with shorter PFS. In this heterogeneous population, PFS with investigational agents appeared comparable with that previously published for patients receiving standard treatments beyond first line. CONCLUSION: Prognostic factors in sarcoma patients do not differ from a broader phase I population. Efficacy measures suggest that some patients with sarcoma derive benefit from therapy in this setting which could therefore be considered for patients with no remaining standard therapeutic option.

A phase I, dose-escalation study of the Eg5-inhibitor EMD 534085 in patients with advanced solid tumors or lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: The kinesin spindle protein Eg5 is involved in mitosis, and its inhibition promotes mitotic arrest. EMD 534085, a potent, reversible Eg5 inhibitor, demonstrated significant preclinical antitumor activity. METHODS: This first-in-man, single-center, open-label, phase I dose-escalation study (3 + 3 design) investigated EMD 534085 safety, pharmacokinetics and antitumor activity in refractory solid tumors, Hodgkin's lymphoma, or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. EMD 534085 (starting dose 2 mg/m²/day) was administered intravenously every 3 weeks. Doses were escalated in 100% steps in successive cohorts of 3 patients until grade 2 toxicity occurred, followed by 50% until the first dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) arose. If <2 of 6 patients experienced a DLT, doses were further increased by 25%. Dose-escalation was stopped if a DLT occurred in ≥2 of 6 patients. RESULTS: Forty-four patients received EMD 534085. Median treatment duration was 43 days (range, 21-337). Thirty-eight patients (86%) received ≥2 cycles. DLTs were grade 4 neutropenia (1 patient each at 108 and 135 mg/m²/day), and grade 3 acute coronary syndrome with troponin I elevation (1 patient at 135 mg/m²/day). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was 108 mg/m²/day. The most common treatment-related adverse events were asthenia (50%) and neutropenia (32%). EMD 534085 appeared to have linear pharmacokinetics. Increase in phospho-histone H3 positive cells in paired pre- and on-treatment biopsies showed evidence of target modulation. No complete or partial responses were observed. Best response was stable disease in 23 patients (52%). CONCLUSIONS: EMD 534085 appeared to be well tolerated; MTD was 108 mg/m²/day. Preliminary antitumor results suggested limited activity in monotherapy.

Sequential research-related biopsies in phase I trials: acceptance, feasibility and safety.

BACKGROUND: Sequential tumour biopsies are of potential interest for the rational development of molecular targeted therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From June 2004 to July 2009, 186 patients participated in 14 phase I clinical trials in which sequential tumour biopsies (13 trials) and/or sequential normal skin biopsies (6 trials) were optional. All patients had to sign an independent informed consent for the biopsies. RESULTS: Tumour biopsies were proposed to 155 patients and 130 (84%) signed the consent while normal skin biopsies were proposed to 70 patients and 57 (81%) signed the consent. Tumour biopsies could not be carried out in 41 (31%) of the 130 consenting patients. Tumour biopsies were collected at baseline in 33 patients, at baseline and under treatment in 56 patients. Tumour biopsies were obtained using an 18-gauge needle, under ultrasound or computed tomography guidance. Only nine minor complications were recorded. Most tumour biopsy samples collected were intended for ancillary molecular studies including protein or gene expression analysis, comparative genomic hybridization array or DNA sequencing. According to the results available, 70% of the biopsy samples met the quality criteria of each study and were suitable for ancillary studies. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, the majority of the patients accepted skin biopsies as well as tumour biopsies. Sequential tumour and skin biopsies are feasible and safe during early-phase clinical trials, even when patients are exposed to anti-angiogenic agents. The real scientific value of such biopsies for dose selection in phase I trials has yet to be established.