Real-word experience of pazopanib and sorafenib in patients with desmoid tumors: A CanSaRCC multi-center study.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib and pazopanib, two tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI), are widely used in patients with progressive symptomatic desmoid tumors (DT). Limited real-word data is available on long-term outcomes of patients who progressed on, stopped, or continued TKIs. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with DTs and treated with sorafenib or pazopanib between 2011 and 2022 at 11 institutions were reviewed. Patient history, response to therapy and toxicity were recorded. Statistical analyses utilized Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests. RESULTS: 142 patients with DT treated with sorafenib (n = 126, 88.7 %) or pazopanib (n = 16, 11.3 %) were analyzed. The median treatment duration was 10.8 months (range: 0.07- 73.9). The overall response rate and the disease control rate were 26.0 % and 95.1 %, respectively. The median tumor shrinkage was - 8.5 % (range -100.0 %- +72.5 %). Among responders, the median time to an objective response was 15.2 months (range: 1.1 to 33.1). The 1-year and 2-year progression-free survival rates were 82 % and 80 %. Dose reductions were necessary in 34 (23.9 %) patients. Grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported in 36 (25.4 %) patients. On the last follow-up, 55 (38.7 %) patients continued treatment. Treatment discontinuation (n = 85, 59.9 %) was mainly for toxicity (n = 35, 45.9 %) or radiological or clinical progression (n = 30, 35.3 %). For the entire cohort, 36 (25.4 %) patients required subsequent treatment. In the 32 responders, only 1 (3.1 %) patient required a subsequent treatment. In patients who discontinued TKI, 25 (44.6 %) with stable disease received subsequent treatment compared to 0 (0.0 %) of responders. CONCLUSION: This retrospective study represents the largest cohort of DT patients treated with sorafenib or pazopanib to date. Discontinuation of treatment in responders is safe. The optimal treatment duration in patients with stable disease remains to be defined.

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

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

Tumor reactive γδ T cells contribute to a complete response to PD-1 blockade in a Merkel cell carcinoma patient.

Immunotherapies targeting PD-1/PD-L1 are now widely used in the clinic to treat a variety of malignancies. While most of the research on T cell exhaustion and PD-1 blockade has been focused on conventional αß T cells, the contribution of innate-like T cells such as γδ T cells to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 mediated therapy is limited. Here we show that tumor reactive γδ T cells respond to PD-1 blockade in a Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) patient experiencing a complete response to therapy. We find clonally expanded γδ T cells in the blood and tumor after pembrolizumab treatment, and this Vγ2Vδ1 clonotype recognizes Merkel cancer cells in a TCR-dependent manner. Notably, the intra-tumoral γδ T cells in the MCC patient are characterized by higher expression of PD-1 and TIGIT, relative to conventional CD4 and CD8 T cells. Our results demonstrate that innate-like T cells could also contribute to an anti-tumor response after PD-1 blockade.

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

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

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

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

A Phase 1b/2 Study of Alpelisib in Combination with Cetuximab in Patients with Recurrent or Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Alpelisib in combination with cetuximab showed synergistic anti-tumour activity in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) models. OBJECTIVES: The recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) was determined in a phase 1b dose-escalation study. Phase 2 evaluated anti-tumour activity with a randomised part in cetuximab-naïve patients and a non-randomised part in cetuximab-resistant patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS:  Alpelisib was administered in 28 d cycles as whole tablets, suspension from crushed tablets or suspension from dispersible tablets in patients with platinum-resistant, recurrent/metastatic HNSCC. RESULTS: The RP2D determined for alpelisib was 300 mg/d. Alpelisib-cetuximab achieved an overall response rate of 25% and 9.9% and disease control rate of 75% and 43.7% in phase 1b and phase 2 studies, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) per central review was 86 d for combination treatment and 87 d for cetuximab monotherapy (unadjusted HR 1.12; 95% CI 0.69-1.82; P > 0.05). When adjusted for baseline covariates [sum of longest diameters from central data, haemoglobin and white blood cell (WBC), the results favoured combination treatment (adjusted HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.30-0.97; P = 0.039). PFS per investigator assessment resulted in an unadjusted HR of 0.76 (95% CI 0.49-1.19; P > 0.05) favouring combination treatment. The median PFS in cetuximab-resistant patients was 3.9 months. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of alpelisib to cetuximab did not demonstrate a PFS benefit in cetuximab-naïve patients with advanced HNSCC. The alpelisib-cetuximab combination showed moderate activity in cetuximab-resistant patients, with a consistent safety profile. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01602315; EudraCT 2011-006017-34.

Autoimmune PaneLs as PrEdictors of Toxicity in Patients TReated with Immune Checkpoint InhibiTors (ALERT).

BACKGROUND: Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) can lead to immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in a significant proportion of patients. The mechanisms underlying irAEs development are mostly unknown and might involve multiple immune effectors, such as T cells, B cells and autoantibodies (AutoAb). METHODS: We used custom autoantigen (AutoAg) microarrays to profile AutoAb related to irAEs in patients receiving ICI. Plasma was collected before and after ICI from cancer patients participating in two clinical trials (NCT03686202, NCT02644369). A one-time collection was obtained from healthy controls for comparison. Custom arrays with 162 autoAg were used to detect IgG and IgM reactivities. Differences of median fluorescent intensity (MFI) were analyzed with Wilcoxon sign rank test and Kruskal-Wallis test. MFI 500 was used as threshold to define autoAb reactivity. RESULTS: A total of 114 patients and 14 healthy controls were included in this study. irAEs of grade (G) ≥ 2 occurred in 37/114 patients (32%). We observed a greater number of IgG and IgM reactivities in pre-ICI collections from patients versus healthy controls (62 vs 32 p < 0.001). Patients experiencing irAEs G ≥ 2 demonstrated pre-ICI IgG reactivity to a greater number of AutoAg than patients who did not develop irAEs (39 vs 33 p = 0.040). We observed post-treatment increase of IgM reactivities in subjects experiencing irAEs G ≥ 2 (29 vs 35, p = 0.021) and a decrease of IgG levels after steroids (38 vs 28, p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, these results support the potential role of autoAb in irAEs etiology and evolution. A prospective study is ongoing to validate our findings (NCT04107311).

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

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

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

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

Phase 1 study of GSK3368715, a type I PRMT inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: GSK3368715, a first-in-class, reversible inhibitor of type I protein methyltransferases (PRMTs) demonstrated anticancer activity in preclinical studies. This Phase 1 study (NCT03666988) evaluated safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary efficacy of GSK3368715 in adults with advanced-stage solid tumors. METHODS: In part 1, escalating doses of oral once-daily GSK3368715 (50, 100, and 200 mg) were evaluated. Enrollment was paused at 200 mg following a higher-than-expected incidence of thromboembolic events (TEEs) among the first 19 participants, resuming under a protocol amendment starting at 100 mg. Part 2 (to evaluate preliminary efficacy) was not initiated. RESULTS: Dose-limiting toxicities were reported in 3/12 (25%) patients at 200 mg. Nine of 31 (29%) patients across dose groups experienced 12 TEEs (8 grade 3 events and 1 grade 5 pulmonary embolism). Best response achieved was stable disease, occurring in 9/31 (29%) patients. Following single and repeat dosing, GSK3368715 maximum plasma concentration was reached within 1 h post dosing. Target engagement was observed in the blood, but was modest and variable in tumor biopsies at 100 mg. CONCLUSION: Based on higher-than-expected incidence of TEEs, limited target engagement at lower doses, and lack of observed clinical efficacy, a risk/benefit analysis led to early study termination. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03666988.

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

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

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

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

Early phase oncology clinical trials in Malaysia: current status and future perspectives.

Historically, the majority of oncology clinical trials are conducted in Western Europe and North America. Globalization of drug development has resulted in sponsors shifting their focus to the Asia-Pacific region. In Malaysia, implementation of various government policies to promote clinical trials has been initiated over a decade ago and includes the establishment of Clinical Research Malaysia, which functions as a facilitator and enabler of industry-sponsored clinical trials on a nationwide basis. Although oncology clinical trials in Malaysia have seen promising growth, there are still only a limited number of early phase oncology studies being conducted. Hence, the Phase 1 Realization Project was initiated to develop Malaysia's early phase clinical trial capabilities. In addition, the adaptation of good practices from other countries contribute to the effective implementation of existing initiatives to drive progress in the development of early phase drug development set up in Malaysia. Furthermore, holistic approaches with emphasis in training and education, infrastructure capacities, strategic alliances, reinforcement of upstream activities in the value chain of drug development, enhanced patient advocacy, coupled with continued commitment from policy makers are imperative in nurturing a resilient clinical research ecosystem in Malaysia.

Do Early Phase Oncology Trials Predict Clinical Efficacy in Subsequent Biomarker-Enriched Phase III Randomized Trials?

BACKGROUND: Promising early phase trial results of biomarker-targeted therapies have occasionally led to regulatory approval. OBJECTIVE: We examined if early phase trials were predictive of efficacy in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with matching treatment settings. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cancer drug RCTs conducted between January 2006 and March 2021 were identified through Clinicaltrials.gov. Biomarker-enriched RCTs and associated matching early phase trials were included. Trial pairs were compared using objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). We examined whether early phase trials results were associated with RCT results using logistic regression. RESULTS: The search yielded 2157 unique RCTs and 27 RCTs pairing with early phase trials were included. Based on average difference of trial pairs, ORR was similar (1.6%; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 2.5 to 5.6, p = 0.50) and median PFS was higher in early phase trials (2.0 months; 95% CI 0.9-3.0, p < 0.05). On an individual pair basis, there was large variability in difference for ORR (range - 23.9 to 20.2%) and median PFS (range - 0.8 to 7.4 months). The probability of the RCT meeting its primary endpoint is 95% (95% prediction interval (PI) 72.8-99.3%) when the early phase trial ORR is 77.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, in early phase trials, ORR has minimal bias and median PFS appears to be slightly overestimated. Substantial variability between trials suggests early phase trial results may be inconsistent with subsequent RCT. Early phase trial results may be associated with RCTs meeting their primary endpoint when ORR is very high; however, caution must be exercised when using early phase trials as representative of RCTs.

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

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

Retrospective observational studies in ultra-rare sarcomas: A consensus paper from the Connective Tissue Oncology Society (CTOS) community of experts on the minimum requirements for the evaluation of activity of systemic treatments.

BACKGROUND: In ultra-rare sarcomas (URS) the conduction of prospective, randomized trials is challenging. Data from retrospective observational studies (ROS) may represent the best evidence available. ROS implicit limitations led to poor acceptance by the scientific community and regulatory authorities. In this context, an expert panel from the Connective Tissue Oncology Society (CTOS), agreed on the need to establish a set of minimum requirements for conducting high-quality ROS on the activity of systemic therapies in URS. METHODS: Representatives from > 25 worldwide sarcoma reference centres met in November 2020 and identified a list of topics summarizing the main issues encountered in ROS on URS. An online survey on these topics was distributed to the panel; results were summarized by descriptive statistics and discussed during a second meeting (November 2021). RESULTS: Topics identified by the panel included the use of ROS results as external control data, the criteria for contributing centers selection, modalities for ensuring a correct pathological diagnosis and radiologic assessment, consistency of surveillance policies across centers, study end-points, risk of data duplication, results publication. Based on the answers to the survey (55 of 62 invited experts) and discussion the panel agreed on 18 statements summarizing principles of recommended practice. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations will be disseminated by CTOS across the sarcoma community and incorporated in future ROS on URS, to maximize their quality and favor their use as control data when results from prospective studies are unavailable. These recommendations could help the optimal conduction of ROS also in other rare tumors.

Leiomyosarcoma: Current Clinical Management and Future Horizons.

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

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

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

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

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