ANCHOR CRC: Results From a Single-Arm, Phase II Study of Encorafenib Plus Binimetinib and Cetuximab in Previously Untreated BRAFV600E-Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: The positive BEACON colorectal cancer (CRC) safety lead-in, evaluating encorafenib + cetuximab + binimetinib in previously treated patients with BRAFV600E-mutated metastatic CRC (mCRC), prompted the design of the phase II ANCHOR CRC study (ClinicalTrails.gov identifier: NCT03693170). ANCHOR CRC aimed to evaluate efficacy, safety, and quality of life with first-line encorafenib + binimetinib + cetuximab in BRAFV600E-mutated mCRC. METHODS: In this multicenter, open-label, single-arm study, patients with BRAFV600E-mutated mCRC received oral encorafenib 300 mg once daily and binimetinib 45 mg twice daily in 28-day cycles, plus intravenous cetuximab 400 mg/m2 once on day 1 of cycle 1, then 250 mg/m2 once weekly for the first seven cycles, and 500 mg/m2 once on Days 1 and 15 from cycle 8 onward. The primary end point was locally assessed confirmed objective response rate (cORR), and secondary end points included centrally assessed cORR, progression-free survival, overall survival (OS), quality of life, and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Among 95 patients, the locally assessed cORR was 47.4% (95% CI, 37.0 to 57.9) with all partial responses. Since the lower limit of the 95% CI exceeded 30%, the primary end point was met. With a median follow-up duration of 20.1 months, the median progression-free survival on the basis of local assessments was 5.8 months and the median OS was 18.3 months. Treatment was well tolerated, with no unexpected toxicities. Using Patient Global Impression of Changes, substantial improvement in symptoms was consistently reported in ≥ 30% of patients from cycle 3 to cycle 10. CONCLUSION: The ANCHOR CRC study showed that the scientifically driven combination of encorafenib + binimetinib + cetuximab was active in the first-line setting of BRAFV600E-mutated mCRC with a manageable safety profile. Further first-line evaluation is ongoing (ClinicalTrails.gov identifier: NCT04607421).

Phase I dose-escalation study of F50067, a humanized anti-CXCR4 monoclonal antibody alone and in combination with lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone, in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

PURPOSE: Multiple myeloma (MM) remains an incurable disease as tumor cells ultimately resist to all available drugs. Homing of tumor cells to the bone marrow microenvironment, involving especially the CXCR4/SDF-1 axis, allows them to survive, proliferate and resist to therapy. F50067, a humanized anti-CXCR4 IgG1 antibody, has promising preclinical activity in MM.We present a phase I multicenter escalation study in relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for F50067 alone and in combination with lenalidomide and low dose dexamethasone (Len-Dex). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: 14 end-stage RRMM patients received F50067 single agent (n = 10) or in combination with Len-Dex (n = 4). RESULTS: One dose-limiting toxicity was observed, a grade 4 neutropenia lasting more than 7 days in combination arm. MTD could not be established. Thrombocytopenia was observed in 100% and neutropenia in 92.9% of patients with no cases of febrile neutropenia and no severe bleeding or hematoma. Non-hematological adverse events were of mild to moderate severity.Nine patients (6 in single arm and 3 in combination arm) were evaluable for response, with 66.7% overall response rate (≥PR) in combination arm, and 33.3% of disease control (≥SD) in single agent arm. At the time of study termination, 55.6% had progressed. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that egression of tumor cells to the blood stream can represent a novel therapeutic strategy for MM. However, because of significant hematological toxicity, this study had to be discontinued. Further studies are needed to validate the feasibility of this approach in clinical practice.

Pharmacokinetic profile of cetuximab (Erbitux) alone and in combination with irinotecan in patients with advanced EGFR-positive adenocarcinoma.

This trial assessed pharmacokinetic interactions between cetuximab and irinotecan. Patients were placed in either in group A (irinotecan 350 mg/m2/3 weeks and 400 mg/m2 cetuximab at week 2 then 250 mg/m2/week) or group B (cetuximab weekly starting week 1 then irinotecan starting week 4). Patient plasma or serum samples from each treatment arm were analysed using HPLC and ELISA. Among 14 patients, compartmental model showed no significant differences in mean plasma AUC at week 1 versus week 4 for irinotecan (44,388 versus 39,800 microg/ml/h) and cetuximab (20,441 versus 23,363 microg/ml/h), respectively. Half-lifes (standard deviations) for irinotecan were 16.02 (+/-8.41) h at week 1 and 13.99 (+/-2.14) h at week 4, and for cetuximab 106 (+/-32) at week 3 and 111 (+/-30) h at week 4. Mean concentration-versus-time profiles either alone or in combination were superimposable for cetuximab and irinotecan. From this study, we conclude that there is no evidence of pharmacokinetic interaction between irinotecan and cetuximab.