Dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with BRAF V600E-mutant anaplastic thyroid cancer: updated analysis from the phase II ROAR basket study.

BACKGROUND: Combined therapy with dabrafenib plus trametinib was approved in several countries for treatment of BRAF V600E-mutant anaplastic thyroid cancer (ATC) based on an earlier interim analysis of 23 response-assessable patients in the ATC cohort of the phase II Rare Oncology Agnostic Research (ROAR) basket study. We report an updated analysis describing the efficacy and safety of dabrafenib plus trametinib in the full ROAR ATC cohort of 36 patients with ∼4 years of additional study follow-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ROAR (NCT02034110) is an open-label, nonrandomized, phase II basket study evaluating dabrafenib plus trametinib in BRAF V600E-mutant rare cancers. The ATC cohort comprised 36 patients with unresectable or metastatic ATC who received dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily plus trametinib 2 mg once daily orally until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Secondary endpoints were duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: At data cutoff (14 September 2020), median follow-up was 11.1 months (range, 0.9-76.6 months). The investigator-assessed ORR was 56% (95% confidence interval, 38.1% to 72.1%), including three complete responses; the 12-month DOR rate was 50%. Median PFS and OS were 6.7 and 14.5 months, respectively. The respective 12-month PFS and OS rates were 43.2% and 51.7%, and the 24-month OS rate was 31.5%. No new safety signals were identified with additional follow-up, and adverse events were consistent with the established tolerability of dabrafenib plus trametinib. CONCLUSIONS: These updated results confirm the substantial clinical benefit and manageable toxicity of dabrafenib plus trametinib in BRAF V600E-mutant ATC. Dabrafenib plus trametinib notably improved long-term survival and represents a meaningful treatment option for this rare, aggressive cancer.

Biomarker analyses of second-line ramucirumab in patients with advanced gastric cancer from RAINBOW, a global, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The RAINBOW trial showed that second-line ramucirumab with paclitaxel prolongs overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo plus paclitaxel for treatment of advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer. Plasma samples were collected from patients during the trial and tested to identify predictive and prognostic biomarkers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Circulating factors in plasma samples from mutually exclusive subsets of RAINBOW patients were assayed using: Intertek assays (24 markers, 380 samples, 57% of patients) and Lilly-developed assay (LDA) platform (5 markers, 257 samples, 39% of patients). Time-trend plots were generated for each marker from the Intertek assays. Baseline patient data were dichotomized into low- and high-marker subgroups. Markers were analyzed for predictive effects using interaction models and for prognostic effects using main-effects models. RESULTS: The Intertek and LDA populations were representative of the full trial population. Plasma levels of VEGF-D and PlGF increased from baseline levels during treatment, then declined after treatment discontinued. Angiopoietin-2 exhibited a decrease during treatment, then increased after treatment discontinuation. No clear time trend was evident with the other markers. Analyses of baseline biomarker expression and its relationship with efficacy variables found no biomarker was predictive for efficacy outcomes, including VEGF-D. However, CRP, HGF, ICAM-3, IL-8, SAA, and VCAM-1 were identified as potential prognostic markers with low baseline levels corresponding to longer OS and PFS. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacodynamic and prognostic relationships were found from the exploratory biomarker analyses in RAINBOW; however, no predictive markers for ramucirumab in gastric cancer were identified in this trial.

A phase II, randomised study of mFOLFOX6 with or without the Akt inhibitor ipatasertib in patients with locally advanced or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer.

BACKGROUND: Akt activation is common in gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC) and is associated with chemotherapy resistance. Treatment with ipatasertib, a pan-Akt inhibitor, may potentiate the efficacy of chemotherapy in GC/GEJC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase II trial, patients with locally advanced or metastatic GC/GEJC not amenable to curative therapy were randomised 1:1 to receive ipatasertib or placebo, plus mFOLFOX6 (modified regimen of leucovorin, bolus and infusional 5-fluorouracil [5-FU], and oxaliplatin). The co-primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and in phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN)-low patients. Secondary end-points included PFS in patients with PI3K/Akt pathway-activated tumours; overall survival, investigator-assessed objective response rate and duration of response in the ITT population; and safety assessments. RESULTS: In 153 enrolled patients, the median PFS (ITT) was 6.6 months (90% confidence interval [CI], 5.7-7.5) with ipatasertib/mFOLFOX6 versus 7.5 months (90% CI, 6.2-8.1) with placebo/mFOLFOX6 (hazard ratio, 1.12; 90% CI, 0.81-1.55; P = 0.56). No statistically significant PFS benefit was observed in biomarker-selected patient subgroups (PTEN-low and PI3K/Akt pathway-activated tumours) with ipatasertib/mFOLFOX6 versus placebo/mFOLFOX6. Other secondary end-points did not favour the ipatasertib/mFOLFOX6 treatment arm. The percentages of patients with ≥1 adverse event (AE, 100% versus 98%) and grade ≥3 AEs (79% versus 74%) were similar between arms. Higher rates of AEs leading to treatment withdrawal (16% versus 6%) and serious AEs were reported in the ipatasertib arm (54% versus 43%). Thirty-nine and 29 deaths occurred in the ipatasertib and placebo arms, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Ipatasertib/mFOLFOX6 compared with placebo/mFOLFOX6 did not improve PFS in unselected or biomarker-selected patients. No unexpected safety concerns were observed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01896531).

Ramucirumab combined with FOLFOX as front-line therapy for advanced esophageal, gastroesophageal junction, or gastric adenocarcinoma: a randomized, double-blind, multicenter Phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: We report the first randomized, Phase II trial of ramucirumab, an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 monoclonal antibody, as front-line therapy in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients from the USA with advanced esophageal, gastric, or GEJ adenocarcinoma randomly received (1:1) mFOLFOX6 plus ramucirumab (8 mg/kg) or mFOLFOX6 plus placebo every 2 weeks. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) with 80% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.71 (one-sided α = 0.15). Secondary end points included evaluation of response and overall survival (OS); an exploratory ramucirumab exposure-response analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: Of 168 randomized patients, 52% of tumors were located in the stomach/GEJ and 48% in the esophagus. The trial did not meet the primary end point of PFS [6.4 versus 6.7 months, HR 0.98 (95% confidence interval 0.69-1.37)] or the secondary end point of OS (11.7 versus 11.5 months) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Objective response rates (45.2% versus 46.4%) were similar between arms. Most Grade ≥3 toxicities did not differ significantly between arms, yet premature discontinuation of FOLFOX and ramucirumab (for reasons other than progressive disease) was more common among ramucirumab- versus placebo-treated patients. In an exploratory analysis that censored for premature discontinuation, the HR for PFS favored the ramucirumab arm (HR 0.76), particularly in patients with gastric/GEJ cancer. An exploratory exposure-response analysis indicated that patients with higher ramucirumab exposure had longer OS. CONCLUSION: The addition of ramucirumab to front-line mFOLFOX6 did not improve PFS in the ITT population. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01246960.

Circulating tumour cells as a biomarker for diagnosis and staging in pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Current diagnosis and staging of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has important limitations and better biomarkers are needed to guide initial therapy. We investigated the performance of circulating tumour cells (CTCs) as an adjunctive biomarker at the time of disease presentation. METHODS: Venous blood (VB) was collected prospectively from 100 consecutive, pre-treatment patients with PDAC. Utilising the microfluidic NanoVelcro CTC chip, samples were evaluated for the presence and number of CTCs. KRAS mutation analysis was used to compare the CTCs with primary tumour tissue. CTC enumeration data was then evaluated as a diagnostic and staging biomarker in the setting of PDAC. RESULTS: We found 100% concordance for KRAS mutation subtype between primary tumour and CTCs in all five patients tested. Evaluation of CTCs as a diagnostic revealed the presence of CTCs in 54/72 patients with confirmed PDAC (sensitivity=75.0%, specificity=96.4%, area under the curve (AUROC)=0.867, 95% CI=0.798-0.935, and P<0.001). Furthermore, a cut-off of ⩾3 CTCs in 4 ml VB was able to discriminate between local/regional and metastatic disease (AUROC=0.885; 95% CI=0.800-0.969; and P<0.001). CONCLUSION: CTCs appear to function well as a biomarker for diagnosis and staging in PDAC.

Phase II trial of modified FOLFOX6 and erlotinib in patients with metastatic or advanced adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and gastro-oesophageal junction.

BACKGROUND: There is increased recognition that cancers of the upper GI tract comprise distinct epidemiological and molecular entities. Erlotinib has shown activity in patients with adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus/gastro-oesophageal junction (GEJ), but not in distal gastric cancer. mFOLFOX6 is one of several active regimens used to treat adenocarcinoma of the Eso/GEJ. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of mFOLFOX6 and erlotinib in patients with metastatic or advanced Eso/GEJ cancers. METHODS: Patients with previously untreated advanced or metastatic Eso/GEJ adenocarcinoma are treated with oxaliplatin 85 mg m(-2), 5-FU 400 mg m(-2), LV 400 mg m(-2) on day 1, 5-FU 2400 mg m(-2) over 48 h and erlotinib 150 mg PO daily. Treatment was repeated every 14 days. The primary objective was response rate (RR), secondary objectives include toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and to correlate clinical outcome with expression patterns and molecular alterations in the epidermal growth factor receptor-dependent pathways. RESULTS: A total of 33 patients were treated and evaluable: there were two complete responses, 15 partial responses for an objective RR of 51.5% (95% CI, 34.5-68.6%). Median PFS was 5.5 months (95% CI, 3.1-7.5 months) and median OS was 11.0 months (95% CI, 8.0-17.4 months). The most common grade 3-4 toxicities were: diarrhoea (24%), nausea/vomiting (11%), skin rash (8%) and peripheral neuropathy (8%). The frequency of alterations was KRAS mutations (8%), EGFR mutations (0%) and HER2 amplification (19%). CONCLUSION: In patients with Eso/GEJ adenocarcinoma, mFOLFOX6 and erlotinib is active, has an acceptable toxicity profile and FOLFOX ± erlotinib could be considered for further development.