Safety, Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Antitumor Activity from a Phase I Study of Simlukafusp Alfa (FAP-IL2v) in Advanced/Metastatic Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: Simlukafusp alfa (FAP-IL2v), a tumor-targeted immunocytokine, comprising an interleukin-2 variant moiety with abolished CD25 binding fused to human immunoglobulin G1, is directed against fibroblast activation protein-α. This phase I, open-label, multicenter, dose-escalation and extension study (NCT02627274) evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity of FAP-IL2v in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors. METHODS: Participants received FAP-IL2v intravenously once weekly. Dose escalation started at 5 mg; flat dosing (≤25 mg) and intra-participant up-titration regimens (15/20 mg, 20/25 mg, 20/20/35 mg, 20/35/35 mg) were evaluated. Primary objectives were dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended expansion dose, and pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Sixty-one participants were enrolled. DLTs included fatigue (flat dose 20 mg: n = 1), asthenia (25 mg: n = 1), drug-induced liver injury (up-titration regimen 20/25 mg: n = 1), transaminase increase (20/25 mg: n = 1), and pneumonia (20/35/35 mg: n = 1). Up-titration regimen 15/20 mg was the MTD and was selected as the recommended expansion dose. Increases in peripheral blood absolute immune cell counts were seen for all tested doses (natural killer cells, 13-fold; CD4+ T cells [including Tregs], 2-fold; CD8+ T cells, 3.5-fold), but without any percentage change in Tregs. Clinical activity was observed from 5 mg (objective response rate, 5.1% [n = 3]; disease control rate, 27.1% [n = 16]). Responses were durable (n = 3; 2.8 [censored], 6.3, and 43.4 months). CONCLUSIONS: FAP-IL2v had a manageable safety profile and showed initial signs of antitumor activity in advanced/metastatic solid tumors.

Modified FOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab with and without nivolumab for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: phase 2 results from the CheckMate 9X8 randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Standard first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) include fluoropyrimidine-containing regimens with oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan and a biologic agent. Immunotherapy may enhance antitumor activity in combination with standard therapies in patients with mCRC. Here, we present phase 2 results of nivolumab plus standard-of-care therapy (SOC; 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin/bevacizumab) versus SOC in the first-line treatment of patients with mCRC (CheckMate 9X8). METHODS: CheckMate 9X8 was a multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 2/3 trial. Eligible patients were at least 18 years of age with unresectable mCRC and no prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive nivolumab 240 mg plus SOC or SOC alone every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1. Secondary endpoints included PFS by investigator assessment; objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate, duration of response, and time to response, all by BICR and investigator assessments; overall survival; and safety. Preplanned exploratory biomarker analyses were also performed. RESULTS: From February 2018 through April 2019, 310 patients were enrolled, of which 195 patients were randomized to nivolumab plus SOC (n=127) or SOC (n=68). At 21.5-month minimum follow-up, PFS with nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC did not meet the prespecified threshold for statistical significance; median PFS by BICR was 11.9 months in both arms (HR, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.53 to 1.23); p=0.30). Higher PFS rates after 12 months (18 months: 28% vs 9%), higher ORR (60% vs 46%), and durable responses (median 12.9 vs 9.3 months) were observed with nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 75% versus 48% of patients; no new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The CheckMate 9X8 trial investigating first-line nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC in patients with mCRC did not meet its primary endpoint of PFS by BICR. Nivolumab plus SOC showed numerically higher PFS rates after 12 months, a higher response rate, and more durable responses compared with SOC alone, with acceptable safety. Further investigation to identify subgroups of patients with mCRC that may benefit from nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC in the first-line setting is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03414983.

Targeting KRAS G12C Mutation in Colorectal Cancer, A Review: New Arrows in the Quiver.

Kirsten rat sarcoma virus oncogene homolog (KRAS) is the most frequently mutated oncogene in human cancer. In colorectal cancer (CRC), KRAS mutations are present in more than 50% of cases, and the KRAS glycine-to-cysteine mutation at codon 12 (KRAS G12C) occurs in up to 4% of patients. This mutation is associated with short responses to standard chemotherapy and worse overall survival compared to non-G12C mutations. In recent years, several KRAS G12C inhibitors have demonstrated clinical activity, although all patients eventually progressed. The identification of negative feedback through the EGFR receptor has led to the development of KRAS inhibitors plus an anti-EGFR combination, thus boosting antitumor activity. Currently, several KRAS G12C inhibitors are under development, and results from phase I and phase II clinical trials are promising. Moreover, the phase III CodeBreaK 300 trial demonstrates the superiority of sotorasib-panitumumab over trifluridine/tipiracil, establishing a new standard of care for patients with colorectal cancer harboring KRAS G12C mutations. Other combinations such as adagrasib-cetuximab, divarasib-cetuximab, or FOLFIRI-panitumumab-sotorasib have also shown a meaningful response rate and are currently under evaluation. Nonetheless, most of these patients will eventually relapse. In this setting, liquid biopsy emerges as a critical tool to characterize the mechanisms of resistance, consisting mainly of acquired genomic alterations in the MAPK and PI3K pathways and tyrosine kinase receptor alterations, but gene fusions, histological changes, or conformational changes in the kinase have also been described. In this paper, we review the development of KRAS G12C inhibitors in colorectal cancer as well as the main mechanisms of resistance.

Obinutuzumab Pretreatment as a Novel Approach to Mitigate Formation of Anti-Drug Antibodies Against Cergutuzumab Amunaleukin in Patients with Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: The immunocytokine cergutuzumab amunaleukin (CEA-IL2v) showed manageable safety and favorable pharmacodynamics in phase I/Ib trials in patients with advanced/metastatic carcinoembryonic antigen-positive (CEA+) solid tumors, but this was accompanied by a high incidence of anti-drug antibodies (ADA). We examined B-cell depletion with obinutuzumab as a potential mitigation strategy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Preclinical data comparing B-cell depletion with rituximab versus obinutuzumab are summarized. Substudies of phase I/Ib trials investigated the effect of obinutuzumab pretreatment on ADA development, safety, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity of CEA-IL2v ± atezolizumab in patients with advanced/metastatic or unresectable CEA+ solid tumors who had progressed on standard of care. RESULTS: Preclinical data showed superior B-cell depletion with obinutuzumab versus rituximab. In clinical studies, patients received CEA-IL2v monotherapy with (n = 16) or without (n = 6) obinutuzumab pretreatment (monotherapy study), or CEA-IL2v + atezolizumab + obinutuzumab pretreatment (n = 5; combination study). In the monotherapy study, after four cycles (every 2 weeks treatment), 0/15 evaluable patients administered obinutuzumab pretreatment had ADAs versus 4/6 patients without obinutuzumab. Obinutuzumab pretreatment with CEA-IL2v monotherapy showed no new safety signals and pharmacodynamic data suggested minimal impact on T cells and natural killer cells. Conversely, increased liver toxicity was observed in the combination study (CEA-IL2v + atezolizumab + obinutuzumab pretreatment). CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary findings suggest that obinutuzumab pretreatment before CEA-IL2v administration in patients with CEA+ solid tumors may be a feasible and potent ADA mitigation strategy, with an acceptable safety profile, supporting broader investigation of obinutuzumab pretreatment for ADA mitigation in other settings.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors for metastatic colorectal cancer with microsatellite instability in second or latter line using synthetic control arms: A non-randomised evaluation.

PURPOSE: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) appeared active in single-arm trials for patients with chemoresistant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) harboring microsatellite instability (MSI). Given the paucity of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in this setting, we evaluated the effect size of ICIs using intra-patients comparison and ARCAD database as historical controls. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual-patient data from NIPICOL and CheckMate 142 phase II trials that evaluated a combination of ICIs for MSI mCRC patients (N = 176) and from five non-ICI mCRC historical RCTs in second-line or latter (N = 4026) were analyzed. Firstly, promising of ICIs was identified using intra-patient comparison based on growth modulation index (GMI) defined the ratio of progression-free survivals (PFS) on ICIs and previous line of therapy. Survival outcomes of ICIs-treated patients were then compared with those matched non-ICIs treated from ARCAD database historical RCTs. RESULTS: Among ICIs-treated patients, median PFS on ICIs was 32.66 (range 0.10-74.25) versus 4.07 months (range 0.7-49.87) on prior therapy, resulting on median GMI of 4.97 (range 0.07-59.51; hazard-ratio (HR)= 0.16 (95 %CI=0.11-0.22, P < 0.001)). Compared to matched non-ICI patients, in third-line, median overall survival (OS) was not reached with ICIs versus 3.52 months with placebo (HR=0.20, 95 %CI=0.10-0.41, P < 0.001), and 6.51 months with active drugs (HR=0.30, 95 %CI=0.15-0.60, P = 0.001). In second-line, median OS was not reached with ICIs versus 11.7 months with chemotherapy+placebo (HR=0.12, 95 %CI=0.07-0.22, P < 0.001), and 16.3 months with chemotherapy+targeted therapy (HR=0.10, 95 %CI=0.05-0.19, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: ICIs demonstrates high effect size for MSI mCRC patients in second-line and later. This work might be useful as an example of methodology to avoid RCTs when benefit from experimental therapy is likely to be high.

Safety profile of pembrolizumab monotherapy based on an aggregate safety evaluation of 8937 patients.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab has a manageable safety profile as described in its label, which was primarily based on 2799 patients who participated in clinical trials for melanoma or non-small cell lung cancer. Here, we evaluated the safety of pembrolizumab in a broader population of patients from 31 advanced cancer clinical trials across 19 cancer types. METHODS: Safety was analyzed in patients who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks [Q3W], 10 mg/kg Q2W or Q3W, or 2 mg/kg Q3W). Adverse events (AEs) and immune-mediated AEs and infusion reactions were evaluated. RESULTS: Safety data from 8937 patients in 31 trials of pembrolizumab monotherapy were pooled (median, seven administrations; range, 1-59). Median duration on treatment was 4.1 months (range, 0.03-40.1). AEs occurred in 96.6% of patients. Grade 3-5 AEs occurred in 50.6% of patients. AEs led to pembrolizumab discontinuation in 12.7% of patients and death in 5.9%. Immune-mediated AEs and infusion reactions occurred in 23.7% of patients (4.6% experienced multiple immune-mediated AEs/infusion reactions) and led to pembrolizumab discontinuation in 3.6% and death in 0.2%. Grade 3-5 immune-mediated AEs occurred in 6.3% of patients. Serious immune-mediated AEs and infusion reactions occurred in 6.0% of patients. Median time to immune-mediated AE onset was 85 days (range, 13-163). Of 2657 immune-mediated AEs, 22.3% were initially treated with prednisone ≥ 40 mg/day or equivalent, and 8.3% were initially treated with lower steroid doses. CONCLUSIONS: This pooled analysis of 31 clinical trials showed that pembrolizumab has a consistent safety profile across indications.

UNCAN.eu: Toward a European Federated Cancer Research Data Hub.

To enable a collective effort that generates a new level of UNderstanding CANcer (UNCAN.eu) [Cancer Discov (2022) 12 (11): OF1], the European Union supports the creation of a sustainable platform that connects cancer research across Member States. A workshop hosted in Heidelberg gathered European cancer experts to identify ongoing initiatives that may contribute to building this platform and discuss the governance and long-term evolution of a European Federated Cancer Data Hub.

Cetuximab as a Key Partner in Personalized Targeted Therapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Cetuximab, a chimeric IgG1 monoclonal antibody targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), has revolutionized personalized treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. This review highlights the mechanism of action, characteristics, and optimal indications for cetuximab in mCRC. Cetuximab has emerged as a pivotal partner for novel therapies in specific molecular subgroups, including BRAF V600E, KRAS G12C, and HER2-altered mCRC. Combining cetuximab with immunotherapy and other targeted agents further expands the therapeutic landscape, offering renewed hope for mCRC patients who face the development of resistance to conventional therapies. Ongoing clinical trials have continued to uncover innovative cetuximab-based treatment strategies, promising a brighter future for mCRC patients. This review provides a comprehensive overview of cetuximab's role and its evolving importance in personalized targeted therapy of mCRC patients, offering valuable insights into the evolving landscape of colorectal cancer treatment.

A Randomized Phase III Study of Arfolitixorin versus Leucovorin with 5-Fluorouracil, Oxaliplatin, and Bevacizumab for First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The AGENT Trial.

PURPOSE: Suboptimal treatment outcomes with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/folate, the standard of care for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), have generated interest in optimizing the folate. Arfolitixorin ([6R]-5,10-methylene-tetrahydrofolate) is an immediately active folate and may improve outcomes over the existing standard of care (leucovorin). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: AGENT was a randomized, phase III study (NCT03750786). Patients with mCRC were randomized to arfolitixorin (120 mg/m2 given as two intravenous bolus doses of 60 mg/m2) or leucovorin (400 mg/m2 given as a single intravenous infusion) plus 5-FU, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab. Assessments were performed every 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was the superiority of arfolitixorin for overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Between February 2019 and April 2021, 490 patients were randomized (245 to each arm). After a median follow-up of 266 days, the primary endpoint of superiority for ORR was not achieved (48.2% for arfolitixorin vs. 49.4% for leucovorin, Psuperiority = 0.57). Outcomes were not achieved for median progression-free survival (PFS; 12.8 and 11.6 months, P = 0.38), median duration of response (12.2 and 12.9 months, P = 0.40), and median overall survival (23.8 and 28.0 months, P = 0.78). The proportion of patients with an adverse event of grade ≥3 severity was similar between arms (68.7% and 67.2%, respectively), as was quality of life. BRAF mutations and MTHFD2 expression were both associated with a lower PFS with arfolitixorin. CONCLUSIONS: The study failed to demonstrate clinical benefit of arfolitixorin (120 mg/m2) over leucovorin. However, it provides some useful insights from the first-line treatment setting, including the effect of gene expression on outcomes. SIGNIFICANCE: This phase III study compared arfolitixorin, a direct-acting folate, with leucovorin in FOLFOX plus bevacizumab in mCRC. Arfolitixorin (120 mg/m2) did not improve the ORR, potentially indicating a suboptimal dose.

Neoadjuvant and adjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal cancer (KEYNOTE-585): an interim analysis of the multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of combination neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibition in patients with locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma is unknown. We assess the antitumor activity of neoadjuvant and adjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: The KEYNOTE-585 study is a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 study done at 143 medical centres in 24 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with untreated, locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive voice response system and integrated web response system to neoadjuvant pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously or placebo (saline) plus cisplatin-based doublet chemotherapy (main cohort) every 3 weeks for 3 cycles, followed by surgery, adjuvant pembrolizumab or placebo plus chemotherapy for 3 cycles, then adjuvant pembrolizumab or placebo for 11 cycles. A small cohort was also randomly assigned (1:1) to pembrolizumab or placebo plus fluorouracil, docetaxel, and oxaliplatin (FLOT)-based chemotherapy (FLOT cohort) every 2 weeks for four cycles, followed by surgery, adjuvant pembrolizumab, or placebo plus FLOT for four cycles, then adjuvant pembrolizumab or placebo for 11 cycles. Patients were stratified by geographic region, tumour stage, and chemotherapy backbone. Primary endpoints were pathological complete response (reviewed centrally), event-free survival (reviewed by the investigator), and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population, and safety assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03221426, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Oct 9, 2017, and Jan 25, 2021, of 1254 patients screened, 804 were randomly assigned to the main cohort, of whom 402 were assigned to the pembrolizumab plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy group and 402 to the placebo plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy group, and 203 to the FLOT cohort, of whom 100 were assigned to the pembrolizumab plus FLOT group and 103 to placebo plus FLOT group. In the main cohort of 804 participants, 575 (72%) were male and 229 (28%) were female. In the main cohort, after median follow-up of 47·7 months (IQR 38·0-54·8), pembrolizumab was superior to placebo for pathological complete response (52 [12·9%; 95% CI 9·8-16·6] of 402 vs eight [2·0%; 0·9-3·9] of 402; difference 10·9%, 95% CI 7·5 to 14·8; p<0·00001). Median event-free survival was longer with pembrolizumab versus placebo (44·4 months, 95% CI 33·0 to not reached vs 25·3 months, 20·6 to 33·9; hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·67 to 0·99; p=0·0198) but did not meet the threshold for statistical significance (p=0·0178). Median overall survival was 60·7 months (95% CI 51·5 to not reached) in the pembrolizumab group versus 58·0 months (41·5 to not reached) in the placebo group (HR 0·90, 95% CI 0·73 to 1·12; p=0·174). Grade 3 or worse adverse events of any cause occurred in 312 (78%) of 399 patients in the pembrolizumab group and 297 (74%) of 400 patients in the placebo group; the most common were nausea (240 [60%] vs 247 [62%]), anaemia (168 [42%] vs 158 [40%]), and decreased appetite (163 [41%] vs 172 [43%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 102 (26%) and 97 (24%) patients. Treatment-related adverse events that led to death occurred in four (1%) patients in the pembrolizumab group (interstitial ischaemia, pneumonia, decreased appetite, and acute kidney injury [n=1 each]) and two (<1%) patients in the placebo group (neutropenic sepsis and neutropenic colitis [n=1 each]). INTERPRETATION: Although neoadjuvant and adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo improved the pathological complete response, it did not translate to significant improvement in event-free survival in patients with untreated, locally advanced resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal cancer. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme.

The impact of clinical and translational research on the quality of life during the metastatic colorectal cancer patient journey.

The journey of metastatic colorectal cancer patients is complex and challenging, requiring coordination and collaboration between multiple healthcare providers. Understanding patients' needs, fears, feelings, concerns, and behaviors is essential for providing individualized patient-centered care. In recent years, mCRC patients have experienced improvements in clinical outcomes, from 16 months of overall survival to 32 months, thanks to research. However, there is still room for improvement, and integrating clinical and translational research into routine practice can help patients benefit from treatments and techniques that would not be an option. In the Journey of mCRC patients, living well with cancer and quality of life becomes a priority given the outcomes of the disease. Patient reported outcomes (PRO) and Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) are becoming therefore new estimands in Oncology. Patient advocates represent important figures in this process by prioritizing issues and research questions; evaluating research designs and the performance of the research; the analysis and interpretation of data; and how results are disseminated. Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards and shared decision-making is essential for designing treatment strategies for individual patients. Quality of Life is often prioritized only when it comes to refractory advanced disease and end-of-life care, but it has to be integrated from the beginning, as the emotional impact of diagnosis leads to a vulnerable situation where patients' needs and preferences can be easily overseen. First-line treatment will be chosen among more treatment options than subsequent lines, with longer progression-free survival and a bigger impact on the outcomes. Practicing patient-centered care and optimizing first-line treatment for colorectal cancer patients requires a comprehensive understanding of patient experience and treatment outcomes, which can guide clinical practice and inform regulatory decisions for the benefit of patients.

Reporting reimbursement price decisions for onco-hematology drugs in Spain.

Introduction: Even using well-established technology assessment processes, the basis of the decisions on drug price and reimbursement are sometimes perceived as poorly informed and sometimes may be seen as disconnected from value. The literature remains inconclusive about how Health Technology Assessment Bodies (HTAb) should report the determinants of their decisions. This study evaluates the relationship between oncology and hematology drug list prices and structured value parameters at the time of reimbursement decision in Spain. Methods: The study includes all new onco-hematological products (22), with a first indication authorized between January 2017 and December 2019 in Spain and pricing decisions published up until October 2022. For each product, 56 contextual and non-contextual indicators reflecting the structured multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) - Evidence-based Decision-Making (EVIDEM) framework were measured. The relationship between prices and the MCDA-EVIDEM framework was explored using univariate statistical analyses. Results: Higher prices were observed when the standard of care included for combinations, if there were references to long-lasting responses, for fixed-duration treatment compared to treatment until progression and treatment with lower frequencies of administration; lower prices were observed for oral administration compared to other routes of administration. Statistically significant associations were observed between prices and the median duration of treatment, the impact on patient autonomy, the ease of use of the drug, and the recommendations of experts. Discussion: The study suggests that indicators related to the type of standard of care, references to long-lasting responders, the convenience of the use of the drug, and the impact of treatment on patient autonomy, as well as contextual indicators such as the existence of previous clinical consensus, are factors in setting oncology drug prices in Spain. The implementation of MCDA-EVIDEM methodologies may be useful to capture the influence on pricing decisions of additional factors not included in legislation or consolidated assessment frameworks such as the European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EunetHTA) core model. It may be opportune to consider this in the upcoming revision of the Spanish regulation for health technology assessments and pricing and reimbursement procedures.

Cetuximab every 2 weeks versus standard weekly dosing administration schedule.

Cetuximab every 2 weeks (Q2W) dosing schedule is approved by the US FDA and by the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Phase II trials have found comparable efficacy and safety for the weekly (Q1W) and Q2W schedules, and real-world studies have shown noninferiority of the Q2W compared with the Q1W schedule. Several guidelines recommend cetuximab Q2W administration as an alternative to the Q1W dosing schedule. Cetuximab Q2W can be administered with a Q2W dose of chemotherapy, making it a more convenient option to the Q1W schedule, potentially resulting in reduced costs for administration, increased flexibility for clinical staff and improved patient adherence.

Cetuximab is a drug for patients with colorectal cancer or cancer of the head and neck. It is usually administered once a week. However, studies have shown that cetuximab given once every 2 weeks instead has similar clinical benefits and side effects. Based on this evidence, the every 2 weeks dosing schedule has been approved for use in USA and Japan. The every 2 weeks dosing schedule is a convenient alternative to the weekly schedule. It may result in fewer hospital visits, improved patient quality of life, reduced healthcare costs and more flexibility for medical staff. This review summarizes the current evidence and benefits for the every 2 weeks dosing schedule.

Pembrolizumab plus trastuzumab and chemotherapy for HER2-positive gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: interim analyses from the phase 3 KEYNOTE-811 randomised placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence for the efficacy of combined PD-1 and HER2 blockade with chemotherapy on progression-free and overall survival in HER2-positive gastro-oesophageal cancer is scarce. The first interim analysis of the randomised, phase 3 KEYNOTE-811 study showed a superior objective response with pembrolizumab compared with placebo when added to trastuzumab plus fluoropyrimidine and platinum-based chemotherapy. Here, we report results from protocol-specified subsequent interim analyses of KEYNOTE-811. METHODS: The randomised, phase 3 KEYNOTE-811 trial involved 168 medical centres in 20 countries worldwide. Patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic HER2-positive gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, without previous first-line treatment, were randomly assigned (1:1) by an integrated interactive voice-response and web-response system to intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo, both to be combined with standard chemotherapy (fluoropyrimidine and platinum-based therapy) plus trastuzumab every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles or until disease progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or investigator or participant-initiated withdrawal. Randomisation used a block size of four and was stratified by region, PD-L1 status, and chemotherapy. Dual primary endpoints were progression-free and overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study treatment according to the treatment received. KEYNOTE-811 is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03615326) and is active but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Oct 5, 2018, and Aug 6, 2021, 698 patients were assigned to pembrolizumab (n=350) or placebo (n=348). 564 (81%) were male and 134 (19%) were female. At the third interim analysis, 286 (82%) of 350 patients in the pembrolizumab group and 304 (88%) of 346 in the placebo group who received treatment had discontinued treatment, mostly due to disease progression. At the second interim analysis (median follow-up 28·3 months [IQR 19·4-34·3] in the pembrolizumab group and 28·5 months [20·1-34·3] in the placebo group), median progression-free survival was 10·0 months (95% CI 8·6-11·7) in the pembrolizumab group versus 8·1 months (7·0-8·5) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·72, 95% CI 0·60-0·87; p=0·0002). Median overall survival was 20·0 months (17·8-23·2) versus 16·9 months (15·0-19·8; HR 0·87 [0·72-1·06]; p=0·084). At the third interim analysis (median follow-up 38·4 months [IQR 29·5-44·4] in the pembrolizumab group and 38·6 months [30·2-44·4] in the placebo group), median progression-free survival was 10·0 months (8·6-12·2) versus 8·1 months (7·1-8·6; HR 0·73 [0·61-0·87]), and median overall survival was 20·0 months (17·8-22·1) versus 16·8 months (15·0-18·7; HR 0·84 [0·70-1·01]), but did not meet prespecified criteria for significance and will continue to final analysis. Grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events occurred in 204 (58%) of 350 patients in the pembrolizumab group versus 176 (51%) of 346 patients in the placebo group. Treatment-related adverse events that led to death occurred in four (1%) patients in the pembrolizumab group and three (1%) in the placebo group. The most common treatment-related adverse events of any grade were diarrhoea (165 [47%] in the pembrolizumab group vs 145 [42%] in the placebo group), nausea (154 [44%] vs 152 [44%]), and anaemia (109 [31%] vs 113 [33%]). INTERPRETATION: Compared with placebo, pembrolizumab significantly improved progression-free survival when combined with first-line trastuzumab and chemotherapy for metastatic HER2-positive gastro-oesophageal cancer, specifically in patients with tumours with a PD-L1 combined positive score of 1 or more. Overall survival follow-up is ongoing and will be reported at the final analysis. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Clinical and genomic characterisation of early-onset pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of early-onset pancreatic cancer (EOPC) has risen dramatically in recent years. We aimed to characterise the clinical and genomic features of EOPC and evaluate their therapeutic implications. METHODS: We performed a comparative, single-centre, retrospective analysis of clinical, germline, and genomic features in EOPC (≤50 years) patients and compared them with a control group of average-onset pancreatic cancer patients (AOPC, ≥70 years). Key molecular findings were compared with an external, publicly available cohort. RESULTS: We reviewed 336 patients who met all inclusion criteria (EOPC N = 139, AOPC N = 197). EOPC was associated with smoking status, lower prevalence of diabetes, better performance status, higher CA19.9 levels, and higher albumin levels at diagnosis. After adjustment for baseline covariates, we observed no differences in overall survival (OS). Age was associated with an increase in the incidence of KRASMUT both in our cohort and the validation cohort. EOPC were enriched in potentially actionable alterations according to ESCAT tiers I-IIIA when compared with AOPC in discovery and validation cohorts (19% versus 14% and 14% versus 8%, respectively). In the first-line metastatic setting, EOPC had a longer progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-0.87) and OS (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.45-0.95), although there were no differences in response rate. After adjusting for the number of treatment lines, EOPC patients who did receive targeted therapies exhibited longer OS compared with EOPC who did not (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.12-0.93). CONCLUSIONS: EOPC patients have improved outcomes in the metastatic setting when compared to AOPC and are enriched for targetable alterations that open opportunities for precision oncology-based approaches.

SEAMARK: phase II study of first-line encorafenib and cetuximab plus pembrolizumab for MSI-H/dMMR BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC.

Patients with both BRAF V600E mutations and microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H)/mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) have poor prognosis. Currently, there are no specifically targeted first-line treatment options indicated for patients with mCRC whose tumors harbor both molecular aberrations. Pembrolizumab is a checkpoint inhibitor approved for the treatment of MSI-H/dMMR mCRC, and the BRAF inhibitor encorafenib, in combination with cetuximab, is approved for previously treated BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC. Combination of pembrolizumab with encorafenib and cetuximab may synergistically enhance antitumor activity in patients with BRAF V600E-mutant, MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. SEAMARK is a randomized phase II study comparing the efficacy of the combination of pembrolizumab with encorafenib and cetuximab versus pembrolizumab alone in patients with previously untreated BRAF V600E-mutant, MSI-H/dMMR mCRC.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) occurs when there is an abnormal growth of cells (known as a tumor) in the colon or rectum. Some people with CRC have changes in their tumor genes (known as gene mutations). A gene is a piece of DNA that tells the cell to make specific molecules, such as proteins. Mutations in a gene called BRAF can turn on signals that help the cancer cells grow. Gene mutations that impair DNA repair mechanisms can also make the cancer cells grow more quickly and allow the immune system to detect the cancer cells as being foreign to the body. Targeted therapy is a type of cancer treatment that turns off specific genes and proteins involved in cancer cell survival and growth. BRAF and EGFR inhibitors are targeted therapies that work well together in treating people with BRAF-mutant CRC. BRAF proteins can help cancer cells grow, and BRAF inhibitors block these proteins to prevent, slow, or stop the growth of the cancer cells. Immunotherapy is a type of cancer treatment that helps a person's immune system fight cancer. Immunotherapy is effective for treating CRC that has mutations in the DNA repair mechanisms. By combining targeted therapy and immunotherapy, patients may be able to live longer without their disease getting worse. In the SEAMARK study, we will use a treatment combination including a BRAF inhibitor (encorafenib), an EGFR inhibitor (cetuximab) and an immunotherapy (pembrolizumab) in patients with CRC who have a BRAF mutation and deficiencies in the DNA repair mechanism. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05217446 (ClinicalTrials.gov), 2021-003715-26 (EudraCT).

Immunotherapy for Colorectal Cancer with High Microsatellite Instability: The Ongoing Search for Biomarkers.

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a biological condition associated with inflamed tumors, high tumor mutational burden (TMB), and responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors. In colorectal cancer (CRC), MSI tumors are found in 5% of patients in the metastatic setting and 15% in early-stage disease. Following the impressive clinical activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the metastatic setting, associated with deep and long-lasting responses, the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors has expanded to early-stage disease. Several phase II trials have demonstrated a high rate of pathological complete responses, with some patients even spared from surgery. However, in both settings, not all patients respond and some responses are short, emphasizing the importance of the ongoing search for accurate biomarkers. While various biomarkers of response have been evaluated in the context of MSI CRC, including B2M and JAK1/2 mutations, TMB, WNT pathway mutations, and Lynch syndrome, with mixed results, liver metastases have been associated with a lack of activity in such strategies. To improve patient selection and treatment outcomes, further research is required to identify additional biomarkers and refine existing ones. This will allow for the development of personalized treatment approaches and the integration of novel therapeutic strategies for MSI CRC patients with liver metastases.

Early-Stage Breast Cancer Detection in Breast Milk.

Breast cancer occurring during pregnancy (PrBC) and postpartum (PPBC) is usually diagnosed at more advanced stages compared with other breast cancer, worsening its prognosis. PPBC is particularly aggressive, with increased metastatic risk and mortality. Thus, effective screening methods to detect early PrBC and PPBC are needed. We report for the first time that cell-free tumor DNA (ctDNA) is present in breast milk (BM) collected from patients with breast cancer. Analysis of ctDNA from BM detects tumor variants in 87% of the cases by droplet digital PCR, while variants remain undetected in 92% of matched plasma samples. Retrospective next-generation sequencing analysis in BM ctDNA recapitulates tumor variants, with an overall clinical sensitivity of 71.4% and specificity of 100%. In two cases, ctDNA was detectable in BM collected 18 and 6 months prior to standard diagnosis. Our results open up the potential use of BM as a new source for liquid biopsy for PPBC detection. SIGNIFICANCE: For the first time, we show that BM obtained from patients with breast cancer carries ctDNA, surpassing plasma-based liquid biopsy for detection and molecular profiling of early-stage breast cancer, even prior to diagnosis by image. See related commentary by Cunningham and Turner, p. 2125. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 2109.

Use of Drugs in Clinical Practice and the Associated Cost of Cancer Treatment in Adult Patients with Solid Tumors: A 10-Year Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in the world. Its growing incidence and prevalence, as well as the advances in diagnostic and treatment tools, motivate an open debate about the economic burden it may place on health systems and have raised concerns about access to this technological innovation. There is a lack of information on the detailed costs of pharmacological treatment of cancer in our health setting. In this context, it is necessary to know the use of drugs in cancer treatment in conditions of real clinical practice. A real-word, evidence-based retrospective cohort study was conducted at Vall d'Hebron University Hospital (VHUH), the largest hospital complex in Catalonia, Spain, in order to determine the use of drugs and the associated cost in real clinical practice for the treatment of solid tumors in adult patients attended at this institution over 10 years (2010-2019). METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective cohort study of adult cancer patients attended in clinical practice at the Medical Oncology Department of VHUH between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2019. Data of prescription, preparation, and cost of antineoplastic treatments were analyzed by pharmacological class (cytotoxic drugs, immunotherapy, targeted therapy, radiopharmaceuticals, and others), by antineoplastic agent, and by type of tumor. The number of patients and the pharmaceutical expenditure corresponding to all these subgroups were recorded. The cost per patient in each tumor location was also calculated. RESULTS: The study population included 13,209 patients with an overall pharmaceutical antineoplastic expenditure of EUR 120,396,097, increasing from 7.67% in relation to the total HUVH pharmaceutical expenditure in 2010 to 12.82% in 2019. By pharmacological class, the specific weight of the cost of targeted therapy is relevant (75.22% of pharmaceutical antineoplastic expenditure, 21.3% of patients) compared to the group of conventional cytotoxics (17.25% of pharmaceutical antineoplastic expenditure, 76.37% of patients), while immunotherapy has represented the largest relative increase, from 5% in 2014 to 12% in 2019. Eight targeted therapy drugs represented 50% of the costs of the targeted therapy drug class (palbociclib, trastuzumab, pertuzumab, bevacizumab, nivolumab, cetuximab, pembrolizumab, and trastuzumab emtansine). Eleven tumor sites accounted for 90% of the expenditure in 71% of all patients. Breast cancer had the highest expenditure during the study period (EUR 34,332,210) and at each individual year. Melanoma showed the highest increase, with 9.7% of total pharmaceutical antineoplastic expenditure in 2019 (2% of patients), representing a paradigm of the rising costs of cancer treatment due to the incorporation of new high-cost therapies. The average annual cost per patient was highly variable depending on the pathology. There was a growing increase in costs per patient in most tumor locations, particularly in patients with melanoma (from EUR 1922 in 2010 to EUR 37,020 in 2019), prostate cancer (from EUR 2992 in 2010 to EUR 14,118 in 2019), and non-small cell lung cancer (from EUR 3545 in 2010 to EUR 8371 in 2019). The relevance of the difference in monthly cost per patient that has been identified for the different intrinsic subtypes in breast cancer patients during 2019 (HER2+ EUR 2661/month, Luminal EUR 881/month, Triple negative EUR 386/month) makes us consider suggesting differentiated reimbursement rates for certain clinical conditions. Finally, support treatment with antiemetic drugs, erythropoietin stimulating agents, granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), and bone resorption inhibitors has involved a cost of EUR 5,751,910, which represents 4.6% of the overall pharmacological cost of cancer treatment. CONCLUSION: This study provides detailed insights on the oncological pharmaceutical expenditure for the treatment for solid tumors in the VHUH, based on real cost information from our hospital practice and for all antineoplastic therapies and types of solid tumors. This type of information on all the different types of cancer can be useful to better understand the economic burden of the disease and can be decisive for allocating public resources and funds for research, especially in those areas where information is scarce and therefore where further studies are needed. The contribution to knowledge of the cost of oncology therapy is of great value due to its realism and scope.

Unravelling the Complexity of Colorectal Cancer: Heterogeneity, Clonal Evolution, and Clinical Implications.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a global health concern and a leading cause of death worldwide. The disease's course and response to treatment are significantly influenced by its heterogeneity, both within a single lesion and between primary and metastatic sites. Biomarkers, such as mutations in KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF, provide valuable guidance for treatment decisions in patients with metastatic CRC. While high concordance exists between mutational status in primary and metastatic lesions, some heterogeneity may be present. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis has proven invaluable in identifying genetic heterogeneity and predicting prognosis in RAS-mutated metastatic CRC patients. Tumor heterogeneity can arise from genetic and non-genetic factors, affecting tumor development and response to therapy. To comprehend and address clonal evolution and intratumoral heterogeneity, comprehensive genomic studies employing techniques such as next-generation sequencing and computational analysis are essential. Liquid biopsy, notably through analysis of ctDNA, enables real-time clonal evolution and treatment response monitoring. However, challenges remain in standardizing procedures and accurately characterizing tumor subpopulations. Various models elucidate the origin of CRC heterogeneity, highlighting the intricate molecular pathways involved. This review focuses on intrapatient cancer heterogeneity and genetic clonal evolution in metastatic CRC, with an emphasis on clinical applications.