Trilaciclib plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Trilaciclib is an intravenous cell-cycle inhibitor that transiently maintains immune cells and haemopoietic stem and progenitor cells in G1 arrest. By protecting the immune cells and bone marrow from chemotherapy-induced damage, trilaciclib has the potential to optimise antitumour activity while minimising myelotoxicity. We report safety and activity data for trilaciclib plus gemcitabine and carboplatin chemotherapy in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 2 study, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with evaluable, biopsy-confirmed, locally recurrent or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer who had no more than two previous lines of chemotherapy were recruited from 26 sites in the USA, three in Serbia, two in North Macedonia, one in Croatia, and one in Bulgaria; sites were academic and community hospitals. Availability of diagnostic samples of tumour tissue confirming triple-negative breast cancer was a prerequisite for enrolment. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by an interactive web-response system, stratified by number of previous lines of systemic therapy and the presence of liver metastases, to receive intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 and intravenous carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve 2 µg × h/mL) on days 1 and 8 (group 1), gemcitabine and carboplatin plus intravenous trilaciclib 240 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 (group 2), or gemcitabine and carboplatin on days 2 and 9 plus trilaciclib on days 1, 2, 8, and 9 (group 3) of 21-day cycles. Patients continued treatment until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or discontinuation by the investigator. The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of combining trilaciclib with gemcitabine and carboplatin chemotherapy. The primary endpoints were duration of severe neutropenia during cycle 1 and the occurrence of severe neutropenia during the treatment period. Overall survival was included as a key secondary endpoint. Analyses were in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with EudraCT, 2016-004466-26, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02978716, and is ongoing but closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Feb 7, 2017, and May 15, 2018, 142 patients were assessed for eligibility and 102 were randomly assigned to group 1 (n=34), group 2 (n=33), or group 3 (n=35). Of all patients, 38 (37%) had received one or two lines of previous chemotherapy in the metastatic setting. Median follow-up was 8·4 months (IQR 3·8-13·6) for group 1, 12·7 months (5·5-17·4) for group 2, and 12·9 months (6·7-16·8) for group 3. Data cutoff for myelosuppression endpoints was July 30, 2018, and for antitumour activity endpoints was May 17, 2019. During cycle 1, mean duration of severe neutropenia was 0·8 day (SD 2·4) in group 1, 1·5 days (3·5) in group 2, and 1·0 day (2·6) in group 3 (group 3 vs group 1 one-sided adjusted p=0·70). Severe neutropenia occurred in nine (26%) of 34 patients in group 1, 12 (36%) of 33 patients in group 2, and eight (23%) of 35 patients in group 3 (p=0·70). Overall survival was 12·6 months (IQR 5·8-15·6) in group 1, 20·1 months (9·4-not reached) in group 2, and 17·8 months (8·8-not reached) in group 3 (group 3 vs group 1 two-sided p=0·0023). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (22 [73%] of 34), neutropenia (21 [70%]), and thrombocytopenia (18 [60%]) in group 1; neutropenia (27 [82%] of 33), thrombocytopenia (18 [55%]) and anaemia (17 [52%]) in group 2; and neutropenia (23 [66%] of 35), thrombocytopenia (22 [63%]), and nausea (17 [49%]) in group 3. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: No significant differences were observed in myelosuppression endpoints with trilaciclib plus gemcitabine and carboplatin in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer; however, the regimen was generally well tolerated and overall survival results were encouraging. Further studies of trilaciclib in this setting are warranted. FUNDING: G1 Therapeutics.

Phase II evaluation of LY2603618, a first-generation CHK1 inhibitor, in combination with pemetrexed in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

Introduction LY2603618 is a selective inhibitor of checkpoint kinase 1 (CHK1) protein kinase, a key regulator of the DNA damage checkpoint, and is predicted to enhance the effects of antimetabolites, such as pemetrexed. This phase II trial assessed the overall response rate, safety, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of LY2603618 and pemetrexed in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods In this open-label, single-arm trial, patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC progressing after a prior first-line treatment regimen (not containing pemetrexed) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤2 received pemetrexed (500 mg/m(2), day 1) and LY2603618 (150 mg/m(2), day 2) every 21 days until disease progression. Safety was assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0. Serial blood samples were collected for PK analysis after LY2603618 and pemetrexed administration. Expression of p53, as measured by immunohistochemistry and genetic variant analysis, was assessed as a predictive biomarker of response. Results Fifty-five patients were enrolled in the study. No patients experienced a complete response; a partial response was observed in 5 patients (9.1 %; 90 % CI, 3.7-18.2) and stable disease in 20 patients (36.4 %). The median progression-free survival was 2.3 months (range, 0-27.1). Safety and PK of LY2603618 in combination with pemetrexed were favorable. No association between p53 status and response was observed. Conclusions There was no significant clinical activity of LY2603618 and pemetrexed combination therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. The results were comparable with historical pemetrexed single-agent data, with similar safety and PK profiles being observed.

An innovative, multi-arm, complete phase 1b study of the novel anti-cancer agent tasisulam in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: This phase Ib study used a parallel, multi-arm design to examine tasisulam-sodium (hereafter tasisulam), a drug with complex pharmacology, combined with standard chemotherapies in patients with advanced solid tumors, with the ultimate goal of accelerating drug development. METHODS: Patients received escalating doses of tasisulam (3 + 3 schema; target Cmax 300-400 µg/mL) every 28 days plus 1,000 mg/m(2) gemcitabine HCl (days 1 and 15), 60 mg/m(2) docetaxel, 200 mg/m(2)/day temozolomide, 75 mg/m(2) cisplatin, or 150 mg/day erlotinib. Following dose-escalation, patients were enrolled into specific tumor subtype arms, chosen based on the established activity of the standard agent. Because tasisulam is highly albumin-bound, patients in the tumor-specific confirmation arms were dosed targeting specific albumin-corrected exposure ranges (AUCalb) identified during dose-escalation (3,500 h*µg/mL [75th percentile] for docetaxel, temozolomide, and cisplatin; 4,000 h*µg/mL for gemcitabine and erlotinib). RESULTS: A total of 234 patients were enrolled. The safety profile of tasisulam with standard chemotherapies was sufficient to allow enrollment into the dose-confirmation phase in all arms. The primary dose-limiting toxicities were hematologic (thrombocytopenia and neutropenia). The most common grade ≥3 drug-related treatment-emergent adverse event was neutropenia, with the highest incidence in the docetaxel arm. CONCLUSIONS: The multi-arm design allowed the efficient determination of the maximum tolerated dose of tasisulam across multiple combinations, and a preliminary characterization of pharmacokinetics, safety, and potential efficacy. Although enrollment into all planned groups was not completed due to termination of compound development, these data support the feasibility of this approach for accelerated cancer drug development, even for drugs with complex pharmacology.

Ibrutinib as initial therapy for elderly patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma: an open-label, multicentre, phase 1b/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Chemoimmunotherapy has led to improved numbers of patients achieving disease response, and longer overall survival in young patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia; however, its application in elderly patients has been restricted by substantial myelosuppression and infection. We aimed to assess safety and activity of ibrutinib, an orally administered covalent inhibitor of Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK), in treatment-naive patients aged 65 years and older with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. METHODS: In our open-label phase 1b/2 trial, we enrolled previously untreated patients at clinical sites in the USA. Eligible patients were aged at least 65 years, and had symptomatic chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma requiring therapy. Patients received 28 day cycles of once-daily ibrutinib 420 mg or ibrutinib 840 mg. The 840 mg dose was discontinued after enrolment had begun because comparable activity of the doses has been shown. The primary endpoint was the safety of the dose-fixed regimen in terms of frequency and severity of adverse events for all patients who received treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01105247. FINDINGS: Between May 20, 2010, and Dec 18, 2012, we enrolled 29 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and two patients with small lymphocytic lymphoma. Median age was 71 years (range 65-84), and 23 (74%) patients were at least 70 years old. Toxicity was mainly of mild-to-moderate severity (grade 1-2). 21 (68%) patients had diarrhoea (grade 1 in 14 [45%] patients, grade 2 in three [10%] patients, and grade 3 in four [13%] patients). 15 (48%) patients developed nausea (grade 1 in 12 [39%] patients and grade 2 in three [10%] patients). Ten (32%) patients developed fatigue (grade 1 in five [16%] patients, grade 2 in four [13%] patients, and grade 3 in one [3%] patient). Three (10%) patients developed grade 3 infections, although no grade 4 or 5 infections occurred. One patient developed grade 3 neutropenia, and one developed grade 4 thrombocytopenia. After a median follow-up of 22.1 months (IQR 18.4-23.2), 22 (71%) of 31 patients achieved an objective response (95% CI 52.0-85.8); four patients (13%) had a complete response, one patient (3%) had a nodular partial response, and 17 (55%) patients had a partial response. INTERPRETATION: The safety and activity of ibrutinib in elderly, previously untreated patients with symptomatic chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, or small lymphocytic lymphoma is encouraging, and merits further investigation in phase 3 trials. FUNDING: Pharmacyclics, Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, D Warren Brown Foundation, Mr and Mrs Michael Thomas, Harry Mangurian Foundation, P50 CA140158 to Prof J C Byrd MD.

Antitumor activity and safety of combination therapy with the Toll-like receptor 9 agonist IMO-2055, erlotinib, and bevacizumab in advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer patients who have progressed following chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: IMO-2055 is a Toll-like receptor 9 (TLR9) agonist that potentially enhances the efficacy of antitumor agents through immune stimulation. The objective of this phase Ib dose-escalation trial (3 + 3 design) was to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of IMO-2055 when combined with erlotinib and bevacizumab in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients with stage 3/4 NSCLC and progressive disease (PD) following chemotherapy received IMO-2055 0.08, 0.16, 0.32, or 0.48 mg/kg once weekly plus erlotinib 150 mg daily and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Patients could receive treatment until PD or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients were enrolled; 35 received at least one treatment dose. Two dose-limiting toxicities were observed across the dose range (Grade 3 dehydration and fatigue) with neither suggestive of a consistent toxicity pattern. IMO-2055 0.32 mg/kg was adopted as RP2D based on clinical and pharmacodynamic data. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were diarrhea (74 %), nausea (51 %), fatigue (51 %), rash (51 %), and injection-site reactions (49 %). Four patients experienced serious TEAEs considered to be study drug related. Five patients died, all due to PD. High-grade neutropenia and electrolyte disturbances previously reported with TLR9 agonists combined with platinum-based therapy were not observed in this study. Five of 33 patients evaluable for response (15 %) achieved partial response; another 20 (61 %) had stable disease, including 13 with stable disease ≥4 months. CONCLUSIONS: IMO-2055 demonstrated good tolerability and possible antitumor activity in combination with erlotinib and bevacizumab in heavily pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC.

Axitinib and/or bevacizumab with modified FOLFOX-6 as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: In this multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 2 trial, the authors evaluated the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor axitinib, bevacizumab, or both in combination with chemotherapy as first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: Patients with previously untreated mCRC were randomized 1:1:1 to receive continuous axitinib 5 mg twice daily, bevacizumab 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or axitinib 5 mg twice daily plus bevacizumab 2 mg/kg every 2 weeks, each in combination with modified 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX-6). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: In all, 126 patients were enrolled from August 2007 to September 2008. The ORR was numerically inferior in the axitinib arm (n = 42) versus the bevacizumab arm (n = 43; 28.6% vs 48.8%; 1-sided P = .97). Progression-free survival (PFS) (11.0 months vs 15.9 months; 1-sided P = .57) and overall survival (OS) (18.1 months vs 21.6 months; 1-sided P = .69) also were numerically inferior in the axitinib arm. Similarly, efficacy endpoints for the axitinib/bevacizumab arm (n = 41) were numerically inferior (ORR, 39%; PFS, 12.5 months; OS, 19.7 months). The patients who received axitinib had fewer treatment cycles compared with other arms. Common all-grade adverse events across all 3 treatment arms were fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea (all ≥49%). Hypertension and headache were more frequent in the patients who received axitinib. Patients in the bevacizumab arm had the longest treatment exposures and the highest rates of peripheral neuropathy. CONCLUSIONS: Neither the addition of continuous axitinib nor the axitinib/bevacizumab combination to FOLFOX-6 improved ORR, PFS, or OS compared with bevacizumab as first-line treatment of mCRC.

MRTX-500 Phase 2 Trial: Sitravatinib With Nivolumab in Patients With Nonsquamous NSCLC Progressing On or After Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy or Chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Sitravatinib, a receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting TYRO3, AXL, MERTK receptors, and vascular epithelial growth factor receptor 2, can shift the tumor microenvironment toward an immunostimulatory state. Combining sitravatinib with checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) may augment antitumor activity. METHODS: The phase 2 MRTX-500 study evaluated sitravatinib (120 mg daily) with nivolumab (every 2 or 4 wk) in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC who progressed on or after previous CPI (CPI-experienced) or chemotherapy (CPI-naive). CPI-experienced patients had a previous clinical benefit (PCB) (complete response, partial response, or stable disease for at least 12 weeks then disease progression) or no PCB (NPCB) from CPI. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR); secondary objectives included safety and secondary efficacy end points. RESULTS: Overall, 124 CPI-experienced (NPCB, n = 35; PCB, n = 89) and 32 CPI-naive patients were treated. Investigator-assessed ORR was 11.4% in patients with NPCB, 16.9% with PCB, and 25.0% in CPI-naive. The median progression-free survival was 3.7, 5.6, and 7.1 months with NPCB, PCB, and CPI-naive, respectively; the median overall survival was 7.9 and 13.6 months with NPCB and PCB, respectively (not reached in CPI-naive patients; median follow-up 20.4 mo). Overall, (N = 156), any grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 93.6%; grade 3/4 in 58.3%. One grade 5 TRAE occurred in a CPI-naive patient. TRAEs led to treatment discontinuation in 14.1% and dose reduction or interruption in 42.9%. Biomarker analyses supported an immunostimulatory mechanism of action. CONCLUSIONS: Sitravatinib with nivolumab had a manageable safety profile. Although ORR was not met, this combination exhibited antitumor activity and encouraged survival in CPI-experienced patients with nonsquamous NSCLC.

A Phase III trial of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab vs. pentostatin, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab in B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled studies comparing pentostatin (P), cyclophosphamide (C), and rituximab (R) (PCR) to fludarabine plus C+R (FCR) suggest similar efficacy with fewer infectious complications with PCR. We compared FCR and PCR in previously-untreated or minimally-treated B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). TREATMENT: FCR (F 20 mg/m(2) Days 1-5, C 600 mg/m(2) Day 1, R 375 mg/m(2) Day 1) (28-day cycles) or PCR (P 4 mg/m(2) Day 1, C 600 mg/m(2) Day 1, R 375 mg/m(2) Day 1) (21-day cycles). Dose 1 of R: 100 mg/m(2) was given on Day 8 Cycle 1 and the remainder on Day 9; in subsequent cycles the entire dose was given on Day 1. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients were randomly assigned to each group (N = 184). Groups were balanced; ~20% had received prior chemotherapy. The infection rate (FCR/PCR) was 31%/36%, the infective event rate was 38%/45%; 30 (35%)/37 (44%) patients were hospitalized; total hospitalization days was 271/404. 12 (14%)/6 (7%) patients achieved complete remissions (CR); the overall response rate (ORR) including CR+nodular PR (nPR)+PR was 59%/49%. Grade 3-4 treatment related AEs: neutropenia (69%/57%), leukopenia (34%/17%), thrombocytopenia (13%/6%). Grade 3-4 infections: febrile neutropenia (8%/6%), fever (2%/6%), infection (1%/3%), urinary tract infection (1%/0%), pneumonia (3%/1%), and sepsis (1%/2%); 5 deaths (1 FCR/4 PCR) were treatment-related. CONCLUSIONS: PCR and FCR have significant activity in CLL and can be given safely in the community setting despite significant toxicity. ORRs were lower than expected; the CR rate was higher (NS) with FCR. This trial did not demonstrate a lower infection rate with PCR.

A phase I trial of PX-12, a small-molecule inhibitor of thioredoxin-1, administered as a 72-hour infusion every 21 days in patients with advanced cancers refractory to standard therapy.

PURPOSE: This phase I trial assessed the safety, dose limiting toxicity (DLT) and pharmacodynamics of PX-12 in adult patients with advanced refractory cancers. METHODS: PX-12 was administered to sequential cohorts as a 72-h infusion utilizing a portable infusion pump on days 1, 2, and 3 of a 21-day cycle at a starting dose level of 300 mg/m(2)/day and escalating dose levels till DLT was observed. Plasma thioredoxin (Trx-1), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and FGF-2 (fibroblast growth factor) levels were measured predose and during infusion of PX-12. RESULTS: Patients (n = 14) were enrolled to the following dose cohorts, 300 mg/m(2) (n = 3), 400 mg/m(2) (n = 10) and 500 mg/m(2) (n = 1). Common grade 1/2 toxicities included fatigue, taste alteration and odor caused by expired drug metabolite. DLTs were one episode each of grade 3 hypoxia at the 400 mg/m(2) and grade 3 reversible pneumonitis at the 500 mg/m(2) dose levels. Best response was stable disease in a patient with rectal cancer. Predose Trx-1 levels (n = 12) ranged from 5.1 to 30.0 ng/mL (median 12.6 ng/mL). CONCLUSION: PX-12 administered at 400 mg/m(2)/day by 72-hour infusion appears safe and tolerable. Inhibition of thioredoxin is a strategy worth evaluation with next generation of inhibitors.

Trilaciclib Prior to Chemotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Final Efficacy and Subgroup Analysis from a Randomized Phase II Study.

PURPOSE: We report final antitumor efficacy results from a phase II study of trilaciclib, an intravenous cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor, administered prior to gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GCb) in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (NCT02978716). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to group 1 [GCb (days 1, 8); n = 34], group 2 [trilaciclib prior to GCb (days 1, 8); n = 33], or group 3 [trilaciclib (days 1, 8) and trilaciclib prior to GCb (days 2, 9); n = 35]. Subgroup analyses were performed according to CDK4/6 dependence, level of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, and RNA-based immune signatures using proportional hazards regression. T-cell receptor (TCR) ß CDR3 regions were amplified and sequenced to identify, quantify, and compare the abundance of each unique TCRß CDR3 at baseline and on treatment. RESULTS: Median overall survival (OS) was 12.6 months in group 1, not reached in group 2 (HR = 0.31; P = 0.0016), 17.8 months in group 3 (HR = 0.40; P = 0.0004), and 19.8 months in groups 2 and 3 combined (HR = 0.37; P < 0.0001). Efficacy outcomes were comparable regardless of cancer CDK4/6 dependence status and immune signatures. Administering trilaciclib prior to GCb prolonged OS irrespective of PD-L1 status but had greater benefit in the PD-L1-positive population. T-cell activation was enhanced in patients receiving trilaciclib. CONCLUSIONS: Administering trilaciclib prior to GCb enhanced antitumor efficacy, with significant improvements in OS. Efficacy outcomes in immunologic subgroups and enhancements in T-cell activation suggest these improvements may be mediated via immunologic mechanisms.

Evaluation of cell-free DNA approaches for multi-cancer early detection.

In the Circulating Cell-free Genome Atlas (NCT02889978) substudy 1, we evaluate several approaches for a circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA)-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test by defining clinical limit of detection (LOD) based on circulating tumor allele fraction (cTAF), enabling performance comparisons. Among 10 machine-learning classifiers trained on the same samples and independently validated, when evaluated at 98% specificity, those using whole-genome (WG) methylation, single nucleotide variants with paired white blood cell background removal, and combined scores from classifiers evaluated in this study show the highest cancer signal detection sensitivities. Compared with clinical stage and tumor type, cTAF is a more significant predictor of classifier performance and may more closely reflect tumor biology. Clinical LODs mirror relative sensitivities for all approaches. The WG methylation feature best predicts cancer signal origin. WG methylation is the most promising technology for MCED and informs development of a targeted methylation MCED test.

Phase I study of pemetrexed and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in patients with refractory breast, ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer.

PURPOSE: Pemetrexed and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) are clinically active as single agents and preclinically synergistic. This phase I, open-label trial evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and safety of pemetrexed followed by PLD in patients with breast or gynecologic cancers. PATIENTS: Using 3 + 3 dose escalation, cohorts of 3-9 patients received escalating doses of pemetrexed 400-500 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 15 and PLD 30-45 mg/m(2) on day 1 of a 28-day cycle. All patients received folic acid and vitamin B(12) until 21 days after last pemetrexed dose. Patients continued until dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) or progression (PD). RESULTS: From 11/05 to 2/08, 29 patients entered treatment; median age: 60.6 years (range, 47.5-80.1); ECOG PS 0/1: 27.6%/72.4%; primary disease site: ovarian (55.2%), breast (34.5%), peritoneum (10.3%); prior therapies: chemotherapy (100.0%), surgery (72.4%), hormones/biologics (35%), and radiation (20.7%). Pemetrexed/PLD dose levels: L1 = 400/30 (n = 4), L2 = 400/35 (n = 6), L3 = 500/35 (n = 9), L4 = 500/40 (n = 7), and L5 = 500/45 (n = 3). Treatment-related grade 3-4 toxicities: hematologic-neutropenia (86.2%), leukopenia (58.6%), thrombocytopenia (48.3%), anemia (41.4%); nonhematologic-mucosal inflammation (24.1%), febrile neutropenia (24.1%), hand-foot syndrome (13.8%), hypokalaemia (10.3%). Reasons for discontinuation: PD (48.3%), toxicity (27.6%), patient request (13.8%), and investigator request (10.3%). EFFICACY: 5 ovarian patients (20.8%) achieved partial response; median time to progression (TTP) was 6.1 months (range, 1.2-12.5). CONCLUSION: Pemetrexed plus PLD was reasonably tolerated in this heavily-pretreated population. MTD: pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) and PLD 40 mg/m(2) may be carried forward to phase II studies in specific patient populations. TTP in platinum-refractory ovarian patients was greater than expected.

Gemcitabine plus enzastaurin or single-agent gemcitabine in locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer: results of a phase II, randomized, noncomparative study.

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine (G) is standard therapy for pancreatic cancer. Enzastaurin (E) inhibits PKCß and PI3K/AKT signaling pathways with a dose-dependent effect on growth of pancreatic carcinoma xenografts. Data suggest that the GE combination may improve clinical outcomes. METHODS: Primary objective was overall survival (OS); secondary objectives assessed progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), quality of life (QOL), toxicity, and relationships between biomarker expression and clinical outcomes. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to GE or G treatment; GE arm: E 500 mg p.o. daily; loading-dose (1200 mg; Day 1 Cycle 1 only) and G 1000 mg/m(2) i.v. Days 1, 8, and 15 in 28-day cycles; G arm: G as in GE. Biomarker expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Randomization totaled 130 patients (GE = 86, G = 44); 121 patients were treated (GE = 82, G = 39). GE/G median OS was 5.6/5.1 months; median PFS was 3.4/3.0 months. GE responses: 1 complete response (CR, 1.2%), 6 partial response (PR, 7.4%), and 33 stable disease (SD, 40.7%); disease control rate (DCR=CR+PR+SD, 49.4%). G responses: 2 PR (5.3%) and 16 SD (42.1%); DCR (47.4%). No QOL differences were noted between arms. GE/G Grade 3-4 toxicities included: neutropenia (18.3%/28.2%); thrombocytopenia (14.6%/25.6%); and fatigue (11.0%/7.7%). No statistically significant relationships between biomarker expression and outcomes were observed. However, patients with low expression of cytoplasmic pGSK-3ß trended toward greater OS with GE treatment. CONCLUSIONS: OS, PFS, QOL, and RR were comparable between arms. Adding E to G did not increase hematologic toxicities. GE does not warrant further investigation in unselected pancreatic cancer patients.

Myeloprotective Effects of Trilaciclib Among Patients with Small Cell Lung Cancer at Increased Risk of Chemotherapy-Induced Myelosuppression: Pooled Results from Three Phase 2, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Studies.

PURPOSE: Trilaciclib is an intravenous cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor indicated to decrease the incidence of chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression (CIM) by protecting hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells and immune system function from chemotherapy-induced damage (myeloprotection). Here, we investigated the myeloprotective effects of trilaciclib among patients at increased risk of CIM. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were pooled from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 clinical studies of trilaciclib administered prior to chemotherapy in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). Myeloprotective outcomes were evaluated in patient subgroups based on age (<65 or ≥65 years), risk of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN), and risk of anemia or red blood cell (RBC) transfusions. For the FN and anemia analyses, risk factors were identified from published literature and used to classify patients into FN and anemia risk categories. Subgroup analysis based on age was also performed on patient reported outcome (PRO) measures. RESULTS: In total, 123 patients received trilaciclib and 119 patients received placebo. Myeloprotective benefits of trilaciclib were observed regardless of age, with greater effects observed among patients aged ≥65 years. Across FN risk factors and categories, trilaciclib had beneficial effects on neutrophil-related endpoints vs placebo, with greater effects observed in patients at higher risk of FN. Effects on RBC-related endpoints favored trilaciclib vs placebo, regardless of anemia risk factors and categories. Improvements in PROs with trilaciclib were observed irrespective of age group, but with greater improvements and less deterioration from baseline observed in older patients. CONCLUSION: By both decreasing the incidence of CIM and improving quality of life, trilaciclib has the potential to allow patients receiving chemotherapy for ES-SCLC, including patients who are older or more vulnerable to CIM, to receive chemotherapy on schedule and at standard-of-care doses, and to improve the experience for patients receiving chemotherapy to treat ES-SCLC. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBERS: NCT02499770; NCT03041311; NCT02514447.

A Phase 2 Randomized Placebo-Controlled Adjuvant Trial of GI-4000, a Recombinant Yeast Expressing Mutated RAS Proteins in Patients with Resected Pancreas Cancer.

Purpose: GI-4000, a series of recombinant yeast expressing four different mutated RAS proteins, was evaluated in subjects with resected ras-mutated pancreas cancer. Methods: Subjects (n = 176) received GI-4000 or placebo plus gemcitabine. Subjects' tumors were genotyped to identify which matched GI-4000 product to administer. Immune responses were measured by interferon-γ (IFNγ) ELISpot assay and by regulatory T cell (Treg) frequencies on treatment. Pretreatment plasma was retrospectively analyzed by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time-of-flight (MALDI-ToF) mass spectrometry for proteomic signatures predictive of GI-4000 responsiveness. Results: GI-4000 was well tolerated, with comparable safety findings between treatment groups. The GI-4000 group showed a similar pattern of median recurrence-free and overall survival (OS) compared with placebo. For the prospectively defined and stratified R1 resection subgroup, there was a trend in 1 year OS (72% vs. 56%), an improvement in OS (523.5 vs. 443.5 days [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.06 [confidence interval (CI): 0.53-2.13], p = 0.872), and increased frequency of immune responders (40% vs. 8%; p = 0.062) for GI-4000 versus placebo and a 159-day improvement in OS for R1 GI-4000 immune responders versus placebo (p = 0.810). For R0 resection subjects, no increases in IFNγ responses in GI-4000-treated subjects were observed. A higher frequency of R0/R1 subjects with a reduction in Tregs (CD4+/CD45RA+/Foxp3low) was observed in GI-4000-treated subjects versus placebo (p = 0.033). A proteomic signature was identified that predicted response to GI-4000/gemcitabine regardless of resection status. Conclusion: These results justify continued investigation of GI-4000 in studies stratified for likely responders or in combination with immune check-point inhibitors or other immunomodulators, which may provide optimal reactivation of antitumor immunity. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT00300950.

A Phase Ib multicenter, dose-escalation study of the polyamine analogue PG-11047 in combination with gemcitabine, docetaxel, bevacizumab, erlotinib, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil, or sunitinib in patients with advanced solid tumors or lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Polyamines are absolutely essential for maintaining tumor cell proliferation. PG-11047, a polyamine analogue, is a nonfunctional competitor of the natural polyamine spermine that has demonstrated anticancer activity in cells and animal models of multiple cancer types. Preclinical investigations into the effects of common chemotherapeutic agents have revealed overlap with components of the polyamine metabolic pathway also affected by PG-11047. This report describes a Phase Ib clinical trial investigating PG-11047 in combination with cytotoxic and anti-angiogenic chemotherapeutic agents in patients with advanced refractory metastatic solid tumors or lymphoma. METHODS: A total of 172 patients were assigned to treatment arms based on cancer type to receive the appropriate standard-of-care therapy (gemcitabine, docetaxel, bevacizumab, erlotinib, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), or sunitinib as directed) along with once weekly intravenous infusions of PG-11047. PG-11047 dose escalation ranged from 50 to 590 mg. RESULTS: The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of PG-11047 in combination with bevacizumab, erlotinib, cisplatin, and 5-FU was 590 mg. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) in these groups were rare (5 of 148 patients). Overall partial responses (PR) were observed in 12% of patients treated with PG-11047 and bevacizumab, with stable disease documented in an additional 40%. Stable disease occurred in 71.4% of patients in the 5-FU arm, 54.1% in the cisplatin arm, and 33.3% in the erlotinib arm. Four of the patients receiving cisplatin + PG-11047 (20%) had unconfirmed PRs. MTDs for gemcitabine, docetaxel, and sunitinib could not be determined due to DLTs at low doses of PG-11047 and small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this Phase Ib trial indicate that PG-11047 can be safely administered to patients in combination with bevacizumab, erlotinib, cisplatin, and 5-FU on the once weekly dosing schedule described and may provide therapeutic benefit. The manageable toxicity profile and high MTD determination provide a safety profile for further clinical studies.

Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel with necuparanib or placebo in untreated metastatic pancreas ductal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Necuparanib, a rationally engineered low-molecular-weight heparin, combined with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel showed an encouraging safety and oncologic signal in a phase Ib trial. This randomised multicentre phase II trial evaluates the addition of necuparanib or placebo to gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in untreated metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility included 18 years, histologically or cytologically confirmed metastatic PDAC, measurable disease and Eastern Co-Operative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1. Patients were randomly assigned to necuparanib (5 mg/kg subcutaneous injection once daily) or placebo (subcutaneous injection once daily) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel on days 1, 8 and 15 of 28-day cycles. The primary end-point was median overall survival (OS), and secondary end-points included median progression-free survival, response rates and safety. RESULTS: One-hundred ten patients were randomised, 62 to necuparanib arm and 58 to placebo arm. The futility boundary was crossed at a planned interim analysis, and the study was terminated by the Data Safety Monitoring Board. The median OS was 10.71 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.95-11.96) for necuparanib arm and 9.99 months (95% CI: 7.85-12.85) for placebo arm (hazard ratio: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.66-1.89, P-value: 0.671). The necuparanib arm had a higher incidence of haematologic toxicity relative to placebo patients (83% and 70%). CONCLUSION: The addition of necuparanib to standard of care treatment for advanced PDAC did not improve OS. Safety was acceptable. No further development of necuparanib is planned although targeting the coagulation cascade pathway remains relevant in PDAC. NCT01621243.

Cancer of the pancreas: are we making progress? A review of studies in the US Oncology Research Network.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States. In 2008, approximately 37,680 people will be diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and 34,290 will die of this disease. METHODS: The authors reviewed the literature on treatment of pancreatic cancer with an emphasis on studies conducted in the US Oncology Research (USOR) Network. RESULTS: Although much research has been conducted to develop improved systemic therapies of pancreatic cancer, gemcitabine as a single agent remains the current standard of care. Combinations with other chemotherapeutic drugs or biological agents have resulted in limited improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Despite aggressive efforts to improve treatment for patients with pancreatic cancer, limited progress has been made. It is hoped that new studies being planned and conducted will improve outcomes for patients with this disease.

Phase 1/1b dose escalation and expansion study of BEZ235, a dual PI3K/mTOR inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumors including patients with advanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of BEZ235, an oral inhibitor of class I PI3K and mTOR complexes 1 and 2. METHODS: We performed a phase I/Ib, multicenter, open-label study of oral BEZ235 administered in a continuous daily schedule. The study consisted of two parts: dose-escalation part and safety-expansion part. BEZ235 was administered as a single agent to patients with solid tumors or in combination with trastuzumab for HER2+ advanced breast cancer (aBC). Primary end points were MTD, safety, and tolerability. The secondary end point was pharmacokinetics. Other formulations of BEZ235, solid dispersion system (SDS) sachet, and SDS capsules were also assessed. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-three patients were enrolled; single-agent BEZ235 was administered as hard gelatin capsule (n = 59), SDS capsules A and B (n = 33), and SDS sachet (n = 61), amongst which SDS sachet was chosen as the preferred formulation. The monotherapy MTD for capsule A and SDS sachet was determined to be 1000 and 1200 mg/day, respectively. Thirty patients with HER2+ aBC received BEZ235 in combination with trastuzumab. The MTD of BEZ235 in combination with trastuzumab was 600 mg/day. A total of four patients (13.3%) achieved partial response across the different groups. Most frequent AEs in single agent and combination cohorts included nausea (80.3 and 93.3%), diarrhea (75.4 and 80.0%), and vomiting (63.9 and 63.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The MTD of BEZ235 as single agent was 1200 and 600 mg/day with trastuzumab. Pharmacokinetic profiles showed low-to-moderate variability at low dose (10 mg) and high variability at high doses (100 mg and above). Gastrointestinal AEs were frequent at high doses.

Phase II Study of Taselisib (GDC-0032) in Combination with Fulvestrant in Patients with HER2-Negative, Hormone Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer.

Purpose: This single-arm, open-label phase II study evaluated the safety and efficacy of taselisib (GDC-0032) plus fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with locally advanced or metastatic HER2-negative, hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer.Patients and Methods: Patients received 6-mg oral taselisib capsules daily plus intramuscular fulvestrant (500 mg) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Tumor tissue (if available) was centrally evaluated for PIK3CA mutations. Adverse events (AE) were recorded using NCI-CTCAE v4.0. Tumor response was investigator-determined using RECIST v1.1.Results: Median treatment duration was 4.6 (range: 0.9-40.5) months. All patients experienced ≥1 AE, 30 (50.0%) had grade ≥3 AEs, and 19 (31.7%) experienced 35 serious AEs. Forty-seven of 60 patients had evaluable tissue for central PIK3CA mutation testing [20 had mutations, 27 had no mutation detected (MND)]. In patients with baseline measurable disease, clinical activity was observed in tumors with PIK3CA mutations [best confirmed response rate: 38.5% (5/13; 95% CI, 13.9-68.4); clinical benefit rate (CBR): 38.5% (5/13; 95% CI, 13.9-68.4)], PIK3CA-MND [best confirmed response rate: 14.3% (3/21; 95% CI, 3.0-36.3); CBR: 23.8% (5/21; 95% CI, 8.2-47.2)], and unknown PIK3CA mutation status [best confirmed response rate: 20.0% (2/10; 95% CI, 2.5-55.6); CBR: 30.0% (3/10; 95% CI, 6.7-65.2)].Conclusions: Taselisib plus fulvestrant had clinical activity irrespective of PIK3CA mutation status, with numerically higher objective response rate and CBR in patients with PIK3CA-mutated (vs. -MND) locally advanced or metastatic HER2-negative, HR-positive breast cancer. No new safety signals were reported. A confirmatory phase III trial is ongoing. Clin Cancer Res; 24(18); 4380-7. ©2018 AACR.