A Phase 1/2 trial of SRA737 (a Chk1 inhibitor) administered orally in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: This was a first-in-human Phase 1/2 open-label dose-escalation study of the novel checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) inhibitor SRA737. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumours enrolled in dose-escalation cohorts and received SRA737 monotherapy orally on a continuous daily (QD) dosing schedule in 28-day cycles. Expansion cohorts included up to 20 patients with prospectively selected, pre-specified response predictive biomarkers. RESULTS: In total, 107 patients were treated at dose levels from 20-1300 mg. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of SRA737 was 1000 mg QD, the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) was 800 mg QD. Common toxicities of diarrhoea, nausea and vomiting were generally mild to moderate. Dose-limiting toxicity at daily doses of 1000 and 1300 mg QD SRA737 included gastrointestinal events, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Pharmacokinetic analysis at the 800 mg QD dose showed a mean Cmin of 312 ng/mL (546 nM), exceeding levels required to cause growth delay in xenograft models. No partial or complete responses were seen. CONCLUSIONS: SRA737 was well tolerated at doses that achieved preclinically relevant drug concentrations but single agent activity did not warrant further development as monotherapy. Given its mechanism of action resulting in abrogating DNA damage repair, further clinical development of SRA737 should be as combination therapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02797964.

Development of consensus-driven SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions for early phase dose-finding trials: the DEFINE study.

BACKGROUND: Early phase dose-finding (EPDF) trials are crucial for the development of a new intervention and influence whether it should be investigated in further trials. Guidance exists for clinical trial protocols and completed trial reports in the SPIRIT and CONSORT guidelines, respectively. However, both guidelines and their extensions do not adequately address the characteristics of EPDF trials. Building on the SPIRIT and CONSORT checklists, the DEFINE study aims to develop international consensus-driven guidelines for EPDF trial protocols (SPIRIT-DEFINE) and reports (CONSORT-DEFINE). METHODS: The initial generation of candidate items was informed by reviewing published EPDF trial reports. The early draft items were refined further through a review of the published and grey literature, analysis of real-world examples, citation and reference searches, and expert recommendations, followed by a two-round modified Delphi process. Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) was pursued concurrently with the quantitative and thematic analysis of Delphi participants' feedback. RESULTS: The Delphi survey included 79 new or modified SPIRIT-DEFINE (n = 36) and CONSORT-DEFINE (n = 43) extension candidate items. In Round One, 206 interdisciplinary stakeholders from 24 countries voted and 151 stakeholders voted in Round Two. Following Round One feedback, one item for CONSORT-DEFINE was added in Round Two. Of the 80 items, 60 met the threshold for inclusion (≥ 70% of respondents voted critical: 26 SPIRIT-DEFINE, 34 CONSORT-DEFINE), with the remaining 20 items to be further discussed at the consensus meeting. The parallel PPIE work resulted in the development of an EPDF lay summary toolkit consisting of a template with guidance notes and an exemplar. CONCLUSIONS: By detailing the development journey of the DEFINE study and the decisions undertaken, we envision that this will enhance understanding and help researchers in the development of future guidelines. The SPIRIT-DEFINE and CONSORT-DEFINE guidelines will allow investigators to effectively address essential items that should be present in EPDF trial protocols and reports, thereby promoting transparency, comprehensiveness, and reproducibility. TRIAL REGISTRATION: SPIRIT-DEFINE and CONSORT-DEFINE are registered with the EQUATOR Network ( https://www.equator-network.org/ ).

Quantitative Multiplex Immunofluorescence Evaluation of the Tumor Microenvironment in Pretreatment Tumors of Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer and Serous Ovarian Carcinoma Treated with Liposomal Eribulin.

Eribulin inhibits microtubule polymerization and suppresses epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Conventional pathology approaches have not identified a precise predictive biomarker for Eribulin. We performed qmIF on pre-treatment tissue from 11 patients (6 TNBC, 5 HGSOC) treated with Eribulin-LF. T-lymphocytes were the dominant immune-subset in TME, with higher levels detected in stroma vs tumor (9% vs 2%). Greater density of CD3+ (p = 0.01) and CD3 + CD8+ (p = 0.03) cells and closer proximity between CD3 + CD8+ and tumor cells was observed in the patients with disease control (PR + SD) vs. progressive disease. QmIF identified an association between TIL infiltration and Eribulin-LF sensitivity, which should be evaluated further in prospective studies.

Covariate-adjusted analysis of the Phase 3 REFLECT study of lenvatinib versus sorafenib in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In the Phase 3 REFLECT trial in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), the multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, lenvatinib, was noninferior to sorafenib in the primary outcome of overall survival. Post-hoc review revealed imbalances in prognostic variables between treatment arms. Here, we re-analyse overall survival data from REFLECT to adjust for the imbalance in covariates. METHODS: Univariable and multivariable adjustments were undertaken for a candidate set of covariate values that a physician panel indicated could be prognostically associated with overall survival in uHCC. The values included baseline variables observed pre- and post-randomisation. Univariable analyses were based on a stratified Cox model. The multivariable analysis used a "forwards stepwise" Cox model. RESULTS: Univariable analysis identified alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) as the most influential variable. The chosen multivariable Cox model analysis resulted in an estimated adjusted hazard ratio for lenvatinib of 0.814 (95% CI: 0.699-0.948) when only baseline variables were included. Adjusting for post-randomisation treatment variables further increased the estimated superiority of lenvatinib. CONCLUSIONS: Covariate adjustment of REFLECT suggests that the original noninferiority trial likely underestimated the true effect of lenvatinib on overall survival due to an imbalance in baseline prognostic covariates and the greater use of post-treatment therapies in the sorafenib arm. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial number: NCT01761266 (Submitted January 2, 2013).

Urine protein:creatinine ratio vs 24-hour urine protein for proteinuria management: analysis from the phase 3 REFLECT study of lenvatinib vs sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Proteinuria monitoring is required in patients receiving lenvatinib, however, current methodology involves burdensome overnight urine collection. METHODS: To determine whether the simpler urine protein:creatinine ratio (UPCR) calculated from spot urine samples could be accurately used for proteinuria monitoring in patients receiving lenvatinib, we evaluated the correlation between UPCR and 24-hour urine protein results from the phase 3 REFLECT study. Paired data (323 tests, 154 patients) were analysed. RESULTS: Regression analysis showed a statistically significant correlation between UPCR and 24-hour urine protein (R2: 0.75; P < 2 × 10-16). A UPCR cut-off value of 2.4 had 96.9% sensitivity, 82.5% specificity for delineating between grade 2 and 3 proteinuria. Using this UPCR cut-off value to determine the need for further testing could reduce the need for 24-hour urine collection in ~74% of patients. CONCLUSION: Incorporation of UPCR into the current algorithm for proteinuria management can enable optimisation of lenvatinib treatment, while minimising patient inconvenience. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01761266.

Correction: Urine protein:creatinine ratio vs 24-hour urine protein for proteinuria management: analysis from the phase 3 REFLECT study of lenvatinib vs sorafenib in hepatocellular carcinoma.

This article was originally published under a standard license to Publish, but has now been made available under a CC BY license. The PDF and HTML versions of the paper have been modified accordingly.An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

Characterization of Tumor Responses in Patients with Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Lenvatinib in the Phase 3 Randomized Trial: REFLECT.

Introduction: In REFLECT, lenvatinib was noninferior to sorafenib in terms of overall survival (OS) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC; median 13.6 vs. 12.3 months; HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79-1.06). The objective response rate (ORR) with lenvatinib was 18.8% by blinded independent imaging review (IIR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1); per modified RECIST (mRECIST), the ORR was 40.6%. We sought to further characterize these tumor responses and explore ORR's importance among outcomes for patients with HCC. Methods: Efficacy assessments included all patients randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib treatment (if bodyweight ≥60 kg, 12 mg/day; if <60 kg, 8 mg/day). Time to first objective response (TTR) and duration of response (DOR) included patients who achieved a partial or complete tumor response. Tumors were assessed by IIR per RECIST v1.1 or mRECIST. Results: Four hundred seventy-eight patients were randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib. By IIR, 90 patients (18.8%) achieved an objective response per RECIST v1.1, and 194 (40.6%) had an objective response per mRECIST. Median TTR/DOR were 2.8 months/7.4 months in responders per RECIST v1.1, and 1.9 months/7.3 months in responders per mRECIST, respectively. Per baseline disease characteristics, ORRs by Child-Pugh score (A5/A6) were 21.2%/11.2% per RECIST v1.1 and 42.9%/33.6% per mRECIST, respectively. By baseline alpha-fetoprotein level (<400/≥400 ng/mL), ORRs were 21.4%/15.4% per RECIST v1.1 and 45.6%/33.8% per mRECIST, respectively. Incidences of treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events were 98.9% in responders per RECIST v1.1 and 97.9% in responders per mRECIST. Conclusions: Responses were seen even in those patients with more severe disease at baseline. Tumor responses occurred early and were durable.

Nilotinib in KIT-driven advanced melanoma: Results from the phase II single-arm NICAM trial.

Mucosal (MM) and acral melanomas (AM) are rare melanoma subtypes of unmet clinical need; 15%-20% harbor KIT mutations potentially targeted by small-molecule inhibitors, but none yet approved in melanoma. This multicenter, single-arm Phase II trial (NICAM) investigates nilotinib safety and activity in KIT mutated metastatic MM and AM. KIT mutations are identified in 39/219 screened patients (18%); of 29/39 treated, 26 are evaluable for primary analysis. Six patients were alive and progression free at 6 months (local radiology review, 25%); 5/26 (19%) had objective response at 12 weeks; median OS was 7.7 months; ddPCR assay correctly identifies KIT alterations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in 16/17 patients. Nilotinib is active in KIT-mutant AM and MM, comparable to other KIT inhibitors, with demonstrable activity in nonhotspot KIT mutations, supporting broadening of KIT evaluation in AM and MM. Our results endorse further investigations of nilotinib for the treatment of KIT-mutated melanoma. This clinical trial was registered with ISRCTN (ISRCTN39058880) and EudraCT (2009-012945-49).

A Phase 1a/1b Study of Fostroxacitabine Bralpamide (Fostrox) Monotherapy in Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Solid Tumor Liver Metastases.

Purpose: To evaluate safety, preliminary efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics, of fostroxacitabine bralpamide (fostrox, MIV-818), a novel oral troxacitabine nucleotide prodrug designed to direct exposure to the liver, while minimizing systemic toxicity. Patients and Methods: Fostrox monotherapy was administered in an open-label, single-arm, first-in-human, phase 1a/1b study, in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, or solid tumor liver metastases. The first part (1a) consisted of intra/inter-patient escalating doses (3 mg to 70 mg) QD for up to 5 days, and the second part (1b), doses of 40 mg QD for 5 days, in 21-day cycles. Safety and tolerability were evaluated by the Safety Review Committee, and efficacy was assessed every 6 weeks with CT or MRI using RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST. Results: Nineteen patients were treated with fostrox. Most common adverse events (AEs) were hematological and increased AST. Grade 3 treatment related AEs (TRAE) were seen in 53% of the patients, with transient neutropenia and thrombocytopenia as the most common. No grade 5 AE was observed. Recommended Phase 2 dose of fostrox was 40 mg QD for 5 days in 21-day cycles. Preliminary efficacy showed a clinical benefit rate in the liver of 53% and stable disease (SD) as best response in 10 patients. Liver targeting with fostrox was confirmed with higher exposure of troxacitabine and its metabolites in liver compared to plasma. Systemic exposure of fostrox was generally low with troxacitabine as main analyte. Biopsies demonstrated tumor-selective, drug-induced DNA damage. Conclusion: The phase 1a/1b monotherapy study of fostrox, in patients with liver tumors, showed a tumor selective effect in the liver and that 40 mg QD for 5 days in 21-day cycles is safe and tolerable. Safety and preliminary efficacy in patients with advanced HCC supports clinical development of fostrox in combination with other modes of action in HCC.

Tebentafusp in combination with durvalumab and/or tremelimumab in patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma: a phase 1 study.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have significantly improved outcomes in first line cutaneous melanoma. However, there is a high unmet need for patients who progress on these therapies and combination therapies are being explored to improve outcomes. Tebentafusp is a first-in-class gp100×CD3 ImmTAC bispecific that demonstrated overall survival (OS) benefit (HR 0.51) in metastatic uveal melanoma despite a modest overall response rate of 9%. This phase 1b trial evaluated the safety and initial efficacy of tebentafusp in combination with durvalumab (anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PDL1)) and/or tremelimumab (anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4) in patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma (mCM), the majority of whom progressed on prior checkpoint inhibitors. METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter, phase 1b, dose-escalation trial, HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with mCM received weekly intravenous tebentafusp with increasing monthly doses of durvalumab and/or tremelimumab starting day 15 of each cycle. The primary objective was to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or recommended phase 2 dose for each combination. Efficacy analyses were performed in all tebentafusp with durvalumab±tremelimumab treated patients with a sensitivity analysis in those who progressed on prior anti-PD(L)1 therapy. RESULTS: 85 patients were assigned to receive tebentafusp in combination with durvalumab (n=43), tremelimumab (n=13), or durvalumab and tremelimumab (n=29). Patients were heavily pretreated with a median of 3 prior lines of therapy, including 76 (89%) who received prior anti-PD(L)1. Maximum target doses of tebentafusp (68 mcg) alone or in combination with durvalumab (20 mg/kg) and tremelimumab (1 mg/kg) were tolerated; MTD was not formally identified for any arm. Adverse event profile was consistent with each individual therapy and there were no new safety signals nor treatment-related deaths. In the efficacy subset (n=72), the response rate was 14%, tumor shrinkage rate was 41% and 1-year OS rate was 76% (95% CI: 70% to 81%). The 1-year OS for triplet combination (79%; 95% CI: 71% to 86%) was similar to tebentafusp plus durvalumab (74%; 95% CI: 67% to 80%). CONCLUSION: At maximum target doses, the safety of tebentafusp with checkpoint inhibitors was consistent with safety of each individual therapy. Tebentafusp with durvalumab demonstrated promising efficacy in heavily pretreated patients with mCM, including those who progressed on prior anti-PD(L)1. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02535078.

Mechanistic and Clinical Overview Cardiovascular Toxicity of BRAF and MEK Inhibitors: JACC: CardioOncology State-of-the-Art Review.

Rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma B-type (BRAF) and mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase (MEK) inhibitors have revolutionized melanoma treatment. Approximately half of patients with melanoma harbor a BRAF gene mutation with subsequent dysregulation of the RAF-MEK-ERK signaling pathway. Targeting this pathway with BRAF and MEK blockade results in control of cell proliferation and, in most cases, disease control. These pathways also have cardioprotective effects and are necessary for normal vascular and cardiac physiology. BRAF and MEK inhibitors are associated with adverse cardiovascular effects including hypertension, left ventricular dysfunction, venous thromboembolism, atrial arrhythmia, and electrocardiographic QT interval prolongation. These effects may be underestimated in clinical trials. Baseline cardiovascular assessment and follow-up, including serial imaging and blood pressure assessment, are essential to balance optimal anti-cancer therapy while minimizing cardiovascular side effects. In this review, an overview of BRAF/MEK inhibitor-induced cardiovascular toxicity, the mechanisms underlying these, and strategies for surveillance, prevention, and treatment of these effects are provided.

Liquid Biopsy for Pancreatic Cancer Detection Using Infrared Spectroscopy.

Pancreatic cancer claims over 460,000 victims per year. The carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 test is the blood test used for pancreatic cancer's detection; however, its levels can be raised in symptomatic patients with other non-malignant diseases, or with other tumors in the surrounding area. Attenuated total reflection Fourier-transform infrared (ATR-FTIR) spectroscopy has demonstrated exceptional potential in cancer diagnostics, and its clinical implementation could represent a significant step towards early detection. This proof-of-concept study, investigating the use of ATR-FTIR spectroscopy on dried blood serum, focused on the discrimination of both cancer versus healthy control samples, and cancer versus symptomatic non-malignant control samples, as a novel liquid biopsy approach for pancreatic cancer diagnosis. Machine learning algorithms were applied, achieving results of up to 92% sensitivity and 88% specificity when discriminating between cancers (n = 100) and healthy controls (n = 100). An area under the curve (AUC) of 0.95 was obtained through receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Balanced sensitivity and specificity over 75%, with an AUC of 0.83, were achieved with cancers (n = 35) versus symptomatic controls (n = 35). Herein, we present these results as demonstration that our liquid biopsy approach could become a simple, minimally invasive, and reliable diagnostic test for pancreatic cancer detection.

Lenvatinib dose, efficacy, and safety in the treatment of multiple malignancies.

INTRODUCTION: Lenvatinib is an oral multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor that has shown efficacy and manageable safety across multiple cancer types. The recommended starting doses for lenvatinib differ across cancer types and indications based on whether it is used as monotherapy or as combination therapy. AREAS COVERED: This review covers clinical trials that established the dosing paradigm and efficacy of lenvatinib and defined its adverse-event profile as a monotherapy; or in combination with the mTOR inhibitor, everolimus; or the anti-PD-1 antibody, pembrolizumab; and/or chemotherapy. EXPERT OPINION: Lenvatinib has been established as standard-of-care either as a monotherapy or in combination with other anticancer agents for the treatment of radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid carcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, renal cell carcinoma, and endometrial carcinoma, and is being investigated further across several other tumor types. The dosing and adverse-event management strategies for lenvatinib have been developed through extensive clinical trial experience. Collectively, the data provide the rationale to start lenvatinib at the recommended doses and then interrupt or dose reduce as necessary to achieve required dose intensity for maximized patient benefit. The adverse-event profile of lenvatinib is consistent with that of other tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and clinicians are encouraged to review and adopt relevant symptom-management strategies.

Prognostic implications of microRNA-21 overexpression in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: an international multicenter study of 686 patients.

Despite progress in genomic characterization, no single prognostic marker that can be evaluated using an easy-to-perform and relatively inexpensive method is available for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). MicroRNAs, which are stable, tumor- and tissue-specific molecules, are potentially ideal biomarkers, and we established an inter-laboratory validated method to investigate miR-21 as a prognostic biomarker in PDAC. The study samples of PDAC patients were recruited from a test cohort of Glasgow (n = 189) and three validation cohorts of Pisa (n = 69), Sydney (n = 249), and International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) (n = 249). Tissue microarrays were used for miR-21 staining by chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH). The patients were subdivided into no/low and high miR-21 staining groups using a specific histoscore. Furthermore, miR-21 staining was evaluated against clinicopathological variables and follow-up data by Fisher/log-rank test and Cox proportional models. The prognostic variables found to be significant in univariate analysis (P value < 0.10) were included in multivariate analysis in a backward-stepwise fashion. MiR-21 expression was cytoplasmic, with more consistent staining in the malignant ductal epithelium than in the stroma. The expression of miR-21 was significantly associated with tumor size and lymph node metastasis, whereas no association was observed with other clinicopathological variables. High miR-21 staining (histoscore ≥ 45 [median score]) was an independent predictor of survival in the Glasgow test cohort (HR 2.37, 95% CI: 1.42-3.96, P < 0.0001) and three validation cohorts (Pisa, HR 2.03, 95% CI: 1.21-3.39, P = 0.007; Sydney, HR 2.58, 95% CI (1.21-3.39), P < 0.0001; and ICGC, HR 3.34, 95% CI: 2.07-5.84, P = 0.002) when adjusted for clinical variables in a multivariate model. In comparison to the patients with low miR-21, the patients with high miR-21 expression had significant increase in OS as they benefit from gemcitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy (Glasgow 16.5 months [with chemotherapy] vs 10.5 months [without chemotherapy]); Sydney 25.0 vs 10.6; ICGC 25.2 vs 11.9. These results indicated that miR-21 is a predictor of survival, prompting prospective trials. Evaluation of miR-21 offers new opportunities for the stratification of patients with PDAC and might facilitate the implementation of clinical management and therapeutic interventions for this devastating disease.

Analyses of PD-L1 and Inflammatory Gene Expression Association with Efficacy of Nivolumab ± Ipilimumab in Gastric Cancer/Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer.

PURPOSE: In advanced gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction cancer (GC/GEJC), there is a need to identify biomarkers of response to therapies, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In post hoc exploratory analyses from CheckMate 032 (GC/GEJC cohort), we evaluated associations between nivolumab ± ipilimumab (NIVO ± IPI) efficacy and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, defined by tumor cells (% TC) or combined positive score (CPS; sum of PD-L1-staining TCs + immune cells, divided by total viable TCs, × 100) using the Dako PD-L1 IHC 28-8 pharmDx assay, or inflammatory gene expression. RESULTS: There was a trend toward increased efficacy (objective response and overall survival) when PD-L1 expression was determined by CPS compared with % TC at higher cutoffs of ≥5 and ≥10 in the pooled analysis of all treatment regimens. In this analysis, 19% and 26% of patients with PD-L1-positive tumors at a CPS cutoff of ≥5 and ≥10, respectively, had an objective response compared with 8% and 9% of patients at the equivalent % TC cutoffs. Longer survival was demonstrated in patients with PD-L1-positive (defined by CPS cutoffs of ≥5 and ≥10) versus PD-L1-negative status. Similar results were observed in the NIVO 1 mg/kg + IPI 3 mg/kg subgroup. Multiple inflammatory gene signatures/transcripts, including a signature consisting of four genes (CD274, CD8A, LAG3, and STAT1), showed associations with response to NIVO ± IPI. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests a greater association of PD-L1 expression by CPS with NIVO ± IPI efficacy compared with % TC PD-L1 expression in patients with GC/GEJC. Inflammatory signatures were also associated with NIVO ± IPI response, warranting further investigation.See related commentary by Moutafi and Rimm, p. 3812.

Pharmacodynamic Biomarkers Predictive of Survival Benefit with Lenvatinib in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: From the Phase III REFLECT Study.

PURPOSE: In REFLECT, lenvatinib demonstrated an effect on overall survival (OS) by confirmation of noninferiority to sorafenib in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. This analysis assessed correlations between serum or tissue biomarkers and efficacy outcomes from REFLECT. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Serum biomarkers (VEGF, ANG2, FGF19, FGF21, and FGF23) were measured by ELISA. Gene expression in tumor tissues was measured by the nCounter PanCancer Pathways Panel. Pharmacodynamic changes in serum biomarker levels from baseline, and associations of clinical outcomes with baseline biomarker levels, were evaluated. RESULTS: Four hundred and seven patients were included in the serum analysis set (lenvatinib n = 279, sorafenib n = 128); 58 patients were included in the gene-expression analysis set (lenvatinib n = 34, sorafenib n = 24). Both treatments were associated with increases in VEGF; only lenvatinib was associated with increases in FGF19 and FGF23 at all time points. Lenvatinib-treated responders had greater increases in FGF19 and FGF23 versus nonresponders at cycle 4, day 1 (FGF19: 55.2% vs. 18.3%, P = 0.014; FGF23: 48.4% vs. 16.4%, P = 0.0022, respectively). Higher baseline VEGF, ANG2, and FGF21 correlated with shorter OS in both treatment groups. OS was longer for lenvatinib than sorafenib [median, 10.9 vs. 6.8 months, respectively; HR, 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.33-0.85; P-interaction = 0.0397] with higher baseline FGF21. In tumor tissue biomarker analysis, VEGF/FGF-enriched groups showed improved OS with lenvatinib versus the intermediate VEGF/FGF group (HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16-0.91; P = 0.0253). CONCLUSIONS: Higher baseline levels of VEGF, FGF21, and ANG2 may be prognostic for shorter OS. Higher baseline FGF21 may be predictive for longer OS with lenvatinib compared with sorafenib, but this needs confirmation.

A monolithic single-chip point-of-care platform for metabolomic prostate cancer detection.

There is a global unmet need for rapid and cost-effective prognostic and diagnostic tools that can be used at the bedside or in the doctor's office to reduce the impact of serious disease. Many cancers are diagnosed late, leading to costly treatment and reduced life expectancy. With prostate cancer, the absence of a reliable test has inhibited the adoption of screening programs. We report a microelectronic point-of-care metabolite biomarker measurement platform and use it for prostate cancer detection. The platform, using an array of photodetectors configured to operate with targeted, multiplexed, colorimetric assays confined in monolithically integrated passive microfluidic channels, completes a combined assay of 4 metabolites in a drop of human plasma in under 2 min. A preliminary clinical study using l-amino acids, glutamate, choline, and sarcosine was used to train a cross-validated random forest algorithm. The system demonstrated sensitivity to prostate cancer of 94% with a specificity of 70% and an area under the curve of 0.78. The technology can implement many similar assay panels and hence has the potential to revolutionize low-cost, rapid, point-of-care testing.

Effects of Subsequent Systemic Anticancer Medication Following First-Line Lenvatinib: A Post Hoc Responder Analysis from the Phase 3 REFLECT Study in Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding the relationship between subsequent-line therapies and overall survival (OS) is important for maximizing OS for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. OBJECTIVE: In this post hoc analysis, we investigated OS in lenvatinib- and sorafenib-treated patients from the REFLECT study, who then received subsequent anticancer medication during the survival follow-up period. METHODS: The follow-up period commenced at the first off-treatment visit after stopping the study medication and continued until study termination, withdrawal of consent, or death. OS and objective response rate were calculated for patients who did or did not receive poststudy anticancer medication for both treatment arms, as well as for the overall cohort. We investigated the subset of patients who responded to first-line treatment and subsequently received anticancer medication. RESULTS: The OS for patients initially randomized to first-line lenvatinib (versus first-line sorafenib) and who then received any subsequent anticancer medication was 20.8 vs. 17.0 months (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87; 95% CI 0.67-1.14). The OS for patients who initially received first-line lenvatinib (versus first-line sorafenib) and who did not receive any subsequent anticancer medication was 11.5 vs. 9.1 months (HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.75-1.09). Responders to first-line lenvatinib who received subsequent medication had a median OS of 25.7 months (95% CI 18.5-34.6); responders to first line-sorafenib who received subsequent medication had a median OS of 22.3 months (95% CI 14.6-not evaluable). CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of all patients in the REFLECT study who received subsequent anticancer medication, OS was increased compared with patients who did not receive any subsequent anticancer medication. In a subset analysis of responders who had received subsequent anticancer medication, use of first-line lenvatinib led to a slightly longer median OS; more research is needed on the benefits of using first-line lenvatinib compared with sorafenib.

Tebentafusp, A TCR/Anti-CD3 Bispecific Fusion Protein Targeting gp100, Potently Activated Antitumor Immune Responses in Patients with Metastatic Melanoma.

PURPOSE: Tebentafusp is a first-in-class bispecific fusion protein designed to target gp100 (a melanoma-associated antigen) through a high affinity T-cell receptor (TCR) binding domain and an anti-CD3 T-cell engaging domain, which redirects T cells to kill gp100-expressing tumor cells. Here, we report a multicenter phase I/II trial of tebentafusp in metastatic melanoma (NCT01211262) focusing on the mechanism of action of tebentafusp. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-four patients with advanced melanoma received tebentafusp. Treatment efficacy, treatment-related adverse events, and biomarker assessments were performed for blood-derived and tumor biopsy samples obtained at baseline and on-treatment. RESULTS: Tebentafusp was generally well-tolerated and active in both patients with metastatic uveal melanoma and patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma. A 1-year overall survival rate of 65% was achieved for both patient cohorts. On-treatment cytokine measurements were consistent with the induction of IFNγ pathway-related markers in the periphery and tumor. Notably, tebentafusp induced an increase in serum CXCL10 (a T-cell attractant) and a reduction in circulating CXCR3+ CD8+ T cells together with an increase in cytotoxic T cells in the tumor microenvironment. Furthermore, increased serum CXCL10 or the appearance of rash (likely due to cytotoxic T cells targeting gp100-expressing skin melanocytes) showed a positive association with patient survival. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that redirecting T cells using a gp100-targeting TCR/anti-CD3 bispecific fusion protein may provide benefit to patients with metastatic melanoma. Furthermore, the activity observed in these two molecularly disparate melanoma classes hints at the broad therapeutic potential of tebentafusp.