Vorasidenib in IDH1- or IDH2-Mutant Low-Grade Glioma.

BACKGROUND: Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant grade 2 gliomas are malignant brain tumors that cause considerable disability and premature death. Vorasidenib, an oral brain-penetrant inhibitor of mutant IDH1 and IDH2 enzymes, showed preliminary activity in IDH-mutant gliomas. METHODS: In a double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with residual or recurrent grade 2 IDH-mutant glioma who had undergone no previous treatment other than surgery to receive either oral vorasidenib (40 mg once daily) or matched placebo in 28-day cycles. The primary end point was imaging-based progression-free survival according to blinded assessment by an independent review committee. The key secondary end point was the time to the next anticancer intervention. Crossover to vorasidenib from placebo was permitted on confirmation of imaging-based disease progression. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 331 patients were assigned to receive vorasidenib (168 patients) or placebo (163 patients). At a median follow-up of 14.2 months, 226 patients (68.3%) were continuing to receive vorasidenib or placebo. Progression-free survival was significantly improved in the vorasidenib group as compared with the placebo group (median progression-free survival, 27.7 months vs. 11.1 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27 to 0.56; P<0.001). The time to the next intervention was significantly improved in the vorasidenib group as compared with the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.43; P<0.001). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 22.8% of the patients who received vorasidenib and in 13.5% of those who received placebo. An increased alanine aminotransferase level of grade 3 or higher occurred in 9.6% of the patients who received vorasidenib and in no patients who received placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with grade 2 IDH-mutant glioma, vorasidenib significantly improved progression-free survival and delayed the time to the next intervention. (Funded by Servier; INDIGO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04164901.).

Phase 3 Trial of Selpercatinib in Advanced RET-Mutant Medullary Thyroid Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Selpercatinib, a highly selective, potent RET inhibitor, has shown efficacy in advanced RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer in a phase 1-2 trial, but its efficacy as compared with approved multikinase inhibitors is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, randomized trial comparing selpercatinib as first-line therapy with the physician's choice of cabozantinib or vandetanib (control group). Eligible patients had progressive disease documented within 14 months before enrollment. The primary end point in the protocol-specified interim efficacy analysis was progression-free survival, assessed by blinded independent central review. Crossover to selpercatinib was permitted among patients in the control group after disease progression. Treatment failure-free survival, assessed by blinded independent central review, was a secondary, alpha-controlled end point that was to be tested only if progression-free survival was significant. Among the other secondary end points were overall response and safety. RESULTS: A total of 291 patients underwent randomization. At a median follow-up of 12 months, median progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review was not reached in the selpercatinib group and was 16.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.2 to 25.1) in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.48; P<0.001). Progression-free survival at 12 months was 86.8% (95% CI, 79.8 to 91.6) in the selpercatinib group and 65.7% (95% CI, 51.9 to 76.4) in the control group. Median treatment failure-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review was not reached in the selpercatinib group and was 13.9 months in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression, discontinuation due to treatment-related adverse events, or death, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.42; P<0.001). Treatment failure-free survival at 12 months was 86.2% (95% CI, 79.1 to 91.0) in the selpercatinib group and 62.1% (95% CI, 48.9 to 72.8) in the control group. The overall response was 69.4% (95% CI, 62.4 to 75.8) in the selpercatinib group and 38.8% (95% CI, 29.1 to 49.2) in the control group. Adverse events led to a dose reduction in 38.9% of the patients in the selpercatinib group, as compared with 77.3% in the control group, and to treatment discontinuation in 4.7% and 26.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Selpercatinib treatment resulted in superior progression-free survival and treatment failure-free survival as compared with cabozantinib or vandetanib in patients with RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer. (Funded by Loxo Oncology, a subsidiary of Eli Lilly; LIBRETTO-531 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04211337.).

Selective inhibition of the BD2 bromodomain of BET proteins in prostate cancer.

Proteins of the bromodomain and extra-terminal (BET) domain family are epigenetic readers that bind acetylated histones through their bromodomains to regulate gene transcription. Dual-bromodomain BET inhibitors (DbBi) that bind with similar affinities to the first (BD1) and second (BD2) bromodomains of BRD2, BRD3, BRD4 and BRDt have displayed modest clinical activity in monotherapy cancer trials. A reduced number of thrombocytes in the blood (thrombocytopenia) as well as symptoms of gastrointestinal toxicity are dose-limiting adverse events for some types of DbBi1-5. Given that similar haematological and gastrointestinal defects were observed after genetic silencing of Brd4 in mice6, the platelet and gastrointestinal toxicities may represent on-target activities associated with BET inhibition. The two individual bromodomains in BET family proteins may have distinct functions7-9 and different cellular phenotypes after pharmacological inhibition of one or both bromodomains have been reported10,11, suggesting that selectively targeting one of the bromodomains may result in a different efficacy and tolerability profile compared with DbBi. Available compounds that are selective to individual domains lack sufficient potency and the pharmacokinetics properties that are required for in vivo efficacy and tolerability assessment10-13. Here we carried out a medicinal chemistry campaign that led to the discovery of ABBV-744, a highly potent and selective inhibitor of the BD2 domain of BET family proteins with drug-like properties. In contrast to the broad range of cell growth inhibition induced by DbBi, the antiproliferative activity of ABBV-744 was largely, but not exclusively, restricted to cell lines of acute myeloid leukaemia and prostate cancer that expressed the full-length androgen receptor (AR). ABBV-744 retained robust activity in prostate cancer xenografts, and showed fewer platelet and gastrointestinal toxicities than the DbBi ABBV-07514. Analyses of RNA expression and chromatin immunoprecipitation followed by sequencing revealed that ABBV-744 displaced BRD4 from AR-containing super-enhancers and inhibited AR-dependent transcription, with less impact on global transcription compared with ABBV-075. These results underscore the potential value of selectively targeting the BD2 domain of BET family proteins for cancer therapy.

Ivosidenib and Azacitidine in IDH1-Mutated Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: The combination of ivosidenib - an inhibitor of mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) - and azacitidine showed encouraging clinical activity in a phase 1b trial involving patients with newly diagnosed IDH1-mutated acute myeloid leukemia. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed IDH1-mutated acute myeloid leukemia who were ineligible for intensive induction chemotherapy to receive oral ivosidenib (500 mg once daily) and subcutaneous or intravenous azacitidine (75 mg per square meter of body-surface area for 7 days in 28-day cycles) or to receive matched placebo and azacitidine. The primary end point was event-free survival, defined as the time from randomization until treatment failure (i.e., the patient did not have complete remission by week 24), relapse from remission, or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 146 patients: 72 in the ivosidenib-and-azacitidine group and 74 in the placebo-and-azacitidine group. At a median follow-up of 12.4 months, event-free survival was significantly longer in the ivosidenib-and-azacitidine group than in the placebo-and-azacitidine group (hazard ratio for treatment failure, relapse from remission, or death, 0.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16 to 0.69; P = 0.002). The estimated probability that a patient would remain event-free at 12 months was 37% in the ivosidenib-and-azacitidine group and 12% in the placebo-and-azacitidine group. The median overall survival was 24.0 months with ivosidenib and azacitidine and 7.9 months with placebo and azacitidine (hazard ratio for death, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.73; P = 0.001). Common adverse events of grade 3 or higher included febrile neutropenia (28% with ivosidenib and azacitidine and 34% with placebo and azacitidine) and neutropenia (27% and 16%, respectively); the incidence of bleeding events of any grade was 41% and 29%, respectively. The incidence of infection of any grade was 28% with ivosidenib and azacitidine and 49% with placebo and azacitidine. Differentiation syndrome of any grade occurred in 14% of the patients receiving ivosidenib and azacitidine and 8% of those receiving placebo and azacitidine. CONCLUSIONS: Ivosidenib and azacitidine showed significant clinical benefit as compared with placebo and azacitidine in this difficult-to-treat population. Febrile neutropenia and infections were less frequent in the ivosidenib-and-azacitidine group than in the placebo-and-azacitidine group, whereas neutropenia and bleeding were more frequent in the ivosidenib-and-azacitidine group. (Funded by Agios Pharmaceuticals and Servier Pharmaceuticals; AGILE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03173248.).

Cabozantinib in patients with unresectable and progressive metastatic phaeochromocytoma or paraganglioma (the Natalie Trial): a single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic phaeochromocytomas and paragangliomas (MPPGs) are orphan diseases. Up to 50% of MPPGs are associated with germline pathogenic variants of the SDHB gene. These tumours and many non-familial MPPGs exhibit a phenotype that is characterised by abnormal angiogenesis. We aimed to assess the activity and safety of cabozantinib, an antiangiogenic multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with MPPGs. METHODS: The Natalie Trial is a single-arm, phase 2 clinical trial being conducted at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX, USA). Patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed, progressive, and unresectable MPPGs, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, were treated with oral cabozantinib 60 mg/day. The primary endpoint was the investigator-assessed overall response rate per the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1 criteria. All outcomes were assessed in all evaluable participants who received any amount of study treatment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02302833) and is active but not recruiting. FINDINGS: From March 10, 2015, to May 11, 2021, 17 patients (13 male participants and four female participants) were enrolled. The median follow-up was 25 months (IQR 18-49). The overall response rate was 25·0% (95% CI 7·3-52·4; four of 16 patients). Seven grade 3 adverse events were reported in six patients, including single cases of hand-and-foot syndrome, hypertension, rectal fistula, QT prolongation, and asymptomatic hypomagnesaemia, and two cases of asymptomatic elevations of amylase and lipase. There were no grade 4 adverse events and no patient died on-study. INTERPRETATION: Cabozantinib shows promising activity in patients with MPPGs. FUNDING: Team NAT Foundation, Margaret Cazalot, and Clarence P Cazalot.

Cabozantinib monotherapy for advanced adrenocortical carcinoma: a single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Adrenocortical carcinoma is a rare malignancy with poor response to systemic chemotherapy. Mitotane is the only approved therapy for adrenocortical carcinoma. Cabozantinib is a multikinase inhibitor approved in multiple malignancies. This is the first prospective trial to explore the anti-tumour activity, safety, and pharmacokinetic profile of cabozantinib in patients with advanced adrenocortical carcinoma. METHODS: This investigator-initiated, single-arm, phase 2 trial in adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with advanced adrenocortical carcinoma was done at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX, USA). Eligible patients had histologically confirmed adrenocortical carcinoma, were not candidates for surgery with curative intent, had measurable disease, had an estimated life expectancy of at least 3 months, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2 with adequate organ function. Patients who had used mitotane within 6 months of study participation were required to have a serum mitotane level of less than 2 mg/L. Patients were given oral cabozantinib 60 mg daily with the option of dose reduction to manage adverse events. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 4 months, assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03370718, and is now complete. FINDINGS: Between March 1, 2018, and May 31, 2021, we enrolled 18 patients (ten males and eight females), all of whom received at least one dose of study treatment. Of the 18 patients, eight (44%) had an ECOG performance status of 0, nine (50%) patients had a performance status of 1, and one (6%) patient had a performance status of 2. Median follow-up was 36·8 months (IQR 30·2-50·3). At 4 months, 13 (72·2%; 95% CI 46·5-90·3) of 18 patients had progression-free survival and median progression-free survival was 6 months (95% CI 4·3 to not reached). One patient remains on treatment. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse occurred in 11 (61%) of 18 patients. The most common grade 3 adverse events were lipase elevation (three [17%] of 18 patients), elevated γ-glutamyl transferase concentrations (two [11%] patients), elevated alanine aminotransferase concentrations (two [11%] patients), hypophosphatemia (two [11%] patients), and hypertension (two [11%] patients). One (6%) of 18 patients had grade 4 hypertension. No treatment related deaths occurred on study. INTERPRETATION: Cabozantinib in advanced adrenocortical carcinoma showed promising efficacy with a manageable and anticipated safety profile. Further prospective studies with cabozantinib alone and in combination with immune checkpoint therapy are ongoing. FUNDING: Exelixis.

Neoadjuvant camrelizumab plus apatinib for locally advanced microsatellite instability-high or mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer (NEOCAP): a single-arm, open-label, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: PD-1 blockade is highly efficacious for mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer in both metastatic and neoadjuvant settings. We aimed to explore the activity and safety of neoadjuvant therapy with PD-1 blockade plus an angiogenesis inhibitor and the feasibility of organ preservation in patients with locally advanced mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer. METHODS: We initiated a single-arm, open-label, phase 2 trial (NEOCAP) at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center and the Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China. Patients aged 18-75 years with untreated mismatch repair-deficient or microsatellite instability-high or POLE/POLD1-mutated locally advanced colorectal cancer (cT3 or N+ for rectal cancer, and T3 with invasion ≥5mm or T4, with or without N+ for colon cancer) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 0-1 were enrolled and given 200 mg camrelizumab intravenously on day 1 and 250 mg apatinib orally from day 1-14, every 3 weeks for 3 months followed by surgery or 6 months if patients did not have surgery. Patients who had a clinical complete response did not undergo surgery and proceeded with a watch-and-wait approach. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a pathological or clinical complete response. Eligible enrolled patients who received at least one cycle of neoadjuvant treatment and had at least one tumour response assessment following the baseline assessment were included in the activity analysis, and patients who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analysis. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04715633) and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Sept 29, 2020, and Dec 15, 2022, 53 patients were enrolled; one patient was excluded from the activity analysis because they were found to be mismatch repair-proficient and microsatellite-stable. 23 (44%) patients were female and 29 (56%) were male. The median follow-up was 16·4 (IQR 10·5-23·5) months. 28 (54%; 95% CI 35-68) patients had a clinical complete response and 24 of these patients were managed with a watch-and-wait approach, including 20 patients with colon cancer and multiple primary colorectal cancer. 23 (44%) of 52 patients underwent surgery for the primary tumour, and 14 (61%; 95% CI 39-80) had a pathological complete response. 38 (73%; 95% CI 59-84) of 52 patients had a complete response. Grade 3-5 adverse events occurred in 20 (38%) of 53 patients; the most common were increased aminotransferase (six [11%]), bowel obstruction (four [8%]), and hypertension (four [8%]). Drug-related serious adverse events occurred in six (11%) of 53 patients. One patient died from treatment-related immune-related hepatitis. INTERPRETATION: Neoadjuvant camrelizumab plus apatinib show promising antitumour activity in patients with locally advanced mismatch repair-deficient or microsatellite instability-high colorectal cancer. Immune-related adverse events should be monitored with the utmost vigilance. Organ preservation seems promising not only in patients with rectal cancer, but also in those with colon cancer who have a clinical complete response. Longer follow-up is needed to assess the oncological outcomes of the watch-and-wait approach. FUNDING: The National Natural Science Foundation of China, Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation, and the Cancer Innovative Research Program of Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center. TRANSLATION: For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Assessing patient burden and benefit: A decade of cabozantinib clinical trials.

Drug development is complex and costly. Clinical trial participants take on risks, making it essential to maximize trial efficiency and maintain participant safety. Identifying periods of excessive burden during drug development can inform trial design, ensure patient benefit and prevent harm. This study aims to examine all published clinical trials for cabozantinib to assess patient benefit and burden over time. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional review of interventional clinical trials of cabozantinib for solid cancer treatment. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane (CENTRAL) and ClinicalTrials.gov. We extracted adverse event rates, median progression-free survival (PFS), median overall survival and objective response rate (ORR) for each included trial. We calculated frequencies of trial characteristics, cumulative grade 3-5 adverse event rates and cumulative ORRs. Out of 1735 studies, 54 publications were included that involved 6372 participants and 21 cancers. Of the 54 studies in our sample, 31 (57.41%) were single-arm trials and 23 (42.60%) had negative results. Trials among and within various indications had conflicting results over time. Cumulative risk to participants increased over time, and clinical benefit decreased. The findings suggest that the risk profile of cabozantinib increased from 2011 to 2016 and has remained elevated but stable while benefit has decreased over time. The use of non-randomized and single-arm trials is concerning, and more methodologically rigorous trials are needed. The results of trials for different indications are inconsistent, and empirical administration may reduce the drug's efficacy.

Phase I trial of apatinib and paclitaxel+oxaliplatin+5-FU/levoleucovorin for treatment-naïve advanced gastric cancer.

Chinese guidelines recommend POF (paclitaxel, oxaliplatin, and 5-FU/levoleucovorin) as first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Apatinib can augment the antitumor effect of paclitaxel, oxaliplatin, or fluorouracil in preclinical studies of AGC. A phase I clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the anticancer activity and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of apatinib plus POF in treatment-naïve patients with AGC and to establish a recommended phase II dose. Participants received escalating doses of daily oral apatinib (250, 375, 500, 625, 750, and 850 mg) plus POF every 2 weeks using a conventional "3 + 3" study design. Among 21 treated patients, one experienced a dose-limiting toxicity (grade 3 skin ulceration at 850 mg). No MTD was reached. Apatinib 750 mg plus POF was recommended for phase II study. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (33.3%), mucositis (14.3%), and hand-foot syndrome (14.3%). Median progression-free and overall survival were 10.4 months (95% CI: 6.3, 14.6) and 18.4 months (95% CI: 9.8, 28.2), respectively. Apatinib up to 850 mg coadministered with POF was well tolerated with manageable AEs. The safety and anticancer activity of this regimen warrants its further investigation as first-line treatment for AGC in a larger study.

Exposure-response relationship of cabozantinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated in routine care.

BACKGROUND: Interindividual pharmacokinetic variability may influence the clinical benefit or toxicity of cabozantinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). We aimed to investigate the exposure-toxicity and exposure-response relationship of cabozantinib in unselected mRCC patients treated in routine care. METHODS: This ambispective multicenter study enrolled consecutive patients receiving cabozantinib in monotherapy. Steady-state trough concentration (Cmin,ss) within the first 3 months after treatment initiation was used for the PK/PD analysis with dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and survival outcomes. Logistic regression and Cox proportional-hazards models were used to identify the risk factors of DLT and inefficacy in patients, respectively. RESULTS: Seventy-eight mRCC patients were eligible for the statistical analysis. Fifty-two patients (67%) experienced DLT with a median onset of 2.1 months (95%CI 0.7-8.2). In multivariate analysis, Cmin,ss was identified as an independent risk factor of DLT (OR 1.46, 95%CI [1.04-2.04]; p = 0.029). PFS and OS were not statistically associated with the starting dose (p = 0.81 and p = 0.98, respectively). In the multivariate analysis of PFS, Cmin, ss > 336 ng/mL resulted in a hazard ratio of 0.28 (95%CI, 0.10-0.77, p = 0.014). By contrast, Cmin, ss > 336 ng/mL was not statistically associated with longer OS. CONCLUSION: Early plasma drug monitoring may be useful to optimise cabozantinib treatment in mRCC patients treated in monotherapy, especially in frail patients starting at a lower than standard dose.

Treatment with fostamatinib in patients with immune thrombocytopenia: Experience from the Andalusian region in Spain-The Fostasur Study.

Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is characterized by low platelet counts (PLTs) and an increased risk of bleeding. Fostamatinib, a spleen tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has been approved as a second-line treatment for ITP. Real-world data on fostamatinib are lacking. This observational, retrospective, multicentre study, conducted in the Andalusia region of Spain, evaluated 44 adult primary ITP patients (47.7% female; median age 58 years; newly diagnosed ITP 6.8%; persistent 13.6%; chronic 79.5%; median four prior treatments) after ≥ 4 weeks of fostamatinib therapy. The median PLT at the initiation of fostamatinib was 15 × 109/L. Common reasons for starting fostamatinib were refractoriness or intolerance to prior therapy, oral medication preference, history of thrombosis and cardiovascular risk. Dosing was individualized based on efficacy and tolerance. After 2 weeks, global response rate was 56.8% (response and complete response). Response rates were 70.5%, 62.5% and 64% at 4 weeks, 12 weeks and at the end of the study respectively. Adverse events were mild, and no patients discontinued as a result. This real-world study demonstrated a response rate similar to fostamatinib as seen in the pivotal clinical trials while including newly diagnosed patients and allowing for individualized dosing.

Ubrogepant for the treatment of migraine attacks during the prodrome: a phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial in the USA.

BACKGROUND: Ubrogepant is a calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist that is approved for acute treatment of migraine. The prodrome is the earliest phase of a migraine attack and is characterised by non-aura symptoms that precede headache onset. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ubrogepant 100 mg compared with placebo for the acute treatment of migraine when administered during the prodrome. METHODS: This PRODROME trial was a phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial of ubrogepant 100 mg conducted at 75 research centres and headache clinics in the USA. Eligible participants were adults aged 18-75 years who had at least a 1-year history of migraine with or without aura and a history of two to eight migraine attacks per month with moderate to severe headache in each of the 3 months before screening. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either receive placebo to treat the first qualifying prodrome event and ubrogepant 100 mg to treat the second qualifying prodrome event or to receive ubrogepant 100 mg to treat the first qualifying prodrome event and placebo to treat the second qualifying prodrome event. An automated interactive web-response system used permuted blocks of four to manage randomisation. All people giving interventions and assessing outcomes were masked to group assignment during the study. People doing data analysis, which occurred after study completion, were not masked to group assignment. During the double-blind treatment period, each participant was instructed to orally take two tablets of the study drug at the onset of each qualifying prodrome event. The primary endpoint was absence of moderate or severe intensity headache within 24 h after study-drug dose; efficacy analyses were conducted with the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population, defined as all randomly assigned participants with at least one headache assessment within 24 h after taking the study drug during the treatment period. The safety population included all treated participants who took at least one administration of study drug. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04492020). FINDINGS: Between Aug 21, 2020, and April 19, 2022, 518 participants were randomly assigned to double-blind crossover treatment. The safety population included 480 participants and the mITT population included 477 participants; 421 (88%) of 480 participants were female and 59 (12%) were male. Absence of moderate or severe headache within 24 h after a dose occurred after 190 (46%) of 418 qualifying prodrome events that had been treated with ubrogepant and after 121 (29%) of 423 qualifying prodrome events that had been treated with placebo (odds ratio 2·09, 95% CI 1·63-2·69; p<0·0001). Adverse events that occurred within 48 h after study-drug administration were reported after 77 (17%) of 456 qualifying prodrome events that had been treated with ubrogepant and after 55 (12%) of 462 events that had been treated with placebo. INTERPRETATION: Ubrogepant was effective and well tolerated for the treatment of migraine attacks when taken during the prodrome. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Hedgehog Inhibitors Beyond Clinical Complete Response in Basal Cell Carcinoma: Should I Stop or Should I Go?

INTRODUCTION: In advanced basal cell carcinoma (BCC), the issue of whether Hedgehog inhibitors (HHIs) should be stopped or not after clinical complete response (cCR) achievement remains an unmet clinical need. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, multicenter study across 7 Italian dermato-oncology units including patients with BCC who continued vismodegib after cCR between 2012 and 2019. We assessed the relationship between the duration of vismodegib intake (days to cCR [DTCR], days to stop after cCR [DTS], total treatment days [TTD]), and disease-free survival (DFS). Reasons to stop vismodegib were (R1) toxicity and (R2) disease recurrence. The relationship between DTCR, DTS, TTD, and DFS in the whole population and in R1 subgroup was assessed by Pearson's correlation coefficient (P < .05) and Bayesian statistics (BF10). RESULTS: Sixty-eight BCC patients with a median (m) age of 75.5 years (39-100) were included. Most patients were male (N = 43, 63%), without Gorlin syndrome (N = 56, 82%) and with head and neck area as primary site (N = 51, 75%). After cCR, out of 68 patients, 90% (N = 61/68) discontinued vismodegib: 82% (N = 50/61) due to toxicity (R1), and 18% (N = 11/61) due to recurrence (R2). Conversely, 10% (N = 7/68) continued vismodegib until last follow-up. In the whole population (N = 68), cCR was achieved with a mDTCR of 180.50 days. DFS showed a significant correlation with DTS (P < .01, BF10 = 39.2) and TTD (P < .01, BF10 = 35566), while it was not correlated to DTCR (BF10 < 0.1). The analysis of R1 subgroup (N = 50) confirmed these results. DFS correlated with DTS in all recurrent patients (N = 38, r = 0.44, P < .01) and in the recurrent patients who stopped vismodegib for toxicity (N = 26, r = 0.665, P < .01). DFS was longer when vismodegib was maintained for >2 months after cCR (mDFS > 2 months, N = 54 vs. ≤ 2 months, N = 14: 470 vs. 175 d, P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Our retrospective results suggest that HHIs should be continued after cCR to improve DFS in BCC.

Proton Pump Inhibitors and Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 4/6 Inhibitors in Patients With Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) reduce the bioavailability of several anticancer drugs. The impact of PPIs co-administered with cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors is controversial. We aimed to clarify whether the concomitant use of PPIs impacts palbociclib and abemaciclib effectiveness in breast cancer treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective, observational study, conducted across 4 medical institutions in Japan, consecutively included patients with endocrine-resistant metastatic breast cancer, receiving palbociclib or abemaciclib between December 2017 and August 2022. Propensity score-matched analyses were performed. Treatment efficacy and safety with and without PPIs were compared. Progression-free survival and overall survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using a log-rank test. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the hazard ratio. RESULTS: The study included 240 patients. After 1:1 matching, 112 patients were treated with and without PPIs. The median progression-free survival period was 1.2 years in the PPI group and 1.3 years in the non-PPI group (hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.70-2.02). The median overall survival period was 3.6 years in the PPI group, whereas it was not reached in the non-PPI group (hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.61-2.47). Consistent results were obtained for subgroups receiving palbociclib (n = 177) and abemaciclib (n = 63) without propensity score matching. Adverse event incidence and severity were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors is unlikely to be affected by concomitant PPI use. Future prospective pharmacokinetic studies are warranted.

Atogepant for the Preventive Treatment of Migraine.

BACKGROUND: Atogepant is an oral, small-molecule, calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist that is being investigated for the preventive treatment of migraine. METHODS: In a phase 3, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned adults with 4 to 14 migraine days per month in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive a once-daily dose of oral atogepant (10 mg, 30 mg, or 60 mg) or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary end point was the change from baseline in the mean number of migraine days per month across the 12 weeks. Secondary end points included headache days per month, a reduction from baseline of at least 50% in the 3-month average of migraine days per month, quality of life, and scores on the Activity Impairment in Migraine-Diary (AIM-D). RESULTS: A total of 2270 participants were screened, 910 were enrolled, and 873 were included in the efficacy analysis; 214 were assigned to the 10-mg atogepant group, 223 to the 30-mg atogepant group, 222 to the 60-mg atogepant group, and 214 to the placebo group. The mean number of migraine days per month at baseline ranged from 7.5 to 7.9 in the four groups. The changes from baseline across 12 weeks were -3.7 days with 10-mg atogepant, -3.9 days with 30-mg atogepant, -4.2 days with 60-mg atogepant, and -2.5 days with placebo. The mean differences from placebo in the change from baseline were -1.2 days with 10-mg atogepant (95% confidence interval [CI], -1.8 to -0.6), -1.4 days with 30-mg atogepant (95% CI, -1.9 to -0.8), and -1.7 days with 60-mg atogepant (95% CI, -2.3 to -1.2) (P<0.001 for all comparisons with placebo). Results for the secondary end points favored atogepant over placebo with the exceptions of the AIM-D Performance of Daily Activities score and the AIM-D Physical Impairment score for the 10-mg dose. The most common adverse events were constipation (6.9 to 7.7% across atogepant doses) and nausea (4.4 to 6.1% across atogepant doses). Serious adverse events included one case each of asthma and optic neuritis in the 10-mg atogepant group. CONCLUSIONS: Oral atogepant once daily was effective in reducing the number of migraine days and headache days over a period of 12 weeks. Adverse events included constipation and nausea. Longer and larger trials are needed to determine the effect and safety of atogepant for migraine prevention. (Funded by Allergan; ADVANCE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03777059.).

Triple Therapy for Cystic Fibrosis Phe508del-Gating and -Residual Function Genotypes.

BACKGROUND: Elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor is a small-molecule cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator regimen shown to be efficacious in patients with at least one Phe508del allele, which indicates that this combination can modulate a single Phe508del allele. In patients whose other CFTR allele contains a gating or residual function mutation that is already effectively treated with previous CFTR modulators (ivacaftor or tezacaftor-ivacaftor), the potential for additional benefit from restoring Phe508del CFTR protein function is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled trial involving patients 12 years of age or older with cystic fibrosis and Phe508del-gating or Phe508del-residual function genotypes. After a 4-week run-in period with ivacaftor or tezacaftor-ivacaftor, patients were randomly assigned to receive elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor or active control for 8 weeks. The primary end point was the absolute change in the percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) from baseline through week 8 in the elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor group. RESULTS: After the run-in period, 132 patients received elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor and 126 received active control. Elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor resulted in a percentage of predicted FEV1 that was higher by 3.7 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8 to 4.6) relative to baseline and higher by 3.5 percentage points (95% CI, 2.2 to 4.7) relative to active control and a sweat chloride concentration that was lower by 22.3 mmol per liter (95% CI, 20.2 to 24.5) relative to baseline and lower by 23.1 mmol per liter (95% CI, 20.1 to 26.1) relative to active control (P<0.001 for all comparisons). The change from baseline in the Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised respiratory domain score (range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life) with elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor was 10.3 points (95% CI, 8.0 to 12.7) and with active control was 1.6 points (95% CI, -0.8 to 4.1). The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups; adverse events led to treatment discontinuation in one patient (elevated aminotransferase level) in the elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor group and in two patients (anxiety or depression and pulmonary exacerbation) in the active control group. CONCLUSIONS: Elexacaftor-tezacaftor-ivacaftor was efficacious and safe in patients with Phe508del-gating or Phe508del-residual function genotypes and conferred additional benefit relative to previous CFTR modulators. (Funded by Vertex Pharmaceuticals; VX18-445-104 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04058353.).

Muscarinic Cholinergic Receptor Agonist and Peripheral Antagonist for Schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: The muscarinic receptor agonist xanomeline has antipsychotic properties and is devoid of dopamine receptor-blocking activity but causes cholinergic adverse events. Trospium is a peripherally restricted muscarinic receptor antagonist that reduces peripheral cholinergic effects of xanomeline. The efficacy and safety of combined xanomeline and trospium in patients with schizophrenia are unknown. METHODS: In this double-blind, phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned patients with schizophrenia in a 1:1 ratio to receive twice-daily xanomeline-trospium (increased to a maximum of 125 mg of xanomeline and 30 mg of trospium per dose) or placebo for 5 weeks. The primary end point was the change from baseline to week 5 in the total score on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS; range, 30 to 210, with higher scores indicating more severe symptoms of schizophrenia). Secondary end points were the change in the PANSS positive symptom subscore, the score on the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scale (range, 1 to 7, with higher scores indicating greater severity of illness), the change in the PANSS negative symptom subscore, the change in the PANSS Marder negative symptom subscore, and the percentage of patients with a response according to a CGI-S score of 1 or 2. RESULTS: A total of 182 patients were enrolled, with 90 assigned to receive xanomeline-trospium and 92 to receive placebo. The PANSS total score at baseline was 97.7 in the xanomeline-trospium group and 96.6 in the placebo group. The change from baseline to week 5 was -17.4 points with xanomeline-trospium and -5.9 points with placebo (least-squares mean difference, -11.6 points; 95% confidence interval, -16.1 to -7.1; P<0.001). The results for the secondary end points were significantly better in the xanomeline-trospium group than in the placebo group, with the exception of the percentage of patients with a CGI-S response. The most common adverse events in the xanomeline-trospium group were constipation, nausea, dry mouth, dyspepsia, and vomiting. The incidences of somnolence, weight gain, restlessness, and extrapyramidal symptoms were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In a 5-week trial, xanomeline-trospium resulted in a greater decrease in the PANSS total score than placebo but was associated with cholinergic and anticholinergic adverse events. Larger and longer trials are required to determine the efficacy and safety of xanomeline-trospium in patients with schizophrenia. (Funded by Karuna Therapeutics and the Wellcome Trust; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03697252.).

Phase 3 Trials of Tirbanibulin Ointment for Actinic Keratosis.

BACKGROUND: The tubulin polymerization and Src kinase signaling inhibitor tirbanibulin is being investigated as a topical treatment for actinic keratosis, a precursor of squamous-cell carcinoma. METHODS: In two identically designed double-blind trials, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, adults with actinic keratoses on the face or scalp to receive either topical tirbanibulin or vehicle (placebo) ointment. The ointment was applied by the patients to a 25-cm2 contiguous area containing four to eight lesions once daily for 5 consecutive days. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients with a complete (100%) reduction in the number of lesions in the application area at day 57. The secondary outcome was the percentage of patients with a partial (≥75%) reduction in the number of lesions within the application area at day 57. The incidence of recurrence was evaluated at 1 year. Local reactions were scored with the use of 4-point scale (ranging from 0 [absent] to 3 [severe]). RESULTS: A total of 702 patients were enrolled in the two trials (351 patients per trial). Complete clearance in trial 1 occurred in 44% of the patients (77 of 175) in the tirbanibulin group and in 5% of those (8 of 176) in the vehicle group (difference, 40 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 32 to 47; P<0.001); in trial 2, the percentages were 54% (97 of 178 patients) and 13% (22 of 173), respectively (difference, 42 percentage points; 95% CI, 33 to 51; P<0.001). The percentages of patients with partial clearance were significantly higher in the tirbanibulin groups than in the vehicle groups. At 1 year, the estimated percentage of patients with recurrent lesions was 47% among patients who had had a complete response to tirbanibulin. The most common local reactions to tirbanibulin were erythema in 91% of the patients and flaking or scaling in 82%. Adverse events with tirbanibulin were application-site pain in 10% of the patients and pruritus in 9%, all of which resolved. CONCLUSIONS: In two identically designed trials, tirbanibulin 1% ointment applied once daily for 5 days was superior to vehicle for the treatment of actinic keratosis at 2 months but was associated with transient local reactions and recurrence of lesions at 1 year. Trials comparing tirbanibulin with conventional treatments and that have longer follow-up are needed to determine the effects of tirbanibulin therapy on actinic keratosis. (Funded by Athenex; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT03285477 and NCT03285490.).

Sotorasib for Lung Cancers with KRAS p.G12C Mutation.

BACKGROUND: Sotorasib showed anticancer activity in patients with KRAS p.G12C-mutated advanced solid tumors in a phase 1 study, and particularly promising anticancer activity was observed in a subgroup of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: In a single-group, phase 2 trial, we investigated the activity of sotorasib, administered orally at a dose of 960 mg once daily, in patients with KRAS p.G12C-mutated advanced NSCLC previously treated with standard therapies. The primary end point was objective response (complete or partial response) according to independent central review. Key secondary end points included duration of response, disease control (defined as complete response, partial response, or stable disease), progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Exploratory biomarkers were evaluated for their association with response to sotorasib therapy. RESULTS: Among the 126 enrolled patients, the majority (81.0%) had previously received both platinum-based chemotherapy and inhibitors of programmed death 1 (PD-1) or programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1). According to central review, 124 patients had measurable disease at baseline and were evaluated for response. An objective response was observed in 46 patients (37.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 28.6 to 46.2), including in 4 (3.2%) who had a complete response and in 42 (33.9%) who had a partial response. The median duration of response was 11.1 months (95% CI, 6.9 to could not be evaluated). Disease control occurred in 100 patients (80.6%; 95% CI, 72.6 to 87.2). The median progression-free survival was 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.1 to 8.2), and the median overall survival was 12.5 months (95% CI, 10.0 to could not be evaluated). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 88 of 126 patients (69.8%), including grade 3 events in 25 patients (19.8%) and a grade 4 event in 1 (0.8%). Responses were observed in subgroups defined according to PD-L1 expression, tumor mutational burden, and co-occurring mutations in STK11, KEAP1, or TP53. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 2 trial, sotorasib therapy led to a durable clinical benefit without new safety signals in patients with previously treated KRAS p.G12C-mutated NSCLC. (Funded by Amgen and the National Institutes of Health; CodeBreaK100 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03600883.).

A Randomized Trial of a Transglutaminase 2 Inhibitor for Celiac Disease.

BACKGROUND: In celiac disease, small intestinal transglutaminase 2 causes deamidation of glutamine residues in gluten peptides, which enhances stimulation of T cells and leads to mucosal injury. Inhibition of transglutaminase 2 is a potential treatment for celiac disease. METHODS: In a proof-of-concept trial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of a 6-week treatment with ZED1227, a selective oral transglutaminase 2 inhibitor, at three dose levels as compared with placebo, in adults with well-controlled celiac disease who underwent a daily gluten challenge. The primary end point was the attenuation of gluten-induced mucosal damage, as measured by the ratio of villus height to crypt depth. Secondary end points included intraepithelial lymphocyte density, the Celiac Symptom Index score, and the Celiac Disease Questionnaire score (for assessment of health-related quality of life). RESULTS: Of the 41 patients assigned to the 10-mg ZED1227 group, the 41 assigned to the 50-mg group, the 41 assigned to the 100-mg group, and the 40 assigned to the placebo group, 35, 39, 38, and 30 patients, respectively, had adequate duodenal-biopsy samples for the assessment of the primary end point. Treatment with ZED1227 at all three dose levels attenuated gluten-induced duodenal mucosal injury. The estimated difference from placebo in the change in the mean ratio of villus height to crypt depth from baseline to week 6 was 0.44 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15 to 0.73) in the 10-mg group (P = 0.001), 0.49 (95% CI, 0.20 to 0.77) in the 50-mg group (P<0.001), and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.20 to 0.77) in the 100-mg group (P<0.001). The estimated differences from placebo in the change in intraepithelial lymphocyte density were -2.7 cells per 100 epithelial cells (95% CI, -7.6 to 2.2) in the 10-mg group, -4.2 cells per 100 epithelial cells (95% CI, -8.9 to 0.6) in the 50-mg group, and -9.6 cells per 100 epithelial cells (95% CI, -14.4 to -4.8) in the 100-mg group. Use of the 100-mg dose may have improved symptom and quality-of-life scores. The most common adverse events, the incidences of which were similar across all groups, were headache, nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. Rash developed in 3 of 40 patients (8%) in the 100-mg group. CONCLUSIONS: In this preliminary trial, treatment with ZED1227 attenuated gluten-induced duodenal mucosal damage in patients with celiac disease. (Funded by Dr. Falk Pharma; CEC-3 EudraCT number, 2017-002241-30.).