Operational complexity versus design efficiency: challenges of implementing a phase IIa multiple parallel cohort targeted treatment platform trial in advanced breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Platform trial designs are used increasingly in cancer clinical research and are considered an efficient model for evaluating multiple compounds within a single disease or disease subtype. However, these trial designs can be challenging to operationalise. The use of platform trials in oncology clinical research has increased considerably in recent years as advances in molecular biology enable molecularly defined stratification of patient populations and targeted therapy evaluation. Whereas multiple separate trials may be deemed infeasible, platform designs allow efficient, parallel evaluation of multiple targeted therapies in relatively small biologically defined patient sub-populations with the promise of increased molecular screening efficiency and reduced time for drug evaluation. Whilst the theoretical efficiencies are widely reported, the operational challenges associated with these designs (complexity, cost, regulatory, resource) are not always well understood. MAIN: In this commentary, we describe our practical experience of the implementation and delivery of the UK plasmaMATCH trial, a platform trial in advanced breast cancer, comprising an integrated screening component and multiple parallel downstream mutation-directed therapeutic cohorts. plasmaMATCH reported its primary results within 3 years of opening to recruitment. We reflect on the operational challenges encountered and share lessons learnt to inform the successful conduct of future trials. Key to the success of the plasmaMATCH trial was well co-ordinated stakeholder engagement by an experienced clinical trials unit with expert methodology and trial management expertise, a federated model of clinical leadership, a well-written protocol integrating screening and treatment components and including justification for the chosen structure and intentions for future adaptions, and an integrated funding model with streamlined contractual arrangements across multiple partners. Findings based on our practical experience include the importance of early engagement with the regulators and consideration of a flexible resource infrastructure to allow adequate resource allocation to support concurrent trial activities as adaptions are implemented in parallel to the continued management of patient safety and data quality of the ongoing trial cohorts. CONCLUSION: Platform trial designs allow the efficient reporting of multiple treatment cohorts. Operational challenges can be overcome through multidisciplinary engagement, streamlined contracting processes, rationalised protocol and database design and appropriate resourcing.

Results of the c-TRAK TN trial: a clinical trial utilising ctDNA mutation tracking to detect molecular residual disease and trigger intervention in patients with moderate and high-risk early stage triple negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Post-treatment detection of circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) in early-stage triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients predicts high risk of relapse. c-TRAK-TN assessed the utility of prospective ctDNA surveillance in TNBC and the activity of pembrolizumab in patients with ctDNA detected (ctDNA+). PATIENTS AND METHODS: c-TRAK-TN, a multi-centre phase II trial, with integrated prospective ctDNA surveillance by digital PCR, enrolled patients with early-stage TNBC and residual disease following neoadjuvant chemotherapy, or, stage II/III with adjuvant chemotherapy. ctDNA surveillance comprised three monthly blood sampling to 12 months (18 months if samples were missed due to COVID), and ctDNA+ patients were randomised 2:1; intervention:observation. ctDNA results were blinded unless patients were allocated to intervention, when staging scans were done and those free of recurrence were offered pembrolizumab. A protocol amendment (16/09/2020) closed the observation group; all subsequent ctDNA+ patients were allocated to intervention. Co-primary endpoints were i) ctDNA detection rate ii) sustained ctDNA clearance rate on pembrolizumab (NCT03145961). RESULTS: 208 patients registered between 30/01/18 - 06/12/19, 185 had tumour sequenced, 171 (92·4%) had trackable mutations, and 161 entered ctDNA surveillance. Rate of ctDNA detection by 12 months was 27·3% (44/161,95%CI:20·6-34·9). Seven patients relapsed without prior ctDNA detection. 45 patients entered the therapeutic component (intervention n=31; observation n=14; 1 observation patient was re-allocated to intervention following protocol amendment). Of patients allocated intervention, 72% (23/32) had metastases on staging at time of ctDNA+, and 4 patients declined pembrolizumab. Of the five patients who commenced pembrolizumab, none achieved sustained ctDNA clearance. CONCLUSION: c-TRAK-TN is the first prospective study to assess whether ctDNA assays have clinical utility in guiding therapy in TNBC. Patients had a high rate of metastatic disease on ctDNA detection. Findings have implications for future trial design, emphasising the importance of commencing ctDNA testing early, with more sensitive and/or frequent ctDNA testing regimes.

Implementation of platform trials in the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid review.

MOTIVATION: Platform designs - master protocols that allow for new treatment arms to be added over time - have gained considerable attention in recent years. Between 2001 and 2019, 16 platform trials were initiated globally. The COVID-19 pandemic seems to have provided a new motivation for these designs. We conducted a rapid review to quantify and describe platform trials used in COVID-19. METHODS: We cross-referenced PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cytel COVID-19 Clinical Trials Tracker to identify platform trials, defined by their stated ability to add future arms. RESULTS: We identified 58 COVID-19 platform trials globally registered between January 2020 and May 2021. According to trial registries, 16 trials have added new therapies (median 3, IQR 4) and 11 have dropped arms (median 3, IQR 2.5). About 50% of trials publicly share their protocol, and 31 trials (53%) intend to share trial data. Forty-nine trials (84%) explicitly report adaptive features, and 21 trials (36%) state Bayesian methods. CONCLUSIONS: During the pandemic, there has been a surge in the number of platform trials compared to historical use. While transparency in statistical methods and clarity of data sharing policies needs improvement, platform trials appear particularly well-suited for rapid evidence generation. Trials secured funding quickly and many succeeded in adding new therapies in a short time period, thus demonstrating the potential for these trial designs to be implemented beyond the pandemic. The evidence gathered here may provide ample insight to further inform operational, statistical, and regulatory aspects of future platform trial conduct.

When the World Throws You a Curve Ball: Lessons Learned in Breast Cancer Management.

In the care of patients with operable breast cancer, there has been a shift toward increasing use of neoadjuvant therapy. There are benefits to neoadjuvant therapy, such as monitoring for response, as well as an increased rate of breast conservation and reduction of potential morbidity associated with breast surgery, including axillary management. Among patients with highly proliferative tumors, such as HER2-positive or triple-negative breast cancer, those with residual disease are at higher risk of recurrence, which informs the recommended systemic therapy in the adjuvant setting. For instance, in patients with residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and HER2-targeted therapy, there is a role for adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine for those with residual disease at the time of surgery. The same holds true regarding the role of adjuvant capecitabine in patients with residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. With the added complexities of treating patients in the era of the COVID-19 outbreak, additional considerations are critical, including initiation of surgery within an appropriate time from completion of neoadjuvant therapy. National consensus guidelines on time to surgery must be developed to improve measurement and comparison across systems. In addition, there is emerging radiation treatment management research addressing a number of factors, including hypofractionation, role of proton beam therapy, safe omission of radiotherapy, and preoperative radiotherapy with or without drug combination. In this article, the multidisciplinary approach of treating patients with operable breast cancer is highlighted, with updates and future considerations described.

Evidence-based guidelines for managing patients with primary ER+ HER2- breast cancer deferred from surgery due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Many patients with ER+ HER2- primary breast cancer are being deferred from surgery to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NeoET) during the COVID-19 pandemic. We have collated data from multiple international trials of presurgical endocrine therapy in order to provide guidance on the identification of patients who may have insufficiently endocrine-sensitive tumors and should be prioritised for early surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy rather than NeoET during or in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic for safety or when surgical activity needs to be prioritized. For postmenopausal patients, our data provide strong support for the use of ER and PgR status at diagnosis for triaging of patients into three groups in which (taking into account clinical factors): (i) NeoET is likely to be inappropriate (Allred ER <6 or ER 6 and PgR <6) (ii) a biopsy for Ki67 analysis (on-treatment Ki67) could be considered after 2-4 weeks of NeoET (a: ER 7 or 8 and PgR <6 or b: ER 6 or 7 and PgR ≥6) or (iii) NeoET is an acceptable course of action (ER 8 and PgR ≥6). Cut-offs for percentage of cells positive are also given. For group (ii), a high early on-treatment level of Ki67 (>10%) indicates a higher priority for early surgery. Too few data were available for premenopausal patients to provide a similar treatment algorithm. These guidelines should be helpful for managing patients with early ER+ HER2- breast cancer during and in the aftermath of the COVID-19 crisis.