Identifying treatment options for BRAFV600 wild-type metastatic melanoma: A SU2C/MRA genomics-enabled clinical trial.

Although combination BRAF and MEK inhibitors are highly effective for the 40-50% of cutaneous metastatic melanomas harboring BRAFV600 mutations, targeted agents have been ineffective for BRAFV600wild-type (wt) metastatic melanomas. The SU2C Genomics-Enabled Medicine for Melanoma Trial utilized a Simon two-stage optimal design to assess whether comprehensive genomic profiling improves selection of molecular-based therapies for BRAFV600wt metastatic melanoma patients who had progressed on standard-of-care therapy, which may include immunotherapy. Of the response-evaluable patients, binimetinib was selected for 20 patients randomized to the genomics-enabled arm, and nine were treated on the alternate treatment arm. Response rates for 27 patients treated with targeted recommendations included one (4%) partial response, 18 (67%) with stable disease, and eight (30%) with progressive disease. Post-trial genomic and protein pathway activation mapping identified additional drug classes that may be considered for future studies. Our results highlight the complexity and heterogeneity of metastatic melanomas, as well as how the lack of response in this trial may be associated with limitations including monotherapy drug selection and the dearth of available single and combination molecularly-driven therapies to treat BRAFV600wt metastatic melanomas.

A Phase Ib Dose-Escalation Study of the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Cobimetinib and Duligotuzumab in Patients with Previously Treated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Cancers with Mutant KRAS.

LESSONS LEARNED: Cobimetinib and duligotuzumab were well tolerated as single agents and in combination with other agents.The cobimetinib and duligotuzumab combination was associated with increased toxicity, most notably gastrointestinal, and limited efficacy in the patient population tested. BACKGROUND: KRAS-mutant tumors possess abnormal mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPK) pathway signaling, leading to dysregulated cell proliferation. Cobimetinib blocks MAPK signaling. The dual-action antibody duligotuzumab (MEHD7945A) inhibits ligand binding to both epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3). Blockade of EGFR/HER3 and inhibition of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MEK) in KRAS-mutant tumors may provide additive benefit. METHODS: Patients with KRAS-mutant solid tumors were eligible for this phase Ib dose-escalation study with a planned expansion phase. Duligotuzumab was given intravenously (IV) at 1,100 mg every 2 weeks (q2w), while cobimetinib was given orally in a standard 3 + 3 design to identify the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of this combination. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were enrolled. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) included grade 4 hypokalemia and grade 3 mucosal inflammation, asthenia, and dermatitis acneiform. Seventy percent of patients experienced grade 3 or worse adverse events (AEs). Five (22%) and 12 (52%) patients missed at least 1 dose of duligotuzumab and cobimetinib, respectively, and 9 (39%) patients required a cobimetinib dose reduction. Three (13%) patients discontinued due to an AE. Best response was limited to 9 patients with stable disease and 13 patients with progressive disease. CONCLUSION: Given the limited tolerability and efficacy of this combination, the study did not proceed to expansion stage and closed for enrollment.

Effects of sorafenib on intra-tumoral interstitial fluid pressure and circulating biomarkers in patients with refractory sarcomas (NCI protocol 6948).

PURPOSE: Sorafenib is a multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor with therapeutic efficacy in several malignancies. Sorafenib may exert its anti-neoplastic effect in part by altering vascular permeability and reducing intra-tumoral interstitial hypertension. As correlative science with a phase II study in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcomas (STS), we evaluated the impact of this agent on intra-tumor interstitial fluid pressure (IFP), serum circulating biomarkers, and vascular density. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced STS with measurable disease and at least one superficial lesion amenable to biopsy received sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. Intratumoral IFP and plasma and circulating cell biomarkers were measured before and after 1-2 months of sorafenib administration. Results were analyzed in the context of the primary clinical endpoint of time-to-progression (TTP). RESULTS: In 15 patients accrued, the median TTP was 45 days (range 14-228). Intra-tumoral IFP measurements obtained in 6 patients at baseline showed a direct correlation with tumor size. Two patients with stable disease at two months had post-sorafenib IFP evaluations and demonstrated a decline in IFP and vascular density. Sorafenib significantly increased plasma VEGF, PlGF, and SDF1α and decreased sVEGFR-2 levels. Increased plasma SDF1α and decreased sVEGFR-2 levels on day 28 correlated with disease progression. CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment intra-tumoral IFP correlated with tumor size and decreased in two evaluable patients with SD on sorafenib. Sorafenib also induced changes in circulating biomarkers consistent with expected VEGF pathway blockade, despite the lack of more striking clinical activity in this small series. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00330421.

Sequential doxorubicin and topotecan in relapsed/refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: results of CALGB 59906.

Topoisomerase enzymes are critical components of genomic replication and function to minimize torsional stress on DNA. Sequential administration of a topoisomerase II inhibitor followed by a topoisomerase I inhibitor is potentially synergistic due to increased target enzyme levels. Patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphomas (NHL) were eligible for this phase II study of doxorubicin 25 mg/m2 intravenous (IV) on day 1 and topotecan 1.75 mg/m2/day IV on days 3 - 5, every 21 days. The trial objectives included the overall response rate, progression-free survival, and toxicity. Twenty-six patients were enrolled and 25 patients are assessable for toxicity and response. The median age was 58 (range 23 - 74) years. The patients had received a median of two (range one to five) prior regimens, including five patients with a prior stem cell transplant. Five patients (20%, 95% confidence interval 0.07, 0.42) responded with two (8%) complete remissions and three (12%) partial remissions; an additional four (16%) patients had stable disease. Both patients achieving a complete remission had Burkitt's lymphoma. There were no treatment-related deaths. In conclusion, the combination of doxorubicin and topotecan is well tolerated and has modest activity in relapsed/refractory NHL, with occasional patients having a prolonged remission. The activity in Burkitt's lymphoma should be investigated further.

Evidence of determinant spreading in the antibody responses to prostate cell surface antigens in patients immunized with prostate-specific antigen.

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer consistently remains a difficult clinical problem. The development of novel therapy strategies for effective control and treatment of prostate cancer is essential. The prostate represents a unique site for immunotherapy, in part because prostate-specific immunity would most probably be without significant long-term sequellae. Antibodies and cell-mediated immunity, induced by either active or passive immunization, represent potential means to specifically target prostate tumor cells. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The serum IgG response to cell surface antigens expressed on LNCAP [prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-positive] and PC-3 (PSA-negative) were analyzed in individuals with advanced disease receiving vaccinia- or fowlpox-expressed PSA (v-PSA or f-PSA, respectively) by flow cytometry. RESULTS: Sera from all seven patients in a Phase I study of v-PSA, collected prior to the third immunization, reacted with both prostate tumor cell lines. The majority of individuals (n = 12) in a Phase II trial of v-PSA and f-PSA developed sustainable antibody responses to cell surface antigens on the prostate tumor cell lines. The magnitude and kinetics of these responses were dependent on the immunization schedule. Of importance, the baseline serum of only one of nine patients tested had reactivity with nonprostate tumor cell lines. Sera from three normal males also lacked reactivity with prostate tumor cells. CONCLUSIONS: PSA vaccine constructs are immunogenic and induce antibody responses to a multitude of surface antigens on prostate tumor cell lines by epitope or determinant spreading after stimulation of the immune system by PSA immunization.