CRISPR-Cas9 In Vivo Gene Editing for Transthyretin Amyloidosis.

BACKGROUND: Transthyretin amyloidosis, also called ATTR amyloidosis, is a life-threatening disease characterized by progressive accumulation of misfolded transthyretin (TTR) protein in tissues, predominantly the nerves and heart. NTLA-2001 is an in vivo gene-editing therapeutic agent that is designed to treat ATTR amyloidosis by reducing the concentration of TTR in serum. It is based on the clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats and associated Cas9 endonuclease (CRISPR-Cas9) system and comprises a lipid nanoparticle encapsulating messenger RNA for Cas9 protein and a single guide RNA targeting TTR. METHODS: After conducting preclinical in vitro and in vivo studies, we evaluated the safety and pharmacodynamic effects of single escalating doses of NTLA-2001 in six patients with hereditary ATTR amyloidosis with polyneuropathy, three in each of the two initial dose groups (0.1 mg per kilogram and 0.3 mg per kilogram), within an ongoing phase 1 clinical study. RESULTS: Preclinical studies showed durable knockout of TTR after a single dose. Serial assessments of safety during the first 28 days after infusion in patients revealed few adverse events, and those that did occur were mild in grade. Dose-dependent pharmacodynamic effects were observed. At day 28, the mean reduction from baseline in serum TTR protein concentration was 52% (range, 47 to 56) in the group that received a dose of 0.1 mg per kilogram and was 87% (range, 80 to 96) in the group that received a dose of 0.3 mg per kilogram. CONCLUSIONS: In a small group of patients with hereditary ATTR amyloidosis with polyneuropathy, administration of NTLA-2001 was associated with only mild adverse events and led to decreases in serum TTR protein concentrations through targeted knockout of TTR. (Funded by Intellia Therapeutics and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04601051.).

MILO/ENGOT-ov11: Binimetinib Versus Physician's Choice Chemotherapy in Recurrent or Persistent Low-Grade Serous Carcinomas of the Ovary, Fallopian Tube, or Primary Peritoneum.

PURPOSE: Low-grade serous ovarian carcinomas (LGSOCs) have historically low chemotherapy responses. Alterations affecting the MAPK pathway, most commonly KRAS/BRAF, are present in 30%-60% of LGSOCs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate binimetinib, a potent MEK1/2 inhibitor with demonstrated activity across multiple cancers, in LGSOC. METHODS: This was a 2:1 randomized study of binimetinib (45 mg twice daily) versus physician's choice chemotherapy (PCC). Eligible patients had recurrent measurable LGSOC after ≥ 1 prior platinum-based chemotherapy but ≤ 3 prior chemotherapy lines. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR); additional assessments included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), clinical-benefit rate, biomarkers, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 303 patients were randomly assigned to an arm of the study at the time of interim analysis (January 20, 2016). Median PFS by BICR was 9.1 months (95% CI, 7.3 to 11.3) for binimetinib and 10.6 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 14.5) for PCC (hazard ratio,1.21; 95%CI, 0.79 to 1.86), resulting in early study closure according to a prespecified futility boundary after 341 patients had enrolled. Secondary efficacy end points were similar in the two groups: ORR 16% (complete response [CR]/partial responses[PRs], 32) versus 13% (CR/PRs, 13); median DOR, 8.1 months (range, 0.03 to ≥ 12.0 months) versus 6.7 months (0.03 to ≥ 9.7 months); and median OS, 25.3 versus 20.8 months for binimetinib and PCC, respectively. Safety results were consistent with the known safety profile of binimetinib; the most common grade ≥ 3 event was increased blood creatine kinase level (26%). Post hoc analysis suggests a possible association between KRAS mutation and response to binimetinib. Results from an updated analysis (n = 341; January 2019) were consistent. CONCLUSION: Although the MEK Inhibitor in Low-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer Study did not meet its primary end point, binimetinib showed activity in LGSOC across the efficacy end points evaluated. A higher response to chemotherapy than expected was observed and KRAS mutation might predict response to binimetinib.

Estimation of treatment effect under non-proportional hazards and conditionally independent censoring.

In clinical trials with time-to-event outcomes, it is common to estimate the marginal hazard ratio from the proportional hazards model, even when the proportional hazards assumption is not valid. This is unavoidable from the perspective that the estimator must be specified a priori if probability statements about treatment effect estimates are desired. Marginal hazard ratio estimates under non-proportional hazards are still useful, as they can be considered to be average treatment effect estimates over the support of the data. However, as many have shown, under non-proportional hazard, the 'usual' unweighted marginal hazard ratio estimate is a function of the censoring distribution, which is not normally considered to be scientifically relevant when describing the treatment effect. In addition, in many practical settings, the censoring distribution is only conditionally independent (e.g., differing across treatment arms), which further complicates the interpretation. In this paper, we investigate an estimator of the hazard ratio that removes the influence of censoring and propose a consistent robust variance estimator. We compare the coverage probability of the estimator to both the usual Cox model estimator and an estimator proposed by Xu and O'Quigley (2000) when censoring is independent of the covariate. The new estimator should be used for inference that does not depend on the censoring distribution. It is particularly relevant to adaptive clinical trials where, by design, censoring distributions differ across treatment arms.

Whole-brain radiotherapy with or without efaproxiral for the treatment of brain metastases: Determinants of response and its prognostic value for subsequent survival.

PURPOSE: To determine the prognostic factors for radiographic response and its prognostic value for subsequent survival in patients undergoing whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) for brain metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Five hundred fifteen eligible patients were randomized in a phase III trial evaluating WBRT and supplemental oxygen with or without efaproxiral, an allosteric modifier of hemoglobin that reduces hemoglobin oxygen-binding affinity and enhances tumor oxygenation, potentially increasing tumor radiosensitivity. Brain images were obtained at baseline and at scheduled follow-up visits after WBRT. Landmark analysis was used to assess the ability of response at selected time points to predict subsequent survival. Logistic regression was used to assess determinants of response at 3 months. RESULTS: Treatment arm, Karnofsky Performance Status, presence or absence of liver metastases, and primary site were all determinants of response at the 3-month follow-up visit, with patients in the efaproxiral arm experiencing a 67% greater odds of response at this visit (p = 0.02). Response at 3 and 6 months was a significant prognostic factor for longer subsequent survival. CONCLUSIONS: The 3-month scan is a valuable prognostic factor for subsequent survival in patients with brain metastases treated with WBRT. Patients in the efaproxiral arm had a higher response rate at 3 and 6 months than those in the control arm.

Phase III study of efaproxiral as an adjunct to whole-brain radiation therapy for brain metastases.

PURPOSE: To determine whether efaproxiral, an allosteric modifier of hemoglobin, improves survival in patients with brain metastases when used as an adjunct to whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with brain metastases from solid tumors and a Karnofsky performance score of > or = 70 were randomly assigned to receive WBRT with supplemental oxygen and either efaproxiral at 75 or 100 mg/kg (efaproxiral arm) or no efaproxiral (control arm). The primary end point was survival. RESULTS: The study consisted of 515 eligible patients (efaproxiral arm, n = 265; control arm, n = 250). The median survival time (MST) was 5.4 months for the efaproxiral arm versus 4.4 months for the control arm (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.87; P = .16). For the subgroup of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or breast cancer, the MST was 6.0 and 4.4 months, respectively (HR = 0.82; P = .07). Cox multiple regression analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in the risk of death for the efaproxiral arm in both primary populations. Further analysis indicated that the benefit may be restricted to the subgroup of patients with breast cancer. Response rates (radiographic complete response plus partial response) improved by 7% (P = .10) and 13% (P = .01) for all patients and for NSCLC and breast cancer patients in the efaproxiral arm, respectively. The most common severe adverse event in patients treated with efaproxiral was hypoxemia, which was reversible and effectively managed with supplemental oxygen in most patients. CONCLUSION: The addition of efaproxiral, a noncytotoxic radiation sensitizer, to WBRT may improve response rates and survival in patients with brain metastases, particularly metastases from breast cancer. A confirmatory trial for breast cancer patients has been initiated.

Phase II multicenter study of induction chemotherapy followed by concurrent efaproxiral (RSR13) and thoracic radiotherapy for patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Efaproxiral (RSR13) reduces hemoglobin oxygen-binding affinity, facilitates oxygen release, and increases tissue pO2. We conducted a phase II multicenter study that assessed the efficacy and safety of efaproxiral when administered with thoracic radiation therapy (TRT), following induction chemotherapy, for treatment of locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-one patients with locally advanced NSCLC were enrolled at 13 sites. Treatment comprised two cycles of paclitaxel (225 mg/m2) and carboplatin (area under the curve, 6), 3 weeks apart, followed by TRT (64 Gy/32 fractions) with concurrent efaproxiral (50 to 100 mg/kg). Survival results were compared with results of study Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 94-10. RESULTS: Overall response rate was 75% (37 of 49 patients). Complete and partial response rates were 6% (three of 49 patients) and 69% (34 of 49 patients), respectively. Median survival time (MST) was 20.6 months (95% CI, 14.0 to 24.2); overall survival rates at 1- and 2-years were 67% and 37%, respectively. Survival results were compared with the sequential (S-CRT) and concurrent (C-CRT) chemoradiotherapy arms of RTOG 94-10. MSTs for cases matched by stage, Karnofsky performance status, and age were: RT-010, 20.6 months; S-CRT, 15.1 months; and C-CRT, 17.9 months. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities related to efaproxiral that occurred in more than one patient included transient hypoxemia (19%), radiation pneumonitis (11%), and fatigue (4%). CONCLUSION: Addition of efaproxiral to S-CRT represents a promising approach in NSCLC treatment, and a randomized study should be pursued. The low incidence of grade 3 to 4 toxicities suggests that the use of efaproxiral instead of a cytotoxic agent, as a radiation sensitizer, may be advantageous.