Performance of a Cell-Free DNA-Based Multi-cancer Detection Test in Individuals Presenting With Symptoms Suspicious for Cancers.

PURPOSE: A multi-cancer detection test using a targeted methylation assay and machine learning classifiers was validated and optimized for screening in prospective, case-controlled Circulating Cell-free Genome Atlas (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02889978) substudy 3. Here, we report test performance in a subgroup of participants with symptoms suspicious for cancer to assess the test's ability to potentially facilitate efficient diagnostic evaluation in symptomatic individuals. METHODS: We evaluated test performance (sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of cancer signal origin [CSO] prediction accuracy) in participants with clinically presenting cancers (CPCs) and noncancer with underlying medical conditions and among two subgroups (65 years and older and GI cancers). Overall survival (OS) of participants who had a cancer signal detected/not detected was compared with SEER-based expected survival. RESULTS: A total of 2,036 cancer and 1,472 noncancer participants were included. Specificity was high in all noncancer participants (99.5% [95% CI, 98.4 to 99.8]). In participants with CPCs, the overall sensitivity was 64.3% (95% CI, 62.2 to 66.4) and the overall accuracy of CSO prediction in true positives was 90.3%. For GI cancers, the overall sensitivity was 84.1% (95% CI, 80.6 to 87.1). In participants 65 years and older, test performance was similar to that of all participants. Individuals with cancers not detected had a significantly better OS than that expected from SEER (P < .01). CONCLUSION: This test detected a cancer signal with high specificity and CSO prediction accuracy and moderate sensitivity in symptomatic individuals, with especially high performance in participants with GI cancers. The survival analysis implied that the cancers not detected were less clinically aggressive than cancers detected by the test, providing prognostic insights to physicians. This multi-cancer detection test could facilitate efficient workup and stratify cancer risk in symptomatic individuals.

MRTX-500 Phase 2 Trial: Sitravatinib With Nivolumab in Patients With Nonsquamous NSCLC Progressing On or After Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy or Chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Sitravatinib, a receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting TYRO3, AXL, MERTK receptors, and vascular epithelial growth factor receptor 2, can shift the tumor microenvironment toward an immunostimulatory state. Combining sitravatinib with checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) may augment antitumor activity. METHODS: The phase 2 MRTX-500 study evaluated sitravatinib (120 mg daily) with nivolumab (every 2 or 4 wk) in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC who progressed on or after previous CPI (CPI-experienced) or chemotherapy (CPI-naive). CPI-experienced patients had a previous clinical benefit (PCB) (complete response, partial response, or stable disease for at least 12 weeks then disease progression) or no PCB (NPCB) from CPI. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR); secondary objectives included safety and secondary efficacy end points. RESULTS: Overall, 124 CPI-experienced (NPCB, n = 35; PCB, n = 89) and 32 CPI-naive patients were treated. Investigator-assessed ORR was 11.4% in patients with NPCB, 16.9% with PCB, and 25.0% in CPI-naive. The median progression-free survival was 3.7, 5.6, and 7.1 months with NPCB, PCB, and CPI-naive, respectively; the median overall survival was 7.9 and 13.6 months with NPCB and PCB, respectively (not reached in CPI-naive patients; median follow-up 20.4 mo). Overall, (N = 156), any grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 93.6%; grade 3/4 in 58.3%. One grade 5 TRAE occurred in a CPI-naive patient. TRAEs led to treatment discontinuation in 14.1% and dose reduction or interruption in 42.9%. Biomarker analyses supported an immunostimulatory mechanism of action. CONCLUSIONS: Sitravatinib with nivolumab had a manageable safety profile. Although ORR was not met, this combination exhibited antitumor activity and encouraged survival in CPI-experienced patients with nonsquamous NSCLC.

Hemodynamic Gain Index and Exercise Capacity in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.

Decreased exercise capacity portends a poor prognosis in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The hemodynamic gain index (HGI) is an integrated marker of hemodynamic reserve measured during exercise stress testing and is associated with survival. The goal of this study was to establish the association of HGI with exercise capacity, serum biomarkers, and echocardiography features in subjects with HFpEF. In 209 subjects with HFpEF enrolled in the RELAX (Phosphodiesterase-5 Inhibition to Improve Clinical Status and Exercise Capacity in Diastolic Heart Failure) trial who underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing, we calculated the HGI ([peak heart rate [HR] × peak systolic blood pressure [SBP]-[HR at rest × SBP at rest])/(HR at rest × SBP at rest) and tested associations with outcomes of interest. The median (interquartile range) HGI was 0.94 (0.5 to 1.3) beats per min/mm Hg. In multivariable-adjusted linear regression, higher HGI was associated with greater peak oxygen consumption (VO2), VO2 at anaerobic threshold, peak minute ventilation, and 6-minute walk distance (all p <0.001). Higher HGI was associated with lower serum high-sensitivity troponin I, pro-collagen III, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and creatinine (all p <0.05) and with longer deceleration time, lower E/A ratio, and lower left atrial volume index by echocardiography (all p <0.05). In conclusion, higher HGI in stable HFpEF was associated with greater exercise capacity, a biomarker profile indicating less myocardial injury and fibrosis and less kidney dysfunction, and with less severe diastolic dysfunction. These results suggest that HGI, an easily calculated metric from routine exercise testing, is a marker of functional capacity and disease severity in HFpEF and may serve as a surrogate for VO2 parameters for use in treadmill testing without gas exchange capability.

Silmitasertib plus gemcitabine and cisplatin first-line therapy in locally advanced/metastatic cholangiocarcinoma: A Phase 1b/2 study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study aimed to investigate safety and efficacy of silmitasertib, an oral small molecule casein kinase 2 inhibitor, plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (G+C) versus G+C in locally advanced/metastatic cholangiocarcinoma. APPROACH AND RESULTS: This work is a Phase 1b/2 study (S4-13-001). In Phase 2, patients received silmitasertib 1000 mg twice daily for 10 days with G+C on Days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. Primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in the modified intent-to-treat population (defined as patients who completed at least one cycle of silmitasertib without dose interruption/reduction) from both phases (silmitasertib/G+C n = 55, G+C n = 29). The response was assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. The median PFS was 11.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.6, 14.7) versus 5.8 months (95% CI, 3.1, not evaluable [NE]) ( p  = 0.0496); 10-month PFS was 56.1% (95% CI, 38.8%, 70.2%) versus 22.2% (95% CI, 1.8%, 56.7%); and median overall survival was 17.4 months (95% CI, 13.4, 25.7) versus 14.9 months (95% CI, 9.9, NE) with silmitasertib/G+C versus G+C. Overall response rate was 34.0% versus 30.8%; the disease control rate was 86.0% versus 88.5% with silmitasertib/G+C versus G+C. Almost all silmitasertib/G+C (99%) and G+C (93%) patients reported at least one treatment emergent adverse event (TEAE). The most common TEAEs (all grades) with silmitasertib/G+C versus G+C were diarrhea (70% versus 13%), nausea (59% vs. 30%), fatigue (47% vs. 47%), vomiting (39% vs. 7%), and anemia (39% vs. 30%). Twelve patients (10%) discontinued treatment because of TEAEs during the study. CONCLUSIONS: Silmitasertib/G+C demonstrated promising preliminary evidence of efficacy for the first-line treatment of patients with locally advanced/metastatic cholangiocarcinoma.

Evaluation of cell-free DNA approaches for multi-cancer early detection.

In the Circulating Cell-free Genome Atlas (NCT02889978) substudy 1, we evaluate several approaches for a circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA)-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test by defining clinical limit of detection (LOD) based on circulating tumor allele fraction (cTAF), enabling performance comparisons. Among 10 machine-learning classifiers trained on the same samples and independently validated, when evaluated at 98% specificity, those using whole-genome (WG) methylation, single nucleotide variants with paired white blood cell background removal, and combined scores from classifiers evaluated in this study show the highest cancer signal detection sensitivities. Compared with clinical stage and tumor type, cTAF is a more significant predictor of classifier performance and may more closely reflect tumor biology. Clinical LODs mirror relative sensitivities for all approaches. The WG methylation feature best predicts cancer signal origin. WG methylation is the most promising technology for MCED and informs development of a targeted methylation MCED test.

Trilaciclib Prior to Chemotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Final Efficacy and Subgroup Analysis from a Randomized Phase II Study.

PURPOSE: We report final antitumor efficacy results from a phase II study of trilaciclib, an intravenous cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor, administered prior to gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GCb) in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (NCT02978716). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to group 1 [GCb (days 1, 8); n = 34], group 2 [trilaciclib prior to GCb (days 1, 8); n = 33], or group 3 [trilaciclib (days 1, 8) and trilaciclib prior to GCb (days 2, 9); n = 35]. Subgroup analyses were performed according to CDK4/6 dependence, level of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, and RNA-based immune signatures using proportional hazards regression. T-cell receptor (TCR) ß CDR3 regions were amplified and sequenced to identify, quantify, and compare the abundance of each unique TCRß CDR3 at baseline and on treatment. RESULTS: Median overall survival (OS) was 12.6 months in group 1, not reached in group 2 (HR = 0.31; P = 0.0016), 17.8 months in group 3 (HR = 0.40; P = 0.0004), and 19.8 months in groups 2 and 3 combined (HR = 0.37; P < 0.0001). Efficacy outcomes were comparable regardless of cancer CDK4/6 dependence status and immune signatures. Administering trilaciclib prior to GCb prolonged OS irrespective of PD-L1 status but had greater benefit in the PD-L1-positive population. T-cell activation was enhanced in patients receiving trilaciclib. CONCLUSIONS: Administering trilaciclib prior to GCb enhanced antitumor efficacy, with significant improvements in OS. Efficacy outcomes in immunologic subgroups and enhancements in T-cell activation suggest these improvements may be mediated via immunologic mechanisms.

Myeloprotective Effects of Trilaciclib Among Patients with Small Cell Lung Cancer at Increased Risk of Chemotherapy-Induced Myelosuppression: Pooled Results from Three Phase 2, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Studies.

PURPOSE: Trilaciclib is an intravenous cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor indicated to decrease the incidence of chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression (CIM) by protecting hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells and immune system function from chemotherapy-induced damage (myeloprotection). Here, we investigated the myeloprotective effects of trilaciclib among patients at increased risk of CIM. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were pooled from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 clinical studies of trilaciclib administered prior to chemotherapy in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). Myeloprotective outcomes were evaluated in patient subgroups based on age (<65 or ≥65 years), risk of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN), and risk of anemia or red blood cell (RBC) transfusions. For the FN and anemia analyses, risk factors were identified from published literature and used to classify patients into FN and anemia risk categories. Subgroup analysis based on age was also performed on patient reported outcome (PRO) measures. RESULTS: In total, 123 patients received trilaciclib and 119 patients received placebo. Myeloprotective benefits of trilaciclib were observed regardless of age, with greater effects observed among patients aged ≥65 years. Across FN risk factors and categories, trilaciclib had beneficial effects on neutrophil-related endpoints vs placebo, with greater effects observed in patients at higher risk of FN. Effects on RBC-related endpoints favored trilaciclib vs placebo, regardless of anemia risk factors and categories. Improvements in PROs with trilaciclib were observed irrespective of age group, but with greater improvements and less deterioration from baseline observed in older patients. CONCLUSION: By both decreasing the incidence of CIM and improving quality of life, trilaciclib has the potential to allow patients receiving chemotherapy for ES-SCLC, including patients who are older or more vulnerable to CIM, to receive chemotherapy on schedule and at standard-of-care doses, and to improve the experience for patients receiving chemotherapy to treat ES-SCLC. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBERS: NCT02499770; NCT03041311; NCT02514447.

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in patients with either treatment-naive or previously treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (Study 111/KEYNOTE-146): a phase 1b/2 study.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), there is an unmet need for options to address disease progression during or after treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Pembrolizumab and lenvatinib are active as monotherapies in RCC; thus, we aimed to evaluate the combination of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in these patients. METHODS: We report results of the metastatic RCC cohort from an open-label phase 1b/2 study of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in patients aged at least 18 years with selected solid tumours and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1. Oral lenvatinib at 20 mg was given once daily along with intravenous pembrolizumab at 200 mg once every 3 weeks. Patients remained on study drug treatment until disease progression, development of unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. Efficacy was analysed in patients with clear cell metastatic RCC receiving study drug by previous therapy grouping: treatment naive, previously treated ICI naive (previously treated with at least one line of therapy but not with an anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 ICI), and ICI pretreated (ie, anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1) patients. Safety was analysed in all enrolled and treated patients. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate at week 24 per immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (irRECIST) by investigator assessment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02501096) and with the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT2017-000300-26), and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between July 21, 2015, and Oct 16, 2019, 145 patients were enrolled in the study. Two patients had non-clear cell RCC and were excluded from the efficacy analysis (one in the treatment-naive group and one in the ICI-pretreated group); thus, the population evaluated for efficacy comprised 143 patients (n=22 in the treatment-naive group, n=17 in the previously treated ICI-naive group, and n=104 in the ICI-pretreated group). All 145 enrolled patients were included in the safety analysis. The median follow-up was 19·8 months (IQR 14·3-28·4). The number of patients with an objective response at week 24 by irRECIST was 16 (72·7%, 95% CI 49·8-89·3) of 22 treatment-naive patients, seven (41·2%, 18·4-67·1) of 17 previously treated ICI-naive patients, and 58 (55·8%, 45·7-65·5) of 104 ICI-pretreated patients. Of 145 patients, 82 (57%) had grade 3 treatment-related adverse events and ten (7%) had grade 4 treatment-related adverse events. The most common grade 3 treatment-related adverse event was hypertension (30 [21%] of 145 patients). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 36 (25%) patients, and there were three treatment-related deaths (upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage, sudden death, and pneumonia). INTERPRETATION: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab showed encouraging antitumour activity and a manageable safety profile and might be an option for post-ICI treatment of metastatic RCC. FUNDING: Eisai and Merck Sharp & Dohme.

A Phase 2 Randomized Placebo-Controlled Adjuvant Trial of GI-4000, a Recombinant Yeast Expressing Mutated RAS Proteins in Patients with Resected Pancreas Cancer.

Purpose: GI-4000, a series of recombinant yeast expressing four different mutated RAS proteins, was evaluated in subjects with resected ras-mutated pancreas cancer. Methods: Subjects (n = 176) received GI-4000 or placebo plus gemcitabine. Subjects' tumors were genotyped to identify which matched GI-4000 product to administer. Immune responses were measured by interferon-γ (IFNγ) ELISpot assay and by regulatory T cell (Treg) frequencies on treatment. Pretreatment plasma was retrospectively analyzed by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time-of-flight (MALDI-ToF) mass spectrometry for proteomic signatures predictive of GI-4000 responsiveness. Results: GI-4000 was well tolerated, with comparable safety findings between treatment groups. The GI-4000 group showed a similar pattern of median recurrence-free and overall survival (OS) compared with placebo. For the prospectively defined and stratified R1 resection subgroup, there was a trend in 1 year OS (72% vs. 56%), an improvement in OS (523.5 vs. 443.5 days [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.06 [confidence interval (CI): 0.53-2.13], p = 0.872), and increased frequency of immune responders (40% vs. 8%; p = 0.062) for GI-4000 versus placebo and a 159-day improvement in OS for R1 GI-4000 immune responders versus placebo (p = 0.810). For R0 resection subjects, no increases in IFNγ responses in GI-4000-treated subjects were observed. A higher frequency of R0/R1 subjects with a reduction in Tregs (CD4+/CD45RA+/Foxp3low) was observed in GI-4000-treated subjects versus placebo (p = 0.033). A proteomic signature was identified that predicted response to GI-4000/gemcitabine regardless of resection status. Conclusion: These results justify continued investigation of GI-4000 in studies stratified for likely responders or in combination with immune check-point inhibitors or other immunomodulators, which may provide optimal reactivation of antitumor immunity. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT00300950.

Efficacy and safety of ofatumumab and bendamustine followed by ofatumumab maintenance in patients with relapsed indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma after prior rituximab.

In indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (iNHL), patients treated with rituximab, alone or in combination with various chemotherapeutic agents eventually relapse. This study evaluated the combination of ofatumumab and bendamustine, followed by maintenance ofatumumab in patients with relapsed iNHL with prior sensitivity to rituximab. Among the 49 patients enrolled, 24.5% achieved a complete response (CR) and 42.9% achieved a partial response (PR), with an overall response rate of 67.3% at the end of the induction therapy. Additionally, six patients with PR during induction phase achieved CR during the maintenance phase. Treatment-related adverse event was observed in 95.9% patients. The most common hematologic and biochemical abnormalities were decrease in lymphocytes (85.7%) and increase in glucose (91.8%), respectively. Overall, 42.9% progressed and 14.3% died during the study. Thus, ofatumumab in combination with bendamustine, followed by ofatumumab maintenance, was effective in the treatment of patients with iNHL with a manageable safety profile (NCT01294579).

Phase I Study of Elacestrant (RAD1901), a Novel Selective Estrogen Receptor Degrader, in ER-Positive, HER2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: This phase I study (RAD1901-005; NCT02338349) evaluated elacestrant, an investigational oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD), in heavily pretreated women with estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer, including those with estrogen receptor gene alpha (ESR1) mutation. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose and/or recommended phase II dose (RP2D). METHODS: The study consisted of a 3 + 3 design (elacestrant capsules) followed by expansion at RP2D (400-mg capsules, then 400-mg tablets) for the evaluation of safety and antitumor activity. Elacestrant was taken once daily until progression or intolerability. RESULTS: Of 57 postmenopausal women enrolled, 50 received RP2D (400 mg once daily): median age, 63 years; median three prior anticancer therapies, including cyclin-dependent kinase 4,6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i; 52%), SERD (52%), and ESR1 mutation (circulating tumor DNA; 50%). No dose-limiting toxicities occurred; the most common adverse events at RP2D (400-mg tablet; n = 24) were nausea (33.3%) and increased blood triglycerides and decreased blood phosphorus (25.0% each). Most adverse events were grade 1-2 in severity. The objective response rate was 19.4% (n = 31 evaluable patients receiving RP2D), 15.0% in patients with prior SERD, 16.7% in patients with prior CDK4/6i, and 33.3% in patients with ESR1 mutation (n = 5/15). The clinical benefit rate (24-week) was 42.6% overall (n = 47 patients receiving RP2D), 56.5% (n = 23, ESR1 mutation), and 30.4% (n = 23, prior CDK4/6i). Elacestrant clinical benefit was associated with decline in ESR1 mutant allele fraction. CONCLUSION: Elacestrant 400 mg orally once daily has an acceptable safety profile and demonstrated single-agent activity with confirmed partial responses in heavily pretreated patients with estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer. Notably, responses were observed in patients with ESR1 mutation as well as those with prior CDK4/6i and prior SERD. A phase III trial investigating elacestrant versus standard endocrine therapy is ongoing.

A Phase Ib multicenter, dose-escalation study of the polyamine analogue PG-11047 in combination with gemcitabine, docetaxel, bevacizumab, erlotinib, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil, or sunitinib in patients with advanced solid tumors or lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Polyamines are absolutely essential for maintaining tumor cell proliferation. PG-11047, a polyamine analogue, is a nonfunctional competitor of the natural polyamine spermine that has demonstrated anticancer activity in cells and animal models of multiple cancer types. Preclinical investigations into the effects of common chemotherapeutic agents have revealed overlap with components of the polyamine metabolic pathway also affected by PG-11047. This report describes a Phase Ib clinical trial investigating PG-11047 in combination with cytotoxic and anti-angiogenic chemotherapeutic agents in patients with advanced refractory metastatic solid tumors or lymphoma. METHODS: A total of 172 patients were assigned to treatment arms based on cancer type to receive the appropriate standard-of-care therapy (gemcitabine, docetaxel, bevacizumab, erlotinib, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), or sunitinib as directed) along with once weekly intravenous infusions of PG-11047. PG-11047 dose escalation ranged from 50 to 590 mg. RESULTS: The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of PG-11047 in combination with bevacizumab, erlotinib, cisplatin, and 5-FU was 590 mg. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) in these groups were rare (5 of 148 patients). Overall partial responses (PR) were observed in 12% of patients treated with PG-11047 and bevacizumab, with stable disease documented in an additional 40%. Stable disease occurred in 71.4% of patients in the 5-FU arm, 54.1% in the cisplatin arm, and 33.3% in the erlotinib arm. Four of the patients receiving cisplatin + PG-11047 (20%) had unconfirmed PRs. MTDs for gemcitabine, docetaxel, and sunitinib could not be determined due to DLTs at low doses of PG-11047 and small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this Phase Ib trial indicate that PG-11047 can be safely administered to patients in combination with bevacizumab, erlotinib, cisplatin, and 5-FU on the once weekly dosing schedule described and may provide therapeutic benefit. The manageable toxicity profile and high MTD determination provide a safety profile for further clinical studies.

Correction to: Phase Ib Trial of the PI3K Inhibitor Copanlisib Combined with the Allosteric MEK Inhibitor Refametinib in Patients with Advanced Cancer.

The article Phase Ib Trial of the PI3K Inhibitor Copanlisib Combined with the Allosteric MEK Inhibitor Refametinib in Patients with Advanced Cancer.

Phase Ib clinical trial of the anti-frizzled antibody vantictumab (OMP-18R5) plus paclitaxel in patients with locally advanced or metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Vantictumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds to frizzled (FZD) receptors and inhibits canonical WNT signaling. This phase Ib dose escalation study enrolled patients with locally recurrent or metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer who were treated with weekly paclitaxel in combination with escalating doses of vantictumab. METHODS: Patients were enrolled in dose escalation cohorts treated with weekly paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15 in combination with vantictumab 3.5-14 mg/kg days 1 and 15 or 3-8 mg/kg day 1 of every 28-day cycle. Primary endpoints were safety, dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetics, efficacy and an exploratory biomarker analysis. RESULTS: Forty-eight female patients with a mean age of 54 were enrolled. The majority (66.6%) received prior chemotherapy for recurrent or metastatic disease; 45.8% were hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative and 54.2% triple-negative. The most frequent adverse events related to any study treatment were nausea (54.2%), alopecia (52.1%), fatigue (47.9%), and peripheral neuropathy (43.8%). No DLTs occurred; however, 6 patients experienced fractures outside of the DLT window. The overall response rate was 31.3% and the clinical benefit rate was 68.8%. A 6-gene WNT pathway signature showed significant association with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the biomarker high versus biomarker low groups (PFS: p = 0.029 and OS: p = 0.00045, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of vantictumab and weekly paclitaxel was generally well tolerated with promising efficacy; however, the incidence of fractures limits future clinical development of this particular WNT inhibitor in metastatic breast cancer. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT01973309.

Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel with necuparanib or placebo in untreated metastatic pancreas ductal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Necuparanib, a rationally engineered low-molecular-weight heparin, combined with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel showed an encouraging safety and oncologic signal in a phase Ib trial. This randomised multicentre phase II trial evaluates the addition of necuparanib or placebo to gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in untreated metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility included 18 years, histologically or cytologically confirmed metastatic PDAC, measurable disease and Eastern Co-Operative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1. Patients were randomly assigned to necuparanib (5 mg/kg subcutaneous injection once daily) or placebo (subcutaneous injection once daily) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel on days 1, 8 and 15 of 28-day cycles. The primary end-point was median overall survival (OS), and secondary end-points included median progression-free survival, response rates and safety. RESULTS: One-hundred ten patients were randomised, 62 to necuparanib arm and 58 to placebo arm. The futility boundary was crossed at a planned interim analysis, and the study was terminated by the Data Safety Monitoring Board. The median OS was 10.71 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.95-11.96) for necuparanib arm and 9.99 months (95% CI: 7.85-12.85) for placebo arm (hazard ratio: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.66-1.89, P-value: 0.671). The necuparanib arm had a higher incidence of haematologic toxicity relative to placebo patients (83% and 70%). CONCLUSION: The addition of necuparanib to standard of care treatment for advanced PDAC did not improve OS. Safety was acceptable. No further development of necuparanib is planned although targeting the coagulation cascade pathway remains relevant in PDAC. NCT01621243.

Phase Ib Trial of the PI3K Inhibitor Copanlisib Combined with the Allosteric MEK Inhibitor Refametinib in Patients with Advanced Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Dual inhibition of PI3K and MAPK signaling is conceptually a promising anticancer therapy. OBJECTIVE: This phase 1b trial investigated the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended phase II dose, pharmacokinetics, tumor response, fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) pharmacodynamics, and biomarker explorations for the combination of pan-PI3K inhibitor copanlisib and allosteric MEK inhibitor refametinib in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was an adaptive trial with eight dose cohorts combining dose escalation and varying schedules in repeated 28-day cycles. Patients received copanlisib (0.2-0.8 mg/kg intravenously) intermittently (days 1, 8, 15) or weekly (days 1, 8, 15, 22) each cycle, and refametinib (30-50 mg twice daily orally) continuously or 4 days on/3 days off. Patients with KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, or PI3KCA mutations were eligible for the expansion cohort. RESULTS: In the dose-escalation (n = 49) and expansion (n = 15) cohorts, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events included diarrhea (59.4%), nausea, acneiform rash, and fatigue (51.6% each). Dose-limiting toxicities included oral mucositis (n = 4), increased alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase (n = 3), rash acneiform, hypertension (n = 2 each), and diarrhea (n = 1). MTD was copanlisib 0.4 mg/kg weekly and refametinib 30 mg twice daily. No pharmacokinetic interactions were identified. Decreased tumor FDG uptake and MEK-ERK signaling inhibition were demonstrated during treatment. Best response was stable disease (n = 21); median treatment duration was 6 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Despite sound rationale and demonstrable pharmacodynamic tumor activity in relevant tumor populations, a dose and schedule could not be identified for this drug combination that was both tolerable and offered clear efficacy in the population assessed. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01392521.

Trilaciclib plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Trilaciclib is an intravenous cell-cycle inhibitor that transiently maintains immune cells and haemopoietic stem and progenitor cells in G1 arrest. By protecting the immune cells and bone marrow from chemotherapy-induced damage, trilaciclib has the potential to optimise antitumour activity while minimising myelotoxicity. We report safety and activity data for trilaciclib plus gemcitabine and carboplatin chemotherapy in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 2 study, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with evaluable, biopsy-confirmed, locally recurrent or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer who had no more than two previous lines of chemotherapy were recruited from 26 sites in the USA, three in Serbia, two in North Macedonia, one in Croatia, and one in Bulgaria; sites were academic and community hospitals. Availability of diagnostic samples of tumour tissue confirming triple-negative breast cancer was a prerequisite for enrolment. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by an interactive web-response system, stratified by number of previous lines of systemic therapy and the presence of liver metastases, to receive intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 and intravenous carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve 2 µg × h/mL) on days 1 and 8 (group 1), gemcitabine and carboplatin plus intravenous trilaciclib 240 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 (group 2), or gemcitabine and carboplatin on days 2 and 9 plus trilaciclib on days 1, 2, 8, and 9 (group 3) of 21-day cycles. Patients continued treatment until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or discontinuation by the investigator. The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of combining trilaciclib with gemcitabine and carboplatin chemotherapy. The primary endpoints were duration of severe neutropenia during cycle 1 and the occurrence of severe neutropenia during the treatment period. Overall survival was included as a key secondary endpoint. Analyses were in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with EudraCT, 2016-004466-26, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02978716, and is ongoing but closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Feb 7, 2017, and May 15, 2018, 142 patients were assessed for eligibility and 102 were randomly assigned to group 1 (n=34), group 2 (n=33), or group 3 (n=35). Of all patients, 38 (37%) had received one or two lines of previous chemotherapy in the metastatic setting. Median follow-up was 8·4 months (IQR 3·8-13·6) for group 1, 12·7 months (5·5-17·4) for group 2, and 12·9 months (6·7-16·8) for group 3. Data cutoff for myelosuppression endpoints was July 30, 2018, and for antitumour activity endpoints was May 17, 2019. During cycle 1, mean duration of severe neutropenia was 0·8 day (SD 2·4) in group 1, 1·5 days (3·5) in group 2, and 1·0 day (2·6) in group 3 (group 3 vs group 1 one-sided adjusted p=0·70). Severe neutropenia occurred in nine (26%) of 34 patients in group 1, 12 (36%) of 33 patients in group 2, and eight (23%) of 35 patients in group 3 (p=0·70). Overall survival was 12·6 months (IQR 5·8-15·6) in group 1, 20·1 months (9·4-not reached) in group 2, and 17·8 months (8·8-not reached) in group 3 (group 3 vs group 1 two-sided p=0·0023). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (22 [73%] of 34), neutropenia (21 [70%]), and thrombocytopenia (18 [60%]) in group 1; neutropenia (27 [82%] of 33), thrombocytopenia (18 [55%]) and anaemia (17 [52%]) in group 2; and neutropenia (23 [66%] of 35), thrombocytopenia (22 [63%]), and nausea (17 [49%]) in group 3. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: No significant differences were observed in myelosuppression endpoints with trilaciclib plus gemcitabine and carboplatin in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer; however, the regimen was generally well tolerated and overall survival results were encouraging. Further studies of trilaciclib in this setting are warranted. FUNDING: G1 Therapeutics.

Efficacy and Safety of Ribociclib With Letrozole in US Patients Enrolled in the MONALEESA-2 Study.

BACKGROUND: In the Mammary Oncology Assessment of LEE011's (Ribociclib's) Efficacy and Safety (MONALEESA-2) study, combination treatment with the selective inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases 4/6 ribociclib with letrozole significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus letrozole alone in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC). Herein we present results from the subset of US patients enrolled in MONALEESA-2. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- ABC without previous treatment for advanced disease were randomized (1:1) to ribociclib 600 mg/d (3 weeks on/1 week off) with letrozole 2.5 mg/d (continuous) or placebo with letrozole. The primary end point was locally assessed PFS. RESULTS: Overall, 213 US patients were enrolled in MONALEESA-2 (ribociclib, n = 100; placebo, n = 113). Baseline characteristics were similar between treatment groups and consistent with the global population. With a median follow-up of 27 months, 38 (38%) and 29 (26%) patients in the ribociclib and placebo groups, respectively, had continued to receive treatment. Median PFS was 27.6 months with ribociclib and 15.0 months with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.53). The most common all-cause adverse events were neutropenia (ribociclib, 72.0% [n = 72]; placebo, 4.6% [n = 5]), nausea (ribociclib, 69.0% [n = 69]; placebo, 44.0% [n = 48]), and fatigue (ribociclib, 60.0% [n = 60]; placebo, 50.5% [n = 55]). Two patients (ribociclib, 2.0%; placebo, 0%) experienced febrile neutropenia. CONCLUSION: In the US subset of MONALEESA-2, ribociclib with letrozole showed superior efficacy versus letrozole alone. These findings are consistent with the global population and support first-line use of ribociclib with letrozole in patients with HR+/HER2- ABC.

LY2495655, an antimyostatin antibody, in pancreatic cancer: a randomized, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cachexia is a formidable clinical challenge in pancreatic cancer. We assessed LY2495655 (antimyostatin antibody) plus standard-of-care chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer using cachexia status as a stratifier. METHODS: In this randomized, phase 2 trial, patients with stage II-IV pancreatic cancer were randomized to 300 mg LY2495655, 100 mg LY2495655, or placebo, plus physician-choice chemotherapy from a prespecified list of standard-of-care regimens for first and later lines of care. Investigational treatment was continued during second-line treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival. RESULTS: Overall, 125 patients were randomized. In August 2014, 300 mg LY2495655 was terminated due to imbalance in death rates between the treatment arms; in January 2015, 100 mg LY2495655 treatment was terminated due to futility. LY2495655 did not improve overall survival: the hazard ratio was 1.70 (90% confidence interval, 1.1-2.7) for 300 mg vs. placebo and 1.3 (0.82-2.1) for 100 mg vs. placebo (recommended doses). Progression-free survival results were consistent with the overall survival results. A numerically higher hazard ratio was observed in patients with weight loss (WL) of ≥5% (cachexia) than with <5% WL within 6 months before randomization. Subgroup analyses for patients stratified by WL in the 6 months preceding enrollment suggested that functional responses to LY2495655 (either dose) may have been superior in patients with <5% WL vs. patients with ≥5% WL. Among possibly drug-related adverse events, fatigue, diarrhoea, and anorexia were more common in LY2495655-treated than in placebo-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, LY2495655 did not confer clinical benefit in pancreatic cancer. Our data highlight the importance of assessing survival when investigating therapeutic management of cachexia and support the use of WL as a stratifier (independent of performance status).