Search

Purpose: Patients with advanced tumors enrolled in phase I trials display strong treatment expectations and few therapeutic alternatives. When oligoacquired resistance (OAR; ≤3 lesions of disease progression) occurs, local ablative stereotactic radiation therapy (SRT) could allow disease control and continuing the experimental systemic treatment., Methods and Materials: Data from patients enrolled in phase I trials evaluating systemic treatments, who experienced OAR while on the phase I systemic therapy and subsequently received SRT between January 2014 and April 2023, were retrospectively analyzed. Progression-free survival (PFS)1 (trial entry to OAR), PFS2 (SRT to first subsequent relapse), time to next systemic treatment (TTNT), and overall survival (OS) were assessed. First subsequent patterns of relapse after SRT were distinguished as OAR2, which could be locally rechallenged, or systemic acquired resistance (SAR; >3 lesions of disease progression). When available, correlations between molecular profile and pathway enrichments of OAR and SAR were explored., Results: Forty-two patients with 52 oligoprogressive lesions were analyzed. The median follow-up was 24 months. SRT allowed a median PFS2 of 7.1 months and a median TTNT of 12.8 months. PFS2 included 49% OAR2 and 51% SAR. Median time to first subsequent relapse (9.6 vs 3.5 months; P = .014) and TTNT (22.4 vs 7.6 months; P < .001) were longer for OAR2 compared with that for SAR. No severe toxicities were reported. A PFS1 of <6 months and de novo oligoprogressive lesions were associated with the presence of SAR. More diverse enriched gene pathways were observed for SAR compared with that for OAR2., Conclusions: In patients enrolled in phase I trials, OAR managed with SRT may increase time on investigational systemic treatments. Predictive factors reflecting tumor aggressiveness and clonal heterogeneity could help deciphering OAR2 from SAR and maximize SRT output in the oligoprogressive setting., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) is a lethal cancer, with limited therapeutic options. Large-scale studies in early settings provided critical insights into the genomic and transcriptomic characteristics of non-metastatic UC. The genomic landscape of mUC remains however unclear. Using Whole Exome (WES) and mRNA sequencing (RNA-seq) performed on metastatic biopsies from 111 patients, we show that driver genomic alterations from mUC were comparable to primary UC (TCGA data). APOBEC, platin, and HRD mutational signatures are the most prevalent in mUC, identified in 56%, 14%, and 9% of mUC samples, respectively. Molecular subtyping using consensus transcriptomic classification in mUC shows enrichment in neuroendocrine subtype. Paired samples analysis reveals subtype heterogeneity and temporal evolution. We identify potential therapeutic targets in 73% of mUC patients, of which FGFR3 (26%), ERBB2 (7%), TSC1 (7%), and PIK3CA (13%) are the most common. NECTIN4 and TACSTD2 are highly expressed regardless of molecular subtypes, FGFR3 alterations and sites of metastases., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: High-throughput sequencing techniques have revolutionized oncology. Paired germline-tumor DNA analysis has emerged as a comprehensive strategy to uncover actionable alterations in advanced cancer patients (ACP) enrolled in precision oncology trials. However, challenges persist in variant interpretation and managing incidental germline findings., Methods: We conducted a study involving 288 ACP from MOSCATO (NCT01566019) and MATCHR (NCT02517892) trials to assess germline variants impacting cancer-related genes. Germline DNA sequencing was performed using a panel of 250 cancer-related genes, and the results were discussed during tumor molecular board sessions., Results: Germline pathogenic variants (PV) were classified according to the ESCAT classification. Lung cancer (36.8 %), followed by prostate (18.4 %) and breast cancer (17.7 %), comprised the most prevalent tumor types. PVs were found in 12.5 % of patients. Most PVs were classified as ESCAT X (63.9 %), highlighting limited therapeutic actionability. Notably,2 % of patients had actionable variants (ESCAT I-A/II-A). Incidental findings included 7.3 % of patients with PVs in cancer-predisposition genes, with 2.4 % having very high-risk potential, necessitating mandatory oncogenetic counseling. Nearly one in five patients (21.9 %) had at least one VUS., Discussion: Our study underscores the significance of germline sequencing in identifying actionable alterations and the need for improved variant interpretation as well as pretest counseling plans in precision oncology trials., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Early-phases clinical trials (Phases 1 and 2) have evolved from a traditional assessment of toxicity to an adaptive approach based on patients' medical needs and access to effective new therapies. The global risks, benefits, and relevance of early-phases clinical trials participation for patients with hematological malignancies remain poorly evaluated., Patients and Methods: All early-phases clinical trials participations for patients with hematological malignancies, from 2008 to 2023, in a tertiary academic center in Europe, were reviewed. Patient's demographics, tumor type categories, therapeutic responses, mortality, overall survival (OS), and investigational product (IP) were assessed., Results: Over the period 2008-2023, 736 patients participating in 92 different early-phases clinical trials, were analyzed. The most common tumor categories were diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (n = 253; 34.4%), acute myeloid leukemia/myelodysplastic syndrome (n = 164; 22.3%) and multiple myeloma (n = 100; 13.6%). The median OS was 14.8 (95% CI: 12.4-17.9) months and response rate 31.9%, including complete responses in 13.5% of patients. By tumor categories, the highest and lowest median duration of OS were observed for patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (99.8; [95% CI: 47.0-not reached] months) and peripheral T-cell lymphoma (8.9 [95% CI: 5.3-12.0] months), respectively. The on-protocol and treatment-related mortality rates were 5.43% and 0.54%, respectively. Overall response rate was 29.1% including 13.5% of complete response. Overall, 202 (27.5%) patients received an IP later approved by the health authorities, and those patients had better OS (18.2 months vs. 12.1 months HR: 1.160 [95% CI; 0.6977-1.391], p = 0.0283)., Conclusion: In conclusion, patients with hematologic malignancies who have participated in early-phases clinical trials over the past 15 years have achieved variable therapeutic response rates, acceptable risk/benefit ratio and potentially significant therapeutic advantages. This study provides framework material for hematologists to further discuss clinical trial participation with their patients., (© 2024 The Author(s). European Journal of Haematology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) involves measuring and interpreting drug concentrations in biological fluids to adjust drug dosages. In onco-hematology, TDM guidelines for oral molecular targeted therapies (oMTTs) are varied. This study evaluates a quantitative approach with a score to predict the clinical usefulness of TDM for oMTTs. We identified key parameters for an oMTT's suitability for TDM from standard TDM recommendations. We gathered oMTT pharmacological data, which covered exposure variability (considering pharmacokinetic (PK) impact of food and proton pump inhibitors), technical intricacy (PK linearity and active metabolites), efficacy (exposure-response relationship), and safety (maximum tolerated dose, and exposure-safety relationship). To assess the validity and the relevance of the score and define relevant thresholds, we evaluated molecules with prospective validation or strong recommendations for TDM, both in oncology and in other fields. By September 1, 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved 67 oMTTs for onco-hematological indications. Scores ranged from 15 (acalabrutinib) to 80 (sunitinib) with an average of 48.3 and a standard deviation of 15.6. Top scorers included sunitinib, sorafenib, cabozantinib, nilotinib, and abemaciclib. Based on scores, drugs were categorized into low (< 40), intermediate (≥ 40 and < 60), and high (≥ 60) relevance for TDM. Notably, negative controls generally scored around or under 40, whereas positive controls had a high score across different indications. In this work, we propose a quantitative and reproducible score to compare the potential usefulness of TDM for oMTTs. Future guidelines should prioritize the TDM for molecules with the highest score., (© 2024 The Authors. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics © 2024 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Activated guided irradiation by X-ray (AGuIX) nanoparticles are gadolinium-based agents that have the dual benefit of mimicking the effects of a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) contrast agent used in a clinical routine and enhancing the radiotherapeutic activity of conventional X-rays (for cancer treatment). This "theragnostic" action is explained on the one hand by the paramagnetic properties of gadolinium and on the other hand by the generation of high densities of secondary radiation following the interaction of ionizing radiation and high-Z atoms, which leads to enhanced radiation dose deposits within the tumors where the nanoparticles accumulate. Here, we report the results of a phase I trial that aimed to assess the safety and determine the optimal dose of AGuIX nanoparticles in combination with chemoradiation and brachytherapy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. AGuIX nanoparticles were administered intravenously and appropriately accumulated within tumors on a dose-dependent manner, as assessed by T 1 -weighted MRI, with a rapid urinary clearance of uncaught nanoparticles. We show that the observed tumor accumulation of the compounds can support precise delineation of functional target volumes at the time of brachytherapy based on gadolinium enhancement. AGuIX nanoparticles combined with chemoradiation appeared well tolerated among the 12 patients treated, with no dose-limiting toxicity observed. Treatment yielded excellent local control, with all patients achieving complete remission of the primary tumor. One patient had a distant tumor recurrence. These results demonstrate the clinical feasibility of using theranostic nanoparticles to augment the accuracy of MRI-based treatments while focally enhancing the radiation activity in tumors.

T-cell engagers (TCE) are cancer immunotherapies that have recently demonstrated meaningful benefit for patients with hematological malignancies and solid tumors. The anticipated widespread use of T cell engagers poses implementation challenges and highlights the need for guidance to anticipate, mitigate, and manage adverse events. By mobilizing T-cells directly at the contact of tumor cells, TCE mount an obligatory and immediate anti-tumor immune response that could result in diverse reactions and adverse events. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) is the most common reaction and is largely confined to the first drug administrations during step-up dosage. Cytokine release syndrome should be distinguished from infusion related reaction by clinical symptoms, timing to occurrence, pathophysiological aspects, and clinical management. Other common reactions and adverse events with TCE are immune effector Cell-Associated Neurotoxicity Syndrome (ICANS), infections, tumor flare reaction and cytopenias. The toxicity profiles of TCE and CAR-T cells have commonalities and distinctions that we sum-up in this review. As compared with CAR-T cells, TCE are responsible for less frequently severe CRS or ICANS. This review recapitulates terminology, pathophysiology, severity grading system and management of reactions and adverse events related to TCE., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Jean-Marie Michot (JMM) declare conflict of interest outside of the considered work, as being principal/sub-Investigator of clinical trials for Abbvie, Adaptimmune, Adlai Nortye USA Inc, Aduro Biotech, Agios Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Astex Pharmaceuticals, Astra Zeneca Ab, Aveo, Basilea Pharmaceutica International Ltd, Bayer Healthcare Ag, Bbb Technologies Bv, Beigene, BicycleTx Ltd, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ca, Casi Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Celgene Corporation, Cellcentric, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co, Cullinan-Apollo, Curevarc, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eisai, Eisai Limited, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, Faron Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Forma Tharapeutics, Gamamabs, Genentech, Glaxosmithkline, H3 Biomedicine, Hoffmann La Roche Ag, Imcheck Therapeutics, Incyte Corporation, Innate Pharma, Institut De Recherche Pierre Fabre, Iris Servier, Iteos Belgium SA, Janssen Cilag, Janssen Research Foundation, Janssen R&D LLC, Kura Oncology, Kyowa Kirin Pharm. Dev, Lilly France, Loxo Oncology, Medimmune, Menarini Ricerche, Merck Sharp & Dohme Chibret, Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Merus, Molecular Partners Ag, Nanobiotix, Nektar Therapeutics, Novartis Pharma, Octimet Oncology Nv, Oncoethix, Oncopeptides, Orion Pharma, Genomics, Ose Pharma, Pfizer, Pharma Mar, Pierre Fabre Medicament, Regeneron, Relay Therapeutics, Inc, Roche, Sanofi Aventis, Seattle Genetics, Sotio A.S, Syros Pharmaceuticals, Taiho Pharma, Tesaro, Transgene S.A, Turning Point Therapeutics, Xencor. JMM declare conflict of interest outside of the considered work, research grants from Astex pharmaceuticals. JMM declare conflict of interest outside of the considered work, personal fees (fees paid for services rendered, generally honoraria, royalties or fees for consulting, lectures, speakers bureaus, expert testimony, employment, ad-boards, etc.) from: Ideogen, Glaxosmithkline, MSD, Therakos/Mallinckrodt, Regeneron. Thomas Hueso (TH) declare conflict of interest outside of the considered work, as being principal/sub-Investigator of clinical trials for Abbvie, Adaptimmune, Adlai Nortye USA Inc, Aduro Biotech, Agios Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Astex Pharmaceuticals, Astra Zeneca Ab, Aveo, Basilea Pharmaceutica International Ltd, Bayer Healthcare Ag, Bbb Technologies Bv, Beigene, BicycleTx Ltd, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ca, Casi Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Celgene Corporation, Cellcentric, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co, Cullinan-Apollo, Curevarc, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eisai, Eisai Limited, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, Faron Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Forma Tharapeutics, Gamamabs, Genentech, Glaxosmithkline, H3 Biomedicine, Hoffmann La Roche Ag, Imcheck Therapeutics, Incyte Corporation, Innate Pharma, Institut De Recherche Pierre Fabre, Iris Servier, Iteos Belgium SA, Janssen Cilag, Janssen Research Foundation, Janssen R&D LLC, Kura Oncology, Kyowa Kirin Pharm. Dev, Lilly France, Loxo Oncology, Medimmune, Menarini Ricerche, Merck Sharp & Dohme Chibret, Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Merus, Molecular Partners Ag, Nanobiotix, Nektar Therapeutics, Novartis Pharma, Octimet Oncology Nv, Oncoethix, Oncopeptides, Orion Pharma, Genomics, Ose Pharma, Pfizer, Pharma Mar, Pierre Fabre Medicament, Regeneron, Relay Therapeutics, Inc, Roche, Sanofi Aventis, Seattle Genetics, Sotio A.S, Syros Pharmaceuticals, Taiho Pharma, Tesaro, Transgene S.A, Turning Point Therapeutics, Xencor. Arthur Geraud (AG) declare conflict of interest outside of the considered work, as being principal/sub-Investigator of clinical trials for Abbvie, Adaptimmune, Adlai Nortye USA Inc, Aduro Biotech, Agios Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Astex Pharmaceuticals, Astra Zeneca Ab, Aveo, Basilea Pharmaceutica International Ltd, Bayer Healthcare Ag, Bbb Technologies Bv, Beigene, BicycleTx Ltd, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ca, Casi Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Celgene Corporation, Cellcentric, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co, Cullinan-Apollo, Curevarc, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eisai, Eisai Limited, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, Faron Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Forma Tharapeutics, Gamamabs, Genentech, Glaxosmithkline, H3 Biomedicine, Hoffmann La Roche Ag, Imcheck Therapeutics, Incyte Corporation, Innate Pharma, Institut De Recherche Pierre Fabre, Iris Servier, Iteos Belgium SA, Janssen Cilag, Janssen Research Foundation, Janssen R&D LLC, Kura Oncology, Kyowa Kirin Pharm. Dev, Lilly France, Loxo Oncology, Medimmune, Menarini Ricerche, Merck Sharp & Dohme Chibret, Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Merus, Molecular Partners Ag, Nanobiotix, Nektar Therapeutics, Novartis Pharma, Octimet Oncology Nv, Oncoethix, Oncopeptides, Orion Pharma, Genomics, Ose Pharma, Pfizer, Pharma Mar, Pierre Fabre Medicament, Regeneron, Relay Therapeutics, Inc, Roche, Sanofi Aventis, Seattle Genetics, Sotio A.S, Syros Pharmaceuticals, Taiho Pharma, Tesaro, Transgene S.A, Turning Point Therapeutics, Xencor. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Genomic studies have identified new subsets of aggressive prostate cancer (PCa) with poor prognosis (eg, neuroendocrine prostate cancer [NEPC], PCa with DNA damage response [DDR] alterations, or PCa resistant to androgen receptor pathway inhibitors [ARPIs]). Development of novel therapies relies on the availability of relevant preclinical models., Objective: To develop new preclinical models (patient-derived xenograft [PDX], PDX-derived organoid [PDXO], and patient-derived organoid [PDO]) representative of the most aggressive variants of PCa and to develop a new drug evaluation strategy., Design, Setting, and Participants: NEPC (n = 5), DDR (n = 7), and microsatellite instability (MSI)-high (n = 1) PDXs were established from 51 patients with metastatic PCa; PDXOs (n = 16) and PDOs (n = 6) were developed to perform drug screening. Histopathology and treatment response were characterized. Molecular profiling was performed by whole-exome sequencing (WES; n = 13), RNA sequencing (RNA-seq; n = 13), and single-cell RNA-seq (n = 14). WES and RNA-seq data from patient tumors were compared with the models., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Relationships with outcome were analyzed using the multivariable chi-square test and the tumor growth inhibition test., Results and Limitations: Our PDXs captured both common and rare molecular phenotypes and their molecular drivers, including alterations of BRCA2, CDK12, MSI-high status, and NEPC. RNA-seq profiling demonstrated broad representation of PCa subtypes. Single-cell RNA-seq indicates that PDXs reproduce cellular and molecular intratumor heterogeneity. WES of matched patient tumors showed preservation of most genetic driver alterations. PDXOs and PDOs preserve drug sensitivity of the matched tissue and can be used to determine drug sensitivity., Conclusions: Our models reproduce the phenotypic and genomic features of both common and aggressive PCa variants and capture their molecular heterogeneity. Successfully developed aggressive-variant PCa preclinical models provide an important tool for predicting tumor response to anticancer therapy and studying resistance mechanisms., Patient Summary: In this report, we looked at the outcomes of preclinical models from patients with metastatic prostate cancer enrolled in the MATCH-R trial (NCT02517892)., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Purpose: With liquid biopsy's widespread adoption in oncology, an increased number of clonal hematopoiesis-associated mutations (CHm) have been identified in patients with solid tumors. However, its impact on patient outcomes remains unclear. This study aimed to analyze and describe CHm in a cohort of phase I patients., Methods: Retrospective data collection from medical records and molecular profiles (Foundation One Liquid CDx Assay) was performed before first study drug administration at the Drug Development Department of Gustave Roussy (France) within the STING trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04932525). CHm prevalence was assessed using any and ≥1% variant allele frequency (VAF) in epigenetic modifier genes ( DNMT3A , TET2 , and ASXL1 )., Results: From January 2021 to December 2022, 255 patients were enrolled in a phase I clinical trial. A total of 55% were male, with a median age of 62 years (24-86). Principal tumor locations were GI (27%) and genitourinary (21%). Overall, 104 patients (41%) had at least one CHm in liquid biopsy, with 55 patients (22%) having a VAF of ≥ 1%. The most frequent mutation was DNMT3A 73% at any VAF (n = 76) and 22% at 1% VAF (n = 23). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 3.8 months (m) for the CHm group versus 3.2 m for nonclonal hematopoiesis (CH; P = .08) and 18.26 m CHm versus 15.8 m non-CH ( P = .9), respectively. PFS increased in the CHm population treated with targeted therapy (hazard ratio, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.84]; P = .004)., Conclusion: CHm was commonly found in patients with solid tumors treated in phase I trials, with a prevalence of 41% in our cohort. The most frequently mutated gene was DNMT3A . The presence of CHm had no impact on the population of patients treated in the phase I trials.

Background: Immuno-radiotherapy may improve outcomes for patients with advanced solid tumors, although optimized combination modalities remain unclear. Here, we report the colorectal (CRC) cohort analysis from the SABR-PDL1 trial that evaluated the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab in combination with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in advanced cancer patients., Methods: Eligible patients received atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks until progression or unmanageable toxicity, together with ablative SBRT delivered concurrently with the 2nd cycle (recommended dose of 45 Gy in 3 fractions, adapted upon normal tissue tolerance constraint). SBRT was delivered to at least one tumor site, with at least one additional measurable lesion being kept from the radiation field. The primary efficacy endpoint was one-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate from the start of atezolizumab. Sequential tumor biopsies were collected for deep multi-feature immune profiling., Results: Sixty pretreated (median of 2 prior lines) advanced CRC patients (38 men [63%]; median age, 59 years [range, 20-81 years]; 77% with liver metastases) were enrolled in five centers (France: n = 4, Spain: n = 1) from 11/2016 to 04/2019. All but one (98%) received atezolizumab and 54/60 (90%) received SBRT. The most frequently irradiated site was lung (n = 30/54; 56.3%). Treatment-related G3 (no G4-5) toxicity was observed in 3 (5%) patients. Median OS and PFS were respectively 8.4 [95%CI:5.9-11.6] and 1.4 months [95%CI:1.2-2.6], including five (9%) patients with PFS > 1 year (median time to progression: 19.2 months, including 2/5 MMR-proficient). Best overall responses consisted of stable disease (n = 38; 64%), partial (n = 3; 5%) and complete response (n = 1; 2%). Immune-centric multiplex IHC and RNAseq showed that SBRT redirected immune cells towards tumor lesions, even in the case of radio-induced lymphopenia. Baseline tumor PD-L1 and IRF1 nuclear expression (both in CD3 + T cells and in CD68 + cells) were higher in responding patients. Upregulation of genes that encode for proteins known to increase T and B cell trafficking to tumors (CCL19, CXCL9), migration (MACF1) and tumor cell killing (GZMB) correlated with responses., Conclusions: This study provides new data on the feasibility, efficacy, and immune context of tumors that may help identifying advanced CRC patients most likely to respond to immuno-radiotherapy., Trial Registration: EudraCT N°: 2015-005464-42; Clinicaltrial.gov number: NCT02992912., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

More than half of cancer cases occur in patients aged 65 years or older. The efficacy and safety of antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) in older patients remains an unclear subject as available evidence is limited. Geriatric population is underrepresented in clinical trials. Consequently, most of our knowledge regarding innovative therapeutics was studied on a younger population. In this review of published literature, we report the available information on efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of FDA approved ADCs for hematologic malignancies and solid tumors in the geriatric population. We explore the results of clinical trials dedicated for older individuals as well as subgroup analyses of the geriatric population in major trials evaluating these drugs. Available data suggest a similar efficacy in older adults as compared to general population. However, older patients might be prone to a higher rate of adverse events in incidence with a potential impact on quality of life. We lack data to support primary dose reductions or schedule modifications in this category of patients. No pharmacokinetic differences were reported between age groups. It is crucial to encourage the development of clinical trials dedicated to older patients with geriatric parameters (G8 score, G-CODE…) so that results can be more representative of this population outside of clinical trials., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The androgen receptor axis inhibitors (ARPI; e.g., enzalutamide, abiraterone acetate) are administered in daily practice for men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, not all patients respond, and mechanisms of both primary and acquired resistance remain largely unknown., Experimental Design: In the prospective trial MATCH-R (NCT02517892), 59 patients with mCRPC underwent whole-exome sequencing (WES) and/or RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) of samples collected before starting ARPI. Also, 18 patients with mCRPC underwent biopsy at time of resistance. The objectives were to identify genomic alterations associated with resistance to ARPIs as well as to describe clonal evolution. Associations of genomic and transcriptomic alterations with primary resistance were determined using Wilcoxon and Fisher exact tests., Results: WES analysis indicated that no single-gene genomic alterations were strongly associated with primary resistance. RNA-seq analysis showed that androgen receptor (AR) gene alterations and expression levels were similar between responders and nonresponders. RNA-based pathway analysis found that patients with primary resistance had a higher Hedgehog pathway score, a lower AR pathway score and a lower NOTCH pathway score than patients with a response. Subclonal evolution and acquisition of new alterations in AR-related genes or neuroendocrine differentiation are associated with acquired resistance. ARPIs do not induce significant changes in the tumor transcriptome of most patients; however, programs associated with cell proliferation are enriched in resistant samples., Conclusions: Low AR activity, activation of stemness programs, and Hedgehog pathway were associated with primary ARPIs' resistance, whereas most acquired resistance was associated with subclonal evolution, AR-related events, and neuroendocrine differentiation. See related commentary by Slovin, p. 4323., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: FGFR alterations are reported across various malignancies and might act as oncogenic drivers in multiple histologies. Erdafitinib is an oral, selective pan-FGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor with activity in FGFR-altered advanced urothelial carcinoma. We aimed to evaluate the safety and activity of erdafitinib in previously treated patients with FGFR-altered advanced solid tumours., Methods: The single-arm, phase 2 RAGNAR study was conducted at 156 investigative centres (hospitals or oncology practices that are qualified oncology study centres) across 15 countries. The study consisted of four cohorts based on tumour histology and patient age; the results reported in this Article are for the primary cohort of the study, defined as the Broad Panel Cohort, which was histology-agnostic. We recruited patients aged 12 years or older with advanced or metastatic tumours of any histology (except urothelial cancer) with predefined FGFR1-4 alterations (mutations or fusions according to local or central testing). Eligible patients had disease progression on at least one previous line of systemic therapy and no alternative standard therapy available to them, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 (or equivalent for adolescents aged 12-17 years). Patients received once-daily oral erdafitinib (8 mg/day with provision for pharmacodynamically guided up-titration to 9 mg/day) on a continuous 21-day cycle until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate by independent review committee according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, or Response Assessment In Neuro-Oncology (RANO). The primary analysis was conducted on the treated population of the Broad Panel Cohort. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04083976., Findings: Patients were recruited between Dec 5, 2019, and Feb 15, 2022. Of 217 patients treated with erdafitinib, 97 (45%) patients were female and 120 (55%) were male. The data cutoff was Aug 15, 2022. At a median follow-up of 17·9 months (IQR 13·6-23·9), an objective response was observed in 64 (30% [95% CI 24-36]) of 217 patients across 16 distinct tumour types. The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events related to erdafitinib were stomatitis (25 [12%]), palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (12 [6%]), and hyperphosphataemia (11 [5%]). The most commonly occurring serious treatment-related adverse events (grade 3 or higher) were stomatitis in four (2%) patients and diarrhoea in two (1%). There were no treatment-related deaths., Interpretation: RAGNAR results show clinical benefit for erdafitinib in the tumour-agnostic setting in patients with advanced solid tumours with susceptible FGFR alterations who have exhausted other treatment options. These results support the continued development of FGFR inhibitors in patients with advanced solid tumours., Funding: Janssen Research & Development., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests SP has received consulting fees from Ipsen, Janssen, Novartis, and Zymeworks; and institutional research funding from 4D Pharma, Arcus Biosciences, Astellas Pharma, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Elicio Therapeutics, Janssen, Lilly, Mirati Therapeutics, NGM Biopharmaceuticals, Novartis, Purple Biotech, Rgenix, and Xencor. MS has received consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Oncology, Merck Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Takeda; honoraria from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen-Cilag, and Novartis; institutional research funding from AstraZeneca and Bristol Myers Squibb; and has institutional patents, royalties, or other intellectual property for a highly sensitive method for mutation detection by PCR. GI has received consulting fees from Basilea, Bayer, Flare Therapeutics, Janssen, Loxo/Lilly, and Mirati Therapeutics; speakers’ bureau fees from Gilead Sciences and Lynx Group; and institutional research funding from Bayer, Debiopharm Group, Janssen, Mirati Therapeutics, Novartis, and Seagen. OW has received consulting fees from Bayer US, LCC, Bristol Myers Squibb, Day One Therapeutics, Novartis, and Roche; and research funding from AstraZeneca, Bayer US, LLC, Blueprint Medicines, Day One Therapeutics, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly, Loxo, Novartis, and Roche. TD has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Kaken Pharmaceutical, Kyowa Kirin, MSD, Otsuka, PRA Health Science, Rakuten Medical, Shionogi, Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Takeda; honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb Japan, Chugai Pharma, Daicchi Sankyo, Ono Pharmaceutical, Rakuten Medical Japan, and Taiho Pharmaceutical; and institutional research funding from AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, IQVIA, Janssen, MSD, Ono Pharmaceutical, Novartis, Pfizer, PRA Health Sciences, Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma, and Taiho Pharmaceutical. JT has received consulting fees from Array BioPharma, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardiff Oncology, Chugai Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, F Hoffman LaRoche, Genentech, HalioDx, Ikena Oncology, Inspirna, IQVIA, Lilly, Menarini, Merck Serono, Merus, Mirati Therapeutics, MSD, NeoPhore, Ona Therapeutics, Orion Biotechnology, Hutchison MediPharma, Novartis, Peptomyc, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi, Scandion Oncology, Scorpion Therapeutics, Servier, Sotio, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Tessa Therapeutics, TheraMyc, and Tolremo; other financial interests from Imedex/HMP, Medscape, MJH Life Sciences, Peerview, Physicians’ Education Resource; and stock and other ownership interests from Oniria Therapeutics. DAR has received consulting fees from Advantagene, Agenus, Agios, AnHeart Therapeutics, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Delmar Pharmaceuticals, Ellipses Pharma, EMD Serono, Genenta Science, Imvax, Kintara Therapeutics, Kiyatec, Medicenna, Merck, Merck KGaA, Novocure, Oncorus, Regeneron, Taiho Pharmaceutical, and Vivacitas Oncology; honoraria from Advantagene, Agenus, AnHeart Therapeutics, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Deciphera, DelMar Pharmaceuticals, Ellipses Pharma, EMD Serono, Genenta Science, Imvax, Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Kintara Therapeutics, Kiyatec, Medicenna, Merck, Merck KGaA, Neuvogen, Oncorus, Novocure, Regeneron, Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Vivacitas Oncology, and Y-mAbs Therapeutics; and institutional research funding from Acerta Pharma, Agenus, Celldex, EMD Serono, Enterome, Incyte, and Omniox. CM has received consulting fees from Amgen, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Blueprint Medicines, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Debiopharm Group, Faron Pharmaceuticals, Genentech/Roche, Innate Pharma, Ipsen, Janssen, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Orion, Pfizer, PharmaMar, Sanofi, and Taiho Pharmaceutical. AM has received consulting fees from Bayer, Chugai, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck, and Novartis Oncology; has been reimbursed for travel, accommodations, or expenses from Amgen; and has received fees for participating in a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from Faron, Genmab, Janssen, Merck, and Takeda. IL has received consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim; honoraria from Agenus, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celon, Cullinan Oncology, Jacobio, Janssen, Loxo, Macrogenics, Menarini, MSD, Pfizer, Rhizen, Roche, Sanofi, and Takeda; institutional research funding from Agenus and Roche; and has been reimbursed for travel, accommodations, or expenses from Bristol Myers Squibb. OC has received consulting fees from Bayer US, LLC, and Janssen; honoraria from Bayer US, LLC, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer; and speakers’ bureau fees from Merck and Pfizer. DA has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CRA International, Gilead, Janssen Cilag, MSD, Onkowissen, Pierre Fabre Pharma, Seagen, and Terumo; honoraria from Amgen, Aptitude Health, Art Tempi Media, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Clinical Care Options, Eisai, From Research to Practice, GlaxoSmithKline, Imedex, Ipsen, MCI, MedAhead (Austria), Merck Serono, MSD, Pierre Fabre Pharma, PRMA Consulting, Roche, Sanofi (Genzyme), Seagen, Servier, Streamitup Germany, Tactics MD LLC, Terumo, Viatris, and WebMD; fees for editorial roles with Elsevier; fees and an institutional education grant from AbbVie; institutional trial support from Bristol Myers Squibb and Oncolytics; and has served in a leadership role with EORTC. MG has received consulting fees from Celularity and Guardant. HW has received honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, and Novartis; and has been reimbursed for travel, accommodations, or expenses from Janssen. KS, LC, SN, CH, STh, AS-W, STr, and HS received personal fees from Janssen during the conduct of the study. YL has received consulting fees from Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Immunomedics, Janssen (personal and institutional), MSD Oncology (personal and institutional), Loxo/Lilly, Pfizer/EMD Serono, Roche, and Taiho Pharmaceutical; has been reimbursed for travel, accommodations, or expenses from Astellas, AstraZeneca, Janssen Oncology, MSD Oncology, and Roche; and has received institutional research funding from Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Basilea, Bristol Myers Squibb, Exelixis, Gilead Sciences, Incyte, Janssen Oncology, Merck KGaA, MSD Oncology, Nektar, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and Taiho Pharmaceutical. SQ declares no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: At metastatic stage, treatment of adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) relies in first line on mitotane therapy, combination of mitotane with locoregional therapies or cisplatin-based chemotherapy according to initial presentation. In second line, ESMO-EURACAN recommendations favour enrolment of patients in clinical trials investigating experimental therapies. However, the benefit of this approach remains unknown., Methods: The aim of our retrospective study was to analyse the inclusion and outcomes of all patients of the French cohort ENDOCAN-COMETE included in early clinical trials between 2009 and 2019., Results: Of the 141 patients for whom a local or national multidisciplinary tumour board recommended, as first choice, to look for clinical trial, 27 patients (19%) were enroled in 30 early clinical trials. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.02 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI]; 2.3-4.6) and median overall survival (OS) was 10.2 months (95% CI; 7.13-16.3) while the best response, evaluable in 28 of 30 trial participants according to RECIST 1.1 criteria, was partial response for 3 patients (11%) stable disease for 14 patients (50%) and progressive disease for 11 patients (39%), resulting in a disease control rate of 61%. Median growth modulation index (GMI) in our cohort was 1.32, with a significantly prolonged PFS in 52% of the patients compared to the previous line. The Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) prognostic score was not associated with OS in this cohort., Conclusion: Our study suggests that patients with metastatic ACC benefit from inclusion in early clinical trials in second line. As recommended, if a clinical trial is available, it should be the first choice for suitable patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Sarcoma is a heterogeneous group of diseases with few treatment options. Immunotherapy has shown little activity in studies including unselected sarcomas, but immune checkpoint blockers have shown activity in specific histotypes. We evaluated the activity of pembrolizumab in rare and ultra-rare sarcomas., Methods: AcSé Pembrolizumab is an ongoing phase 2, basket, multitumour study investigating the activity of pembrolizumab monotherapy in rare cancers. Here, we report the results obtained in patients with selected histotypes of rare sarcomas (incidence of less than one case per 1 000 000 people per year) recruited at 24 French hospitals. Key inclusion criteria were age 15 years or older, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and advanced disease that was untreated and resistant to treatment. Patients were given pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously on day 1 of every 21-day cycle for a maximum of 24 months. The primary endpoint was objective response rate at week 12 using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1, assessed by local investigators. The primary endpoint and safety were analysed in the intention-to-treat population. The AcSé Pembrolizumab study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03012620., Findings: Between Sept 4, 2017, and Dec 29, 2020, 98 patients were enrolled, of whom 97 received treatment and were included in analyses (median age 51 years [IQR 35-65]; 53 [55%] were male; 44 [45%] were female; no data were collected on race or ethnicity). 34 (35%) patients had chordomas, 14 (14%) had alveolar soft part sarcomas, 12 (12%) had SMARCA4-deficient sarcomas or malignant rhabdoid tumours, eight (8%) had desmoplastic small round cell tumours, six (6%) had epithelioid sarcomas, four (4%) had dendritic cell sarcomas, three (3%) each had clear cell sarcomas, solitary fibrous tumours, and myxoid liposarcomas, and ten (10%) had other ultra-rare histotypes. As of data cutoff (April 11, 2022), median follow-up was 13·1 months (range 0·1-52·8; IQR 4·3-19·7). At week 12, objective response rate was 6·2% (95% CI 2·3-13·0), with no complete responses and six partial responses in the 97 patients. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were anaemia (eight [8%] of 97), alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase increase (six [6%]), and dyspnoea (five [5%]). 86 serious adverse events were reported in 37 patients. Five deaths due to adverse events were reported, none of which were determined to be related to treatment (two due to disease progression, two due to cancer, and one due to unknown cause)., Interpretation: Our data show the activity and manageable toxicity of pembrolizumab in some rare and ultra-rare sarcoma histotypes, and support the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway as a potential therapeutic target in selected histotypes. The completion of the basket study will provide further evidence regarding the activity and toxicity of pembrolizumab in identified rare types of cancer., Funding: The Ligue contre le cancer, INCa, MSD., Translation: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests J-YB received support for the present research from INCa (Institut National du Cancer; French National Cancer Institute), Unicancer, Fondation ARC, and MSD (drug supply) as well as research support from MSD Avenir Foundation for unrelated research. ALC reports personal fees from Pharmamar and Deciphera. CE received consulting fees from BMS, MSD, Novartis, F Star therapeutics, and Merck Serono, as well as grant support from MSD and Merck Serono. CM was principal investigator or investigator of clinical trials for Abbvie, Aduro, Agios, Amgen, Argen-x, Astex, AstraZeneca, Aveo pharmaceuticals, Bayer, Beigene, Blueprint, BMS, Boeringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Chugai, Clovis, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eisai, Eos, Exelixis, Forma, Gamamabs, Genentech, Gortec, GSK, H3 biomedecine, Incyte, Innate Pharma, Janssen, Kura,Oncology, Kyowa, Lilly, Loxo, Lysarc, Lytix,Biopharma, Medimmune, Menarini, Merus, MSD, Nanobiotix, Nektar Therapeutics, Novartis, Octimet, Oncoethix, Oncopeptides AB, Orion, Pfizer, Pharmamar, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Sierra Oncology, Taiho, Takeda, Tesaro, and Xencor; received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, BMS, Celgene, Debiopharm, Genentech, Ipsen, Janssen, Lilly, MedImmune, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and Orion; and travel grants from Janssen and AstraZeneca. PBR received consulting fees from Ipsen and travel grants from Pharmamar and Pfizer. MC reported support for attending meetings or travel from Ipsen, Janssen, Pfizer, Amgen, MSD, Biogaran, and Novartis. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)