Search

BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal chondrosarcoma (MCS) is an ultra-rare sarcoma that follows a more aggressive course than conventional chondrosarcoma. This study evaluates prognostic factors, treatments (surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation), and outcomes in an Australian setting. METHODS: We collected demographics, clinicopathological variables, treatment characteristics, and survival status from patients with MCS registered on the national ACCORD sarcoma database. Outcomes include overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: We identified 22 patients with MCS between 2001-2022. Median age was 28 (range 10-59) years, 19 (86%) had localised disease at diagnosis of whom 16 had surgery (84%), 11 received radiation (58%), and 10 chemotherapy (53%). Ten (52%) developed recurrence and/or metastases on follow-up and three patients with initial metastatic disease received surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. At a median follow-up of 50.9 (range 0.4-210) months nine patients had died. The median OS was 104.1 months (95% CI 25.8-182.3). There was improved OS for patients with localised disease who had surgical resection of the primary (p = 0.003) and those with ECOG 0-1 compared to 2-3 (p = 0.023) on univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates contemporary Australian treatment patterns of MCS. The role of chemotherapy for localised disease remains uncertain. Understanding treatment patterns and outcomes help support treatment decisions and design of trials for novel therapeutic strategies.

Background: Enco + cetux (doublet) has been approved in the US, EU, and Japan for the treatment of BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC after progression on 1-2 prior regimens. In the BEACON CRC study (NCT02928224), median OS (95% CI) with the doublet was 9.3 months (8.0-11.3) vs 5.9 months (5.1-7.1) with cetux + irinotecan or FOLFIRI (control) in patients (pts) with BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC (HR 0.61 [95% CI: 0.5-0.8]). This post hoc analysis investigates OS by prior therapies to the doublet treatment in pts with BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC from the BEACON CRC study. Methods : OS of pts treated with the doublet or control were compared according to prior treatment with bevacizumab, oxaliplatin or FOLFOXIRI and duration of prior anticancer therapy (ACT). Results : Sixty-four per cent and 55% of pts in the doublet and control arm respectively received prior bevacizumab. Of pts who had one prior therapy, 95% and 88% received prior oxaliplatin and 20% and 14% received prior FOLFOXIRI, respectively. In the doublet arm, pts who had bevacizumab < 4 months before start of study treatment had a median OS of 8.3 months (95% CI: 6.2-11.2); those who had bevacizumab >=4 months prior had a median OS of 10.7 (95% CI: 7.5-17.7). Within each treatment arm, OS was similar regardless of prior treatment with oxaliplatin or FOLFOXIRI. The duration of prior ACT was similar across study arms, ranging from 5.6 to 5.8 months for the first line of ACT. Conclusions : In the BEACON CRC study, pts treated with the doublet for BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC demonstrated similar OS regardless of prior therapies or duration of prior therapy use. This exploratory post hoc analysis provides data that reflect the prior treatment landscape clinicians may face when deciding subsequent treatment regimens for pts with BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC.

Background: In the BEACON study, encorafenib + binimetinib + cetuximab (enco/bini/cetux; triplet) and enco + cetux (doublet) improved OS and ORR vs standard of care in previously treated BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC pts. Molecular profiling of tumours from this study was performed to identify molecular correlates of outcome. Methods : Baseline tumour samples were analysed by whole-exome sequencing (WES) and whole transcriptome sequencing (WTS). BRAF-mutant (BM) and consensus molecular subtypes (CMS) were determined and pathway activities evaluated with gene set variation analysis. Tumour response was evaluated for each subtype. Additional association and interaction analyses between molecular features and outcomes by treatments are ongoing and will be presented. Results : Baseline tumour samples were analysed by WES and/or WTS for 79.2% of pts. Of the 460 pts analysed by WTS (73.7% in the triplet arm, 66.4% in the doublet arm, 67.4% in the control arm), 84.6% were classified as CMS1 or CMS4. Overall 32.2% of pts were classified as BM1 and the majority (84.5%) of these were CMS4. Many of those classified as BM2 (67.8%) were CMS1 (64.7%). In the BM1 and CMS4 tumours, expression of inflammatory response and epithelial mesenchymal transition genes were elevated, and expression of cell cycle genes was reduced. Response rate in pts with CMS4 and/or BM1 tumors was higher in the triplet arm (CMS4: 33.3% [95% CI: 21.7-46.7]; BM1: 33.3% [95% CI: 21.4-47.1]) vs the doublet arm (CMS4: 19.2% [95% CI: 9.6-32.5]; BM1: 14.9% [95% CI: 6.2-28.3]). Conclusions : Molecular characteristics and biological properties observed in BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC suggest a subset of pts with specific molecular features may derive greater clinical benefit from triplet vs doublet therapy. These findings support further investigating the biological landscape in BRAF-mutant mCRC to enable potential hypotheses for pt selection to improve clinical outcome in future studies.

BACKGROUND: Panobinostat treatment has been shown to terminally differentiate malignant rhabdoid tumours (MRT) and atypical teratoid rhabdoid tumours (ATRT) in pre-clinical models. We report results of the open label, phase II study of oral panobinostat in patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed MRT/ATRT. AIMS: To assess the anti-tumour activity of low dose, continuous oral panobinostat as well as its associated toxicities. To assess the biological activity of low dose panobinostat by measuring histone H4 acetylation status in peripheral mononuclear cells (PMNC), and differentiation markers. METHOD(S): Following primary institutional standard of care induction and consolidation chemotherapy and/or radiation treatment, patients were enrolled and commenced on panobinostat as a continuous daily oral dose starting at 10mg/m2/day, with a three-week wash out period between therapies. Real-time acetylation status, measuring acetylated H4 on PMNC, was performed to determine the pharmacodynamics of panobinostat at different dosing levels. Patients were monitored for toxicity; dose reductions were in decrements of 2mg/ m2/day. RESULT(S): A total of 13 patients with newly diagnosed ATRT/MRT and one patient with relapsed MRT have been enrolled. The average age at enrollment was 3.6 years (range 0.8-6.8 years). The mean treatment duration was 206 days (13-344 days). Currently, six patients (42.9%) remain on study with a mean study duration of 531 days (range 13-895 days). 6/14 patients (42.9%) were removed due to disease progression at a mean study duration of 245 days (44-560 days). 2/14 patients (14.3%) withdrew due to toxicity. 12/14 patients (85.7%) required dose reductions. The main toxicities were thrombocytopaenia and leukopaenia (Grade III-IV). Real-time pharmacodynamic assessment of panobinostat, at a dose as low as 6mg/m2/day resulted in significant acetylation of histone H4 in PMNC. CONCLUSION(S): Treatment with low dose panobinostat is well tolerated in infants and

Gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) are the most common gastrointestinal tract mesenchymal tumours. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have transformed the management of advanced GIST. Imatinib was the first TKI to gain approval as management for patients with advanced GIST, establishing a new standard of care. Since then, as a result of several trials including the GRID and INVICTUS studies, we now have five lines of approved targeted therapy, including imatinib, sunitinib, regorafenib, ripretinib and avapritinib for the treatment of unresectable, advanced GISTs. In this review, the Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group (AGITG) provide an overview of the key trials that have changed clinical practice, discuss the molecular drivers of GISTs, the importance of molecular testing and directing therapy according to molecular targets, as well as future strategies in the management of advanced GISTs.

BACKGROUND: In the BEACON CRC study (NCT02928224), encorafenib plus cetuximab with binimetinib {9.3 versus 5.9 months; hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.60 [0.47-0.75]} or without binimetinib [9.3 versus 5.9 months; HR (95% CI): 0.61 (0.48-0.77)] significantly improved overall survival (OS) compared with the previous standard of care (control) in patients with BRAF V600E metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Quality of life (QoL) was a secondary endpoint, assessed using validated instruments. PATIENTS AND METHODS: BEACON CRC was a randomized, open-label, phase III study comparing encorafenib plus cetuximab with or without binimetinib and the investigator's choice of irinotecan plus cetuximab or FOLFIRI plus cetuximab (chemotherapy control) in patients with previously treated BRAF V600E mCRC. Patient-reported QoL assessments included the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT-C). The primary outcome for these tools was time to definitive 10% deterioration. RESULTS: Encorafenib plus cetuximab, both with and without binimetinib, was associated with longer median times to definitive 10% deterioration versus the control group in the EORTC Global Health Status scale [HR (95% CI): 0.65 (0.52-0.80) versus 0.61 (0.49-0.75), respectively] and the FACT-C functional well-being subscale [HR (95% CI): 0.62 (0.50-0.76) versus 0.58 (0.47-0.72), respectively]. Consistent results were observed across all subscales of the EORTC and FACT-C instruments. QoL was generally maintained during treatment for the global EORTC and FACT-C scales. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to improving OS, encorafenib plus cetuximab with or without binimetinib delays QoL decline in previously treated patients with BRAF V600E-mutant mCRC.

BACKGROUND: Complex genomic profiling (CGP) has transformed cancer treatment decision making, yet there is a lack of robust and quantifiable evidence for how utilisation of CGP improves patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated cohort level clinical effectiveness of CGP to improve overall survival (OS) in real-world advanced cancer patients using a registry-based matched control population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two cohorts of advanced and refractory cancer patients were seen in consecutive series for early phase trial enrolment consideration. The first cohort (CGP group) accessed tumour profiling via a research study; while the second cohort that followed was not profiled. Overall survival between cohorts was compared using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models. Potential confounding was analysed and adjusted for using stabilised weights based on propensity scores. RESULTS: Within the CGP group, 25 (17.6%) patients received treatment informed by CGP results and this subgroup had significantly improved survival compared with CGP patients in whom results did not impact their treatment (unadjusted HR = 0.44, (0.22-0.88), p = 0.02). However, when comparing the entire CGP cohort with the No CGP cohort, no significant survival benefit was evident with adjusted median OS for CGP of 13.5 months (9.2-17.0) compared with 11.0 (9.2-17.4) for No CGP (adjusted HR = 0.92, (0.65-1.30), p = 0.63). CONCLUSIONS: This study utilised real-world data to simulate a control arm and quantify the clinical effectiveness of genomic testing. The magnitude of survival benefit for patients who had CGP result-led treatments was insufficient to drive an overall survival gain for the entire tested population. Translation of CGP into clinics requires strategies to ensure higher rates of tested patients obtain clinical benefit to deliver on the value proposition of CGP in an advanced cancer population.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer patients beyond the second line remains challenging, highlighting the need for early phase trials of combination therapies for patients who had disease progression during or following two prior lines of therapy. Leveraging hybrid control design in these trials may preserve the benefits of randomization while strengthening evidence by integrating historical trial data. Few examples have been established to assess the applicability of such design in supporting early phase metastatic colorectal cancer trials. METHODS: MORPHEUS-CRC is an umbrella, multicenter, open-label, phase Ib/II, randomized, controlled trial (NCT03555149), with active experimental arms ongoing. Patients enrolled were assigned to a control arm (regorafenib, 15 patients randomized and 13 analysed) or multiple experimental arms for immunotherapy-based treatment combinations. One experimental arm (atezolizumab + isatuximab, 15 patients randomized and analysed) was completed and included in the hybrid-control study, where the hybrid-control arm was constructed by integrating data from the IMblaze370 phase 3 trial (NCT02788279). To estimate treatment efficacy, Cox and logistic regression models were used in a frequentist framework with standardized mortality ratio weighting or in a Bayesian framework with commensurate priors. The primary endpoint is objective response rate, while disease control rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival were the outcomes assessed in the hybrid-control study. RESULTS: The experimental arm showed no efficacy signal, yet a well-tolerated safety profile in the MORPHEUS-CRC trial. Treatment effects estimated in hybrid control design were comparable to those in the MORPHEUS-CRC trial using either frequentist or Bayesian models. CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid control provides comparable treatment-effect estimates with generally improved precision, and thus can be of value to inform early-phase clinical development in metas

BACKGROUND: Panobinostat treatment has been shown to terminally differentiate malignant rhabdoid tumours (MRT) and atypical teratoid rhabdoid tumours (ATRT) in pre-clinical models. We report results of the open label, phase II study of oral panobinostat in patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed MRT/ATRT. AIMS: To assess the anti-tumour activity of low dose, continuous oral panobinostat as well as its associated toxicities. To assess the biological activity of low dose panobinostat by measuring histone H4 acetylation status in peripheral mononuclear cells (PMNC), and differentiation markers. METHODS: Following primary institutional standard of care induction and consolidation chemotherapy and/or radiation treatment, patients were enrolled and commenced on panobinostat as a continuous daily oral dose starting at 10mg/m2/day, with a three-week wash out period between therapies. Real-time acetylation status, measuring acetylated H4 on PMNC, was performed to determine the pharmacodynamics of panobinostat at different dosing levels. Patients were monitored for toxicity; dose reductions were in decrements of 2mg/m2/day. RESULTS: A total of 13 patients with newly diagnosed ATRT/MRT and one patient with relapsed MRT have been enrolled. The average age at enrollment was 3.6 years (range 0.8-6.8 years). The mean treatment duration was 206 days (13-344 days). Currently, six patients (42.9%) remain on study with a mean study duration of 531 days (range 13-895 days). 6/14 patients (42.9%) were removed due to disease progression at a mean study duration of 245 days (44-560 days). 2/14 patients (14.3%) withdrew due to toxicity. 12/14 patients (85.7%) required dose reductions. The main toxicities were thrombocytopaenia and leukopaenia (Grade III-IV). Real-time pharmacodynamic assessment of panobinostat, at a dose as low as 6mg/m2/day resulted in significant acetylation of histone H4 in PMNC. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with low dose panobinostat is well tolerated in infants a

AIM: Despite lack of advances in the first-line systemic therapy, the overall survival (OS) has continued to improve in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) with the recent estimation of median OS at 20 months. Several systemic therapy options are available now for the second-line and beyond, with more treatment tailored to histology and molecular subtype. The aim of this retrospective study was to characterize current patterns of care in managing patients with advanced STS (aSTS) in Australia. METHODS: Sarcoma databases from 7 Australian sarcoma services were accessed to identify patients diagnosed with locally advanced inoperable and/or metastatic STS between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2015. Baseline clinicopathological factors and initial treatment patterns were descriptively analyzed. For the Victorian cohort where treatment of aSTS and follow-up details were available, further exploratory analysis was conducted to determine the impact of patient and tumor characteristics and the use of palliative-intent treatment OS. RESULTS: Of 2261 cases of STS, 671 were deemed as aSTS. Two thirds were relapsed disease with a mean 1.9 years from initial diagnosis. Median age at diagnosis of aSTS was 59 years (18-95 years) and 56.3% was male. Histology classification revealed four main subtypes: undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS) (23.1%), leiomyosarcoma (18.2%), liposarcoma (12.8%), synovial sarcoma (8.2%), and other comprising 14 STS subtypes. For the Victorian cohort (N = 361), approximately 80% of patients accessed palliative-intent treatment of various modalities. Nearly 40% of patients underwent tumor-debulking surgery or metastasectomy, of which lung wedge resection was the most common (N = 83, 47.7%). A total of 438 palliative-intent radiotherapy treatments were delivered to 259 patients (71.7%), with the majority in the form of external beam radiotherapy. Palliative-intent systemic therapy was delivered to 51.5% of patients (N = 186), mostly (