Search

Background Primary brain tumors are highly heterogeneous and current therapy confers only modest clinical benefit. There is a tremendous need for new therapeutic options and genomic profiling could help defining new strategies. Methods Data from patients with advanced primary brain tumors enrolled in the prospective clinical trial MOSCATO at the Drug Development Department (DITEP) at Gustave Roussy Cancer Center were retrospectively reviewed. Multiple high throughput molecular techniques were used to identify genetic mutations: Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), comparative genomic hybridization array (CGHa) and Foundation one CDx (FMI). Matched therapy was decided accordingly for patients who had targeted molecular alterations. Results Between April 2016 and December 2018, 103 patients with primary brain tumors were enrolled. Median age was 48 years (range, 19-75), median number of previous systemic therapies was 2 (range, 0–5), 98% had an ECOG performance status 0 or 1. The most prevalent histology was glioblastoma (70 %). Ten patients were screen failure due to unavailability of tumor tissue and no possibility of new brain biopsy. Eighty-nine molecular analyses were successful (CGH: N = 45, NGS: N = 47, FMI: N = 42). Median time between consent and results was 49 days (range, 18-235). Tumor mutational burden (TMB) was available in 42 pts and was considered low ( Conclusions Molecular profiling in patients with primary brain tumors is feasible and can lead to orientation in clinical trials and/or treatment with targeted therapies. However the reasons for the small number of patients finally treated are currently under investigations and will be presented at the conference. Legal entity responsible for the study Christophe Massard. Funding Institut Gustave Roussy. Disclosure C. Baldini: Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: BMS; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Abbvie; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Roche; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Amgen; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Sanofi. L. Verlingue: Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Adaptherapy; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Pierre Fabre; Research grant / Funding (self): BMS. E. Angevin: Advisory / Consultancy: Merck; Advisory / Consultancy: GSK; Advisory / Consultancy: Celgene; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Abbvie; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Roche; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Sanofi; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Pfizer. A. Varga: Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Roche; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Astra Zeeneca; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: MSD. S. Postel Vinay: Research grant / Funding (self): Merck; Research grant / Funding (self): Boehringer; Research grant / Funding (self): Roche; Research grant / Funding (self): AstraZeneca; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Merck; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: AstraZeneca; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: AstraZeneca. A. Gazzah: Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Boehringer; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Novartis; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Pfizer; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Roche; Advisory / Consultancy: Novartis. R. Bahleda: Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Taiho; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Janssen; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Pfizer; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Boehringer. A. Marabelle: Advisory / Consultancy: Roche; Advisory / Consultancy: Pierre Fabre; Advisory / Consultancy: Onxeo; Advisory / Consultancy: EISAI; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Bayer; Advisory / Consultancy: Genticel; Advisory / Consultancy: Rigontec; Advisory / Consultancy: Diachii; Advisory / Consultancy: Imaxio; Advisory / Consultancy: Sanofi; Advisory / Consultancy: BioNtech; Advisory / Consultancy: Corvus; Advisory / Consultancy: Deerfield; Advisory / Consultancy: Bioncotech; Research grant / Funding (self): Merus; Research grant / Funding (self): BMS; Research grant / Funding (self): Boehringer; Research grant / Funding (self): Transgene. V. Ribrag: Advisory / Consultancy, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: BMS; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Pharmamar; Advisory / Consultancy: Incyte; Advisory / Consultancy: MSD; Advisory / Consultancy, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Roche; Advisory / Consultancy: Nanostring Technologies; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Servier; Honoraria (self): Eisai. S. Champiat: Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: AstraZeneca; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: BMS; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: MSD; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Roche; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Novartis; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Janssen. J. Michot: Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: BMS; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: AstraZeneca; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Janssen. A. Hollebecque: Advisory / Consultancy: Amgen; Advisory / Consultancy: Spectrum Pharmaceuticals; Advisory / Consultancy: Lilly; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Servier; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Amgen; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Lilly; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Bayer. J. Soria: Full / Part-time employment: Medimmune. C. Massard: Advisory / Consultancy: Amgen; Advisory / Consultancy: Astellas; Advisory / Consultancy: AstraZeneca; Advisory / Consultancy: Bayer; Advisory / Consultancy: Beigene; Advisory / Consultancy: BMS; Advisory / Consultancy: Celgene; Advisory / Consultancy: Debiopharm; Advisory / Consultancy: Roche/Genentech; Advisory / Consultancy: Lilly; Advisory / Consultancy: Ipsen; Advisory / Consultancy: Janssen; Advisory / Consultancy: Medimmune; Advisory / Consultancy: Novartis; Advisory / Consultancy: Pfizer; Advisory / Consultancy: Sanofi. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Background Several studies have suggested that combining radiotherapy (RT) to immunotherapy (IO) may be synergistic but many questions are still pending regarding the radiation modalities to optimize this combination, such as the choice of the lesion to irradiate. Radiomics consists in the analysis of quantitative data extracted from standard medical imaging to generate imaging biomarkers. A previous study published in The Lancet Oncology has shown that a radiomic signature could predict the CD8 cells infiltration, which is associated with the activity of anti-PD-1/PD-L1. We aimed to assess whether this biomarker could help to guide IO-RT combinations. Methods Patients from three clinical studies of IO-RT combinations with advanced solid tumors in two institutions were screened. Patients with available baseline (E0) and first evaluation (E1) CTs were included. Immunotherapy consisted in 4 different drugs. Hypofractionated conformal RT or stereotactic RT of one tumor lesion was delivered after the start of IO for most of the patients. The irradiated lesion and a sample of non-irradiated lesions were delineated from E0 and E1 CTs. Radiomics features were extracted and the published radiomic signature was applied to estimate the CD8 cells. Results 84 patients were included. 244 tumor lesions were delineated on the E0 CT, including the 84 lesions which were selected for irradiation. Median time between IO and RT start was 21 days (IQR: 9-24), and 2.4 mo between E0 and E1 (IQR: 1.3 - 3). 80 irradiated lesions and 152 non irradiated lesions remained at E1. At baseline, the volume and the radiomic score of TIL (RS) were not different between the two groups (irradiation or no) (p = 0.94 and 0.50). While the mean volume of the analyzed lesions was not different from E1 to E0 (p = 0.15), irradiated lesions were significantly smaller at E1 (p = 0.03). A high RS in the irradiated lesion at E1 (compared to the median value) was associated with PFS (HR = 0.57, IC95%: 0.345-0.95, p = 0.031) irrespective of the volume in multivariate analysis but was not significantly associated with OS. Conclusions Radiomic score of the irradiated lesion was associated with PFS. Such biomarker may help to guide the selection of the lesion to irradiate in IO-RT combinations. Legal entity responsible for the study Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus. Funding Fondation pour la Recherche Medicale, SIRIC-SOCRATE 2.0, Fondation ARC, Amazon. Disclosure R. Sun: Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: AstraZeneca. N.L. Sundahl: Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Merck Sharpe & Dohme; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Astellas; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Bayer; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Bristol-Myers Squibb. P. Ost: Research grant / Funding (institution): Merck Sharpe & Dohme; Research grant / Funding (institution): Astellas; Research grant / Funding (institution): Janssen; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Ipsen; Honoraria (self), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Ferring Pharmaceuticals; Honoraria (self): Bayer. C. Massard: Advisory / Consultancy: Amgen; Advisory / Consultancy: AstraZeneca; Advisory / Consultancy: Bayer; Advisory / Consultancy: Celgene; Advisory / Consultancy: Genentech; Advisory / Consultancy: Ipsen; Advisory / Consultancy: Jansen; Advisory / Consultancy: Lilly; Advisory / Consultancy: Novartis; Advisory / Consultancy: Pfizer; Advisory / Consultancy: Roche; Advisory / Consultancy: Sanofi; Advisory / Consultancy: Orion. E. Deutsch: Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): Roche Genentech; Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): Merck Serono; Research grant / Funding (institution): AstraZeneca; Research grant / Funding (institution): BMS; Research grant / Funding (institution): MSD. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

The anti-tumor activity of AZD1480, a potent, selective inhibitor of Janus-associated kinases 1 and 2, was demonstrated in preclinical models of myeloproliferative neoplasms. In a phase I clinical study, 35 patients with myelofibrosis received 2.5-70mg AZD1480 orally once daily (QD) or 10 or 15mg twice daily (BID) continuously during repeated 28-day cycles. Two patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities: one patient in the 2.5mg QD cohort had a grade 3 lung infiltration/acute pneumonia, and one patient receiving 50mg QD had grade 3 presyncope. Dosing was stopped at 70mg QD after the first patient experienced an adverse neurological event (AE) and evidence of low-grade neurological toxicity in patients on lower doses after the initial month of therapy became apparent. The most common AZD1480-related AEs were dizziness and anemia. AZD1480 was absorbed quickly and eliminated from the plasma rapidly, with a mean terminal half-life of 2.45-8.06h; accumulation was not observed after repeated daily dosing for 28 days. Four patients showed evidence of clinical improvement based on IWG-MRT 2006 criteria. AZD1480 was relatively well tolerated, however, low-grade, reversible neurological toxicity was therapy limiting and led to study termination.

4574 Background: Since previous experiments of B with VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors showed overlapping and limiting toxicities, a dose-finding study was designed to explore the safety and feasibility of the combination of a recent VEGFR inhibitor P with B in mRCC treatment-naive patients (pts) or in pts with other advanced refractory solid tumors. Methods: This double center trial was conducted with 3+3+3 escalation doses of P + B. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was the highest dosage not expected to cause a dose limiting toxicity (DLT) in more than 2/3, 3/6 or finally 3/9 pts, during the first 8 weeks of treatment. After preliminary DLT results, an approved by IDSMB extension cohort was enrolled and treated at MTD level.The effect of B on steady-state pharmacokinetic (PK) of P was also investigated by comparing PK at day 1 (D1) and D15 (day of B infusion). Results: 25 pts were enrolled with mRCC (n=7) or other advanced refractory solid tumors (n=18). Median age is 62 (41-79), 14 pts are male. At DL2 (n=10) 3 nephrectomized and 2 non-nephrectomized pts experienced DLT, as presented in the Table. In the 6-non-nephrectomized-pt extension cohort at DL1, 3 additional DLT were observed. Mean P AUC at D1 was higher than previously described in phase I P monotherapy (Clin Cancer Res 2009;15:4220). Mean P AUC at steady-state (D15) at both P dose levels was also significantly higher, though without being influenced by B infusion. Conclusions: The MTD of the P + B combination is respectively 400 mg/d and 7.5mg/kg (DL1) in all patients. Final PK analysis showed that there is no influence of B on P PK and that P AUC is higher than previously reported. Clinical trial information: NCT01202032. [Table: see text]

3027 Background: NER (HKI-272) is an irreversible pan-ErbB tyrosine kinase inhibitor with antitumor activity in pts with HER2-amplified tumors. TEM inhibits mTOR (TORC1). Hyperactivation of the PI3...

TPS149 Background: Co-selective inhibition of VEGFRs and FGFR has the potential benefit of blocking the two most relevant players in tumor angiogenesis and simultaneously targeting proliferation in...

3006^ Background: The Ras-Raf-MEK-extra-cellular signal-regulated kinase 1 and 2 (ERK1/2) pathway is frequently deregulated in human cancer. RO5126766, a first-in-class, dual Raf/MEK inhibitor was tested in a phase I (Ph1) study. Objectives were determination of maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), recommended phase II dose (RP2D), safety/tolerability, PK/PD and clinical activity. Methods: Patients (pts) with advanced or metastatic solid tumors received oral RO5126766 once daily (QD) in 28 day cycles. To increase the therapeutic window, 2 intermittent regimens were also evaluated: 7 days on/7 days off (7/7) and 4 days on/3 days off (4/3). PK and PD samples (PBMCs) were collected after a single run-in dose and on cycle 1 day 15 (C1D15). Paired skin and tumor biopsies (baseline, C1D15) were analyzed for mutational status and target inhibition. FDG-PET scans (baseline, C1D15, and C3D1) were performed. Results: 52 pts (25 QD, 13 4/3 and 14 7/7) were enrolled in 13 cohorts (QD: 0.1 - ...

3026 Background: Cross-talk between human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER) and insulin-like growth factor type I receptor (IGF-IR) signaling pathways involved in cell growth and survival has ...

e13109 Background: Few clinical trials are conducted in patients with rare types of cancer. Phase I clinical trials could be a great opportunity for patients with advanced rare tumors who fail to r...

2515 Background: Monitoring of treatment efficacy is mainly based on RECIST post-treatment evaluations. We investigated the impact of pre-treatment tumor growth dynamics on the evaluation of response to treatment in phase I trials. Methods: Response at 12 weeks was evaluated using RECIST criteria in 76 patients treated in phase I trials. All patients had a scannographic evaluation at the start of the experimental treatment (D0), at least 2 evaluations before D0 and one evaluation after D0. The mean time between evaluations was 6 weeks. Tumor growth rate (GR=% change in tumor volume per month) was calculated for the pre-treatment period (from the 1st available evaluation to D0), and the experimental period (after D0). GR was compared to RECIST and to time to progression. Disease control (DC) was defined as stable disease, partial response or complete response. We also classified patients according to the variation in GR. Results: A total of 550 evaluations were performed: 256 before D0, 76 at D0 and 218 after. Tumor GR differed according to the time period: 26.6% per month during pre-treatment period vs. 6.6% in experimental period (P 12 weeks and a decrease in GR during the experimental period (P=0.01). Several discordances however were noted. Eight patients with a time to progression >12 weeks (8/46=17%) had an increased GR with the experimental treatment. Thirteen patients who progressed No significant financial relationships to disclose.