Search

Lessons Learned Background Cediranib, a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor, suppresses expression of BRCA1/2 and RAD51 inducing homologous recombination DNA repair deficiency (HRD) in several cancer cell lines and xenograft models [1]. Olaparib provides a clinical benefit in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) with germline BRCA mutation (gBRCAmt) [2]. We hypothesized that cediranib induces HRD in the absence of gBRCAmt and synergizes with olaparib, resulting in an objective response in patients with mPDAC. Methods Patients with mPDAC with at least one prior systemic chemotherapy were enrolled. Patients with known gBRCAmt were excluded. Patients took cediranib 30 mg daily and olaparib 200 mg twice daily, orally. The primary endpoint was objective response (OR) rate. Results Nineteen patients received the study drugs. Seven patients came off treatment before the first restaging scan: six because of clinical progression and one because of an adverse event. No OR was observed. Six patients had stable disease (SD) as a best overall response. The median duration of SD was 3.1 months. The median overall survival was 3.4 months. Common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue, hypertension, and diarrhea. Conclusion Cediranib and olaparib combination did not result in clinically meaningful activity in patients with mPDAC without gBRCAmt.

PURPOSE: We conducted a phase 1 trial of the HSP90 inhibitor onalespib in combination with the CDK inhibitor AT7519, in patients with advanced solid tumors to determine the safety profile and maximally tolerated dose, pharmacokinetics, preliminary antitumor activity, and to assess the pharmacodynamic (PD) effects on HSP70 expression in patient-derived PBMCs and plasma. METHODS: This study followed a 3 + 3 trial design with 1 week of intravenous (IV) onalespib alone, followed by onalespib/AT7519 (IV) on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of a 21-days cycle. PK and PD samples were collected at baseline, after onalespib alone, and following combination therapy. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients were treated with the demonstration of downstream target engagement of HSP70 expression in plasma and PBMCs. The maximally tolerated dose was onalespib 80 mg/m(2) IV + AT7519 21 mg/m(2) IV. Most common drug-related adverse events included Grade 1/2 diarrhea (79%), fatigue (54%), mucositis (57%), nausea (46%), and vomiting (50%). Partial responses were seen in a palate adenocarcinoma and Sertoli–Leydig tumor; a colorectal and an endometrial cancer patient both remained on study for ten cycles with stable disease as the best response. There were no clinically relevant PK interactions for either drug. CONCLUSIONS: Combined onalespib and AT7519 is tolerable, though below monotherapy RP2D. Promising preliminary clinical activity was seen. Further benefit may be seen with the incorporation of molecular signature pre-selection. Further biomarker development will require the assessment of the on-target impact on relevant client proteins in tumor tissue.

PURPOSE NCI-MATCH is a nationwide, histology-agnostic, signal-finding, molecular profile–driven trial for patients with refractory cancers, lymphomas, or myelomas. Patients with tumors harboring actionable aberration(s) in fibroblast growth factor receptor ( FGFR) 1-3 were treated with AZD4547, an oral FGFR1-3 inhibitor. METHODS Patients’ tumors were screened by next-generation sequencing for predefined FGFR amplification, activating mutations, or fusions. Patients were treated with AZD4547, 80 mg orally twice daily until progression of disease or drug intolerance. A response rate of 16% was considered promising. RESULTS Between July 2016 and June 2017, 70 patients were assigned and 48 received protocol therapy and are eligible for analysis. Patients’ tumors harbored FGFR1 or FGFR2 amplification (n = 20), FGFR2 or FGFR3 single-nucleotide variants (n = 19), or FGFR1 or FGFR3 fusions (n = 9). The most common primary tumors were breast (33.3%), urothelial (12.5%), and cervical cancer (10.4%).Grade 3 adverse events were consistent with those described in previous clinical trials. Confirmed partial responses were seen in 8% (90% CI, 3% to 18%) and were observed only in patients whose tumors harbored FGFR1-3 point mutations or fusions. Stable disease was observed in 37.5% (90% CI, 25.8% to 50.4%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.4 months, and the 6-month PFS rate was 15% (90% CI, 8% to 31%). For patients with tumors harboring FGFR fusions, the response rate was 22% (90% CI, 4.1% to 55%), and 6-month PFS rate was 56% (90% CI, 31% to 100%). CONCLUSION Preliminary signals of activity appeared to be limited to cancers harboring FGFR activating mutations and fusions, although AZD4547 did not meet the primary end point. Different FGFR somatic alterations may confer different levels of signaling potency and/or oncogene dependence.

Background Tumor molecular profiling from patients experiencing exceptional responses to systemic therapy may provide insights into cancer biology and improve treatment tailoring. This pilot study evaluates the feasibility of identifying exceptional responders retrospectively, obtaining pre-exceptional response treatment tumor tissues, and analyzing them with state-of-the-art molecular analysis tools to identify potential molecular explanations for responses. Methods Exceptional response was defined as partial (PR) or complete (CR) response to a systemic treatment with population PR or CR rate less than 10% or an unusually long response (eg, duration >3 times published median). Cases proposed by patients’ clinicians were reviewed by clinical and translational experts. Tumor and normal tissue (if possible) were profiled with whole exome sequencing and, if possible, targeted deep sequencing, RNA sequencing, methylation arrays, and immunohistochemistry. Potential germline mutations were tracked for relevance to disease. Results Cases reflected a variety of tumors and standard and investigational treatments. Of 520 cases, 476 (91.5%) were accepted for further review, and 222 of 476 (46.6%) proposed cases met requirements as exceptional responders. Clinical data were obtained from 168 of 222 cases (75.7%). Tumor was provided from 130 of 168 cases (77.4%). Of 117 of the 130 (90.0%) cases with sufficient nucleic acids, 109 (93.2%) were successfully analyzed; 6 patients had potentially actionable germline mutations. Conclusion Exceptional responses occur with standard and investigational treatment. Retrospective identification of exceptional responders, accessioning, and sequencing of pretreatment archived tissue is feasible. Data from molecular analyses of tumors, particularly when combining results from patients who received similar treatments, may elucidate molecular bases for exceptional responses.

BackgroundTrametinib is an oral MEK 1/2 inhibitor, with a single agent recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of 2 mg daily (QD). This study was designed to evaluate RP2D, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of trametinib in patients with advanced solid tumors who had various degrees of hepatic dysfunction (HD).MethodsAdvanced cancer patients were stratified into 4 HD groups based on Organ Dysfunction Working Group hepatic function stratification criteria: normal (Norm), mild (Mild), moderate (Mod), severe (Sev). Dose escalation was based on “3 + 3” design within each HD group. PK samples were collected at cycle 1 days 15-16.ResultsForty-six patients were enrolled with 44 evaluable for safety [Norm=17, Mild=7, Mod (1.5 mg)=4, Mod (2 mg)=5, Sev (1 mg)=9, Sev (1.5 mg)=2] and 22 for PK analysis. Treatment related adverse events were consistent with prior trametinib studies. No treatment related deaths occurred. Dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were evaluable in 15 patients (Mild=6, Mod (1.5 mg)=3, Mod (2 mg)=2, Sev (1 mg)=3 and Sev (1.5 mg)=1). One DLT (grade 3 acneiform rash) was observed in a Sev patient (1.5 mg). Dose interruptions or reductions due to treatment related adverse events occurred in 15 patients (34%) [Norm=9, 53%; Mild=2, 29%; Mod (1.5 mg)=1, 33%; Mod (2 mg)=2, 33%; Sev (1 mg)=1, 11%; Sev (1.5 mg)=1; 50%]. There were no significant differences across HD groups for all PK parameters when trametinib was normalized to 2 mg. However, only limited PK data were available for the Mod (n = 3) and Sev (n = 3) groups compared to Norm (n = 10) and Mild (n = 6) groups. Trametinib is heavily protein bound, with no correlation between serum albumin level and unbound trametinib fraction (p = 0.26).ConclusionsRP2D for trametinib in Mild HD patients is 2 mg QD. There are insufficient number of evaluable patients due to difficulty of patient accrual to declare RP2D and MTD for Mod and Sev HD groups. DLTs were not observed in the highest dose cohorts that reached three evaluable patients – 1.5 mg QD in Mod group, and 1 mg QD in Sev group.Trial registrationThis study was registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov website (NCT 02070549) on February 25, 2014. .

Purpose. Targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway improves progression free survival in multiple advanced malignancies but durable responses are uncommon. Inhibition of the VEGF pathway at multiple levels of signal transduction may improve clinical outcomes. Preclinical data with cediranib, an inhibitor of all 3 VEGF receptors, in combination with selumetinib, an inhibitor of MEK 1/2, demonstrated improved tumor control experimentally. This phase I trial was designed to test the two agents in combination to evaluate the tolerability, safety and assess disease response. Methods. Patients with advanced solid malignancies were enrolled into this phase I trial. Cediranib and selumetinib were dosed using a toxicity-adaptive isotonic design for the dose escalation/de-escalation of each agent. Both cediranib and selumetinib were administered daily and continuously. Cycles were 28 days in length. Results. Eighteen patients were enrolled. At all dose levels, dose limiting toxicities (DLT) were observed, which limited dose escalation and further evaluation. The maximum tolerated dose of cediranib and selumetinib in combination could not be determined. The best response of stable disease was observed in eight patients. Conclusions. Cediranib and selumetinib in combination on a continuous schedule was not tolerable, with patients experiencing cardiovascular and other DLTs. Intermittent schedules may be needed to establish a safe and tolerable combination of cediranib and selumetinib.

Summary Background Kidney function assessment by estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equations, such as the Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation, is important to determine dosing and eligibility for anticancer drugs. Inclusion of race in eGFR equations calculates a higher eGFR at a given serum creatinine concentration for Black patients versus non-Black patients. We aimed to characterise the effect of removing race from the CKD-EPI equation on dosing and eligibility of anticancer drugs with kidney function cutoffs. Methods We did a retrospective analysis of patients enrolled in phase 1 studies sponsored by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program between January, 1995, and October, 2010. eGFR based on creatinine (eGFRCr) was calculated by the CKD-EPI equation and a version of the CKD-EPI equation without the race term (CKD-EPIwithout race). Estimated creatinine clearance (eClCr) was calculated by the Cockcroft-Gault equation. Dosing simulations based on each assessment of kidney function were done for ten anticancer drugs with kidney function cutoffs for dosing (oxaliplatin, capecitabine, etoposide, topotecan, fludarabine, and bleomycin) or eligibility (cisplatin, pemetrexed, bendamustine, and mitomycin) based on labelling approved by the US Food and Drug Administration or consensus guidelines. The absolute proportion of patients eligible or in each renal dosing range was calculated for each drug. Eligibility and dosing discordance rates were also calculated. Findings Demographics and laboratory values from 340 Black patients (172 men and 168 women) were used. Median age was 57 years (IQR 47–64), median bodyweight was 78·1 kg (67·0–89·8), median body surface area was 1·91 m2 (1·77–2·09), and median serum creatinine concentration was 0·9 mg/dL (0·8–1·1). Median eGFRCr or eClCr was 103 mL/min (85–122) calculated by CKD-EPI, 89 mL/min (73–105) by CKD-EPIwithout race, and 90 mL/min (72–120) by Cockcroft-Gault. Black patients were recommended to receive dose reductions or were rendered ineligible to receive drug more frequently when using CKD-EPIwithout race than when using CKD-EPI, but at a similar rate as when using Cockcroft-Gault. The number of patients ineligible for therapy or recommended to receive any renal dose adjustment when CKD-EPIwithout race versus CKD-EPI was used increased by 72% (from 25 of 340 to 43 of 340 patients) for cisplatin, by 120% (from five to 11) for pemetrexed, by 67% (from three to five) for bendamustine, by 150% (from ten to 25) for capecitabine, by 150% (from ten to 25) for etoposide, by 67% (from three to five) for topotecan, by 61% (from 74 to 119) for fludarabine, and by 163% (from eight to 21) for bleomycin. Up to 18% of patients had discordant recommendations using CKD-EPIwithout race versus CKD-EPI. Interpretation Removing race from the CKD-EPI equation will calculate a lower eGFR for Black patients and exclude more patients from receiving anticancer therapy, which could lead to undertreatment of Black patients with cancer and adversely affect their outcomes. Funding National Institutes of Health.

Purpose: Romidepsin dosing recommendations for patients with malignancy and varying degrees of hepatic dysfunction was lacking at the time of regulatory approval for T-cell lymphoma. We conducted a multicenter phase I clinical trial (ETCTN-9008) via the NCI Organ Dysfunction Working Group to investigate safety, first cycle MTD, and pharmacokinetic profile of romidepsin in this setting. Patients and Methods: Patients with select advanced solid tumors or hematologic malignancies were stratified according to hepatic function. Romidepsin was administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle and escalation followed a 3 + 3 design in moderate and severe impairment cohorts. Blood samples for detailed pharmacokinetic analyses were collected after the first dose. Results: Thirty-one patients received one dose of romidepsin and were evaluable for pharmacokinetic analyses in normal (n = 12), mild (n = 8), moderate (n = 5), and severe (n = 6) cohorts. Adverse events across cohorts were similar, and dose-limiting toxicity occurred in two patients (mild and severe impairment cohorts). The MTD was not determined because the geometric mean AUC values of romidepsin in moderate (7 mg/m2) and severe (5 mg/m2) impairment cohort were 114% and 116% of the normal cohort (14 mg/m2). Conclusions: Data from the ETCTN-9008 trial led to changes in the romidepsin labeling to reflect starting dose adjustment for patients with cancer and moderate and severe hepatic impairment, with no adjustment for mild hepatic impairment.

Background: Primary DLBCL of the CNS (PCNSL) relies on chronic active B-cell receptor (BCR) signaling. Ibrutinib targets BCR signaling through BTK inhibition (BTKi), which may also impair innate immunity. We showed that ibrutinib and temozolomide, etoposide, liposomal doxorubicin, dexamethasone, rituximab (TEDDI-R) induces durable remissions in relapsed/refractory PCNSL but 7 (39%) pts developed Aspergillus infections without fungal prophylaxis. Newer triazoles are effective against Aspergillus but inhibit ibrutinib clearance through CYP3A4. Isavuconazole has less effect on CYP3A4 and less hepatotoxicity than voriconazole. We hypothesized that ibrutinib and isavuconazole could be safely co-administered in TEDDI-R and ameliorate the risk of Aspergillus while maintaining efficacy. We studied escalating doses of ibrutinib in TEDDI-R with isavuconazole to determine the safety profile, ibrutinib PK, and clinical activity in relapsed/refractory PCNSL. Methods: Pts with relapsed/refractory PCNSL, age ≥18, ECOG PS ≤2, and adequate organ function were enrolled. Previous BTKi, HIV, EBV+, and pregnancy were excluded. Pts had baseline MRI brain, FDG-PET brain and body, Ommaya placed, CSF with flow cytometry, and eye exam. Isavuconazole 200mg BID x 3d started prior to ibrutinib then 200mg daily. Three dose levels of ibrutinib (280mg, 420mg, 560mg) were given continuously through each cycle. Pts received up to 6 cycles of TEDDI-R with IT cytarabine. No one received maintenance or consolidation. If a DLT occurred in the first 3 pts at a given ibrutinib dose level, 3 more pts were treated before escalating. Full safety and PK data was reviewed after two dose levels prior to escalating. An expansion of 10 pts was planned at the highest ibrutinib dose level to confirm safety and clinical activity. Surveillance for fungal infections included chest CT mid-cycle 1 and after each cycle along with Beta-D glucan and aspergillus galactomannan in blood and CSF. Brain MRI was performed after cycles 1, 2, 4, and 6 to determine response and screen for CNS Aspergillus. All remissions by MRI were confirmed with FDG-PET and CSF analysis. Surveillance brain MRI were q3m for 1y, q4m x 1y, q6m x 1y, then annually. Primary objective was to identify the highest dose of ibrutinib safely co-administered with isavuconazole in TEDDI-R that achieves adequate PK concentrations. Results: 13 relapsed/refractory PCNSL pts enrolled between 11/2018 and 06/2020. 10 (77%) pts were male and the median age was 65 (range 46-77), including 3 pts ≥age 70. 13 (100%) pts had prior high-dose MTX, and 2 (15%) pts had prior autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Three evaluable pts received ibrutinib 280mg, 3 pts received ibrutinib 420mg, and 6 pts received ibrutinib 560mg. One pt in the 280mg cohort was not evaluable. Toxicity was evaluated in 13 pts across 49 cycles and the toxicity was mainly hematologic. G3 and G4 neutropenia occurred in 45% and 37% of cycles, respectively, while febrile neutropenia occurred in 8% of cycles. The median (range) duration of neutropenia was 4.5 (1-12) days. One pt with prior ASCT stopped after 4 cycles due to myelosuppression. Four (8%) cycles were complicated by ≥G3 infection, but no opportunistic infections (including Aspergillus) were observed. G3 and G4 thrombocytopenia occurred in 22% and 8% of cycles, respectively, and 1 pt developed melena with no overt GI bleeding. ≥G3 mucositis occurred in 6% of cycles and 1 patient stopped therapy after 5 cycles due to recurrent mucositis. Palmar-plantar-erythrodysesthesia led to dose reductions of liposomal doxorubicin in 9 (69%) pts, but only 1 G3 event occurred. Twelve pts were evaluable for response, and 11 (92%) pts have responded and all after receiving only 1 cycle (Figure 1). All 8 (100%) pts who have completed at least 4 cycles have achieved CR and the other 4 remain on therapy. Six (75%) pts who achieved CR remain in remission while 2 (25%) pts relapsed within 3 months of stopping therapy. After a median potential f/u of 5.2 months, the 1-year PFS is estimated at 60.0% (95% CI, 12.6-88.2) and the OS is 100%. Conclusions: Ibrutinib 560mg was safely co-administered with isavuconazole in TEDDI-R for relapsed/refractory PCNSL. No DLTs were observed, no cases of Aspergillus occurred, and no new safety signals. The first 8 (100%) patients who have completed therapy achieved complete response. Updated clinical results from this ongoing study (NCT02203526) will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Lai: Abbvie: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Jazz: Speakers Bureau; Macrogenics: Consultancy; Astellas: Speakers Bureau.

Study Background: Survival outcomes of older patients with AML are dismal with a 3-year survival of < 10%. The combination of hypomethylating agents (HMA) with venetoclax has emerged as the new standard of care for older unfit patients with AML, but median survival remains less than 15 months. Patients with undetectable MRD after this regimen seem to have the best long-term clinical outcomes. In this randomized phase 2 trial, the goal with combining pembrolizumab is to facilitate a more effective CTL mediated destruction of leukemic blasts resulting in improved rates of CR without MRD, which would hopefully increase duration of response and lower relapse rates. Here we report on the design of the first randomized multi-center clinical trial of HMA+venetoclax +/- ICPI in unfit AML patients. Methods: The primary objective of this Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program-approved multi-institutional, randomized phase II study (NCT04284787) is to assess the percentage of patients with MRD negative CR (MRD- CR) as measured by flow cytometry with chemotherapy + pembrolizumab during the first 6 cycles and compare between the two study arms (See study Schema). Secondary objectives include rates of CR / complete remission with incomplete count recovery (CRi), complete remission with partial recovery count (CRh) and Hematologic improvement (HI) to red blood cells and platelets, MRD negativity at Day 14, MRD-negative CR at end of induction therapy and MRD negative CR after last consolidation cycle, event free survival (EFS), relapse free survival (RFS), duration of response (DOR), and overall survival (OS), and proportion of patients who develop severe toxicity. Important exploratory objectives include MRD assessment by duplex sequencing (DS), and comparing DS and multiparameter flow cytometry for MRD detection. A total of 76 patients will be included (38 patients in the intervention arm and 38 patients in the control arm). Planned stratification factors include 1) cytogenetics (intermediate/unknown vs. adverse karyotype) 2) antecedent hematologic disorder defined as prior MDS, MPN, or aplastic anemia (present vs. absent); and 3) reason to not receive intensive chemotherapy (ineligibility vs refusal). All patients will receive azacitidine at 75 mg/m2 IV over 10-40 minutes or SQ x 7 days on Days 1-7 or Days 5-2 (to avoid weekend administration) and, including a ramp-up phase to 400 mg /day venetoclax on Days 1-4. Venetoclax will be administered at 400 mg/day on the remaining days of the cycle for the first cycle and on Days 1-21 or 1-28 for subsequent cycles (depending on count recovery). Half of the patients will receive pembrolizumab intravenously starting on Day 8 of the first cycle and then q 3 weeks in cycles 2-6 (intervention arm), up to 2 years of maintenance. The other half will not receive pembrolizumab (control arm). After 15 efficacy-evaluable patients in each of the two study arms have had their primary endpoint results available, a formal futility and toxicity analysis will be conducted. Follow up will continue up to 2 years after the last patient is randomized Eligible patients are aged ≥60 years with newly diagnosed and pathologically-confirmed AML, including secondary AML arising from prior MDS and therapy-related AML, who are deemed ineligible for intensive chemotherapy according to treating physician's assessment or who refuse intensive chemotherapy. Candidates with high risk MDS and secondary AML arising from myeloproliferative neoplasm or other hematologic disorders are not allowed. Additional exclusion criteria include CBF-AML, prior allogeneic stem cell transplant, receipt of prior hypomethylating therapy for antecedent MDS, active infection requiring systemic therapy, and use of corticosteroids. Responses in AML patients will be assessed using European Leukemia Net 2017 response criteria. EFS will be calculated as the time from initial treatment to either disease relapse or death. OS will be calculated from time from initial treatment to death. Biomarker analyses will include an extensive array of immunologic and correlative studies that will evaluate PD-1 and PD-L1 expression, immune cell subset analysis, leukemia specific T-cell response, cytokine level, T-cell receptor (TCR) repertoire, as well as RNA-seq, gut microbiome characterization and metabolomics, and whole exome sequencing for tumor and germline DNA. Disclosures Zeidan: Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; MedImmune/Astrazeneca: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene / BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Trovagene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Acceleron: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; BeyondSpring: Consultancy, Honoraria; Cardiff Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ionis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society: Other; CCITLA: Other; Astex: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Taiho: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Cardinal Health: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria. Radich:Amgen: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding.

BACKGROUND Like most proliferating tumors, GBM relies heavily on accurate DNA repair for maintenance of genome stability. Dysfunction in repair of both single and double strand DNA breaks by PARP inhibition and impairment of homologous recombination, respectively, would be synthetically lethal. In this study we combined the PARP inhibitor olaparib with cediranib, a pan VEGF receptor inhibitor. Cediranib may mediate disruption in the homologous recombination pathway through its antiangiogenic properties. METHODS Through the Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network, we performed an open-label randomized phase II study of bevacizumab (BEV)- naive adult patients with first or second recurrence of glioblastoma after radiation and temozolomide. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either olaparib 200 mg by mouth twice daily with cediranib 30 mg by mouth daily or BEV 10 mg/kg IV every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 6 months (PFS6). Secondary endpoints included safety and overall survival. Exploratory objectives included blood, tissue and imaging-based biomarkers of response to treatment. RESULTS Seventy patients were enrolled. Median age was 60.5 years (range: 19–79), 39% females, median KPS was 90 (range: 60–100). Baseline characteristics were well balanced. With a data cut-off of 5/2/2019, PFS6 was 14% [95% CI 4–30%] in the cediranib/olaparib arm vs 30.9% [95% CI 12.7–51.2%] in the BEV arm. Median OS was 247 days in the cediranib/olaparib arm vs 201 days in the BEV arm, HR 0.816, 95% CI (0.431, 1.546). Related grade 3, 4 or 5 toxicity was experienced in 29% vs 12% of patients for the cediranib/olaparib vs BEV arm. CONCLUSION Treatment with cediranib/olaparib failed to increase PFS and OS in patients with recurrent GBM. Blood, tissue and imaging correlates will be presented to help understand why this treatment combination was unsuccessful.

BACKGROUND Women with gynecologic cancer may be at increased risk for adverse events (AEs) due to peritoneal disease burden and prior treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, and pelvic radiotherapy). This study compared the toxicity profiles of patients with and without gynecologic cancer enrolled in phase 1 trials. METHODS This was a retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Institute phase 1 database for all trials enrolling 1 or more patients with gynecologic cancer over 2 decades (1995-2015). Clinical parameters collected included demographics, cancer history, trial information, AEs, and responses. AEs (according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) were documented for each patient during treatment, and they were counted once and analyzed on the basis of the highest grade and drug attribution. Multiple regression models were used to compare AEs at the baseline and during treatment. RESULTS A total of 4269 patients enrolled in 150 trials were divided into 3 groups: 1) women with gynecologic cancer (n = 685), 2) women with nongynecologic cancer (n = 1698), and 3) men with cancer (n = 1886). The median age was 58 years. The mean number of total AEs reported during treatment was highest for women with gynecologic cancer (17.1 vs 14.7 vs 13.5; P

Targeted radiopharmaceuticals for therapeutic use deliver radionuclides directly to tumor anywhere in the body, and therefore, have renewed interest for clinical development in women with disseminated chemorefractory ovarian cancers. About two in every five women with advanced stage ovarian cancer outlive their disease after the first treatment phase, with the rest rendered incurable due to the chemorefractory nature of their disease. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program conducted 67 phase I or phase Ib trials among women with relapsed or refractory ovarian cancer between 1989 and 2017 in an effort to uncover tolerable and effective drug combinations intended to increase survival rates. None of these early clinical development phase trials involved radiopharmaceuticals. Here, the NCI provides its perspective on targeted radiopharmaceutical conjugates alone or in combination with its experimental therapeutics portfolio for women with relapsed or refractory ovarian cancer. An infrastructure build for Federal radiopharmaceutical medical monitoring and adverse event reporting has begun.

Radiopharmaceuticals, meaning drugs that hold a radionuclide intended for use in cancer patients for treatment of their disease or for palliation of their disease-related symptoms, have gained new interest for clinical development in adult patients with relapsed or refractory leukemia. About one-third of adult patients outlive their leukemia, with the remainder unable to attain complete remission status following the first phase of treatment due to refractory bone marrow or blood residual microscopic disease. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program conducted 49 phase 1-1b trials in adult patients with leukemia between 1986 and 2017 in an effort to discover tolerated and effective therapeutic drug combinations intended to improve remission and mortality rates. None of these trials involved radiopharmaceuticals. In this article, the NCI perspective on the challenges encountered in and on the future potential of radiopharmaceuticals alone or in combination for adult patients with relapsed or refractory leukemia is discussed. An effort is underway already to build-up the NCI's clinical trial enterprise infrastructure for radiopharmaceutical clinical development.

Experimental therapeutic oncology agents are often combined to circumvent tumor resistance to individual agents. However, most combination trials fail to demonstrate sufficient safety and efficacy to advance to a later phase. This study collected survey data on phase 1 combination therapy trials identified from ClinicalTrials.gov between January 1, 2003 and November 30, 2017 to assess trial design and the progress of combinations toward regulatory approval. Online surveys (N = 289, 23 questions total) were emailed to Principal Investigators (PIs) of early-phase National Cancer Institute and/or industry trials; 263 emails (91%) were received and 113 surveys completed (43%). Among phase 1 combination trials, 24.9% (95%CI: 15.3%, 34.4%) progressed to phase 2 or further; 18.7% (95%CI: 5.90%, 31.4%) progressed to phase 3 or regulatory approval; and 12.4% (95%CI: 0.00%, 25.5%) achieved regulatory approval. Observations of “clinical promise” in phase 1 combination studies were associated with higher rates of advancement past each milestone toward regulatory approval (cumulative OR = 11.9; p = 0.0002). Phase 1 combination study designs were concordant with Clinical Trial Design Task Force (CTD-TF) Recommendations 79.6% of the time (95%CI: 72.2%, 87.1%). Most discordances occurred where no plausible pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interactions were expected. Investigator-defined “clinical promise” of a combination is associated with progress toward regulatory approval. Although concordance between study designs of phase 1 combination trials and CTD-TF Recommendations was relatively high, it may be beneficial to raise awareness about the best study design to use when no plausible pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interactions are expected.

TPS182 Background: Radium-223 is an α-emitting radioisotope that induces DNA double-stranded breaks leading to cell death and has demonstrated improvement in overall survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) with bone metastases. PARP inhibitors, including olaparib and rucaparib, inhibit repair of DNA single-stranded beaks and have demonstrated clinical efficacy in mCRPC patients harboring alterations in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway. In extensive preclinical cancer models, PARP inhibitors have shown efficacy as radiosensitizing agents. We designed a phase 1/2 trial to test the clinical hypothesis that the combination of radium-223 with olaparib will demonstrate anti-tumor activity in patients with mCRPC irrespective of underlying HRR deficiency status. Methods: This is an open label, multi-center, phase 1/2 study (NCT03317392) evaluating the dosing, safety and efficacy of olaparib in combination with radium-223 in men with mCRPC with bone metastases. Patient must have 2 or more bone metastases and at least 1 bone metastasis that has not been treated with prior radiation therapy. Key exclusion criteria include the presence of visceral metastases or malignant lymphadenopathy exceeding 4 cm and prior therapy with radium-223 and/or PARP inhibitors. The phase 1 component of the study uses a 3+3 dose escalation design to determine the recommended phase 2 dose of olaparib in combination with standard of care dosing of Radium-223. The primary endpoint of the phase 1 component is safety. The phase 2 component of the study is an open-label, randomized study evaluating the combination of olaparib and radium-223 compared to radium-223 alone. The primary endpoint of the phase 2 component is radiographic progression-free survival as defined by Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 guidelines for bone metastases and RECIST v1.1 for non-bone metastases. Secondary endpoints include time to PSA progression, PSA response, time to subsequent therapy, time to first skeletal event, overall survival, and safety. Exploratory endpoints include stratification of response based on HRR alterations, whole exome sequencing of plasma cell free DNA both at baseline, on treatment, and at progression, and evaluation of changes in the tumor immune microenvironment with therapy. As of October 1, 2020, the phase 1 component has completed accrual and we anticipate opening the phase 2 component by December 2020. Clinical trial information: NCT03317392.

Purpose: The NCI Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program sponsors hepatic dysfunction phase I clinical trials (HDCT) and phase 1 clinical trials (P1CT) to determine safe doses and schedules of antineoplastic therapeutics. We sought to compare clinical outcomes between these trial types while stratifying by hepatotoxic agents. Experimental Design: Individual subject data were extracted from the records of 51 NCI-sponsored HDCT and P1CT. The NCI's Organ Dysfunction Working Group's hepatic impairment categorization and two drug-induced liver injury (DILI) scales (FDA R ratio and Hy's law) were used to classify subjects. The number of cycles administered and treatment discontinuation reason were also evaluated and compared between groups. Results: There were 513 and 1,328 subjects treated on HDCT (n = 9) and P1CT (n = 42), respectively. There were differing patterns of DILI with significant worsening of total bilirubin in subjects on HDCT, and worsening of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) in subjects on P1CT. Cholestatic peak patterns of liver impairment (predominant increases in alkaline phosphatase rather than transaminases) were more frequent in HDCT. Criteria for Hy's law were met by 11 subjects on P1CT, but not by any subjects on HDCT. Disease progression was the most common reason for treatment discontinuation, followed by adverse events at similar frequencies in both HDCT and P1CT. Conclusions: The differential effects on hepatotoxicity suggest that underlying hepatic function may affect susceptibility to and patterns of DILI. The incorporation of additional measures of hepatic function may help identify those at highest risk of hepatotoxicity in future trials because baseline liver tests did not. Clin Cancer Res; 22(22); 5472–9. ©2016 AACR.

Purpose The current dose-finding methodology for estimating the maximum tolerated dose of investigational anticancer agents is based on the cytotoxic chemotherapy paradigm. Molecularly targeted agents (MTAs) have different toxicity profiles, which may lead to more long-lasting mild or moderate toxicities as well as to late-onset and cumulative toxicities. Several approved MTAs have been poorly tolerated during long-term administration, leading to postmarketing dose optimization studies to re-evaluate the optimal treatment dose. Using data from completed bortezomib dose-finding trials, we explore its toxicity profile, optimize its dose, and examine the appropriateness of current designs for identifying an optimal dose. Patients and Methods We classified the toxicities captured from 481 patients in 14 bortezomib dose-finding studies conducted through the National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, computed the incidence of late-onset toxicities, and compared the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) among groups of patients receiving different doses of bortezomib. Results A total of 13,008 toxicities were captured: 46% of patients’ first DLTs and 88% of dose reductions or discontinuations of treatment because of toxicity were observed after the first cycle. Moreover, for the approved dose of 1.3 mg/m2, the estimated cumulative incidence of DLT was > 50%, and the estimated cumulative incidence of dose reduction or treatment discontinuation because of toxicity was nearly 40%. Conclusions When considering the entire course of treatment, the approved bortezomib dose exceeds the conventional ceiling DLT rate of 20% to 33%. Retrospective analysis of trial data provides an opportunity for dose optimization of MTAs. Future dose-finding studies of MTAs should take into account late-onset toxicities to ensure that a tolerable dose is identified for future efficacy and comparative trials.

BACKGROUND Dermatologic adverse events (AEs) can be key determinants of overall drug tolerability and of the maximum tolerated and recommended phase 2 doses in phase 1 trials. The authors present the largest dedicated analysis of dermatologic AEs on phase 1 trials to date. METHODS Data from a prospectively maintained database of patients with solid tumors who were enrolled onto Cancer Therapeutics Evaluation Program (CTEP)-sponsored phase 1 trials of cytotoxic or molecularly targeted agents (MTAs) from 2000 to 2010 were analyzed. Cumulative incidence, site, and type of drug-related dermatologic AEs were described and compared. The timing of worst drug-related dermatologic AEs was summarized. RESULTS In total, 3517 patients with solid tumors and 6165 unique, drug-related dermatologic AEs were analyzed, including 1545 patients on MTA-only trials, 671 on cytotoxic-only trials, and 1392 on combination MTA and cytotoxic trials. Of 1270 patients who had drug-related dermatologic events, the timing of the worst AE was as follows: 743 (cycle 1), 303 (cycle 2), and 224 (cycle 3 or later). Although the cumulative incidence of grade ≥3 drug-related AEs increased to 2.4% by cycle 6, it was only 1.6% at the end of cycle 1. The cumulative incidence of drug-related AEs was highest in patients who received MTA-only therapy (P

Purpose: Phase I studies rely on investigators to accurately attribute adverse events as related or unrelated to study drug. This information is ultimately used to help establish a safe dose. Attribution in the phase I setting has not been widely studied and assessing the accuracy of attribution is complicated by the lack of a gold standard. We examined dose–toxicity relationships as a function of attribution and toxicity category to evaluate for evidence of toxicity misattribution. Experimental Design: Individual patient records from 38 phase I studies activated between 2000 and 2010 were used. Dose was defined as a percentage of maximum dose administered on each study. Relationships between dose and patient-level toxicity were explored graphically and with logistic regression. All P values were two-sided. Results: 11,909 toxicities from 1,156 patients were analyzed. Unrelated toxicity was not associated with dose (P = 0.0920 for grade ≥3, P = 0.4194 for grade ≥1), whereas related toxicity increased with dose (P < 0.0001, both grade ≥3 and ≥1). Similar results were observed across toxicity categories. In the five-tier system, toxicities attributed as “possibly,” “probably,” or “definitely” related were associated with dose (all P < 0.0001), whereas toxicities attributed as “unlikely” or “unrelated” were not (all P > 0.1). Conclusions: Reassuringly, we did not observe an association between unrelated toxicity rate and dose, an association that could only have been explained by physician misattribution. Our findings also confirmed our expectation that related toxicity rate increases with dose. Our analysis supports simplifying attribution to a two-tier system by collapsing “possibly,” “probably,” and “definitely” related. Clin Cancer Res; 22(3); 553–9. ©2015 AACR. See related commentary by Sharma and Ratain, p. 527

Purpose Alterations in renal clearance of anticancer drugs can affect the occurrence of toxicities related to drug exposure. The National Cancer Institute and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) use different criteria to classify renal dysfunction. We examined those discrepancies and their potential association with the incidence of toxicities in patients enrolled onto Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program–sponsored single-agent phase I studies over three decades (1979 to 2010). Methods Data to estimate creatinine clearance according to the Cockcroft-Gault and Jelliffe formulas were available from 10,236 patients, and data to estimate creatinine clearance according to the six- and four-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formulas were available from a subset (n = 4,084). Patients were classified according to National Cancer Institute and FDA criteria, and the rates of clinically relevant toxicities were evaluated within groups and compared among groups. Results Cockcroft-Gault estimated renal function improved over time, which may be attributed to an increase in weight of patients in the same time frame. Approximately 36% of patients enrolled onto phase I trials had mild renal dysfunction by FDA criteria. Relative to normal function, mild renal dysfunction was associated with a statistically significant but small increase in grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic toxicity and any relevant toxicities. Conclusion Patients with mild renal dysfunction by FDA criteria have routinely been enrolled onto phase I studies of antineoplastics without clinically meaningful increase in the risk of toxicity. In future oncology renal dysfunction trials based on the FDA classification, the FDA mild group may only need to be activated when the moderate and normal groups differ substantially in tolerability or pharmacokinetics.

Rucaparib, a polyADPribose polymerase inhibitor (PARPi), was approved recently for use in women with high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC). It is now one of three approved PARPi for use in recurrent ovarian cancer, a family of agents that has changed the HGSOC treatment landscape and outcome. Clin Cancer Res; 23(23); 7155–7. ©2017 AACR. See related article by Balasubramaniam et al., p. 7165

Study Background: The presence of minimal residual disease (MRD) after IC in AML patients is often a harbinger of relapse, and therapeutic targeting of MRD has emerged as an important strategy to improve long-term outcomes. The importance of the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway in immune evasion of AML has been demonstrated in murine AML models whereby PD-L1 and PD-1 were upregulated in leukemia cells, and PD-1 blockade suppresses invivo leukemia cell proliferation and improved survival in AML bearing mice (Zhang et al., 2009; Zhou et al., 2010). Combining IC with immune checkpoint inhibition (ICPI) has resulted in a significant clinical activity in some advanced solid malignancies including non-small-cell lung cancer. A recent single-arm phase 2 study combining IC with nivolumab showed the combination was feasible and resulted in undetectable MRD in 53% of patients with Complete response (CR)/CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi) (Ravandi et al, 2019). Here we report on the design of the first randomized multi-center clinical trial of IC+ICPI in fit AML patients. Methods: The primary objective of this investigator-initiated Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP)-sponsored multi-institutional, randomized phase II study (NCT04214249) is to assess the percentage of patients with MRD negative CR (MRD- CR) as measured by flow cytometry at the end of first cycle of consolidation therapy with IC+ pembrolizumab and compare between the two study arms (Figure 1). Secondary objectives include rates of CR/CRi, complete remission with partial recovery count (CRh) and hematologic improvement (HI) to red blood cells and platelets, MRD negativity at Day 14, MRD-negative CR at end of induction therapy and MRD negative CR after last consolidation cycle, event free survival (EFS), relapse free survival (RFS), duration of response (DOR), and overall survival (OS), and proportion of patients who develop severe toxicity. Important exploratory objectives include MRD assessment by duplex sequencing (DS) and comparing DS and multiparameter flow cytometry for MRD detection. The study will consist of an induction, consolidation, and maintenance phase of therapy. A total of 124 patients will be included (62 patients in the intervention arm and 62 patients in the control arm). Planned stratification factors include 1) age (younger than 65 vs. 65 and older), 2) cytogenetics by FISH or metaphase karyotype (presence vs. absence of core binding factor inversions and translocations), and 3) t-AML or AML arising from prior/antecedent MDS. All patients will receive cytarabine at 100 mg/m2/day continuous infusion on Days 1-7 and either idarubicin 12 mg/m2/day IV on Days 1-3 or daunorubicin 60 mg/m2/day IV on Days 1-3. on Day 8 of the induction chemotherapy, half of the patients will receive pembrolizumab IV (intervention arm), and continue Q3 weeks throughout Induction/Consolidation, and thereafter for up to 2 years from the start of maintenance. The other half will not receive pembrolizumab (control arm). After 31 efficacy-evaluable patients (patients who had a bone marrow biopsy done after the first consolidation cycle) in each of the two study arms have had their primary endpoint results available, a formal futility and toxicity analysis will be conducted. Follow up will continue up to 2 years after the last patient is randomized. Eligible patients are aged ≥18 and ≤75 years with newly diagnosed and pathologically-confirmed AML, including secondary AML arising from prior MDS and therapy-related AML. Patients with FLT3-mutated AML are excluded as well as those with prior allogeneic stem cell transplant, active infection requiring systemic therapy, and requiring use of high dose corticosteroids. Responses in AML patients will be assessed using European Leukemia Net 2017 response criteria. EFS will be calculated as the time from initial treatment to either disease relapse or death. OS will be calculated from time from initial treatment to death. Biomarker analyses will include an extensive array of immunologic and correlative studies that will evaluate PD-1 and PD-L1 expression, immune cell subset analysis, leukemia specific T-cell response, cytokine level, T-cell receptor (TCR) repertoire, as well as RNA-seq, gut microbiome characterization and metabolomics, and whole exome sequencing for tumor and germline DNA. Figure 1 Disclosures Zeidan: Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Cardinal Health: Consultancy, Honoraria; Acceleron: Consultancy, Honoraria; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society: Other; Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene / BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; BeyondSpring: Consultancy, Honoraria; Cardiff Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ionis: Consultancy, Honoraria; MedImmune/Astrazeneca: Research Funding; Trovagene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Astex: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Taiho: Consultancy, Honoraria; CCITLA: Other; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria. Radich:Amgen: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Introduction: Emerging data from the COVID-19 pandemic suggest that an IL6-mediated cytokine release syndrome (CRS) may contribute to disease severity. Tocilizumab (Toci), an anti-IL6 receptor antibody, is FDA approved for the treatment of chimeric antigen receptor T cell-associated CRS for patients (pts) as young as 2 years of age. Phase 3 randomized testing of toci in pts with severe COVID-19 disease is ongoing. Cancer pts infected with SARS-CoV-2 are at risk for life-threatening or fatal complications. Outcomes are particularly dismal for those with hematologic malignancies or lung cancer. Due to disease and treatment-related complications, cancer patients may not be eligible for enrollment on COVID-19 directed studies, including the aforementioned randomized phase 3 study of toci. Furthermore, access to clinical trials is frequently restricted to those who are adults; however, children with cancer may also be predisposed to developing more severe complications from COVID-19. Improving access to clinical trial enrollment for vulnerable, minority, and underserved populations at increased risk of complications from COVID-19 is imperative. Methods: We developed a multicenter, single-arm, open-label, expanded-access treatment study to provide toci to cancer pts with COVID-19. Coordinated through the National Cancer Institute, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, and the Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, this expanded-access trial is being conducted to provide clinical trial access to this potentially beneficial therapy in cancer pts and to collect data on clinical outcomes. The primary objective is to enhance access to toci for cancer patients who cannot participate in the randomized phase 3 toci trial with a specific emphasis on enrollment of those who belong to high-risk and minority populations and children. Hospitalized cancer subjects > 2 years of age with COVID-19 respiratory compromise may be eligible to receive toci. Treatment will allow for up to two doses of toci and will also evaluate the efficacy of a lower dose of toci in those who are not intubated. Concurrent receipt of investigational cancer and/or antiviral therapy and other supportive therapies is permitted. Exploratory objectives will include analysis of inflammatory cytokines, monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 viral load, and determination of pharmacokinetics of toci to facilitate exposure-response analysis. Results: This trial was officially activated on May 28, 2020, and is being opened at multiple sites across the United States from the National Cancer Institute’s Community Oncology Research Program, the National Clinical Trials Network, and the Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network. Updates will be presented at the AACR Virtual Meeting: COVID-19 and Cancer. Conclusions: Targeting an unmet need, this trial provides a prospective mechanism for tocilizumab access and clinical outcome collection in cancer patients with severe COVID-19 disease. Citation Format: Nirali N. Shah, Percy Ivy, Rebecca Enos, Matthew J. Boron, Rodney Howells, Boris Freidlin, Carmen Allegra, Margaret M. Mooney, Worta McCaskill-Stevens, James H. Doroshow, Richard F. Little. Expanded access trial of tocilizumab in COVID19+ hospitalized cancer patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Virtual Meeting: COVID-19 and Cancer; 2020 Jul 20-22. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2020;26(18_Suppl):Abstract nr PO-092.

11506 Background: Uterine leiomyosarcoma (uLMS) is an aggressive sarcoma subtype with frequent metastatic relapse. After failure of front-line chemotherapy, remaining options provide limited benefit (trabectedin: ORR 11%, mPFS 4.0 mos; pazopanib: ORR 11%, median PFS 2.9 mos; dacarbazine: ORR 9%, mPFS 1.5 mos). Recent molecular studies suggest uLMS harbors characteristic defects in the homologous recombination (HR) DNA repair pathway, including somatic biallelic BRCA2 deletion in 10%, implicating potential sensitivity to PARP-inhibitor based treatment approaches. In preclinical uLMS models in which temozolomide (T, an oral equivalent to dacarbazine) or the PARP inhibitor olaparib (O) showed limited single agent activity, the combination of T + O was highly effective in inhibiting uLMS tumor growth and promoting apoptosis. Methods: NCI protocol #10250 is a single-arm, open-label, multi-center phase II study evaluating T + O in advanced uLMS. Pts had progression on ≥ 1 prior line and ECOG PS ≤ 2. Pts received T 75 mg/m2 PO daily + O 200 mg PO BID days 1-7 in 21-day cycles. Primary endpoint was ORR. A one-stage binomial design was used. If ≥ 5/22 responded, the treatment was considered promising (95% power; α = 0.06). All pts underwent paired tumor biopsies. Correlative assays to evaluate for HR deficiency (whole exome sequencing/RNAseq, RAD51 foci formation) and for intrinsic PARP inhibitor resistance (SLFN11 expression) will be correlated with response. Results: 22 patients were evaluable (median age 55, median prior treatment lines 3). Median follow-up was 10.8 mos. Primary endpoint, ORR within 6 mos of initiating treatment, was 23% (5/22). Overall ORR was 27% (6/22). Median PFS was 6.9 mos (95% CI: 5.4 mos – not estimable (NE)). Median duration of response (DOR) was 12.0 mos (95% CI: 9.5 mos – NE). Hematologic toxicity was common (grade 3/4 neutropenia, 77%; thrombocytopenia 32%) but manageable with dose modification. Correlative assays are ongoing with plans to present at the meeting. An immunohistochemical assay for RAD51 foci has been adapted for uLMS samples and clearly distinguishes BRCA2- deleted and wild-type tumors. Conclusions: NCI 10250 met the prespecified primary efficacy endpoint of ORR in a population of patients with heavily pre-treated uLMS. Responses are durable (median DOR 12 mos). Correlative assays are being completed to evaluate whether uLMS tumors with HR deficiency or with preserved SLFN11 expression are most sensitive to T + O and may underlie durable responses. A randomized study of the combination is planned. Clinical trial information: NCT03880019.

Clinical ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) inhibitors have reinvigorated enthusiasm for radiochemotherapy treatment of patients with regionally advanced stage cervical cancers. About two-thirds of patients outlive their cervical cancer (1), even though up to half of their tumors retain residual microscopic disease (2). The National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program conducted two prospective trials of triapine-cisplatin-radiation to improve upon this finding by precisely targeting cervical cancer's overactive RNR. Triapine's potent inactivation of RNR arrests cells at the G1/S cell cycle restriction checkpoint and enhances cisplatin-radiation cytotoxicity. In this article, we provide perspective on challenges encountered in and future potential of clinical development of a triapine-cisplatin-radiation combination for patients with regionally advanced cervical cancer. New trial results and review presented here suggest that a triapine-cisplatin-radiation combination may offer molecular cell cycle target control to maximize damage in cancers and to minimize injury to normal cells. A randomized trial now accrues patients with regionally advanced stage cervical cancer to evaluate triapine's contribution to clinical benefit after cisplatin-radiation (clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02466971).

Purpose Patients with high-grade gliomas (HGG) are frequently excluded from first-in-human solid tumor trials because of perceived poor prognosis, excessive toxicities, concomitant drug interactions, and poor efficacy. We conducted an analysis of outcomes from select, single-agent phase I studies in patients with HGG. We compared outcomes to pooled analysis of published studies in solid tumors with various molecular and cytotoxic drugs evaluated as single agents or as combinations. Patient and Methods Individual records of patients with recurrent HGG enrolled onto Adult Brain Tumor Consortium trials of single-agent, cytotoxic or molecular agents from 2000 to 2008 were analyzed for baseline characteristics, toxicities, responses, and survival. Results Our analysis included 327 patients with advanced, refractory HGG who were enrolled onto eight trials involving targeted molecular (n = 5) and cytotoxic (n = 3) therapies. At enrollment, patients had a median Karnofsky performance score of 90 and median age of 52 years; 62% were men, 63% had glioblastoma, and the median number of prior systemic chemotherapies was one. Baseline laboratory values were in an acceptable range to meet eligibility criteria. Patients were on the study for a median of two cycles (range, < one to 56 cycles), and 96% were evaluable for primary end points. During cycle 1, grade ≥ 3 nonhematologic and grade ≥ 4 hematologic toxicities were 5% (28 of 565 adverse events) and 0.9% (five of 565 adverse events), respectively, and 66% of these occurred at the highest dose level. There was one death attributed to drug. Overall response rate (complete and partial response) was 5.5%. Median progression-free and overall survival times were 1.8 and 6 months, respectively. Conclusion Patients with HGG who meet standard eligibility criteria may be good candidates for solid tumor phase I studies with single-agent molecular or cytotoxic drugs with favorable preclinical rationale and pharmacokinetic properties in this population.

Purpose A phase II study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of single-agent RO4929097 (a gamma-secretase inhibitor) in patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Experimental design Women with progressive platinum-resistant ovarian cancer treated with ≤2 chemotherapy regimens for recurrent disease were enrolled in this trial. Patients received oral RO4929097 at 20mg once daily, 3days on/4days off each week in a three week cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) rate at the end of 4cycles. Secondary objectives included assessment of the safety of RO4929097 and exploration of molecular correlates of outcome in archival tumor tissue and serum. Results Of 45 patients enrolled, 40 were evaluable for response. Thirty-seven (82%) patients had high-grade ovarian cancer. No objective responses were observed. Fifteen patients (33%) had stable disease as their best response, with a median duration of 3.1months. The median PFS for the whole group was 1.3months (1.2–2.5). Treatment was generally well tolerated with 10% of patients discontinuing treatment due to an adverse event. In high grade serous ovarian cancer patients, the median PFS trended higher when the expression of intracellular Notch (NICD) protein by immunohistochemistry was high versus low (3.3 versus 1.3months, p=0.09). No clear relationship between circulating angiogenic factors and PFS was found despite a suggestion of an improved outcome with higher baseline VEGFA levels. Conclusions RO4929097 has insufficient activity as a single-agent in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer to warrant further study as monotherapy. Future studies are needed to explore the potential for cohort enrichment using NICD expression.

Ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) is an enzyme involved in the de novo synthesis of deoxyribonucleotides, which are critical for DNA replication and DNA repair. Triapine is a small-molecule RNR inhibitor. A phase I trial studied the safety of triapine in combination with cisplatin-paclitaxel in patients with advanced stage or metastatic solid tumor cancers in an effort to capitalize on disrupted DNA damage repair. A total of 13 patients with a variety of previously-treated cancers were given a 96-hour continuous intravenous (i.v.) infusion of triapine (40-120 mg/m2) on day 1, and then 3-hour i.v. paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) followed by 1-hour i.v. cisplatin (50-75 mg/m2) on day 3. This combination regimen was repeated every 21 days. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for each agent was identified to be triapine (80 mg/m2), cisplatin (50 mg/m2), and paclitaxel (80 mg/m2). Common grade 3 or 4 toxicities included reversible anemia, leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, or electrolyte abnormalities. The combination regimen of triapine-cisplatin-paclitaxel resulted in no objective responses; however, five (83%) of six patients treated at the MTD had stable disease between one and eight months duration. This phase I study showed that the combination regimen of triapine-cisplatin-paclitaxel was safe, and provides a rational basis for a follow-up phase II trial to evaluate efficacy and progression-free survival in women with metastatic or recurrent uterine cervix cancer.

BACKGROUND The current study was conducted to evaluate the safety and biological activity of dual inhibition of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway with combined bevacizumab and cediranib (a VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor). METHODS This was a 3 + 3 dose escalation study in patients with advanced solid tumors. Cediranib was given orally daily for 21 days and bevacizumab intravenously every 2 weeks. Pharmacokinetics and correlates (nitric oxide synthase, nitrate oxide, and circulating tumor cells) were assessed. RESULTS Fifty-one patients were treated. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) (grade 3-4; graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events [version 3.0]) observed included 1 patient with chest pain, 1 patient with fatigue, 2 patients with thrombocytopenia, 3 patients with hypertension (1 with intracranial hemorrhage), and 1 patient with grade 5 hemoptysis. Moreover, 2 patients presented with grade 3 intracranial bleeding beyond the DLT window. Dose level 2 (cediranib at a dose of 20 mg/day and bevacizumab at a dose of 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks) was selected as the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D); 17 patients were treated at dose level 2 with 1 DLT and no intracranial bleeding or severe hypertension reported. Pharmacokinetics of cediranib at dose level 3 demonstrated a 46% to 77% increase in area under the curve (0-24 hours) on cycle 1 day 1 compared with historical controls. Four patients attained partial remissions: inflammatory breast cancer (-54%), basal cell carcinoma (-33%), alveolar soft part sarcoma (-33%), and synovial sarcoma (-32%). Patients with a lower circulating tumor cell count (

Background: Recurring mutations have been identified in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) which translate to therapeutic targets. Isocitrate dehydrogenase-1 and -2 (IDH1/2) mutations occur in ~20% of AML, and up to 12% of patients with MDS. Three conserved mutational hotspots in the IDH enzymes alter their function and lead to the production of (R)-2-hydroxyglutarate (2HG), an oncometabolite with numerous downstream effects, including impaired DNA damage repair. Specifically, homologous recombination (HR) is impaired by inhibiting the function of histone demethylases that are critical for HR and recruitment of the HR machinery to sites of DNA damage. In HR deficient tumors poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) enzymes mediate a key salvage pathway. PARP inhibition in HR deficient tumors leads to synthetic lethality via simultaneous inhibition of HR and SSB mediated DNA repair. Our group previously demonstrated synthetic lethality with PARP inhibition in IDH mutant cells lines, and other IDH mutant models including primary patient-derived cell lines and genetically-matched tumor xenografts. Study Design and Methods: The PRIME trial (NCI10264) is a proof of concept, biomarker-driven, multi-institution, phase II open label clinical trial to assess the overall response of IDH1/2 mutant relapsed/refractory AML and MDS to PARP inhibitor monotherapy with olaparib. The clinical trial is executed by the Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network of the NCI. The Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program will provide olaparib. Eligibility criteria include documented IDH1 or IDH2 mutation in blood or bone marrow within 30 days of enrollment based on mutational testing by PCR or sequencing in a CLIA certified laboratory and willingness to undergo a bone marrow biopsy. Patients will be treated with olaparib 300 mg q12hrs each day of a 28-day cycle, using a tablet formulation, until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent or death. Blood and bone marrow samples for 2-HG analysis will be collected prior to starting therapy and after 1 cycle (28 days), cycle 2, 3, 6, 9, 12 or when there is concern for disease progression (Figure 1). A Simon two-stage optimal design will be used to test the null (ORR=10%) versus the alternative hypothesis (ORR=40%) in each arm. In the first stage, 9 patients will be accrued in each arm. If one or fewer responses are observed in these 9 patients, that arm will be stopped early for futility. Otherwise, 11 additional patients will be accrued for a total of 18 in each arm. We reject the null hypothesis if at least 5 responses are observed in these 20 patients. In each arm, we have approximately 90% power to detect a 30% increase in ORR at a one-sided type I error rate of 0.05. Primary endpoint: Overall response rate (ORR) of 40%, i.e., a 30% ORR improvement (40% vs. historical control ORR = 10%) based on MDS International Working Group 2006 criteria and AML MDS International Working Group 2003 criteria after 6 cycles of treatment. Cumulative ORR will include complete remission, complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery, partial response, and bone marrow complete remission. Secondary endpoints: Progression-free survival (the interval between the time of initiation of olaparib to the time of documentation of olaparib failure or last follow-up) and overall survival (the interval between the time of initiation of olaparib to the time of death or last follow-up) for the trial. Exploratory studies: The PRIME trial will also test the utility of 2-HG and DNA damage markers such as γ-H2AX as potential biomarkers of response to olaparib. Using multiple viability assays on leukemia cell lines and bone marrow cultures we will assess synergistic therapeutic combinations to further improve outcomes in this patient population. To confirm efficacy in vivo without undue toxicity, promising combination therapies will be confirmed in cytokine-humanized immunodeficient "MISTRG" mice. We will also examine the impact of PARP inhibitors on the genomic, proteomic, metabolomic and immunologic landscape of IDH 1/2-mutant hematologic malignancies using DNA whole exome sequencing (WES), RNA-Seq, and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry assessment of oncometabolites. Disclosures Bindra: Cybrexa: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. Prebet:pfizer: Honoraria; pfizer: Honoraria; pfizer: Honoraria; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; pfizer: Honoraria; Tetraphase: Consultancy; novartis: Honoraria; novartis: Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; novartis: Honoraria; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; pfizer: Honoraria; novartis: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; novartis: Honoraria. OffLabel Disclosure: We will be using PARP inhibitors as a novel therapy for patients with relapsed or refractory AML and high risk MDS based on preclinical data.

Lessons Learned The negative results are consistent with the negative results of large phase III trials in which docetaxel plus antiangiogenic agents were used in patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The negative data underscore that, despite a sound biological rationale and supportive early-phase clinical results, adding antiangiogenic agents to docetaxel for mCRPC is a great challenge. Background Inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signaling abrogates tumor-induced angiogenesis to constrain tumor growth, and can be exploited therapeutically by using cediranib, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor of VEGF receptor signaling. Our preliminary phase I trial data showed that adding cediranib to docetaxel plus prednisone (DP) was safe and feasible, with early evidence for efficacy in patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Methods This multicenter phase II trial assessed whether adding cediranib to DP improves efficacy of DP in patients with mCRPC. Chemotherapy-naive patients with mCRPC were randomly assigned to receive either docetaxel (75 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks) with prednisone (5 mg twice daily) plus cediranib (30 mg once daily; the DP+C arm) or DP only (the DP arm). The primary endpoint was to compare 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate between the two arms. Secondary endpoints included 6-month overall survival (OS), objective tumor and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rates, biomarkers, and adverse events. Results The 6-month PFS rate in a total of 58 patients was only numerically higher in the DP+C arm (61%) compared with the DP arm (57%). Similarly, the 6-month OS rate, objective tumor and PSA response rates, and biomarkers were not significantly different between the two arms. Increased baseline levels of interleukin 6 (IL-6), however, were significantly associated with increased risk of progression. Neutropenia was the only grade 4 toxicity (38% in the DP+C arm vs. 18% in the DP arm). Conclusion Combining cediranib with docetaxel + prednisone failed to demonstrate superior efficacy, compared with docetaxel + prednisone, and added toxicity. Our data do not support pursuing the combination further in patients with mCRPC.

e18239 Background: The NCI Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) has developed guidance and reporting measures to balance inclusion of younger cancer patients on trials with minimizing potential risks. CTEP began mandating the use of 2 forms of contraception for all participants of child bearing potential starting in the early 2000s in trials of thalidomide in multiple myeloma. The development of oncology clinical trials using other known teratogens such as Hedgehog Inhibitors led to development of comprehensive guidance on enrolling women on clinical trials. In 2012, CTEP further updated its guidelines to develop a reporting system for pregnancies occurring on clinical trial. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the CTEP Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) to identify unanticipated pregnancies in subjects or their partners while on oncology clinical trials. Results: 33 events were identified between 2011 and 2018, including 21 female and 11 male. One female subject got pregnant twice on the same trial. In female subjects, there were 4 live births, 1 active pregnancy, 5 spontaneous abortions, 5 medical termination of pregnancy and 1 death of the mother due to cancer. Outcome of pregnancy was not reported for 6 female subjects. Of the live births: 3 received an immunotherapy checkpoint inhibitor, and 1 received trastuzumab. Of 5 spontaneous abortions: 3 received cytotoxic chemotherapy, one radiation and one trastuzumab. Of 12 male subjects whose partners got pregnant: 3 live births, 2 active pregnancy, no pregnancy loss. Outcome of pregnancy was not reported for 6 male subjects. Conclusions: Though uncommon, pregnancies on clinical trial still occur despite requiring subjects to use 2 effective forms of contraception. With the increasing number of younger subjects being included in clinical trials for cancer, information about pregnancy outcomes in patients being treated with experimental agents is scientifically valuable and important to collect from study subjects and their partners. Since not all anti-cancer agents are of equal teratogenic potential, it is vital that this data continues to be collected and reported, including long term follow up of the pregnancy and the health of the child.

Myeloproliferative neoplasms are a varied group of disorders that can have prolonged chronic phases, but eventually accelerate and can transform into a secondary acute myeloid leukemia that is ultimately fatal. Triapine is a novel inhibitor of the M2 subunit of ribonucleotide reductase. Sequential inhibition of ribonucleotide reductase with triapine and an M1 ribonucleotide reductase inhibitor (fludarabine) was noted to be safe, and led to a 29% complete plus partial response rate in myeloproliferative neoplasms. This article reports the findings of a phase II trial of triapine (105 mg/m(2)/day) followed by fludarabine (30 mg/m(2)/day) daily for 5 consecutive days in 37 patients with accelerated myeloproliferative neoplasms and secondary acute myeloid leukemia. The overall response rate was 49% (18/37), with a complete remission rate of 24% (9/37). Overall response rates and complete remissions were seen in all disease subsets, including secondary acute myeloid leukemia, in which the overall response rate and complete remission rate were 48% and 33%, respectively. All patients with known JAK2 V617F mutations (6/6) responded. The median overall survival of the entire cohort was 6.9 months, with a median overall survival of both overall responders and complete responders of 10.6 months. These data further demonstrate the promise of sequential inhibition of ribonucleotide reductase in patients with accelerated myeloproliferative neoplasms and secondary acute myeloid leukemia. This study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00381550).

Antiangiogenic therapy has shown clear activity and improved survival benefit for certain tumor types. However, an incomplete understanding of the mechanisms of action of antiangiogenic agents has hindered optimization and broader application of this new therapeutic modality. In particular, the impact of antiangiogenic therapy on tumor blood flow and oxygenation status (i.e., the role of vessel pruning versus normalization) remains controversial. This controversy has become critical as multiple phase III trials of anti-VEGF agents combined with cytotoxics failed to show overall survival benefit in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (nGBM) patients and several other cancers. Here, we shed light on mechanisms of nGBM response to cediranib, a pan-VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, using MRI techniques and blood biomarkers in prospective phase II clinical trials of cediranib with chemoradiation vs. chemoradiation alone in nGBM patients. We demonstrate that improved perfusion occurs only in a subset of patients in cediranib-containing regimens, and is associated with improved overall survival in these nGBM patients. Moreover, an increase in perfusion is associated with improved tumor oxygenation status as well as with pharmacodynamic biomarkers, such as changes in plasma placenta growth factor and sVEGFR2. Finally, treatment resistance was associated with elevated plasma IL-8 and sVEGFR1 posttherapy. In conclusion, tumor perfusion changes after antiangiogenic therapy may distinguish responders vs. nonresponders early in the course of this expensive and potentially toxic form of therapy, and these results may provide new insight into the selection of glioblastoma patients most likely to benefit from anti-VEGF treatments.

BackgroundPhase 2 trials suggest that prolonged intravenous (IV) infusion of the topoisomerase 1 inhibitor topotecan may be less toxic than when given by standard IV bolus 5-day administration. Oxaliplatin exhibits efficacy in platinum-pretreated disease and shows preclinical synergy with topoisomerase 1 inhibitors. We sought to determine the efficacy and safety of oxaliplatin plus infusion topotecan in recurrent platinum-pretreated ovarian cancer.MethodsPatients with recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancers previously treated with 1 to 2 prior regimens including platinum and taxane received oxaliplatin (85 mg/m2day 1 and day 15) and topotecan (0.4 mg/m2per day) by continuous IV infusion over 14 days every 4 weeks. The primary objective of the trial was to estimate the objective response rate in platinum-resistant disease (stratum 1) and in platinum-sensitive disease (stratum 2). Toxicities were assessed in all patients.ResultsThirty-eight patients received 144 cycles of therapy (median, 4; range, 1–6). The most common grade 3 and grade 4 toxicities included thrombocytopenia (grade 3, 37%; and grade 4, 19%), neutropenia (grade 3, 37%; grade 4, 11%), and anemia (grade 3, 15%). Response occurred in 4 of 19 patients in stratum I (21%; 95% confidence intervals, 6%–46%) and 9 of 19 patients in stratum 2 (47%; 95% CI, 24%–71%). Three in each stratum had lengthy complete responses.ConclusionsBiweekly oxaliplatin plus a 14-day continuous IV infusion of topotecan, given monthly, is an active regimen in platinum-pretreated ovarian cancer and merits additional evaluation.

Summary Background To determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) and assess the safety, pharmacokinetics (PKs) and pharmacodynamics of RO4929097in combination with temsirolimus. Methods Escalating doses of RO4929097 and temsirolimus were administered at three dose levels. Patients received once daily oral RO4929097 on a 3 days on/4 days off schedule every week, and weekly intravenous temsirolimus. Blood samples were collected for PK analysis. Archival tissue specimens were collected for Notch pathway biomarker analysis and genotyping of frequent oncogenic mutations. Results Seventeen patients with refractory advanced solid tumors were enrolled in three dose levels (DLs): DL1 (RO4929097 10 mg; Temsirolimus 25 mg), DL2 (RO4929097 20 mg; Temsirolimus 25 mg), and DL3 (RO4929097 20 mg; Temsirolimus 37.5 mg). The most common toxicities related to the study drug combination included: fatigue (82 %; grade 3 6 %), mucositis, (71 %; grade 3 6 %), neutropenia (59 %; grade 3 12 %), anemia (59 %; grade 3 0 %), and hypertriglyceridemia (59 %; grade 3 0 %). Two dose-limiting toxicities, grade 3 rash and grade 3 mucositis, were observed in the same patient in the first dose level prompting dose expansion. Eleven patients (73 %) had stable disease as their best response. Co-administration of RO4929097 was associated with increased clearance and reduced exposure to temsirolimus, suggestive of drug-drug interaction via CYP3A4 induction. No correlation between the expression of Notch pathway biomarkers or genotype and time to progression was noted. Conclusions RO4929097 can be safely combined with temsirolimus in patients with advanced solid tumors. The RP2D was established at 20 mg of RO4929097 combined with 37.5 mg of temsirolimus. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10637-013-0001-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP)-inhibitors and anti-angiogenics have activity in recurrent ovarian and breast cancer; however, the effect of combined therapy against PARP and angiogenesis in this population has not been reported. We investigated the toxicities and recommended phase 2 dosing (RP2D) of the combination of cediranib, a multitargeted inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-1/2/3 and olaparib, a PARP-inhibitor (NCT01116648). Methods Cediranib tablets once daily and olaparib capsules twice daily were administered orally in a standard 3+3 dose escalation design. Patients with recurrent ovarian or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer were eligible. Patients had measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 or met Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) CA125 criteria. No prior PARP-inhibitors or anti-angiogenics in the recurrent setting were allowed. Results 28 patients (20 ovarian, 8 breast) enrolled to 4 dose levels. 2 dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) (1 grade 4 neutropenia ⩾4 days; 1 grade 4 thrombocytopenia) occurred at the highest dose level (cediranib 30 mg daily; olaparib 400 mg twice daily [BID]). The RP2D was cediranib 30 mg daily and olaparib 200 mg BID. Grade 3 or higher toxicities occurred in 75% of patients, and included grade 3 hypertension (25%) and grade 3 fatigue (18%). One grade 3 bowel obstruction occurred. The overall response rate (ORR) in the 18 RECIST-evaluable ovarian cancer patients was 44%, with a clinical benefit rate (ORR plus stable disease (SD) >24 weeks) of 61%. None of the seven evaluable breast cancer patients achieved clinical response; two patients had stable disease for >24 weeks. Interpretation The combination of cediranib and olaparib has haematologic DLTs and anticipated class toxicities, with promising evidence of activity in ovarian cancer patients.

Purpose: Pazopanib is a potent, multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor; however, there is limited information regarding the effects of liver function on pazopanib metabolism and pharmacokinetics. The objective of this study was to establish the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and pharmacokinetic profile of pazopanib in patients with varying degrees of hepatic dysfunction. Experimental Design: Patients with any solid tumors or lymphoma were stratified into four groups based on the degree of hepatic dysfunction according to the National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group (NCI-ODWG) criteria. Pazopanib was given orally once a day on a 21-day cycle. A modified 3+3 design was used. Results: Ninety-eight patients were enrolled. Patients in the mild group tolerated 800 mg per day. The moderate and severe groups tolerated 200 mg per day. Pharmacokinetic data in the mild group were similar to the data in the normal group. Comparison of the median Cmax and area under the curve [AUC(0–24)] in the moderate or severe groups at 200 mg per day to the values in the normal and mild groups at 800 mg per day indicated less than dose–proportional systemic exposures in patients with moderate and severe hepatic impairment. This suggests that the lower maximum-tolerated dose in the moderate and severe group is not due to a decrease in drug clearance or alteration in the proportion of metabolites. Conclusions: In patients with mild liver dysfunction, pazopanib is well tolerated at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–approved dose of 800 mg per day. Patients with moderate and severe liver dysfunction tolerated 200 mg per day. Clin Cancer Res; 19(13); 3631–9. ©2013 AACR.

Summary Purpose To establish the recommended phase II dose of the oral γ-secretase inhibitor RO4929097 (RO) in combination with gemcitabine; secondary objectives include the evaluation of safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, biomarkers of Notch signaling and preliminary anti-tumor activity. Methods Patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled in cohorts of escalating RO dose levels (DLs). Tested RO DLs were 20 mg, 30 mg, 45 mg and 90 mg. RO was administered orally, once daily on days 1–3, 8–10, 15–17, 22–24. Gemcitabine was administered at 1,000 mg/m2 on d1, 8, and 15 in 28 d cycles. Dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were assessed by CTCAE v4. Serial plasma was collected for RO (total and unbound) and gemcitabine pharmacokinetic analysis. Biomarkers of Notch signaling were assessed by immunohistochemistry in archival tissue. Antitumor activity was evaluated (RECIST 1.1). Results A total of 18 patients were enrolled to establish the recommended phase II dose. Of these, 3 patients received 20 mg RO, 7 patients received 30 mg RO, 6 patients received 45 mg RO and 2 patients received 90 mg RO. DLTs were grade 3 transaminitis (30 mg RO), grade 3 transaminitis and maculopapular rash (45 mg RO), and grade 3 transaminitis and failure to receive 75 % of planned RO doses secondary to prolonged neutropenia (90 mg); all were reversible. The maximum tolerated dose was exceeded at 90 mg RO. Pharmacokinetic analysis of both total and free RO confirmed the presence of autoinduction at 45 and 90 mg. Median levels of Notch3 staining were higher in individuals who received fewer than 4 cycles (p = 0.029). Circulating angiogenic factor levels did not correlate with time to progression or ≥ grade 3 adverse events. Best response (RECIST 1.1) was partial response (nasopharyngeal cancer) and stable disease > 4 months was observed in 3 patients (pancreas, tracheal, and breast primary cancers). Conclusions RO and gemcitabine can be safely combined. The recommended phase II dose of RO was 30 mg in combination with gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2. Although RO exposure was limited by the presence of autoinduction, RO levels achieved exceeded the area under the concentration-time curve for 0–24 h (AUC0–24) predicted for efficacy in preclinical models using daily dosing. Evidence of clinical antitumor activity and prolonged stable disease were identified.

Background Inhibition of angiogenesis has emerged as an effective therapeutic strategy in metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). In this single arm phase 2 study, we evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of cediranib (AZD2171) a potent angiogenesis inhibitor in first line mRCC. Methods Eligible patients who had no prior systemic therapy received cediranib 45 mg orally once daily continuously. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints were clinical benefit rate (ORR plus stable disease (SD) ≥ 4 months), duration of response, progression free survival (PFS), median overall survival (OS), safety and tolerability. Results Between January 2006 and April 2008, 44 patients were accrued. The median age was 62 (range 44–83) and performance status was either 0 (22 patients) or 1 (22 patients). Of the 39 evaluable patients there were 15 (38 %) partial responses (95 % CI: 23–55 %); 18 stable disease (SD) for a clinical benefit rate of 33/39 = 85 % (95 % CI: 69–94 %) and 6 progressive disease. Median PFS was 8.9 months (95 % CI: 5.1–12.9); and median OS was 28.6 months (95 % CI: 18.2–37.3 months). The most frequent grade 3 or higher AEs included hypertension, fatigue, hand-foot syndrome and diarrhea. Conclusions Cediranib demonstrated significant anti-tumour activity in first line, treatment-naive mRCC, with efficacy parameters comparable to the other approved agents (sunitinib and pazopanib) in this setting. The main toxicities were fatigue, diarrhea and hypertension. Based on these encouraging results, further evaluation of cediranib in mRCC at a more tolerable dose of 30 mg daily appears warranted.

Advanced-stage malignancies have increased deoxyribonucleotide demands in DNA replication and repair, making deoxyribonucleotide supply a potential exploitable target for therapy based on ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) inhibition. A dose-finding phase I trial was conducted of intravenous (i.v.) triapine, a small-molecule RNR inhibitor, and cisplatin chemotherapy in patients with advanced-stage solid tumor malignancies. Patients received dose-finding levels of i.v. triapine (48–96 mg/m2) and i.v. cisplatin (20–75 mg/m2) on 1 of 3 different schedules. The primary endpoint was to identify the maximum tolerated dose of a triapine–cisplatin combination. Secondary endpoints included the rate of triapine–cisplatin objective response and the pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of a single oral triapine dose. (Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT00024323). The MTD was 96 mg/m2 triapine daily days 1–4 and 75 mg/m2 cisplatin split over day 2 and day 3. Frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events included fatigue, dyspnea, leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and electrolyte abnormalities. No objective responses were observed; 5 (50%) of 10 patients treated at the MTD had stable disease. Pharmacokinetics indicated an oral triapine bioavailability of 88%. The triapine–cisplatin combination may be given safely in patients with advanced-stage solid tumor malignancies. On the basis of these results, a phase I trial adequately powered to evaluate oral triapine bioavailability in women with advanced-stage uterine cervix or vulvar cancers is underway.

BACKGROUND Therapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has largely remained unchanged, and outcomes are unsatisfactory. We sought to analyze outcomes of AML patients enrolled in phase I studies to determine whether overall response rates (ORR) and mortality rates have changed over time. METHODS A retrospective analysis was performed on 711 adult AML patients enrolling in 45 phase I clinical trials supported by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program of the National Cancer Institute from 1986 to 2009. Changes in ORR and mortality rates for patients enrolled in 1986 to 1990, 1991 to 1995, 1996 to 2000, 2001 to 2005, and 2006 to 2009 were estimated with multivariable logistic regression models. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS There was a statistically significant increase in AML patients enrolling in phase I clinical trials over time (1986 to 1990: n = 61; 2006 to 2009: n = 256; P = .03). The ORR for the entire cohort was 15.4% (1986 to 1990: 8.9%, 1991 to 1995: 21.1%; 1996 to 2000: 7.0%; 2001 to 2005: 10.0%; 2006 to 2009: 22.6%), and it statistically significantly improved over time (P < .001). There was a statistically significant improvement in ORRs with novel agents in combination vs single agents (ORR = 22.8% vs 4.7%, respectively, odds ratio = 5.95, 95% confidence interval = 3.22 to 11.9, P < .001). The 60-day mortality rate for the entire cohort was 22.6%, but it statistically significantly improved over time (P = .009). CONCLUSIONS There has been an encouraging increase in AML patients enrolling in phase I clinical studies over time. The improvement in ORRs appears to be partly because of the increase in combination trials and the inclusion of previously untreated poor-risk AML. Continued enrollment of AML patients in early phase clinical trials is vital for drug development and improvement in therapeutic outcomes.

Background To date, the primary objective of phase I trials has been to safely select the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of a drug or drug combination for utilization in subsequent trials. Although conventional cytotoxic chemotherapy is generally more effective at the MTD than molecularly targeted agents (MTAs), recent single-institution data suggest that molecularly targeted agent may not require an MTD for efficacy. We analyzed patient outcome results in MTA phase I trials at multiple institutions throughout North America sponsored by the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program. Methods We retrospectively collected and analyzed data on patients treated on monotherapy phase I trials investigating novel MTAs with a defined MTD from 2000 to 2009. Logistic regression analysis was used to test whether there was an increase in the probability of a response as dose increased. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine if overall survival increased with increasing dose. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results We analyzed 1908 patients treated on 55 eligible clinical trials. The probability of both overall response (complete response plus partial response) and overall survival increased with increasing dose (odds ratio for increased response = 1.56, P = .10; hazard ratio for death = 0.37, P = .008) when controlling for study as a covariate. Conclusions Patients treated in the context of phase I trials with MTAs continue to derive reasonable clinical benefit. Contrary to other single institution data, our data suggest clinical benefit in terms of increasing response and overall survival with increasing dose.

Purpose: The proteasome inhibitor bortezomib undergoes oxidative hepatic metabolism. This study (NCI-6432; NCT00091117) was conducted to evaluate bortezomib pharmacokinetics and safety in patients with varying degrees of hepatic impairment, to inform dosing recommendations in these special populations. Experimental Design: Patients received bortezomib on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of 21-day cycles. Patients were assigned to four hepatic function groups based on the National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group classification. Those with normal function received bortezomib at the 1.3 mg/m2 standard dose. Patients with severe, moderate, and mild impairment received escalating doses from 0.5, 0.7, and 1.0 mg/m2, respectively, up to a 1.3 mg/m2 maximum. Serial blood samples were collected for 24 hours postdose on days 1 and 8, cycle 1, for bortezomib plasma concentration measurements. Results: Sixty-one patients were treated, including 14 with normal hepatic function and 17, 12, and 18 with mild, moderate, and severe impairment, respectively. Mild hepatic impairment did not alter dose-normalized bortezomib exposure (AUC0-tlast) or Cmax compared with patients with normal function. Mean dose-normalized AUC0-tlast was increased by approximately 60% on day 8 in patients with moderate or severe impairment. Conclusions: Patients with mild hepatic impairment do not require a starting dose adjustment of bortezomib. Patients with moderate or severe hepatic impairment should be started at a reduced dose of 0.7 mg/m2. Clin Cancer Res; 18(10); 2954–63. ©2012 AACR.

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and biological effects of the gemcitabine/tanespimycin combination in patients with advanced ovarian and peritoneal cancer. To assess the effect of tanespimycin on tumor cells, levels of the chaperone proteins HSP90 and HSP70 were examined in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) and paired tumor biopsy lysates. Methods Two-cohort phase II clinical trial. Patients were grouped according to prior gemcitabine therapy. All participants received tanespimycin 154mg/m 2 on days 1 and 9 of cycle 1 and days 2 and 9 of subsequent cycles. Patients also received gemcitabine 750mg/m 2 on day 8 of the first treatment cycle and days 1 and 8 of subsequent cycles. Results The tanespimycin/gemcitabine combination induced a partial response in 1 gemcitabine naive patient and no partial responses in gemcitabine resistant patients. Stable disease was seen in 6 patients (2 gemcitabine naive and 4 gemcitabine resistant). The most common toxicities were hematologic (anemia and neutropenia) as well as nausea and vomiting. Immunoblotting demonstrated limited upregulation of HSP70 but little or no change in levels of most client proteins in PBMC and paired tumor samples. Conclusions Although well tolerated, the tanespimycin/gemcitabine combination exhibited limited anticancer activity in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian and primary peritoneal carcinoma, perhaps because of failure to significantly downregulate the client proteins at clinically achievable exposures.

The abnormal vasculature of the tumor microenvironment supports progression and resistance to treatment. Judicious application of antiangiogenic therapy may normalize the structure and function of the tumor vasculature, promoting improved blood perfusion. However, direct clinical evidence is lacking for improvements in blood perfusion after antiangiogenic therapy. In this study, we used MRI to assess tumor blood perfusion in 30 recurrent glioblastoma patients who were undergoing treatment with cediranib, a pan-VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Tumor blood perfusion increased durably for more than 1 month in 7 of 30 patients, in whom it was associated with longer survival. Together, our findings offer direct clinical evidence in support of the hypothesis that vascular normalization can increase tumor perfusion and help improve patient survival. Cancer Res; 72(2); 402–7. ©2011 AACR.

The standard categorical system for assessing attribution of toxicity to study drug(s) in phase I trials is cumbersome and uninformative. While a binary system (‘related’ versus ‘unrelated’) would be sufficient to define maximum tolerated dose, a probability estimation would better support dose selection for randomized dose ranging phase II trials.

Sunitinib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor of VEGF, PDGF, c-KIT, and flt-3 receptors. A pediatric phase I study of sunitinib capsules identified the maximum tolerated dose as 15 mg/m(2)/day. This study was conducted to evaluate sunitinib given as a powder formulation.Sunitinib 15 mg/m(2) was administered orally daily for 4 weeks on/2 weeks off to patients21 years old with refractory solid tumors. Sunitinib capsules were opened, and the powder sprinkled onto applesauce or yogurt. Plasma levels of sunitinib and an active metabolite, SU12662, were measured, and pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated.12 patients, median age 13 (range 4-21) years, were treated. The most common first-cycle toxicities were leucopenia (n = 6), fatigue (n = 5), neutropenia (n = 4), and hypertension (n = 4). Three patients had dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) in cycle 1 (dizziness/back pain, hand-foot syndrome, and intratumoral hemorrhage/hypoxia). A median peak plasma sunitinib concentration of 21 (range 6-36) ng/ml was reached at a median of 4 (range 4-8) h after the first dose. The median exposure (AUC(0-48)) was 585 (range 196-1,059) h ng/l. The median half-life was 23 (range 13-36) h. The median trough concentration measured before day 14 dosing was 32 (range 12-58) ng/ml.The pharmacokinetic profile of sunitinib appears similar between a powder formulation and published data using capsules. The powder formulation allows patients unable to swallow capsules to receive sunitinib.