Search

Background WNT974 is a small molecule inhibitor of Wnt signaling that specifically inhibits porcupine O-acyltransferase. This phase Ib dose-­escalation study evaluated the maximum tolerated dose of WNT974 in combination with encorafenib and cetuximab in patients with BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer with RNF43 mutations or RSPO fusions. Patients and Methods Patients received once-daily encorafenib and weekly cetuximab, in addition to once-daily WNT974, in sequential dosing cohorts. In the first cohort, patients received 10-mg WNT974 (COMBO10), which was reduced in subsequent cohorts to 7.5-mg (COMBO7.5) or 5-mg (COMBO5) after dose–limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed. Primary endpoints were incidence of DLTs and exposure to WNT974 and encorafenib. Secondary endpoints were anti-tumor activity and safety. Results Twenty patients were enrolled (COMBO10, n = 4; COMBO7.5, n = 6; COMBO5, n = 10). DLTs were observed in 4 patients, including grade 3 hypercalcemia (COMBO10, n = 1; COMBO7.5, n = 1), grade 2 dysgeusia (COMBO10, n = 1), and lipase increased (COMBO10, n = 1). A high incidence of bone toxicities (n = 9) was reported, including rib fracture, spinal compression fracture, pathological fracture, foot fracture, hip fracture, and lumbar vertebral fracture. Serious adverse events were reported in 15 patients, most frequently bone fracture, hypercalcemia, and pleural effusion. The overall response rate was 10% and disease control rate 85%; most patients achieved stable disease as their best response. Conclusion Concerns surrounding the safety and lack of preliminary evidence of improved anti-tumor activity of WNT974 + encorafenib + cetuximab, compared with previous encorafenib + cetuximab data, ultimately led to study discontinuation. Phase II was not initiated. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02278133

Gemcitabina; Cáncer avanzado Gemcitabina; Càncer avançat Gemcitabine; Advanced cancer Purpose: This was a Phase I/II trial of the novel checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) inhibitor SRA737 given in combination with gemcitabine. Its objectives were to establish the safety profile, recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D), pharmacokinetics profile, and clinical activity of SRA737. Patients and Methods: Patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled into dose-escalation cohorts and treated in 28-day cycles with oral SRA737 on days 2, 3, 9, 10, 16, and 17, and intravenous gemcitabine on days 1, 8, and 15. Treatment was continued until progression. Each expansion cohort included up to 20 patients with specific genetically defined tumors. Results: The RP2D was determined to be 500 mg SRA737 combined with low-dose (250 mg/m2) gemcitabine. Of 143 enrolled patients, 77 were treated at doses of at least 500 mg SRA737 combined with 250 mg/m2 gemcitabine. Common toxicities of nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and diarrhea were primarily mild to moderate, and rarely led to treatment discontinuation. Anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia were grade ≥3 in 11.7%, 16.7%, and 10% of patients treated at the RP2D, respectively. The objective response rate (ORR) was 10.8% overall and notably the ORR in anogenital cancer was 25%. Partial tumor responses were observed in anogenital cancer, cervical cancer, high-grade serous ovarian cancer, rectal cancer, and small cell lung cancer. Conclusions: SRA737 in combination with low-dose gemcitabine was well tolerated with lower myelotoxicity than has been seen at standard doses of gemcitabine or with other combinations of Chk1 inhibitors with gemcitabine. Tumor responses were observed in anogenital and other solid tumors. The trial was sponsored by Sierra Oncology, Inc. Medical writing support was provided by Tina Ippolito, an independent consultant funded by Sierra Oncology. Andrew Dye, an employee of Sierra Oncology, also provided medical writing support and data curation. Bryan Strouse, an employee of Sierra Oncology, also contributed to data curation for this report. UK clinical trial sites acknowledge infrastructural funding from the Experimental Cancer Medical Center and National Institute of Health and Care Research Biomedical Research Centers. The ICR/RMH in addition acknowledges Cancer Research UK funding to Cancer Centre Funding and funding to the Cancer Therapeutics Unit. U. Banerji is a recipient of the NIHR RP-2016–07–028. The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of publication fees. Therefore, and solely to indicate this fact, this article is hereby marked “advertisement” in accordance with 18 USC section 1734.

RET inhibition; Pralsetinib; Targeted therapy Inhibición de RET; Pralsetinib; Terapia dirigida Inhibició de RET; Pralsetinib; Teràpia dirigida Background RET fusions are present in 1%-2% of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Pralsetinib, a highly potent, oral, central nervous system-penetrant, selective RET inhibitor, previously demonstrated clinical activity in patients with RET fusion–positive NSCLC in the phase I/II ARROW study, including among treatment-naive patients. We report an updated analysis from the ARROW study. Patients and methods ARROW is a multi-cohort, open-label, phase I/II study. Eligible patients were ≥18 years of age with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 (later 0-1). Patients initiated pralsetinib at the recommended phase II dose of 400 mg once daily until disease progression, intolerance, consent withdrawal, or investigator’s decision. The co-primary endpoints (phase II) were overall response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review and safety. Results Between 17 March 2017 and 6 November 2020 (data cut-off), 281 patients with RET fusion–positive NSCLC were enrolled. The ORR was 72% [54/75; 95% confidence interval (CI) 60% to 82%] for treatment-naive patients and 59% (80/136; 95% CI 50% to 67%) for patients with prior platinum-based chemotherapy (enrolment cut-off for efficacy analysis: 22 May 2020); median duration of response was not reached for treatment-naive patients and 22.3 months for prior platinum-based chemotherapy patients. Tumour shrinkage was observed in all treatment-naive patients and in 97% of patients with prior platinum-based chemotherapy; median progression-free survival was 13.0 and 16.5 months, respectively. In patients with measurable intracranial metastases, the intracranial response rate was 70% (7/10; 95% CI 35% to 93%); all had received prior systemic treatment. In treatment-naive patients with RET fusion–positive NSCLC who initiated pralsetinib by the data cut-off (n = 116), the most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were neutropenia (18%), hypertension (10%), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (9%), and lymphopenia (9%). Overall, 7% (20/281) discontinued due to TRAEs. Conclusions Pralsetinib treatment produced robust efficacy and was generally well tolerated in treatment-naive patients with advanced RET fusion–positive NSCLC. Results from the confirmatory phase III AcceleRET Lung study (NCT04222972) of pralsetinib versus standard of care in the first-line setting are pending. This work was supported by Blueprint Medicines Corporation and F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd, Switzerland (no grant number).

Immunogenicity; Proteogenomics Inmunogenicidad; Proteogenómica Immunogenicitat; Proteogenòmica Purpose: Tumor antigens are central to antitumor immunity. Recent evidence suggests that peptides from noncanonical (nonC) aberrantly translated proteins can be presented on HLA-I by tumor cells. Here, we investigated the immunogenicity of nonC tumor HLA-I ligands (nonC-TL) to better understand their contribution to cancer immunosurveillance and their therapeutic applicability. Experimental Design: Peptides presented on HLA-I were identified in 9 patient-derived tumor cell lines from melanoma, gynecologic, and head and neck cancer through proteogenomics. A total of 507 candidate tumor antigens, including nonC-TL, neoantigens, cancer-germline, or melanocyte differentiation antigens, were tested for T-cell recognition of preexisting responses in patients with cancer. Donor peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL) were in vitro sensitized against 170 selected nonC-TL to isolate antigen-specific T-cell receptors (TCR) and evaluate their therapeutic potential. Results: We found no recognition of the 507 nonC-TL tested by autologous ex vivo expanded tumor-reactive T-cell cultures while the same cultures demonstrated reactivity to mutated, cancer-germline, or melanocyte differentiation antigens. However, in vitro sensitization of donor PBL against 170 selected nonC-TL, led to the identification of TCRs specific to three nonC-TL, two of which mapped to the 5′ UTR regions of HOXC13 and ZKSCAN1, and one mapping to a noncoding spliced variant of C5orf22C. T cells targeting these nonC-TL recognized cancer cell lines naturally presenting their corresponding antigens. Expression of the three immunogenic nonC-TL was shared across tumor types and barely or not detected in normal cells. Conclusions: Our findings predict a limited contribution of nonC-TL to cancer immunosurveillance but demonstrate they may be attractive novel targets for widely applicable immunotherapies. We thank the patients for their participation in this study, Steven A. Rosenberg for providing valuable reagents and support for NGS studies, R. Pujol for helpful scientific discussion, J. Gonzalez for bioinformatics support, CRG/UPF Flow Cytometry Unit for assistance with cell sorting, and CRG/UPF and IRB Proteomics Units for technical support. A. Gros and this work were funded by the Comprehensive Program of Cancer Immunotherapy & Immunology II (CAIMI-II) supported by the BBVA Foundation (53/2021), Institute Carlos III (MS15/00058 and PI17/01085), AECC (IDEAS197PORT), and La Fundació La Marató de TV3 (201919–30). We thank CERCA Programme / Generalitat de Catalunya for institutional support. M. Lozano-Rabella was supported by the Agència de Gestió d'Ajuts Universitaris i de Recerca (AGAUR) (2018FI_B 00946). A. Garcia-Garijo was supported by Generalitat PERIS award (SLT017/20/000131). A. Yuste-Estevanez was supported by the Agència de Gestió d'Ajuts Universitaris i de Recerca (AGAUR) (2021 FI_B 00365). J. Palomero was supported by the Beatriu de Pinós programme (BP 2018), cofounded by the Agency for Management of University and Research Grants (AGAUR) and European Union's Horizon 2020.

Discrimination; Gender equity; Oncology Discriminació; Equitat de gènere; Oncologia Discriminación; Equidad de género; Oncología Background Following a European Society for Medical Oncology Women for Oncology (ESMO W4O) survey in 2016 showing severe under-representation of female oncologists in leadership roles, ESMO launched a series of initiatives to address obstacles to gender equity. A follow-up survey in October 2021 investigated progress achieved. Materials and methods The W4O questionnaire 2021 expanded on the 2016 survey, with additional questions on the impact of ethnicity, sexual orientation and religion on career development. Results were analysed according to respondent gender and age. Results The survey sample was larger than in 2016 (n = 1473 versus 482), especially among men. Significantly fewer respondents had managerial or leadership roles than in 2016 (31.8% versus 51.7%). Lack of leadership development for women and unconscious bias were considered more important in 2021 than in 2016. In 2021, more people reported harassment in the workplace than in 2016 (50.3% versus 41.0%). In 2021, ethnicity, sexual orientation and religion were considered to have little or no impact on professional career opportunities, salary setting or related potential pay gap. However, gender had a significant or major impact on career development (25.5% of respondents), especially in respondents ≤40 years of age and women. As in 2016, highest ranked initiatives to foster workplace equity were promotion of work–life balance, development and leadership training and flexible working. Significantly more 2021 respondents (mainly women) supported the need for culture and gender equity education at work than in 2016. Conclusions Gender remains a major barrier to career progression in oncology and, although some obstacles may have been reduced since 2016, we are a long way from closing the gender gap. Increased reporting of discrimination and inappropriate behaviour in the workplace is a major, priority concern. The W4O 2021 survey findings provide new evidence and highlight the areas for future ESMO interventions to support equity and diversity in oncology career development. This work was supported by the European Society for Medical Oncology (no grant number).

Atezolizumab; Isatuximab; Solid tumors Atezolizumab; Isatuximab; Tumores sólidos Atezolizumab; Isatuximab; Tumors sòlids Background The anti-CD38 antibody isatuximab is approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, but there are no data on its efficacy in solid tumors. This phase I/II study (NCT03637764) assessed the safety and activity of isatuximab plus atezolizumab (Isa + Atezo), an anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody, in patients with immunotherapy-naive solid tumors: epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), glioblastoma (GBM), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). Patients and methods Phase I assessed safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of isatuximab 10 mg/kg intravenously (i.v.) every week for 3 weeks followed by once every 3 weeks + atezolizumab 1200 mg i.v. every 3 weeks. Phase II used a Simon’s two-stage design to assess the overall response rate or progression-free survival rate at 6 months (GBM cohort). Interim analysis was carried out at 6 months following first dose of the last enrolled patient in each cohort. Pharmacodynamic biomarkers were tested for CD38, PD-L1, tumor-infiltrating immune cells, and FOXP3+ regulatory T cells (Tregs) in the tumor microenvironment (TME). Results Overall, 107 patients were treated (EOC, n = 18; GBM, n = 33; HCC, n = 27; SCCHN, n = 29). In phase I, Isa + Atezo showed an acceptable safety profile, no dose-limiting toxicities were observed, and RP2D was confirmed. Most patients experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), with ≤48.5% being grade ≥3. The most frequent TEAE was infusion reactions. The study did not continue to stage 2 based on prespecified targets. Tumor-infiltrating CD38+ immune cells were reduced and almost cleared after treatment. Isa + Atezo did not significantly modulate Tregs or PD-L1 expression in the TME. Conclusions Isa + Atezo had acceptable safety and tolerability. Clinical pharmacodynamic evaluation revealed efficient target engagement of isatuximab via treatment-mediated reduction of CD38+ immune cells in the TME. Based on clinical data, CD38 inhibition does not improve responsiveness to PD-L1 blockade in these patients. This work was sponsored by Sanofi (no grant number).

Senescencia celular; Inmunidad antitumoral Senescència cel·lular; Immunitat antitumoral Cellular senescence; Antitumor immunity Cellular senescence is a stress response that activates innate immune cells, but little is known about its interplay with the adaptive immune system. Here, we show that senescent cells combine several features that render them highly efficient in activating dendritic cells (DC) and antigen-specific CD8 T cells. This includes the release of alarmins, activation of IFN signaling, enhanced MHC class I machinery, and presentation of senescence-associated self-peptides that can activate CD8 T cells. In the context of cancer, immunization with senescent cancer cells elicits strong antitumor protection mediated by DCs and CD8 T cells. Interestingly, this protection is superior to immunization with cancer cells undergoing immunogenic cell death. Finally, the induction of senescence in human primary cancer cells also augments their ability to activate autologous antigen-specific tumor-infiltrating CD8 lymphocytes. Our study indicates that senescent cancer cells can be exploited to develop efficient and protective CD8-dependent antitumor immune responses. Significance: Our study shows that senescent cells are endowed with a high immunogenic potential—superior to the gold standard of immunogenic cell death. We harness these properties of senescent cells to trigger efficient and protective CD8-dependent antitumor immune responses. We are grateful to Maria Isabel Muñoz for assistance with the animal protocols; to Kevin Kovalchik for help with data sharing; to Francesca Castoldi for help in total RNA extraction for B16F10 and IMR-90 cells; to Fredrik Fagerstrom-Billai, Susann Fält, Anastasios Damdimopoulos, and David Brodin at Bioinformatics and Expression Analysis Core Facility, Karolinska Institute (KI), for assistance in RNA-seq and analysis; to the IRB core facilities (Functional Genomics, Biostatistics/Bioinformatics and Histopathology); and to the PCB (Animal House) for general research support. I. Marin was the recipient of an FPI fellowship from the Spanish Ministry of Science (PRE2018-083381). O. Boix was the recipient of an FPI-AGAUR fellowship from the Generalitat de Catalunya. A. Garcia-Garijo was supported by a PERIS grant (SLT017/20/000131) from the Generalitat de Catalunya. J.A. López-Domínguez and M. Kovatcheva were supported by a fellowship from the Spanish Association Against Cancer (AECC). Work in the laboratory of E. Caron was funded by the Fonds de recherche du Québec – Santé (FRQS), the Cole Foundation, CHU Sainte-Justine, the Charles-Bruneau Foundation, the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council (#RGPIN-2020-05232), and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (#174924). E. Garralda received funding from the Comprehensive Program of Cancer Immunotherapy and Immunology II (CAIMI-II) supported by the BBVA Foundation (grant 53/2021). The M. Abad lab received funding from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (RTI2018-102046-B-I00A and RTC-2017-6123-1) and the AECC (PRYCO211023SERR). M. Abad was the recipient of a Ramón y Cajal contract from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (RYC-2013-14747). A. Gros received funding from the Spanish Ministry of Science cofunded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF; RTC-2017-6123-1), from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (MS15/00058), and from CAIMI-II (grant 53/2021) supported by the BBVA Foundation. The work in the laboratory of F. Pietrocola is supported by a KI Starting Grant, a Starting Grant from the Swedish Research Council (2019_02050_3), and grants from the Harald Jeanssons Foundation, the Loo and Hans Osterman Foundation, and Cancerfonden (21 1637 Pj). Work in the laboratory of M. Serrano was funded by the IRB and La Caixa Foundation, and by grants from the Spanish Ministry of Science cofunded by the European Regional Development Fund (SAF-2017-82613-R, RTC-2017-6123-1), the European Research Council (ERC-2014-AdG/669622), Secretaria d'Universitats i Recerca del Departament d'Empresa i Coneixement of Catalonia (Grup de Recerca consolidat 2017 SGR 282), and the AECC (PRYCO211023SERR). The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of publication fees. Therefore, and solely to indicate this fact, this article is hereby marked “advertisement” in accordance with 18 USC section 1734.

Cancer; Cancer genetics Cáncer; Genética del cáncer Càncer; Genètica del càncer There is a growing need for systems that efficiently support the work of medical teams at the precision-oncology point of care. Here, we present the implementation of the Molecular Tumor Board Portal (MTBP), an academic clinical decision support system developed under the umbrella of Cancer Core Europe that creates a unified legal, scientific and technological platform to share and harness next-generation sequencing data. Automating the interpretation and reporting of sequencing results decrease the need for time-consuming manual procedures that are prone to errors. The adoption of an expert-agreed process to systematically link tumor molecular profiles with clinical actions promotes consistent decision-making and structured data capture across the connected centers. The use of information-rich patient reports with interactive content facilitates collaborative discussion of complex cases during virtual molecular tumor board meetings. Overall, streamlined digital systems like the MTBP are crucial to better address the challenges brought by precision oncology and accelerate the use of emerging biomarkers. Open access funding provided by Karolinska Institute

Colorectal cancer; Lung cancer; Monoclonal antibody Cáncer colorrectal; Cáncer de pulmón; Anticuerpo monoclonal Càncer colorectal; Càncer de pulmó; Anticòs monoclonal Background The phase I GATTO study (NCT03360734) explored the feasibility, tolerability and preliminary activity of combining gatipotuzumab, a novel humanized monoclonal antibody binding to the tumor-associated epitope of mucin 1 (TA-MUC1) and an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) antibody in refractory solid tumors. Patients and methods Initially the study enrolled primary phase (PP) patients with EGFR-positive metastatic solid tumors, for whom no standard treatment was available. Patients received gatipotuzumab administered at 1400 mg every 2 weeks, 6 weeks after the start of the glyco-optimized anti-EGFR antibody tomuzotuximab at 1200 mg every 2 weeks. As this regimen was proven safe, enrollment continued in an expansion phase (EP) of patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer, head and neck cancer and breast cancer. Tomuzotuximab and gatipotuzumab were given at the same doses and gatipotuzumab treatment started 1 week after the first dose of the anti-EGFR antibody. Additionally, investigators could use a commercial anti-EGFR antibody in place of tomuzotuximab. Results A total of 52 patients were enrolled, 20 in the PP and 32 in the EP. The combined treatment was well tolerated and no dose-limiting toxicity was observed in the whole study, nor related serious adverse event or death. Preliminary activity of the combination was observed, with one and four RECIST partial responses in the PP and EP, all in colorectal cancer patients. The trial was accompanied by a comprehensive translational research program for identification of biomarkers, including soluble TA-MUC1 (sTA-MUC1) in serum. In the EP, patients with baseline sTA-MUC1 levels above the median appeared to have improved progression-free survival and overall survival. Conclusions Combination of a TA-MUC1-targeting antibody and an EGFR-targeting antibody is safe and feasible. Interesting antitumor activity was observed in heavily pretreated patients. Future studies should test this combination together with chemotherapy and explore the potential of sTA-MUC1 as a companion biomarker for further development of the combination. This work was supported by Glycotope GmbH (no grant number).

Advanced; Colorectal cancer Avanzado; Cáncer colorrectal Avançat; Càncer colorrectal Background Treatment options are limited for participants with microsatellite stable (MSS) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that progressed after two or more prior therapies. Studies have shown that blockade of both lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) can improve antitumor activity. Here, we evaluate the antitumor activity of the LAG-3 antibody favezelimab alone or in combination with pembrolizumab in participants with MSS mCRC. Patients and methods Eligible participants with MSS PD-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) treatment-naive mCRC that progressed on two or more prior therapies received 800 mg favezelimab, 800 mg favezelimab plus 200 mg pembrolizumab, or 800 mg favezelimab/200 mg pembrolizumab co-formulation, every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was safety, the secondary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), and exploratory endpoints included duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results At the data cut-off date of 23 October 2020, a total of 20 participants received favezelimab alone, 89 received favezelimab plus pembrolizumab (including as favezelimab/pembrolizumab co-formulation); 48 had PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) ≥1 tumors. At this interim analysis median follow-up was 5.8 months with favezelimab and 6.2 with favezelimab plus pembrolizumab. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were 65% with favezelimab and 65.2% with favezelimab plus pembrolizumab. Grade ≥3 TRAEs were 15% with favezelimab and 20% with favezelimab plus pembrolizumab. No grade 5 TRAEs occurred. Common TRAEs (≥15%) included fatigue (20.0%), nausea (15.0%) with favezelimab, and fatigue (16.9%) with favezelimab plus pembrolizumab. Confirmed ORR was 6.3% with favezelimab plus pembrolizumab, with median duration of response of 10.6 months (range 5.6-12.7 months), median OS of 8.3 months (95% confidence interval 5.5-12.9 months), and median PFS of 2.1 months (1.9-2.2 months). In an exploratory analysis of PD-L1 CPS ≥1 tumors, the confirmed ORR was 11.1%, median OS was 12.7 months (4.5 to not reached), and median PFS was 2.2 months (1.8-4.2 months) with favezelimab plus pembrolizumab. Conclusions Favezelimab with or without pembrolizumab had a manageable safety profile, with no treatment-related deaths. Promising antitumor activity was observed with combination therapy, particularly in participants with PD-L1 CPS ≥1 tumors. This work was supported by Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (no grant number).

Checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) have revolutionized the treatment paradigm for advanced solid tumors; however, there remains an opportunity to improve response rates and outcomes. In preclinical models, 4-1BB costimulation synergizes with CPIs targeting the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) axis by activating cytotoxic T-cell–mediated antitumor immunity. DuoBody-PD-L1×4-1BB (GEN1046) is an investigational, first-in-class bispecific immunotherapy agent designed to act on both pathways by combining simultaneous and complementary PD-L1 blockade and conditional 4-1BB stimulation in one molecule. GEN1046 induced T-cell proliferation, cytokine production, and antigen-specific T-cell–mediated cytotoxicity superior to clinically approved PD-(L)1 antibodies in human T-cell cultures and exerted potent antitumor activity in transplantable mouse tumor models. In dose escalation of the ongoing first-in-human study in heavily pretreated patients with advanced refractory solid tumors (NCT03917381), GEN1046 demonstrated pharmacodynamic immune effects in peripheral blood consistent with its mechanism of action, manageable safety, and early clinical activity [disease control rate: 65.6% (40/61)], including patients resistant to prior PD-(L)1 immunotherapy.Significance:DuoBody-PD-L1×4-1BB (GEN1046) is a first-in-class bispecific immunotherapy with a manageable safety profile and encouraging preclinical and early clinical activity. With its ability to confer clinical benefit in tumors typically less sensitive to CPIs, GEN1046 may fill a clinical gap in CPI-relapsed or refractory disease or as a combination therapy with CPIs.See related commentary by Li et al., p. 1184.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1171

Immunotherapy; Phase 1 trials; Prognostic model Inmunoterapia; Ensayos de fase 1; Modelo pronóstico Immunoteràpia; Assajos de fase 1; Model pronòstic Purpose Patient selection in phase 1 clinical trials (Ph1t) continues to be a challenge. The aim of this study was to develop a user-friendly prognostic calculator for predicting overall survival (OS) outcomes in patients to be included in Ph1t with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) or targeted agents (TAs) based on clinical parameters assessed at baseline. Methods Using a training cohort with consecutive patients from the VHIO phase 1 unit, we constructed a prognostic model to predict median OS (mOS) as a primary endpoint and 3-month (3m) OS rate as a secondary endpoint. The model was validated in an internal cohort after temporal data splitting and represented as a web application. Results We recruited 799 patients (training and validation sets, 558 and 241, respectively). Median follow-up was 21.2 months (m), mOS was 10.2 m (95% CI, 9.3–12.7) for ICIs cohort and 7.7 m (95% CI, 6.6–8.6) for TAs cohort. In the multivariable analysis, six prognostic variables were independently associated with OS – ECOG, number of metastatic sites, presence of liver metastases, derived neutrophils/(leukocytes minus neutrophils) ratio [dNLR], albumin and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels. The phase 1 prognostic online (PIPO) calculator showed adequate discrimination and calibration performance for OS, with C-statistics of 0.71 (95% CI 0.64–0.78) in the validation set. The overall accuracy of the model for 3m OS prediction was 87.2% (95% CI 85%–90%). Conclusions PIPO is a user-friendly objective and interactive tool to calculate specific survival probabilities for each patient before enrolment in a Ph1t. The tool is available at https://pipo.vhio.net/. The research leading to these results has received funding from “la Caixa” Foundation (LCF/PR/CE07/50610001). Cellex Foundation for providing research facilities and equipment. This work was supported by the Accelerator Award (UpSMART) from Fundacion Científica – Asociacion Espanola Contra el Cancer (FC -AECC)/ Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC) /Cancer Research United Kingdom (CRUK).

Oncologia de precisió; Assaigs clínics; Preselecció molecular Oncología de precisión; Ensayos clínicos; Preselección molecular Precision oncology; Clinical Trials; Molecular prescreening Most academic precision oncology programs have been designed to facilitate enrollment of patients in early clinical trials with matched targeted agents. Over the last decade, major changes were seen both in the targetable molecular alteration landscape and in drug development trends. In this article, we describe how the Vall d’Hebron Institute of Oncology molecular prescreening program adapted to a dynamic model of biomarker-drug codevelopment. We started with a tumor-agnostic hotspot mutation panel plus in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry of selected markers and subsequently transitioned to tumor-specific amplicon-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) tests together with custom copy number, fusion, and outlier gene expression panels. All assays are optimized for archived formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor tissues without matched germline sequencing. In parallel, biomarker-matched trials evolved from a scenario of few targets and large populations (such as PI3K inhibitors in PIK3CA mutants) to a complex situation with many targets and small populations (such as multiple targetable fusion events). Recruitment rates in clinical trials with mandatory biomarkers decreased over the last 3 years. Molecular tumor board meetings proved critical to guide oncologists on emerging biomarkers for clinical testing and interpretation of NGS results. The substantial increase of immunotherapy trials had a major impact in target prioritization and guided clinical implementation of new markers, such as tumor mutational burden, with larger exon-based NGS assays and gene expression signatures to capture microenvironment infiltration patterns. This new multiomics era of precision oncology is expected to increase the opportunities for early clinical trial matching.

Background European Society for Medical Oncology Women for Oncology (ESMO W4O) research has previously shown under-representation of female oncologists in leadership roles. As early reports suggested disproportionate effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on women, the ESMO W4O Committee initiated a study on the impact of the pandemic on the lives of female and male oncologists. Methods A questionnaire was sent to ESMO members and put on the ESMO website between 8 June 2020 and 2 July 2020. Questions focused on the working (hospital tasks, laboratory tasks, science) and home (household management, childcare, parent care, personal care) lives of oncologists during and after COVID-19-related lockdowns. Results Of 649 respondents, 541 completed the questionnaire. Of these, 58% reported that COVID-19 had affected their professional career, 83% of whom said this was in a negative way (85% of women versus 76% of men). Approximately 86% reported that COVID-19 had changed their personal life and 82% their family life. Women were again significantly more affected than men: personal life (89% versus 78%; P = 0.001); family life (84% versus 77%; P = 0.037). During lockdowns, women reported increased time spent on hospital and laboratory tasks compared with men (53% versus 46% and 33% versus 26%, respectively) and a significantly higher proportion of women than men spent less time on science (39% versus 25%) and personal care (58% versus 39%). After confinement, this trend remained for science (42% versus 23%) and personal care (55% versus 36%). Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected the professional and home lives of oncologists, especially women. Reduced research time for female oncologists may have long-lasting career consequences, especially for those at key stages in their career. The gender gap for promotion to leadership positions may widen further as a result of the pandemic., Highlights • Female oncologists were significantly more affected than men by COVID-19 in multiple aspects of their working and home life. • Reduced time available to female oncologists for research activities may have long-lasting career consequences. • The gender gap for promotion to leadership positions may widen further as a result of the pandemic. • Greater awareness is needed about gender inequalities in career development in oncology, especially after the pandemic. • Gender transformative policies and strategies are needed due to the impact of COVID-19 and other causes of inequalities.

Adaptive designs; Umbrella protocols; Basket protocols Dissenys adaptatius; Protocols de paraigua; Protocols de cistell Diseños adaptativos; Protocolos de paraguas; Protocolos de cesto Cancer treatment has made significant strides towards the promise of personalized medicine. Recent scientific advances have shown that there are numerous genetic deregulations that are common in multiple cancer types, raising the possibility of developing drugs targeting those deregulations irrespective of the tumour type. Precision cancer medicine was born out of accumulated evidence matching targeted agents with these tumour molecular deregulations. At the same time, the therapeutic armamentarium is rapidly increasing and the number of new drugs (including immune-oncology agents) entering drug development continues to rise. These factors, added to strong collaboration with regulatory agencies which have approved novel agents based on data obtained from Phase 1/2 trials, have led to unprecedented evolution in the design of early stage clinical trials. Currently, we have seen rapid Phase 1 dose escalation trials followed by remarkably large expansion cohorts, and are witnessing the emergence of new trials, such as adaptive studies with basket and umbrella designs aimed at optimizing the biomarker-drug co-development process. Alongside the growing complexity of these clinical trials, new frameworks for stronger and faster collaboration between all stakeholders in drug development, including academic institutions and frameworks, clinicians, pharma companies and regulatory agencies, have been established. In this review article, we describe the main challenges and opportunities that these new trial designs may provide for a more efficient drug development process, which may ultimately help ensure that precision cancer medicine becomes a reality for patients