Search

Supplementary Figure S1. Mean concentration-time erdafitinib profiles after a single dose (cycle 1 day 1 [C1D1]) and at steady-state (cycle 2 day 1 [C2D1]) after daily dosing (Panel A) or intermittent dosing (Panel B). 9 mg QD Part 1 at Cycle 2 Day 1 (C2D1) was not reported as n=1.

Purpose:Here, we report results of the first phase I study of erdafitinib, a potent, oral pan-FGFR inhibitor.Patients and Methods:Patients age ≥18 years with advanced solid tumors for which standard antineoplastic therapy was no longer effective were enrolled (NCT01703481). Parts 2 to 4 employed molecular screening for activating FGFR genomic alterations. In patients with such alterations, two selected doses/schedules identified during part 1 dose-escalation [9 mg once daily and 10 mg intermittently (7 days on/7 days off), as previously published (Tabernero JCO 2015;33:3401-8)] were tested.Results:The study included 187 patients. The most common treatment-related adverse events were hyperphosphatemia (64%), dry mouth (42%), and asthenia (28%), generally grade 1/2 severity. All cases of hyperphosphatemia were grade 1/2 except for 1 grade 3 event. Skin, nail, and eye changes were observed in 43%, 33%, and 28% of patients, respectively (mostly grade 1/2 and reversible after temporary dosing interruption). Urothelial carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma were most responsive to erdafitinib, with objective response rates (ORR) of 46.2% (12/26) and 27.3% (3/11), respectively, in response-evaluable patients with FGFR mutations or fusions. All patients with urothelial carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma who responded to erdafitinib carried FGFR mutations or fusions. Median response duration was 5.6 months for urothelial carcinoma and 11.4 months for cholangiocarcinoma. ORRs in other tumor types were Conclusions:Erdafitinib shows tolerability and preliminary clinical activity in advanced solid tumors with genomic changes in the FGFR pathway, at two different dosing schedules and with particularly encouraging responses in urothelial carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma.

Supplementary Table S1. Arithmetic Mean {plus minus} SD Plasma Erdafitinib Pharmacokinetic Parameters after the First Erdafitinib Administration (Cycle 1 Day 1) or at Steady-State (Cycle 2 Day 1) in Patients Assigned to the Continuous Daily Dosing or the Intermittent (7 Days on/7 Days off) Dosing Regimen (Part 1 and Part 2 of the Study)

Purpose We conducted a dose escalation Phase 1 study of autologous PBMCs loaded by microfluidic squeezing (Cell Squeeze® technology) with HPV16 E6 and E7 antigens (SQZ-PBMC-HPV), in HLA-A*02 + patients with advanced/metastatic HPV16 + cancers. Preclinical studies in murine models had shown such cells resulted in stimulation and proliferation of antigen specific CD8 + cells, and demonstrated antitumor activity. Methods Administration of SQZ-PBMC-HPV was every 3 weeks. Enrollment followed a modified 3 + 3 design with primary objectives to define safety, tolerability, and the recommended Phase 2 dose. Secondary and exploratory objectives were antitumor activity, manufacturing feasibility, and pharmacodynamic evaluation of immune responses. Results Eighteen patients were enrolled at doses ranging from 0.5 × 106to 5.0 × 106live cells/kg. Manufacture proved feasible and required 6live cells/kg with double priming was chosen as the recommended Phase 2 dose. Multiple participants exhibited pharmacodynamic changes consistent with immune responses supporting the proposed mechanism of action for SQZ-PBMC-HPV, including patients previously refractory to checkpoint inhibitors.

Papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) is the most common type of thyroid cancer, usually with an indolent course.

Background: Axl, Mer and CSF1 receptor tyrosine kinases play vital roles in promoting the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME) by affecting myeloid functions (e.g., tumor associated macrophage [TAM], myeloid derived suppression cell [MDSC]) and promoting epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT). Thus, simultaneous inhibition of Axl, Mer and CSF1R may be an effective strategy for TME modification. Q702 is a novel Axl/Mer/CSF1R kinase inhibitor that affects the immune components (modulating TAM and MDSC populations, inducing CD8+ T cell infiltration and increasing IFN-ɣ in CD8+ T cell) as well as changes in malignant cells such as increasing MHC I on the tumor cells of syngeneic mouse models. These nonclinical results suggest that Q702 monotherapy or Q702 combination with conventional therapies may have considerable potential as a novel treatment strategy for patients with advanced solid tumors. Methods: This is a Phase 1, Multicenter, Open-label, Dose-Escalation, Safety, Pharmacodynamic, Pharmacokinetic Study of Q702 with a Cohort Expansion at the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors (NCT04648254). Q702 was administered orally for seven days every other week. Peripheral blood samples were obtained on days 1,8,15, and 21. Axl, Mer and CSF1R target engagement is assessed by the quantifications of soluble Axl, Mer and M-CSF in plasma by Luminex xMAP® technology or ELISA. The pharmacodynamic biomarker changes are measured by flow cytometry for immune cell population shifts and IFN-ɣ levels in specific immune cells. Results: PK and PD biomarker samples from 22 patients with various tumor types (e.g. colon, pancreas, esophageal) from the dose escalation phase (4 mg to 240 mg) have been analyzed. Pharmacokinetic studies demonstrated dose proportional increase in Cmax and AUClast of Q702 and its two active metabolites which have activity against Axl and/or CSF1R. Axl and CSF1R target engagement by Q702 treatment is observed in a dose dependent manner. From the 60 mg cohort, target engagement for Axl and CSF1R reached a inhibitory level that was observed in nonclinical models. In the pharmacodynamic biomarker analysis, IFN-ɣ in CD8+ T cells and non-T cell populations is increased. Monocytes and M-MDSC population are decreased in peripheral blood. Conclusion: Up to 240 mg, Q702 has demonstrated the intended pharmacologic activity with acceptable safety profile. In biomarker analysis, immune modulation activity is exerted by Axl/Mer/CSF1R inhibition. Further assessment of pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, safety and antitumor activity will be performed at the expansion phase at the RP2D in patients with selected advanced tumors. Citation Format: Bae Jung Choi, Devalingam Devalingam, Angela Alistar, Anthony El-Khoueiry, Alain Mita, Hwankyu Kang, Jinho Choi, Hyunji Ahn, Jeongjun Kim, Seung-Joo Lee, Yeong-In Yang, Jiye Ahn, Borami Jeon, Jaeseung Kim, Kiyean Nam. Patient pharmacodynamic biomarker and pk evaluation results from an ongoing phase I dose-escalation study of q702, an axl, mer and csf1r kinase inhibitor in patients with advanced solid tumors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 2255.

Radiotherapy (RT) without chemotherapy is considered a standard of care for the management of American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 7th edition (7E) T1-2N1 oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). Recent data suggests concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT) may benefit these patients but did not include human papillomavirus (HPV) status. Given the radiosensitivity differences between HPV-positive versus HPV-negative OPSCC, the effect of chemotherapy may differ in these patients.We analyzed patients in the National Cancer Database diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 with AJCC 7E stage cT1-2N1M0 OPSCC and known HPV status undergoing definitive RT or CCRT.Overall, 1964 patients were included, including 1297 (66%) HPV-positive and 667 (34%) HPV-negative patients. 66% received CCRT and 34% received RT alone. In multivariate analysis, CCRT was associated with improved survival compared with RT alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.87; P = 0.001). In propensity score-matched cohorts, 4-year overall survival was 87.4% vs 78.4% in HPV-positive patients receiving CCRT and RT alone, respectively (P = 0.002), and 65.5% vs 58.9% in HPV-negative patients, respectively (P = 0.2). There was no evidence that HPV-positivity diminished the association between CCRT and longer survival (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42-0.81) versus what was observed in HPV-negative patients (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.64-1.16) (interaction P = 0.06).CCRT is associated with improved survival in AJCC 7E T1-2N1 OPSCC. Despite the radiosensitivity of HPV-positive OPSCC, the association of CCRT with improved survival for T1-2N1 HPV-positive OPSCC was at least as strong, if not stronger, than what was observed in HPV-negative patients.

The modern treatment of locoregionally advanced disease often requires a multimodality combination approach. A number of chemotherapeutic agents can be combined with radiation, but the platinum agent cisplatin, a potent radiation sensitizer, is best studied in head and neck cancer. Newer agents such as cetuximab can be used in combination with radiation therapy for those patients who cannot tolerate cisplatin. For chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic head and neck cancer who demonstrate a good performance status, platinum doublet regimens are commonly used. Doublet regimens generally improve response rates compared to single-agent chemotherapies, although they have not demonstrated a survival benefit over single agents and they have added toxicity. Immunotherapies, alternative cytotoxic chemotherapies, and targeted therapies are second-line options for patients with disease that has progressed on platinum-based therapy. Immunotherapy, in particular, has gained focus by enhancing the ability of the immune system to recognize and destroy malignant cells. When multimodal approaches are used, as in combined chemotherapy and radiation therapy, toxicities are increased. It is imperative that patients are followed closely in order to maximize treatment benefit while minimizing complications.

Single-modality radiotherapy is considered a standard-of-care option for certain stage III, T1-2N1 head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCCs). The role of concomitant chemoradiation is not well established because there have been no studies comparing chemoradiation with radiation alone in this population.This study analyzed patients in the National Cancer Data Base with cT1-2N1M0 invasive squamous cell carcinomas of the oropharynx, larynx, and hypopharynx who were diagnosed between 2004 and 2012 and were undergoing definitive radiation. Patients who were undergoing surgery before radiation with unknown follow-up or for whom either the receipt or timing of chemotherapy was unknown were excluded.In all, 5030 patients with T1-2N1 oropharyngeal, laryngeal, or hypopharyngeal cancer were included. The median follow-up was 56.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 55.7-58.6 months). Overall, 68% of the patients received concomitant chemoradiation (CCRT). The use of CCRT significantly increased during the time period of this study from 53% in 2004 to 78% in 2012 (P.001). CCRT was associated with improved overall survival (OS) in comparison with radiation alone in a multivariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.72-0.88; P.001). In propensity score-adjusted analyses, CCRT remained significantly associated with improved OS, with 5-year OS rates of 63.5% (95% CI, 60.7%-66.2%) and 55.6% (95% CI, 52.7%-58.4%; P.001) with CCRT and radiation alone, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed a benefit across the majority of subgroups, including patients with oropharyngeal cancer (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.65-0.85; P.001).Concomitant chemoradiation is associated with improved survival for patients with T1-2N1 HNSCC. Prospective trials in this population should be pursued. Cancer 2017;123:1555-1565. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Purpose To determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and assess the safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary evidence of antitumor activity of YM155, a small-molecule inhibitor of survivin. Patients and Methods Patients with advanced solid malignancies or lymphoma were treated with escalating doses of YM155 administered by 168-hour continuous intravenous infusion (CIVI). Plasma and urine samples were assayed to determine pharmacokinetic parameters and excretion. Results Forty-one patients received 127 cycles of YM155 at doses ranging from 1.8 to 6.0 mg/m2/d by 168-hour CIVI every 3 weeks. Overall, the most common grade 1 to 2 toxicities were stomatitis, pyrexia, and nausea, whereas grade 3 and 4 toxicities were rare. Reversible elevation in serum creatinine in two patients, with one developing acute tubular necrosis, was dose-limiting at 6.0 mg/m2. The MTD was 4.8 mg/m2. At the MTD, the mean steady-state concentration, clearance, volume of distribution at steady-state, and terminal elimination half-life were 7.7 ng/mL, 47.7 L/h, 1,763 L, and 26 hours, respectively. One complete and two partial responses lasting 8, 24+ and 48+ months occurred in three patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, two patients with hormone- and docetaxel-refractory prostate cancer had prostate-specific antigen responses, and one patient with non–small-cell lung cancer had a minor response. Conclusion YM155 can be administered safely at 4.8 mg/m2/d 168 hours CIVI every 3 weeks. The absence of severe toxicities, attainment of plasma concentrations active in preclinical models, and compelling antitumor activity warrant further disease-directed studies of this agent alone and in combination with chemotherapy in a broad array of tumors.

The molecular target of rapamycin (mTOR), which is a member of the phosphoinositide 3-kinase related kinase (PIKK) family and a central modulator of cell growth, is a prime strategic target for anti-cancer therapeutic development. mTOR plays a critical role in transducing proliferative signals mediated through the phosphatidylinositol 3 kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase B (Akt) signaling pathway, principally by activating downstream protein kinases that are required for both ribosomal biosynthesis and translation of key mRNAs of proteins required for G(1) to S phase traverse. By targeting mTOR, the immunsuppressant and antiproliferative agent rapamycin (RAP) inhibits signals required for cell cycle progression, cell growth, and proliferation. RAP, a complex macrolide and highly potent fungicide, immunosuppressant, and anti-cancer agent, is a highly specific inhibitor of mTOR. In essence, RAP gains function by binding to the immunophilin FK506 binding protein 12 (FKBP12) and the resultant complex inhibits the activity of mTOR. Since mTOR activates both the 40S ribosomal protein S6 kinase ((p)70(s6k)) and the eukaryotic initiation factor 4E-binding protein-1 (4E-BP1), RAP blocks activation of these downstream signaling elements, which results in cell cycle arrest in the G1 arrest. RAP also prevents cyclin-dependent kinase (cdk) activation, inhibits retinoblastoma protein ((p)Rb) phosphorylation, and accelerates the turnover of cyclin D1 that leads to a deficienciy of active cdk4/cyclin D1 complexes, all of which potentially contribute to the prominent inhibitory effects of RAP at the G(1)/S phase transition. Both RAP and several RAP analogs with more favorable pharmaceutical properties have demonstrated prominent growth inhibitory effects against a broad range of human cancers in both preclinical and early clinical evaluations. This review will summarize the principal mechanisms of action of RAP and RAP derivatives and their potential utility of these agents as anti-cancer therapeutics. The preliminary results of early clinical evaluations with RAP analogs and the unique developmental challenges that lie ahead will also be discussed.

Conversion of ceramide, a putative mediator of anticancer drug-induced apoptosis, into glucosylceramide, by the action of glucosylceramide synthase (GCS), has been implicated in drug resistance. Herein, we compared GM95 mouse melanoma cells deficient in GCS activity, with cells stably transfected with a vector encoding GCS (GM95/GCS). Enzymatic and metabolic analysis demonstrated that GM95/GCS cells expressed a fully functional enzyme, resulting in normal ceramide glycosylation. However, cytotoxicity assays, as well as caspase activation and cytochrome c release studies, did not reveal any difference between the two cell lines with respect to their sensitivity toward doxorubicin, vinblastine, paclitaxel, cytosine arabinoside, or short-chain ceramide analogs. Administration of doxorubicin resulted in ceramide accumulation in both cell lines, with similar kinetics and amplitude. Although glucosylceramide formation was detected in doxorubicin-treated GM95/GCS cells, metabolism of drug-induced ceramide did not appear to be instrumental in cell survival. Furthermore, N-(n-butyl)deoxynojirimycin, a potent and non-toxic GCS inhibitor, had no chemosensitizing effect on wild-type melanoma cells. Altogether, both genetic and pharmacological alterations of the cellular ceramide glycosylation capacity failed to sensitize melanoma cells to anticancer drugs, therefore moderating the importance of ceramide glucosylation in drug-resistance mechanisms.