Search

Background: FGFR alterations are reported across various malignancies and might act as oncogenic drivers in multiple histologies. Erdafitinib is an oral, selective pan-FGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor with activity in FGFR-altered advanced urothelial carcinoma. We aimed to evaluate the safety and activity of erdafitinib in previously treated patients with FGFR-altered advanced solid tumours. Methods: The single-arm, phase 2 RAGNAR study was conducted at 156 investigative centres (hospitals or oncology practices that are qualified oncology study centres) across 15 countries. The study consisted of four cohorts based on tumour histology and patient age; the results reported in this Article are for the primary cohort of the study, defined as the Broad Panel Cohort, which was histology-agnostic. We recruited patients aged 12 years or older with advanced or metastatic tumours of any histology (except urothelial cancer) with predefined FGFR1–4 alterations (mutations or fusions according to local or central testing). Eligible patients had disease progression on at least one previous line of systemic therapy and no alternative standard therapy available to them, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1 (or equivalent for adolescents aged 12–17 years). Patients received once-daily oral erdafitinib (8 mg/day with provision for pharmacodynamically guided up-titration to 9 mg/day) on a continuous 21-day cycle until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate by independent review committee according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, or Response Assessment In Neuro-Oncology (RANO). The primary analysis was conducted on the treated population of the Broad Panel Cohort. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04083976. Findings: Patients were recruited between Dec 5, 2019, and Feb 15, 2022. Of 217 patients treated with erdafitinib, 97 (45%) pa

Purpose: To assess the safety and tolerability of BMS-986148, a mesothelin-directed antibody-drug conjugate (ADC)+/-nivolumab, in patients with selected tumors. Patients and Methods: In an international phase I/IIa study [NCT02341625 (CA008-002)], patients received BMS-986148 monotherapy (0.1-1.6 mg/kg intravenously (i.v.) every 3 weeks or 0.4 or 0.6 mg/kg i.v. once weekly; n=96) or BMS-986148 0.8 mg/kg nivolumab 360 mg i.v. every 3 weeks (n = 30). The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability. Result(s): In CA008-002, the most common (>= 10%) treatmentrelated adverse events (TRAEs) included increased aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, and alkaline phosphatase. Grade 3/4 TRAEs occurred in 42 patients (49%) receiving BMS-986148 every 3 weeks monotherapy, three (25%) receiving BMS-986148 once-weekly monotherapy, and 10 (33%) receiving BMS-986148 + nivolumab every 3 weeks. Overall, 17 of 126 patients (13%) discontinued because of a TRAE. The MTD of BMS-986148 was 1.2 mg/kg i.v. every 3 weeks. The safety profile of BMS-986148 nivolumab was similar to that of BMS-986148 monotherapy (0.8 mg/kg). Active ADC exposures increased in a dose-proportional manner with both dosing regimens (every 3 weeks and once weekly). Preliminary clinical activity was observed with BMS-986148 +/- nivolumab. No association between mesothelin expression and response was detected. Conclusion(s): BMS-986148 _ nivolumab demonstrated a clinically manageable safety profile and preliminary evidence of clinical activity, supporting additional studies combining directed cytotoxic therapies with checkpoint inhibitors as potential multimodal therapeutic strategies in patients with advanced solid tumors.Copyright © 2022 American Association for Cancer Research Inc.. All rights reserved.

PRECISION is an initiative from the Belgian Society of Medical Oncology (BSMO) in collaboration with several stakeholders, encompassing four programs that aim to boost genomic and clinical knowledge with the ultimate goal to offer patients with metastatic solid tumors molecularly guided treatments. The PRECISION 1 study has led to the creation of a clinico-genomic database. The Belgian Approach for Local Laboratory Extensive Tumor Testing (BALLETT) and GeNeo studies will increase the number of patients with advanced cancer that have comprehensive genotyping of their cancer. The PRECISION 2 project consists of investigator-initiated phase II studies aiming to provide access to a targeted drug for patients whose tumors harbor actionable mutations in case the matched drug is not available through reimbursement or clinical trials in Belgium.

Solid cancer is an independent prognostic factor for poor outcome with COVID-19. As guidelines for patient management in that setting depend on retrospective efforts, we here present the first analyses of a nationwide database of patients with cancer hospitalized with COVID-19 in Belgium, with a focus on changes in anticancer treatment plans at the time of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nineteen Belgian hospitals identified all patients with a history of solid cancer hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 2020 and February 2021. Demographic, cancer-specific and COVID-specific data were pseudonymously entered into a central Belgian Society of Medical Oncology (BSMO)-COVID database. The association between survival and primary cancer type was analyzed through multivariate multinomial logistic regression. Group comparisons for categorical variables were carried out through a Chi-square test. A total of 928 patients were registered in the database; most of them were aged ≥70 years (61.0%) and with poor performance scores [57.2% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) ≥2]. Thirty-day COVID-related mortality was 19.8%. In multivariate analysis, a trend was seen for higher mortality in patients with lung cancer (27.6% versus 20.8%, P = 0.062) and lower mortality for patients with breast cancer (13.0% versus 23.3%, P = 0.052) compared with other tumour types. Non-curative treatment was associated with higher 30-day COVID-related mortality rates compared with curative or no active treatment (25.8% versus 14.3% versus 21.9%, respectively, P < 0.001). In 33% of patients under active treatment, the therapeutic plan was changed due to COVID-19 diagnosis, most frequently involving delays/interruptions in systemic treatments (18.6%). Thirty-day COVID-related mortality was not significantly different between patients with and without treatment modifications (21.4% versus 20.5%). Interruption in anticancer treatments at the time of SARS-CoV-2 infection was not associated with a reduction

Item does not contain fulltext, OBJECTIVE: To analyse if exposure to sunitinib in the Immediate Surgery or Surgery After Sunitinib Malate in Treating Patients With Metastatic Kidney Cancer (SURTIME) trial, which investigated opposite sequences of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) and systemic therapy, is associated with the overall survival (OS) benefit observed in the deferred CN arm. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A post hoc analysis of SURTIME trial data. Variables analysed included number of patients receiving sunitinib, time from randomisation to start sunitinib, overall response rate by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, and duration of drug exposure and dose in the intention-to-treat population of the immediate and deferred arm. Descriptive methods and 95% confidence-intervals (CI) were used. RESULTS: In the deferred arm, 97.7% (95% CI 89.3-99.6%; n = 48) received sunitinib vs 80% (95% CI 66.9-88.7%, n = 40) in the immediate arm. Following immediate CN, 19.6% progressed 4 weeks after CN and the median time to start sunitinib was 39.5 vs 4.5 days in the deferred arm. At week 16, 46.0% had progressed at metastatic sites in the immediate CN arm vs 32.7% in the deferred arm. Sunitinib dose reductions, escalations and interruptions were not statistically significantly different between arms. Among patients who received sunitinib in the immediate or deferred arm the median total sunitinib treatment duration was 172.5 vs 248 days. Reduction of target lesions was more profound in the deferred arm. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to the deferred CN approach, immediate CN impairs administration, onset, and duration of sunitinib. Starting with systemic therapy leads to early and more profound disease control and identification of progression prior to planned CN, which may have contributed to the observed OS benefit.

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 treatm

PURPOSE: To assess the safety and tolerability of BMS-986148, a mesothelin-directed antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) {plus minus} nivolumab in patients with selected tumors. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In an international phase 1/2a study (NCT02341625 [CA008-002]), patients received BMS-986148 monotherapy (0.1-1.6 mg/kg IV Q3W or 0.4 or 0.6 mg/kg IV QW; n = 96) or BMS-986148 0.8 mg/kg + nivolumab 360 mg IV Q3W (n = 30). The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability. RESULT(S): In CA008-002, the most common ({greater than or equal to} 10%) treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) included increased AST, ALT, and ALP. Grade 3/4 TRAEs occurred in 42 patients (49%) receiving BMS-986148 Q3W monotherapy, 3 (25%) receiving BMS-986148 QW monotherapy, and 10 (33%) receiving BMS-986148 + nivolumab Q3W. Overall, 17 of 126 patients (13%) discontinued due to a TRAE. The maximum tolerated dose of BMS-986148 was 1.2 mg/kg IV Q3W.The safety profile of BMS-986148 + nivolumab was similar to that of BMS-986148 monotherapy (0.8 mg/kg). Active ADC exposures increased in a dose-proportional manner with both dosing regimens (Q3W and QW). Preliminary clinical activity was observed with BMS-986148 {plus minus} nivolumab. No association between mesothelin expression and response was detected. CONCLUSION(S): BMS-986148 {plus minus} nivolumab demonstrated a clinically manageable safety profile and preliminary evidence of clinical activity, supporting additional studies combining directed cytotoxic therapies with checkpoint inhibitors as potential multimodal therapeutic strategies in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Simple Summary Anthracyclines are among the most active chemotherapies in breast cancer (BC). However, they can cause structural and cumulative dose-related cardiac damage; hence, they require careful administration after preliminary functional cardiac assessment and subsequent monitoring, along with a limitation in the cumulative dose delivered. Non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (NPLD) has been precisely developed to optimize the doxorubicin toxicity profile, while retaining its therapeutic efficacy, thanks to a reduced diffusion in normal tissues with preserved drug penetrance into cancer sites. This has allowed administration of NPLD beyond a conventional doxorubicin maximum cumulative dose, as well as in patients with cardiac comorbilities or anthracycline pretreatment. At present, NPLD is approved in Europe and Canada in combination with cyclophosphamide as the first line of metastatic HER2-negative BC. However, given the increasing complexity of the therapeutic scenario in this setting, we have carefully revised the most updated literature on the topic and dissected the potential role of NPLD in the evolving therapeutic algorithms. Anthracyclines are among the most active chemotherapies (CT) in breast cancer (BC). However, cardiotoxicity is a risk and peculiar side effect that has been limiting their use in clinical practice, especially after the introduction of taxanes. Non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (NPLD) has been developed to optimize the toxicity profile induced by anthracyclines, while maintaining its unquestionable therapeutic index, thanks to its delivering characteristics that increase its diffusion in tumor tissues and reduce it in normal tissues. This feature allows NPLD to be safely administered beyond the standard doxorubicin maximum cumulative dose of 450-480 mg/m(2). Following three pivotal first-line phase III trials in HER2-negative metastatic BC (MBC), this drug was finally approved in combination with cyclophosphamide in this specific

Background Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is a clinically validated target for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). AMG 160 BiTE® immuno-oncology therapy redirects T cells to cancer cells by binding to PSMA on cancer cells and CD3 on T cells, leading to T-cell activation, tumor-cell killing, and T-cell expansion. As the BiTE mode of action leads to an upregulation of immune checkpoints, combining AMG 160 with a PD-1 inhibitor may lead to sustained T cell–dependent killing of tumor cells. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) is a first-dose effect induced by BiTE molecule-mediated T-cell activation. An approach to mitigate CRS is prophylaxis with an anti-inflammatory agent. Methods The phase 1 study (NCT03792841) has four parts: AMG 160 monotherapy; AMG 160 in combination with pembrolizumab; AMG 160 monotherapy with etanercept prophylaxis; and AMG 160 monotherapy administered in outpatient centers with 24-hour monitoring. Included in the study are men with histologically/cytologically confirmed mCRPC who are refractory to novel androgen receptor signaling inhibitors: abiraterone, enzalutamide, darolutamide, and/or apalutamide and have failed, refused, or are unsuitable for taxanes; and who have ongoing castration with evidence of progressive disease. Patients who received prior PSMA radionuclide therapy are eligible. Patients with CNS metastases, leptomeningeal disease, spinal cord compression, or active autoimmune disease are excluded. Primary objectives are to evaluate safety and tolerability and determine the MTD or RP2D of AMG 160 monotherapy or in combination with pembrolizumab. Secondary objectives are to characterize pharmacokinetics and preliminary antitumor activity. Evaluation of preliminary antitumor activity will be based on RECIST 1.1 with Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 modifications, PSA response, CTC response, progression-free survival (radiographic and PSA), and overall survival. PSMA PET/CT and FDG PET/CT imaging will be us

Contains fulltext : 208381.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer SURTIME trial explored timing of sunitinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), and cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Previous retrospective studies suggest increased surgery-related adverse events (AEs) after presurgical TKI. We report surgical safety from a randomised comparison of CN before or after sunitinib. In-hospital mortality, 30-d readmission rate, and intraoperative and 30-d postoperative AEs according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4 and Clavien-Dindo (CD) were analysed. Patients were randomised 1:1 to immediate CN followed by sunitinib versus sunitinib followed by deferred CN 24h after the last dose of sunitinib. None of the tumours in the deferred arm became unresectable, and only two patients had a sunitinib-related delay of CN of >2wk. AEs related to surgery (all grades) in the immediate and deferred arms occurred in 52% and 53% after CN, respectively, although the number of intraoperative surgery-related AEs was higher in the immediate arm. Postoperative AEs (CD >/=3), 30-d readmission, and in-hospital mortality rates were 6.5%, 13%, and 4.3% in the immediate arm and 2.5%, 7.5%, and 2.5% in the deferred arm, respectively. There were no differences in surgery time, blood loss, and hospital stay. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with metastatic kidney cancer do not have more surgical complications irrespective of whether they are treated with systemic therapy before or after surgery.