Search

Purpose: Amplification of CDK4 and CDK6 is a feature of a variety of malignancies, and preclinical evidence suggests inhibition of CDK4/6 is a plausible treatment strategy in these tumors. Subprotocol Z1C of the NCI-MATCH trial was designed to evaluate the CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib in CDK4- or CDK6-amplified tumors., Patients and Methods: Patients had a solid malignancy with progression on at least one systemic therapy for advanced disease. Tumors with ≥ 7 copies of CDK4 or CDK6 were considered amplified and molecularly eligible. Enrolled patients were treated with palbociclib 125 mg daily on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was ORR., Results: Forty-three patients were enrolled on subprotocol Z1C, and 38 patients were deemed eligible, treated, and included in analyses; 25 patients were eligible, treated, and centrally confirmed to have CDK4 or CDK6 amplification and comprised the primary analysis cohort for ORR endpoint. Among the 25 patients in the primary cohort, one patient had a PR, 4 patients had SD, and 16 patients had PD as best response. Four patients were not evaluable due to lack of follow-up scans. Among the 38 evaluable patients, one patient had a PR, 10 patients had SD, and 21 patients had PD as best response. Partial response and stable disease were only seen in patients with CDK4 amplification. Median progression-free survival was 2.0 months, and median overall survival was 8.8 months., Conclusions: Palbociclib showed limited activity in histology-agnostic CDK4- or CDK6-amplified tumors, though CNS tumors may be worthy of future investigation.

Purpose: National Cancer Institute-Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (NCI-MATCH) was a multicohort phase 2 trial that assigned patients with advanced pretreated cancers to molecularly targeted therapies on the basis of tumor genomic testing. NCI-MATCH Arm A evaluated afatinib, an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) approved for advanced non-small cell lung cancer, in patients with tumors other than lung cancer harboring EGFR mutations., Methods: Patients with advanced pretreated cancers other than lung cancer found to have selected actionable EGFR mutations were offered participation in Arm A. Previous therapy with an EGFR TKI was not allowed. Patients received afatinib 40 mg once daily continuously until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), 6-month PFS, and overall survival (OS)., Results: Seventeen patients received protocol therapy. Tumor types included glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) (13), gliosarcoma (1), adenocarcinoma not otherwise specified (NOS) (2), and adenosquamous carcinoma of the breast (1). Fifty-nine percent of patients received ≥2 lines of previous therapy. The ORR was 11.8% (90% CI, 2.1 to 32.6), with one complete response lasting 16.4 months (GBM harboring a rare exon 18 EGFR-SEPT14 fusion) and one partial response lasting 12.8 months (adenocarcinoma NOS with the classic EGFR mutation, p.Glu746_Ala750del). Three patients had stable disease. The 6-month PFS was 15% (90% CI, 0 to 30.7); the median OS was 9 months (90% CI, 4.6 to 14.0). Rash and diarrhea were the most common toxicities., Conclusion: Afatinib had modest activity in a cohort of patients with heavily pretreated cancer with advanced nonlung, EGFR- mutated tumors, but the trial's primary end point was not met. Further evaluation of afatinib in GBM with EGFR exon 18 fusions may be of interest.

Purpose: NCI-MATCH assigned patients with advanced cancer and progression on prior treatment, based on genomic alterations in pretreatment tumor tissue. Arm J (EAY131-J) evaluated the combination of trastuzumab/pertuzumab (HP) across HER2-amplified tumors., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients had high levels of HER2 amplification [copy number (CN) ≥7] detected by central next-generation sequencing (NGS) or through NCI-designated laboratories. Patients with breast/gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma and those who received prior HER2-directed therapy were excluded. Enrollment of patients with colorectal cancer was capped at 4 based on emerging data. Patients received HP IV Q3 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR); secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)., Results: Thirty-five patients were enrolled, with 25 included in the primary efficacy analysis (CN ≥7 confirmed by a central lab, median CN = 28). Median age was 66 (range, 31-80), and half of all patients had ≥3 prior therapies (range, 1-11). The confirmed ORR was 12% [3/25 partial responses (colorectal, cholangiocarcinoma, urothelial cancers), 90% confidence interval (CI) 3.4%-28.2%]. There was one additional partial response (urothelial cancer) in a patient with an unconfirmed ERBB2 copy number. Median PFS was 3.3 months (90% CI 2.0-4.1), and median OS 9.4 months (90% CI 5.0-18.9). Treatment-emergent adverse events were consistent with prior studies. There was no association between HER2 CN and response., Conclusions: HP was active in a selection of HER2-amplified tumors (non-breast/gastroesophageal) but did not meet the predefined efficacy benchmark. Additional strategies targeting HER2 and potential resistance pathways are warranted, especially in rare tumors., (©2024 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: Subprotocol K2 (EAY131-K2) of the NCI-MATCH platform trial was an open-label, single-arm, phase II study designed to evaluate the antitumor efficacy of the oral FGFR1-4 inhibitor, erdafitinib, in patients with tumors harboring FGFR1-4 mutations or fusions., Methods: Central confirmation of tumor FGFR1-4 mutations or fusions was required for outcome analysis. Patients with urothelial carcinoma were excluded. Enrolled subjects received oral erdafitinib at a starting dose of 8 mg daily continuously until intolerable toxicity or disease progression. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) with key secondary end points of safety, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS)., Results: Thirty-five patients were enrolled, and 25 patients were included in the primary efficacy analysis as prespecified in the protocol. The median age was 61 years, and 52% of subjects had received ≥3 previous lines of therapy. The confirmed ORR was 16% (4 of 25 [90% CI, 5.7 to 33.0], P = .034 against the null rate of 5%). An additional seven patients experienced stable disease as best-confirmed response. Four patients had a prolonged PFS including two with recurrent WHO grade IV, IDH1-/2-wildtype glioblastoma. The median PFS and OS were 3.6 months and 11.0 months, respectively. Erdafitinib was manageable with no new safety signals., Conclusion: This study met its primary end point in patients with several pretreated solid tumor types harboring FGFR1-3 mutations or fusions. These findings support advancement of erdafitinib for patients with fibroblast growth factor receptor-altered tumors outside of currently approved indications in a potentially tumor-agnostic manner.

Purpose: The National Cancer Institute Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice trial is a signal-finding genomically driven platform trial that assigns patients with any advanced refractory solid tumor, lymphoma, or myeloma to targeted therapies on the basis of next-generation sequencing results. Subprotocol E evaluated osimertinib, an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with EGFR mutations., Methods: Eligible patients had EGFR mutations (T790M or rare activating) and received osimertinib 80 mg once daily. Patients with lung cancer with EGFR T790M were excluded. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR), and the secondary end points were 6-month progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and toxicity., Results: A total of 19 patients were enrolled: 17 were evaluable for toxicity and 13 for efficacy. The median age of the 13 included in the efficacy analysis was 63 years, 62% had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 1, and 31% received >three previous systemic therapies. The most common tumor type was brain cancers (54%). The ORR was 15.4% (n = 2 of 13; 90% CI, 2.8 to 41.0) and 6-month PFS was 16.7% (90% CI, 0 to 34.4). The two confirmed RECIST responses were observed in a patient with neuroendocrine carcinoma not otherwise specified ( EGFR exon 20 S768T and exon 18 G719C mutation) and a patient with low-grade epithelial carcinoma of the paranasal sinus ( EGFR D770_N771insSVD). The most common (>20%) treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea, thrombocytopenia, and maculopapular rash., Conclusion: In this pretreated cohort, osimertinib did not meet the prespecified end point threshold for efficacy, but responses were seen in a neuroendocrine carcinoma with an EGFR exon 20 S768T and exon 18 G719C mutation and an epithelial carcinoma with an EGFR D770_N771insSVD mutation. Osimertinib was well tolerated and had a safety profile consistent with previous studies.

Purpose: Despite fibroblast growth factor receptor ( FGFR ) inhibitors being approved in tumor types with select FGFR rearrangements or gene mutations, amplifications of FGFR represent the most common FGFR alteration across malignancies. Subprotocol K1 (EAY131-K1) of the National Cancer Institute-MATCH platform trial was designed to evaluate the antitumor efficacy of the oral FGFR1-4 inhibitor, erdafitinib, in patients with tumors harboring FGFR1-4 amplification., Methods: EAY131-K1 was an open-label, single-arm, phase II study with central confirmation of presence of FGFR1-4 amplification in tumors. Patients with urothelial carcinoma were excluded. Enrolled patients received oral erdafitinib at a starting dose of 8 mg once daily continuously with escalation to 9 mg once daily continuously, on the basis of predefined time point assessments of phosphate levels, until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary end point was centrally assessed objective response rate (ORR), with key secondary end points being 6-month progression-free survival (PFS6), PFS, overall survival (OS), and safety., Results: Thirty-five patients were enrolled into this study with 18 included in the prespecified primary efficacy analysis. The median age of the 18 patients was 60 years, and 78% had received ≥3 previous lines of therapy. There were no confirmed responses to erdafitinib; however, five patients experienced stable disease (SD) as best response. One patient with an FGFR1 -amplified breast cancer had a prolonged PFS >168 days (5.5 months). The median PFS was 1.7 months (90% CI, 1.1 to 1.8 months) and the median OS was 4.2 months (90% CI, 2.3 to 9.3 months). The estimated PFS6 rate was 13.8% (90% CI, 3.3 to 31.6). The majority of toxicities were grade 1 to 2 in nature, although there was one grade 5 treatment-related adverse event., Conclusion: Erdafitinib did not meet its primary end point of efficacy as determined by ORR in treatment-refractory solid tumors harboring FGFR1-4 amplifications. Our findings support that rearrangements and gene mutations, but not amplifications, of FGFR remain the established FGFR alterations with approved indications for FGFR inhibition.

Background: Racial differences have been reported in toxicity outcomes for anticancer drug treatments. However, these observations were often from studies with small sample sizes, and many only reported the maximum grade of toxicity and no longitudinal information. This current analysis aims to investigate racial differences in longitudinal toxicities using a large-scale clinical trials database., Methods: Early-phase clinical trials sponsored by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program at the National Cancer Institute, USA, that evaluated cytotoxic drugs and molecularly targeted agents between March 2000 and December 2012 were studied. Race was categorized as White, Black or African-American, and Asian. Each toxicity's grade prevalence, mean grade at each cycle, and time to develop grade 2 or higher toxicity was evaluated., Results: In total, 25,442 patients from 697 trials were included in this study. The number of patients categorized as White, Black, and Asian designations was 22,756 (89%), 1874 (7%), and 812 (3%), respectively. Notable findings include the rate of any grade of diarrhea in Black people was 26% and 21% lower than that of White and Asian people. The median time to the first grade 2 or higher event was 6 cycles in White people, 8 in Black people, and 6 in Asian people. The rate of any grade hyperglycemia was significantly higher in Asian people., Conclusions: Although we identified several racial differences in longitudinal toxicities, most were of generally lower grade. Further study is needed to clarify the cause of racial differences in treatment-associated toxicities., (© 2023 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The NCI-MATCH (Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice) trial ( NCT02465060 ) was launched in 2015 as a genomically driven, signal-seeking precision medicine platform trial-largely for patients with treatment-refractory, malignant solid tumors. Having completed in 2023, it remains one of the largest tumor-agnostic, precision oncology trials undertaken to date. Nearly 6,000 patients underwent screening and molecular testing, with a total of 1,593 patients (inclusive of continued accrual from standard next-generation sequencing) being assigned to one of 38 substudies. Each substudy was a phase 2 trial of a therapy matched to a genomic alteration, with a primary endpoint of objective tumor response by RECIST criteria. In this Perspective, we summarize the outcomes of the initial 27 substudies in NCI-MATCH, which met its signal-seeking objective with 7/27 positive substudies (25.9%). We discuss key aspects of the design and operational conduct of the trial, highlighting important lessons for future precision medicine studies., (© 2023. Springer Nature America, Inc.)

Purpose: Cyclin D/CDK4/6 is critical in controlling the G1 to S checkpoint. CCND, the gene encoding cyclin D, is known to be amplified in a variety of solid tumors. Palbociclib is an oral CDK4/6 inhibitor, approved in advanced breast cancer in combination with endocrine therapy. We explored the efficacy of palbociclib in patients with nonbreast solid tumors containing an amplification in CCND1, 2, or 3., Patients and Methods: Patients with tumors containing a CCND1, 2, or 3 amplification and expression of the retinoblastoma protein were assigned to subprotocol Z1B and received palbociclib 125 mg once daily for 21 days of a 28-day cycle. Tumor response was assessed every two cycles., Results: Forty patients were assigned to subprotocol Z1B; 4 patients had outside assays identifying the CCND1, 2, or 3 amplification and were not confirmed centrally; 3 were ineligible and 2 were not treated (1 untreated patient was also ineligible), leaving 32 evaluable patients for this analysis. There were no partial responses; 12 patients (37.5%) had stable disease as best response. There were seven deaths on study, all during cycle 1 and attributable to disease progression. Median progression-free survival was 1.8 months. The most common toxicities were leukopenia (n = 21, 55%) and neutropenia (n = 19, 50%); neutropenia was the most common grade 3/4 event (n = 12, 32%)., Conclusions: Palbociclib was not effective at treating nonbreast solid tumors with a CCND1, 2, or 3 amplification in this cohort. These data do not support further investigation of single-agent palbociclib in tumors with CCND1, 2, or 3 amplification., (©2023 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: NCI-MATCH is a precision medicine trial using genomic testing to allocate patients with advanced malignancies to targeted treatment subprotocols. This report combines two subprotocols evaluating trametinib, a MEK1/2 inhibitor, in patients with Neurofibromatosis 1 ( NF1 [S1] or GNA11/Q [S2]) altered tumors., Methods: Eligible patients had tumors with deleterious inactivating NF1 or GNA11/Q mutations by the customized Oncomine AmpliSeq panel. Prior MEK inhibitor treatment was excluded. Glioblastomas (GBMs) were permitted, including malignancies associated with germline NF1 mutations (S1 only). Trametinib was administered at 2 mg once daily over 28-day cycles until toxicity or disease progression. Primary end point was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months, PFS, and overall survival. Exploratory analyses included co-occurring genomic alterations and PTEN loss., Results: Fifty patients were eligible and started therapy: 46 with NF1 mutations (S1) and four with GNA11 mutations (S2). In the NF1 cohort, nonsense single-nucleotide variants were identified in 29 and frameshift deletions in 17 tumors. All in S2 had nonuveal melanoma and GNA11 Q209L variant. Two partial responses (PR) were noted in S1, one patient each with advanced lung cancer and GBM for an ORR of 4.3% (90% CI, 0.8 to 13.1). One patient with melanoma in S2 had a PR (ORR, 25%; 90% CI, 1.3 to 75.1). Prolonged stable disease (SD) was also noted in five patients (four in S1 and one in S2) with additional rare histologies. Adverse events were as previously described with trametinib. Comutations in TP53 and PIK3CA were common., Conclusion: Although these subprotocols did not meet the primary end point for ORR, significant responses or prolonged SD noted in some disease subtypes warrants further investigation.

Background: The low expectation of clinical benefit from phase 1 cancer therapeutics trials might negatively affect patient and physician participation, study reimbursement, and slow the progress of oncology research. Advances in cancer drug development, meanwhile, might have favourably improved treatment responses; however, little comprehensive data exist describing the response and toxicity associated with phase 1 trials across solid tumours. The aim of the study is to evaluate the trend of toxicity and response in phase 1 trials for solid tumours over time., Methods: We analysed patient-level data from the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program of the National Cancer Institute-sponsored investigator-initiated phase 1 trials for solid tumours, from Jan 1, 2000, to May 31, 2019. We assessed risks of treatment-related death (grade 5 toxicity ratings possibly, probably, or definitely attributable to treatment), all on-treatment deaths (deaths during protocol treatment regardless of attribution), grade 3-4 toxicity, and proportion of overall response (complete response and partial response) and complete response rate in the study periods of 2000-05, 2006-12, and 2013-2019, and evaluated their trends over time. We also analysed cancer type-specific and investigational agent-specific response, and analysed the trend of response in each cancer type over time. Univariate associations of overall response rates with patients' baseline characteristics (age, sex, performance status, BMI, albumin concentration, and haemoglobin concentration), enrolment period, investigational agents, and trial design were assessed using risk ratio based on the modified Poisson regression model., Findings: We analysed 465 protocols that enrolled 13 847 patients using 261 agents. 144 (31%) trials used a monotherapy and 321 (69%) used combination therapies. The overall treatment-related death rate was 0·7% (95% CI 0·5-0·8) across all periods. Risks of treatment-related deaths did not change over time (p=0·52). All on-treatment death risk during the study period was 8·0% (95% CI 7·6-8·5). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were haematological; grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 2336 (16·9%) of 13 847 patients, lymphopenia in 1230 (8·9%), anaemia in 894 (6·5%), and thrombocytopenia in 979 (7·1%). The overall response rate for all trials during the study period was 12·2% (95% CI 11·5-12·8; 1133 of 9325 patients) and complete response rate was 2·7% (2·4-3·0; 249 of 9325). Overall response increased from 9·6% (95% CI 8·7-10·6) in 2000-05 to 18·0% (15·7-20·5) in 2013-19, and complete response rates from 2·5% (2·0-3·0) to 4·3% (3·2-5·7). Overall response rates for combination therapy were substantially higher than for monotherapy (15·8% [15·0-16·8] vs 3·5% [2·8-4·2]). The overall response by class of agents differed across diseases. Anti-angiogenesis agents were associated with higher overall response rate for bladder, colon, kidney and ovarian cancer. DNA repair inhibitors were associated with higher overall response rate in ovarian and pancreatic cancer. The rates of overall response over time differed markedly by disease; there were notable improvements in bladder, breast, and kidney cancer and melanoma, but no change in the low response of pancreatic and colon cancer., Interpretation: During the past 20 years, the response rate in phase 1 trials nearly doubled without an increase in the treatment-related death rate. However, there is significant heterogeneity in overall response by various factors such as cancer type, investigational agent, and trial design. Therefore, informed decision making is crucial for patients before participating in phase 1 trials. This study provides updated encouraging outcomes of modern phase 1 trials in solid tumours., Funding: National Cancer Institute., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests RL has served as a consultant for Monte Rosa Therapeutics. CRF has served as a consultant for AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Bristol Meyers Sqibb/Celgene, Denovo Biopharma, Genentech/Roche Pharma, Genmab, Gilead Sciences, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Morphosys, Pharmacyclics/Janssen, Seagen, and Spectrum Pharmaceuticals; and has received research funding paid to the institution from 4D, AbbVie, Acerta Pharma, Adaptimmune, Allogene Therapeutics, Amgen, Bayer, Celgene, Cellectis, EMD, Gilead Sciences, Genentech/Roche, Guardant, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Janssen, Kite Pharma, MorphoSys, Nektar Therapeutics, Novartis, Pfizer, Pharmacyclics, Sanofi, Takeda, TG Therapeutics, Xencor, Ziopharm, Burroughs Wellcome Fund, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, National Cancer Institute, V Foundation for Cancer Research, and the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas where he is a CPRIT Scholar in Cancer Research. LJN has received research support from BMS/Celgene, Caribou Biosciences, Epizyme, Genentech, Gilead/Kite, IGM Biosciences, Janssen, Novartis, Takeda, and TG Therapeutics; and has served as consultant for ADC Therapeutics, Bayer, BMS/Celgene, Epizyme, Genentech, Gilead/Kite, Janssen, Morphosys, Novartis, Takeda, and TG Therapeutics. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: National Cancer Institute-Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice is a multicohort trial that assigns patients with advanced cancers to targeted therapies on the basis of central tumor genomic testing. Arm B evaluated afatinib, an ErbB family tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with ERBB2 -activating mutations., Methods: Eligible patients had selected ERBB2 single-nucleotide variants or insertions/deletions detected by the National Cancer Institute-Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice next-generation sequencing assay. Patients had performance status ≤ 1, left ventricular ejection fraction > 50%, grade ≤ 1 diarrhea, and no prior human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) therapy. Patients received afatinib 40 mg once daily in 28-day cycles. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary end points were 6-month progression-free survival, overall survival, toxicity, and molecular correlates., Results: A total of 59 patients were assigned and 40 were enrolled. The median age was 62 years, 78% were female, 68% had performance status = 1, and 58% had received > 3 prior therapies. The confirmed ORR was 2.7% (n = 1 of 37; 90% CI, 0.14 to 12.2), and 6-month progression-free survival was 12.0% (90% CI, 5.6 to 25.8). A confirmed partial response occurred in a patient with adenocarcinoma of extra-mammary Paget disease of skin who progressed after cycle 6. Two unconfirmed partial responses were observed (low-grade serous gynecological tract and estrogen receptor-positive/HER2-negative immunohistochemistry breast ductal carcinoma). Of 12 patients with breast cancer, 1 additional patient with lobular carcinoma (estrogen receptor-positive/HER2 fluorescent in situ hybridization) had a 51% reduction in target lesions but progressed because of a new lesion at cycle 6. The most common (> 20%) treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea (68%), mucositis (43%), fatigue (40%), acneiform rash (30%), dehydration (27%), vomiting (27%), nausea (27%), anemia (27%), and anorexia (22%). Four patients (11%) discontinued because of adverse events., Conclusion: Although afatinib did not meet the prespecified threshold for antitumor activity in this heavily pretreated cohort, the response in a rare tumor type is notable. The safety profile of afatinib was consistent with prior studies.

Purpose: Cancer drug development has largely shifted from cytotoxic chemotherapy to targeted treatment in the past two decades. Although previous studies have highlighted improvement in response rates in recent phase I trials, disease-focused reporting is limited., Methods: We integrated patient-level data for patients with hematologic malignancies who participated in phase I trials sponsored by the National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program between January 2000 and May 2019 and estimated the trend of grade 5 toxicity and response by disease subtype over time., Results: We analyzed 161 trials involving 3,308 patients, all of whom were assessed for toxicity and 2,404 of whom were evaluable for response to therapy. The overall rate of grade 5 toxicities was 1.81% (95% CI, 1.36 to 2.27), with no significant change in the rate over time. Baseline characteristics associated with higher risk of grade 5 toxicity were age and performance status ≥ 2 at enrollment. Overall response rate (ORR) and complete response (CR) rate for all trials during the study period were 25.1% and 14.7%, respectively. A significant increase in both ORR and CR rate was observed over time (ORR, 18.5% in 2000-2005, 25.9% in 2006-2012, and 50.6% in 2013-2019, P < .001). ORR in phase I trials varied across disease subtypes: 20.2% in acute myeloid leukemia, 9.1% in myelodysplastic syndrome, 43.2% in lymphoma, 42.9% in chronic lymphocytic leukemia, 15.1% in acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and 16.5% in myeloma., Conclusion: Over time, the ORR and CR rates in phase I trials for hematologic malignancy have improved meaningfully, whereas the rate of toxicity-related death remains stable. This study provides broad experience that physicians can use when discussing the potential outcomes for patients with hematologic malignancy considering participation in phase I trials., Competing Interests: Dai ChiharaHonoraria: AstraZeneca/Daiichi SankyoResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene Larry V. RubinsteinThis author is a member of the Journal of Clinical Oncology Editorial Board. Journal policy recused the author from having any role in the peer review of this manuscript. Loretta J. NastoupilHonoraria: Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Novartis, Bayer, Janssen Oncology, Pfizer, TG Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, ADC Therapeutics, Morphosys, Epizyme, Genmab, TakedaResearch Funding: TG Therapeutics, Janssen Biotech, Celgene, Genentech/Roche, LAM Therapeutics, Epizyme, Novartis, IgM Biosciences, Caribou Biosciences, Gilead Sciences, Allogene Therapeutics, Takeda Christopher R. FlowersConsulting or Advisory Role: Bayer, Gilead Sciences, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie, Celgene, Denovo Biopharma, BeiGene, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Pharmacyclics/Janssen, Genentech/Roche, EpizymeResearch Funding: Acerta Pharma (Inst), Janssen Oncology (Inst), Gilead Sciences (Inst), Celgene (Inst), TG Therapeutics (Inst), Genentech/Roche (Inst), Pharmacyclics (Inst), AbbVie (Inst), Millennium (Inst), Alimera Sciences (Inst), Xencor (Inst)No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: Activating mutations in PIK3CA are observed across multiple tumor types. The NCI-MATCH (EAY131) is a tumor-agnostic platform trial that enrolls patients to targeted therapies on the basis of matching genomic alterations. Arm Z1F evaluated copanlisib, an α and δ isoform-specific phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitor, in patients with PIK3CA mutations (with or without PTEN loss)., Patients and Methods: Patients received copanlisib (60 mg intravenous) once weekly on days 1, 8, and 15 in 28-day cycles until progression or toxicity. Patients with KRAS mutations, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancers, and lymphomas were excluded. The primary end point was centrally assessed objective response rate (ORR); secondary end points included progression-free survival, 6-month progression-free survival, and overall survival., Results: Thirty-five patients were enrolled, and 25 patients were included in the primary efficacy analysis as prespecified in the Protocol. Multiple histologies were enrolled, with gynecologic (n = 6) and gastrointestinal (n = 6) being the most common. Sixty-eight percent of patients had ≥ 3 lines of prior therapy. The ORR was 16% (4 of 25, 90% CI, 6 to 33) with P = .0341 against a null rate of 5%. The most common reason for protocol discontinuation was disease progression (n = 17, 68%). Grade 3/4 toxicities observed were consistent with reported toxicities for PI3K pathway inhibition. Sixteen patients (53%) had grade 3 toxicities, and one patient (3%) had grade 4 toxicity (CTCAE v5.0). Most common toxicities include hyperglycemia (n = 19), fatigue (n = 12), diarrhea (n = 11), hypertension (n = 10), and nausea (n = 10)., Conclusion: The study met its primary end point with an ORR of 16% ( P = .0341) with copanlisib showing clinical activity in select tumors with PIK3CA mutation in the refractory setting., Competing Interests: Senthil DamodaranResearch Funding: EMD Serono (Inst), Guardant Health (Inst), Taiho Pharmaceutical (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Sermonix Pharmaceuticals (Inst) Fengmin ZhaoThis author is a member of the Journal of Clinical Oncology Editorial Board. Journal policy recused the author from having any role in the peer review of this manuscript. Dustin A. DemingConsulting or Advisory Role: Bayer, Promega, Array BioPharma, Lilly, PfizerResearch Funding: Merck (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Revolution Medicines (Inst), Millennium (Inst), Bayer Edith P. MitchellLeadership: Corvus PharmaceuticalsHonoraria: Sanofi, ExelixisConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech, Novartis, Merck, Bristol Myers SquibSpeakers' Bureau: IpsenResearch Funding: Genentech (Inst), sanofi (Inst) Robert J. GrayResearch Funding: Agios, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Genentech/Roche, Genomic Health, Genzyme, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Ortho, Onyx, Pfizer, Sequenta, Syndax, Novartis, Takeda, AbbVie, Sanofi, Merck Sharp & Dohme Lisa M. McShaneThis author is a member of the Journal of Clinical Oncology Editorial Board. Journal policy recused the author from having any role in the peer review of this manuscript. Larry V. RubinsteinThis author is a member of the Journal of Clinical Oncology Editorial Board. Journal policy recused the author from having any role in the peer review of this manuscript. P. Mickey WilliamsResearch Funding: Illumina (Inst)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: I was a coinventor of the DLBCL cell of origin patent recently filed by the NIH Stanley R. HamiltonResearch Funding: Minerva Biotechnologies, Intima Carlos L. ArteagaStock and Other Ownership Interests: Provista DiagnosticsConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Lilly, Sanofi, Radius Health, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Puma Biotechnology, Merck, Origimed, Immunomedics, Daiichi Sankyo, Athenex, Astrazeneca, ArvinasResearch Funding: Pfizer, Lilly, TakedaOther Relationship: Susan G. Komen for the Cure Lyndsay N. HarrisPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Philips Healthcare Peter J. O'DwyerConsulting or Advisory Role: GenentechResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Mirati Therapeutics (Inst), Celgene (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), BBI Healthcare (Inst), Pharmacyclics (Inst), Five Prime Therapeutics (Inst), Forty Seven (Inst), Amgen (Inst), H3 Biomedicine (Inst), Taiho Pharmaceutical (Inst), Array BioPharma (Inst), Lilly/ImClone (Inst), Syndax (Inst), Minneamrita Therapeutics (Inst)Expert Testimony: Lilly, Dai-ichi Sankyo Alice P. ChenUncompensated Relationships: Frontiers in Medicine Keith T. FlahertyStock and Other Ownership Interests: Clovis Oncology, Loxo, X4 Pharma, Strata Oncology, PIC Therapeutics, Shattuck Labs, Apricity Health, Oncoceutics, FOGPharma, Tvardi Therapeutics, Checkmate Pharmaceuticals, Kinnate Biopharma, Scorpion Therapeutics, ALX Oncology, xCures, Monopteros Therapeutics, Vibliome Therapeutics, Transcode Therapeutics, Soley TherapeuticsConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Lilly, Oncoceutics, Tvardi Therapeutics, Takeda, Boston Biomedical, Debiopharm Group, FOGPharmaNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

The NCI-MATCH was designed to characterize the efficacy of targeted therapies in histology-agnostic driver mutation-positive malignancies. Sub-protocols F and G were developed to evaluate the role of crizotinib in rare tumors that harbored either ALK or ROS1 rearrangements. Patients with malignancies that progressed following at least one prior systemic therapy were accrued to the NCI-MATCH for molecular profiling, and those with actionable ALK or ROS1 rearrangements were offered participation in sub-protocols F or G, respectively. There were five patients who enrolled on Arm F (ALK) and four patients on Arm G (ROS1). Few grade 3 or 4 toxicities were noted, including liver test abnormalities, and acute kidney injury. For sub-protocol F (ALK), the response rate was 50% (90% CI 9.8-90.2%) with one complete response among the 4 eligible patients. The median PFS was 3.8 months, and median OS was 4.3 months. For sub-protocol G (ROS1) the response rate was 25% (90% CI 1.3-75.1%). The median PFS was 4.3 months, and median OS 6.2 months. Data from 3 commercial vendors showed that the prevalence of ALK and ROS1 rearrangements in histologies other than non-small cell lung cancer and lymphoma was rare (0.1% and 0.4% respectively). We observed responses to crizotinib which met the primary endpoint for ALK fusions, albeit in a small number of patients. Despite the limited accrual, some of the patients with these oncogenic fusions can respond to crizotinib which may have a therapeutic role in this setting., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Purpose: PIK3CA mutations frequently contribute to oncogenesis in solid tumors. Taselisib, a potent and selective inhibitor of phosphoinositide 3-kinase, has demonstrated clinical activity in PIK3CA -mutant breast cancer. Whether PIK3CA mutations predict sensitivity to taselisib in other cancer types is unknown. National Cancer Institute-Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice Arm EAY131-I is a single-arm, phase II study of the safety and efficacy of taselisib in patients with advanced cancers., Methods: Eligible patients had tumors with an activating PIK3CA mutation. Patients with breast or squamous cell lung carcinoma, or whose cancer had KRAS or PTEN mutations, were excluded. Patients received taselisib 4 mg, orally once daily continuously, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was objective response rate. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), 6-month PFS, overall survival (OS), and identification of predictive biomarkers., Results: Seventy patients were enrolled, and 61 were eligible and initiated protocol therapy. Types of PIK3CA mutations included helical 41 of 61 (67%), kinase 11 of 61 (18%), and other 9 of 61 (15%). With a median follow-up of 35.7 months, there were no complete or partial responses. Six-month PFS was 19.9% (90% CI, 12.0 to 29.3) and median PFS was 3.1 months (90% CI, 1.8 to 3.7). Six-month OS was 60.7% (90% CI, 49.6 to 70.0) and median OS was 7.2 months (90% CI, 5.9 to 10.0). Individual comutations were too heterogeneous to correlate with clinical outcome. Fatigue, diarrhea, nausea, and hyperglycemia were the most common toxicities, and most were grade 1 and 2., Conclusion: In this study, taselisib monotherapy had very limited activity in a heterogeneous cohort of heavily pretreated cancer patients with PIK3CA -mutated tumors; the presence of a PIK3CA mutation alone does not appear to be a sufficient predictor of taselisib activity., Competing Interests: Ian E. KropEmployment: Freeline Therapeutics (I), PureTech (I), AMAG Pharmaceuticals (I)Leadership: AMAG Pharmaceuticals (I), Freeline Therapeutics (I), PureTech (I)Stock and Other Ownership Interests: AMAG Pharmaceuticals (I), Freeline Therapeutics (I), PureTech (I)Honoraria: Genentech/Roche, AstraZeneca, CelltrionConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech/Roche, Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo, Macrogenics, Novartis, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZenecaResearch Funding: Genentech (Inst), Pfizer (Inst) Juneko E. Grilley-OlsonConsulting or Advisory Role: Bayer, Chimerix, Kura Oncology, SpringWorks TherapeuticsResearch Funding: NanoCarrier (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Seattle Genetics (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Loxo (Inst), Astellas Pharma (Inst), Iovance Biotherapeutics (Inst) Josh D. LauringEmployment: Janssen Research & DevelopmentStock and Other Ownership Interests: Johnson & JohnsonConsulting or Advisory Role: Galderma (I), Regeneron (I), Novartis (I)Speakers' Bureau: Galderma (I), AbbVie (I), Pfizer (I)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: I intermittently receive royalty payments for cell lines created in my laboratory, which are licensed for commercial sale to Horizon Discovery, Ltd by Johns Hopkins UniversityTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Galderma (I), AbbVie (I) Edith P. MitchellLeadership: Corvus PharmaceuticalsHonoraria: Sanofi, ExelixisConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech, Novartis, Merck, Bristol Myers SquibSpeakers' Bureau: IpsenResearch Funding: Genentech (Inst), sanofi (Inst) Robert J. GrayResearch Funding: Agios, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Genentech/Roche, Genomic Health, Genzyme, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Ortho, Onyx, Pfizer, Sequenta, Syndax, Novartis, Takeda, AbbVie, Sanofi, Merck Sharp & Dohme P. Mickey WilliamsResearch Funding: Illumina (Inst)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: I was a coinventor of the DLBCL cell of origin patent recently filed by the NIH Stanley R. HamiltonResearch Funding: Minerva Biotechnologies, Intima James M. FordThis author is the Editor-in-Chief for JCO Precision Oncology. Journal policy recused the author from having any role in the peer review of this manuscript.Research Funding: Genentech (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Puma Biotechnology (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Merus (Inst), Bayer (Inst), Incyte (Inst) Agustin A. GarciaConsulting or Advisory Role: Biotheranostics, GlaxoSmithKlineResearch Funding: Advenchen Laboratories (Inst), Seattle Genetics (Inst), Merck (Inst), Iovance Pharm (Inst) Xingwei D. SuiConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis Robert D. SiegelResearch Funding: Merck (Inst), Mirati Therapeutics (Inst), GRAIL (Inst), Altor BioScience (Inst), Galera Therapeutics (Inst), Apollomics (Inst), Strata Oncology (Inst), Arcus Biosciences (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Cancer Insight (Inst), Puma Biotechnology (Inst), Conjupro Biotherapeutics (Inst), Razor Genomics (Inst), Sanofi (Inst), Seattle Genetics (Inst)Other Relationship: American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) Brian M. SlomovitzConsulting or Advisory Role: Clovis Oncology, AstraZeneca, Genentech, Incyte, Agenus, GlaxoSmithKline, GOG Foundation, Myriad Genetics, Merck, Eisai Carlos L. ArteagaStock and Other Ownership Interests: Provista DiagnosticsConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Lilly, Sanofi, Radius Health, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Puma Biotechnology, Merck, Origimed, Immunomedics, Daiichi Sankyo, Athenex, Astrazeneca, ArvinasResearch Funding: Pfizer, Lilly, TakedaOther Relationship: Susan G. Komen for the Cure Lyndsay N. HarrisPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Philips Healthcare Peter J. O'DwyerConsulting or Advisory Role: GenentechResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Mirati Therapeutics (Inst), Celgene (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), BBI Healthcare (Inst), Pharmacyclics (Inst), Five Prime Therapeutics (Inst), Forty Seven (Inst), Amgen (Inst), H3 Biomedicine (Inst), Taiho Pharmaceutical (Inst), Array BioPharma (Inst), Lilly/ImClone (Inst), Syndax (Inst), Syndax (Inst), Syndax (Inst), Syndax (Inst), syndax (Inst), Minneamrita Therapeutics (Inst)Expert Testimony: Lilly, Dai-ichi Sankyo Alice P. Chen(OPTIONAL) Uncompensated Relationships: Frontiers in Medicine Keith T. FlahertyStock and Other Ownership Interests: Clovis Oncology, Loxo, X4 Pharma, Strata Oncology, PIC Therapeutics, Shattuck Labs, Apricity Health, Oncoceutics, FOGPharma, Tvardi Therapeutics, Checkmate Pharmaceuticals, Kinnate Biopharma, Scorpion Therapeutics, ALX Oncology, xCures, Monopteros Therapeutics, Vibliome Therapeutics, Transcode Therapeutics, Soley TherapeuticsConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Lilly, Oncoceutics, Tvardi Therapeutics, Takeda, Boston Biomedical, Debiopharm Group, FOGPharmaNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: Preclinical and clinical data suggest that downstream inhibition with an MEK inhibitor, such as binimetinib, might be efficacious for NRAS -mutated cancers., Patients and Methods: Patients enrolled in the NCI-MATCH trial master protocol underwent tumor biopsy and molecular profiling by targeted next-generation sequencing. Patients with NRAS -mutated tumors, except melanoma, were enrolled in subprotocol Z1A, a single-arm study evaluating binimetinib 45 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). A post hoc analysis examined the association of NRAS mutation type with outcome., Results: In total, 47 eligible patients with a refractory solid tumor harboring a codon 12, 13, or 61 NRAS mutation were treated. Observed toxicity was moderate, and 30% of patients discontinued treatment because of binimetinib-associated toxicity. The ORR was 2.1% (1/47 patients). A patient with malignant ameloblastoma harboring a codon 61 NRAS mutation achieved a durable partial response (PR). A patient with NRAS codon 61-mutated colorectal cancer had an unconfirmed PR, and two other patients with NRAS codon 61-mutated colorectal had stable disease for at least 12 months. In an exploratory analysis, patients with colorectal cancer bearing a NRAS codon 61 mutation ( n = 8) had a significantly longer OS ( P = 0.03) and PFS ( P = 0.007) than those with codon 12 or 13 mutations ( n = 16)., Conclusions: Single-agent binimetinib did not show promising efficacy in NRAS -mutated cancers. The observation of increased OS and PFS in patients with codon 61 NRAS -mutated colorectal cancer merits further investigation., (©2021 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Differential responses to tamoxifen may be due to inter-patient variability in tamoxifen metabolism into pharmacologically active Z-endoxifen. Z-endoxifen administration was anticipated to bypass these variations, increasing active drug levels, and potentially benefitting patients responding sub-optimally to tamoxifen., Materials and Methods: Patients with treatment-refractory gynecologic malignancies, desmoid tumors, or hormone receptor-positive solid tumors took oral Z-endoxifen daily with a 3+3 phase 1 dose escalation format over 8 dose levels (DLs). Safety, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, and clinical outcomes were evaluated., Results: Thirty-four of 40 patients were evaluable. No maximum tolerated dose was established. DL8, 360 mg/day, was used for the expansion phase and is higher than doses administered in any previous study; it also yielded higher plasma Z-endoxifen concentrations. Three patients had partial responses and 8 had prolonged stable disease (≥ 6 cycles); 44.4% (8/18) of patients at dose levels 6-8 achieved one of these outcomes. Six patients who progressed after tamoxifen therapy experienced partial response or stable disease for ≥ 6 cycles with Z-endoxifen; one with desmoid tumor remains on study after 62 cycles (nearly 5 years)., Conclusions: Evidence of antitumor activity and prolonged stable disease are achieved with Z-endoxifen despite prior tamoxifen therapy, supporting further study of Z-endoxifen, particularly in patients with desmoid tumors., Competing Interests: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright: © 2021 Takebe et al.)

Importance: In the National Cancer Institute Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (NCI-MATCH) trial, agents targeting genetic tumor abnormalities are administered to patients. In the NCI-MATCH subprotocol EAY131-Y trial, patients with an AKT1 E17K-mutated metastatic tumor received the pan-AKT inhibitor capivasertib., Objective: To assess the objective response rate (ORR) of capivasertib in patients with an AKT1 E17K-mutated tumor., Design, Setting, and Participants: Between July 13, 2016, and August 10, 2017, patients in the NCI-MATCH trial were enrolled and assigned to the subprotocol EAY131-Y nonrandomized trial. Patients included adults with an AKT1 E17K-mutated metastatic tumor that had progressed with standard treatment, and these patients were assigned to receive capivasertib. Tumor assessments were repeated every 2 cycles. Data analysis of this evaluable population was performed from November 8, 2019, to March 12, 2020., Interventions: The study treatment was capivasertib, 480 mg, orally twice daily for 4 days on and 3 days off weekly in 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effect. If patients continued hormone therapy for metastatic breast cancer, the capivasertib dose was 400 mg., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the ORR (ie, complete response [CR] and partial response) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria, version 1.1. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), 6-month PFS, overall survival, and safety., Results: In total, 35 evaluable and analyzable patients were included, of whom 30 were women (86%), and the median (range) age was 61 (32-73) years. The most prevalent cancers were breast (18 [51%]), including 15 patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive/ERBB2-negative and 3 with triple-negative disease, and gynecologic (11 [31%]) cancers. The ORR rate was 28.6% (95% CI, 15%-46%). One patient with endometrioid endometrial adenocarcinoma achieved a CR and remained on therapy at 35.6 months. Patients with confirmed partial response had the following tumor types: 7 had HR-positive/ERBB2-negative breast cancer, 1 had uterine leiomyosarcoma, and 1 had oncocytic parotid gland carcinoma and continued receiving treatment at 28.8 months. Sixteen patients (46%) had stable disease as the best response, 2 (6%) had progressive disease, and 7 (20%) were not evaluable. With a median follow-up of 28.4 months, the overall 6-month PFS rate was 50% (95% CI, 35%-71%). Capivasertib was discontinued because of adverse events in 11 of 35 patients (31%). Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events included hyperglycemia (8 [23%]) and rash (4 [11%]). One grade 4 hyperglycemic adverse event was reported., Conclusions and Relevance: This nonrandomized trial found that, in patients with an AKT1 E17K-mutated tumor treated with capivasertib, a clinically significant ORR was achieved, including 1 CR. Clinically meaningful activity with single-agent capivasertib was demonstrated in refractory malignant neoplasms, including rare cancers., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00700882.

This trial assessed the utility of applying tumor DNA sequencing to treatment selection for patients with advanced, refractory cancer and somatic mutations in one of four signaling pathways by comparing the efficacy of four study regimens that were either matched to the patient's aberrant pathway (experimental arm) or not matched to that pathway (control arm)., Materials and Methods: Adult patients with an actionable mutation of interest were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive either (1) a study regimen identified to target the aberrant pathway found in their tumor (veliparib with temozolomide or adavosertib with carboplatin [DNA repair pathway], everolimus [PI3K pathway], or trametinib [RAS/RAF/MEK pathway]), or (2) one of the same four regimens, but chosen from among those not targeting that pathway., Results: Among 49 patients treated in the experimental arm, the objective response rate was 2% (95% CI, 0% to 10.9%). One of 20 patients (5%) in the experimental trametinib cohort had a partial response. There were no responses in the other cohorts. Although patients and physicians were blinded to the sequencing and random assignment results, a higher pretreatment dropout rate was observed in the control arm (22%) compared with the experimental arm (6%; P = .038), suggesting that some patients may have had prior tumor mutation profiling performed that led to a lack of participation in the control arm., Conclusion: Further investigation, better annotation of predictive biomarkers, and the development of more effective agents are necessary to inform treatment decisions in an era of precision cancer medicine. Increasing prevalence of tumor mutation profiling and preference for targeted therapy make it difficult to use a randomized phase II design to evaluate targeted therapy efficacy in an advanced disease setting., Competing Interests: The following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated unless otherwise noted. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/po/author-center. Open Payments is a public database containing information reported by companies about payments made to US-licensed physicians (Open Payments). Shivaani KummarStock and Other Ownership Interests: PathomIQ, Arxeon Consulting or Advisory Role: Corvus Pharmaceuticals, MedTree, Nodus Therapeutics, Genentech, ShangPharma Innovation, Seattle Genetics, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Mundipharma EDO GMBH, Harbour BioMed, Cadila Pharmaceuticals Research Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb, Dynavax Technologies, Pfizer, Loxo, Corvus Pharmaceuticals, Plexxikon, Jounce Therapeutics, ADC Therapeutics, Advenchen Laboratories, Incyte, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Bayer, Astex Pharmaceuticals, Seattle Genetics, Amgen, Genome & Company Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: BayerNancy MoorePatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Nestle NutritionP. Mickey WilliamsResearch Funding: Illumina Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: I was a co-inventor of the DLBCL cell of origin patent recently filed by the NIHKanwal P. S. RaghavConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Bayer, Eisai, Daiichi SankyoFunda Meric-BernstamEmployment: MD Anderson Cancer Center Honoraria: Mayo Clinic, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey Consulting or Advisory Role: Genentech, Inflection Biosciences, Samsung Bioepis, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Aduro Biotech, OrigiMed, Xencor, Debiopharm Group, Mersana, Seattle Genetics, Silverback Therapeutics, Immunomedics, IBM, Roche, PACT Pharma, eFFECTOR Therapeutics, Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Kolon Life Sciences, Parexel International, Pfizer, Tyra Biosciences, Zymeworks, Puma Biotechnology, Zentalis, Alkermes Speakers' Bureau: Chugai Pharma Research Funding: Novartis, AstraZeneca, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Genentech, Calithera Biosciences, Debiopharm Group, Bayer, Aileron Therapeutics, Puma Biotechnology, CytomX Therapeutics, Jounce Therapeutics, Zymeworks, Curis, Pfizer, eFFECTOR Therapeutics, Abbvie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Guardant Health, Daiichi Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline, Seattle Genetics, Millennium Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Taiho Pharmaceutical, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical CenterStephen LeongEmployment: Merck Sharp & Dohme Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Antares Pharmaceuticals, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals Consulting or Advisory Role: Bristol Myers Squibb Research Funding: Deciphera, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Lilly Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Genentech/RocheSaiama WaqarResearch Funding: Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Lilly, Pfizer, Genentech/Roche, Daiichi Sankyo, Newlink Genetics, EMD Serono, Puma Biotechnology, Novartis, Xcovery, Synermore Biologics, Celgene, Vertex, Bristol Myers Squibb, Stemcentrx, Hengrui Therapeutics, Checkpoint Therapeutics, Ignyta, AstraZeneca, ARIAD, Roche, MerckBiswajit DasResearch Funding: IlluminaChris KarlovichStock and Other Ownership Interests: Clovis Oncology Research Funding: Illumina Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: IlluminaChih-Jian LihEmployment: Exelixis Stock and Other Ownership Interests: ExelixisEric PolleyResearch Funding: GRAILRichard SimonConsulting or Advisory Role: AbbVie, Amgen, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Onco-Nano Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Amgen No other potential conflicts of interest were reported., (© 2021 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: Therapeutically actionable molecular alterations are widely distributed across cancer types. The National Cancer Institute Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (NCI-MATCH) trial was designed to evaluate targeted therapy antitumor activity in underexplored cancer types. Tumor biopsy specimens were analyzed centrally with next-generation sequencing (NGS) in a master screening protocol. Patients with a tumor molecular alteration addressed by a targeted treatment lacking established efficacy in that tumor type were assigned to 1 of 30 treatments in parallel, single-arm, phase II subprotocols., Patients and Methods: Tumor biopsy specimens from 5,954 patients with refractory malignancies at 1,117 accrual sites were analyzed centrally with NGS and selected immunohistochemistry in a master screening protocol. The treatment-assignment rate to treatment arms was assessed. Molecular alterations in seven tumors profiled in both NCI-MATCH trial and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) of primary tumors were compared., Results: Molecular profiling was successful in 93.0% of specimens. An actionable alteration was found in 37.6%. After applying clinical and molecular exclusion criteria, 17.8% were assigned (26.4% could have been assigned if all subprotocols were available simultaneously). Eleven subprotocols reached their accrual goal as of this report. Actionability rates differed among histologies (eg, > 35% for urothelial cancers and < 6% for pancreatic and small-cell lung cancer). Multiple actionable or resistance-conferring tumor mutations were seen in 11.9% and 71.3% of specimens, respectively. Known resistance mutations to targeted therapies were numerically more frequent in NCI-MATCH than TCGA tumors, but not markedly so., Conclusion: We demonstrated feasibility of screening large numbers of patients at numerous accruing sites in a complex trial to test investigational therapies for moderately frequent molecular targets. Co-occurring resistance mutations were common and endorse investigation of combination targeted-therapy regimens.

Purpose: BRAF V600 mutations are commonly found in melanoma and thyroid cancers and to a lesser degree in other tumor types. Subprotocol H (EAY131-H) of the NCI-MATCH platform trial sought to investigate the selective BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib and the MEK1/2 inhibitor trametinib in patients with solid tumors, lymphomas, or multiple myeloma whose tumors harbored a BRAF V600 mutation., Patients and Methods: EAY131-H is an open-label, single-arm study. Patients with melanoma, thyroid, or colorectal cancer were excluded; patients with non-small-cell lung cancer were later excluded in an amendment. Patients received dabrafenib 150 mg twice per day and trametinib 2 mg per day continuously until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary end point was centrally assessed objective response rate (ORR); secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), 6-month PFS, and overall survival., Results: Thirty-five patients were enrolled, and 29 were included in the primary efficacy analysis as prespecified in the protocol. Median age was 59 years, and 45% of the patients had received ≥ 3 lines of therapy. The confirmed ORR was 38% (90% CI, 22.9% to 54.9%) with P < .0001 against a null rate of 5%, and PFS was 11.4 months (90% CI, 8.4 to 16.3 months); responses were seen in 7 distinct tumor types. Seven patients had a duration of response of > 12 months, including 4 patients with a duration of response of > 24 months. An additional 8 patients had a PFS > 6 months. The median overall survival was 28.6 months. Reported adverse events were comparable to those noted in previously reported profiles of dabrafenib and trametinib., Conclusion: This study met its primary end point, with an ORR of 38% ( P < .0001) in this mixed histology, pretreated cohort. This promising activity warrants additional investigations in BRAF V600 -mutated tumors outside of currently approved indications., Competing Interests: The content of this article is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the US government.

Background: The proportion of tumors of various histologies that may respond to drugs targeted to molecular alterations is unknown. NCI-MATCH, a collaboration between ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group and the National Cancer Institute, was initiated to find efficacy signals by matching patients with refractory malignancies to treatment targeted to potential tumor molecular drivers regardless of cancer histology., Methods: Trial development required assumptions about molecular target prevalence, accrual rates, treatment eligibility, and enrollment rates as well as consideration of logistical requirements. Central tumor profiling was performed with an investigational next-generation DNA-targeted sequencing assay of alterations in 143 genes, and protein expression of protein expression of phosphatase and tensin homolog, mutL homolog 1, mutS homolog 2, and RB transcriptional corepressor 1. Treatments were allocated with a validated computational platform (MATCHBOX). A preplanned interim analysis evaluated assumptions and feasibility in this novel trial., Results: At interim analysis, accrual was robust, tumor biopsies were safe (<1% severe events), and profiling success was 87.3%. Actionable molecular alteration frequency met expectations, but assignment and enrollment lagged due to histology exclusions and mismatch of resources to demand. To address this lag, we revised estimates of mutation frequencies, increased screening sample size, added treatments, and improved assay throughput and efficiency (93.9% completion and 14-day turnaround)., Conclusions: The experiences in the design and implementation of the NCI-MATCH trial suggest that profiling from fresh tumor biopsies and assigning treatment can be performed efficiently in a large national network trial. The success of such trials necessitates a broad screening approach and many treatment options easily accessible to patients., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press.)

The evaluation of antibody-targeted or peptide-targeted radiopharmaceuticals as monotherapy or in oncological drug combinations requires programmatic collaboration within the National Cancer Institute (NCI) clinical trial enterprise. Phase 0 trials provide a flexible research platform for the study of radiopharmaceutical-drug pharmacokinetics, radiation dosimetry, biomarkers of DNA damage response modulation, and pharmacodynamic benchmarks predictive of therapeutic success. In this article, we discuss a phase 0 clinical development approach for human antibody-targeted or peptide-targeted radiopharmaceutical-agent combinations. We expect that early-phase radiopharmaceutical-agent combination trials will become a more tactical and more prevalent part of radiopharmaceutical clinical development in the near-term future for the NCI Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program., (Copyright © 2020 Kunos, Rubinstein, Capala and McDonald.)

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., Competing Interests: The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. government.

Purpose: Substantial preclinical evidence and case reports suggest that MEK inhibition is an active approach in tumors with BRAF mutations outside the V600 locus, and in BRAF fusions. Thus, Subprotocol R of the NCI-MATCH study tested the MEK inhibitor trametinib in this population., Patients and Methods: The NCI-MATCH study performed genomic profiling on tumor samples from patients with solid tumors and lymphomas progressing on standard therapies or with no standard treatments. Patients with prespecified fusions and non-V600 mutations in BRAF were assigned to Subprotocol R using the NCI-MATCHBOX algorithm. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR)., Results: Among 50 patients assigned, 32 were eligible and received therapy with trametinib. Of these, 1 had a BRAF fusion and 31 had BRAF mutations (13 and 19 with class 2 and 3 mutations, respectively). There were no complete responses; 1 patient (3%) had a confirmed partial response (patient with breast ductal adenocarcinoma with BRAF G469E mutation) and 10 patients had stable disease as best response (clinical benefit rate 34%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 1.8 months, and median overall survival was 5.7 months. Exploratory subgroup analyses showed that patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma ( n = 8) had particularly poor PFS. No new toxicity signals were identified., Conclusions: Trametinib did not show promising clinical activity in patients with tumors harboring non-V600 BRAF mutations, and the subprotocol did not meet its primary endpoint., (©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: The National Cancer Institute-Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (NCI-MATCH) is a national precision medicine study incorporating centralized genomic testing to direct refractory cancer patients to molecularly targeted treatment subprotocols. This treatment subprotocol was designed to screen for potential signals of efficacy of ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in HER2-amplified histologies other than breast and gastroesophageal tumors., Methods: Eligible patients had HER2 amplification at a copy number (CN) >7 based on targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) with a custom Oncomine AmpliSeq™ (ThermoFisher Scientific) panel. Patients with prior trastuzumab, pertuzumab or T-DM1 treatment were excluded. Patients received T-DM1 at 3.6 mg/kg i.v. every 3 weeks until toxicity or disease progression. Tumor assessments occurred every three cycles. The primary end point was centrally assessed objective response rate (ORR). Exploratory end points included correlating response with HER2 CN by NGS. The impact of co-occurring genomic alterations and PTEN loss by immunohistochemistry were also assessed., Results: Thirty-eight patients were enrolled and 36 included in efficacy analysis. Median prior therapies in the metastatic setting was 3 (range 0-9; unknown in one patient). Median HER2 CN was 17 (range 7-139). Partial responses were observed in two (5.6%) patients: one mucoepidermoid carcinoma of parotid gland and one parotid gland squamous cell cancer. Seventeen patients (47%) had stable disease including 8/10 (80%) with ovarian and uterine carcinomas, with median duration of 4.6 months. The 6-month progression-free survival rate was 23.6% [90% confidence interval 14.2% to 39.2%]. Common toxicities included fatigue, anemia, fever and thrombocytopenia with no new safety signals. There was a trend for tumor shrinkage with higher levels of gene CN as determined by the NGS assay., Conclusion: T-DM1 was well tolerated. While this subprotocol did not meet the primary end point for ORR in this heavily pre-treated diverse patient population, clinical activity was seen in salivary gland tumors warranting further study in this tumor type in dedicated trials., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose:: Research biopsy specimens collected in clinical trials often present requirements beyond those of tumor biopsy specimens collected for diagnostic purposes. Research biopsies underpin hypothesis-driven drug development, pharmacodynamic assessment of molecularly targeted anticancer agents, and, increasingly, genomic assessment for precision medicine; insufficient biopsy specimen quality or quantity therefore compromises the scientific value of a study and the resources devoted to it, as well as each patient's contribution to and potential benefit from a clinical trial., Methods:: To improve research biopsy specimen quality, we consulted with other translational oncology teams and reviewed current best practices., Results:: Among the recommendations were improving communication between oncologists and interventional radiologists, providing feedback on specimen sufficiency, increasing academic recognition and financial support for the time investment required by radiologists to collect and preserve research biopsy specimens, and improving real-time assessment of tissue quality., Conclusion:: Implementing these recommendations at the National Cancer Institute's Developmental Therapeutics Clinic has demonstrably improved the quality of biopsy specimens collected; more widespread dissemination of these recommendations beyond large clinical cancer centers is possible and will be of value to the community in improving clinical research and, ultimately, patient care.

Robust and analytically validated assays are essential for clinical studies. We outline an analytical validation study of a targeted next-generation sequencing mutation-detection assay used for patient selection in the National Cancer Institute Molecular Profiling-Based Assignment of Cancer Therapy (NCI-MPACT) trial (NCT01827384). Using DNA samples from normal or tumor cell lines and xenografts with known variants, we assessed the sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility of the NCI-MPACT assay in five variant types: single-nucleotide variants (SNVs), SNVs at homopolymeric (HP) regions (≥3 identical bases), small insertions/deletions (indels), large indels (gap ≥4 bp), and indels at HP regions. The assay achieved sensitivities of 100% for 64 SNVs, nine SNVs at HP regions, and 11 large indels, 83.33% for six indels, and 93.33% for 15 indels at HP regions. Zero false positives (100% specificity) were found in 380 actionable mutation loci in 96 runs of haplotype map cells. Reproducibility analysis showed 96.3% to 100% intraoperator and 98.1% to 100% interoperator mean concordance in detected variants and 100% reproducibility in treatment selection. To date, 38 tumors have been screened, 34 passed preanalytical quality control, and 18 had actionable mutations for treatment assignment. The NCI-MPACT assay is well suited for its intended investigational use and can serve as a template for developing next-generation sequencing assays for other cancer clinical trial applications., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

We have developed an informatics system, GeneMed, for the National Cancer Institute (NCI) molecular profiling-based assignment of cancer therapy (MPACT) clinical trial (NCT01827384) being conducted in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Clinical Center. This trial is one of the first to use a randomized design to examine whether assigning treatment based on genomic tumor screening can improve the rate and duration of response in patients with advanced solid tumors. An analytically validated next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay is applied to DNA from patients' tumors to identify mutations in a panel of genes that are thought likely to affect the utility of targeted therapies available for use in the clinical trial. The patients are randomized to a treatment selected to target a somatic mutation in the tumor or with a control treatment. The GeneMed system streamlines the workflow of the clinical trial and serves as a communications hub among the sequencing lab, the treatment selection team, and clinical personnel. It automates the annotation of the genomic variants identified by sequencing, predicts the functional impact of mutations, identifies the actionable mutations, and facilitates quality control by the molecular characterization lab in the review of variants. The GeneMed system collects baseline information about the patients from the clinic team to determine eligibility for the panel of drugs available. The system performs randomized treatment assignments under the oversight of a supervising treatment selection team and generates a patient report containing detected genomic alterations. NCI is planning to expand the MPACT trial to multiple cancer centers soon. In summary, the GeneMed system has been proven to be an efficient and successful informatics hub for coordinating the reliable application of NGS to precision medicine studies.

There is growing interest in the application of molecular profiling, including sequencing, genotyping, and/or mRNA expression profiling, to the analysis of patient tumors with the objective of applying these data to inform therapeutic choices for patients with advanced cancers. Multiple clinical trials that are attempting to validate this personalized or precision medicine approach are in various stages of development and execution. Although preliminary data from some of these efforts have fueled excitement about the value and utility of these studies, their execution has also provoked many questions about the best way to approach complicating factors such as tumor heterogeneity and the choice of which genetic mutations to target. This commentary highlights some of the challenges confronting the clinical application of molecular tumor profiling and the various trial designs being utilized to address these challenges. Randomized trials that rigorously test patient response to molecularly targeted agents assigned based on the presence of a defined set of mutations in putative cancer-driving pathways are required to address some of the current challenges and to identify patients likely to benefit from this approach., (Published by Oxford University Press 2015.)

After ipilimumab, vemurafenib, and interleukin-2, standard of care chemotherapy for melanoma remains dacarbazine (response rate ∼9%). Despite this, many physicians hesitate to refer patients to phase I protocols given a perceived lack of clinical benefit and potential for harm. To better understand the validity of these perceptions, the experience of all patients with melanoma treated on phase I trials sponsored by the National Cancer Institute-Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (NCI-CTEP) from 1995 to 2011 were analyzed and compared with the pooled results of six contemporary phase III trials of dacarbazine. A total of 937 patients with melanoma were treated in 148 CTEP phase I trials. The majority were men with a median of two prior therapies (46% receiving prior dacarbazine). Response and clinical benefit rates in these trials were not clinically different from those of dacarbazine (phase I: 6.3 and 26.8% vs. dacarbazine: 8.8 and 27.9%) although grades 3 and 4 toxicity was significantly higher (54 vs. 28%). Efficacy and toxicity were generally consistent within phase I subgroups (targeted agents, immunotherapies, or chemotherapeutics) though targeted therapy was associated with a lower response rate, immunotherapy with lower clinical benefit rate, and chemotherapy with higher incidence of grade 4 toxicity. Thus, the perception of limited efficacy of phase I trials for patients with melanoma was disproven, whereas the perception of toxicity was observed. However, this difference in toxicity may have been largely because of the nature of phase I vs. phase III trials (i.e. more heavily pretreated) and because of the phase I trials often being multiagent as opposed to dacarbazine alone., (© 2013 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.)

The PD-driven phase 0 trial is a new form, designed to be a first-in-man study, often of a new agent, conducted to assess drug effect on a molecular target, by means of a pharmacodynamic (PD) assay, in a very small number (10-15) of patients. Such a study is meant to be a proof of principle trial to determine whether the agent yields the PD effect predicted by pre-clinical studies. The dosage is meant to be pharmacologically active, but is neither toxic nor likely to yield clinical benefit. Such a trial may be used to serve as a very early test of an agent's biologic effect, allowing for early weeding out of ineffective agents, or as an early means of determining the most promising of competing analogue agents. This manuscript will present designs for such PD-driven studies that are statistically efficient and rigorous, focusing on non-comparative trials. The phase 0 trial promises to become an increasingly important tool for facilitating and speeding the development of new therapeutic agents, particularly in oncology.

Future progress in improving cancer therapy can be expedited by better prioritization of new treatments for phase III evaluation. Historically, phase II trials have been key components in the prioritization process. There has been a long-standing interest in using phase II trials with randomization against a standard-treatment control arm or an additional experimental arm to provide greater assurance than afforded by comparison to historic controls that the new agent or regimen is promising and warrants further evaluation. Relevant trial designs that have been developed and utilized include phase II selection designs, randomized phase II designs that include a reference standard-treatment control arm, and phase II/III designs. We present our own explorations into the possibilities of developing "phase II screening trials," in which preliminary and nondefinitive randomized comparisons of experimental regimens to standard treatments are made (preferably using an intermediate end point) by carefully adjusting the false-positive error rates (alpha or type I error) and false-negative error rates (beta or type II error), so that the targeted treatment benefit may be appropriate while the sample size remains restricted. If the ability to conduct a definitive phase III trial can be protected, and if investigators feel that by judicious choice of false-positive probability and false-negative probability and magnitude of targeted treatment effect they can appropriately balance the conflicting demands of screening out useless regimens versus reliably detecting useful ones, the phase II screening trial design may be appropriate to apply.

Traditional phase I dose-finding studies for chemotoxic agents base dose escalation on toxicity, with escalation continuing until unacceptable toxicity is observed. Recent development of molecularly targeted agents that have little or no toxicity in the therapeutic dose range has raised questions over the best study designs for phase I studies. Two types of designs are proposed and evaluated in this paper. In these designs, escalation is based on a binary response that indicates whether or not the agent has had the desired effect on the molecular target. One design is developed to ensure that if the true target response rate is low there will be a high probability of escalating and if the true target response rate is high there will be a low probability of escalating. The other design is developed to continue to escalate as long as the true response rate is increasing and to stop escalating when the response rate plateaus or decreases. A limited simulation study is performed and the designs are compared with respect to the dose level at the end of escalation and the number of patients treated on study.

An analysis of the activity of compounds tested in pre-clinical in vivo and in vitro assays by the National Cancer Institute's Developmental Therapeutics Program was performed. For 39 agents with both xenograft data and Phase II clinical trials results available, in vivo activity in a particular histology in a tumour model did not closely correlate with activity in the same human cancer histology, casting doubt on the correspondence of the pre-clinical models to clinical results. However, for compounds with in vivo activity in at least one-third of tested xenograft models, there was correlation with ultimate activity in at least some Phase II trials. Thus, an efficient means of predicting activity in vivo models remains desirable for compounds with anti-proliferative activity in vitro. For 564 compounds tested in the hollow fibre assay which were also tested against in vivo tumour models, the likelihood of finding xenograft activity in at least one-third of the in vivo models tested rose with increasing intraperitoneal hollow fibre activity, from 8% for all compounds tested to 20% in agents with evidence of response in more than 6 intraperitoneal fibres (P< 0.0001). Intraperitoneal hollow fibre activity was also found to be a better predictor of xenograft activity than either subcutaneous hollow fibre activity or intraperitoneal plus subcutaneous activity combined. Since hollow fibre activity was a useful indicator of potential in vivo response, correlates with hollow fibre activity were examined for 2304 compounds tested in both the NCI 60 cell line in vitro cancer drug screen and hollow fibre assay. A positive correlation was found for histologic selectivity between in vitro and hollow fibre responses. The most striking correlation was between potency in the 60 cell line screen and hollow fibre activity; 56% of compounds with mean 50% growth inhibition below 10(-7.5) M were active in more than 6 intraperitoneal fibres whereas only 4% of compounds with a potency of 10(-4) M achieved the same level of hollow fibre activity (P< 0.0001). Structural parameters of the drugs analysed included compound molecular weight and hydrogen-bonding factors, both of which were found to be predictive of hollow fibre activity., (Copyright 2001 Cancer Research Campaign.)

This article discusses the problems in basic design, conduct, and interpretation associated with phases I, II, and III of the cancer clinical trials and explains the various statistical solutions to these problems. The fundamental problem common to all three trials is achieving a correct and precise answer to the question posed to inform future testing and treatment while protecting trial patients from receiving treatment that has demonstrated excessive toxicity or lack of clinical efficacy. This shared problem gives rise to statistical designs with basic similarities across the three trial types.

Since 1990, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) has screened more than 60,000 compounds against a panel of 60 human cancer cell lines. The 50-percent growth-inhibitory concentration (GI50) for any single cell line is simply an index of cytotoxicity or cytostasis, but the patterns of 60 such GI50 values encode unexpectedly rich, detailed information on mechanisms of drug action and drug resistance. Each compound's pattern is like a fingerprint, essentially unique among the many billions of distinguishable possibilities. These activity patterns are being used in conjunction with molecular structural features of the tested agents to explore the NCI's database of more than 460,000 compounds, and they are providing insight into potential target molecules and modulators of activity in the 60 cell lines. For example, the information is being used to search for candidate anticancer drugs that are not dependent on intact p53 suppressor gene function for their activity. It remains to be seen how effective this information-intensive strategy will be at generating new clinically active agents.

We used human tumor cell lines from the National Cancer Institute's In Vitro Antineoplastic Drug Screen to assess whether sensitivity to any of the approximately 45,000 compounds tested previously correlated with the presence of a ras oncogene. Among these cell lines, the mutations in Ki-ras2 clustered in non-small cell lung and colon carcinoma subpanels, and five of the six leukemia lines contained mutations in either N-ras or Ki-ras2. These analyses revealed a striking correlation with 1-beta-D-arabinofuranosylcytosine (Ara-C) and 2,2'-O-cyclocytidine sensitivity in the cell lines harboring ras mutations compared to the tumor lines with wild-type ras alleles. Strong correlations were also found with topoisomerase (topo) II inhibitors, especially 3'-hydroxydaunorubicin and an olivacine derivative. These differential sensitivities persisted in an additional 22 non-small cell lung carcinoma lines (ras mutations, n = 12 and wild-type ras, n = 10). Thus, the association with Ara-C sensitivity was greatest while topo II inhibitors showed a lower, but significant, correlation. These results suggest that the ras oncogene may play a determinant role in rendering tumor cells sensitive to deoxycytidine analogues and topo II inhibitors.

We elected to examine available information from several sources to approximate the annual number of cases of vaginal adenocarcinoma in the United States for recent years. Data were obtained from the Registry of Hormonal Transplacental Carcinogenesis, the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program of the National Cancer Institute, the National Cancer Databank of the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer, and a survey of gynecologic oncologists practicing in the United States. In 1990 a total of 33 new cases and 11 recurrences were reported, while in 1991 23 new cases and 8 recurrences were reported. Neither SEER nor the Registry appear to provide adequate surveillance for this rare disease. Phase III clinical trials are not feasible, given the small number of patients. Statistically effective phase II one-armed studies to investigate new agents in the treatment of advanced or recurrent vaginal clear cell cancer may be possible. Effective mobilization of patients and physicians will be required for such trials to be completed in a timely manner.

Background: It has been reported that limited resection (segment or wedge) is equivalent to lobectomy in the management of early stage (T1-2 N0) non-small cell lung cancer., Methods: A prospective, multiinstitutional randomized trial was instituted comparing limited resection with lobectomy for patients with peripheral T1 N0 non-small cell lung cancer documented at operation. Analysis included locoregional and distant recurrence rates, 5-year survival rates, perioperative morbidity and mortality, and late pulmonary function assessment., Results: There were 276 patients randomized, with 247 patients eligible for analysis. There were no significant differences for all stratification variables, selected prognostic factors, perioperative morbidity, mortality, or late pulmonary function. In patients undergoing limited resection, there was an observed 75% increase in recurrence rates (p = 0.02, one-sided) attributable to an observed tripling of the local recurrence rate (p = 0.008 two-sided), an observed 30% increase in overall death rate (p = 0.08, one-sided), and an observed 50% increase in death with cancer rate (p = 0.09, one-sided) compared to patients undergoing lobectomy (p = 0.10, one-sided was the predefined threshold for statistical significance for this equivalency study)., Conclusions: Compared with lobectomy, limited pulmonary resection does not confer improved perioperative morbidity, mortality, or late postoperative pulmonary function. Because of the higher death rate and locoregional recurrence rate associated with limited resection, lobectomy still must be considered the surgical procedure of choice for patients with peripheral T1 N0 non-small cell lung cancer.

Phase I cancer chemotherapy trials are designed to determine rapidly the maximum tolerated dose of a new agent for further study. A recently proposed Bayesian method, the continual reassessment method, has been suggested to offer an improvement over the standard design of such trials. We find the previous comparisons did not completely address the relative performance of the designs as they would be used in practice. Our results indicate that with the continual reassessment method, more patients will be treated at very high doses and the trials will take longer to complete. We offer some suggested improvements to both the standard design and the Bayesian method.

Temozolomide, a methylating agent with clinical activity against brain tumors, demonstrated excellent antitumor activity following p.o. administration to athymic mice bearing human brain tumor xenografts. In the early stage s.c. implanted SNB-75 astrocytoma model, a 400-mg/kg dose administered on Day 5 produced 10 of 10 Day 54 tumor-free mice. In later staged s.c. U251 and SF-295 glioblastoma models, a single 600-mg/kg dose produced 9 of 10 Day 86 and 2 of 10 Day 40 tumor-free mice, respectively. In the latter group, a tumor growth delay of > 315% was attained. Similar levels of activity were attained with equal total doses on schedules of daily for 5 doses and every fourth day for 3 doses. A single 40-mg/kg i.v. dose of 1,3-bis(2-chloroethyl)-1-nitrosourea (BCNU) also demonstrated excellent activity, producing 9 of 10 tumor-free mice in the SNB-75 model and growth delays of 283 and 301% in the U251 and SF-295 models, respectively. Temozolomide was also highly effective against intracerebral implants of the U251 and SF-295 glioblastomas. Administration of either 600 mg/kg on Day 1 or 200 mg/kg on Days 1, 5, and 9 produced 7 of 9 Day 90 tumor-free mice in the U251 model. In the SF-295 model, a single 400-mg/kg dose or three 200-mg/kg doses produced 3 and 4 of 10 Day 90 tumor-free mice, respectively, and prolonged survival by 127%. A single 40-mg/kg i.v. dose of BCNU was more effective than temozolomide in the intracerebral SF-295 model, and less effective in the intracerebral U251 model. The synergistic potential of temozolomide and BCNU in combination was evaluated in an advanced stage s.c. implanted SF-295 model. When temozolomide was administered 2 h after BCNU on a single treatment day, a dramatic synergistic therapeutic effect was observed in two experiments. For example, single agent doses of temozolomide (600 mg/kg) and BCNU (60 mg/kg) and a combination (400 mg/kg + 27 mg/kg) demonstrating equivalent toxicity produced growth delays of 190, 258, and > 492% (includes 5 of 10 Day 51 tumor-free mice), respectively. Analysis of the data by a quadratic dose response model indicated synergism with significance at P = 0.0001 in both experiments. Synergism also was demonstrated by the isobole method. The reverse sequence was more toxic, but at lower combination doses a synergistic effect was still observed (P = 0.0001).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

The National Cancer Institute currently tests approximately 400 compounds per week against a panel of human tumour cell lines in order to identify potential anti-cancer drugs. We describe several approaches, based on these in vitro data, to the problem of identifying the primary biochemical mechanism of action of a compound. Using linear and non-parametric discriminant procedures and cross-validation, we find that accurate identification of the mechanism of action is achieved for approximately 90 per cent of a diverse collection of 141 known compounds, representing six different mechanistic categories. We demonstrate that two-dimensional graphical displays of the compounds in terms of the initial three principal components (of the original data) result in suggestive visual clustering according to mechanism of action. Finally, we compare the classification accuracy of the statistical discrimination procedures with the accuracy obtained from a neural network approach and, for our example, we find that the results obtained from the various approaches are similar.

The National Cancer Institute's drug discovery program screens more than 20,000 chemical compounds and natural products a year for activity against a panel of 60 tumor cell lines in vitro. The result is an information-rich database of patterns that form the basis for what we term an "information-intensive" approach to the process of drug discovery. The first step was a demonstration, both by statistical methods (including the program COMPARE) and by neural networks, that patterns of activity in the screen can be used to predict a compound's mechanism of action. Given this finding, the overall plan has been to develop three large matrices of information: the first (designated A) gives the pattern of activity for each compound tested against each cell line in the screen; the second (S) encodes any of a number of types of 2-D or 3-D structural motifs for each compound; the third (T) indicates each cell's expression of molecular targets (e.g., from 2-dimensional protein gel electrophoresis). Construction and updating of these matrices is an ongoing process. The matrices can be concatenated in various ways to test a variety of specific hypotheses about compounds screened, as well as to "prioritize" candidate compounds for testing. To aid in these efforts, we have developed the DISCOVERY program package, which integrates the matrix data for visual pattern recognition. The "information-intensive" approach summarized here in some senses serves to bridge the perceived gap between screening and structure-based drug design.