Search

DNA damage response inhibitors have a potentially important therapeutic role in paediatric cancers; however, their optimal use, including patient selection and combination strategy, remains unknown. Moreover, there is an imbalance between the number of drugs with diverse mechanisms of action and the limited number of paediatric patients available to be enrolled in early-phase trials, so prioritisation and a strategy are essential. While PARP inhibitors targeting homologous recombination-deficient tumours have been used primarily in the treatment of adult cancers with BRCA1/2 mutations, BRCA1/2 mutations occur infrequently in childhood tumours, and therefore, a specific response hypothesis is required. Combinations with targeted radiotherapy, ATR inhibitors, or antibody drug conjugates with DNA topoisomerase I inhibitor-related warheads warrant evaluation. Additional monotherapy trials of PARP inhibitors with the same mechanism of action are not recommended. PARP1-specific inhibitors and PARP inhibitors with very good central nervous system penetration also deserve evaluation. ATR, ATM, DNA-PK, CHK1, WEE1, DNA polymerase theta and PKMYT1 inhibitors are early in paediatric development. There should be an overall coordinated strategy for their development. Therefore, an academia/industry consensus of the relevant biomarkers will be established and a focused meeting on ATR inhibitors (as proof of principle) held. CHK1 inhibitors have demonstrated activity in desmoplastic small round cell tumours and have a potential role in the treatment of other paediatric malignancies, such as neuroblastoma and Ewing sarcoma. Access to CHK1 inhibitors for paediatric clinical trials is a high priority. The three key elements in evaluating these inhibitors in children are (1) innovative trial design (design driven by a clear hypothesis with the intent to further investigate responders and non-responders with detailed retrospective molecular analyses to generate a revised or new hypothesis); (2) biomarker selection and (3) rational combination therapy, which is limited by overlapping toxicity. To maximally benefit children with cancer, investigators should work collaboratively to learn the lessons from the past and apply them to future studies. Plans should be based on the relevant biology, with a focus on simultaneous and parallel research in preclinical and clinical settings, and an overall integrated and collaborative strategy.

BACKGROUND: Childhood cancer is still a leading cause of death around the world. To improve outcomes, there is an urgent need for tailored treatment. The systematic evaluation of existing preclinical data can provide an overview of what is known and identify gaps in the current knowledge. Here, we applied the target actionability review (TAR) methodology to assess the strength and weaknesses of available scientific literature on CDK4/6 as a therapeutic target in paediatric solid and brain tumours by structured critical appraisal. METHODS: Using relevant search terms in PubMed, a list of original publications investigating CDK4/6 in paediatric solid tumour types was identified based on relevancy criteria. Each publication was annotated for the tumour type and categorised into separate proof-of-concept (PoC) data modules. Based on rubrics, quality and experimental outcomes were scored independently by two reviewers. A third reviewer evaluated and adjudicated score discrepancies. Scores for each PoC module were averaged for each tumour type and visualised in a heatmap matrix in the publicly available R2 data portal. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: This CDK4/6 TAR, generated by analysis of 151 data entries from 71 publications, showed frequent genomic aberrations of CDK4/6 in rhabdomyosarcoma, osteosarcoma, high-grade glioma, medulloblastoma, and neuroblastoma. However, a clear correlation between CDK4/6 aberrations and compound efficacy is not coming forth from the literature. Our analysis indicates that several paediatric indications would need (further) preclinical evaluation to allow for better recommendations, especially regarding the dependence of tumours on CDK4/6, predictive biomarkers, resistance mechanisms, and combination strategies. Nevertheless, our TAR heatmap provides support for the relevance of CDK4/6 inhibition in Ewing sarcoma, medulloblastoma, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumour and to a lesser extent neuroblastoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, rhabdoid tumour and high-grade glioma. The interactive heatmap is accessible through R2 [r2platform.com/TAR/CDK4_6].

BACKGROUND Rituximab added to chemotherapy prolongs survival among adults with B-cell cancer. Data on its efficacy and safety in children with high-grade, mature B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma are limited. METHODS We conducted an open-label, international, randomized, phase 3 trial involving patients younger than 18 years of age with high-risk, mature B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (stage III with an elevated lactate dehydrogenase level or stage IV) or acute leukemia to compare the addition of six doses of rituximab to standard lymphomes malins B (LMB) chemotherapy with standard LMB chemotherapy alone. The primary end point was event-free survival. Overall survival and toxic effects were also assessed. RESULTS Analyses were based on 328 patients who underwent randomization (164 patients per group); 85.7% of the patients had Burkitt's lymphoma. The median follow-up was 39.9 months. Events were observed in 10 patients in the rituximab-chemotherapy group and in 28 in the chemotherapy group. Event-free survival at 3 years was 93.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.1 to 96.7) in the rituximab-chemotherapy group and 82.3% (95% CI, 75.7 to 87.5) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio for primary refractory disease or first occurrence of progression, relapse after response, death from any cause, or second cancer, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.66; one-sided P=0.00096, which reached the significance level required for this analysis). Eight patients in the rituximab-chemotherapy group died (4 deaths were disease-related, 3 were treatment-related, and 1 was from a second cancer), as did 20 in the chemotherapy group (17 deaths were disease-related, and 3 were treatment-related) (hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.82). The incidence of acute adverse events of grade 4 or higher after prephase treatment was 33.3% in the rituximab-chemotherapy group and 24.2% in the chemotherapy group (P=0.07); events were related mainly to febrile neutropenia and infection. Approximately twice as many patients in the rituximab-chemotherapy group as in the chemotherapy group had a low IgG level 1 year after trial inclusion. CONCLUSIONS Rituximab added to standard LMB chemotherapy markedly prolonged event-free survival and overall survival among children and adolescents with high-grade, high-risk, mature B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and was associated with a higher incidence of hypogammaglobulinemia and, potentially, more episodes of infection.

Purpose: The current standard-of-care for front-line therapy for acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) results in short-term and long-term toxicity, but still approximately 40% of children relapse. Therefore, there is a major need to accelerate the evaluation of innovative medicines, yet drug development continues to be adult-focused. Furthermore, the large number of competing agents in rare patient populations requires coordinated prioritisation, within the global regulatory framework and cooperative group initiatives. Methods: The fourth multi-stakeholder Paediatric Strategy Forum focused on AML in children and adolescents. Results: CD123 is a high priority target and the paediatric development should be accelerated as a proof-of-concept. Efforts must be coordinated, however, as there are a limited number of studies that can be delivered. Studies of FLT3 inhibitors in agreed paediatric investigation plans present challenges to be completed because they require enrolment of a larger number of patients than actually exist. A consensus was developed by industry and academia of optimised clinical trials. For AML with rare mutations that are more frequent in adolescents than in children, adult trials should enrol adolescents and when scientifically justified, efficacy data could be extrapolated. Methodologies and definitions of minimal residual disease need to be standardised internationally and validated as a new response criterion. Industry supported, academic sponsored platform trials could identify products to be further developed. The Leukaemia and Lymphoma Society PedAL/EUpAL initiative has the potential to be a major advance in the field. Conclusion: These initiatives continue to accelerate drug development for children with AML and ultimately improve clinical outcomes. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.