Adjuvant enzalutamide for the treatment of early-stage androgen-receptor positive, triple-negative breast cancer: a feasibility study.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy with or without immunotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). A subset of TNBCs express the androgen receptor (AR), representing a potential new therapeutic target. This study assessed the feasibility of adjuvant enzalutamide, an AR antagonist, in early-stage, AR-positive (AR +) TNBC. METHODS: This study was a single-arm, open-label, multicenter trial in which patients with stage I-III, AR ≥ 1% TNBC who had completed standard-of-care therapy were treated with enzalutamide 160 mg/day orally for 1 year. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of 1 year of adjuvant enzalutamide, defined as the treatment discontinuation rate of enzalutamide due to toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or other events related to tolerability. Secondary endpoints included disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and genomic features of recurrent tumors. RESULTS: Fifty patients were enrolled in this study. Thirty-five patients completed 1 year of therapy, thereby meeting the prespecified trial endpoint for feasibility. Thirty-two patients elected to continue with an optional second year of treatment. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events were uncommon. The 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year DFS were 94%, 92% , and 80%, respectively. Median OS has not been reached. CONCLUSION: This clinical trial demonstrates that adjuvant enzalutamide is a feasible and well-tolerated regimen in patients with an early-stage AR + TNBC. Randomized trials in the metastatic setting may inform patient selection through biomarker development; longer follow-up is needed to determine the effect of anti-androgens on DFS and OS in this patient population

Bortezomib, liposomal doxorubicin and dexamethasone followed by thalidomide and dexamethasone is an effective treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma with Internatinal Staging System stage II or III, or extramedullary disease

We evaluated sequential bortezomib, liposomal doxorubicin and dexamethasone (BDD) followed by thalidomide and dexamethasone (TD) if ≥ partial response (PR) or bortezomib and TD (BTD) if < PR in untreated patients with multiple myeloma with International Staging System stage II/III or extramedullary disease. Of the 42 patients enrolled, two-thirds had cytogenetic abnormalities including high-risk findings [del(13q) by karyotype, t(4;14), loss of p53 or gain 1q] in one-third. After the planned three cycles of BDD, the overall response rate (ORR) was 81% with 40% ≥ very good partial response (VGPR), including 26% near complete and complete responses (nCR/CR). After the additional two cycles of TD or BTD, ORR was 83% with 60% ≥ VGPR including 43% nCR/CR, indicating deeper responses following sequential therapy (p = 0.008). Two-thirds of patients who presented with significant renal impairment had improved renal function. All patients undergoing stem cell harvest had a successful collection. BDD followed by TD or BTD is effective initial therapy for this population with higher-risk myeloma and results in rapid disease control and a high response rate

Bendamustine in combination with ofatumumab as first line treatment for elderly patients with mantle cell lymphoma: a phase II risk-adapted design

This study evaluated ofatumumab (Ofa), an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, alone or with bendamustine (Benda), in transplant-ineligible patients with mantle cell lymphoma. Low-risk patients received Ofa monotherapy. Non-responders received subsequent treatment with Benda-Ofa. Six patients received Ofa monotherapy and 3 patients crossed over to Bend-Ofa. Twenty-four high-risk patients were initially treated with Benda-Ofa. The overall response rate for patients treated with Ofa monotherapy was 1/6 (17%) and 23/25 (92%) for patients treated with Benda-Ofa. With a median follow-up of 8.6 years, all Ofa patients progressed with a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 0.6 years (95% CI 0.31-NR) and remain alive. With a median follow-up of 6.3 years, Bend-Ofa treated patients had median PFS 2.5 years (95% CI 1.8-NR) and a median overall survival of 7.4 years (95% CI 5.8-NR). Benda-Ofa had a favorable adverse event profile and efficacy similar, but not clearly superior, to those reported for Benda-Rituximab

A phase 1 study of ibrutinib in combination with R-ICE in patients with relapsed or primary refractory DLBCL

In the postrituximab era, approximately half of the patients with relapsed or refractory (rel/ref) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) fail to achieve a chemosensitive response to standard salvage therapy, and are thus ineligible to proceed to autologous stem cell transplantation with curative intent. The Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib demonstrates single-agent activity in rel/ref DLBCL, particularly of non-germinal center (non-GC) cell of origin. We conducted a single-center phase 1 study evaluating dose-escalated ibrutinib, in a 3-by-3 design, in combination with rituximab, ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide (R-ICE) in physiologically transplant-eligible rel/ref DLBCL patients. Twenty-one patients have been treated and are evaluable for toxicity with no dose-limiting toxicities observed through expansion with ibrutinib at 840 mg daily at dose level 3. Of the 20 patients evaluable for response, per modern International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma criteria, 11 patients achieved complete remission (CR) and 7 patients achieved partial remission for an overall response rate of 90%. All evaluable patients with non-GC DLBCL achieved a metabolic CR. Ibrutinib in combination with R-ICE demonstrates tolerability and efficacy in rel/ref DLBCL, particularly of non-GC phenotype. This treatment program warrants further investigation in later-phase studies. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02219737

Prephase rituximab/prednisone therapy and aging-related, proinflammatory cytokine milieu in older, vulnerable patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) predominantly affects older adults with suboptimal therapeutic outcomes due to increased treatment-related mortality and toxicities in vulnerable patients, clinically defined by geriatric impairments such as functional limitation, multimorbidity, or cognitive deficits. In this prospective pilot study, we evaluated a rituximab/prednisone prephase treatment strategy in 33 older, vulnerable patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL, defined by either age ≥70 years or age 60-70 years with Karnofsky performance scale (KPS) <80. A single dose of rituximab 375 mg/m2 between 3-10 days and oral prednisone for at least 5 days prior to the first dose of chemoimmunotherapy was administered. All patients completed prephase treatment and all but one commenced anthracycline-based chemoimmunotherapy. Only one early cycle death occurred. Toxicity events, defined by either unplanned hospitalization, unplanned dose reduction/delay, or chemotherapy discontinuation, occurred in 22 patients (67%). Sixteen patients (48%) experienced grade 3 or higher non-hematologic toxicities and/or grade 4 or higher hematologic toxicities. With a median follow-up of 4.4 years, both 5-year progression-free survival and overall survival were at 81% (95% confidence interval: 69-96). Importantly, we found that phenotypic impairments in basic and instrumental activities of daily living, physical function, mobility, KPS, and Cancer and Aging Research Group chemotherapy toxicity risk score were significantly associated with senescence-associated, proinflammatory cytokine milieu which was readily reversed with prephase treatment, potentially explaining its clinical effectiveness. Prephase therapy with rituximab/prednisone should be considered for all older, vulnerable DLBCL patients prior to curative intent, anthracycline-based chemoimmunotherapy. This trial was registered as clinicaltrials gov. Identifier: NCT89028394

Morphological and genomic characteristics of breast cancers occurring in individuals with Lynch Syndrome

PurposeLynch syndrome is defined by germline pathogenic mutations involving DNA mismatch repair (MMR) genes and linked with the development of MMR-deficient colon and endometrial cancers. Whether breast cancers developing in the context of Lynch syndrome are causally related to MMR deficiency (MMRd), remains controversial. Thus, we explored the morphologic and genomic characteristics of breast cancers occurring in Lynch syndrome individuals.Experimental designA retrospective analysis of 20,110 patients with cancer who underwent multigene panel genetic testing was performed to identify individuals with a likely pathogenic/pathogenic germline variant in MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, or PMS2 who developed breast cancers. The histologic characteristics and IHC assessment of breast cancers for MMR proteins and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression were assessed on cases with available materials. DNA samples from paired tumors and blood were sequenced with Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets (≥468 key cancer genes). Microsatellite instability (MSI) status was assessed utilizing MSISensor. Mutational signatures were defined using SigMA.ResultsA total of 272 individuals with Lynch syndrome were identified, 13 (5%) of whom had primary breast cancers. The majority of breast cancers (92%) were hormone receptor-positive tumors. Five (42%) of 12 breast cancers displayed loss of MMR proteins by IHC. Four (36%) of 11 breast cancers subjected to tumor-normal sequencing showed dominant MSI mutational signatures, high tumor mutational burden, and indeterminate (27%) or high MSISensor scores (9%). One patient with metastatic MMRd breast cancer received anti-PD1 therapy and achieved a robust and durable response.ConclusionsA subset of breast cancers developing in individuals with Lynch syndrome are etiologically linked to MMRd and may benefit from anti-PD1/PD-L1 immunotherapy

Frontline Sequential Immunochemotherapy Plus Lenalidomide for Mantle Cell Lymphoma Incorporating MRD Evaluation: Phase II, Investigator-Initiated, Single-Center Study

Background: Fit patients (pts) with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) are commonly treated with immunochemotherapy and consolidative high-dose therapy + stem cell rescue (cHDT/SCR), yet this approach has not demonstrated an overall survival (OS) benefit in a randomized trial. Outcomes for pts with high-risk MCL (TP53 aberrancy, high proliferation index, blastic histology) after cHDT/SCR are poor, and not all pts with MCL are eligible for this approach. Methods: We conducted a phase II study of sequential immunochemotherapy incorporating lenalidomide enriching for pts with high-risk disease features (defined as blastoid/pleomorphic histology and/or Ki67 >=30%). The three phases of tx were: 1) lenalidomide (15 mg daily, days 1-14) plus R-CHOP for four 21-day cycles; 2) R-HiDAC for 2 cycles (initially age-based cytarabine 1-3 g/m2; 3 g/m2 dose removed after 16 pts due to hematologic toxicity); and 3) rituximab monthly plus lenalidomide (15 mg daily) for 6 months (mos). Eligibility requirements were untreated stage II-IV MCL, KPS ≥70%, and adequate organ function; we sought ≥2/3 high-risk pts. We performed MRD testing on peripheral blood (cellular DNA) using the clonoSEQ Assay (Adaptive Biotechnologies). We obtained PET/CT and MRD testing after each phase of treatment and also MRD evaluation at 6 mos post-rituximab + lenalidomide maintenance. The primary endpoint was the rate of 3-yr progression-free survival (PFS), (acceptable PFS ≥75%, unacceptable ≤60%, based on desired proportion of high-risk pts). Results: Among 49 pts enrolled, 47 were evaluable for PFS (1 had progressive disease (PD) and 1 had toxicity during len-R-CHOP). Characteristics for 47 evaluable pts are shown in Table 1: 64% were high-risk and 18% had TP53 mutation. 45 completed maintenance (1 had PD during R-HiDAC and 1 withdrew to pursue cHDT/SCR) and 43 achieved complete response (CR), 1 stable disease, and 1 PD at end of treatment (EoT), yielding overall response rate of 91%, all CR (Figure 1). With a median follow-up of 2.8 yrs among survivors, the 3-yr PFS was 64% (95 CI 50, 82) and OS 85% (95 CI 74, 99). Three-yr PFS differed by TP53 status (14% mut vs. 85% wt, P < 0.0001, Table 2). Of 4 pts with PD, 3 had TP53 mutation and 1 had an unknown mutation status. Among TP53 wt pts, there was no significant difference in outcomes by risk (Table 2). MRD results were not obtained in 4 pts. Among 45 pts with MRD results, tumor clonal characterization for MRD evaluation was successful in 87% (39/45). MRD results are shown in Figure 2. Examining the initial phase of treatment (len-R-CHOP and R-HiDAC), among 37 pts with results at 1x10-5 sensitivity (1E5) following len-RCHOP, a substantial proportion (32%, 12/37 pts) remained MRD+ and 11 of 12 MRD+ pts post len-RCHOP converted to MRD- following R-HiDAC. At 1x10-6 sensitivity (1E6) following R-HiDAC, 5/20 pts were MRD+, and among responding pts, shorter median PFS was observed in MRD+ versus MRD- pts (23.1 mos vs. NR, P = 0.03). Examining the final phase of treatment (rituximab + lenalidomide maintenance) and observation period, among 37 pts with MRD results at 1E5 at EoT, 4 were MRD+, 2 of which were simultaneous (within 2 weeks of testing) with relapse; the remaining two MRD+ pts had median PFS 4.9 mos versus 37.4 mos for the 32 non-relapsed MRD- pts (P < 0.001). At 1E6, 6 pts who were MRD- at EoT converted to MRD+ after 6 mos of observation. MRD status at 1E6 at 6-mos post-EOT correlated with PFS: among 20 non-relapsed pts (6 MRD+, 14 MRD-), median PFS was 30.8 mos for MRD- versus 13.2 mos for MRD+ (P = 0.02). Conclusions: In a novel approach of sequential immunochemotherapy plus lenalidomide enrolling majority high-risk pts, outcomes for TP53-mutant pts were poor and we did not reach our primary endpoint of 3-yr PFS ≥75%. Among TP53-wt pts, this treatment program was highly effective even among pts with elevated Ki-67 (>=30%) and was associated with a high response rate, a 3-yr rate of PFS of 85%, and a high rate of MRD- at EoT. A substantial proportion of pts converted to MRD- after receipt of R-HiDAC, highlighting the efficacy of cytarabine in MCL. There was a high rate of MRD- after induction chemoimmunotherapy (Len-R-CHOP + R-HiDAC) at 1E5 (97%) and at 1E6 (80%), and the latter predicted remission duration. Several pts converted from MRD- to MRD+ at 6-mos post-EOT and eventually relapsed, suggesting that a more prolonged period of maintenance may be beneficial. Finally, MRD at 1E6 at 6 mos following EoT predicted response duration. Disclosures Batlevi: Life Sci, GLG, Juno/Celgene, Seattle Genetics, Kite: Consultancy; Janssen, Novartis, Epizyme, Xynomics, Bayer, Autolus, Roche/Genentech: Research Funding. Dogan:National Cancer Institute: Research Funding; EUSA Pharma: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Corvus Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy. Drullinsky:Novartis: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding. Gerecitano:Janssen: Current Employment. Hamlin:Portola Pharmaceutics: Consultancy; J&J Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding; Molecular Templates: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Ho:Invivoscribe, Inc.: Honoraria. Jacob:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Matasar:Rocket Medical: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Research Funding; IGM Biosciences: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Immunovaccine Technologies: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Teva: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Moskowitz:Incyte: Research Funding; Imbrium Therapeutics, L.P.: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Miragen Therapeutics: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Mullins:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Current Employment, Other: shareholder. Straus:Elsevier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: CME writer; NY Lymphoma Rounds: Consultancy; Imedex, Inc.: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Targeted Oncology: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; ASH: Other: Conference in December 2019 on HL to other physicians during ASH; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; OncLive: Speakers Bureau; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Younes:BioPath: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Current Employment; BMS: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; HCM: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Zelenetz:Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy; Sandoz: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnology: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; BeiGene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Honoraria for Advisory Board; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria, Other: Honoraria for Advisory Board; Celgene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies,: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Other: Honoraria for Advisory Board