39 research outputs found
Determinants of activity and efficacy of anti-PD1/PD-L1 therapy in patients with advanced solid tumors recruited in a clinical trials unit: a longitudinal prospective biomarker-based study
Immune checkpoint inhibitors; Immunotherapy; Solid tumorsInhibidores de puntos de control inmunitarios; Inmunoterapia; Tumores sólidosInhibidors del punt de control immunitari; Immunoteràpia; Tumors sòlidsImmune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized the therapeutic landscape of cancer. However, optimal patient selection is still an unmet need. One-hundred-forty-six patients with metastatic cancer candidates to ICI at the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona Clinical Trials Unit were prospectively recruited in this observational study. Blood samples were collected at different timepoints, baseline LIPI score calculated and pre-ICI archived tissues retrieved to evaluate PD-L1, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and PD1 mRNA levels. Tumor assessments were centrally reviewed by RECIST 1.1 criteria. Associations with overall response rates (ORR), durable clinical benefit (DCB), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were performed with univariable/multivariable logistic and Cox regressions, where appropriate. At a median follow-up of 26.9 months, median PFS and OS were 2.7 and 12.9 months. Response rates were 17.8% with duration of response (DOR) of 4.4 months. LIPI score was independently associated with PFS (p = 0.025) and OS (p < 0.001). Immunotherapy-naïve status was independently associated with better PFS (p = 0.005). Time-to-best response (TTBR) and ORR (p < 0.001 both) were associated with better OS at univariate analysis. PFS and DOR were moderately correlated with OS (p < 0.001 both). A PD-L1 10% cut-off detected worse/best responders in terms of ORR (univariate p = 0.011, multivariate p = 0.028) and DCB (univariate p = 0.043). PD1 mRNA levels were strikingly associated to complete responses (p = 0.021). To resume, in our prospective observational pan-cancer study, baseline LIPI score, immunotherapy-naïve status, cancer type and RT before starting ICI were the most relevant clinical factors independently correlated with immunotherapy outcomes. Longer TTBR seemed to associate with better survival, while PD1 mRNA and PD-L1 protein levels might be tumor-agnostic predictive factors of response to ICI and should be furtherly explored
Recommended from our members
ToTem: A phase Ib trial of temisirolimus with gemcitabine and cisplatin.
Background: gemcitabine (G) and cisplatin (C) is a standard-of-care, combination chemotherapy regimen for neoadjuvant treatment of muscle-invasive and palliative treatment of advanced bladder cancer (BC). More effective regimens are urgently needed, with no significant improvements on GC in more than a decade. Mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) is a rational target for BC therapy, as abnormalities are commonly seen in mTOR’s upstream activators/downstream effectors in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway. We therefore performed a Phase Ib trial, combining escalating doses of the mTOR inhibitor, temsirolimus (T) with GC. Methods: following regulatory and ethical approvals, eligible patients with advanced malignancy were treated with one or more doses of intravenous (IV) T plus fixed doses of IV GC in a 21-day (d) cycle. Previous unpublished data suggest a possible interaction between G and T. We therefore pursued a cautious escalation strategy (see table), as a precaution against excessive toxicity. Results: 14 patients (3 BC, 2 lung, 2 ovarian, 7 other cancers; 7 previous platinum exposure) were treated, at 4 dose schedules in 2 UK centers. There were no treatment-related deaths or SUSARs. Of 14 SAEs, 4 were SARs, in 10 individuals, 7 of whom had received IMP. Addition of 10mg T on d15, then d8&15 was tolerated, but DLTs were encountered when administering three 10mg doses of T, both on d1,8&15 (neutropenia; hypokalaemia) and d2,9&15 (febrile neutropenia; rash). T was omitted because of myelosuppression on d15, cycle 1 in 6/8 patients scheduled to receive 3 doses of T. Conclusions: it has not been feasible to add three, weekly doses of T to GC, even at low T doses, in the patient group tested, because of predominantly hematological toxicity. We plan to amend the schedule to include two doses of T, on d2&9, informed by data from pre-planned PK analyses of patients already treated. ToTem was developed by the UK NCRI Bladder Cancer Clinical Studies Group, sponsored by Cardiff University, funded by Cancer Research UK, and supported by supply of free drug and distribution costs from Pfizer. Clinical trial information: 31546330
Recommended from our members
POSEIDON Trial Phase 1b Results: Safety, Efficacy and Circulating Tumor DNA Response of the Beta Isoform-Sparing PI3K Inhibitor Taselisib (GDC-0032) Combined with Tamoxifen in Hormone Receptor Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients.
PURPOSE: The strategy of combining endocrine therapy with PI3K-mTOR inhibition has shown promise in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer, but new agents and combinations with a better therapeutic index are urgently needed. Taselisib is a potent, selective, beta-isoform-sparing PI3 kinase inhibitor. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 30 patients with ER-positive, metastatic breast cancer who had failed prior endocrine therapy were treated with escalating doses of taselisib (2 or 4 mg in an intermittent or continuous schedule) combined with tamoxifen 20 mg once daily in this phase 1b study using a "rolling six" design. RESULTS: Taselisib combined with tamoxifen was generally well tolerated, with treatment-emergent adverse events as expected for this class of drugs, including diarrhea (13 patients, 43%), mucositis (10 patients, 33%), and hyperglycemia (8 patients, 27%). No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Objective responses were seen in 6 of 25 patients with RECIST-measurable disease (ORR 24%). Median time to disease progression was 3.7 months. Twelve of 30 patients (40%) had disease control for 6 months or more. Circulating tumor (ct)DNA studies using next-generation tagged amplicon sequencing identified early indications of treatment response and mechanistically relevant correlates of clinical drug resistance (e.g., mutations in KRAS, ERBB2) in some patients. CONCLUSIONS: Taselisib can be safely combined with tamoxifen at the recommended phase 2 dose of 4 mg given once daily on a continuous schedule. Preliminary evidence of antitumor activity was seen in both PIK3CA mutant and wild-type cancers. The randomized phase 2 part of POSEIDON (testing tamoxifen plus taselisib or placebo) is currently recruiting
Enhanced detection of circulating tumor DNA by fragment size analysis.
Existing methods to improve detection of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) have focused on genomic alterations but have rarely considered the biological properties of plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA). We hypothesized that differences in fragment lengths of circulating DNA could be exploited to enhance sensitivity for detecting the presence of ctDNA and for noninvasive genomic analysis of cancer. We surveyed ctDNA fragment sizes in 344 plasma samples from 200 patients with cancer using low-pass whole-genome sequencing (0.4×). To establish the size distribution of mutant ctDNA, tumor-guided personalized deep sequencing was performed in 19 patients. We detected enrichment of ctDNA in fragment sizes between 90 and 150 bp and developed methods for in vitro and in silico size selection of these fragments. Selecting fragments between 90 and 150 bp improved detection of tumor DNA, with more than twofold median enrichment in >95% of cases and more than fourfold enrichment in >10% of cases. Analysis of size-selected cfDNA identified clinically actionable mutations and copy number alterations that were otherwise not detected. Identification of plasma samples from patients with advanced cancer was improved by predictive models integrating fragment length and copy number analysis of cfDNA, with area under the curve (AUC) >0.99 compared to AUC 0.91 compared to AUC < 0.5 without fragmentation features. Fragment size analysis and selective sequencing of specific fragment sizes can boost ctDNA detection and could complement or provide an alternative to deeper sequencing of cfDNA.We would like to acknowledge the support of The University of Cambridge, Cancer Research UK and the EPSRC (CRUK grant numbers A11906 (NR), A20240 (NR), A22905 (JDB), A15601 (JDB), A25177 (CRUK Cancer Centre Cambridge), A17242 (KMB), A16465 (CRUK-EPSRC Imaging Centre in Cambridge and Manchester)). The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007-2013) / ERC Grant Agreement n. 337905. The research was supported by the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge, National Cancer Research Network, Cambridge Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre and Hutchison Whampoa Limited. This research is also supported by Target Ovarian Cancer and the Medical Research Council through their Joint Clinical Research Training Fellowship for Dr Moore. The CALIBRATE study was supported by funding from AstraZeneca
Liquid biopsies come of age: towards implementation of circulating tumour DNA
Improvements in genomic and molecular methods are expanding the range of potential applications for circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA), both in a research setting and as a ‘liquid biopsy’ for cancer management. Proof-of-principle studies have demonstrated the translational potential of ctDNA for prognostication, molecular profiling and monitoring. The field is now in an exciting transitional period in which ctDNA analysis is beginning to be applied clinically, although there is still much to learn about the biology of cell-free DNA. This is an opportune time to appraise potential approaches to ctDNA analysis, and to consider their applications in personalized oncology and in cancer research.We would like to acknowledge the support of The University of Cambridge, Cancer Research UK (grant numbers A11906, A20240, A15601) (to N.R., J.D.B.), the European Research Council under the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007-2013)/ERC Grant Agreement n. 337905 (to N.R.), the Cambridge Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre, and Hutchison Whampoa Limited (to N.R.), AstraZeneca (to R.B., S.P.), the Cambridge Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (ECMC) (to R.B., S.P.), and NIHR Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) (to R.B., S.P.). J.G.C. acknowledges clinical fellowship support from SEOM
Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries
Abstract
Background
Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres.
Methods
This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries.
Results
In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia.
Conclusion
This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries
Recommended from our members
A phase I/II study of epertinib plus trastuzumab with or without chemotherapy in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.
A phase I/II study of epertinib plus trastuzumab with or without chemotherapy in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.
BACKGROUND: Epertinib (S-222611) is a potent reversible inhibitor of HER2, EGFR and HER4. This trial evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and antitumour activity of daily oral epertinib combined with trastuzumab (arm A), with trastuzumab plus vinorelbine (arm B) or with trastuzumab plus capecitabine (arm C), in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: Eligible patients, with or without brain metastases, had received prior HER2-directed therapy. A dose-escalation phase determined the tolerability of each combination and established a dose for further study. Further, patients were recruited to expansion cohorts in each of the 3 arms to further explore efficacy and safety. RESULTS: The recommended doses of epertinib were 600 mg, 200 mg and 400 mg in arms A, B and C, respectively. The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse event (AE) was diarrhoea in all arms, which was manageable with medical intervention and dose modification. The objective response rate (complete response [CR] plus partial response [PR]) in heavily pre-treated HER2-positive MBC patients at the recommended doses of epertinib combined with trastuzumab was 67% (N = 9), with trastuzumab plus vinorelbine was 0% (N = 5) and with trastuzumab plus capecitabine was 56% (N = 9). Notably, 4 of 6 patients previously treated with T-DM1 responded in the arm A expansion cohort (epertinib plus trastuzumab). In the arm C expansion cohort (epertinib plus trastuzumab plus capecitabine), 4 of 7 patients responded despite previous exposure to capecitabine. Measurable regression of brain metastases was observed in patients with CNS target lesions treated in both arms A and C. CONCLUSION: We observed safety, tolerability and encouraging antitumour activity of epertinib combined with trastuzumab, or with trastuzumab plus capecitabine. This supports further evaluation of these combinations in patients with pre-treated HER2-positive MBC, with or without brain metastases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT Number: 2013-003894-87; registered 09-September-2013
A phase I pharmacokinetic and safety study of cabazitaxel in adult cancer patients with normal and impaired renal function.
PURPOSE: Limited data are available on cabazitaxel pharmacokinetics in patients with renal impairment. This open-label, multicenter study assessed cabazitaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors and normal or impaired renal function. METHODS: Cohorts A (normal renal function: creatinine clearance [CrCL] >80 mL/min/1.73 m2), B (moderate renal impairment: CrCL 30 to <50 mL/min/1.73 m2) and C (severe impairment: CrCL <30 mL/min/1.73 m2) received cabazitaxel 25 mg/m2 (A, B) or 20 mg/m2 (C, could be escalated to 25 mg/m2), once every 3 weeks. Pharmacokinetic parameters and cabazitaxel unbound fraction (F U) were assessed using linear regression and mixed models. Geometric mean (GM) and GM ratios (GMRs) were determined using mean CrCL intervals (moderate and severe renal impairment: 40 and 15 mL/min/1.73 m2) versus a control (90 mL/min/1.73 m2). RESULTS: Overall, 25 patients received cabazitaxel (median cycles: 3 [range 1-20]; Cohort A: 5 [2-13]; Cohort B: 3 [1-15]; and Cohort C: 5 [1-20]), of which 24 were eligible for pharmacokinetic analysis (eight in each cohort). For moderate and severe renal impairment versus normal renal function, GMR estimates were: clearance normalized to body surface area (CL/BSA) 0.95 (90% CI 0.80-1.13) and 0.89 (0.61-1.32); area under the curve normalized to dose (AUC/dose) 1.06 (0.88-1.27) and 1.14 (0.76-1.71); and F U 0.99 (0.94-1.04) and 0.97 (0.87-1.09), respectively. Estimated slopes of linear regression of log parameters versus log CrCL (renal impairment) were: CL/BSA 0.06 (-0.15 to 0.28); AUC/dose -0.07 (-0.30 to 0.16); and F U 0.02 (-0.05 to 0.08). Cabazitaxel safety profile was consistent with previous reports. CONCLUSIONS: Renal impairment had no clinically meaningful effect on cabazitaxel pharmacokinetics