Dose recommendations for anticancer drugs in patients with renal or hepatic impairment

Renal or hepatic impairment is a common comorbidity for patients with cancer either because of the disease itself, toxicity of previous anticancer treatments, or because of other factors affecting organ function, such as increased age. Because renal and hepatic function are among the main determinants of drug exposure, the pharmacokinetic profile might be altered for patients with cancer who have renal or hepatic impairment, necessitating dose adjustments. Most anticancer drugs are dosed near their maximum tolerated dose and are characterised by a narrow therapeutic index. Consequently, selecting an adequate dose for patients who have either hepatic or renal impairment, or both, is challenging and definitive recommendations on dose adjustments are scarce. In this Review, we discuss the effect of renal and hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics of anticancer drugs. To guide clinicians in selecting appropriate dose adjustments, information from available drug labels and from the published literature were combined to provide a practical set of recommendations for dose adjustments of 160 anticancer drugs for patients with hepatic and renal impairment

Precision oncology using organoids of a secretory carcinoma of the salivary gland treated with TRK-inhibitors

•We describe the first NTRK3 fusion positive organoid model for secretory carcinoma;•The model was used to in vitro predict the in vivo drug response to larotrectinib;•The importance of thorough characterization of organoids was illustrated;•Characterization is required prior to extrapolating in vitro findings to the clinic. The use of anticancer drugs targeting specific molecular tumor characteristics is rapidly increasing in clinical practice, but selecting patients to benefit from these remains a challenge. It has been suggested that organoid cultures would be ideally suited to test drug responses in vitro. Here we describe and characterize in depth a case of ETV6-NTRK3 gene fusion-positive secretory carcinoma of the salivary glands and corresponding organoid cultures that responded and subsequently acquired resistance to TRK targeting therapy with larotrectinib. This case-culture-characterization illustrates the advances made in precision oncology, but also exposes important caveats in using organoids to predict treatment response

Predictive and Prognostic Biomarker Identification in a Large Cohort of Androgen Receptor-Positive Salivary Duct Carcinoma Patients Scheduled for Combined Androgen Blockade

Patients suffering from recurrent or metastatic (R/M) salivary duct carcinoma (SDC) are often treated with combined androgen blockade (CAB). However, CAB frequently fails, resulting in a worse prognosis. Therefore, biomarkers that can predict treatment failure are urgently needed. mRNA from 76 R/M androgen receptor (AR)-positive SDC patients treated with leuprorelin acetate combined with bicalutamide was extracted from pre-treatment tumor specimens. AR, Notch, MAPK, TGFβ, estrogen receptor (ER), Hedgehog (HH), and PI3K signaling pathway activity scores (PAS) were determined based on the expression levels of target genes. Additionally, 5-alpha reductase type 1 (SRD5A1) expression was determined. These markers were related to clinical benefit (complete/partial response or stable disease ≥6 months) and progression-free and overall survival (PFS/OS). SRD5A1 expression had the highest general predictive value for clinical benefit and positive predictive value (PPV: 85.7%). AR PAS had the highest negative predictive value (NPV: 93.3%). The fitting of a multivariable model led to the identification of SRD5A1, TGFβ, and Notch PAS as the most predictive combination. High AR, high Notch, high ER, low HH PAS, and high SRD5A1 expression were also of prognostic importance regarding PFS and SRD5A1 expression levels for OS. AR, Notch PAS, and SRD5A1 expression have the potential to predict the clinical benefit of CAB treatment in SDC patients. SRD5A1 expression can identify patients that will and AR PAS patients that will not experience clinical benefit (85.7% and 93.3% for PPV and NPV, respectively). The predictive potential of SRD5A1 expression forms a rational basis for including SRD5A1-inhibitors in SDC patients’ treatment

Identification of Fusion Genes and Targets for Genetically Matched Therapies in a Large Cohort of Salivary Gland Cancer Patients

Introduction: Salivary gland cancer (SGC) is a rare cancer for which systemic treatment options are limited. Therefore, it is important to characterize its genetic landscape in search for actionable aberrations, such as NTRK gene fusions. This research aimed to identify these actionable aberrations by combining NGS-based analysis of RNA (gene fusions) and DNA (single and multiple nucleotide variants, copy number variants, microsatellite instability and tumor mutational burden) in a large cohort of SGC patients. Methods: RNA and DNA were extracted from archival tissue of 121 patients with various SGC subtypes. Gene fusion analysis was performed using a customized RNA-based targeted NGS panel. DNA was sequenced using a targeted NGS panel encompassing 523 cancer-related genes. Cross-validation of NGS-based NTRK fusion detection and pan-TRK immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed. Results: Fusion transcripts were detected in 50% of the cases and included both known (MYB-NFIB, MYBL1-NFIB, CRTC1-MAML2) and previously unknown fusions (including transcripts involving RET, BRAF or RAD51B). Only one NTRK fusion transcript was detected, in a secretory carcinoma case. Pan-TRK IHC (clone EPR17341) was false positive in 74% of cases. The proportion of patients with targets for genetically matched therapies differed among subtypes (salivary duct carcinoma: 82%, adenoid cystic carcinoma 28%, mucoepidermoid carcinoma 50%, acinic cell carcinoma 33%). Actionable aberrations were most often located in PIK3CA (n = 18, 15%), ERBB2 (n = 15, 12%), HRAS and NOTCH1 (both n = 9, 7%). Conclusions: Actionable genetic aberrations were seen in 53.7% of all SGC cases on the RNA and DNA level, with varying percentages between subtypes