Design and Implementation of a Decentralized Virtual Molecular Tumor Board across a Large, Diverse Community Health System

Introduction: Rapid advances in precision cancer therapy and immunotherapy are transforming oncology with a wealth of genomic biomarker-associated drugs recently approved or available through clinical trials. Concomitantly, clinical tumor genomic sequencing has expanded in scope and utilization. As such, oncologists are now faced with treatment decisions of increasing complexity that may span conventional, precision therapies and immunotherapies for a single patient. However, typically supporting tumor board infrastructures are often suboptimal, with isolated boards carried out at individual sites and not utilizing large-scale analytics. Here we describe our efforts in designing and implementing a decentralized virtual molecular tumor board (VMTB) across a large health system spanning 50+ hospitals across seven states. Methods: A software platform was developed that integrates clinical genomics datasets, digital pathology imaging, and radiology imaging, as well as restructures key elements from the electronic health records. The platform was deployed in a secure internal cloud environment at Providence and made available systemwide to all clinicians. VMTBs were carried out twice a month via videoconference. Over the initial six-month launch window of the VTMB study, data were manually abstractsed for aggregate analysis. Results: Key novel features integrated in the platform include real-time clinical trial matching, deep integration of medical imaging, timeline visualizations of a patient’s treatment trajectory, and treatment comparisons via patient matching across the health system. Over the pilot phase of the VMTB, the most common tumor types discussed at the conference were of brain origin, followed by colon, lung, and bile duct. For patients discussed at the VMTB, 62% had a recommendation for treatment with a precision therapy or immunotherapy, either standard of care or through a clinical trial enrollment. This is in comparison to historical utilization of 18% for precision therapies, 30% for immunotherapies, and 4% for clinical trial enrollment for genomicstested patients that were not presented at the VMTB. Conclusions: The VMTB developed into a forum for multidisciplinary experts across a broad geographic region to assist with critical treatment decisions for cancer patients. Patients discussed at the VMTB were more likely to receive a precision therapy or immunotherapy. Although part of this is likely due to selection bias (i.e., cases without actionable findings would be less likely to be presented at a molecular tumor board), we also expect the knowledge gained by participating physicians to lead to appropriate increases in precision therapy or clinical trial utilization over the larger patient population

Pemigatinib for previously treated, locally advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma: a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study

BACKGROUND: Fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) 2 gene alterations are involved in the pathogenesis of cholangiocarcinoma. Pemigatinib is a selective, potent, oral inhibitor of FGFR1, 2, and 3. This study evaluated the safety and antitumour activity of pemigatinib in patients with previously treated, locally advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma with and without FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, single-arm, multicohort, phase 2 study (FIGHT-202), patients aged 18 years or older with disease progression following at least one previous treatment and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2 recruited from 146 academic or community-based sites in the USA, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia were assigned to one of three cohorts: patients with FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements, patients with other FGF/FGFR alterations, or patients with no FGF/FGFR alterations. All enrolled patients received a starting dose of 13·5 mg oral pemigatinib once daily (21-day cycle; 2 weeks on, 1 week off) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or physician decision. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved an objective response among those with FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements, assessed centrally in all patients who received at least one dose of pemigatinib. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02924376, and enrolment is completed. FINDINGS: Between Jan 17, 2017, and March 22, 2019, 146 patients were enrolled: 107 with FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements, 20 with other FGF/FGFR alterations, 18 with no FGF/FGFR alterations, and one with an undetermined FGF/FGFR alteration. The median follow-up was 17·8 months (IQR 11·6-21·3). 38 (35·5% [95% CI 26·5-45·4]) patients with FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements achieved an objective response (three complete responses and 35 partial responses). Overall, hyperphosphataemia was the most common all-grade adverse event irrespective of cause (88 [60%] of 146 patients). 93 (64%) patients had a grade 3 or worse adverse event (irrespective of cause); the most frequent were hypophosphataemia (18 [12%]), arthralgia (nine [6%]), stomatitis (eight [5%]), hyponatraemia (eight [5%]), abdominal pain (seven [5%]), and fatigue (seven [5%]). 65 (45%) patients had serious adverse events; the most frequent were abdominal pain (seven [5%]), pyrexia (seven [5%]), cholangitis (five [3%]), and pleural effusion (five [3%]). Overall, 71 (49%) patients died during the study, most frequently because of disease progression (61 [42%]); no deaths were deemed to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION: These data support the therapeutic potential of pemigatinib in previously treated patients with cholangiocarcinoma who have FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements. FUNDING: Incyte Corporation.status: publishe

Nivolumab Plus Cabozantinib With or Without Ipilimumab for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Results From Cohort 6 of the CheckMate 040 Trial.

PURPOSE: To investigate the safety and efficacy of nivolumab plus cabozantinib with or without ipilimumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In cohort 6 of the multicohort, open-label, phase I/II CheckMate 040 study, patients who were treatment-naive, sorafenib-intolerant, or had progressed on sorafenib were randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks plus cabozantinib 40 mg once daily (doublet arm); or nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus cabozantinib 40 mg once daily with ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 6 weeks (triplet arm). Primary objectives were safety and tolerability, objective response rate, and duration of response by investigator assessment per RECIST v1.1. Secondary objectives included progression-free survival (by blinded independent central review) and overall survival. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients were randomly assigned: 36 to the doublet arm and 35 to the triplet arm. After 32.0-month median follow-up, objective response rate (95% CI) was 17% (6 to 33) and 29% (15 to 46) in the doublet and triplet arms, respectively. Median (95% CI) duration of response was 8.3 (6.9 to not estimable) months in the doublet arm and not reached (0.0 to not estimable) in the triplet arm. Median progression-free survival was 5.1 and 4.3 months, and median overall survival was 20.2 and 22.1 months for the doublet and triplet arms, respectively. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 50% and 74% of patients and treatment-related adverse events leading to discontinuation were reported for 11% and 23% in the doublet and triplet arms, respectively. There were no treatment-related deaths in either arm. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab plus cabozantinib with or without ipilimumab showed encouraging preliminary antitumor activity and had consistent safety profiles with those established for the individual drugs in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma