Patients with Biallelic BRCA1/2 Inactivation respond to Olaparib treatment across Histologic tumor types

Purpose: To assess the efficacy of olaparib, a PARP inhibitor (PARPi) in patients with tumors with BRCA1/2 mutations, regardless of histologic tumor type. Patients and Methods: Patients with treatment-refractory BRCA1/2-mutated cancer were included for treatment with offlabel olaparib 300 mg twice daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. In Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), patients with treatment-refractory solid malignancies receive offlabel drugs based on tumor molecular profiles while whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is performed on baseline tumor biopsies. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit (CB; defined as objective response or stable disease ≥ 16 weeks according to RECIST 1.1). Per protocol patients were enrolled using a Simon-like two-stage model. Results: Twenty-four evaluable patients with nine different tumor types harboring BRCA1/2 mutations were included, 58% had CB from treatment with olaparib. CB was observed in patients with complete loss of function (LoF) of BRCA1/2, while 73% of patients with biallelic BRCA LoF had CB. In 17 patients with and seven without current labeled indication, 10 and four patients had CB, respectively. Treatment resistance in four patients with biallelic loss might be explained by an additional oncogenic driver which was discovered by WGS, including Wnt pathway activation, FGFR amplification, and CDKN2A loss, in three tumor types. Conclusions: These data indicate that using PARPis is a promising treatment strategy for patients with non-BRCA-associated histologies harboring biallelic BRCA LoF. WGS allows to accurately detect complete LoF of BRCA and homologous repair deficiency (HRD) signature as well as oncogenic drivers that may contribute to resistance, using a single assay

Patients with Rare Cancers in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP) Benefit from Genomics-Guided Treatment

Purpose: Patients with rare cancers (incidence less than 6 cases per 100,000 persons per year) commonly have less treatment opportunities and are understudied at the level of genomic targets. We hypothesized that patients with rare cancer benefit from approved anticancer drugs outside their label similar to common cancers. Experimental Design: In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), patients with therapy-refractory metastatic cancers harboring an actionable molecular profile are matched to FDA/European Medicines Agency–approved targeted therapy or immunotherapy. Patients are enrolled in parallel cohorts based on the histologic tumor type, molecular profile and study drug. Primary endpoint is clinical benefit (complete response, partial response, stable disease ≥ 16 weeks). Results: Of 1,145 submitted cases, 500 patients, including 164 patients with rare cancers, started one of the 25 available drugs and were evaluable for treatment outcome. The overall clinical benefit rate was 33% in both the rare cancer and nonrare cancer subgroup. Inactivating alterations of CDKN2A and activating BRAF aberrations were overrepresented in patients with rare cancer compared with nonrare cancers, resulting in more matches to CDK4/6 inhibitors (14% vs. 4%; P ≤ 0.001) or BRAF inhibitors (9% vs. 1%; P ≤ 0.001). Patients with rare cancer treated with small-molecule inhibitors targeting BRAF experienced higher rates of clinical benefit (75%) than the nonrare cancer subgroup. Conclusions: Comprehensive molecular testing in patients with rare cancers may identify treatment opportunities and clinical benefit similar to patients with common cancers. Our findings highlight the importance of access to broad molecular diagnostics to ensure equal treatment opportunities for all patients with cancer

Notas sobre la sostenibilidad de la deuda pública en Venezuela

En el presente trabajo se lleva a cabo una evaluación de la sostenibilidad de la deuda pública en Venezuela. En la primera parte del estudio se presenta un breve bosquejo teórico de los modelos para evaluar la sostenibilidad de la deuda pública que aparece reflejado en la literatura económica. Asimismo, se presenta la evolución de los indicadores de sostenibilidad de la deuda pública, así como una comparación internacional de los niveles de deuda de Venezuela en comparación con otros países de la región. Se observa que aunque los indicadores tradicionales de deuda pública no indican un peso importante de la deuda sobre la economía nacional, al estudiar la trayectoria de endeudamiento actual, se concluye que el endeudamiento público no es sostenible en el tiempo

Codon-specific KRAS mutations predict survival benefit of trifluridine/tipiracil in metastatic colorectal cancer

Genomics has greatly improved how patients with cancer are being treated; however, clinical-grade genomic biomarkers for chemotherapies are currently lacking. Using whole-genome analysis of 37 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with the chemotherapy trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI), we identified KRAS codon G12 (KRASG12) mutations as a potential biomarker of resistance. Next, we collected real-world data of 960 patients with mCRC receiving FTD/TPI and validated that KRASG12 mutations were significantly associated with poor survival, also in analyses restricted to the RAS/RAF mutant subgroup. We next analyzed the data of the global, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 RECOURSE trial (n = 800 patients) and found that KRASG12 mutations (n = 279) were predictive biomarkers for reduced overall survival (OS) benefit of FTD/TPI versus placebo (unadjusted interaction P = 0.0031, adjusted interaction P = 0.015). For patients with KRASG12 mutations in the RECOURSE trial, OS was not prolonged with FTD/TPI versus placebo (n = 279; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.73–1.20; P = 0.85). In contrast, patients with KRASG13 mutant tumors showed significantly improved OS with FTD/TPI versus placebo (n = 60; HR = 0.29; 95% CI = 0.15–0.55; P &lt; 0.001). In isogenic cell lines and patient-derived organoids, KRASG12 mutations were associated with increased resistance to FTD-based genotoxicity. In conclusion, these data show that KRASG12 mutations are biomarkers for reduced OS benefit of FTD/TPI treatment, with potential implications for approximately 28% of patients with mCRC under consideration for treatment with FTD/TPI. Furthermore, our data suggest that genomics-based precision medicine may be possible for a subset of chemotherapies.</p

Patient-derived organoids can predict response to chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer patients

There is a clear and unmet clinical need for biomarkers to predict responsiveness to chemotherapy for cancer. We developed an in vitro test based on patient-derived tumor organoids (PDOs) from metastatic lesions to identify nonresponders to standard-of-care chemotherapy in colorectal cancer (CRC). In a prospective clinical study, we show the feasibility of generating and testing PDOs for evaluation of sensitivity to chemotherapy. Our PDO test predicted response of the biopsied lesion in more than 80% of patients treated with irinotecan-based therapies without misclassifying patients who would have benefited from treatment. This correlation was specific to irinotecan-based chemotherapy, however, and the PDOs failed to predict outcome for treatment with 5-fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin. Our data suggest that PDOs could be used to prevent cancer patients from undergoing ineffective irinotecan-based chemotherapy.Pattern Recognition and Bioinformatic

Codon-specific KRAS mutations predict survival benefit of trifluridine/tipiracil in metastatic colorectal cancer

Genomics has greatly improved how patients with cancer are being treated; however, clinical-grade genomic biomarkers for chemotherapies are currently lacking. Using whole-genome analysis of 37 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with the chemotherapy trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI), we identified KRAS codon G12 (KRASG12) mutations as a potential biomarker of resistance. Next, we collected real-world data of 960 patients with mCRC receiving FTD/TPI and validated that KRASG12 mutations were significantly associated with poor survival, also in analyses restricted to the RAS/RAF mutant subgroup. We next analyzed the data of the global, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 RECOURSE trial (n = 800 patients) and found that KRASG12 mutations (n = 279) were predictive biomarkers for reduced overall survival (OS) benefit of FTD/TPI versus placebo (unadjusted interaction P = 0.0031, adjusted interaction P = 0.015). For patients with KRASG12 mutations in the RECOURSE trial, OS was not prolonged with FTD/TPI versus placebo (n = 279; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.73–1.20; P = 0.85). In contrast, patients with KRASG13 mutant tumors showed significantly improved OS with FTD/TPI versus placebo (n = 60; HR = 0.29; 95% CI = 0.15–0.55; P &lt; 0.001). In isogenic cell lines and patient-derived organoids, KRASG12 mutations were associated with increased resistance to FTD-based genotoxicity. In conclusion, these data show that KRASG12 mutations are biomarkers for reduced OS benefit of FTD/TPI treatment, with potential implications for approximately 28% of patients with mCRC under consideration for treatment with FTD/TPI. Furthermore, our data suggest that genomics-based precision medicine may be possible for a subset of chemotherapies.Pattern Recognition and Bioinformatic

Maximizing Treatment Opportunities:Assessing Protocol Waivers’ Impact on Safety and Outcome in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol

Purpose: Although eligibility criteria are essential in trial design, overly restrictive criteria contribute to low accrual and limited generalizability. To enhance trial inclusivity, there has been growing interest in broadening eligibility criteria, especially for patients with advanced or treatment-refractory disease. Yet, the impact on patient safety remains uncertain. In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), protocol exceptions are frequently requested and occasionally granted. Here we describe the impact of these waivers on treatment safety and efficacy.Experimental Design: DRUP is a multicenter, nonrandomized clinical basket trial treating patients with therapy-refractory cancer with molecularly targeted and immunotherapies outside their registered indications (NCT02925234). Here, all granted waivers were revised, analyzed in terms of safety and efficacy outcome, and com-paredwithoutcomes of includedpatientswho didnot receive awaiver. Results: Between September 1, 2016, and September 1, 2021, protocol waivers were granted for 82 patients (8%) of 1,019 included patients in DRUP. Most waivers (45%) were granted for general- or drug-related eligibility criteria; other categories were out-of-window testing, treatment, and testing exceptions. Serious adverse event rate was similar between patients who received a waiver (pW) and patients who did not (pNW): 39% vs. 41%, respectively (P ¼ 0.81). The clinical benefit (either objective response or stable disease ≥ 16 weeks) rate of pW was 40% versus 33% in pNW (P ¼ 0.43). Conclusions: Safety and clinical benefit were preserved in patients for whom a waiver was granted. These data support a more personalized approach in assessing eligibility criteria, especially in trials with widely used and approved drugs accruing patients without other treatment options.</p

Maximizing treatment opportunities: assessing protocol waivers' impact on safety and outcome in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol

Purpose: Although eligibility criteria are essential in trial design, overly restrictive criteria contribute to low accrual and limited generalizability. To enhance trial inclusivity, there has been growing interest in broadening eligibility criteria, especially for patients with advanced or treatment-refractory disease. Yet, the impact on patient safety remains uncertain. In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), protocol exceptions are frequently requested and occasionally granted. Here we describe the impact of these waivers on treatment safety and efficacy. Experimental Design: DRUP is a multicenter, nonrandomized clinical basket trial treating patients with therapy-refractory cancer with molecularly targeted and immunotherapies outside their registered indications (NCT02925234). Here, all granted waivers were revised, analyzed in terms of safety and efficacy outcome, and com-paredwithoutcomes of includedpatientswho didnot receive awaiver. Results: Between September 1, 2016, and September 1, 2021, protocol waivers were granted for 82 patients (8%) of 1,019 included patients in DRUP. Most waivers (45%) were granted for general- or drug-related eligibility criteria; other categories were out-of-window testing, treatment, and testing exceptions. Serious adverse event rate was similar between patients who received a waiver (pW) and patients who did not (pNW): 39% vs. 41%, respectively (P ¼ 0.81). The clinical benefit (either objective response or stable disease ≥ 16 weeks) rate of pW was 40% versus 33% in pNW (P ¼ 0.43). Conclusions: Safety and clinical benefit were preserved in patients for whom a waiver was granted. These data support a more personalized approach in assessing eligibility criteria, especially in trials with widely used and approved drugs accruing patients without other treatment options

Caring for patients with cancer in the COVID-19 era.

The current COVID-19 pandemic challenges oncologists to profoundly re-organize oncological care in order to dramatically reduce hospital visits and admissions and therapy-induced immune-related complications without compromising cancer outcomes. Since COVID-19 is a novel disease, guidance by scientific evidence is often unavailable, and impactful decisions are inevitably made on the basis of expert opinions. Here we report how the seven comprehensive cancer centers of Cancer Core Europe have organized their healthcare systems at an unprecedented scale and pace to make their operations 'pandemic proof'. We identify and discuss many commonalities, but also important local differences, and pinpoint critical research priorities to enable evidence-based remodeling of cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Also, we discuss how the current situation offers a unique window of opportunity for assessing the effects of de-escalating anticancer regimens, which may fast-forward the development of more-refined and less-toxic treatments. By sharing our joint experiences, we offer a roadmap for proceeding and aim to mobilize the global research community to generate the data that are critically needed to offer the best possible care to patients

Study protocol: Whole genome sequencing Implementation in standard Diagnostics for Every cancer patient (WIDE)

BACKGROUND: 'Precision oncology' can ensure the best suitable treatment at the right time by tailoring treatment towards individual patient and comprehensive tumour characteristics. In current molecular pathology, diagnostic tests which are part of the standard of care (SOC) only cover a limited part of the spectrum of genomic changes, and often are performed in an iterative way. This occurs at the expense of valuable patient time, available tissue sample, and interferes with 'first time right' treatment decisions. Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) captures a near complete view of genomic characteristics of a tumour in a single test. Moreover, WGS facilitates faster implementation of new treatment relevant biomarkers. At present, WGS mainly has been applied in study settings, but its performance in a routine diagnostic setting remains to be evaluated. The WIDE study aims to investigate the feasibility and validity of WGS-based diagnostics in clinical practice. METHODS: 1200 consecutive patients in a single comprehensive cancer centre with (suspicion of) a metastasized solid tumour will be enrolled with the intention to analyse tumour tissue with WGS, in parallel to SOC diagnostics. Primary endpoints are (1) feasibility of implementation of WGS-based diagnostics into routine clinical care and (2) clinical validation of WGS by comparing identification of treatment-relevant variants between WGS and SOC molecular diagnostics. Secondary endpoints entail (1) added clinical value in terms of additional treatment options and (2) cost-effectiveness of WGS compared to SOC diagnostics through a Health Technology Assessment (HTA) analysis. Furthermore, the (3) perceived impact of WGS-based diagnostics on clinical decision making will be evaluated through questionnaires. The number of patients included in (experimental) therapies initiated based on SOC or WGS diagnostics will be reported with at least 3 months follow-up. The clinical efficacy is beyond the scope of WIDE. Key performance indicators will be evaluated after every 200 patients enrolled, and procedures optimized accordingly, to continuously improve the diagnostic performance of WGS in a routine clinical setting. DISCUSSION: WIDE will yield the optimal conditions under which WGS can be implemented in a routine molecular diagnostics setting and establish the position of WGS compared to SOC diagnostics in routine clinical care