Trastuzumab duocarmazine in locally advanced and metastatic solid tumours and HER2-expressing breast cancer: a phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study

Background: Trastuzumab duocarmazine is a novel HER2-targeting antibody-drug conjugate comprised of trastuzumab covalently bound to a linker drug containing duocarmycin. Preclinical studies showed promising antitumour activity in various models. In this first-in-human study, we assessed the safety and activity of trastuzumab duocarmazine in patients with advanced solid tumours. Methods: We did a phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study. The dose-escalation cohort comprised patients aged 18 years or older enrolled from three academic hospitals in Belgium, the Netherlands, and the UK with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours with variable HER2 status who were refractory to standard cancer treatment. A separate cohort of patients were enrolled to the dose-expansion phase from 15 hospitals in Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, and the UK. Dose-expansion cohorts included patients aged 18 years or older with breast, gastric, urothelial, or endometrial cancer with at least HER2 immunohistochemistry 1+ expression and measurable disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Trastuzumab duocarmazine was administered intravenously on day 1 of each 3-week cycle. In the dose-escalation phase, trastuzumab duocarmazine was given at doses of 0.3 mg/kg to 2.4 mg/kg (3 + 3 design) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint of the dose-escalation phase was to assess safety and ascertain the recommended phase 2 dose, which would be the dose used in the dose-expansion phase. The primary endpoint of the dose-expansion phase was the proportion of patients achieving an objective response (complete response or partial response), as assessed by the investigator using RECIST version 1.1. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02277717, and is fully recruited. Findings: Between Oct 30, 2014, and April 2, 2018, 39 patients were enrolled and treated in the dose-escalation phase and 146 patients were enrolled and treated in the dose-expansion phase. One dose-limiting toxic effect (death from pneumonitis) occurred at the highest administered dose (2.4 mg/kg) in the dose-escalation phase. One further death occurred in the dose-escalation phase (1.5 mg/kg cohort) due to disease progression, which was attributed to general physical health decline. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events reported more than once in the dose-escalation phase were keratitis (n=3) and fatigue (n=2). Based on all available data, the recommended phase 2 dose was set at 1.2 mg/kg. In the dose-expansion phase, treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 16 (11%) of 146 patients, most commonly infusion-related reactions (two [1%]) and dyspnoea (two [1%]). The most common treatment-related adverse events (grades 1-4) were fatigue (48 [33%] of 146 patients), conjunctivitis (45 [31%]), and dry eye (45 [31%]). Most patients (104 [71%] of 146) had at least one ocular adverse event, with grade 3 events reported in ten (7%) of 146 patients. No patients died from treatment-related adverse events and four patients died due to disease progression, which were attributed to hepatic failure (n=1), upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage (n=1), neurological decompensation (n=1), and renal failure (n=1). In the breast cancer dose-expansion cohorts, 16 (33%, 95% CI 20.4-48.4) of 48 assessable patients with HER2-positive breast cancer achieved an objective response (all partial responses) according to RECIST. Nine (28%, 95% CI 13.8-46.8) of 32 patients with HER2-low, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer and six (40%, 16.3-67.6) of 15 patients with HER2-low, hormone receptor-negative breast cancer achieved an objective response (all partial responses). Partial responses were also observed in one (6%, 95% CI 0.2-30.2) of 16 patients with gastric cancer, four (25%, 7.3-52.4) of 16 patients with urothelial cancer, and five (39%, 13.9-68.4) of 13 patients with endometrial cancer. Interpretation: Trastuzumab duocarmazine shows notable clinical activity in heavily pretreated patients with HER2-expressing metastatic cancer, including HER2-positive trastuzumab emtansine-resistant and HER2-low breast cancer, with a manageable safety profile. Further investigation of trastuzumab duocarmazine for HER2-positive breast cancer is ongoing and trials for HER2-low breast cancer and other HER2-expressing cancers are in preparation. Copyright (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

[18F]FDG and [18F]FES PET/CT Imaging as a Biomarker for Therapy Effect in Patients with Metastatic ER+ Breast Cancer Undergoing Treatment with Rintodestrant

PURPOSE: Positron emission tomography (PET) with 16α-[18F]-fluoro-17β-estradiol ([18F]FES) allows assessment of whole body estrogen receptor (ER) expression. The aim of this study was to investigate [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG) and [18F]FES PET/CT imaging for response prediction and monitoring of drug activity in patients with metastatic ER+ breast cancer undergoing treatment with the selective estrogen receptor downregulator (SERD) rintodestrant.PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this trial (NCT03455270), PET/CT imaging was performed at baseline ([18F]FDG and [18F]FES), during treatment and at time of progression (only [18F]FES). Visual, quantitative and mutational analysis was performed to derive a heterogeneity score (HS) and assess tracer uptake in lesions, in relation to the mutation profile. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS).RESULTS: The HS and PFS in the entire group did not correlate (n=16, Spearman's rho, P=0.06), but patients with a low HS (&lt;25.0%, n=4) had a PFS of &gt;5 months whereas patients with no [18F]FES uptake (HS 100.0%, n =3) had a PFS of &lt;2 months. [18F]FES uptake was not affected by ESR1 mutations. On-treatment [18F]FES PET/CT scans showed no [18F]FES uptake in any of the baseline [18F]FES positive lesions. At progression, [18F]FES uptake remained blocked in patients scanned ≤1-2 half-lives of rintodestrant whereas it restored in patients scanned ≥5 days after end of treatment.CONCLUSION: Absence of ER expression on [18F]FES PET is a predictor for no response to rintodestrant. [18F]FES uptake during treatment and at time of progression is useful to monitor the (reversible) effect of therapy and continued mode of action of SERDs.</p

A phase 1b study evaluating the effect of elacestrant treatment on estrogen receptor availability and estradiol binding to the estrogen receptor in metastatic breast cancer lesions using 18F-FES PET/CT imaging

Background: Elacestrant is an oral selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader. This phase 1b open-label, nonrandomized study (RAD1901-106) was initiated to determine the effect of elacestrant on the availability of ER in lesions from postmenopausal women with ER+ advanced breast cancer (ABC) using 16α18F-fluoro-17β-estradiol positron emission tomography with low-dose computed tomography (FES-PET/CT). Methods: Eligible patients were postmenopausal women with ER+, HER2− ABC; tumor progression after ≥ 6 months of 1–3 lines of endocrine treatment for ABC; and measurable or evaluable disease. Two 8-patient cohorts were enrolled: one treated with 400 mg elacestrant once daily (QD) and one treated with 200 mg elacestrant QD with dose escalation to 400 mg QD after 14 days. Elacestrant was dosed continuously until progressive disease, toxicity, or withdrawal. FES-PET/CT was performed pre-dose at baseline and 4 h post-dose on day 14. The primary endpoint was the percentage difference in FES uptake in tumor lesions (maximum 20) after 14 days of treatment compared to baseline. Overall response was investigator-assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid T

The genetic basis of DOORS syndrome: an exome-sequencing study.

Deafness, onychodystrophy, osteodystrophy, mental retardation, and seizures (DOORS) syndrome is a rare autosomal recessive disorder of unknown cause. We aimed to identify the genetic basis of this syndrome by sequencing most coding exons in affected individuals

Biomarker analyses in the phase III ASCENT study of sacituzumab govitecan versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer

Background: The pivotal phase III ASCENT trial demonstrated improved survival outcomes associated with sacituzumab govitecan (SG), an anti-trophoblast cell-surface antigen 2 (anti-Trop-2) antibody-drug conjugate linked with the topoisomerase-inhibitor SN-38, over single-agent chemotherapy treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in previously treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). This prespecified, exploratory biomarker analysis from the ASCENT trial evaluates the association between tumor Trop-2 expression and germline BRCA1/2 mutation status with clinical outcomes. Patients and methods: Patients with mTNBC refractory to or progressing after two or more prior chemotherapies, with one or more in the metastatic setting, were randomized to receive SG (10 mg/kg intravenously days 1 and 8, every 21 days) or TPC (capecitabine, eribulin, vinorelbine, or gemcitabine) until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. Biopsy or surgical specimens were collected at study entry to determine Trop-2 expression level using a validated immunohistochemistry assay and histochemical scoring. Germline BRCA1/2 mutation status was collected at baseline. Results: Of 468 assessable patients, 290 had Trop-2 expression data [64% (n = 151 SG) versus 60% (n = 139 TPC)] and 292 had known BRCA1/2 mutation status [63% (n = 149 SG) versus 61% (n = 143 TPC)]. Median progression-free survival in SG- versus TPC-treated patients was 6.9, 5.6, and 2.7 months versus 2.5, 2.2, and 1.6 months for high, medium, and low Trop-2 expression, respectively. Median overall survival (14.2, 14.9, and 9.3 months versus 6.9, 6.9, and 7.6 months) and objective response rates (44%, 38%, and 22% versus 1%, 11%, and 6%) were numerically higher with SG versus TPC in patients with high, medium, and low Trop-2 expression, respectively. Efficacy outcomes were numerically higher with SG versus TPC in patients with and without germline BRCA1/2 mutations. Conclusions: SG benefits patients with previously treated mTNBC expressing high/medium Trop-2 compared with standard-of-care chemotherapy and regardless of germline BRCA1/2 mutation status. The small number of patients with low Trop-2 expression precludes definitive conclusions on the benefit of SG in this subgroup

The clinical impact of using complex molecular profiling strategies in routine oncology practice

Molecular profiling and functional assessment of signalling pathways of advanced solid tumours are becoming increasingly available. However, their clinical utility in guiding patients’ treatment remains unknown. Here, we assessed whether molecular profiling helps physicians in therapeutic decision making by analysing the molecular profiles of 1057 advanced cancer patient samples after failing at least one standard of care treatment using a combination of next-generation sequencing (NGS), immunohistochemistry (IHC) and other specific tests. The resulting information was interpreted and personalized treatments for each patient were suggested. Our data showed that NGS alone provided the oncologist with useful information in 10–50% of cases (depending on cancer type), whereas the addition of IHC/other tests increased extensively the usefulness of the information provided. Using internet surveys, we investigated how therapy recommendations influenced treatment choice of the oncologist. For patients who were still alive after the provision of the molecular information (76.8%), 60.4% of their oncologists followed report recommendations. Most treatment decisions (93.4%) were made based on the combination of NGS and IHC/other tests, and an approved drug- rather than clinical trial enrolment- was the main treatment choice. Most common reasons given by physicians to explain the non-adherence to recommendations were drug availability and cost, which remain barriers to personalised precision medicine. Finally, we observed that 27% of patients treated with the suggested therapies had an overall survival > 12 months. Our study demonstrates that the combination of NGS and IHC/other tests provides the most useful information in aiding treatment decisions by oncologists in routine clinical practice

Sacituzumab govitecan in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer have a poor prognosis. Sacituzumab govitecan is an antibody-drug conjugate composed of an antibody targeting the human trophoblast cell-surface antigen 2 (Trop-2), which is expressed in the majority of breast cancers, coupled to SN-38 (topoisomerase I inhibitor) through a proprietary hydrolyzable linker. METHODS In this randomized, phase 3 trial, we evaluated sacituzumab govitecan as compared with single-agent chemotherapy of the physician's choice (eribulin, vinorelbine, capecitabine, or gemcitabine) in patients with relapsed or refractory metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. The primary end point was progression-free survival (as determined by blinded independent central review) among patients without brain metastases. RESULTS A total of 468 patients without brain metastases were randomly assigned to receive sacituzumab govitecan (235 patients) or chemotherapy (233 patients). The median age was 54 years; all the patients had previous use of taxanes. The median progression-free survival was 5.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.3 to 6.3; 166 events) with sacituzumab govitecan and 1.7 months (95% CI, 1.5 to 2.6; 150 events) with chemotherapy (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.52; P<0.001). The median overall survival was 12.1 months (95% CI, 10.7 to 14.0) with sacituzumab govitecan and 6.7 months (95% CI, 5.8 to 7.7) with chemotherapy (hazard ratio for death, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.59; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with an objective response was 35% with sacituzumab govitecan and 5% with chemotherapy. The incidences of key treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher were neutropenia (51% with sacituzumab govitecan and 33% with chemotherapy), leukopenia (10% and 5%), diarrhea (10% and <1%), anemia (8% and 5%), and febrile neutropenia (6% and 2%). There were three deaths owing to adverse events in each group; no deaths were considered to be related to sacituzumab govitecan treatment. CONCLUSIONS Progression-free and overall survival were significantly longer with sacituzumab govitecan than with single-agent chemotherapy among patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. Myelosuppression and diarrhea were more frequent with sacituzumab govitecan

Neue Untersuchungsergebnisse zum alter von dunkelbäuchigen Ringelgänsen Branta b. bernicla

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe