Optimising fusion detection through sequential DNA and RNA molecular profiling of non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES: There is an increasing number of driver fusions in NSCLC which are amenable to targeted therapy. Panel testing for fusions is increasingly appropriate but can be costly and requires adequate good quality biopsy material. In light of the typical mutual exclusivity of driver events in NSCLC, the objective of this study was to trial a novel testing pathway, supported by industrial collaboration, in which only patients negative for driver mutations on DNA-NGS were submitted for fusion panel analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Over 18 months, all patients from a single centre with non-squamous NSCLC were submitted for DNA-NGS, plus ALK and ROS1 immunohistochemistry +/− FISH. Those which were negative for a driver mutation were then recalled for RNA panel testing. RESULTS: 307 samples were referred for DNA-NGS mutation analysis, of which, 10% of cases were unsuitable for or failed DNA-NGS analysis. Driver mutations were detected in 61% (167/275) of all those successfully tested. Of those without a driver mutation and with some remaining tissue available, 28% had insufficient tissue/extracted RNA or failed RNA-NGS. Of those successfully tested, 24% (17/72) had a fusion gene detected involving either ALK, ROS, MET, RET, FGFR or EGFR. Overall, 66% (184/277) of patients had a driver event detected through the combination of DNA and RNA panels. CONCLUSION: Sequential DNA and RNA based molecular profiling increased the efficacy of detecting fusion driven NSCLCs. Continued optimisation of tissue procurement, handling and the diagnostic pathways for gene fusion analysis is necessary to reduce analysis failure rates and improve detection rate for treatment with the next generation of small molecule inhibitors

Clinical implementation of pre-treatment DPYD genotyping in capecitabine-treated metastatic breast cancer patients

Purpose Metastatic breast cancer (mBC) patients with DPYD genetic variants linked to loss of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) activity are at risk of severe capecitabine-associated toxicities. However, prospective DPYD genotyping has not yet been implemented in routine clinical practice. Following a previous internal review in which two patients underwent lengthy hospitalisations whilst receiving capecitabine, and were subsequently found to be DPD deficient, we initiated routine DPYD genotyping prior to starting capecitabine. This study evaluates the clinical application of routine DPYD screening at a large cancer centre in London. Methods We reviewed medical records for consecutive patients with mBC who underwent DPYD genotyping before commencing capecitabine between December 2014 and December 2017. Patients were tested for four DPYD variants associated with reduced DPD activity. Results Sixty-six patients underwent DPYD testing. Five (8.4%) patients were found to carry DPYD genetic polymorphisms associated with reduced DPD activity; of these, two received dose-reduced capecitabine. Of the 61 patients with DPYD wild-type, 14 (23%) experienced grade 3 toxicities which involved palmar–plantar erythrodysesthesia (65%), and gastrointestinal toxicities (35%); no patient was hospitalised due to toxicity. Conclusions Prospective DPYD genotyping can be successfully implemented in routine clinical practice and can reduce the risk of severe fluoropyrimidine toxicities

Clinical outcomes and prognostic factors of patients with advanced mesothelioma treated in a phase I clinical trials unit.

Background We have previously reported a prognostic score for patients in phase I trials in the Drug Development Unit, treated at the Royal Marsden Hospital (RPS). The RPS is an objective tool used in patient selection for phase I trials based on albumin, number of disease sites and LDH. Patients with mesothelioma are often selected for phase I trials as the disease remains localised for long periods of time. We have now reviewed the clinical outcomes of patients with relapsed malignant mesothelioma (MM) and propose a specific mesothelioma prognostic score (m-RPS) that can help identify patients who are most likely to benefit from early referral.Methods Patients who participated in 38 phase I trials between September 2003 and November 2015 were included in the analysis. Efficacy was assessed by response rate, median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Univariate (UVA) and multivariate analyses (MVA) were carried out to develop the m-RPS.Results A total of 65 patients with advanced MM were included in this retrospective study. The PFS was 2.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.0-3.1 months) and OS was 8 months (95% CI 5.6-9.8 months). A total of four (6%) patients had RECIST partial responses, whereas 26 (40%) patients had RECIST stable disease >3 months. The m-RPS was developed comprising of three different prognostic factors: a neutrophil: lymphocyte ratio greater than 3, the presence of more than two disease sites (including lymph nodes as a single site of disease) and albumin levels less than 35 from the MVA. Patients each received a score of 1 for the presence of each factor. Patients in group A (m-RPS 0-1; n = 35) had a median OS of 13.4 months (95% CI 8.5-21.6), whereas those in group B (m-RPS 2-3; n = 30) had a median OS of 4.0 months (95% CI 2.9-7.1, P < 0.0001). A total of 56 (86%) patients experienced G1-2 toxicities, whereas reversible G3-4 toxicities were observed in 18 (28%) patients. Only 10 (15%) patients discontinued phase I trials due to toxicity.Conclusions Phase I clinical trial therapies were well tolerated with early signals of antitumour activity in advanced MM patients. The m-RPS is a useful tool to assess MM patient suitability for phase I trials and should now be prospectively validated

Phase 1, dose-escalation study of guadecitabine (SGI-110) in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with solid tumors

Background: Data suggest that immunomodulation induced by DNA hypomethylating agents can sensitize tumors to immune checkpoint inhibitors. We conducted a phase 1 dose-escalation trial (NCT02998567) of guadecitabine and pembrolizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. We hypothesized that guadecitabine will overcome pembrolizumab resistance. Methods: Patients received guadecitabine (45 mg/m 2 or 30 mg/m 2, administered subcutaneously on days 1-4), with pembrolizumab (200 mg administered intravenously starting from cycle 2 onwards) every 3 weeks. Primary endpoints were safety, tolerability and maximum tolerated dose; secondary and exploratory endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), changes in methylome, transcriptome, immune contextures in pre-treatment and on-treatment tumor biopsies. Results: Between January 2017 and January 2020, 34 patients were enrolled. The recommended phase II dose was guadecitabine 30 mg/m 2, days 1-4, and pembrolizumab 200 mg on day 1 every 3 weeks. Two dose-limiting toxicities (neutropenia, febrile neutropenia) were reported at guadecitabine 45 mg/m 2 with none reported at guadecitabine 30 mg/m 2. The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were neutropenia (58.8%), fatigue (17.6%), febrile neutropenia (11.8%) and nausea (11.8%). Common, grade 3+ TRAEs were neutropaenia (38.2%) and febrile neutropaenia (11.8%). There were no treatment-related deaths. Overall, 30 patients were evaluable for antitumor activity; ORR was 7% with 37% achieving disease control (progression-free survival) for ≥24 weeks. Of 12 evaluable patients with non-small cell lung cancer, 10 had been previously treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors with 5 (42%) having disease control ≥24 weeks (clinical benefit). Reduction in LINE-1 DNA methylation following treatment in blood (peripheral blood mononuclear cells) and tissue samples was demonstrated and methylation at transcriptional start site and 5' untranslated region gene regions showed enriched negative correlation with gene expression. Increases in intra-tumoural effector T-cells were seen in some responding patients. Patients having clinical benefit had high baseline inflammatory signature on RNAseq analyses. Conclusions: Guadecitabine in combination with pembrolizumab is tolerable with biological and anticancer activity. Reversal of previous resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors is demonstrated

A Phase 1, Dose Escalation Study of Guadecitabine (SGI-110) in Combination with Pembrolizumab in Patients with Solid Tumours

Background: Data suggest that immunomodulation induced by DNA hypomethylating agents can sensitize tumors to immune checkpoint inhibitors. We conducted a phase 1 dose-escalation trial (NCT02998567) of guadecitabine and pembrolizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. We hypothesized that guadecitabine will overcome pembrolizumab resistance. Methods: Patients received guadecitabine (45 mg/m 2 or 30 mg/m 2, administered subcutaneously on days 1-4), with pembrolizumab (200 mg administered intravenously starting from cycle 2 onwards) every 3 weeks. Primary endpoints were safety, tolerability and maximum tolerated dose; secondary and exploratory endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), changes in methylome, transcriptome, immune contextures in pre-treatment and on-treatment tumor biopsies. Results: Between January 2017 and January 2020, 34 patients were enrolled. The recommended phase II dose was guadecitabine 30 mg/m 2, days 1-4, and pembrolizumab 200 mg on day 1 every 3 weeks. Two dose-limiting toxicities (neutropenia, febrile neutropenia) were reported at guadecitabine 45 mg/m 2 with none reported at guadecitabine 30 mg/m 2. The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were neutropenia (58.8%), fatigue (17.6%), febrile neutropenia (11.8%) and nausea (11.8%). Common, grade 3+ TRAEs were neutropaenia (38.2%) and febrile neutropaenia (11.8%). There were no treatment-related deaths. Overall, 30 patients were evaluable for antitumor activity; ORR was 7% with 37% achieving disease control (progression-free survival) for ≥24 weeks. Of 12 evaluable patients with non-small cell lung cancer, 10 had been previously treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors with 5 (42%) having disease control ≥24 weeks (clinical benefit). Reduction in LINE-1 DNA methylation following treatment in blood (peripheral blood mononuclear cells) and tissue samples was demonstrated and methylation at transcriptional start site and 5' untranslated region gene regions showed enriched negative correlation with gene expression. Increases in intra-tumoural effector T-cells were seen in some responding patients. Patients having clinical benefit had high baseline inflammatory signature on RNAseq analyses. Conclusions: Guadecitabine in combination with pembrolizumab is tolerable with biological and anticancer activity. Reversal of previous resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors is demonstrated

A retrospective analysis of clinical outcome of patients with chemo-refractory metastatic breast cancer treated in a single institution phase I unit

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: Novel approaches to treat chemo-refractory metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are currently under investigation. This retrospective series reviews the outcome of 70 MBC patients who have participated in 30 phase I trials at the Royal Marsden Hospital from 2002 to 2009. RESULTS: The median treatment lines before phase I trial entry for MBC was 5 (range: 1-12 lines). The overall response rate was 11.4% (95% CI: 4.0-18.9%) and the clinical benefit rate at 4 months was 20% (95% CI: 10.6-29.3). The median time to progression was 7.0 weeks (95% CI: 6.4-7.5) and median overall survival was 8.7 months (95% CI: 7.6-9.8) from start of first phase I treatment. No patients discontinued trial because of treatment-related toxicities. Abnormal lactate dehydrogenase, serum albumin <35 mg per 100 ml, >or=5 previous treatment lines, liver metastases and Eastern Cooperative Group performance status >or=2 at study entry were significantly associated with poor overall survival in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: This retrospective analysis provides evidence that patients with MBC tolerate phase I clinical trials and a significant proportion of patients with chemo-refractory disease, particularly those with triple-negative or Her2-positive breast cancer, may benefit from treatment

First-in-Human Study of AT13148, a Dual ROCK-AKT Inhibitor in Patients with Solid Tumors

Purpose: AT13148 is an oral AGC kinase inhibitor, which potently inhibits ROCK and AKT kinases. In preclinical models, AT13148 has been shown to have antimetastatic and antiproliferative activity. Patients and Methods: The trial followed a rolling six design during dose escalation. An intrapatient dose escalation arm to evaluate tolerability and a biopsy cohort to study pharmacodynamic effects were later added. AT13148 was administered orally three days a week (Mon–Wed–Fri) in 28-day cycles. Pharmacokinetic profiles were assessed using mass spectrometry and pharmacodynamic studies included quantifying p-GSK3β levels in platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and p-cofilin and p-MLC2 levels in tumor biopsies. Results: Fifty-one patients were treated on study. The safety of 5–300 mg of AT13148 was studied. Further, the doses of 120–180–240 mg were studied in an intrapatient dose escalation cohort. The dose-limiting toxicities included hypotension (300 mg), pneumonitis, and elevated liver enzymes (240 mg), and skin rash (180 mg). The most common side effects were fatigue, nausea, headaches, and hypotension. On the basis of tolerability, 180 mg was considered the maximally tolerated dose. At 180 mg, mean Cmax and AUC were 400 nmol/L and 13,000 nmol/L/hour, respectively. At 180 mg, ≥50% reduction of p-cofilin was observed in 3 of 8 posttreatment biopsies. Conclusions: AT13148 was the first dual potent ROCK-AKT inhibitor to be investigated for the treatment of solid tumors. The narrow therapeutic index and the pharmacokinetic profile led to recommend not developing this compound further. There are significant lessons learned in designing and testing agents that simultaneously inhibit multiple kinases including AGC kinases in cancer

Target-based therapeutic matching of phase I trials in patients with metastatic breast cancer in a tertiary referral centre.

Background Greater understanding of the molecular classification of breast cancer has permitted the development of rational drug design strategies. In a phase I clinical trial setting, molecular profiling with next-generation sequencing of individual tumour samples has been employed to guide treatment.Methods We conducted a retrospective evaluation of clinical outcomes of patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) treated in phase I clinical trials at our institution to assess the benefit of molecularly matched compared to non-matched treatments.Results A total of 97 consecutive patients with MBC were enrolled onto ≥1 trial between 2009 and 2015. Fourteen patients participated in multiple trials, and a total of 113 trial encounters were reviewed in this retrospective study. Eighty-three percent of patients with molecular data available were able to participate in trials matched to molecular aberrations. Patients who were treated on matched studies had improved clinical benefit (RR: 1.80, p = 0.005), progression-free (HR: 0.52, p = 0.003) and overall survival (HR: 0.54, p < 0.001). Treatment was well tolerated with low rates of treatment discontinuation for toxicity (8% overall) that did not differ between groups. No toxicity-related deaths were observed.Conclusions Molecular profiling for MBC patients in a phase I setting is feasible and aids therapeutic decisions with improved patient outcomes

The evolution of non-small cell lung cancer metastases in TRACERx

Metastatic disease is responsible for the majority of cancer-related deaths1. We report the longitudinal evolutionary analysis of 126 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumours from 421 prospectively recruited patients in TRACERx who developed metastatic disease, compared with a control cohort of 144 non-metastatic tumours. In 25% of cases, metastases diverged early, before the last clonal sweep in the primary tumour, and early divergence was enriched for patients who were smokers at the time of initial diagnosis. Simulations suggested that early metastatic divergence more frequently occurred at smaller tumour diameters (less than 8 mm). Single-region primary tumour sampling resulted in 83% of late divergence cases being misclassified as early, highlighting the importance of extensive primary tumour sampling. Polyclonal dissemination, which was associated with extrathoracic disease recurrence, was found in 32% of cases. Primary lymph node disease contributed to metastatic relapse in less than 20% of cases, representing a hallmark of metastatic potential rather than a route to subsequent recurrences/disease progression. Metastasis-seeding subclones exhibited subclonal expansions within primary tumours, probably reflecting positive selection. Our findings highlight the importance of selection in metastatic clone evolution within untreated primary tumours, the distinction between monoclonal versus polyclonal seeding in dictating site of recurrence, the limitations of current radiological screening approaches for early diverging tumours and the need to develop strategies to target metastasis-seeding subclones before relaps