A signal-seeking Phase 2 study of olaparib and durvalumab in advanced solid cancers with homologous recombination repair gene alterations

Purpose: To determine the safety and efficacy of PARP plus PD-L1 inhibition (olaparib + durvalumab, O + D) in patients with advanced solid, predominantly rare cancers harbouring homologous recombination repair (HRR) defects. Patients and methods: In total, 48 patients were treated with O + D, 16 with BRCA1/2 alterations (group 1) and 32 with other select HRR alterations (group 2). Overall, 32 (66%) patients had rare or less common cancers. The primary objective of this single-arm Phase II trial was a progression-free survival rate at 6 months (PFS6). Post hoc exploratory analyses were conducted on archival tumour tissue and serial bloods. Results: The PFS6 rate was 35% and 38% with durable objective tumour responses (OTR) in 3(19%) and 3(9%) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Rare cancers achieving an OTR included cholangiocarcinoma, perivascular epithelioid cell (PEComa), neuroendocrine, gallbladder and endometrial cancer. O + D was safe, with five serious adverse events related to the study drug(s) in 3 (6%) patients. A higher proportion of CD38 high B cells in the blood and higher CD40 expression in tumour was prognostic of survival. Conclusions: O + D demonstrated no new toxicity concerns and yielded a clinically meaningful PFS6 rate and durable OTRs across several cancers with HRR defects, including rare cancers

ICECREAM: randomised phase II study of cetuximab alone or in combination with irinotecan in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with either KRAS, NRAS, BRAF and PI3KCA wild type, or G13D mutated tumours

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer whose disease has progressed on oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-containing regimens may benefit from EGFR-inhibiting monoclonal antibodies if they do not contain mutations in the KRAS gene (are &quot;wild type&quot;). It is unknown whether these antibodies, such as cetuximab, are more efficacious in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer as monotherapy, or in combination with irinotecan. Lack of mutation&nbsp;in KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA predicts response to EFGR-inhibitors. The ICECREAM trial examines the question of monotherapy versus combination with chemotherapy in two groups of patients: those with a &quot;quadruple wild type&quot; tumour genotype (no mutations in KRAS, NRAS, PI3KCA or BRAF genes) and those with the specific KRAS mutation in codon G13D, for whom possibly EGFR-inhibitor efficacy may be equivalent. METHODS AND DESIGN: ICECREAM is a randomised, phase II, open-label, controlled trial comparing the efficacy of cetuximab alone or with irinotecan in patients with &quot;quadruple wild type&quot; or G13D-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer, whose disease has progressed on, or who are intolerant of oxaliplatin- and fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. The primary endpoint is the 6-month progression-free survival benefit of the treatment regimen. Secondary endpoints are response rate, overall survival, and quality of life. The tertiary endpoint is prediction of outcome with further biological markers. International collaboration has facilitated recruitment in this prospective trial of treatment in these infrequently found molecular subsets of colorectal cancer. DISCUSSION: This unique trial will yield prospective information on the efficacy of cetuximab and whether this is further enhanced with chemotherapy in two distinct populations of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: the &quot;quadruple wild type&quot;, which may \u27superselect\u27 for tumours sensitive to EGFR-inhibition, and the rare KRAS G13D mutated tumours, which are also postulated to be sensitive to the drug. The focus on establishing both positive and negative predictive factors for the response to targeted therapy is an attempt to improve outcomes, reduce toxicity and contain treatment costs. Tissue and blood will yield a resource for molecular studies. Recruitment, particularly of patients with the rare G13D mutation, will demonstrate the ability for international collaboration to run prospective trials in small colorectal cancer molecular subgroups.<br /

The Clinical Translation of Genomic Output in Oncology

The accelerated progress in genomic technologies enables a systematic molecular reclassification of cancers, and can guide therapeutic opportunities. The clinical translation of genomic insights has lagged behind the pace of scientific discovery. This work analyses practical approaches to using genomic output to inform patient care. The Molecular Screening and Therapeutics program enabled patients with advanced cancer to access molecular tumour profiling in the Australian setting. Molecular results were reviewed by a molecular tumour board to determine the therapeutic relevance of results, and to guide therapeutic options through the program, or via other clinical trials/ or compassionate access schema. Enrolment was agnostic to tumour histology, with a focus on rare and less common cancers, where histology specific trials are limited. Our findings underscore the importance of trials using genomic selection as a vehicle for accessing novel therapies for these populations. The histology-agnostic approach required innovative approaches to trial endpoints to enable comparisons between widely different cancer types, as well as translational correlates to assist in interpretation of clinical benefit. We developed workflows to triage incidentally identified germline variants of clinical importance. This was necessary because of increasing uncertainty regarding traditional clinical parameters to guide prioritisation of cases for follow up, given this was not the primary purpose of the tumour profiling. A separate analysis of the therapeutic implications of germline variation showed that this is likely to be an increasingly important factor in coming years. Lastly, clinicians’ experiences with navigating and communicating genomic profiling results was explored, given their key role in translating genomic results into treatment selection. Most oncologists felt responsible for this, but often wanted assistance. Oncologists reported gene and variant interpretation, and access to the recommended therapies as the main barriers to treatment. This PhD contributes to the development of precision oncology through practical approaches to the clinical translation of genomic output. Future endeavours should prioritise the evaluation of impact on patient outcomes, the implications of germline findings, and further innovation in trials design to enable greater access to, and faster progress in the development of new cancer treatments

The experiences and needs of Australian medical oncologists in integrating comprehensive genomic profiling into clinical care: A nation-wide survey

Purpose: Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) is increasingly used to guide cancer therapy. This study aimed to characterise oncologists’ experiences and needs when utilising genomic results. Materials and Methods: An electronic survey distributed nation-wide to practising medical oncologists in Australia explored oncologists’ experiences with consenting, interpreting and communicating CGP results to patients. Results: The survey was completed by 108 of 333 oncologists (32%) and most respondents (n = 97, 90%) had referred patients for CGP. Using a 100-point visual analogue scale score [VAS], where higher values indicate greater confidence, most oncologists were confident consenting patients for referral [median 75 (Interquartile range, IQR: 53–85), discussing CGP results (median VAS: 70, IQR: 51–80), but significantly less confident discussing secondary germline findings (median VAS: 56, IQR 30–70, p \u3c 0.001). Confidence with pursuing therapies based on CGP results increased with clinical experience (mean VAS increases by 4.8 per 5 years of experience, p \u3c 0.001). Most oncologists (N = 68, 63%) reported wanting assistance with interpretation of CGP and patient-centric resources to aid communication with patients. Conclusions: Oncologists are integrating genomics into clinical care, but only display moderate confidence in communication and changing management accordingly. The development of patient- and clinician- targeted resources may assist with routine utilisation of CGP results in cancer care

Topological barrier to Cas12a activation by circular DNA nanostructures facilitates autocatalysis and transforms DNA/RNA sensing

Abstract Control of CRISPR/Cas12a trans-cleavage is crucial for biosensor development. Here, we show that small circular DNA nanostructures which partially match guide RNA sequences only minimally activate Cas12a ribonucleoproteins. However, linearizing these structures restores activation. Building on this finding, an Autocatalytic Cas12a Circular DNA Amplification Reaction (AutoCAR) system is established which allows a single nucleic acid target to activate multiple ribonucleoproteins, and greatly increases the achievable reporter cleavage rates per target. A rate-equation-based model explains the observed near-exponential rate trends. Autocatalysis is also sustained with DNA nanostructures modified with fluorophore-quencher pairs achieving 1 aM level (<1 copy/μL) DNA detection (106 times improvement), without additional amplification, within 15 min, at room temperature. The detection range is tuneable, spanning 3 to 11 orders of magnitude. We demonstrate 1 aM level detection of SNP mutations in circulating tumor DNA from blood plasma, genomic DNA (H. Pylori) and RNA (SARS-CoV-2) without reverse transcription as well as colorimetric lateral flow tests of cancer mutations with ~100 aM sensitivity

Update on optimal treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer from the ACTG/AGITG expert meeting: ECCO 2015

The treatment of metastatic CRC (mCRC) has evolved over the last 20 years, from fluoropyrimidines alone to combination chemotherapy and new biologic agents. Median overall survival is now over 24 months for RAS mutated (MT) patients and over 30 months for RAS wild-type (WT) patients. However, there are subgroups of patients with BRAF V600E MT CRC who have a significantly poorer outlook. Newer treatment options are also being explored in select subgroups of patients (anti-HER 2 in HER2 positive mCRC and immunotherapy in patients with defective mismatch repair (dMMR)). The best use of these systemic treatment options, as well as surgery in well-selected patients requires careful consideration of predictive biomarkers and importantly, the optimal sequence in which therapies should be given to derive maximal benefit. A group of colorectal subspecialty medical oncologists from Australia, USA, The Netherlands and Germany met during ECCO 2015 in Vienna to review current practic

Diversity and frequencies of HLA class I and class II genes of an East African population

Human Leukocyte Antigens (HLAs) play an important role in host immune responses to infectious pathogens, and influence organ transplantation, cancer and autoimmune diseases. In this study we conducted a high resolution, sequence-based genotyping of HLA class I and class II genes of more than 2000 women from Kenya, eastern Tanzania and southern Uganda around Lake Victoria and analyzed their allele, phenotype and haplotype frequencies. A considerable genetic diversity was observed at both class I and II loci. A total of 79 HLA-A, 113 HLA-B, 53 HLA-C, 25 HLA-DPA1, 60 HLA-DPB1, 15 HLA-DQA1, 44 HLA-DQB1 and 38 HLA-DRB1 alleles have been identified. The most common class I alleles were A * 02:01:01 (10.90%), B * 58:02 (8.79%), and C * 06:02:01 (16.98%). The most common class II alleles were DPA1*01:03:01 (40.60%), DPB1 * 01:01:01 (23.45%), DQA1 * 01:02:01 (31.03%), DQB1 * 03:01:01 (21.79%), DRB1 * 11:01:02 (11.65%), DRB3 * 02:02:01 (31.65%), DRB4 * 01:01:01 (10.50%), and DRB5 * 01:01:01 (10.50%). Higher than expected homozygosity was observed at HLA-B (P = 0.022), DQA1 (P = 0.004), DQB1 (P = 0.023), and DRB1 (P = 0.0006) loci. The allele frequency distribution of this population is very similar to the ones observed in other sub-Saharan populations with the exception of lower frequencies of A * 23 (5.55% versus 11.21%) and DQA1 * 03 (4.79% versus 11.72%), and higher frequencies of DPB1 * 30 (2.26% versus 0.37%) and DRB1 * 11 (21.51% versus 15.89%). The knowledge of the diversity and allele/ phenotype frequencies of the HLA alleles of this east African population, can contribute to the understanding of how host genetic factors influence disease susceptibility and effective anti-retroviral treatment of HIV infections and future vaccine trials.26 page(s

Cetuximab Alone or With Irinotecan for Resistant KRAS-, NRAS-, BRAF- and PIK3CA-wild-type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The AGITG Randomized Phase II ICECREAM Study

BACKGROUND: The Irinotecan Cetuximab Evaluation and Cetuximab Response Evaluation (ICECREAM) study assessed the efficacy of cetuximab monotherapy compared with cetuximab combined with chemotherapy for quadruple wild-type (KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, or P13KCA exon 20) metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were enrolled in an open-label, multicenter, phase II trial and randomly assigned to cetuximab 400 mg/m2, then 250 mg/m2 cetuximab weekly, with or without irinotecan 180 mg/m2 every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival; secondary endpoints were response rate, overall survival, toxicity, and quality of life. RESULTS: From 2012 to 2016, 48 patients were recruited. Two were ineligible, and 2 were not evaluable for response. Characteristics were balanced, except gender (male, 62% vs. 72%) and primary sidedness (left, 95% vs. 68%). For cetuximab compared with cetuximab-irinotecan, progression-free survival was 14% versus 41% (hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.78; P = .008); response rate was 10% (2 partial responses) versus 38% (1 complete, 8 partial); P = .04. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities were less with cetuximab monotherapy (23% vs. 50%); global and specific quality of life scores did not differ. CONCLUSION: In comparison with cetuximab alone, cetuximab plus irinotecan increases the response rate and delays progression in irinotecan-resistant RAS wild-type colorectal cancer. This echoes data from molecularly unselected patients.status: publishe

Cetuximab Alone or With Irinotecan for Resistant KRAS-, NRAS-, BRAF- and PIK3CA-wild-type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The AGITG Randomized Phase II ICECREAM Study

This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BYNC- ND 4.0 license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This author accepted manuscript is made available following 12 month embargo from date of publication (June 2018) in accordance with the publisher’s archiving policyBackground The Irinotecan Cetuximab Evaluation and Cetuximab Response Evaluation (ICECREAM) study assessed the efficacy of cetuximab monotherapy compared with cetuximab combined with chemotherapy for quadruple wild-type (KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, or P13KCA exon 20) metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients and Methods Patients were enrolled in an open-label, multicenter, phase II trial and randomly assigned to cetuximab 400 mg/m2, then 250 mg/m2 cetuximab weekly, with or without irinotecan 180 mg/m2 every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival; secondary endpoints were response rate, overall survival, toxicity, and quality of life. Results From 2012 to 2016, 48 patients were recruited. Two were ineligible, and 2 were not evaluable for response. Characteristics were balanced, except gender (male, 62% vs. 72%) and primary sidedness (left, 95% vs. 68%). For cetuximab compared with cetuximab-irinotecan, progression-free survival was 14% versus 41% (hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.78; P = .008); response rate was 10% (2 partial responses) versus 38% (1 complete, 8 partial); P = .04. Grade 3 to 4 toxicities were less with cetuximab monotherapy (23% vs. 50%); global and specific quality of life scores did not differ. Conclusion In comparison with cetuximab alone, cetuximab plus irinotecan increases the response rate and delays progression in irinotecan-resistant RAS wild-type colorectal cancer. This echoes data from molecularly unselected patients.This trial was sponsored by the Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group (AGITG) and coordinated by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney. This work was supported by an unrestricted medical grant from Merck Serono Australia, an affiliate of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany, to the Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group (AGITG)