Combination Arm Research Articles

Improving follow-up survey completion rates through pilot interventions in the All of Us Research Program: Results from a non-randomized intervention study.

Retention to complete follow-up surveys in extensive longitudinal epidemiological cohort studies is vital yet challenging. All of Us developed pilot interventions to improve response rates for follow-up surveys. The pilot interventions occurred from April 27, 2020, to August 3, 2020. The three arms were: (1) telephone appointment [staff members calling participants offering appointments to complete surveys over phone] (2) postal [mail reminder to complete surveys through U.S. Postal Service], and (3) combination of telephone appointment and postal. Controls received digital-only reminders [program-level digital recontact via email or through the participant portal]. Study sites chose their study arm and participants were not randomized. A total of 50 sites piloted interventions with 17,593 participants, while 47,832 participants comprised controls during the same period. Of all participants, 6,828 (10.4%) completed any follow-up surveys (1448: telephone; 522: postal; 486: combination; 4372: controls). Follow-up survey completions were 24% higher in the telephone appointment arm than in controls in bivariate analyses. When controlling for confounders, telephone appointment and combination arms increased rates of completion similarly compared to controls, while the postal arm had no significant effect (odds ratio [95% Confidence Interval], telephone appointment:2.01[1.81-2.23]; combination:1.91[1.66-2.20]; postal:0.92[0.79-1.07]). Although the effects of the telephone appointment and combination arms were similar, differential effects were observed across sub-populations. Telephone appointments appeared to be the most successful intervention in our study. Lessons learned about retention interventions, and improvement in follow-up survey completion rates provide generalizable knowledge for similar cohort studies and demonstrate the potential value of precision reminders and engagement with sub-populations of a cohort.

Combination of carvedilol with variceal band ligation in prevention of first variceal bleed in Child-Turcotte-Pugh B and C cirrhosis with high-risk oesophageal varices: the ‘CAVARLY TRIAL’

ObjectivesBeta-blockers and endoscopic variceal band ligation (VBL) have been preferred therapies for primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding. However, the choice of therapy in patients with advanced liver disease with high-risk...

Beyond bedwetting: How successful treatment is observed in sleep macrostructure

IntroductionSleep enuresis (SE), commonly known as bedwetting, refers to involuntary urination during sleep. It is a prevalent condition affecting approximately 15 % of children at age 5, 10 % by age 7, and 5 % by age 10. This condition can significantly impact both children and their families. The pathophysiology of SE is complex and not yet fully understood. There are several established treatment methods, but limited information on their sleep dynamics. ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate differences in sleep structure before and after treatment in patients with monosymptomatic SE (MSE), focusing on alarm therapy, desmopressin, and a combination of both. The analysis compared pre- and post-treatment differences within each treatment arm. The analysis was conducted for both successful and unsuccessful treatment outcomes. Methods/resultsThis was a prospective study with MSE patients, aged 6–16 years, diagnosed by multidisciplinary assessment. Of the 140 initial applicants 75 were initially included in the study and randomized for therapeutic intervention in three treatment arms, namely: alarm, desmopressin and alarm + desmopressin. Therapeutic response was evaluated 12 months after treatment discontinuation. Polysomnographic evaluation pre and post treatment was carried out. 51/75 completed the entire protocol. 42/51 were successfully treated and had a median age of 10 [8–12] and the non-success, 8 [7–10]. Among the successful patients, the percentage of N2 sleep decreased from a median of 55.7 %–48.5 % (p = 0.0004) in the alarm arm, from 58.8 % to 50 % (p = 0.002) in the desmopressin arm, and from 54.7 % to 50.9 % (p = 0.044) in the combined arm. The percentage of N3 sleep increased from 25.7 % to 30.1 % (p = 0.004) in the alarm arm, from 21.6 % to 26 % (p = 0.032) in the desmopressin arm, and from 23.7 % to 28.3 % (p = 0.014) in the combined arm. The arousal index significantly increased from pre-to post-treatment in all arms: in the alarm arm, from 1.25 to 2.8 (p = 0.002); in the desmopressin arm, from 1.3 to 2.7 (p = 0.019); and in the combined treatment arm, from 1 to 4 (p = 0.003). No significant differences were observed in the non-successful arm or among those who experienced complete resolution of the enuresis without treatment. ConclusionThe observed increase in N3 sleep and arousal and decrease in N2 sleep following successful treatment, regardless of the specific interventions, underscores the role of sleep in the pathophysiology of enuresis. Conversely, the lack of sleep differences in the non-successful arm further highlights the importance of sleep, beyond developmental factors, in influencing the clinical outcomes of enuresis, especially since all children were assessed 12 months after the start of treatment.

Health-related quality of life in patients with progressive glioblastoma treated with combined bevacizumab and lomustine versus lomustine only: Secondary outcome of the randomized phase III EORTC 26101 study

Abstract Background Progression-free survival, but not overall survival, was prolonged with bevacizumab and lomustine compared to lomustine only in the randomized phase 3 European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 26101 study. Objective To evaluate the impact of treatment on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in progressive glioblastoma patients participating in the EORTC 26101 study. Methods Patients with progressive glioblastoma, after standard radio-chemotherapy, were 2:1 randomized to either BEV/LOM or LOM. HRQoL was a secondary trial outcome and assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BN20 questionnaires at baseline, and subsequently every 12 weeks. Predefined scales for analysis were global health status (GH), physical functioning, social functioning (SF), motor dysfunction, and communication deficit. The primary endpoint was HRQoL during the last assessment up to week 36. Moreover, time to HRQoL deterioration (TTD) and HRQoL deterioration-free survival (DFS) were calculated. Results Out of 437 patients, 402 (92%) patients had a baseline HRQoL assessment, which dropped to 66% at week 36. During the last assessment up to week 36, no differences were observed for predefined scales, apart from SF being clinically relevant lower in the combination arm (mean 66.0 versus 81.0, p = .001). Of note, the baseline SF score was 66.4 for patients in the combination arm, showing stable SF. Median DFS was significantly longer in the combination arm (12.4 weeks) compared to lomustine alone (6.7 weeks), reflecting the difference in time to progression between arms. TTD, not including progression as an event, was not different between treatment arms (median 13.0 versus 12.9 weeks). Conclusion The addition of bevacizumab to lomustine did not negatively affect HRQoL during the progression-free period.

Experimental demonstration of the combined arm- and cavity-locking system for LISA

Experimental demonstration of the combined arm- and cavity-locking system for LISA

CtDNA dynamics and mechanisms of acquired resistance in patients treated with osimertinib with or without bevacizumab from the randomised phase II ETOP-BOOSTER trial

Abstract Background: ETOP 10-16 BOOSTER study was a randomised phase II trial of osimertinib and bevacizumab versus osimertinib in patients with an acquired EGFR T790M mutation. The mechanisms of acquired resistance to osimertinib and bevacizumab have not been described previously. Methods: Next generation sequencing (Guardant360®) was conducted in serial plasma samples. The association between ctDNA and efficacy outcomes was explored and molecular alterations at progression were described. Results: 136 patients (88% of 155 randomised) had plasma samples at baseline (68 per arm), 110 (71%) at week 9 and 65 (42%) at progression. In a multivariable model for progression-free survival (PFS), the treatment effect was found different by smoking status (interaction p=0.046), with the effect of smoking also different by baseline EGFR T790M (interaction p=0.033), while both TP53 at baseline and tissue EGFR Exon 21 L858R mutation were significantly associated with worse PFS outcome. Smokers (current/former) without baseline EGFR T790M showed a significant improvement in PFS under combination treatment, albeit with small numbers (p=0.015). Week-9 EGFR T790M clearance was associated with improved PFS in the osimertinib arm (p=0.0097). Acquired EGFR C797S mutations were detected in 22% and 13% of patients in the combination and osimertinib arm, respectively. Conclusions: The differential effect of treatment by smoking was not explained by TP53 mutation or other molecular alterations examined. Molecular mechanisms of acquired resistance were detected but no novel molecular alterations were identified in the combination arm.

Mediating effects of inequitable gender norms on intimate partner violence and contraceptive use in a cluster randomized control trial in Niger.

Previous research has demonstrated that the Reaching Married Adolescents intervention (RMA) was associated with changes in inequitable gender norms, intimate partner violence (IPV), and modern contraceptive use. This study seeks to understand if changes in inequitable gender norms mediate the RMA intervention's effects on contraceptive use and intimate partner violence (IPV). A four-arm cluster randomized control trial was conducted to evaluate effects of the RMA intervention (household visits, small groups, combination, control) on married adolescent girls and their husbands in Dosso, Niger (baseline: 1042 dyads; 24m follow-up: 737 dyads; 2016-2019). Mediation was assessed using inverse odds ratio weighting. In the small group intervention, of the total effect on IPV prevalence (8% reduction), indirect effects via inequitable gender norms is associated with a 2% decrease (95% CI: -0.07, 0.12) and direct effects with a 6% decrease (95% CI: -0.20, -0.02). For household visits, of the total effect on contraceptive use (20% increase), the indirect effect accounts for an 11% decrease (95% CI: -0.18, -0.01) and direct effect, a 32% increase (95% CI: 0.13, 0.44); similar to findings for the combination arm. This experimental evidence informs the value of changing underlying social norms to reduce IPV and increase contraception use.

5 A Phase 1b, Open-Label, Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy Study of HC-7366 in Combination with Belzutifan (WELIREGTM) in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma, NCT06234605

Abstract Background HC-7366 is a novel, orally administered, highly selective and potent activator of general control nonderepressible 2 (GCN2) kinase, a core regulator of metabolic stress through activation of the integrated stress response (ISR). Activation of GCN2 promotes cell survival, whereas prolonged activation induces apoptosis. GCN2 activation also suppresses general protein synthesis and induces cell cycle arrest, thereby preventing cell growth during nutrient scarcity. Additionally, HC-7366 decreases HIF expression and inhibits glycolysis, oxidative phosphorylation, and TCA cycle function. HC-7366 also inhibits HIF expression in immunosuppressive myeloid cells, including macrophages. These effects of HC-7366 on metabolism, HIF signaling, and immune suppression suggest therapeutic benefit in ccRCC with clear rationale for combinations with HIF2a antagonists and immune checkpoint inhibitors. HC-7366 (0.5-1 mg/kg), combined with belzutifan (1 mg/kg), exhibited combination benefit in HIF-2 dependent A-498 and 786-O RCC xenografts, yielding 90% tumor growth inhibition and a three-fold increase in complete responses, respectively. Additionally, HC-7366 drives significant monotherapy antitumor activity in PDX models that demonstrated belzutifan resistance. Mechanism of action studies have identified several pathway engagement and potential efficacy biomarkers (Stokes, et al., 2024). Trial design/schema This multicenter, open-label phase 1b study will identify the Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) and/or the Recommended Phase 2 Dose (RP2D) of HC-7366 in combination with fixed-dose belzutifan, 120 mg po qd, in patients with advanced or metastatic RCC with renal cell histology irrespective of VHL gene mutation. Monotherapy HC-7366 will be evaluated in parallel. The monotherapy arm, HC-7366, 60 mg p.o. qd, includes patients who have relapsed after 1 to 4 prior lines of standard of care that may include belzutifan or another HIF-2α inhibitor. The combination arm includes patients who have received 1 to 3 prior lines of standard of care and are belzutifan or HIF-2α naïve. HC-7366 dose escalation arm evaluates combination fixed dose belzutifan, 120 mg po qd plus HC-7366 at 20, 40, or 60 mg po qd. Enrollment will start with the HC-7366 monotherapy arm. Subsequently, patients will begin to enroll in the combination therapy HC-7366 dose escalation arm, while the monotherapy arm will continue to enroll. Expansion will evaluate the combination of fixed dose belzutifan with two doses of HC-7366 selected from escalation. Assessments include safety, PK, and anti-tumor activity. The study will enroll up to 80 patients at US study sites. Significance and vision Combination HC-7366 plus belzutifan, supported by preclinical evidence, is being studied to assess antitumor activity in the RCC relapsed setting. Determining safety and evaluation of dose are foundational to this study. Reference Stokes M, Tameire F, Wojnarowicz P, et al. HC-7366, a potent GCN2 activator, complements belzutifan, a HIF-2⍺ antagonist, by providing combination benefit in belzutifan-sensitive models and monotherapy activity in belzutifan-resistant models. Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego (CA); AACR; 2024. Abstract 4615. This study is in collaboration with Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA

8 Nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs sunitinib for first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma: 8-year follow-up with analyses in favorable risk patients from the phase 3 CheckMate 214 trial

Abstract Background First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) has provided substantial long-term survival benefits over sunitinib (SUN) in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) in CheckMate 214. With a median follow-up of 8 years, the longest follow-up to date for any phase 3 trial of immune checkpoint inhibitor combination therapy in patients with aRCC, we report survival, response per independent radiology review committee (IRRC), and safety in all randomized patients (intent-to-treat [ITT] population) and in patients with International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) favorable risk. Methods Patients with clear cell aRCC were randomized 1:1 to NIVO 3 mg/kg plus IPI 1 mg/kg Q3W×4 doses, followed by NIVO (3 mg/kg or 240 mg Q2W or 480 mg Q4W); or SUN 50 mg once daily for 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off. Key study endpoints included overall survival (OS), IRRC-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) in intermediate/poor-risk (primary), ITT (secondary), and favorable-risk (exploratory) patients. Cancer-specific survival was evaluated in ITT patients by censoring all causes of death other than RCC. Post hoc exploratory analyses in patients with favorable risk were performed. Results With 8 years (99.1 months) median follow-up, OS with NIVO+IPI versus SUN remained superior in ITT patients (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; Table). The HR for PFS with NIVO+IPI versus SUN was 0.88. ORR was higher with NIVO+IPI versus SUN (Table), with more complete responses (12% vs 3%) and a longer median duration of response (DOR) in the combination arm versus SUN. In patients with favorable risk, OS benefits were similar between arms (HR, 0.82; Table). The HR for PFS favored SUN (HR, 1.76). ORR was lower with NIVO+IPI versus SUN, yet more patients achieved complete responses (13% vs 6%, respectively) and median DOR was longer with NIVO+IPI. Median cancer-specific survival (95% CI) in ITT patients was 73.7 (62.8-91.2) months with NIVO+IPI versus 45.1 (37.8-53.3) months with SUN (HR, 0.69; 95% CI 0.59-0.82). In exploratory post hoc analyses of patients with favorable risk, 75/125 (60.0%) patients in the NIVO+IPI arm and 85/124 (68.5%) patients in the SUN arm died over 8 years of follow-up. Of these patients, 31 in the NIVO+IPI arm and 27 in the SUN arm died within 3 years of randomization; the primary reason for death was disease in either arm (71.0% and 85.2%, respectively). Furthermore, among 27 patients in the NIVO+IPI arm with favorable risk who died after disease progression within 3 years, 12 patients did not receive second-line systemic therapy. Beyond 3 years, only 2 of 43 patients who died after disease progression did not receive subsequent systemic therapy. Among all treated patients, incidence of any-grade and grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events remained largely unchanged. No new drug-related deaths occurred in either arm since the previous database lock. Table Conclusions With a median follow-up up of 8 years, NIVO+IPI continues to demonstrate sustained survival and more durable response benefits versus SUN in the ITT population, including a further reduction in the risk of death with NIVO+IPI as measured by cancer-specific survival. Long-term exploratory data in patients with favorable risk have shown a steady improvement in the HR for OS, and a marked improvement in median DOR and complete response rates with NIVO+IPI versus SUN, thus contributing to the survival and response benefits reported in the ITT population. Furthermore, the disproportionate number of patients with favorable risk who died within 3 years of randomization after documented progression without receiving subsequent therapy may have affected the HR for OS in this patient population early on. NIVO+IPI offers the potential for positive long-term outcomes, regardless of IMDC risk, and with no emergence of new safety signals.

Epacadostat plus pembrolizumab versus placebo plus pembrolizumab for advanced urothelial carcinoma: results from the randomized phase III ECHO-303/KEYNOTE-698 study

BackgroundIndoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1) levels correlate with poor outcomes in urothelial carcinoma (UC). IDO1 and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) are often co-expressed. Epacadostat is a potent and highly selective inhibitor of IDO1. In a subgroup analysis of patients with advanced UC participating in a phase I/II study, epacadostat-pembrolizumab treatment produced an objective response rate (ORR) of 35%.MethodsECHO-303/KEYNOTE-698 was a double-blinded, randomized phase III study of adults with metastatic or unresectable locally advanced UC with recurrence or progression following first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Participants were randomized to epacadostat 100 mg twice daily (BID) plus pembrolizumab or placebo plus pembrolizumab until completion of 35 pembrolizumab infusions, disease progression, or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed ORR per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1.ResultsTarget enrollment was 648 patients; enrollment was halted early based on efficacy results from the phase III ECHO-301/KEYNOTE-252 study in metastatic melanoma. Forty-two patients were randomized to each treatment arm. Median duration of follow-up was 62 days in each arm. The investigator-assessed ORR (unconfirmed) was 26.2% (95% CI 16.35–48.11) for epacadostat plus pembrolizumab and 11.9% (95% CI 4.67–29.50) for placebo plus pembrolizumab. Two complete responses were reported, both in the placebo-plus-pembrolizumab arm. Circulating kynurenine levels increased from C1D1 to C2D1 in the placebo-plus-pembrolizumab arm and numerically decreased in the epacadostat-plus-pembrolizumab arm. The safety profile of epacadostat plus pembrolizumab was similar to that of pembrolizumab monotherapy, although a numerically greater proportion of patients in the combination vs. control arm experienced treatment-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events (16.7% vs. 7.3%). One patient in each arm died due to cardiovascular events, which were not deemed drug-related. No new safety concerns were identified for either agent.ConclusionsEpacadostat plus pembrolizumab demonstrated anti-tumor activity and was generally tolerable as second-line treatment of patients with unresectable locally advanced or recurrent/progressive metastatic UC. Epacadostat 100 mg BID, when administered with pembrolizumab, did not normalize circulating kynurenine in most patients. Further study of combined IDO1/PD-L1 inhibition in this patient population, particularly with epacadostat doses that result in durable normalization of circulating kynurenine, may be warranted.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03374488. Registered 12/15/2017.

Baseline biomarkers of efficacy and on-treatment immune-profile changes associated with bempegaldesleukin plus nivolumab

In PIVOT IO 001 (NCT03635983), the combination of the investigational interleukin-2 agonist bempegaldesleukin (BEMPEG) with nivolumab (NIVO) had no added clinical benefit over NIVO monotherapy in unresectable/metastatic melanoma. Pre-defined baseline and on-treatment changes in selected biomarkers were analyzed to explore the potential mechanisms underlying the clinical observations. In each treatment arm, higher baseline tumor mutational burden or immune infiltration/inflammation was associated with improved efficacy compared with lower levels. On-treatment peripheral biomarker changes showed that BEMPEG + NIVO increased all immune cell subset counts interrogated, including regulatory T cells. This was followed by attenuation of the increase in CD8 + T cells, conventional CD4 + T cells, and systemic interferon gamma levels at later treatment cycles in the combination arm. Changes in tumor biomarkers were comparable between arms. These biomarker results help provide a better understanding of the mechanism of action of BEMPEG + NIVO and may help contextualize the clinical observations from PIVOT IO 001.

The effect of vitamin E and docosahexaenoic acid ethyl ester on Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated steatotic Liver Disease (MASLD)-A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial (PUVENAFLD).

We conducted a clinical trial to determine the efficacy of the combination of vitamin E and/or docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) versus placebo in reducing liver fat content after 6 months of intervention in adults with MASLD. Adults with MASLD were randomised to one of four treatment arms (vitamin E 1000 mg/daily + DHA 1.89 g/daily or combination arm, vitamin E 1000 mg alone, DHA 1.89 g alone or placebo) following a 2:1:1:2 randomisation. The primary objective was to determine the efficacy of DHA + vitamin E versus placebo in reducing hepatic fat fraction (%) relative to baseline after 6 months of intervention. Secondary objectives were to determine the effect of vitamin E or DHA alone versus placebo on reducing liver fat at 6 months. Our cohort consisted of 203 subjects with a mean age of 51 years, 53% female, 91% White, 59% Hispanic ethnicity. The combination of vitamin E + DHA had no effect on the primary endpoint of reducing hepatic steatosis as determined by MRI-PDFF (p = 0.98). Neither vitamin E alone (p = 0.91) nor DHA alone (p = 0.14) significantly reduced hepatic steatosis compared to placebo. However, the trial was not powered adequately for this analysis. Compared with placebo, no statistically significant differences were detected in the 3-month or 6-month levels for ALT (U/L) or AST (U/L) in all three intervention groups. The combination of DHA + vitamin E or either agent alone did not demonstrate efficacy on reducing liver fat or aminotransferases in the studied population.

Phase 1 dose escalation study of the MDM2 inhibitor milademetan as monotherapy and in combination with azacitidine in patients with myeloid malignancies.

Mouse double minute-2 homolog (MDM2) plays a key role in downregulating p53 activity in hematologic malignancies, and its overexpression is associated with poor outcomes. This phase 1 study assessed the safety and efficacy of different dosing regimens of the MDM2 inhibitor milademetan as monotherapy and in combination with azacitidine (AZA) in patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia or high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes. Seventy-four patients (monotherapy, n = 57; milademetan-AZA combination, n = 17) were treated. The maximum tolerated dose of milademetan was 160 mg once daily given for the first 14-21 days of 28-day cycles as monotherapy and on Days 5-14 in combination with AZA. Dose-limiting toxicities were gastrointestinal, fatigue, or renal/electrolyte abnormalities. Treatment-emergent adverse events related to milademetan occurred in 82.5% and 64.7% of participants in the monotherapy and AZA combination arms, respectively. Two participants (4.2%) in the monotherapy arm achieved complete remission (CR), and 1 (2.1%) achieved CR with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi). Two participants (13.3%) achieved CRi in the combination arm. New TP53 mutations, detected only during milademetan monotherapy, were found pre-existing below standard detection frequency by droplet digital polymerase chain reaction. Milademetan was relatively well tolerated in this population; however, despite signals of activity, clinical efficacy was minimal.

Clinician- and Patient-Directed Communication Strategies for Patients With Cancer at High Mortality Risk

Serious illness conversations (SICs) that elicit patients' values, goals, and care preferences reduce anxiety and depression and improve quality of life, but occur infrequently for patients with cancer. Behavioral economic implementation strategies (nudges) directed at clinicians and/or patients may increase SIC completion. To test the independent and combined effects of clinician and patient nudges on SIC completion. A 2 × 2 factorial, cluster randomized trial was conducted from September 7, 2021, to March 11, 2022, at oncology clinics across 4 hospitals and 6 community sites within a large academic health system in Pennsylvania and New Jersey among 163 medical and gynecologic oncology clinicians and 4450 patients with cancer at high risk of mortality (≥10% risk of 180-day mortality). Clinician clusters and patients were independently randomized to receive usual care vs nudges, resulting in 4 arms: (1) active control, operating for 2 years prior to trial start, consisting of clinician text message reminders to complete SICs for patients at high mortality risk; (2) clinician nudge only, consisting of active control plus weekly peer comparisons of clinician-level SIC completion rates; (3) patient nudge only, consisting of active control plus a preclinic electronic communication designed to prime patients for SICs; and (4) combined clinician and patient nudges. The primary outcome was a documented SIC in the electronic health record within 6 months of a participant's first clinic visit after randomization. Analysis was performed on an intent-to-treat basis at the patient level. The study accrued 4450 patients (median age, 67 years [IQR, 59-75 years]; 2352 women [52.9%]) seen by 163 clinicians, randomized to active control (n = 1004), clinician nudge (n = 1179), patient nudge (n = 997), or combined nudges (n = 1270). Overall patient-level rates of 6-month SIC completion were 11.2% for the active control arm (112 of 1004), 11.5% for the clinician nudge arm (136 of 1179), 11.5% for the patient nudge arm (115 of 997), and 14.1% for the combined nudge arm (179 of 1270). Compared with active control, the combined nudges were associated with an increase in SIC rates (ratio of hazard ratios [rHR], 1.55 [95% CI, 1.00-2.40]; P = .049), whereas the clinician nudge (HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.64-1.41; P = .79) and patient nudge (HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.73-1.33]; P = .93) were not. In this cluster randomized trial, nudges combining clinician peer comparisons with patient priming questionnaires were associated with a marginal increase in documented SICs compared with an active control. Combining clinician- and patient-directed nudges may help to promote SICs in routine cancer care. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04867850.

Combination Therapy with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors or Alkylating Agents.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) have been widely adopted in a number of early and advanced malignancies. Histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACis) and alkylating agents (AAs) have been suggested to potentiate the actions of CPIs on tumor cells. We conducted a comprehensive literature review to explore the potential synergistic activity between CPIs, AAs, and HDACis. Clinical and non-clinical studies describing outcomes in patients with cancer receiving CPIs and either concomitant or sequential (pre- or post-CPI) AAs or HDACis were identified in PubMed using pre-defined search strings. Manual searches of key oncology congresses were similarly performed. All relevant articles and abstracts were manually screened for relevance, classified according to the specific anticancer agents used (CPIs, AAs, or HDACis), tumor entity, and whether treatment was concomitant or sequential. Overall, 227 unique clinical studies across a range of tumor types, both solid tumors and hematological malignancies, were identified. One hundred and fifty-nine publications on Phase I and II clinical studies together with 41 publications on Phase III studies were examined. The most commonly investigated tumor types were melanoma, triple-negative breast cancer, non-small cell lung cancer, and Hodgkin lymphoma. The randomized clinical studies identified, all of which reported on the combination of a CPI with an AA, demonstrated superior outcomes in the combination arm compared with CPI or AA monotherapy. Similarly, combination therapy with CPIs and HDACis demonstrated promising activity. Sequential or concomitant administration of a CPI with an AA or an HDACi may improve outcomes for patients with a range of tumor types. There is a rationale to support further investigation into the potential for synergy between CPIs, alkylating agents and/or HDACis in both the non-clinical and clinical settings.

Validation of a laboratory craving assessment and evaluation of 4 different interventions on cravings among adults with overweight or obesity

Food cue reactivity (FCR) is an appetitive trait associated with overeating and weight gain. We developed a laboratory craving assessment to objectively evaluate cognitive aspects of FCR. This study examined the preliminary construct and criterion validity of this craving assessment and evaluated 4 different interventions, 2 of which incorporated cue-exposure treatment for food, on craving over treatment and follow-up. 271 treatment-seeking adults with overweight/obesity (body mass index = 34.6[5.2]; age = 46.5[11.8]; 81.2% female; 61.6% non-Latinx White) completed the Food Cue Responsivity Scale and the laboratory craving assessment, during which they alternated holding and smelling a highly craved food and provided craving ratings over 5 min. Participants were subsequently randomized to 26 treatment sessions over 12-months of ROC, Behavioral Weight Loss (BWL), a combined arm (ROC+) and an active comparator (AC), and repeated the craving assessment at post-treatment and 12-month follow-up. Linear mixed-effects models assessed associations between trial type (holding vs. smelling), trial number, pre-treatment FCR, treatment arm, assessment time point, and craving. Cravings were greater when smelling vs. holding food (b = 0.31, p < 0.001), and cravings decreased over time (b = −0.02, p < 0.001). Participants with higher pre-treatment FCR reported elevated cravings (b = 0.29, p < 0.001). Longitudinally, we observed a significant 3-way interaction in which treatment arm modified the relationship between pre-treatment FCR and craving over time (F(17,5122) = 6.88, p < 0.001). An attenuated FCR-craving relationship was observed in ROC+ and BWL from baseline to post-treatment but was only sustained in BWL at follow-up. This attenuation was also observed in ROC and AC from post-treatment to follow-up. The preliminary validity of this laboratory craving assessment was supported; however, greater craving reductions over time in ROC/ROC+ compared to BWL and AC were not consistently observed, and thus do not appear to fully account for the moderating effect of FCR on weight losses observed in the trial.

Alliance A222001: A randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled phase II study of oxybutynin versus placebo for the treatment of hot flashes in men receiving androgen deprivation therapy.

LBA12004 Background: Hot flashes are among the most common adverse events impacting quality of life reported by patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for the treatment of prostate cancer. Oxybutynin is an effective therapy for reducing frequency and severity of hot flashes in women. Pilot information supports that this drug may also benefit men with hot flashes related to ADT. Methods: Patients with prostate cancer receiving a stable regimen of ADT with at least 28 hot flashes per week were randomized to receive either oral oxybutynin 2.5 mg twice a day, oxybutynin 5 mg twice a day, or matching placebo doses for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in patient-reported hot flash scores (determined by multiplying the number of hot flashes by the mean hot flash severity [grade 0: none, 1: mild, 2: moderate, 3: severe, and 4: very severe]) from baseline to 6 weeks, as measured by a daily hot flash diary. A total of 87 patients provided 76% power to reject the null hypothesis of no between-arm mean difference in hot flash score reduction from baseline to 6 weeks, when comparing each oxybutynin arm to the combined placebo arms. This was based on a two-sided contrast estimated from a generalized linear mixed model, α= 0.10, intraclass correlation of 0.50, population standardized mean difference of 0.50, and 10% missing data rate. Results: 88 patients were accrued between 10/28/21 and 12/02/23. Six patients cancelled before starting treatment and one was ineligible, leaving 81 analyzed patients with a median age of 68. Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms with patients reporting an average of 10.15 (SD = 5.55) hot flashes per day and an average daily hot flash score of 18.23 (SD = 13.48) at enrollment. On average, patients on the placebo arm, low dose oxybutynin arm, and high dose oxybutynin arm had reductions of 2.15, 4.77, and 6.89 hot flashes/day, respectively. Compared to placebo arm patients, high dose oxybutynin arm patients had a greater reduction in hot flashes/day (p &lt; 0.001), as did low dose oxybutynin arm patients (p = 0.02). Daily hot flash scores for the same three protocol arms reduced by an average of 4.85, 9.94, and 13.95 points, respectively. Compared to placebo arm patients, high dose oxybutynin arm patients had a greater reduction in daily hot flash scores (p = 0.002), as did low dose oxybutynin arm patients (p = 0.07). No treatment-related grade 3+ adverse events occurred. The most commonly reported oxybutynin-related grade 2 adverse event was dry mouth. Conclusions: Oxybutynin is superior to a placebo for the management of hot flashes in men associated with androgen deprivation therapy and appears to be well tolerated. Support: UG1CA189823; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Clinical trial information: NCT04600336 .

Phase I dose escalation trial of the first-in-class TNFR2 agonist monoclonal antibody, HFB200301, in monotherapy and in combination with tislelizumab, an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, in adult patients with advanced solid tumors.

2526 Background: Tumor necrosis factor receptor-2 (TNFR2) is expressed on effector CD8+, CD4+, and regulatory T (Treg) cells, natural killer (NK) cells, and myeloid cells. Activation of TNFR2 is anticipated to yield effective anti-tumor immunity by stimulating T-cell and NK-cell activation and proliferation in the tumor microenvironment. HFB200301 is a first-in-class anti-TNFR2 agonistic monoclonal antibody that triggers both innate and adaptive immune stimulation by binding to a specific epitope on TNFR2. We report initial results of an ongoing Phase I dose escalation, multicenter study (NCT05238883) of HFB200301 in monotherapy and in combination with tislelizumab (TIS) in patients (pts) with advanced refractory solid tumors. Methods: A Phase I trial designed to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and initial efficacy of HFB200301 in monotherapy and in combination with TIS. Eligible pts, ≥18 years with an ECOG PS 0-1 and advanced solid tumors, will be enrolled in dose escalation at 5 different dose cohorts in monotherapy (Q4W), 3 different dose cohorts in combination with TIS (Q4W), or in dose expansion following determination of safety. Radiographic response is assessed every 8 weeks. Results: A total of 39 pts have been enrolled, 27 pts in monotherapy and 12 pts in combination. All pts received prior systemic therapy (median 2, range 1-4); 23 pts (59%) had prior checkpoint inhibitor treatment. No dose limiting toxicities were observed in either the monotherapy or combination arms. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 44% of monotherapy and in 50% of combination pts, with pruritis (11%), tremor (7%), fatigue (7%), asthenia (7%) and nausea (7%) being the most common TRAEs. No ≥ Grade 3 TRAEs were reported, and there were no drug discontinuations due to TRAEs. Preliminary HFB200301 PK analysis demonstrated non-linear clearance of HFB200301, with dose-proportional maximum concentration [Cmax], achieving sufficient exposures for peripheral target engagement in all tested doses. Emerging PD data demonstrates evidence of immune activation and expansion of CD8+ T cells, but not Tregs, in the tumor microenvironment and peripheral blood. Single cell RNAseq analysis of peripheral blood mononuclear cells demonstrated PD modulation in TNFR2 positive immune cell types post-HFB200301 treatment. Early response evaluation reveals ongoing durable clinical responses (&gt; 6 months) in a PD-L1+ pleural mesothelioma pt and an EBV+ gastric cancer pt from combination cohorts. Conclusions: HFB200301 demonstrates a favorable safety profile, dose-dependent PK, with PD and preliminary clinical activity in monotherapy and in combination with TIS in pts with heavily pre-treated refractory solid tumors. Clinical trial information: NCT05238883 .

Dose-expansion part of a phase 1b global study of E7386 in combination with lenvatinib (LEN) in patients (pts) with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and other solid tumors including endometrial cancer (EC).

TPS3169 Background: E7386, a first-in-class anticancer agent, inhibits protein-protein interaction between β-catenin and the CREB-binding protein, thus modulating Wnt/β-catenin signaling. E7386 is being tested in combination with LEN in the open-label global phase 1b Study 102. The dose-escalation part of Study 102 determined the recommended dose of E7386 + LEN in pts with HCC and other solid tumors. Here we describe the ongoing dose-expansion part in pts with HCC or EC. Methods: Eligible pts ≥18 years old should have an ECOG PS of 0-1 and a confirmed diagnosis of advanced, unresectable, or recurrent solid tumor. Pts with HCC will have a Child-Pugh score of A and a categorization of BCLC Stage B (not amenable to locoregional therapy or refractory to locoregional therapy, and not amenable to a curative treatment) or Stage C. Pts with HCC should also have received 1 prior immuno-oncology (IO)-based regimen and have progressed on/after prior treatment with IO therapy. If ineligible for IO therapy, pts should not have received prior systemic therapy; pts who previously received LEN are ineligible. In the EC subpart, pts should have disease progression after receiving prior platinum-based chemotherapy (PBT) and an IO-based therapy for EC. Pts may have received 1 additional line of PBT if given in the neoadjuvant/adjuvant setting, but not exceeding 3 lines of therapies. Pts with EC who are ineligible for IO therapy may have received only 1 prior systemic therapy including PBT. Pts who have received prior LEN therapy will be eligible if they meet protocol-specified criteria. Pts with HCC (n≈60) will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio into 1 of 2 treatment arms and will receive either the combination E7386 + LEN or LEN monotherapy in 28-day cycles. E7386 will be administered at 100 mg BID in the combination arm and LEN will be administered QD at 8 mg (if body weight &lt;60 kg) or 12 mg (if body weight ≥60 kg) in both arms. Pts with HCC will be stratified by geographical region (Western Europe and North America vs Japan vs other countries). Pts with EC (n≈30) will receive only the combination E7386 120 mg BID + LEN 14 mg QD. The expansion part of Study 102 aims to assess safety and tolerability (primary endpoints), and pharmacokinetics and preliminary efficacy (secondary endpoints), of E7386 in combination with LEN for pts with HCC and EC. Efficacy of LEN monotherapy will be assessed for HCC (secondary endpoint). Tumors will be assessed by investigator per RECIST v1.1 every 8 weeks from the date of the first dose. Adverse events will be monitored and recorded for up to 30 days after the last dose or until initiation of a new anticancer therapy, whichever occurs first. Study sites will include the United States, France, Republic of Korea, Japan, and Taiwan. As of February 5, 2024, 46 pts with HCC and 16 pts with EC have enrolled. Clinical trial information: NCT04008797 .

A phase I trial of intratumoral STX-001: A novel self-replicating mRNA expressing IL-12 alone or with pembrolizumab in advanced solid tumors.

TPS2696 Background: STX-001 is a multi-mechanistic lipid nanoparticle encapsulated synthetic self-replicating mRNA, engineered to express the IL-12 cytokine for an extended duration when administered intratumorally. A murine surrogate of STX-001 induces deep durable responses in multiple preclinical solid tumor models. This Phase 1 open-label, multi-center first-in-human dose-escalation trial evaluates the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and preliminary antitumor activity of STX-001 alone, or in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with treatment refractory advanced cancers. Methods: Approximately 30 adults ≥18 years of age with histologically confirmed advanced solid tumors that are refractory to standard treatments will be enrolled. The study will consist of two arms, an STX-001 monotherapy arm and an STX-001 + pembrolizumab combination arm, enrolling approximately 15 patients each. Key eligibility criteria include ECOG status 0 or 1, a tumor lesion amendable to injection, and confirmed prior disease progression. STX-001 will be administered every 3 weeks (q3w) for 3 doses and then every 6 weeks (q6w) for a further 3 doses. Tumor biopsies will be obtained at baseline and after the first STX-001 administration. Primary endpoints will include safety and maximum tolerated dose (MTD), with secondary endpoints encompassing pharmacokinetics and preliminary efficacy as measured by RECIST 1.1. To determine the MTD, this study will employ the Bayesian optimal interval (BOIN) design, with the 3 + 3 design run-in and a recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) will be determined. Tumor response will be assessed using RECIST 1.1 criteria. Exploratory pharmacodynamic analyses will assess tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and STX-001 mRNA in baseline and on-treatment biopsies, evaluate inflammatory cytokine profiles in plasma, determine immune activation in circulating immune cells, and measure circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) for molecular response assessment. Clinical trial information: NCT06249048 .