Prior Lines Of Therapy Research Articles

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Erdafitinib vs Enfortumab Vedotin in Patients with Locally Advanced Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

Background: For patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC), prognosis is poor and effective treatment options are limited. Erdafitinib is an oral fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) kinase inhibitor approved by the FDA for the treatment of adults with la/mUC harboring FGFR alterations whose disease progressed following at least 1 prior line of therapy, including a PD-1 or PD-L(1) inhibitor, based on the phase 3, randomized THOR trial (NCT03390504, Cohort 1). Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of erdafitinib vs enfortumab vedotin-ejfv (EV) in the absence of head-to-head comparison via an anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC). Methods: An anchored MAIC was conducted according to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance, with physician's choice of chemotherapy (docetaxel/paclitaxel and vinflunine) as the common comparator. Individual patient data from THOR were adjusted to match published key eligibility criteria and average baseline characteristics of EV-301, such as Bellmunt risk score, liver or visceral metastases, primary site, among others. Erdafitinib was then indirectly compared with EV using the relative treatment effects for the reweighted THOR population and those published for EV-301. Results: After matching, the effective sample size for THOR was 126 patients. The MAIC-recalculated hazard ratio (95% credible interval) for erdafitinib vs EV was 0.92 (0.54, 1.57) for overall survival and 0.93 (0.55, 1.56) for progression-free survival, yielding Bayesian probabilities of erdafitinib being better than EV of 62.1% and 60.5%, respectively. For response outcomes, the MAIC-recalculated risk ratio was 1.49 (0.56, 3.90) for confirmed objective response rate and 2.89 (0.27, 30.33) for confirmed complete response with probabilities of 72.6% and 81.3% for erdafitinib being better than EV, respectively. For safety, MAIC-yielded risk ratios of 1.09 (0.99, 1.21) for any treatment-related adverse events, 0.86 (0.57, 1.28) for grade 3+ TRAEs, and 1.02 (0.98, 1.06) for any treatment-emergent adverse events. Conclusion: The MAIC indicates comparable efficacy of erdafitinib vs EV for overall survival and progression-free survival, with erdafitinib showing a higher probability of achieving deep responses. While erdafitinib is associated with slightly more adverse events compared with EV, these events seem to be less severe.

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Erdafitinib vs Enfortumab Vedotin in Patients with Locally Advanced Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma

Background: For patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC), prognosis is poor and effective treatment options are limited. Erdafitinib is an oral fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) kinase inhibitor approved by the FDA for the treatment of adults with la/mUC harboring FGFR alterations whose disease progressed following at least 1 prior line of therapy, including a PD-1 or PD-L(1) inhibitor, based on the phase 3, randomized THOR trial (NCT03390504, Cohort 1). Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of erdafitinib vs enfortumab vedotin-ejfv (EV) in the absence of head-to-head comparison via an anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC). Methods: An anchored MAIC was conducted according to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance, with physician’s choice of chemotherapy (docetaxel/paclitaxel and vinflunine) as the common comparator. Individual patient data from THOR were adjusted to match published key eligibility criteria and average baseline characteristics of EV-301, such as Bellmunt risk score, liver or visceral metastases, primary site, among others. Erdafitinib was then indirectly compared with EV using the relative treatment effects for the reweighted THOR population and those published for EV-301. Results: After matching, the effective sample size for THOR was 126 patients. The MAIC-recalculated hazard ratio (95% credible interval) for erdafitinib vs EV was 0.92 (0.54, 1.57) for overall survival and 0.93 (0.55, 1.56) for progression-free survival, yielding Bayesian probabilities of erdafitinib being better than EV of 62.1% and 60.5%, respectively. For response outcomes, the MAIC-recalculated risk ratio was 1.49 (0.56, 3.90) for confirmed objective response rate and 2.89 (0.27, 30.33) for confirmed complete response with probabilities of 72.6% and 81.3% for erdafitinib being better than EV, respectively. For safety, MAIC-yielded risk ratios of 1.09 (0.99, 1.21) for any treatment-related adverse events, 0.86 (0.57, 1.28) for grade 3+ TRAEs, and 1.02 (0.98, 1.06) for any treatment-emergent adverse events. Conclusion: The MAIC indicates comparable efficacy of erdafitinib vs EV for overall survival and progression-free survival, with erdafitinib showing a higher probability of achieving deep responses. While erdafitinib is associated with slightly more adverse events compared with EV, these events seem to be less severe.

PembroWM: A phase II trial to investigate the safety and efficacy of rituximab and pembrolizumab in relapsed/refractory Waldenström's Macroglobulinaemia.

The optimal therapeutic approach for relapsed/refractory (R/R) Waldenström's Macroglobulinaemia (WM) has not been clearly defined, especially after treatment with chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) and covalent Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors (cBTKi). The PembroWM trial is a multi-centre, phase II, single-arm study assessing the safety, tolerability and efficacy of rituximab with pembrolizumab in R/R WM patients who had received at least one prior line of treatment, with all having relapsed post-CIT and most also exposed to cBTKi. A total of 17 patients were enrolled, with a median age of 70, and median of three prior lines of therapy with 15 either refractory or intolerant of a cBTKi. A significant proportion was identified as genomically high risk with BTKC481, CXCR4 and MYD88 L265P wild-type aberrations. Twenty-four-week overall response rate was 50% (60% CI 39.3%-60.7%), and median duration of response was 11.6 months (IQR: 6.3-17). The median progression-free survival was 13.6 months (95% CI 3-19.8), and the median overall survival (OS) was not reached. Treatment was well tolerated, with minimal numbers of immune-mediated AEs typically seen with checkpoint inhibitors. PembroWM is the first study to evaluate the feasibility of PD-1 axis modulation in WM and has shown that in combination with Rituximab the combination is safe and deliverable.

Cabozantinib plus ipilimumab/nivolumab in patients with previously treated advanced differentiated thyroid cancer.

This investigator-initiated phase II trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy of cabozantinib in combination with nivolumab and ipilimumab (CaboNivoIpi) in previously treated patients with radioactive iodine (RAI)-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) (NCT03914300). Eligible patients with RAI-refractory DTC who progressed on 1 prior line of VEGFR-targeted therapy received a 2-week run-in of cabozantinib monotherapy followed by CaboNivoIpi for 4 cycles (cycle length = 6 weeks), followed by cabozantinib plus nivolumab (cycle length = 4 weeks) until disease progression. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) within the first 6 months of treatment. A Simon optimal 2-stage design allowed for an interim analysis after accrual of 10 evaluable patients. At least 5 responses were needed to proceed to stage 2. Among 11 patients enrolled, the median age was 69 years. Prior VEGFR-targeted therapies included lenvatinib, pazopanib, and sorafenib plus everolimus. Median follow-up was 7.9 months. Among 10 evaluable patients, ORR within the first 6 months of treatment was 10% (1 partial response). Median progression-free survival was 9 months [95% CI: 3.0, not reached] and median overall survival was 19.2 months [(95% CI: 4.6, not reached]. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were noted in 55% (6/11) and grade 5 AEs in 18% (2/11) of patients. The most common treatment-related AE was hypertension. The study did not reach its prespecified efficacy threshold. CaboNivoIpi had low ORRs and a high rate of grade ≥3 treatment-related AEs. NCT03914300.

CVM-1118: An oral anti-vasculogenic mimicry (VM) agent in combination with nivolumab in patients with unresectable advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)—A phase IIa study.

92 Background: CVM-1118 is a potent anti-tumor new chemical entity with multiple mechanisms of action including induction of apoptosis, cell cycle arrest, and inhibition of VM network formation. This study evaluated the anti-tumor effect and safety profile of CVM-1118 plus nivolumab in patients with progressive unresectable advanced HCC following the first-line therapy with TKIs. Methods: Eligible pts had unresectable advanced HCC and were refractory to prior systemic therapy (e.g., sorafenib, lenvatinib, regorafenib, and/or ramucirumab), with the exception of prior immunotherapy. Patients received oral CVM-1118 at 200 mg BID (400 mg daily) in combination with intravenous nivolumab at 240 mg Q2W in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint of objective response rate was evaluated using mRECIST. The secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR) (per RECIST 1.1), progression free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), and duration of overall response (DoR). Results: A total of 31 evaluable pts were enrolled (25 M/6 F; median age 65 y, range 44–80 y). All patients were Child Pugh A, BCLC stage B (13%, n=4) or C (87%, n=27) at the start of treatment. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 1 (range 1–2). The duration of CVM-1118 and nivolumab treatment ranged from 1.5–17.7 mos (median 3.1 mos) with 5/31 (16%) pts remaining on treatment for ≥ 5.2 mos (range 5.2–17.7 mos). The best ORR was 19.4% (mRECIST) (2 CR (6%), 4 PR (13%)), with remaining responses including 11 SD (36%) and 14 PD (45%). The DCR was 54.8% (95% CI 37.3–72.3%), the median PFS was 3.53 mos (95% CI 1.9–5.4 mos) and the median DoR was 12.1 mos (95% CI 5.2–16.1 mos). The most common treatment-related AEs ³ grade 3 included AST increased (12.9%), neutrophil count decreased (9.7%), anemia (6.5%), and WBC decreased (6.5%). As opposed to therapy with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, gastrointestinal hemorrhage and hypertension were not observed in this study. Pharmacokinetics data demonstrated that CVM-1118 was rapidly metabolized to CVM-1125 in all pts following administration. On Day 1, the mean drug exposure of CVM-1125 was Cmax 564 ng/mL and the AUC0-24 was 2154 ng·hr/mL. Intersubject variability of drug exposure appeared to be high; the T1/2 of CVM-1125 was ~1.7 hr. Conclusions: CVM-1118 combined with nivolumab demonstrated clinical activity in advanced HCC pts with a safety profile that appears favorable compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. These data support further development of the combination of CVM-1118 and nivolumab in pts with unresectable advanced HCC. Clinical trial information: NCT05257590 .

Real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (1-3 prior lines): Flatiron database

AbstractIn the context of multiple myeloma (MM), early use of the immunomodulatory drug lenalidomide has led to an increased population of patients with lenalidomide-refractory MM in early-line settings, but their outcomes are not well characterized. Herein, we report treatment patterns, survival outcomes, prognostic variables, and attrition rates for patients with proteasome inhibitor–exposed, lenalidomide-refractory MM, treated with 1 to 3 prior lines of therapy (LOT). From 12 767 patients with MM in the Flatiron Health database between January 2016 and April 2022, 1455 met the inclusion criteria. The most common subsequent treatments were triplet combinations (41.6% of patients); daratumumab/pomalidomide/dexamethasone was the most common treatment regimen (13.2%). Median real-world progression-free survival (RW-PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 6.5 months and 44.4 months, respectively. RW-PFS was similar in patients with 1, 2, or 3 prior LOT. International Staging System stage III, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1, hemoglobin <12 g/dL, high-risk cytogenetics, and refractoriness to anti-CD38 antibody at baseline were associated with worse RW-PFS and OS. Outcomes remained similar for patients who received National Comprehensive Cancer Network–preferred treatments and those who received treatments after 2020. In 561 patients with 1 prior LOT at inclusion, the cumulative attrition rate from LOT 2 to 5 was 85%, which included 25% patients who died and 60% with no further treatment. Patients with lenalidomide-refractory MM who have received 1 to 3 prior LOT have poor outcomes and progress rapidly through available therapies, highlighting the need for more effective treatments early in the disease course, before patients are lost to attrition.

Asciminib monotherapy as frontline treatment of chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia: results from the ASCEND study

AbstractAsciminib is a myristoyl site BCR::ABL1 inhibitor approved for patients with chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CP-CML) failing ≥2 prior lines of therapy. The Australasian Leukaemia and Lymphoma Group conducted the Asciminib Evaluation in Newly Diagnosed CML study to assess efficacy of asciminib for newly diagnosed CP-CML. Patients commenced asciminib 40 mg twice daily. Patients with treatment failure, defined as BCR::ABL1 of >10% at 3 or 6 months, or >1% at 12 or 18 months, received either imatinib, nilotinib, or dasatinib in addition to asciminib. In patients with suboptimal response, defined as levels of 1% to 10% at 6 months, >0.1% to 1% at 12 months, or >0.01% to 1% at 18 months, the asciminib dose was increased to 80 mg twice daily. With a median follow-up of 21 months (range, 0-36), 82 of 101 patients continue asciminib. Most common reasons for treatment discontinuation were adverse events (6%), loss of response (4%), and withdrawn consent (5%). There were no deaths; 1 patient developed lymphoid blast crisis. The coprimary end points were early molecular response (BCR::ABL1 of ≤10% at 3 months), achieved in 93% (96% confidence interval [CI], 86-97%), and major molecular response by 12 months achieved in 79%; (95% CI, 70-87%), respectively. Cumulative incidence of molecular response 4.5 was 53% by 24 months. One patient had 2 cerebrovascular events; no other arterial occlusive events were reported. Asciminib as frontline CP-CML therapy leads to high rates of molecular response with excellent tolerance and a low rate of discontinuation for toxicity. This trial was registered at https://www.anzctr.org.au/ as #ACTRN12620000851965.

7 A Phase 1 study of fianlimab (anti–LAG-3) in combination with cemiplimab (anti–PD-1) in patients with advanced ccRCC

Abstract Background Concurrent blockade of lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) may enhance efficacy of anti–programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) therapies. We present safety and clinical activity data from a Phase 1 study (NCT03005782) in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) treated with anti–LAG-3 (fianlimab) + anti–PD-1 (cemiplimab). Methods Patients with advanced or metastatic ccRCC who had received no more than two previous regimens of anti-angiogenic therapy who were anti–PD-(ligand[L])1-naïve (cohort 3) or anti–PD-(L)1-experienced with most recent dose within 3 months prior to screening (cohort 4) were eligible. All patients were to receive fianlimab 1600 mg + cemiplimab 350 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 24 months. Tumor measurements were performed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 every 6 weeks for 24 weeks, then every 9 weeks. The study objectives were to assess safety and antitumor activity of fianlimab + cemiplimab combination therapy in patients with ccRCC. Results Overall, 15 patients (median age: 64 years) each in cohorts 3 and 4 (total N=30) were enrolled and treated with fianlimab + cemiplimab as of November 1, 2022 data cutoff. For cohorts 3 and 4, 80% and 87% of patients were male, and 40% and 87% were White, respectively. All patients had prior cancer-related systemic therapy. In total, 60% and 93% of patients in cohorts 3 and 4 had ≥2 lines of prior therapies, respectively. For cohorts 3 and 4, median treatment duration was 27 weeks and 18 weeks, and median follow-up was 13 months and 24 months, respectively. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 53% and 33% of patients in cohorts 3 and 4, respectively. Serious TEAEs occurred in 33% and 13% of patients in cohorts 3 and 4, respectively. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) were reported in 80% of patients in cohort 3 and 60% of patients in cohort 4. The most common TRAEs (any Grade) were rash (27%) and infusion related reaction (Grade 1 and 2; 27%) in cohort 3, and fatigue (20%) in cohort 4. Grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 27% of patients in cohort 3; there were no Grade ≥3 TRAEs in cohort 4. Treatment was discontinued due to any TEAE in three patients in cohort 3 and one patient in cohort 4. There was one death in cohort 3; a 79-year-old woman with a history of antiphospholipid syndrome died from complications of biopsy-proven ischemic colitis, which was attributed to study treatment. RECIST 1.1-based investigator-assessed objective response rate was 20% (3 partial responses [PRs]) in cohort 3 and 7% (1 PR) in cohort 4. The disease control rate was 60% and 73% in cohorts 3 and 4, respectively. Kaplan–Meier estimation of median progression-free survival was 4 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 1–10) in cohort 3 and 4 months (95% CI 1–7) in cohort 4. Durations of response were 4, 7, and 26 months in three responders in cohort 3, and 6 months in one responder in cohort 4. Conclusions Fianlimab + cemiplimab demonstrated promising signs of clinical activity with durable responses among patients who were anti–PD-(L)1-naïve (cohort 3) and anti–PD-(L)1-experienced (cohort 4), with an acceptable safety profile.

19 Phase II Trial of Ubamatamab in MUC16-Expressing SMARCB1-Deficient Renal Medullary Carcinoma and Epithelioid Sarcoma

Abstract Background Mucin 16 (MUC16) is a large integral membrane glycoprotein that is highly expressed in malignancies such as ovarian cancer but only at low abundance in epithelial cells of normal tissues. Proteolytic cleavage of cell surface MUC16 results in the shedding of its extracellular portion, known as cancer antigen 125 (CA-125), into the bloodstream and a short, membrane-associated C-terminal MUC16 domain that remains on the cell surface. Renal medullary carcinoma (RMC) and epithelioid sarcoma (ES) are aggressive SMARCB1-deficient malignancies found to have elevated serum CA-125 levels in 70-80% of cases. Our preclinical studies suggest that upregulation of MUC16 upon SMARCB1 loss is a viable and attractive tumor target for SMARCB1-deficient malignancies such as ES and RMC. Ubamatamab is a human IgG4-based anti-MUC16 x anti-CD3 bispecific antibody that specifically targets the cell surface bound C-terminal MUC16 domain and can thus induce T cell–redirected killing of tumor cells even in the presence of high concentrations of CA-125. It would thus be a rationale therapy to use in SMARCB1-deficient malignancies expressing MUC16, including those such as RMC known to downregulate MHC Class I as a resistance mechanism to conventional immunotherapy. This is because CD3-targeting bispecific antibodies such as ubamatamab replace conventional signal 1 by engaging T cells regardless of MHC class I expression. As proof of concept, a 20-year-old patient with metastatic SMARCB1-negative ES expressing high levels of serum CA-125 achieved a durable (12+ months) partial response to ubamatamab after progressing on multiple prior therapies, including EZH2 inhibition with tazemetostat as well as anti-PD1/CTLA4 immune checkpoint inhibition with nivolumab plus ipilimumab. The patient reported Grade 2 CRS, pleural effusion, and pericardial effusion, all of which resolved without intervention1. This serves as proof-of-concept for the ability of CD3-targeted bispecifics to overcome resistance to immune checkpoint inhibition. Given this strong preclinical and clinical evidence, we have developed a phase II clinical trial of ubamatamab alone or in combination with the anti-PD1 immune-checkpoint inhibitor cemiplimab in patients with MUC16-expressing RMC and ES who have progressed on at least one line of prior therapy. Up to 20 patients will be enrolled from each disease cohort (ES and RMC) for a total of up to 40 patients. Patients enrolled in Stage I of the trial will receive ubamatamab monotherapy. Patients with disease progression on ubamatamab monotherapy during Stage I can proceed to stage II, which will evaluate the combination of ubamatamab with cemiplimab combination. The co-primary endpoints will be objective response rate (ORR) at any time during the trial and disease control rate (DCR) through 18 weeks. Secondary endpoints will include overall survival, progression-free survival, duration of response, and safety. All endpoints will be analyzed and reported separately for each disease cohort (RMC and ES), and for each Stage (ubamatamab monotherapy and combination ubamatamab with cemiplimab). The trial will utilize the time-to-event Bayesian Optimal Phase II (TOP) design, which maximizes statistical power with well-controlled type I errors. For patients with ES, the joint null hypotheses are that the objective response rate (ORR) is 15% and the disease control rate (DCR) is 26%. The regimen will be promising if either ORR is greater than 15% or DCR is greater than 26% with 69.6% power to declare this an interesting regimen if ORR is 30% and the DCR is 43%. For patients with RMC, the joint null hypotheses are that the objective response rate (ORR) is 15% and the disease control rate (DCR) is 15%. The regimen will be promising if either ORR is greater than 15% or DCR is greater than 15% with 71.4% power to declare this an interesting regimen if ORR is 30% and the DCR is 30%. Pre- and post-treatment correlative analyses will be performed in blood and tumor biopsy tissues to identify changes in specific immune cell subsets and elucidate the dynamic evolution of tumor and immune cell compartments as well as their spatial relationships following ubamatamab alone or in combination with cemiplimab. References 1 Revon-Riviere G, Chami R, Mills D, et al. Mucin 16 (cancer antigen 125) Expression in Epithelioid Sarcoma leads to Single-Patient Study with Bispecific T-Cell Engager Ubamatamab (Mucin16xCD3): A Bench-To-Bedside Experience. Connective Tissue Oncology Society, Nov 16–19, 2022, Vancouver, Canada.

42 Belzutifan versus everolimus for previously treated advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma: Subgroup analysis of the phase 3 LITESPARK-005 study

Abstract Background Belzutifan monotherapy is approved for the treatment of adult patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) following a PD-(L)1 inhibitor and a vascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGF-TKI) based on the results of the phase 3 LITESPARK-005 study (NCT04195750). In LITESPARK-005, belzutifan improved progression-free survival (PFS; HR 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.90; P &amp;lt; 0.001) and objective response rate (ORR; 21.9% vs 3.5%; P &amp;lt; 0.00001) versus everolimus at first interim analysis (IA1); overall survival (OS) did not reach statistical significance at IA2 (HR 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73-1.07; P = 0.1). We present efficacy outcomes by prespecified subgroups from IA2. Methods Patients with clear cell RCC whose disease progressed after anti–PD-(L)1 and VEGF-targeted therapies and who had 1-3 prior systemic regimens were randomly assigned 1:1 to belzutifan 120 mg by mouth once daily or everolimus 10 mg by mouth once daily until progression or intolerable toxicity. The dual primary end points of PFS by central review per RECIST v1.1 and OS and the key secondary end point of ORR were evaluated by prespecified baseline characteristic subgroups: IMDC risk (favorable vs intermediate/poor), prior VEGF-TKIs (1 vs 2-3), and number of prior lines of therapy (1 vs 2 vs 3). These analyses were not controlled for multiplicity and no formal statistical testing occurred. The database cutoff date was June 13, 2023. Results Overall, 746 patients were assigned to belzutifan (n = 374) or everolimus (n = 372). Baseline characteristics were balanced between groups. Median follow-up was 25.7 months (range, 16.8-39.1). Across analyzed subgroups, PFS and OS results were consistent with the primary analysis (Table). ORR favored belzutifan over everolimus for all subgroups: IMDC favorable risk (22.8% vs 6.0%), IMDC intermediate/poor risk (22.7% vs 2.8%), 1 prior VEGF-TKI (19.7% vs 3.7%), 2 prior VEGF-TKIs (25.7% vs 3.3%), 1 prior line of therapy (28.3% vs 5.8%), 2 prior lines (19.1% vs 2.4%), and 3 prior lines (24.6% vs 3.9%). Conclusions Consistent with the intention-to-treat population of LITESPARK-005, PFS and ORR favored belzutifan over everolimus across prespecified subgroups. These results support belzutifan as a new treatment option for patients with advanced clear cell RCC after prior anti–PD-(L)1 and VEGF-targeted therapies.

A phase I safety and efficacy clinical trial of plocabulin and gemcitabine in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Plocabulin (Plo) induces depolymerization of tubulin fibers with disorganization and fragmentation of the microtubule network leading to mitosis. Plo combined with gemcitabine (Gem) showed synergistic anti-tumor activity in preclinical studies.This phase I trial evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and efficacy of Plo 10-min infusion plus Gem on Day 1 and 8 every 3-week in patients with advanced solid tumors.Fifty-seven patients were enrolled into 8 dose levels (DLs); 74%: females; 74%: ECOG performance status 1; median age: 62years; median number of prior lines of therapy:3. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) in Cycle 1 were grade (G) 3 intestinal obstruction at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), G3 peripheral sensory neuropathy (PSN), G3 abdominal pain, and G4 thrombocytopenia (1 patient each). The highest DL (DL8: Plo 10.5mg/m2/Gem 1000mg/m2) was the MTD. Accrual into DL7 (Plo 10.0mg/m2/Gem 1000mg/m2) was stopped before it was formally defined as the recommended dose (RD). Most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (56%), nausea (55%), diarrhea (31%); G3/4 hematologic toxicities comprised anemia (35%), neutropenia (27%) and thrombocytopenia (17%). No treatment-related deaths occurred. PK parameters for Gem or dFdU at all DLs were in line with reference values from the literature. Six of 46 evaluable pts were responders (overall response rate:13%). Of note, 2 partial responses (PR) and 2 stable disease (SD) ≥ 4months occurred among 13 pts with ovarian cancer.The combination of Plo and Gem is well tolerated. The MTD was Plo 10.5mg/m2/Gem 1000mg/m2. No PK drug-drug interaction was found. The most encouraging outcome occurred in ovarian cancer patients.

Safety and efficacy of belantamab mafodotin with pembrolizumab in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) has shown promising antimyeloma activity in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) as a single agent. It was hypothesized that its multimodal activity may be enhanced by programmed cell death protein 1 pathway inhibition and activation of T cell-mediated antitumor responses. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of belamaf with pembrolizumab in patients with RRMM. DREAMM-4 (NCT03848845) was an open-label, single-arm, phase 1/2 study divided into dose-escalation (part 1) and dose-expansion (part 2) phases. Patients were ≥18 years old with ≥3 prior lines of therapy including a proteasome inhibitor, an immunomodulatory drug, and an anti-CD38 agent. Patients received belamaf (2.5 or 3.4 mg/kg, part 1; 2.5 mg/kg, part 2) and 200 mg pembrolizumab for ≤35 cycles. Of 41 enrolled patients, 34 (n=6 part 1, n=28 part 2) who received 2.5 mg/kg belamaf plus pembrolizumab were included in this final analysis. Sixteen patients (47%) achieved an overall response. Minimal residual disease negativity was achieved in three of 10 patients who had very good partial response or better. Five of eight patients who had prior anti-B-cell maturation antigen therapy achieved partial response or better, including two who had B-cell maturation antigen-refractory disease. Common grade ≥3 adverse events were keratopathy (38%) and thrombocytopenia (29%). Despite belamaf-related ocular events, quality-of-life measures remained stable over time. No new safety signals were observed. The results of DREAMM-4 demonstrated clinical activity and a favorable safety profile of belamaf plus pembrolizumab in patients with RRMM. This trial is registered at www. gov as NCT03848845.

PARP inhibitor therapy in patients with IDH1 mutated cholangiocarcinoma.

Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) missense mutations occur at a frequency of 10%-15% in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA). IDH1 mutations result in accumulation of (R)-2-hydroxyglutarate, an oncometabolite that leads to DNA hypermethylation and impairment of homologous recombination (HR). Impairment of HR results in a "BRCAness" phenotype which may confer sensitivity to poly(ADP ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition. We conducted a retrospective cohort review to identify patients with advanced, IDH1 mutated iCCA treated with a PARP inhibitor (PARPi) at the University of Michigan between 2018 and 2023. Patients are described with respect to prior lines of therapy, response to platinum-based chemotherapy, and progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from the time of PARPi initiation. Between 2018 and 2023 we identified 40 patients with IDH1 mutated iCCA of which 6 patients were treated with a PARPi as monotherapy or in combination with an ATR inhibitor or anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor. Majority of patients (n = 5) carried an IDH1 R132C mutation per tissue-based next generation sequencing. All patients had previously received at least one line of cisplatin-based systemic therapy for advanced disease prior to treatment with PARPi. PFS and OS from time of PARPi initiation ranged from 1.4 to 18.5 months and 2.8 to 42.4 months, respectively. Best response on PARPi therapy included 2 partial responses. This is the first case series to describe PARPi treatment in IDH1 mutated iCCA. Results underscore the limitation of PARPi monotherapy, potentially support combined PARPi therapies, and highlight a need for effective treatment options for patients with IDH1 mutated iCCA.

Sequential Endoluminal Gemcitabine and Cabazitaxel with Intravenous Pembrolizumab as a Bladder-Preserving Strategy for Docetaxel-Unresponsive Non-Muscle Invasive Urothelial Carcinoma Following Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumor.

Growing evidence suggests that many patients with high-risk non-muscle invasive urothelial carcinoma (NMIUC) can undergo bladder-sparing management with salvage intravesical therapies. However, inherent or developed disease resistance, particularly after multiple lines of prior salvage therapy, implores the continued pursuit of new treatment combinations. Herein, we describe the outcomes of 26 patients (31 treated units; 24 lower tract, 7 upper tract) with high-risk NMIUC treated with sequential intravesical gemcitabine and cabazitaxel with concomitant intravenous pembrolizumab (GCP) at the University of Iowa from August 2020 to February 2023. Median (IQR) follow-up was 30 (IQR: 17-35) months. Treated units had a history of high-risk NMIUC with a median of four prior endoluminal inductions. Overall, 87% of units presented with CIS or positive urine cytology. The 1- and 2-year recurrence-free survival was 77% (CI: 58-88%) and 52% (CI: 30-70%), respectively. The 2-year progression-free and cancer-specific survival was 70% (CI: 44-85%) and 96% (CI: 75-99%), respectively. In total, 22/26 (85%) patients reported any adverse event and 5/26 (19%) reported a grade ≥3 adverse event; however, all patients tolerated a full induction course. These results suggest that GCP is an effective and tolerable treatment option for patients with recurrent high-risk NMIUC.

Real-world clinical outcomes with fostamatinib for the treatment of refractory chronic immune thrombocytopenia: a single-center experience.

Fostamatinib is a spleen tyrosine kinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of chronic immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) unresponsive to a previous treatment. Real-world studies evaluating the utilization and effectiveness of fostamatinib outside the context of a clinical trial are lacking. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of fostamatinib for the treatment of ITP in a real-world cohort. We conducted a single-center, retrospective, observational study to evaluate the effectiveness of fostamatinib for the treatment of ITP. The primary endpoint was durable response as defined by the American Society of Hematology ITP response criteria. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate, time to response, and safety. Subgroup analysis was performed to assess frequency of durable response in key subgroups of patients based on prior therapies. Thirty-one patients treated with fostamatinib for ITP were included in our analysis. Patients had received a median of four prior lines of therapy. Ten patients (32%) achieved a durable response. Most durable responders maintained their response at 24 months ( n = 7; 70%). The median time to response was 9 days. Four patients (13%) discontinued fostamatinib due to an adverse event. Subgroups who had higher rates of durable responses included those who had received two to three prior lines of therapy (40%), splenectomized patients (50%), and those who had not received prior rituximab (55%). Fostamatinib therapy in a real-world population of patients with heavily pretreated ITP led to a durable response in a third of patients, which was maintained for most responders.

Real-world outcomes with novel therapies in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

This study used COTA de-identified data (2010–2021) of patients in the US to explore outcomes of novel therapies in relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in real-world settings. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and clinical outcomes of patients with R/R DLBCL who received novel treatments including chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) therapy and tafasitamab- or polatuzumab-based therapies were evaluated. Overall, 175 patients with R/R DLBCL were analyzed; 73, 69, and 27 received CAR T therapy, polatuzumab-based regimens, and tafasitamab-based regimens, respectively. In patients who had ≥1 prior lines of therapy (i.e. starting second-line or later therapy; 2 L+), CAR T, polatuzumab-based regimens, and tafasitamab-based regimens achieved a median overall survival of 26.5, 7.8, and 6.3 months, respectively. Outcomes were particularly poor for patients with relapse following CAR T, indicating that polatuzumab- and tafasitamab-based regimens in 2 L + R/R DLBCL have suboptimal outcomes in the real world. Additional treatment options are needed.

Adverse event costs of systemic therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer previously treated with fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-based chemotherapy and biologics in the US.

Aim: The objective of this study was to compare adverse event (AE) management costs for fruquintinib, regorafenib, trifluridine/tipiracil (T/T) and trifluridine/tipiracil+bevacizumab (T/T+bev) for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) previously treated with at least two prior lines of therapy from the US commercial and Medicare payer perspectives. Materials & methods: A cost-consequence model was developed to calculate the per-patient and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) AE costs using rates of grade 3/4 AEs with incidence ≥5% in clinical trials, event-specific management costs and duration treatment. Anchored comparisons of AE costs were calculated using a difference-in-differences approach with best supportive care (BSC) as a common reference. AE rates and treatment duration were obtained from clinical trials: FRESCO and FRESCO-2 (fruquintinib), RECOURSE (T/T), CORRECT (regorafenib) and SUNLIGHT (T/T, T/T+bev). AE management costs for the commercial and Medicare perspectives were obtained from publicly available sources. Results: From the commercial perspective, the AE costs (presented as per-patient, PPPM) were: $4015, $1091 for fruquintinib (FRESCO); $4253, $1390 for fruquintinib (FRESCO-2); $17,110, $11,104 for T/T (RECOURSE); $9851, $4691 for T/T (SUNLIGHT); $8199, $4823 for regorafenib; and $11,620, $2324 for T/T+bev. These results were consistent in anchored comparisons: the difference-in-difference for fruquintinib based on FRESCO was -$1929 versus regorafenib and -$11,427 versus T/T; for fruquintinib based on FRESCO-2 was -$2257 versus regorafenib and -$11,756 versus T/T. Across all analyses, results were consistent from the Medicare perspective. Conclusion: Fruquintinib was associated with lower AE management costs compared with regorafenib, T/T and T/T+bev for patients with previously treated mCRC. This evidence has direct implications for treatment, formulary and pathways decision-making in this patient population.

Autologous transplant vs. CAR-T therapy in patients with DLBCL treated while in complete remission

In patients with relapsed DLBCL in complete remission (CR), autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT) and CAR-T therapy are both effective, but it is unknown which modality provides superior outcomes. We compared the efficacy of auto-HCT vs. CAR-T in patients with DLBCL in a CR. A retrospective observational study comparing auto-HCT (2015–2021) vs. CAR-T (2018–2021) using the Center for International Blood & Marrow Transplant Research registry. Median follow-up was 49.7 months for the auto-HCT and 24.7 months for the CAR-T cohort. Patients ages 18 and 75 with a diagnosis of DLBCL were included if they received auto-HCT (n = 281) or commercial CAR-T (n = 79) while in a CR. Patients undergoing auto-HCT with only one prior therapy line and CAR-T patients with a previous history of auto-HCT treatment were excluded. Endpoints included Progression-free survival (PFS), relapse rate, non-relapse mortality (NRM) and overall survival (OS). In univariate analysis, treatment with auto-HCT was associated with a higher rate of 2-year PFS (66.2% vs. 47.8%; p < 0.001), a lower 2-year cumulative incidence of relapse (27.8% vs. 48% ; p < 0.001), and a superior 2-year OS (78.9% vs. 65.6%; p = 0.037). In patients with early (within 12 months) treatment failure, auto-HCT was associated with a superior 2-year PFS (70.9% vs. 48.3% ; p < 0.001), lower 2-year cumulative incidence of relapse (22.8% vs. 45.9% ; p < 0.001) and trend for higher 2-year OS (82.4% vs. 66.1% ; p = 0.076). In the multivariable analysis, treatment with auto-HCT was associated with a superior PFS (hazard ratio 1.83; p = 0.0011) and lower incidence of relapse (hazard ratio 2.18; p < 0.0001) compared to CAR-T. In patients with relapsed LBCL who achieve a CR, treatment with auto-HCT is associated with improved clinical outcomes compared to CAR-T. These data support the consideration of auto-HCT in select patients with LBCL achieving a CR in the relapsed setting.

A single-day polychemotherapy regimen with proteasome inhibitor combinations for relapsed/refractory myeloma in the era of novel therapies.

PCAB (prednisone, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, carmustine) is a single-day regimen previously used for induction and now in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We retrospectively analysed the outcomes of 85 patients from five Australian centres. These included 30 patients (35.3%) who received PCAB with one additional agent (bortezomib most frequently). Median age of the patients was 65 years (37-80), with a median of four (1-8) prior lines of therapy. ORR was 37% (CR 4.9%). Median progression free survival and overall survival were 4.4 months (95% CI 3.5-6.7) and 7.4 months (95% CI 6.4-10.2), respectively. Extramedullary disease (EMD) was associated with shorter survival. Grade 3 or 4 cytopenia and febrile neutropenia occurred in 76.2% and 39.1%, respectively, with six (7.1%) treatment-related mortalities. Median inpatient stay was 3.3 days/28-day cycle (IQR 0.6-13), and for patients who died, a median of 20.2% of days alive were spent inpatient (IQR 6.4-39.1%). Three patients were successfully bridged to CAR T-cell therapy using PCAB, despite being penta-exposed and having EMD. PCAB may be considered as a useful salvage therapy amongst other polychemotherapy regimens in late relapse. Further studies is warranted to investigate and define its role as a bridging therapy to novel therapeutics.

Subcutaneous daratumumab in Chinese patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: an open-label, multicenter, phase 1 study (MMY1010).

Despite recent progress in multiple myeloma (MM) treatments, most patients will relapse and require additional treatment. Intravenous daratumumab, a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody targeting CD38, has shown good efficacy in the treatment of MM. A subcutaneous version of daratumumab was formulated to reduce the burden of intravenous infusions. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous daratumumab in Chinese patients with relapsed/refractory MM based on the demonstrated noninferiority of subcutaneous daratumumab to intravenous daratumumab, with a shorter administration time and reduced infusion-related reaction rate in global studies. This phase 1, multicenter study (MMY1010; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04121260) evaluated subcutaneous daratumumab in Chinese patients with relapsed/refractory MM after 1 prior line (n = 1) or ≥2 prior lines (n = 20) of therapy, including a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory drug. Primary endpoints were pharmacokinetics and safety. Mean (standard deviation) maximum trough concentration of daratumumab was 826 (335) μg/mL, which was consistent with prior studies of subcutaneous daratumumab and intravenous daratumumab. Safety was consistent with safety profiles observed in other daratumumab studies, with no new safety concerns identified. Incidences of infusion-related reactions and injection-site reactions were low and consistent with other subcutaneous daratumumab studies. At a median follow-up of 7.5 months, the overall response rate was 57.1%, with a very good partial response or better rate of 38.1% and complete response or better rate of 19.0%. Our results demonstrate a favorable benefit/risk profile of subcutaneous daratumumab in Chinese patients with relapsed/refractory MM, potentially impacting clinical administration of daratumumab in this population.