A Phase II Clinical Trial on the Combination Therapy of PHY906 Plus Capecitabine in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Lessons Learned

• A PHY906 and capecitabine combination could be effective as a salvage therapy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) previously treated with multiple systemic therapies.
• This traditional Chinese medicine formulation can work with Western cancer chemotherapeutic agents to improve clinical outcomes or alleviate side effects for patients with advanced HCC.

BackgroundThis study aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of capecitabine combined with a PHY906 (a pharmaceutical‐grade formulation of four traditional Chinese herbs) in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in Asian patients who were positive for hepatitis B virus (HBV).MethodsThis study was an open‐label, phase II safety and efficacy clinical trial of PHY906 and capecitabine in patients with advanced HCC. Patients received 750 mg/m² capecitabine b.i.d. 14 days plus 800 mg of PHY906 b.i.d. on days 1–4 and days 8–11 every 21‐day cycle. The primary endpoint was 6‐month survival rate, and secondary endpoints were progression‐free survival, overall survival, disease control rate, and safety.ResultsThirty‐nine subjects completed the study with a 46.2% stable disease rate. The median progression‐free survival was 1.5 months, and median overall survival (mOS) was 6 months with a 51.3% 6‐month survival rate. The most common adverse events included lower hemoglobin, diarrhea, pain, abdomen (not otherwise specified), fatigue, increased aspartate aminotransferase, and bilirubin. Patients who (a) had not received previous chemotherapies or targeted therapy or (b) had lower starting alpha‐fetoprotein (AFP) levels or (c) had HBV infection showed better clinical outcome.ConclusionOur data showed that PHY906 increases the therapeutic index of capecitabine by enhancing its antitumor activity and reduces its toxicity profile in advanced HCC.     

Activity of Sorafenib Plus Capecitabine in Previously Treated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Lessons Learned

• Treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) typically involves multiple lines of therapy with eventual development of treatment resistance.
• In this single‐arm, phase II study involving heavily pretreated patients, the combination of sorafenib and capecitabine yielded a clinically meaningful progression‐free survival of 6.2 months with an acceptable toxicity profile.
• This oral doublet therapy is worthy of continued investigation for clinical use in patients with mCRC.

BackgroundCapecitabine (Cape) is an oral prodrug of the antimetabolite 5‐fluorouracil. Sorafenib (Sor) inhibits multiple signaling pathways involved in angiogenesis and tumor proliferation. SorCape has been previously studied in metastatic breast cancer.MethodsThis single‐arm, phase II study was designed to evaluate the activity of SorCape in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients received Sor (200 mg p.o. b.i.d. max daily) and Cape (1,000 mg/m² p.o. b.i.d. on days 1–14) on a 21‐day treatment cycle. Primary endpoint was progression‐free survival (PFS) with preplanned comparison with historical controls.ResultsForty‐two patients were treated for a median number of 3.5 cycles (range 1–39). Median PFS was 6.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.3–7.9) months, and overall survival (OS) was 8.8 (95% CI, 4.3–12.2) months. One patient (2.4%) had partial response (PR), and 22 patients (52.4%) had stable disease (SD) for a clinical benefit rate of 54.8% (95% CI, 38.7%–70.2%). Hand‐foot syndrome was the most common adverse event seen in 36 patients (85.7%) and was grade ≥ 3 in 16 patients (38.1%). One patient (2.4%) had a grade 4 sepsis, and one patient (2.4%) died while on treatment.ConclusionSorCape in this heavily pretreated population yielded a reasonable PFS with manageable but notable toxicity. The combination should be investigated further.     

First-in-Class Selective HDAC6 Inhibitor (ACY-1215) Has a Highly Favorable Safety Profile in Patients with Relapsed and Refractory Lymphoma

Lessons Learned

• Oral selective HDAC6 inhibitors could allow for decreased toxicity compared to pan‐class inhibitors, and increased ease of use.
• ACY‐1215 is well tolerated and led to disease stabilization in 50% of patients treated on a twice‐daily dosing schedule.
• Rational drug combinations with ACY‐1215 improve efficacy in patients with lymphoma.
• Biomarkers such as XBP‐1 level or HDAC6‐score may improve patient selection.

BackgroundACY‐1215, ricolinostat, is an oral, first‐in‐class isoform‐selective HDAC6 inhibitor. HDAC6 is a class IIb deacetylase and plays a critical role in protein homeostasis via the unfolded protein response (UPR). Lymphocytes generate a large repertoire of antibodies and depend on an activated UPR to maintain proteostasis. Lymphomas utilize this biology to evade programmed cell death. In preclinical models of lymphoma, ACY‐1215 disrupted proteostasis, triggering apoptosis.MethodsWe translated these findings into a multi‐institution, open‐label, dose‐escalation phase Ib/II study aimed to determine the safety and efficacy in patients with relapsed and refractory lymphoma.ResultsTwenty‐one patients with heavily pretreated lymphoma were accrued. Patients in the phase Ib portion were enrolled on one of two dose cohorts [Arm A: 160 mg daily (n = 3) or Arm B: 160 mg twice daily (n = 10)]. ACY‐1215 was well tolerated. There were no dose limiting toxicities. Most adverse events were grade 1–2, including diarrhea (57%), nausea (57%), and fatigue (43%). Grade 3–4 toxicities were rare and included anemia (9.5%) and hypercalcemia (9.5%). An additional 8 patients were enrolled on the phase II portion, at 160 mg twice daily. Sixteen patients were evaluable for response. ACY‐1215 did not result in any complete or partial responses in patients treated. Eight patients had stable disease (50%) lasting a median duration of 4.5 months, all of whom were treated twice daily. Disease progressed in eight patients (50%) at cycle 2. Five patients were not evaluable due to disease progression prior to cycle 2. The median PFS was 56 days.ConclusionACY‐1215 is an oral selective HDAC6 inhibitor that was safe in patients with relapsed and refractory lymphoid malignancies and led to disease stabilization in half of the evaluable patients.     

Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of SCB01A,a Microtubule Inhibitor with Vascular Disrupting Activity,in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors

Lessons Learned

• SCB01A is a novel microtubule inhibitor with vascular disrupting activity.
• This first‐in‐human study demonstrated SCB01A safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity.
• SCB01A is safe and well tolerated in patients with advanced solid malignancies with manageable neurotoxicity.

BackgroundSCB01A, a novel microtubule inhibitor, has vascular disrupting activity.MethodsIn this phase I dose‐escalation and extension study, patients with advanced solid tumors were administered intravenous SCB01A infusions for 3 hours once every 21 days. Rapid titration and a 3 + 3 design escalated the dose from 2 mg/m² to the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) based on dose‐limiting toxicity (DLT). SCB01A‐induced cellular neurotoxicity was evaluated in dorsal root ganglion cells. The primary endpoint was MTD. Safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and tumor response were secondary endpoints.ResultsTreatment‐related adverse events included anemia, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, fever, and peripheral sensorimotor neuropathy. DLTs included grade 4 elevated creatine phosphokinase (CPK) in the 4 mg/m² cohort; grade 3 gastric hemorrhage in the 6.5 mg/m² cohort; grade 2 thromboembolic event in the 24 mg/m² cohort; and grade 3 peripheral sensorimotor neuropathy, grade 3 elevated aspartate aminotransferase, and grade 3 hypertension in the 32 mg/m² cohort. The MTD was 24 mg/m², and average half‐life was ~2.5 hours. The area under the curve‐dose response relationship was linear. Nineteen subjects were stable after two cycles. The longest treatment lasted 24 cycles. SCB01A‐induced neurotoxicity was reversible in vitro.ConclusionThe MTD of SCB01A was 24 mg/m² every 21 days; it is safe and tolerable in patients with solid tumors.     

A Phase I Trial of Trametinib in Combination with Sorafenib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Cancer

Lessons Learned

• The combination of trametinib and sorafenib has an acceptable safety profile, albeit at doses lower than approved for monotherapy.
• Maximum tolerated dose is trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice daily.
• The limited anticancer activity observed in this unselected patient population does not support further exploration of trametinib plus sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

BackgroundThe RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK signaling pathway is associated with proliferation and progression of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Preclinical data suggest that paradoxical activation of the MAPK pathway may be one of the resistance mechanisms of sorafenib; therefore, we evaluated trametinib plus sorafenib in HCC.MethodsThis was a phase I study with a 3+3 design in patients with treatment‐naïve advanced HCC. The primary objective was safety and tolerability. The secondary objective was clinical efficacy.ResultsA total of 17 patients were treated with three different doses of trametinib and sorafenib. Two patients experienced dose‐limiting toxicity, including grade 4 hypertension and grade 3 elevation of aspartate aminotransferase (AST)/alanine aminotransferase (ALT)/bilirubin over 7 days. Maximum tolerated dose was trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice a day. The most common grade 3/4 treatment‐related adverse events were elevated AST (37%) and hypertension (24%). Among 11 evaluable patients, 7 (63.6%) had stable disease with no objective response. The median progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.7 and 7.8 months, respectively. Phosphorylated‐ERK was evaluated as a pharmacodynamic marker, and sorafenib plus trametinib inhibited phosphorylated‐ERK up to 98.1% (median: 81.2%) in peripheral blood mononuclear cells.ConclusionTrametinib and sorafenib can be safely administered up to trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice a day with limited anticancer activity in advanced HCC.     

A Phase II Study of Fulvestrant 500 mg as Maintenance Therapy in Hormone Receptor-Positive,Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer After First-Line Chemotherapy

Lessons Learned

• Fulvestrant 500 mg maintenance therapy showed a clinical benefit rate of 76% and median progression‐free survival of 16.1 months in patients who achieved objective responses or disease control after first‐line chemotherapy.
• Adverse events with fulvestrant maintenance therapy were consistent with the known safety profile of the drug.

BackgroundEvidence for maintenance hormonal therapy after chemotherapy for estrogen receptor (ER)–positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–negative advanced breast cancer is scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of fulvestrant 500 mg maintenance therapy in patients after first‐line chemotherapy.MethodsWe enrolled postmenopausal women with ER‐positive/HER2‐negative advanced breast cancer who attained tumor responses or disease control with four to eight cycles of chemotherapy as first‐line treatment. Fulvestrant 500 mg was injected on days 1, 15, and 29 and every 28 (±3) days thereafter. The primary endpoint was the clinical benefit rate (CBR); the secondary endpoints included the objective response rate (ORR), progression‐free survival (PFS), and safety.ResultsWe included 58 patients; the median follow‐up duration was 32.6 months. The CBR since commencing fulvestrant maintenance therapy was 76% (95% confidence interval [CI], 63%–86%), and ORR was 14% (95% CI, 6%–25%); eight patients achieved partial response. The median PFS for fulvestrant maintenance therapy was 16.1 months (95% CI, 10.3–21.0 months). Thirty‐nine patients (67%) reported at least one adverse event, of which most were grade 1/2, whereas three patients (5%) reported grade 3 adverse events.ConclusionFulvestrant 500 mg is a feasible and promising hormonal maintenance strategy in patients with ER‐positive/HER2‐negative advanced breast cancer who have no disease progression after first‐line chemotherapy.     

Metastatic Low-Grade Sarcoma with CARS-ALK Fusion Dramatically Responded to Multiple ALK Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: A Case Report with Comprehensive Genomic Analysis

This article reports a case of advanced metastatic low‐grade sarcoma. The patient was diagnosed with an inoperable large (14 × 12 cm) lesion on his neck in September 2015 and underwent two ineffective chemotherapies in the following 4 months. Interestingly, although several pathologists could not agree on the histopathological diagnosis, the precise molecular pathological diagnosis was obtained using next‐generation sequencing (NGS) and finally brought excellent therapeutic effects. The patient was detected to have CARS‐ALK fusion by NGS and then was successfully treated with crizotinib orally. He received surgical resection of primary and metastatic lesions after tumor shrinkage. The combined treatment brought a durable response for 40 months. Although the tumor recurred in July 2019, the patient has been responding well to the second‐line ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor alectinib to date. We performed whole genome sequencing on the patient''s primary, metastatic, and recurrent tumors and did comprehensive genomic analysis. Furthermore, our analysis results revealed that a whole genome duplication event might have happened during tumorigenesis of this case.Key Points

• To our best knowledge, this is the first report of a very successful treatment with first‐ and second‐line ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors for CARS‐ALK fusion–positive metastatic low‐grade sarcoma.
• Molecular pathological result can guide precision treatment for sarcoma, even when the exact histopathology cannot be obtained.
• Multiple samples from this patient were analyzed using whole genome sequencing. Results provided detailed genomic characteristics and showed tumor evolution of this low‐grade sarcoma case.
• A whole genome duplication event might have happened during tumorigenesis of this low‐grade sarcoma case.

     

Safety and Preliminary Efficacy of Ramucirumab in Combination with FOLFOX4 in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Nonrandomized,Open‐Label,Phase Ib Study

Lessons Learned

• The combination of ramucirumab (8 mg/kg intravenous, day 1 every 2 weeks) and FOLFOX4 as first‐line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was not sufficiently tolerated.
• Preliminary efficacy data suggest that the combination may provide clinical benefit to patients with HCC.
• Dose modification and patient selection should be considered for the future development of ramucirumab plus FOLFOX chemotherapy for advanced HCC.

BackgroundThe objective of this study was to investigate the safety, preliminary efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity of ramucirumab plus FOLFOX4 as first‐line treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).MethodsPatients received ramucirumab (8 mg/kg) intravenously (IV) on day 1, followed by FOLFOX4 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m² IV on day 1, folinic acid 200 mg/m² IV, bolus fluorouracil [5‐FU] 400 mg/m², and a continuous infusion of 5‐FU 600 mg/m² over 22 hours, on days 1 and 2) every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was to assess the safety and tolerability of the combination therapy.ResultsEight patients (6 men, 2 women) were treated; all eight patients experienced at least one treatment‐emergent adverse event (TEAE) of grade ≥3. Dose‐limiting toxicities occurred in three patients (37.5%): hepatic hemorrhage (grade 4), blood bilirubin increased (grade 3), and febrile neutropenia (grade 3). Two patients discontinued study because of hepatic hemorrhage (grade 4) and blood bilirubin increase (grade 3). Six deaths occurred due to progressive disease, and no deaths due to TEAEs.ConclusionThere were no unexpected safety findings with ramucirumab plus FOLFOX4 based on the known safety and toxicity of this regimen. The combination was not sufficiently tolerated in patients with advanced HCC at the specified dose and schedule.     

Acquired MET D1228N Mutations Mediate Crizotinib Resistance in Lung Adenocarcinoma with ROS1 Fusion: A Case Report

Patients with non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) containing ROS1 fusions can have a marked response to the ROS1‐targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as crizotinib. Common resistance mechanisms of ROS1‐fusion targeted therapy are acquired mutations in ROS1. Along with the use of next‐generation sequencing in the clinical management of patients with NSCLC during sequential targeted therapy, many mechanisms of acquired resistance have been discovered in patients with activated tyrosine kinase receptors. Besides acquired resistance mutations, bypass mechanisms of resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)‐TKI treatment are common in patients with EGFR mutations. Here we describe a patient with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with CD74‐ROS1 fusion who initially responded to crizotinib and then developed resistance by the acquired mutation of D1228N in the MET kinase domain, which showed short‐term disease control for cabozantinib.Key Points

• The D1228N point mutation of MET is an acquired mutation for crizotinib resistance.
• The patient obtained short‐term clinical benefit from cabozantinib therapy after resistance to crizotinib.
• The clinical use of next‐generation sequencing could maximize the benefits of precision medicine in patients with cancer.

     

Phase Ib/II Study of Biweekly TAS-102 in Combination with Bevacizumab for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Refractory to Standard Therapies (BiTS Study)

Lessons Learned

• A biweekly TAS‐102 plus BEV schedule in patients with heavily pretreated mCRC showed equivalent efficacy with less toxicity compared with the current schedule of TAS‐102 plus BEV combination.
• Biweekly TAS‐102 plus BEV combination could reduce unnecessary dose reduction of TAS‐102, maintain higher doses, and possibly be effective even in cases without chemotherapy‐induced neutropenia (CIN).
• The prespecified subgroup analysis of this study showed an obvious association between CIN within the first two cycles and prognosis of biweekly TAS‐102 plus BEV.

BackgroundTAS‐102 (trifluridine/tipiracil) plus bevacizumab (BEV) combination therapy has shown promising activity in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, the previously reported dose and schedule for the TAS‐102 (70 mg/m²/day on days 1–5 and 8–12, every 4 weeks) plus BEV (5 mg/kg on day 1, every 2 weeks) regimen is complicated by severe hematological toxicities and difficult administration schedules. Here, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of a more convenient biweekly TAS‐102 plus BEV combination.MethodsPatients with mCRC who were refractory or intolerant to standard chemotherapies were enrolled. Patients received biweekly TAS‐102 (twice daily on days 1–5, every 2 weeks) with BEV (5mg/kg on day 1, every 2 weeks). The primary endpoint was progression‐free survival rate at 16 weeks (16‐w PFS rate).ResultsFrom October 2017 to January 2018, 46 patients were enrolled. The recommended phase II dose was determined to be TAS‐102 (70 mg/m²/day). Of the 44 eligible patients, the 16‐w PFS rate was 40.9% (95% confidence interval, 26.3%–56.8%), and the null hypothesis was rejected (p < .0001). Median progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 4.29 months and 10.86 months, respectively. Disease control rate was 59.1%. Common grade 3 or higher adverse events were hypertension (40.9%), neutropenia (15.9%), and leucopenia (15.9%).ConclusionBiweekly TAS‐102 plus BEV showed promising antitumor activity with safety.     

Phase I/II Study of Cisplatin plus Nab‐Paclitaxel with Concurrent Thoracic Radiotherapy for Patients with Locally Advanced Non‐Small Cell Lung Cancer

Lessons Learned

• The combination of cisplatin plus nab‐paclitaxel with concurrent thoracic radiotherapy in unresectable stage III non‐small cell lung cancer is a promising therapeutic strategy.
• Further investigation is warranted.

BackgroundWe conducted a phase I/II trial of cisplatin plus nab‐paclitaxel with concurrent thoracic radiotherapy for locally advanced non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to determine the recommended dose (RD) of nab‐paclitaxel and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of this regimen.MethodsIn the phase I study, escalating doses of weekly nab‐paclitaxel were administered together with cisplatin at 75 mg/m² every 3 weeks and concurrent radiotherapy. In the phase II study, nab‐paclitaxel was administered at the RD.ResultsIn the phase I study, whereas no dose‐limiting toxicity (DLT) was observed with nab‐paclitaxel at 50 or 60 mg/m², one of six patients experienced DLT (esophagitis of grade 3) at 70 mg/m², determined as the RD. Twenty‐four patients at RD were evaluable for safety and efficacy in phase II. Common toxicities included esophagitis (87.5%) and leukopenia (79.2%). Pneumonitis and treatment‐related deaths were not observed, but 20 patients (83.3%) experienced radiation pneumonitis, with one case of grade 3 and four of grade 2, after completion of concurrent chemoradiotherapy. The 2‐year overall survival and progression‐free survival rates were 73.9% and 56.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 34.3%–74.7%), respectively.ConclusionConcurrent chemoradiation with nab‐paclitaxel at 70 mg/m² and cisplatin at 75 mg/m² every 3 weeks showed encouraging feasibility and activity for locally advanced NSCLC.     

A Phase II Study of Apatinib in Patients with Chemotherapy-Refractory Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma (ESO-Shanghai 11)

Lessons Learned

• Apatinib has potential as an effective and safe second‐line or higher treatment for patients with chemotherapy‐refractory esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).
• Clinical safety is of potential concern when administering apatinib to patients with uncontrolled esophageal lesions or severe invasion of trachea, bronchi, or major blood vessels.
• To the best of the authors'' knowledge, this is the first prospective phase II study to investigate apatinib for patients with chemotherapy‐refractory ESCC. Apatinib could provide an alternative option for ESCC after first‐line or higher therapy in carefully selected patients.

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of the oral vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR‐2) tyrosine kinase inhibitor apatinib in patients with chemotherapy‐refractory esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).MethodsWe enrolled patients with chemotherapy‐refractory ESCC. All patients received continuous apatinib 500 mg once daily.ResultsBetween July 2017 and August 2018, 40 patients were recruited, of whom 5 (12.5%) had uncontrolled primary tumors. Additionally, three patients with partial response (PR) and 23 with stable disease (SD) were observed for overall response rate (ORR) of 7.5% and disease control rate (DCR) of 65.0%. Median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 3.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2–5.4); median overall survival (OS) was 5.8 months (95% CI, 3.2–8.4). Common adverse effects were fatigue (15%), hypertension (12.5%), and palmar‐plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (10%). Two cases of death from massive bronchopulmonary hemorrhage were observed, and esophageal fistula occurred in another two patients. Notably, both patients with esophageal fistula and one patient with massive fatal bronchopulmonary hemorrhage were individuals with uncontrolled primary tumors (3/5, 60%). Fatal bronchopulmonary hemorrhage in a second patient was associated with major blood vessel invasion.ConclusionApatinib has potential as an effective and safe treatment for patients with chemotherapy‐refractory ESCC whose primary tumors are controlled and without severe invasion of trachea, bronchi, or major blood vessels.     

A Phase II Single Arm Pilot Study of the CHK1 Inhibitor Prexasertib (LY2606368) in BRCA Wild-Type,Advanced Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Lessons Learned

• Monotherapy with prexasertib demonstrated modest activity in BRCA wild‐type, recurrent triple‐negative breast cancer, highlighting the unmet need for combination treatment strategies.
• Neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia are common with the use of prexasertib but are manageable with supportive care measures. Prophylactic use of granulocyte colony stimulating factor should be considered to avoid dose reductions or treatment delays.
• Pharmacodynamic studies showed prexasertib treatment induced DNA damage in peripheral immune cells.

BackgroundCell cycle checkpoint kinase 1 (CHK1) is a major G2/M cell cycle regulator in tumors with p53 dysfunction, such as triple‐negative breast cancer (TNBC). We hypothesized the second‐generation CHK1 inhibitor, prexasertib, would yield clinical activity in sporadic TNBC.MethodsThis single arm, phase II trial evaluated prexasertib at 105 mg/m² IV every 2 weeks in patients with metastatic/recurrent TNBC. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR).ResultsAll nine patients enrolled were germline BRCA wild‐type (BRCAwt) and had at least one prior treatment. One partial response (PR) was observed (ORR of 11.1%). Four patients experienced stable disease. The median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 86 days (range 17 to 159 days). Grade 3/4 treatment‐related adverse events included afebrile neutropenia (n = 8; 88.9%), anemia (n = 3; 33.3%), and thrombocytopenia (n = 1; 11.1%). Pharmacodynamic studies showed prexasertib treatment induced DNA damage in peripheral immune cells and demonstrated a decrease in activated/reinvigorated CD8 T cells; however, the one patient with a PR showed evidence of T‐cell recovery.ConclusionPrexasertib monotherapy had modest clinical efficacy in BRCAwt TNBC. Further studies of prexasertib in combination with other agents are needed.     

Neoadjuvant Pyrotinib plus Trastuzumab and Chemotherapy for Stage I–III HER2‐Positive Breast Cancer: A Phase II Clinical Trial

Lessons Learned

• This is the first trial to explore the neoadjuvant therapy of pyrotinib in HER2‐positive operable and locally advanced breast cancer, in combination with epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel plus trastuzumab.
• Results primarily showed that pyrotinib in combination with epirubicin plus cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel plus trastuzumab was effective and safe in HER2‐positive operable and locally advanced breast cancer.
• A subsequent randomized controlled trial is still warranted to confirm these results.

BackgroundThe efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant therapy of pyrotinib, a new irreversible tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), was first estimated in patients with HER2‐positive breast cancer in this phase II study, in combination with trastuzumab and chemotherapy.MethodsBetween February 19, 2019, and November 20, 2019, 20 female Chinese patients with stage I–III HER2‐positive breast cancer were assigned to receive eight cycles of neoadjuvant pyrotinib (P) in combination with four cycles of epirubicin (E) and cyclophosphamide (C) followed by four cycles of docetaxel (T) and trastuzumab (H), once every 3 weeks, referred to as P + EC‐TH.ResultsA total of 19 patients completed the therapy and final surgery. The total pathological complete response (tpCR) rate was 73.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 48.8–90.9), and no recurrence or metastasis occurred during the short‐term follow‐up period. The objective response rate (ORR) was 100% (95% CI, 82.4–100). The most common adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea and leukopenia in 18 of 20 patients (90%), but no grade 5 AEs were reported.ConclusionThis study showed that in HER2‐positive operable or locally advanced breast cancer, the tpCR rate of P + EC‐TH neoadjuvant therapy was about twice as high as that of EC‐TH neoadjuvant therapy reported in other trials, with tolerable side effects.     

Single-Agent Versus Double-Agent Chemotherapy in Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Prospective,Randomized, Multicenter Phase II Clinical Trial

Lessons Learned

• The efficacy of single‐agent chemotherapy was not significantly different from that of double‐agent chemotherapy in concurrent chemoradiotherapy for inoperable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
• Single‐agent concurrent chemoradiotherapy had lower gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicity.
• Overall survival and progression‐free survival were not significantly different between single‐ and double‐agent concurrent chemoradiotherapy.

BackgroundThis multicenter, randomized, phase II trial aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of single‐agent concurrent chemoradiotherapy using the oral fluoropyrimidine S‐1 with those of double‐agent concurrent chemoradiotherapy using S‐1 and cisplatin in patients with inoperable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.MethodsPatients with inoperable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (clinical stages I to III) were randomly allocated to the single‐agent group (S‐1) or the double‐agent group (S‐1/cisplatin). The concurrent intensity‐modulated radiation therapy plan was similar for both groups: planning target volume 1.8 Gy/f*30–33f and planning gross target volume of 2 Gy/f*30–33f. The primary outcome measure was the endoscopic complete response rate.ResultsOf the 105 patients randomized, 89 were assessable. The endoscopic complete response rate was 46.9% (23/49) in the single‐agent group and 52.5% (21/40) in double‐agent group. The median progression‐free survival within a median follow‐up of 23 months was 20 and 21 months, respectively. The median overall survival was 26 months and not reached, respectively. Grade 3 hematological toxicities occurred in 4.1% and 27.5% of the patients in the single‐ and the double‐agent group, respectively.ConclusionSingle‐agent chemotherapy in concurrent chemoradiotherapy for inoperable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma has good efficacy and safety, thus warranting a phase III trial.     

Avelumab,a PD-L1 Inhibitor,in Combination with Hypofractionated Radiotherapy and the Abscopal Effect in Relapsed Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Lessons Learned

• Despite the initial optimism for using immune checkpoint inhibition in the treatment of multiple myeloma, subsequent clinical studies have been disappointing.
• Preclinical studies have suggested that priming the immune system with various modalities in addition to checkpoint inhibition may overcome the relative T‐cell exhaustion or senescence; however, in this small data set, radiotherapy with checkpoint inhibition did not appear to activate the antitumor immune response.

BackgroundExtramedullary disease (EMD) is recognized as an aggressive subentity of multiple myeloma (MM) with a need for novel therapeutic approaches. We therefore designed a proof‐of‐principle pilot study to evaluate the synergy between the combination of the anti–PD‐L1, avelumab, and concomitant hypofractionated radiotherapy.MethodsThis was a single‐arm phase II Simon two‐stage single center study that was prematurely terminated because of the COVID‐19 pandemic after enrolling four patients. Key eligibility included patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who had exhausted or were not candidates for standard therapy and had at least one lesion amenable to radiotherapy. Patients received avelumab until progression or intolerable toxicity and hypofractionated radiotherapy to a focal lesion in cycle 2. Radiotherapy was delayed until cycle 2 to allow the avelumab to reach a study state, given the important observation from previous studies that concomitant therapy is needed for the abscopal effect.ResultsAt a median potential follow‐up of 10.5 months, there were no objective responses, one minimal response, and two stable disease as best response. The median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 5.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.5–7.1 months), and no deaths occurred. There were no grade ≥3 and five grade 1–2 treatment‐related adverse events.ConclusionAvelumab in combination with radiotherapy for patients with RRMM and EMD was associated with very modest systemic clinical benefit; however, patients did benefit as usual from local radiotherapy. Furthermore, the combination was very well tolerated compared with historical RRMM treatment regimens.     

Erlotinib for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with Leptomeningeal Metastases: A Phase II Study (LOGIK1101)

Lessons Learned

• This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of erlotinib for patients with non‐small cell lung cancer with leptomeningeal metastasis.
• The 17 cerebrospinal fluid specimens that were available for epidermal growth factor receptor mutation analysis were all negative for the resistance‐conferring T790M mutation.
• The cytological objective clearance rate was 30.0% (95% confidence interval: 11.9%–54.3%). The median time to progression was 2.2 months.
• The rate of cerebrospinal fluid penetration among these patients was equivalent to those in previous reports regarding leptomeningeal metastasis.

BackgroundLeptomeningeal metastases (LM) occur in approximately 5% of patients with non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and are associated with a poor prognosis. However, no prospective study has identified an active chemotherapeutic drug in this setting.MethodsPatients were considered eligible to receive erlotinib if they had NSCLC with cytologically confirmed LM. The objective cytological clearance rate, time to LM progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), quality of life outcomes, and pharmacokinetics were analyzed. This study was closed because of slow accrual at 21 of the intended 32 patients (66%).ResultsBetween December 2011 and May 2015, 21 patients (17 with activating epidermal growth factor receptor [EGFR] mutations) were enrolled. The 17 cerebrospinal fluid specimens available were all negative for the T790M mutation, which confers erlotinib resistance. The clearance rate was 30.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.9%–54.3%), the median TTP was 2.2 months, and the median OS was 3.4 months. Significantly longer TTP and OS times were observed in patients with mutant EGFR (p = .0113 and p < .0054, respectively). The mean cerebrospinal fluid penetration rate was 3.31% ± 0.77%. There was a good correlation between plasma and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations, although there was no clear correlation between pharmacokinetic parameters and clinical outcome.ConclusionErlotinib was active for LM and may be a treatment option for patients with EGFR‐mutated NSCLC and LM.     

Phase Ib Study of Enzalutamide with or Without Sorafenib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Lessons Learned

• Androgen receptor as assessed by immunohistochemistry is expressed in a high proportion of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
• Enzalutamide at 160 mg orally daily is safe and tolerable in patients with advanced HCC but has no single‐agent antitumor activity.
• Enzalutamide, a CYP3A4 inducer, at a standard dose of 160 mg reduces the exposure of sorafenib, a CYP3A4 substrate.
• Enzalutamide and sorafenib is safe and tolerable in patients with advanced HCC, but the addition of enzalutamide to sorafenib did not enhance the antitumor activity of sorafenib.

BackgroundAndrogen receptor (AR) interference is deleterious to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in preclinical models.MethodsThis is a multicenter, phase Ib study of enzalutamide ± sorafenib in patients with advanced HCC. In part 1, a 3 + 3 dose de‐escalation design with expansion established the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of enzalutamide in patients in whom sorafenib treatment had failed. In part 2, a 3 + 3 dose escalation with expansion established the safety of enzalutamide with sorafenib in treatment‐naive patients with HCC. Secondary objectives included objective response rate (ORR), progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), pharmacokinetics (PK), and determination of AR expression by immunohistochemistry. A 7‐day run‐in with sorafenib alone in part 2 allowed assessment of the impact of enzalutamide on sorafenib pharmacokinetics.ResultsIn part 1, 16 patients received enzalutamide 160 mg daily. No dose‐limiting toxicity (DLT) occurred; 1 patient required dose reduction. Responses were not observed; median PFS and OS were 1.8 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6–3.6) and 7 (95% CI: 3.6 to not reached [NR]) months, respectively. In part 2, patients received sorafenib 400 mg daily (4) or twice a day (8) both with enzalutamide at the recommended phase II dose—no DLTs were observed. ORR was 10% (95% CI: 0.3–44.5), and median PFS and OS were 2.9 (95% CI: 1.6 to NR) and 6.7 (95% CI: 4.6 to NR) months, respectively. Enzalutamide reduced sorafenib exposure by 60%. Tumor AR expression did not associate with outcome.ConclusionEnzalutamide is ineffective in HCC; further development is not supported by this study.     

Phase II Study of Panitumumab Monotherapy in Chemotherapy‐Naïve Frail or Elderly Patients with Unresectable RAS Wild‐Type Colorectal Cancer: OGSG 1602

Lessons Learned

• Panitumumab monotherapy showed favorable efficacy and feasibility in the treatment of frail or elderly patients with RAS wild‐type unresectable colorectal cancer.
• It is especially effective for left‐sided tumors; therefore, panitumumab as first‐line treatment could be an additional therapeutic option for frail elderly patients, particularly in those who are unsuitable for upfront oxaliplatin‐based or irinotecan‐based combination regimens.

BackgroundFirst‐line panitumumab monotherapy is expected to be well tolerated and improve survival in patients ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. However, its safety and efficacy in chemotherapy‐naïve frail or elderly patients with unresectable RAS wild‐type (WT) colorectal cancer (CRC) have not been studied. The aim of this phase II trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of panitumumab as first‐line treatment.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter phase II study on patients aged ≥76 years or ≥65 years considered unsuitable for intensive chemotherapy. Panitumumab 6 mg/kg of intravenous infusion was administered every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR). Secondary endpoints included progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), response rate (RR), time to treatment failure (TTF), and incidence of grade 3 or 4 toxicities.ResultsThirty‐six patients (median age: 81 [range, 67–88] years) were enrolled between February 2017 and August 2018. Two patients were excluded from the analysis of efficacy: one from lack of image examination at baseline and the other from lack of a measurable lesion. Thirty‐three (91.6%) patients had a performance status (PS) of 0 or 1, whereas two (5.6%) patients and one (2.8%) patient had a PS of 2 and 3, respectively. Twenty‐eight patients (77.8%) had left‐sided CRC, whereas eight (22.2%) had right‐sided CRC. The RR was 50.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 32.4–67.6), including three patients (8.8%) who had complete responses. A total of 26.5% had stable diseases, resulting in a DCR of 76.5% (90% CI, 61.5–87.7). The RR of patients with left‐ and right‐sided tumors was 65.4% (95% CI, 44.3–82.8) and 0.0% (95% CI, 0.0–36.9), respectively. Major grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic toxicities were rash (n = 6, 16.7%), hypomagnesemia (n = 4, 11.1%), fatigue (n = 3, 8.3%), paronychia (n = 2, 5.6%), and hyponatremia (n = 2, 5.6%). The only grade 3 hematologic toxicity was neutropenia (n = 1, 2.8%).ConclusionPanitumumab monotherapy showed favorable efficacy and feasibility in frail or elderly patients with RAS WT unresectable CRC. Survival analysis including OS, PFS, and TTF is currently in progress.