Fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) 2 gene alterations are involved in the pathogenesis of cholangiocarcinoma. Pemigatinib is a selective, potent, oral inhibitor of FGFR1, 2, and 3. This study ...evaluated the safety and antitumour activity of pemigatinib in patients with previously treated, locally advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma with and without FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements.
In this multicentre, open-label, single-arm, multicohort, phase 2 study (FIGHT-202), patients aged 18 years or older with disease progression following at least one previous treatment and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–2 recruited from 146 academic or community-based sites in the USA, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia were assigned to one of three cohorts: patients with FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements, patients with other FGF/FGFR alterations, or patients with no FGF/FGFR alterations. All enrolled patients received a starting dose of 13·5 mg oral pemigatinib once daily (21-day cycle; 2 weeks on, 1 week off) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or physician decision. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved an objective response among those with FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements, assessed centrally in all patients who received at least one dose of pemigatinib. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02924376, and enrolment is completed.
Between Jan 17, 2017, and March 22, 2019, 146 patients were enrolled: 107 with FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements, 20 with other FGF/FGFR alterations, 18 with no FGF/FGFR alterations, and one with an undetermined FGF/FGFR alteration. The median follow-up was 17·8 months (IQR 11·6–21·3). 38 (35·5% 95% CI 26·5–45·4) patients with FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements achieved an objective response (three complete responses and 35 partial responses). Overall, hyperphosphataemia was the most common all-grade adverse event irrespective of cause (88 60% of 146 patients). 93 (64%) patients had a grade 3 or worse adverse event (irrespective of cause); the most frequent were hypophosphataemia (18 12%), arthralgia (nine 6%), stomatitis (eight 5%), hyponatraemia (eight 5%), abdominal pain (seven 5%), and fatigue (seven 5%). 65 (45%) patients had serious adverse events; the most frequent were abdominal pain (seven 5%), pyrexia (seven 5%), cholangitis (five 3%), and pleural effusion (five 3%). Overall, 71 (49%) patients died during the study, most frequently because of disease progression (61 42%); no deaths were deemed to be treatment related.
These data support the therapeutic potential of pemigatinib in previously treated patients with cholangiocarcinoma who have FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements.
Incyte Corporation.
The prevailing view that the evolution of cells in a tumor is driven by Darwinian selection has never been rigorously tested. Because selection greatly affects the level of intratumor genetic ...diversity, it is important to assess whether intratumor evolution follows the Darwinian or the non-Darwinian mode of evolution. To provide the statistical power, many regions in a single tumor need to be sampled and analyzed much more extensively than has been attempted in previous intratumor studies. Here, from a hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) tumor, we evaluated multiregional samples from the tumor, using either whole-exome sequencing (WES) (n= 23 samples) or genotyping (n= 286) under both the infinite-site and infinite-allele models of population genetics. In addition to the many single-nucleotide variations (SNVs) present in all samples, there were 35 “polymorphic” SNVs among samples. High genetic diversity was evident as the 23 WES samples defined 20 unique cell clones. With all 286 samples genotyped, clonal diversity agreed well with the non-Darwinian model with no evidence of positive Darwinian selection. Under the non-Darwinian model,M
ALL(the number of coding region mutations in the entire tumor) was estimated to be greater than 100 million in this tumor. DNA sequences reveal local diversities in small patches of cells and validate the estimation. In contrast, the genetic diversity under a Darwinian model would generally be orders of magnitude smaller. Because the level of genetic diversity will have implications on therapeutic resistance, non-Darwinian evolution should be heeded in cancer treatments even for microscopic tumors.
The receptors for hepatocyte and vascular endothelial cell growth factors (MET and VEGFR2, respectively) are critical oncogenic mediators in gastric adenocarcinoma. The purpose is to examine the ...safety and efficacy of foretinib, an oral multikinase inhibitor targeting MET, RON, AXL, TIE-2, and VEGFR2 receptors, for the treatment of metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma.
Foretinib safety and tolerability, and objective response rate (ORR) were evaluated in patients using intermittent (240 mg/day, for 5 days every 2 weeks) or daily (80 mg/day) dosing schedules. Thirty evaluable patients were required to achieve alpha = 0.10 and beta = 0.2 to test the alternative hypothesis that single-agent foretinib would result in an ORR of ≥ 25%. Up to 10 additional patients could be enrolled to ensure at least eight with MET amplification. Correlative studies included tumor MET amplification, MET signaling, pharmacokinetics and plasma biomarkers of foretinib activity.
From March 2007 until October 2009, 74 patients were enrolled; 74% male; median age, 61 years (range, 25-88); 93% had received prior therapy. Best response was stable disease (SD) in 10 (23%) patients receiving intermittent dosing and five (20%) receiving daily dosing; SD duration was 1.9-7.2 months (median 3.2 months). Of 67 patients with tumor samples, 3 had MET amplification, one of whom had SD. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 91% of patients. Rates of hypertension (35% vs. 15%) and elevated aspartate aminotransferase (23% vs. 8%) were higher with intermittent dosing. In both patients with high baseline tumor phospho-MET (pMET), the pMET:total MET protein ratio decreased with foretinib treatment.
These results indicate that few gastric carcinomas are driven solely by MET and VEGFR2, and underscore the diverse molecular oncogenesis of this disease. Despite evidence of MET inhibition by foretinib, single-agent foretinib lacked efficacy in unselected patients with metastatic gastric cancer.
The authors of a recent pilot study incorporated novel concepts including total neoadjuvant therapy with induction triplet FOLFIRINOX then chemoradiotherapy before surgery, along with ctDNA minimal ...residual disease analyses demonstrating both feasibility of this approach as well as confirming prognostic value of ctDNA analysis before and after surgery.
.
The promise of ‘personalized cancer care’ with therapies toward specific molecular aberrations has potential to improve outcomes. However, there is recognized heterogeneity within any given ...tumor-type from patient to patient (inter-patient heterogeneity), and within an individual (intra-patient heterogeneity) as demonstrated by molecular evolution through space (primary tumor to metastasis) and time (after therapy). These issues have become hurdles to advancing cancer treatment outcomes with novel molecularly targeted agents. Classic trial design paradigms are challenged by heterogeneity, as they are unable to test targeted therapeutics against low frequency genomic ‘oncogenic driver’ aberrations with adequate power. Usual accrual difficulties to clinical trials are exacerbated by low frequencies of any given molecular driver. To address these challenges, there is need for innovative clinical trial designs and strategies implementing novel diagnostic biomarker technologies to account for inter-patient molecular diversity and scarce tissue for analysis. Importantly, there is also need for pre-defined treatment priority algorithms given numerous aberrations commonly observed within any one individual sample. Access to multiple available therapeutic agents simultaneously is crucial. Finally intra-patient heterogeneity through time may be addressed by serial biomarker assessment at the time of tumor progression. This report discusses various ‘next-generation’ biomarker-driven trial designs and their potentials and limitations to tackle these recognized molecular heterogeneity challenges. Regulatory hurdles, with respect to drug and companion diagnostic development and approval, are considered. Focus is on the ‘Expansion Platform Design Types I and II’, the latter demonstrated with a first example, ‘PANGEA: Personalized Anti-Neoplastics for Gastro-Esophageal Adenocarcinoma’. Applying integral medium-throughput genomic and proteomic assays along with a practical biomarker assessment and treatment algorithm, ‘PANGEA’ attempts to address the problem of heterogeneity towards successful implementation of molecularly targeted therapies.
•Tumor molecular heterogeneity is a challenge to the design of clinical trials in Oncology.•Inter-patient heterogeneity of low frequency biological events are difficult to study.•Intra-patient heterogeneity through space and time require serial molecular profiling.•We discuss next-generation clinical trial designs aimed to address heterogeneity.•Focus is on novel ‘Exploratory’ and ‘Expansion’ Platform clinical trial designs.
To evaluate feasibility and efficacy, checkpoint inhibitor atezolizumab was added to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy prior to surgery for esophagogastric adenocarcinoma. The approach was deemed ...feasible, and while it did not demonstrate better clinical outcome to propensity-matched patients, biomarker investigation demonstrated that high inflammation in the sample at baseline predicted therapeutic benefit.
.
Background & Aims Tumor cells circulate in low numbers in peripheral blood; their detection is used predominantly in metastatic disease. We evaluated the feasibility and safety of sampling portal ...venous blood via endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) to count portal venous circulating tumor cells (CTCs), compared with paired peripheral CTCs, in patients with pancreaticobiliary cancers (PBCs). Methods In a single-center cohort study, we evaluated 18 patients with suspected PBCs. Under EUS guidance, a 19-gauge EUS fine needle was advanced transhepatically into the portal vein and as many as four 7.5-mL aliquots of blood were aspirated. Paired peripheral blood samples were obtained. Epithelial-derived CTCs were sorted magnetically based on expression of epithelial cell adhesion molecules; only those with a proper morphology and found to be CD45 negative and positive for cytokeratins 8, 18, and/or 19 and 4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole were considered to be CTCs. For 5 samples, CTCs also were isolated by flow cytometry and based on CD45 depletion. ImageStream was used to determine the relative protein levels of P16, SMAD4, and P53. DNA was extracted from CTCs for sequencing of select KRAS codons. Results There were no complications from portal vein blood acquisition. We detected CTCs in portal vein samples from all 18 patients (100%) vs peripheral blood samples from only 4 patients (22.2%). Patients with confirmed PBCs had a mean of 118.4 ± 36.8 CTCs/7.5 mL portal vein blood, compared with a mean of 0.8 ± 0.4 CTCs/7.5 mL peripheral blood ( P < .01). The 9 patients with nonmetastatic, resectable, or borderline-resectable PBCs had a mean of 83.2 CTCs/7.5 mL portal vein blood (median, 62.0 CTCs/7.5 mL portal vein blood). In a selected patient, portal vein CTCs were found to carry the same mutations as those detected in a metastatic lymph node and expressed similar levels of P16, SMAD4, and P53 proteins. Conclusions It is feasible and safe to collect portal venous blood from patients undergoing EUS. We identified CTCs in all portal vein blood samples from patients with PBCs, but less than 25% of peripheral blood samples. Portal vein CTCs can be used for molecular characterization of PBCs and share features of metastatic tissue. This technique might be used to study the pathogenesis and progression of PBCs, as well as a diagnostic or prognostic tool to stratify risk of cancer recurrence or developing metastases.
Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) variations occur in up to approximately 20% of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. In the ClarIDHy trial, progression-free survival as determined by ...central review was significantly improved with ivosidenib vs placebo.
To report the final overall survival (OS) results from the ClarIDHy trial, which aimed to demonstrate the efficacy of ivosidenib (AG-120)-a first-in-class, oral, small-molecule inhibitor of mutant IDH1-vs placebo for patients with unresectable or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation.
This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical phase 3 trial was conducted from February 20, 2017, to May 31, 2020, at 49 hospitals across 6 countries among patients aged 18 years or older with cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation whose disease progressed with prior therapy.
Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive ivosidenib, 500 mg, once daily or matched placebo. Crossover from placebo to ivosidenib was permitted if patients had disease progression as determined by radiographic findings.
The primary end point was progression-free survival as determined by blinded independent radiology center (reported previously). Overall survival was a key secondary end point. The primary analysis of OS followed the intent-to-treat principle. Other secondary end points included objective response rate, safety and tolerability, and quality of life.
Overall, 187 patients (median age, 62 years range, 33-83 years) were randomly assigned to receive ivosidenib (n = 126; 82 women 65%; median age, 61 years range, 33-80 years) or placebo (n = 61; 37 women 61%; median age, 63 years range, 40-83 years); 43 patients crossed over from placebo to ivosidenib. The primary end point of progression-free survival was reported elsewhere. Median OS was 10.3 months (95% CI, 7.8-12.4 months) with ivosidenib vs 7.5 months (95% CI, 4.8-11.1 months) with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.79 95% CI, 0.56-1.12; 1-sided P = .09). When adjusted for crossover, median OS with placebo was 5.1 months (95% CI, 3.8-7.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.49 95% CI, 0.34-0.70; 1-sided P < .001). The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse event (≥5%) reported in both groups was ascites (11 patients 9% receiving ivosidenib and 4 patients 7% receiving placebo). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events considered ivosidenib related were reported in 3 patients (2%). There were no treatment-related deaths. Patients receiving ivosidenib reported no apparent decline in quality of life compared with placebo.
This randomized clinical trial found that ivosidenib was well tolerated and resulted in a favorable OS benefit vs placebo, despite a high rate of crossover. These data, coupled with supportive quality of life data and a tolerable safety profile, demonstrate the clinical benefit of ivosidenib for patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma with IDH1 mutation.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02989857.
PDF
