Explore the vast range of titles available.

Although comprehensive biomarker testing is recommended for all patients with advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) before initiation of first-line treatment, tissue availability can limit testing. Genomic testing in liquid biopsies can be utilized to overcome the inherent limitations of tissue sampling and identify the most appropriate biomarker-informed treatment option for patients. The Blood First Assay Screening Trial is a global, open-label, multicohort trial that evaluates the efficacy and safety of multiple therapies in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC and targetable alterations identified by liquid biopsy. We present data from Cohort D ( ROS1 -positive). Patients ≥18 years of age with stage IIIB/IV, ROS1 -positive NSCLC detected by liquid biopsies received entrectinib 600 mg daily. At data cutoff (November 2021), 55 patients were enrolled and 54 had measurable disease. Cohort D met its primary endpoint: the confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by investigator was 81.5%, which was consistent with the ORR from the integrated analysis of entrectinib (investigator-assessed ORR, 73.4%; data cutoff May 2019, ≥12 months of follow-up). The safety profile of entrectinib was consistent with previous reports. These results demonstrate consistency with those from the integrated analysis of entrectinib in patients with ROS1 -positive NSCLC identified by tissue-based testing, and support the clinical value of liquid biopsies to inform clinical decision-making. The integration of liquid biopsies into clinical practice provides patients with a less invasive diagnostic method than tissue-based testing and has faster turnaround times that may expedite the reaching of clinical decisions in the advanced/metastatic NSCLC setting. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03178552 . Results from this single-arm cohort of the BFAST trial showed that the clinical efficacy of entrectinib in patients with ROS1 -positive NSCLC, selected using liquid biopsies, is consistent with that seen in previous reports where patients were selected using tissue-based testing methods.

ProBio is the first outcome-adaptive platform trial in prostate cancer utilizing a Bayesian framework to evaluate efficacy within predefined biomarker signatures across systemic treatments. Prospective circulating tumor DNA and germline DNA analysis was performed in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer before randomization to androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs), taxanes or a physician’s choice control arm. The primary endpoint was the time to no longer clinically benefitting (NLCB). Secondary endpoints included overall survival and (serious) adverse events. Upon reaching the time to NLCB, patients could be re-randomized. The primary endpoint was met after 218 randomizations. ARPIs demonstrated ~50% longer time to NLCB compared to taxanes (median, 11.1 versus 6.9 months) and the physician’s choice arm (median, 11.1 versus 7.4 months) in the biomarker-unselected or ‘all’ patient population. ARPIs demonstrated longer overall survival (median, 38.7 versus 21.7 and 21.8 months for taxanes and physician’s choice, respectively). Biomarker signature findings suggest that the largest increase in time to NLCB was observed in AR (single-nucleotide variant/genomic structural rearrangement)-negative and TP53 wild-type patients and TMPRSS2–ERG fusion-positive patients, whereas no difference between ARPIs and taxanes was observed in TP53 -altered patients. In summary, ARPIs outperform taxanes and physician’s choice treatment in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with detectable circulating tumor DNA. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03903835 . In a biomarker-driven, outcome-adaptive platform trial for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, androgen receptor pathway inhibitors showed longer survival with respect to taxanes and physician’s choice treatment.

Minimally invasive approaches to detect residual disease after surgery are needed to identify patients with cancer who are at risk for metastatic relapse. Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) holds promise as a biomarker for molecular residual disease and relapse 1 . We evaluated outcomes in 581 patients who had undergone surgery and were evaluable for ctDNA from a randomized phase III trial of adjuvant atezolizumab versus observation in operable urothelial cancer. This trial did not reach its efficacy end point in the intention-to-treat population. Here we show that ctDNA testing at the start of therapy (cycle 1 day 1) identified 214 (37%) patients who were positive for ctDNA and who had poor prognosis (observation arm hazard ratio = 6.3 (95% confidence interval: 4.45–8.92); P  < 0.0001). Notably, patients who were positive for ctDNA had improved disease-free survival and overall survival in the atezolizumab arm versus the observation arm (disease-free survival hazard ratio = 0.58 (95% confidence interval: 0.43–0.79); P  = 0.0024, overall survival hazard ratio = 0.59 (95% confidence interval: 0.41–0.86)). No difference in disease-free survival or overall survival between treatment arms was noted for patients who were negative for ctDNA. The rate of ctDNA clearance at week 6 was higher in the atezolizumab arm (18%) than in the observation arm (4%) ( P  = 0.0204). Transcriptomic analysis of tumours from patients who were positive for ctDNA revealed higher expression levels of cell-cycle and keratin genes. For patients who were positive for ctDNA and who were treated with atezolizumab, non-relapse was associated with immune response signatures and basal–squamous gene features, whereas relapse was associated with angiogenesis and fibroblast TGFβ signatures. These data suggest that adjuvant atezolizumab may be associated with improved outcomes compared with observation in patients who are positive for ctDNA and who are at a high risk of relapse. These findings, if validated in other settings, would shift approaches to postoperative cancer care. The authors report on prospective exploratory analyses of circulating tumour DNA in an urothelial carcinoma immunotherapy clinical trial.

Tumour mutational burden (TMB) has been retrospectively correlated with response to immune checkpoint blockade. We prospectively explored the association of high tissue TMB (tTMB-high) with outcomes in ten tumour-type-specific cohorts from the phase 2 KEYNOTE-158 study, which assessed the anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody pembrolizumab in patients with selected, previously treated, advanced solid tumours. In the multi-cohort, open-label, non-randomised, phase 2 KEYNOTE-158 study, patients were enrolled from 81 academic facilities and community-based institutions across 21 countries in Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Europe. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had a histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced (ie, unresectable or metastatic, or both) incurable solid tumour (eligible tumour types were anal, biliary, cervical, endometrial, mesothelioma, neuroendocrine, salivary, small-cell lung, thyroid, and vulvar), progression on or intolerance to one or more lines of standard therapy, had measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST; version 1.1) assessed by independent central radiological review, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, life expectancy of at least 3 months, adequate organ function, and a tumour sample for biomarker analysis. Participants were given pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles. Tissue TMB (tTMB) was assessed in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumour samples using the FoundationOne CDx assay (Foundation Medicine, Cambridge, MA, USA). The prespecified definition of tTMB-high status was at least 10 mutations per megabase. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with an objective response (complete or partial response) as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1) by independent central review. This prespecified analysis assessed the association between antitumour activity and tTMB in treated patients with evaluable tTMB data. Efficacy was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab, had evaluable tTMB data, and were enrolled at least 26 weeks before data cutoff (June 27, 2019), and safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab and had tTMB-high status. KEYNOTE-158 is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02628067, and is ongoing. Between Jan 15, 2016, and June 25, 2019, 1073 patients were enrolled. 1066 participants were treated as of data cutoff (June 27, 2019), of whom 805 (76%) were evaluable for TMB, and 105 (13%) of 805 had tTMB-high status and were assessed for safety. 1050 (98%) of 1066 patients enrolled by at least 26 weeks before data cutoff, of whom 790 (75%) were evaluable for TMB and included in efficacy analyses. 102 (13%) of these 790 patients had tTMB-high status (≥10 mutations per megabase), and 688 (87%) patients had non-tTMB-high status (<10 mutations per megabase). Median study follow-up was 37·1 months (IQR 35·0–38·3). Objective responses were observed in 30 (29%; 95% CI 21–39) of 102 patients in the tTMB-high group and 43 (6%; 5–8) of 688 in the non-tTMB-high group. 11 (10%) of 105 patients had treatment-related serious adverse events. 16 (15%) participants had a grade 3–5 treatment-related adverse event, of which colitis was the only such adverse event that occurred in more than one patient (n=2). One patient had fatal pneumonia that was assessed by the investigator to be treatment related. tTMB-high status identifies a subgroup of patients who could have a robust tumour response to pembrolizumab monotherapy. tTMB could be a novel and useful predictive biomarker for response to pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with previously treated recurrent or metastatic advanced solid tumours. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc.

Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) showed statistically significant clinical improvement in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2 + ) gastric cancer in the DESTINY-Gastric01 trial. Exploratory results from DESTINY-Gastric01 suggested a potential benefit in patients with HER2-low gastric cancer. Spatial and temporal heterogeneity in HER2 expression or gene alteration, an inherent characteristic of gastric cancer tumors, presents a challenge in identifying patients who may respond to T-DXd. Specific biomarkers related to therapeutic response have not been explored extensively. Exploratory analyses were conducted to assess baseline HER2-associated biomarkers in circulating tumor DNA and tissue samples, and to investigate mechanisms of resistance to T-DXd. Baseline HER2-associated biomarkers were correlated with objective response rate (ORR) in the primary cohort of patients with HER2 + gastric cancer. The primary cohort had 64% concordance between HER2 positivity and HER2 ( ERBB2 ) plasma gene amplification. Other key driver gene amplifications, specifically MET , EGFR and FGFR2 , in circulating tumor DNA were associated with numerically lower ORR. Among 12 patients with HER2 gain-of-function mutations, ORR was 58.3% (7 of 12). ORR was consistent regardless of timing of immunohistochemistry sample collection. Further investigations are required in larger studies. Exploratory analyses of the DESTINY-Gastric01 trial show that baseline HER2-associated biomarkers in circulating tumor DNA or tissue samples were associated with therapeutic response in patients with HER2-positive tumors, and these analyses identify potential drivers of resistance.

Neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab showed high pathologic response rates (pRRs) in patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma in the phase 1b OpACIN ( NCT02437279 ) and phase 2 OpACIN-neo ( NCT02977052 ) studies 1 , 2 . While the results are promising, data on the durability of these pathologic responses and baseline biomarkers for response and survival were lacking. After a median follow-up of 4 years, none of the patients with a pathologic response ( n  = 7/9 patients) in the OpACIN study had relapsed. In OpACIN-neo ( n  = 86), the 2-year estimated relapse-free survival was 84% for all patients, 97% for patients achieving a pathologic response and 36% for nonresponders ( P  < 0.001). High tumor mutational burden (TMB) and high interferon-gamma-related gene expression signature score (IFN-γ score) were associated with pathologic response and low risk of relapse; pRR was 100% in patients with high IFN-γ score/high TMB; patients with high IFN-γ score/low TMB or low IFN-γ score/high TMB had pRRs of 91% and 88%; while patients with low IFN-γ score/low TMB had a pRR of only 39%. These data demonstrate long-term benefit in patients with a pathologic response and show the predictive potential of TMB and IFN-γ score. Our findings provide a strong rationale for a randomized phase 3 study comparing neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab versus standard adjuvant therapy with antibodies against the programmed cell death protein-1 (anti-PD-1) in macroscopic stage III melanoma. Long-term outcomes and biomarker analyses of two neoadjuvant immunotherapy clinical trials in melanoma patients support the clinical benefit of this treatment approach and uncover prognostic correlates of response.

Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer is enriched in DNA damage response (DDR) gene aberrations. The TOPARP-B trial aims to prospectively validate the association between DDR gene aberrations and response to olaparib in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. In this open-label, investigator-initiated, randomised phase 2 trial following a selection (or pick-the-winner) design, we recruited participants from 17 UK hospitals. Men aged 18 years or older with progressing metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with one or two taxane chemotherapy regimens and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less had tumour biopsies tested with targeted sequencing. Patients with DDR gene aberrations were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated minimisation method, with balancing for circulating tumour cell count at screening, to receive 400 mg or 300 mg olaparib twice daily, given continuously in 4-week cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Neither participants nor investigators were masked to dose allocation. The primary endpoint of confirmed response was defined as a composite of all patients presenting with any of the following outcomes: radiological objective response (as assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1), a decrease in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of 50% or more (PSA50) from baseline, or conversion of circulating tumour cell count (from ≥5 cells per 7·5 mL blood at baseline to <5 cells per 7·5 mL blood). A confirmed response in a consecutive assessment after at least 4 weeks was required for each component. The primary analysis was done in the evaluable population. If at least 19 (43%) of 44 evaluable patients in a dose cohort responded, then the dose cohort would be considered successful. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of olaparib. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01682772. Recruitment for the trial has completed and follow-up is ongoing. 711 patients consented for targeted screening between April 1, 2015, and Aug 30, 2018. 161 patients had DDR gene aberrations, 98 of whom were randomly assigned and treated (49 patients for each olaparib dose), with 92 evaluable for the primary endpoint (46 patients for each olaparib dose). Median follow-up was 24·8 months (IQR 16·7–35·9). Confirmed composite response was achieved in 25 (54·3%; 95% CI 39·0–69·1) of 46 evaluable patients in the 400 mg cohort, and 18 (39·1%; 25·1–54·6) of 46 evaluable patients in the 300 mg cohort. Radiological response was achieved in eight (24·2%; 11·1–42·3) of 33 evaluable patients in the 400 mg cohort and six (16·2%; 6·2–32·0) of 37 in the 300 mg cohort; PSA50 response was achieved in 17 (37·0%; 23·2–52·5) of 46 and 13 (30·2%; 17·2–46·1) of 43; and circulating tumour cell count conversion was achieved in 15 (53·6%; 33·9–72·5) of 28 and 13 (48·1%; 28·7–68·1) of 27. The most common grade 3–4 adverse event in both cohorts was anaemia (15 [31%] of 49 patients in the 300 mg cohort and 18 [37%] of 49 in the 400 mg cohort). 19 serious adverse reactions were reported in 13 patients. One death possibly related to treatment (myocardial infarction) occurred after 11 days of treatment in the 300 mg cohort. Olaparib has antitumour activity against metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with DDR gene aberrations, supporting the implementation of genomic stratification of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in clinical practice. Cancer Research UK, AstraZeneca, Prostate Cancer UK, the Prostate Cancer Foundation, the Experimental Cancer Medicine Centres Network, and the National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres.

Colorectal cancer is genetically heterogeneous. Tumors in some patients have defects in mismatch DNA repair. These tumors have a high level of mutations that can lead to immune recognition. In a group of patients with microsatellite-unstable tumors, pembrolizumab led to longer progression-free survival and was less toxic than standard chemotherapy.

Preoperative and perioperative aromatase inhibitor (POAI) therapy has the potential to improve outcomes in women with operable oestrogen receptor-positive primary breast cancer. It has also been suggested that tumour Ki67 values after 2 weeks (Ki672W) of POAI predicts individual patient outcome better than baseline Ki67 (Ki67B). The POETIC trial aimed to test these two hypotheses. POETIC was an open-label, multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, phase 3 trial (done in 130 UK hospitals) in which postmenopausal women aged at least 50 years with WHO performance status 0–1 and hormone receptor-positive, operable breast cancer were randomly assigned (2:1) to POAI (letrozole 2·5 mg per day orally or anastrozole 1 mg per day orally) for 14 days before and following surgery or no POAI (control). Adjuvant treatment was given as per UK standard local practice. Randomisation was done centrally by computer-generated permuted block method (variable block size of six or nine) and was stratified by hospital. Treatment allocation was not masked. The primary endpoint was time to recurrence. A key second objective explored association between Ki67 (dichotomised at 10%) and disease outcomes. The primary analysis for clinical endpoints was by modified intention to treat (excluding patients who withdrew consent). For Ki67 biomarker association and endpoint analysis, the evaluable population included all randomly assigned patients who had paired Ki67 values available. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02338310; the European Clinical Trials database, EudraCT2007-003877-21; and the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN63882543. Recruitment is complete and long-term follow-up is ongoing. Between Oct 13, 2008, and April 16, 2014, 4480 women were recruited and randomly assigned to POAI (n=2976) or control (n=1504). On Feb 6, 2018, median follow-up was 62·9 months (IQR 58·1–74·1). 434 (10%) of 4480 women had a breast cancer recurrence (280 [9%] POAI; 154 [10%] control), hazard ratio 0·92 (95% CI 0·75–1·12); p=0·40 with the proportion free from breast cancer recurrence at 5 years of 91·0% (95% CI 89·9–92·0) for patients in the POAI group and 90·4% (88·7–91·9) in the control group. Within the POAI-treated HER2-negative subpopulation, 5-year recurrence risk in women with low Ki67B and Ki672W (low–low) was 4·3% (95% CI 2·9–6·3), 8·4% (6·8–10·5) with high Ki67B and low Ki672W (high–low) and 21·5% (17·1–27·0) with high Ki67B and Ki672W (high–high). Within the POAI-treated HER2-positive subpopulation, 5-year recurrence risk in the low–low group was 10·1% (95% CI 3·2–31·3), 7·7% (3·4–17·5) in the high–low group, and 15·7% (10·1–24·4) in the high–high group. The most commonly reported grade 3 adverse events were hot flushes (20 [1%] of 2801 patients in the POAI group vs six [<1%] of 1400 in the control group) and musculoskeletal pain (29 [1%] vs 13 [1%]). No treatment-related deaths were reported. POAI has not been shown to improve treatment outcome, but can be used without detriment to help select appropriate adjuvant therapy based on tumour Ki67. Most patients with low Ki67B or low POAI-induced Ki672W do well with adjuvant standard endocrine therapy (giving consideration to clinical–pathological factors), whereas those whose POAI-induced Ki672W remains high might benefit from further adjuvant treatment or trials of new therapies. Cancer Research UK.

Molecularly targeted agents have been reported to have anti-tumour activity for patients whose tumours harbour the matching molecular alteration. These results have led to increased off-label use of molecularly targeted agents on the basis of identified molecular alterations. We assessed the efficacy of several molecularly targeted agents marketed in France, which were chosen on the basis of tumour molecular profiling but used outside their indications, in patients with advanced cancer for whom standard-of-care therapy had failed. The open-label, randomised, controlled phase 2 SHIVA trial was done at eight French academic centres. We included adult patients with any kind of metastatic solid tumour refractory to standard of care, provided they had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, disease that was accessible for a biopsy or resection of a metastatic site, and at least one measurable lesion. The molecular profile of each patient's tumour was established with a mandatory biopsy of a metastatic tumour and large-scale genomic testing. We only included patients for whom a molecular alteration was identified within one of three molecular pathways (hormone receptor, PI3K/AKT/mTOR, RAF/MEK), which could be matched to one of ten regimens including 11 available molecularly targeted agents (erlotinib, lapatinib plus trastuzumab, sorafenib, imatinib, dasatinib, vemurafenib, everolimus, abiraterone, letrozole, tamoxifen). We randomly assigned these patients (1:1) to receive a matched molecularly targeted agent (experimental group) or treatment at physician's choice (control group) by central block randomisation (blocks of size six). Randomisation was done centrally with a web-based response system and was stratified according to the Royal Marsden Hospital prognostic score (0 or 1 vs 2 or 3) and the altered molecular pathway. Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation. Treatments in both groups were given in accordance with the approved product information and standard practice protocols at each institution and were continued until evidence of disease progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, which was not assessed by independent central review. We assessed safety in any patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01771458. Between Oct 4, 2012, and July 11, 2014, we screened 741 patients with any tumour type. 293 (40%) patients had at least one molecular alteration matching one of the 10 available regimens. At the time of data cutoff, Jan 20, 2015, 195 (26%) patients had been randomly assigned, with 99 in the experimental group and 96 in the control group. All patients in the experimental group started treatment, as did 92 in the control group. Two patients in the control group received a molecularly targeted agent: both were included in their assigned group for efficacy analyses, the patient who received an agent that was allowed in the experimental group was included in the experimental group for the purposes of safety analyses, while the other patient, who received a molecularly targeted agent and chemotherapy, was kept in the control group for safety analyses. Median follow-up was 11·3 months (IQR 5·8–11·6) in the experimental group and 11·3 months (8·1–11·6) in the control group at the time of the primary analysis of progression-free survival. Median progression-free survival was 2·3 months (95% CI 1·7–3·8) in the experimental group versus 2·0 months (1·8–2·1) in the control group (hazard ratio 0·88, 95% CI 0·65–1·19, p=0·41). In the safety population, 43 (43%) of 100 patients treated with a molecularly targeted agent and 32 (35%) of 91 patients treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy had grade 3–4 adverse events (p=0·30). The use of molecularly targeted agents outside their indications does not improve progression-free survival compared with treatment at physician's choice in heavily pretreated patients with cancer. Off-label use of molecularly targeted agents should be discouraged, but enrolment in clinical trials should be encouraged to assess predictive biomarkers of efficacy. Institut Curie.