Explore the vast range of titles available.

Recurrent gene fusions, such as ROS1 fusions, are oncogenic drivers of various cancers, including non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Up to 36% of patients with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC have brain metastases at the diagnosis of advanced disease. Entrectinib is a ROS1 inhibitor that has been designed to effectively penetrate and remain in the CNS. We explored the use of entrectinib in patients with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC. We did an integrated analysis of three ongoing phase 1 or 2 trials of entrectinib (ALKA-372-001, STARTRK-1, and STARTRK-2). The efficacy-evaluable population included adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC who received entrectinib at a dose of at least 600 mg orally once per day, with at least 12 months' follow-up. All patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2, and previous cancer treatment (except for ROS1 inhibitors) was allowed. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with an objective response (complete or partial response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1) and duration of response, and were evaluated by blinded independent central review. The safety-evaluable population for the safety analysis included all patients with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC in the three trials who received at least one dose of entrectinib (irrespective of dose or duration of follow-up). These ongoing studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02097810 (STARTRK-1) and NCT02568267 (STARTRK-2), and EudraCT, 2012–000148–88 (ALKA-372-001). Patients were enrolled in ALKA-372-001 from Oct 26, 2012, to March 27, 2018; in STARTRK-1 from Aug 7, 2014, to May 10, 2018; and in STARTRK-2 from Nov 19, 2015 (enrolment is ongoing). At the data cutoff date for this analysis (May 31, 2018), 41 (77%; 95% CI 64–88) of 53 patients in the efficacy-evaluable population had an objective response. Median follow-up was 15·5 monhts (IQR 13·4–20·2). Median duration of response was 24·6 months (95% CI 11·4–34·8). In the safety-evaluable population, 79 (59%) of 134 patients had grade 1 or 2 treatment-related adverse events. 46 (34%) of 134 patients had grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events, with the most common being weight increase (ten [8%]) and neutropenia (five [4%]). 15 (11%) patients had serious treatment-related adverse events, the most common of which were nervous system disorders (four [3%]) and cardiac disorders (three [2%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Entrectinib is active with durable disease control in patients with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC, and is well tolerated with a manageable safety profile, making it amenable to long-term dosing in these patients. These data highlight the need to routinely test for ROS1 fusions to broaden therapeutic options for patients with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC. Ignyta/F Hoffmann-La Roche.

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.

Patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer were randomly assigned to receive daily niraparib, a PARP inhibitor, or placebo as maintenance therapy after having had a response to platinum-based chemotherapy. Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the niraparib group than in the placebo group, with some increase in the frequency of myelosuppression and nausea.

Eighteen patients in a street-drug–induced stupor were seen in EDs on a single day in a New York City neighborhood. With rapid cooperative efforts among physicians, police, public health authorities, and toxicologists, the cannabinoid AMB-FUBINACA was identified as the cause. Commonly abused drugs are undergoing a period of proliferation and diversification, with a corresponding increase in the challenges faced by emergency and critical care physicians, substance abuse professionals, psychiatrists, and toxicologists. New psychoactive substances provide users with alternatives to older and better-characterized drugs of abuse, such as amphetamines, heroin, cocaine, and cannabis. Of the more than 540 new psychoactive substances that have been reported to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 1 synthetic cannabinoids are the fastest growing class, with more than 177 identified by the agency in 2014 and 24 new synthetic cannabinoids reported by Europol in 2015. . . .

Among patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer, the use of niraparib, a PARP inhibitor, was associated with a significantly longer duration of progression-free survival than placebo, with moderate bone marrow toxicity. Ovarian cancer is a leading cause of death from gynecologic cancers worldwide. 1 , 2 Despite a high initial response rate to platinum and taxane treatment in patients with advanced cancer, the effectiveness of the treatments diminishes over time, and most patients have a relapse. 3 Platinum retreatment is used in patients in whom there is an assumed platinum sensitivity, with diminishing effectiveness and a cumulative increase in toxicity. 3 Niraparib is a highly selective inhibitor of poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]–ribose) polymerase (PARP) 1/2, 4 nuclear proteins that detect DNA damage and promote its repair. Clinical studies have evaluated PARP inhibitors in patients with recurrent ovarian . . .

Oral niraparib, a highly-selective, potent poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP)-1 and PARP-2 inhibitor, is approved in the USA for the maintenance treatment of adult patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer who are in a complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy. It is also under regulatory review in the EU for use in maintenance treatment in patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer who are in response to platinum-based chemotherapy. In the multinational, phase 3 NOVA trial in adult patients with platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer, niraparib significantly prolonged median progression-free survival, irrespective of the presence or absence of a germline BRCA ( gBRCA ) mutation and irrespective of the presence or absence of homologous recombinant deficiency. Niraparib is also in development for use in other solid tumours, including breast and prostate cancer. This article summarizes the milestones in the development of niraparib leading to its first global approval for the maintenance treatment of adult patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer.

The treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma has been revolutionised by targeted therapy with drugs that block angiogenesis. So far, no phase 3 randomised trials comparing the effectiveness of one targeted agent against another have been reported. We did a randomised phase 3 study comparing axitinib, a potent and selective second-generation inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors, with sorafenib, an approved VEGF receptor inhibitor, as second-line therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer. We included patients coming from 175 sites (hospitals and outpatient clinics) in 22 countries aged 18 years or older with confirmed renal clear-cell carcinoma who progressed despite first-line therapy containing sunitinib, bevacizumab plus interferon-alfa, temsirolimus, or cytokines. Patients were stratified according to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and type of previous treatment and then randomly assigned (1:1) to either axitinib (5 mg twice daily) or sorafenib (400 mg twice daily). Axitinib dose increases to 7 mg and then to 10 mg, twice daily, were allowed for those patients without hypertension or adverse reactions above grade 2. Participants were not masked to study treatment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and was assessed by a masked, independent radiology review and analysed by intention to treat. This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00678392. A total of 723 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive axitinib (n=361) or sorafenib (n=362). The median PFS was 6·7 months with axitinib compared to 4·7 months with sorafenib (hazard ratio 0·665; 95% CI 0·544–0·812; one-sided p<0·0001). Treatment was discontinued because of toxic effects in 14 (4%) of 359 patients treated with axitinib and 29 (8%) of 355 patients treated with sorafenib. The most common adverse events were diarrhoea, hypertension, and fatigue in the axitinib arm, and diarrhoea, palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia, and alopecia in the sorafenib arm. Axitinib resulted in significantly longer PFS compared with sorafenib. Axitinib is a treatment option for second-line therapy of advanced renal cell carcinoma. Pfizer Inc.

In a phase 3 trial comparing the efficacy and safety of axitinib versus sorafenib as second-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma, patients given axitinib had a longer progression-free survival (PFS). Here, we report overall survival and updated efficacy, quality of life, and safety results. Eligible patients had clear cell metastatic renal cell carcinoma, progressive disease after one approved systemic treatment, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0–1. 723 patients were stratified by ECOG PS and previous treatment and randomly allocated (1:1) to receive axitinib (5 mg twice daily; n=361) or sorafenib (400 mg twice daily; n=362). The primary endpoint was PFS assessed by a masked, independent radiology review committee. We assessed patient-reported outcomes using validated questionnaires. Baseline characteristics and development of hypertension on treatment were studied as prognostic factors. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population, and safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This ongoing trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00678392. Median overall survival was 20·1 months (95% CI 16·7–23·4) with axitinib and 19·2 months (17·5–22·3) with sorafenib (hazard ratio [HR] 0·969, 95% CI 0·800–1·174; one-sided p=0·3744). Median investigator-assessed PFS was 8·3 months (95% CI 6·7–9·2) with axitinib and 5·7 months (4·7–6·5) with sorafenib (HR 0·656, 95% CI 0·552–0·779; one-sided p<0·0001). Patient-reported outcomes scores were similar in the treatment groups at baseline, were maintained during treatment, but decreased at end-of-treatment. Common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events were hypertension (60 [17%]), diarrhoea (40 [11%]), and fatigue (37 [10%]) in 359 axitinib-treated patients and hand–foot syndrome (61 [17%]), hypertension (43 [12%]), and diarrhoea (27 [8%]) in 355 sorafenib-treated patients. In a post-hoc 12-week landmark analysis, median overall survival was longer in patients with a diastolic blood pressure of 90 mm Hg or greater than in those with a diastolic blood pressure of less than 90 mm Hg: 20·7 months (95% CI 18·4–24·6) versus 12·9 months (10·1–20·4) in the axitinib group (p=0·0116), and 20·2 months (17·1–32·0) versus 14·8 months (12·0–17·7) in the sorafenib group (one-sided p=0·0020). Although overall survival, a secondary endpoint for the study, did not differ between the two groups, investigator-assessed PFS remained longer in the axitinib group compared with the sorafenib group. These results establish axitinib as a second-line treatment option for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Pfizer Inc.

Long-acting antiretrovirals can address barriers to HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), such as stigma and adherence. In two phase 3 trials, twice-yearly subcutaneous lenacapavir was safe and highly efficacious for PrEP in diverse populations. Furthering long-acting PrEP efforts, this study assessed the pharmacokinetics and safety of two once-yearly intramuscular lenacapavir formulations. This phase 1, open-label study in participants aged 18–55 years without HIV evaluated the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of two lenacapavir free acid formulations administered by ventrogluteal intramuscular injection as a single 5000 mg dose (formulation 1 with 5% w/w ethanol, formulation 2 with 10% w/w ethanol). Pharmacokinetic samples were collected at prespecified timepoints up to 56 weeks. Lenacapavir plasma concentrations were measured with a validated liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry method and summarised with non-compartmental analysis. Pharmacokinetic parameters evaluated included the area under the concentration–time curve for the once-yearly dosing interval calculated from days 1 to 365 (AUCdays 1–365), peak plasma concentration, time to reach peak plasma concentration, and trough concentration (Ctrough). Plasma concentration data from phase 3 studies of twice-yearly subcutaneous lenacapavir (PURPOSE 1 and PURPOSE 2) were pooled for comparison with once-yearly intramuscular lenacapavir formulations. Safety and tolerability, including participant-reported pain scores, were assessed. 20 participants received lenacapavir formulation 1 and 20 received lenacapavir formulation 2. For estimation of pharmacokinetic parameters, sample size varied over time with at least 13 participants (formulation 1) and at least 19 participants (formulation 2) due to early discontinuations for reasons unrelated to the study drug. Following administration of intramuscular lenacapavir, concentrations increased rapidly, and median time to maximum concentration was 84·1 days (IQR 56·1–112·0) for formulation 1 and 69·9 days (55·3–105·5) for formulation 2. The highest median concentration of once-yearly intramuscular lenacapavir (247·0 ng/mL [IQR 184·0–346·0] for formulation 1, 336·0 ng/mL [233·5–474·3] for formulation 2) remained above the highest median twice-yearly subcutaneous lenacapavir concentration (67·3 ng/mL [46·8–91·4]). Median Ctrough at the end of 52 weeks for formulation 1 was 57·0 ng/mL (IQR 49·9–72·4) and for formulation 2 was 65·6 ng/mL (41·8–87·1), exceeding the median twice-yearly subcutaneous lenacapavir Ctrough of 23·4 ng/mL (15·7–34·3) at the end of 26 weeks. Median AUCdays 1–365 for formulation 1 was 1011·1 h*μg/mL (IQR 881·0–1490·2) and for formulation 2 was 1274·0 h*μg/mL (1177·3–1704·8). Adverse events were mostly grade 1 or 2. The most common was injection-site pain (16 [80%] participants given formulation 1, 15 [75%] given formulation 2), which was generally mild, resolved within 1 week, and was substantially reduced by pretreatment with ice. Following administration of once-yearly intramuscular lenacapavir, median plasma concentrations exceeded those associated with efficacy in phase 3 studies of twice-yearly subcutaneous lenacapavir for PrEP for at least 56 weeks. Both formulations were safe and well tolerated. These data show the potential for biomedical HIV prevention with a once-yearly dosing interval. Gilead Sciences.

Polypharmacology plays an important role in defining response and adverse effects of drugs. For some mechanisms, experimentally mapping polypharmacology is commonplace, although this is typically done within the same protein class. Four PARP inhibitors have been approved by the FDA as cancer therapeutics, yet a precise mechanistic rationale to guide clinicians on which to choose for a particular patient is lacking. The four drugs have largely similar PARP family inhibition profiles, but several differences at the molecular and clinical level have been reported that remain poorly understood. Here, we report the first comprehensive characterization of the off-target kinase landscape of four FDA-approved PARP drugs. We demonstrate that all four PARP inhibitors have a unique polypharmacological profile across the kinome. Niraparib and rucaparib inhibit DYRK1s, CDK16 and PIM3 at clinically achievable, submicromolar concentrations. These kinases represent the most potently inhibited off-targets of PARP inhibitors identified to date and should be investigated further to clarify their potential implications for efficacy and safety in the clinic. Moreover, broad kinome profiling is recommended for the development of PARP inhibitors as PARP-kinase polypharmacology could potentially be exploited to modulate efficacy and side-effect profiles.