Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Overexpression of metabotropic glutamate receptor 1 (GRM1) has been implicated in the pathogenesis of multiple cancers. Riluzole, an inhibitor of glutamate release, showed synergistic antitumor activity in combination with the multi-kinase inhibitor sorafenib in preclinical models. This phase I trial identified the toxicity profile, dose-limiting toxicities, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of riluzole combined with sorafenib in patients with advanced cancers. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Patients with refractory solid tumors were enrolled utilizing a 3+3 dose-escalation design. Riluzole was given at 100 mg PO BID in combination with sorafenib, beginning at 200 mg PO daily and escalating in 200 mg increments per level in 28-day cycles. Restaging evaluations were performed every 2 cycles. RESULTS:35 patients were enrolled over 4 dose levels. The MTD was declared at dose level 3 (riluzole: 100 mg PO BID; sorafenib: 400 mg AM/200 mg PM). Pharmacokinetic analyses did not reveal definitive evidence of drug-drug interactions. Consistent decreases in phospho-forms of ERK and AKT in tumor tissue analyses with accompanying decrease in GRM1 expression and increase in pro-apoptotic BIM suggest target engagement by the combination. Best responses included a partial response in 1 (2.9%) patient with pancreatic acinar cell carcinoma with a KANK4-RAF1 fusion, and stable disease in 11 (36%) patients. CONCLUSION:Combination therapy with riluzole and sorafenib was safe and tolerable in patients with advanced solid tumors. The partial response in a patient with a RAF1 fusion suggests that further exploration in a genomically selected cohort may be warranted.

BACKGROUND:Inhibitors of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) proteins potentiate antitumor activity of platinum chemotherapy. This study sought to determine the safety and tolerability of PARP inhibitor talazoparib with carboplatin and paclitaxel. METHODS: days 1, 8, 15 of 21-day cycles in patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients enrolled using a 3 + 3 design in two cohorts with talazoparib for 7 (schedule A) or 3 days (schedule B). After induction with 4-6 cycles of triplet therapy, patients received one of three maintenance options: (a) continuation of triplet (b) carboplatin/talazoparib, or (c) talazoparib monotherapy. RESULTS:Forty-three patients were treated. The MTD for both schedules was talazoparib 250mcg daily. The main toxicity was myelosuppression including grade 3/4 hematologic treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Dose modification occurred in 87% and 100% of patients for schedules A and B, respectively. Discontinuation due to TRAEs was 13% in schedule A and 10% in B. Ten out of 22 evaluable patients in schedule A and 5/16 patients in schedule B had a complete or partial response. Twelve out of 43 patients received ≥6 cycles of talazoparib after induction, with a 13-month median duration of maintenance. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:on days 1, 8, 15 of 21-day cycles. This regimen is associated with significant myelosuppression, and in addition to maximizing supportive care, modification of the chemotherapy component would be a consideration for further development of this combination with the schedules investigated in this study.

BACKGROUND:Glutamate signaling activates MAPK and PI3K/AKT pathways in tumor cells. Treatment with riluzole, a glutamate release inhibitor, has been previously shown to be safe in melanoma patients and produced biologic effects, but did not lead to radiographic responses, possibly due to poor pharmacokinetic properties. Therefore, we conducted a phase Ib trial to determine the safety and tolerability of the combination of the riluzole prodrug troriluzole (BHV-4157, trigriluzole) and the PD-1 antibody nivolumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS:Patients with advanced or refractory solid tumors and measurable disease per RECIST 1.1 were treated with increasing doses of troriluzole using a semi-Bayesian modified toxicity probability interval dose escalation procedure. Troriluzole monotherapy was orally self-administered for a 14-day lead-in period followed by continuation of troriluzole in combination with nivolumab 240 mg IV every 2 weeks. Endpoints included safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and efficacy. RESULTS:We enrolled 14 patients with advanced solid tumors (melanoma = 3, NSCLC = 3, renal cell carcinoma = 2, bladder/urothelial = 2, ovarian cancer = 1, adenoid cystic carcinoma = 1, pleural mesothelial = 1, head and neck cancer = 1). Eleven patients had cancer progression on prior therapy with PD-1 or PD-L1 agent. Patients received troriluzole total daily doses from 140 to 560 mg (divided). The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) occurring in ≥ 5 patients (> 35%) were transaminitis and increased lipase. DLT (dose-limiting toxicity) occurred in 3 patients: (1) grade 3 anorexia, (2) grade 3 fatigue and, (3) grade 3 atrial fibrillation. Six patients were treated at the MTD (maximum tolerated dose). No subjects discontinued treatment due to AEs. One response occurred (7%), which was a partial response in a subject who had PD-1 refractory disease. The 6-month PFS rate was 21%. PK data showed that the prodrug troriluzole was efficiently cleaved into riluzole by 2-h post-dosing in all dose cohorts tested. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The combination of troriluzole and nivolumab was safe and well-tolerated. The MTD of troriluzole was determined to be 420 mg total daily dose. The observed antitumor activity, primarily disease stabilization, is of interest in patients with PD-1 resistant tumors. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03229278.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Veliparib (V), an oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, potentiates effects of alkylating agents and topoisomerase inhibitors in preclinical tumor models. We conducted a phase I trial of V with iv cyclophosphamide (C) and V plus iv doxorubicin (A) and C. METHODS:) Day 3 in 21-day cycles. In Group 3, patients received AC Day 1 plus V Days 1-7, and in Group 4, AC Day 1 plus V Days 1-14 was given in 21-day cycles to evaluate effects on γH2AX foci. RESULTS:Eighty patients were enrolled. MTD was not reached for V and C. MTD for V and AC was V 100 mg every 12 h Days 1-4 with AC (60/600 mg/m2) Day 3 every 21 days. V PK appears to be dose-dependent and has no effect on the PK of C. Overall, neutropenia and anemia were the most common adverse events. Objective response in V and AC treated groups was 22% (11/49). Overall clinical benefit rate was 31% (25/80). PAR decreased in PBMCs. Percentage of γH2AX-positive CTCs increased after treatment with V and AC. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:V and AC can be safely combined. Activity was observed in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

ABBV-176 is an antibody-drug conjugate composed of the humanized antibody h16f (PR-1594804) conjugated to a highly potent, cytotoxic cross-linking pyrrolobenzodiazepine dimer (PBD; SGD-1882) targeting the prolactin receptor (PRLR), which is overexpressed in several solid tumor types. This phase 1, dose-escalation study (NCT03145909) evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary activity of ABBV-176 in patients with advanced solid tumors likely to exhibit elevated levels of PRLR. Patients received ABBV-176 once every 3 weeks. Dose escalation was by an exposure-adjusted, continual reassessment method. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were assessed from the first day of dosing until the next dose of ABBV-176 to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Nineteen patients received ABBV-176 at doses from 2.7-109.35 μg/kg. Patients enrolled had colorectal cancer (n = 11), breast cancer (n = 6), or adrenocortical carcinoma (n = 2). DLTs occurred in 4 patients and included thrombocytopenia (n = 2; both at 99.9-μg/kg dose level), neutropenia (n = 2; 78.3-μg/kg and 99.9-μg/kg dose levels), and pancytopenia (n = 1; 109.35-μg/kg dose level). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events related to ABBV-176 were thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, increased aspartate aminotransferase, nausea, fatigue, and pleural effusions. Effusions and edema were common, and timing of onset suggested possible cumulative ABBV-176 toxicity. Tumor expression of PRLR varied among patients enrolled and analyzed. No patient had an objective response. MTD was not formally determined, as identification of a tolerable dose was confounded by late-onset toxicities. ABBV-176 was associated with significant toxicity in this phase 1, dose-escalation study. Although cytopenias were often dose limiting, effusions and edema were also common and had late onset that suggested cumulative toxicity. No responses were observed, although data were available from a small number of patients with variable tumor PRLR expression. This study was terminated after the dosing of 19 patients.

BACKGROUND:Ectrodactyly-ectodermal dysplasia-clefting syndrome 3 (EEC) is one of the six overlapping syndromes caused by mutations in the tumor protein p63 gene (TP63). EEC is suspected when patients have cleft hands or feet, polydactyly, and syndactyly, abnormal development of the ectodermally derived structures, and orofacial clefting. Genitourinary (GU) anomalies have been identified in patients with EEC, yet these are often under-recognized and under-reported. The available literature on sonographic prenatal findings is sparse, especially when considering GU anomalies. METHODS:We present the case of a male stillborn fetus, who was found antenatally to have multicystic dysplastic kidneys and anhydramnios. Following the termination of pregnancy, examination and autopsy further revealed unilateral polydactyly and bilateral syndactyly which had not been previously identified on antenatal ultrasound. RESULTS:Whole-exome sequencing (WES) revealed a de novo heterozygous pathogenic variant in exon 5 of the TP63 gene: p.His247Arg: c.740A>G (NM_003722.4) which has been reported in the literature. The His247Arg variant has been published as a pathogenic variant in association with EEC, both with and without orofacial clefting. CONCLUSION:Our prenatal case expands the phenotypic spectrum of TP63-related disorders in general. In addition, it adds to the phenotype associated with the His247Arg pathogenic variant responsible for EEC. Further, we highlight the importance of WES as a postnatal tool to help clarify unexpected findings, and as a way to add to the spectrum of existing phenotypes of known single-gene disorders.

PURPOSE:Here, we report results of the first phase I study of erdafitinib, a potent, oral pan-FGFR inhibitor. PATIENTS AND METHODS:genomic alterations. In patients with such alterations, two selected doses/schedules identified during part 1 dose-escalation [9 mg once daily and 10 mg intermittently (7 days on/7 days off), as previously published (Tabernero JCO 2015;33:3401-8)] were tested. RESULTS:mutations or fusions. Median response duration was 5.6 months for urothelial carcinoma and 11.4 months for cholangiocarcinoma. ORRs in other tumor types were <10%. CONCLUSIONS:Erdafitinib shows tolerability and preliminary clinical activity in advanced solid tumors with genomic changes in the FGFR pathway, at two different dosing schedules and with particularly encouraging responses in urothelial carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND:ONC201 is a small molecule antagonist of DRD2, a G protein-coupled receptor overexpressed in several malignancies, that has prolonged antitumor efficacy and immunomodulatory properties in preclinical models. The first-in-human trial of ONC201 previously established a recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of 625 mg once every three weeks. Here, we report the results of a phase I study that evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics (PD) of weekly ONC201. METHODS:Patients ≥ 18 years old with an advanced solid tumor refractory to standard treatment were enrolled. Dose escalation proceeded with a 3 + 3 design from 375 mg to 625 mg of ONC201. One cycle, also the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) window, was 21 days. The primary endpoint was to determine the RP2D of weekly ONC201, which was confirmed in an 11-patient dose expansion cohort. RESULTS:Twenty patients were enrolled: three at 375 mg and 17 at 625 mg of ONC201. The RP2D was defined as 625 mg with no DLT, treatment discontinuation, or dose modifications due to drug-related toxicity. PK profiles were consistent with every-three-week dosing and similar between the first and fourth dose. Serum prolactin and caspase-cleaved cytokeratin-18 induction were detected, along with intratumoral integrated stress response activation and infiltration of granzyme B+ Natural Killer cells. Induction of immune cytokines and effectors was higher in patients who received ONC201 once weekly versus once every three weeks. Stable disease of > 6 months was observed in several prostate and endometrial cancer patients. CONCLUSIONS:Weekly, oral ONC201 is well-tolerated and results in enhanced immunostimulatory activity that warrants further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT02250781 (Oral ONC201 in Treating Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors), NCT02324621 (Continuation of Oral ONC201 in Treating Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors).