Faculty Bibliography

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).

Response to immune checkpoint therapy can be associated with a high mutation burden, but other mechanisms are also likely to be important. We identified a patient with metastatic gastric cancer with meaningful clinical benefit from treatment with the anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody avelumab. This tumor showed no evidence of high mutation burden or mismatch repair defect but was strongly positive for presence of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) encoded RNA. Analysis of The Cancer Genome Atlas gastric cancer data (25 EBV+, 80 microsatellite-instable [MSI], 310 microsatellite-stable [MSS]) showed that EBV-positive tumors were MSS. Two-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum tests showed that: 1) EBV-positive tumors had low mutation burden (median = 2.07 vs 3.13 in log10 scale, P < 10-12) but stronger evidence of immune infiltration (median ImmuneScore 2212 vs 1295, P < 10-4; log2 fold-change of CD8A = 1.85, P < 10-6) compared with MSI tumors, and 2) EBV-positive tumors had higher expression of immune checkpoint pathway (PD-1, CTLA-4 pathway) genes in RNA-seq data (log2 fold-changes: PD-1 = 1.85, PD-L1 = 1.93, PD-L2 = 1.50, CTLA-4 = 1.31, CD80 = 0.89, CD86 = 1.31, P < 10-4 each), and higher lymphocytic infiltration by histology (median tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte score = 3 vs 2, P < .001) compared with MSS tumors. These data suggest that EBV-positive low-mutation burden gastric cancers are a subset of MSS gastric cancers that may respond to immune checkpoint therapy.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:, can have significant clinical implications for patient care. METHODS:mutations in 1,636 specimens sequenced at Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey. RESULTS:mutations. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:LOHGIC can assess LOH status for both germline and somatic mutations. It also can be applied to any gene with candidate, inherited mutations. This approach demonstrates the clinical utility of targeted sequencing in both identifying patients with potential germline alterations in tumor suppressor genes as well as estimating LOH occurrence in cancer cells, which may confer therapeutic relevance.