Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is an emerging tool in the evaluation of GI cancers. Challenges remain in defining its utility and role as a primary end point in therapeutic trials. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) ctDNA GI working group was created to evaluate current data and provide guidance on the inclusion of ctDNA in GI cancer trials. METHODS:The NCI GI steering committee assigned four task force members to serve as co-chairs for the working group. Co-chairs identified experts within each GI disease group to form a panel that convened to review data and provide recommendations. The group focused on ctDNA's role as a potential surrogate for assessing prognosis and guiding treatment decisions that may enhance GI cancer trials. A manuscript was drafted, circulated, revised, and voted on by the panel. The final draft was reviewed by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program. RESULTS:Further data are required to support ctDNA as a primary end point for late-phase therapeutic trials, particularly in studies that could change the standard-of-care. However, the group supports ctDNA as a primary efficacy end point for phase II studies and as a noninvasive evaluation strategy for new drug development. Incorporation of ctDNA as a biomarker in trial design must consider the specific context of disease biology of the GI cancer subtypes. ctDNA should be incorporated as an exploratory end point across a variety of disease settings and indications. Several practical considerations were identified to optimize the incorporation of ctDNA in future trial design. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Prospective trials are required to clarify the role of ctDNA as a valid surrogate end point for progression-free or overall survival in GI cancers.

BACKGROUND:Cohorts A, C, and E of the phase Ib KEYNOTE-651 study evaluated pembrolizumab + binimetinib ± chemotherapy in microsatellite stable/mismatch repair-proficient metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS/METHODS:Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks plus binimetinib 30 mg twice daily alone (cohort A; previously treated with any chemotherapy) or with 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (cohort C; previously untreated) or 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan (cohort E; previously treated with 1 line of therapy including fluoropyrimidine + oxaliplatin-based regimen) every 2 weeks. Binimetinib dose-escalation to 45 mg twice daily was planned in all cohorts using a modified toxicity probability interval design (target dose-limiting toxicity [DLT], 30%). The primary endpoint was safety; investigator-assessed objective response rate was secondary. RESULTS:In cohort A, 1/6 patients (17%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg; none occurred in 14 patients with 45 mg. In cohort C, 3/9 patients (33%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg; dose was not escalated to 45 mg. In cohort E, 1/5 patients (20%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg; 5/10 patients (50%) had DLTs with 45 mg. Enrollment was stopped in cohort E binimetinib 45 mg and deescalated to 30 mg; 2/4 additional patients (50%) had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg (total 3/9 [33%] had DLTs with binimetinib 30 mg). Objective response rate was 0% in cohort A, 9% in cohort C, and 15% in cohort E. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Per DLT criteria, binimetinib + pembrolizumab (cohort A) was tolerable, binimetinib + pembrolizumab + 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (cohort C) did not qualify for binimetinib dose escalation to 45 mg, and binimetinib + pembrolizumab + 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan (cohort E) required binimetinib dose reduction from 45 to 30 mg. No new safety findings were observed across cohorts. There was no apparent additive efficacy when binimetinib + pembrolizumab was added to chemotherapy. Data did not support continued enrollment in cohorts C and E.

BACKGROUND:The phase 1b KEYNOTE-651 study evaluated pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in microsatellite stable or mismatch repair-proficient metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS/METHODS:Patients with microsatellite stable or mismatch repair-proficient metastatic colorectal cancer received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks plus 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin (previously untreated; cohort B) or 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan (previously treated with fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin; cohort D) every 2 weeks. Primary end point was safety; investigator-assessed objective response rate per RECIST v1.1 was secondary and biomarker analysis was exploratory. RESULTS:Thirty-one patients were enrolled in cohort B and 32 in cohort D; median follow-up was 30.2 and 33.5 months, respectively. One dose-limiting toxicity (grade 3 small intestine obstruction) occurred in cohort D. In cohort B, grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 18 patients (58%), most commonly neutropenia and decreased neutrophil count (n = 5 each). In cohort D, grade 3 or 4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 17 patients (53%), most commonly neutropenia (n = 7). No grade 5 treatment-related AEs occurred. Objective response rate was 61% in cohort B (KRAS wildtype: 71%; KRAS mutant: 53%) and 25% in cohort D (KRAS wildtype: 47%; KRAS mutant: 6%). In both cohorts, PD-L1 combined positive score and T-cell-inflamed gene expression profiles were higher and HER2 expression was lower in responders than nonresponders. No association between tumor mutational burden and response was observed. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Pembrolizumab plus 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin/5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan demonstrated an acceptable AE profile. Efficacy data appeared comparable with current standard of care (including by KRAS mutation status). Biomarker analyses were hypothesis-generating, warranting further exploration. GOV IDENTIFIER/UNASSIGNED:ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT03374254.

Dose-finding oncology trials (DFOTs) provide early access to novel compounds of potential therapeutic benefit in addition to providing critical safety and dosing information. While access to trials for which a patient is eligible remains the largest barrier to enrollment on clinical trials, additional direct and indirect barriers unique to enrollment on DFOTs are often overlooked but worthy of consideration. Direct barriers including financial costs of care, travel and time investments, and logical challenges including correlative study designs are important to bear in mind when developing strategies to facilitate the patient experience on DFOTs. Indirect barriers such as strict eligibility criteria, washout periods, and concomitant medication restrictions should be accounted for during DFOT design to maintain the fidelity of the trial without being overly exclusionary. Involving patients and advocates and incorporating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) throughout the process, from initial DFOT design, through patient recruitment and participation, is critical to informing strategies to minimize identified barriers to offer the benefit of DFOTs to all patients.

BACKGROUND:Our preclinical work revealed tumour hypoxia induces homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), increasing sensitivity to Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. We aimed to induce tumour hypoxia with ramucirumab thereby sensitising tumours to olaparib. PATIENTS AND METHODS/METHODS:This multi-institution single-arm Phase 1/2 trial enrolled patients with metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma refractory to ≥1 systemic treatment. In dose escalation, olaparib was evaluated at escalating dose levels with ramucirumab 8 mg/kg day 1 in 14-day cycles. The primary endpoint of Phase 1 was the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D), and in Phase 2 the primary endpoint was the overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS:Fifty-one patients received ramucirumab and olaparib. The RP2D was olaparib 300 mg twice daily with ramucirumab 8 mg/kg. In evaluable patients at the RP2D the ORR was 6/43 (14%) (95% CI 4.7-25.6). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.8 months (95% CI 2.3-4.2) and median overall survival (OS) was 7.3 months (95% CI 5.7-13.0). Non-statistically significant improvements in PFS and OS were observed for patients with tumours with mutations in HRD genes. CONCLUSIONS:Olaparib and ramucirumab is well-tolerated with efficacy that exceeds historical controls with ramucirumab single agent for gastric cancer in a heavily pre-treated patient population.

Fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFR) are emerging as an important therapeutic target for patients with advanced, refractory cancers. Most selective FGFR inhibitors under investigation show reversible binding, and their activity is limited by acquired drug resistance. This review summarizes the preclinical and clinical development of futibatinib, an irreversible FGFR1-4 inhibitor. Futibatinib stands out among FGFR inhibitors because of its covalent binding mechanism and low susceptibility to acquired resistance. Preclinical data indicated robust activity of futibatinib against acquired resistance mutations in the FGFR kinase domain. In early-phase studies, futibatinib showed activity in cholangiocarcinoma, and gastric, urothelial, breast, central nervous system, and head and neck cancers harboring various FGFR aberrations. Exploratory analyses indicated clinical benefit with futibatinib after prior FGFR inhibitor use. In a pivotal phase II trial, futibatinib demonstrated durable objective responses (42% objective response rate) and tolerability in previously treated patients with advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma harboring FGFR2 fusions or rearrangements. A manageable safety profile was observed across studies, and patient quality of life was maintained with futibatinib treatment in patients with cholangiocarcinoma. Hyperphosphatemia, the most common adverse event with futibatinib, was well managed and did not lead to treatment discontinuation. These data show clinically meaningful benefit with futibatinib in FGFR2-rearrangement-positive cholangiocarcinoma and provide support for further investigation of futibatinib across other indications. Future directions for this agent include elucidating mechanisms of resistance and exploration of combination therapy approaches.