Mortazavi, Amir

TPS276 Background: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) can evolve into a neuroendocrine-like subtype with aggressive behavior and poor outcomes (1). Nuclear Receptor-Binding SET Domain Protein 2 (NSD2) is overexpressed in prostate cancer and is a driver of both androgen-receptor (AR)-dependent signaling and of neuroendocrine differentiation, where cancer cells lose AR dependence and response to AR pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) (2,3,4). In studies of patient-derived neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC) models, genetic depletion of NSD2 led to restoration of AR expression, reversal of adeno-to-neuroendocrine differentiation, and re-sensitization to ARPI (4). We hypothesize that NSD2 inhibition can reverse resistance to ARPIs in patients with progressive mCRPC, including with neuroendocrine differentiation. KTX-2001 is an oral, potent and selective small molecule inhibitor of NSD2. It is the sponsor’s second NSD2 inhibitor to enter the clinic. The sponsor’s first in class NSD2 inhibitor, KTX-1001, was shown to be tolerable and have preliminary efficacy in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (5). Methods: STRIKE-001 (NCT07103018) is a multicenter, open-label phase 1 dose escalation trial of KTX-2001 monotherapy (Part A) and KTX-2001 + darolutamide (Part B). Key inclusion criteria are males age ≥18 years with mCRPC, progression after receiving ARPI, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 0-1, willingness to undergo biopsy if safe and feasible, and life expectancy of ≥6 months. Participants take KTX-2001 by mouth once daily alone (Part A) or with darolutamide 600 mg twice daily (Part B). Dose escalation of KTX-2001 in Parts A and B will follow a 3+3 design and occur in parallel at multiple planned dose levels. Primary objectives are to assess the safety and tolerability, determine MTD, and determine RP2D(s) for further study of KTX-2001 alone and in combination with darolutamide. Secondary objectives include characterization of efficacy and PK parameters for both KTX-2001 monotherapy and in combination with darolutamide. Exploratory objectives include study of pharmacodynamic effects, circulating tumor cells, and cell-free DNA. 1. Conteduca V, Eur J Cancer 2019. 2. Parolia A, Nat Genet 2024. 3. Aytes A, Nat Commun 2018 4. Li J, bioRxiv 2023.07.18.549585 5. Bories P, Blood Vol 144, Suppl 1,2024. Clinical trial information: NCT07103018 .

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for diagnostic workup, staging, and treatment of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the systemic therapy options for patients with advanced RCC and summarize the new clinical data evaluated by the NCCN panel for the recommended therapies in Version 2.2024 of the NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer focus on the screening, diagnosis, staging, treatment, and management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC typically undergo surgery and/or receive systemic therapy. Tumor histology and risk stratification of patients is important in therapy selection. The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer stratify treatment recommendations by histology; recommendations for first-line treatment of ccRCC are also stratified by risk group. To further guide management of advanced RCC, the NCCN Kidney Cancer Panel has categorized all systemic kidney cancer therapy regimens as “Preferred,” “Other Recommended Regimens,” or “Useful in Certain Circumstances.” This categorization provides guidance on treatment selection by considering the efficacy, safety, evidence, and other factors that play a role in treatment selection. These factors include pre-existing comorbidities, nature of the disease, and in some cases consideration of access to agents. This article summarizes surgical and systemic therapy recommendations for patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC.

Abstract Objectives Two pilot studies of AR‐42, a pan‐histone deacetylase inhibitor, in human neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2), vestibular schwannomas (VS), and meningiomas are presented. Primary endpoints included safety, and intra‐tumoral pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD). Methods Pilot 1 is a subset analysis of a phase 1 study of AR‐42 in solid tumors, which included NF2 or sporadic meningiomas. Tumor volumes and treatment‐related adverse events (TRAEs) are reported (NCT01129193). Pilot 2 is a phase 0 surgical study of AR‐42 assessing intra‐tumoral PK and PD. AR‐42 was administered for 3 weeks pre‐operatively. Plasma and tumor drug concentrations and p‐AKT expression were measured (NCT02282917). Results Pilot 1: Five patients with NF2 and two with sporadic meningiomas experienced a similar incidence of TRAEs to the overall phase I trial. The six evaluable patients had 15 tumors (8 VS, 7 meningiomas). On AR‐42, tumor volume increased in six, remained stable in eight, and decreased in one tumor. The annual percent growth rate decreased in eight, remained stable in three, and increased in four tumors. Pilot 2: Four patients with sporadic VS and one patient with meningioma experienced no grade 3/4 toxicities. Expression of p‐AKT decreased in three of four VS. All tumors had higher AR‐42 concentrations than plasma. Conclusions AR‐42 is safe. Tumor volumes showed a mixed response, but most slowed growth. On a 40‐mg regimen, drug concentrated in tumors and growth pathways were suppressed in most tumors, suggesting this may be a well‐tolerated and effective dose. A phase 2 study of AR‐42 for NF2‐associated tumors appears warranted. Level of Evidence 1b, 4.

PURPOSE The combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) is a standard therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Based on data that angiogenesis plays a role in urothelial carcinoma growth and progression, a randomized placebo-controlled trial was performed with the primary objective of testing whether patients treated with GC and bevacizumab (GCB) have superior overall survival (OS) than patients treated with GC and placebo (GCP). PATIENTS AND METHODS Between July 2009 and December 2014, 506 patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma without prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease and no neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy within 12 months were randomly assigned to receive either GCB or GCP. The primary end point was OS, with secondary end points of progression-free survival, objective response, and toxicity. RESULTS With a median follow-up of 76.3 months among alive patients, the median OS was 14.5 months for patients treated with GCB and 14.3 months for patients treated with GCP (hazard ratio for death = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.05; two-sided stratified log-rank P = .14). The median progression-free survival was 8.0 months for GCB and 6.7 months for GCP (hazard ratio = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.95; P = .016). The proportion of patients with grade 3 or greater adverse events did not differ significantly between both arms, although increased bevacizumab-related toxicities such as hypertension and proteinuria occurred in the bevacizumab-treated arm. CONCLUSION The addition of bevacizumab to GC did not result in improved OS. The observed median OS of about 14 months is consistent with prior phase III trials of cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for diagnostic workup, staging, and treatment of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the guidelines, including changes to certain systemic therapy recommendations for patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC. They also discuss the addition of a new section to the guidelines that identifies and describes the most common hereditary RCC syndromes and provides recommendations for genetic testing, surveillance, and/or treatment options for patients who are suspected or confirmed to have one of these syndromes.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for the clinical management of patients with clear cell and non–clear cell renal cell carcinoma, and are intended to assist with clinical decision-making. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the NCCN Kidney Cancer Panel discussions for the 2020 update to the guidelines regarding initial management and first-line systemic therapy options for patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Abstract Background: HER-2 is a transmembrane receptor that is overexpressed in multiple epithelial tumors. We have previously shown that a first generation HER-2 B-cell peptide vaccine targeting epitopes (628-647) and (316-339) was safe and relatively active. We recently developed a novel B-cell epitope specific vaccine (HER-Vaxx) consisting of epitopes derived from the extracellular domain of HER-2 that correspond to amino acid sequences 597-626 (pertuzumab binding site) and 266-296 (trastuzumab binding site). Methods: This first-in-human Phase 1b study evaluated the safety, optimal immunologic/biologic dose (OID/OBD) and immunogenicity of HER-Vaxx. Using a 3+3 dose escalation design, 3 patients (pts) were treated at each dose level (DL). If <2 pts experience dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), we required an additional 3 pts to be entered at that DL for OID/OBD assessment (defined as the dose level inducing a strong immunogenic response for 5 out of 6 patients). We also required that at least 6 patients at each DL to receive 3 inoculations of the combination vaccines at 3-week intervals and that < 2 of the 6 pts experience DLT before dose escalation. DLs were 1.0 mg (DL1), 1.5 mg (DL2), 2.0 mg (DL3) and 2.5 mg (DL4) of each peptide. Each dose contained 0.025 mg of n-MDP. Results: 49 patients with metastatic and/or recurrent solid tumors and a median of 4 prior lines of chemotherapy received at least one inoculation of HER-vaxx. Common related toxicities include injection site reactions (56% grade 1/2 and 5% grade 3/4). There were no DLTs. The OID/OBD was found to be DL 2 (1.5 mg of each peptide vaccine).A total of 28 patients received ≥ 3 vaccinations including 2 with a partial response and 14 with stable disease. Of those, 6 patients received at least one 6-month boost. The vaccine generated sustained humoral response eliciting HER-2 specific antibodies in the majority of responding patients. Conclusion: We demonstrate that HER-Vaxx is well tolerated and able to generate sustained anti-HER-2 immune response. Given the promise, continuous development of the vaccine is ongoing at the suggested OBD in HER-2 overexpressing tumors. Citation Format: Tanios Bekaii-Saab, Lai Wei, Robert Wesolowski, Daniel Ahn, Christina Wu, Maryam Lustberg, Amir Mortazavi, Bhuvaneswari Ramaswamy, Jay Overholser, Pravin Kaumaya. A Phase Ib of a combination of two chimeric (Trastuzumab-like and Pertuzumab-like) HER-2 B cell peptide vaccine emulsified in ISA 720 and nor-MDP adjuvant in patients with advanced solid tumors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT017.

TPS504 Background: Patients with high-risk MIBC have a poor prognosis. Radical cystectomy remains the standard treatment. Yet despite substantial improvements in surgical techniques, mortality from metastatic recurrence remains high. A large number of MIBC patients are ineligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy or have persistent muscle-invasive disease despite neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, has demonstrated significant activity and is FDA-approved for patients with advanced/chemotherapy-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma. We hypothesize that pembrolizumab given post-cystectomy will improve overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with high-risk MIBC. Methods: Patients must have histologically confirmed muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder or upper tract, have received NAC and have ≥ pT2 and/or pN+ at surgery or be cisplatin-ineligible and have ≥ pT3 and/or pN+ at surgery or have declined adjuvant cisplatin-based therapy and have ≥ pT3 and/or pN+ at surgery. Surgery could be radical cystectomy, nephrectomy, or ureterectomy. Patients are stratified by pathologic stage, central PD-L1 status, and prior NAC. Patients are randomized to receive pembrolizumab 240 mg every 3 weeks for 1 year, or observation. The dual primary objectives are to determine DFS and OS. Secondary objectives are to determine DFS and OS in PD-L1-positive and -negative patients and assess safety. Correlative objectives are to determine whether 12 immune gene signatures, tumor molecular subtypes, diversity of T-cell receptor (TCR) clonotypes, persistence of TCR clonotypes, tumor and neoantigen burden, HLA subtypes, and plasma HGF and VEGF levels with IL-10 and IL-17 are associated with OS and DFS. Quality of Life Correlative objectives are to compare health-related quality of life as assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30. Clinical trial information: NCT03244384.

Abstract Purpose: This first-in-human phase I study (NCT 01417546) evaluated the safety profile, optimal immunologic/biological dose (OID/OBD), and immunogenicity of the combination of two peptide B-cell epitope vaccines engineered to represent the trastuzumab- and pertuzumab-binding sites. Although trastuzumab and pertuzumab have been approved for clinical use, patients often develop resistance to these therapies. We have advanced a new paradigm in immunotherapy that focuses on humoral responses based on conformational B-cell epitope vaccines. Patients and Methods: The vaccine is comprised of two chimeric HER-2 B-cell peptide vaccines incorporating a “promiscuous T-cell epitope.” Patients were immunized with the vaccine constructs emulsified with nor-muramyl-dipeptide adjuvant in a water-in-oil Montanide ISA 720VG vehicle. Eligible patients with metastatic and/or recurrent solid tumors received three inoculations every 3 weeks. Results: Forty-nine patients with a median of 4 prior lines of chemotherapy received at least 1 vaccination. Twenty-eight patients completed the 3 vaccination regimens. Six patients received 1 six-month boost after the regimen, and one patient received 7 six-month boosts. No serious adverse reactions or dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The vaccine was well tolerated with dose level 2 as the recommended phase II dose. The most common related toxicity in all patients was injection-site reactions (24%). Two patients had a partial response, 14 had stable disease, and 19 had progressive disease. Conclusions: The study vaccine is safe, exhibits antitumor activity, and shows preliminary indication that peptide vaccination may avoid therapeutic resistance and offer a promising alternative to monoclonal antibody therapies.