Maki, Robert G.

11508 Background: Trabectedin(T) is a marine-derived minor groove DNA binding compound that alters transcription factor activity. Preclinical data suggests that T suppresses the oncogenic driver of ES, EWS::FLI1. This suppression requires a threshold concentration of T and is potentiated by low doses of Irinotecan(I). Preliminary clinical activity and reversal of the EWS::FLI1 transcriptome was seen in patients (pts) in the phase I portion of SARC037. Here we report the phase II results of T with I at the recommended dose in pts with relapsed/refractory ES. Methods: In this open-label multicenter study, T was given at 1 mg/m2 as a 1-h infusion on day(D)1 with I at 25 mg/m2 intravenously on D2 and D4 of a 21D cycle. Key eligibility criteria were EWS::FLI1 fusion transcript, age ≥6 years, ECOG ≤2, adequate organ function, and willing to have a research biopsy if safely accessible. The primary objective was to determine the objective response rate (ORR) assessed by RECIST v1.1. Secondary objectives were progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR), and safety. This study used a Simon two-stage design that required 4 or more responses (CR or PR) at the final analysis to establish treatment activity. Results: 18 pts enrolled from 12/2022-12/2023 across 6 sites, 8F/10M, median age 21y (9-43). Pts had a median of 3 (1-7) prior therapy lines, including I in 67% of pts. Of 16 pts evaluable for response at the cutoff date, 5 pts had a PR, and 2 pts had SD. Two pts have evaluations pending and two pts were removed for toxicity before the first evaluation. Median time to response was 2.6 months(m), 6-month PFS was 37.7% (95% CI 18.3%, 77.7%), and all responses were sustained at the time of data cutoff at 10.4+, 7.5+, 5.5+, 5.0+ and 4.6+ m. There were no G5 AEs. Most pts had molecular profiling, translocation testing, as well as ctDNA collection, quantitation, and analysis. A subset of pts had pre- and post-treatment biopsies for RNA sequencing and evaluation of the impact of drug exposure on the EWS::FLI1 transcriptome. Conclusions: T+I exhibited anti-tumor activity in heavily pretreated pts with ES and met its prespecified ORR with 5 PRs in 16 evaluable patients, all of which are ongoing at data cutoff. There were no unexpected safety signals. The combination of T given as a 1h infusion and low-dose I demonstrated meaningful clinical benefit and is worthy of further study in ES pts. Analysis of biological correlates is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT04067115 .

Abstract Background Regorafenib is one of several FDA‐approved cancer therapies targeting multiple tyrosine kinases. However, there are few subtype‐specific data regarding kinase inhibitor activity in sarcomas. We report results of a single arm, phase II trial of regorafenib in advanced Ewing family sarcomas. Methods Patients with metastatic Ewing family sarcomas (age ≥ 18, ECOG 0–2, good organ function) who had received at least one line of therapy and experienced progression within 6 months of registration were eligible. Prior kinase inhibitors were not allowed. The initial dose of regorafenib was 160 mg oral days 1–21 of a 28‐day cycle. The primary endpoint was estimating progression‐free rate (PFR) at 8 weeks employing RECIST 1.1. Results Thirty patients (median age, 32 years; 33% women [10 patients]; bone primary, 40%; extraskeletal primary, 60%) enrolled at 14 sites. The most common grade 3 or higher toxicities were hypophosphatemia (5 grade 3, 1 grade 4), hypertension (2 grade 3), elevated ALT (2 grade 3). Sixteen patients required dose reductions, most often for hypophosphatemia ( n = 7 reductions in 6 patients); two stopped regorafenib for toxicity. There was one death unrelated to treatment in the 30‐day post‐study period. Median progression‐free survival (PFS) was 14.8 weeks (95% CI 7.3–15.9); PFR at 8 weeks by Kaplan–Meier analysis was 63% (95% CI 46–81%). The RECIST 1.1 response rate was 10%. Median OS was 53 weeks (95% CI 37–106 weeks). Conclusions Regorafenib has modest activity in the Ewing family sarcomas. Toxicity was similar to that seen in approval studies.

PURPOSE CMB305 is a heterologous prime-boost vaccination regimen created to prime NY-ESO-1–specific CD8 T-cell populations and then activate the immune response with a potent TLR-4 agonist. This open-label randomized phase II trial was designed to investigate the efficacy and safety of adding the CMB305 regimen to atezolizumab (anti–programmed death ligand-1 therapy) in comparison with atezolizumab alone in patients with synovial sarcoma or myxoid liposarcoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with locally advanced, relapsed, or metastatic synovial sarcoma or myxoid liposarcoma (any grade) were randomly assigned to receive CMB305 with atezolizumab (experimental arm) or atezolizumab alone (control arm). The primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Safety and immune responses were assessed. RESULTS A total of 89 patients were enrolled; 55.1% had received ≥ 2 prior lines of chemotherapy. Median PFS was 2.6 months and 1.6 months in the combination and control arms, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.6 to 1.3). Median OS was 18 months in both treatment arms. Patients treated with combination therapy had a significantly higher rate of treatment-induced NY-ESO-1–specific T cells ( P = .01) and NY-ESO-1–specific antibody responses ( P < .0001). In a post hoc analysis of all dosed patients, OS was longer (36 months) in the subset who developed anti-NY-ESO-1 T-cell immune response (hazard ratio, 0.3; P = .02). CONCLUSION Although the combination of CMB305 and atezolizumab did not result in significant increases in PFS or OS compared with atezolizumab alone, some patients demonstrated evidence of an anti-NY-ESO-1 immune response and appeared to fare better by imaging than those without such an immune response. Combining prime-boost vaccines such as CMB305 with anti–programmed death ligand-1 therapies merits further evaluation in other clinical contexts.

Abstract Background: Metastatic undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS) and the genetically related myxofibrosarcoma (MFS) are soft tissue sarcoma (STS) subtypes with poor prognoses. While responses to front line chemotherapy can approach 20%, in the 2nd line setting and beyond, efficacy remains limited. Pazopanib, the only approved treatment in the refractory setting has demonstrated an objective response rate (ORR) of 4%. Envafolimab is a single domain PD-L1 antibody administered rapidly by subcutaneous (SQ) injection that is being studied in two additional pivotal trials: MSI-H cancer and biliary tract cancer. The activity of envafolimab is similar to other PD-1 antibodies administered intra-venously. Envafolimab demonstrated a 32% ORR in MSI-H colorectal cancer that failed three approved chemotherapeutics, similar to the ORR of 28% and 33%, with nivolumab and pembrolizumab, respectively. The rationale for the ENVASARC trial is based on the previously reported efficacy of checkpoint inhibition in UPS/MFS. Single agent pembrolizumab demonstrated a 23% ORR, while the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab demonstrated a 29% ORR in refractory UPS/MFS. Methods: ENVASARC (NCT 04480502) is a pivotal multicenter (at ~25 U.S. centers) open-label, randomized, non-comparative, parallel cohort study of treatment with envafolimab 300 mg every 3 weeks by SQ injection (cohort A; n=80) or envafolimab 300 mg every 3 weeks by SQ injection combined with ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks intra-venously for four doses (cohort B; n=80) in patients with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic UPS/MFS who have progressed on one or two lines of prior therapy. The primary objective of each of parallel cohort is to demonstrate an ORR with a lower limit of the 95% confidence interval that excludes 5.0% in each cohort. If ≥ 9 responders are observed of the 80 patients enrolled in each cohort, then the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval will exclude 5.0%. Secondary endpoints include duration of response (DOR), PFS and OS. Key inclusion criteria: ≤ 2 prior lines of therapy (neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy excluded), ECOG ≤ 1. Citation Format: Sandra D'Angelo, Steven Robinson, Joelle Lam, Bonne Adams, James Freddo, Charles P. Theuer, Robert Maki. ENVASARC: A Pivotal Trial of Envafolimab, and Envafolimab in Combination with Ipilimumab, in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Undifferentiated Pleomorphic Sarcoma or Myxofibrosarcoma who have Progressed on Prior Chemotherapy [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr CT239.

TPS11581 Background: Metastatic undifferentiated Pleomorphic Sarcoma (UPS) and the genetically related myxofibrosarcoma (MFS) are soft tissue sarcoma (STS) subtypes with poor prognoses. While responses to front line chemotherapy can approach 20%, efficacy remains limited in the 2nd line setting and beyond. Pazopanib, the only approved treatment in the refractory setting, has demonstrated an objective response rate (ORR) of 4%. Envafolimab is a single domain PD-L1 antibody administered rapidly by subcutaneous (SQ) injection that is being studied in two additional pivotal trials: microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) cancer and biliary tract cancer. The activity of envafolimab appears to be similar to other PD-1 antibodies administered i.v. Envafolimab demonstrated a 32% objective response rate (ORR) in MSI-H colorectal cancer patients who failed three approved chemotherapeutics, similar to the ORR of 28% and 33% with nivolumab and pembrolizumab in these patient populations, respectively. The rationale for the ENVASARC trial is based on the previously reported activity of checkpoint inhibition in UPS/MFS. Single agent pembrolizumab demonstrated a 23% ORR, while the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab demonstrated a 29% ORR in refractory UPS/MFS. Methods: ENVASARC (NCT 04480502) is a pivotal multicenter (at ̃25 U.S. centers) open-label, randomized, non-comparative, parallel cohort study of treatment with envafolimab 300 mg every 3 weeks by SQ injection (cohort A; n = 80) or envafolimab 300 mg every 3 weeks by SQ injection combined with ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks i.v. for four doses (cohort B; n = 80) in patients with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic UPS/MFS who have progressed on one or two lines of prior therapy. The primary objective of each of parallel cohort is to demonstrate an ORR with a lower limit of the 95% confidence interval that excludes 5.0% in each cohort. If ≥ 9 responders are observed of the 80 patients enrolled in each cohort, then the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval will exclude 5.0%. Secondary endpoints include duration of response (DOR), PFS and OS. Key inclusion criteria: ≤ 2 prior lines of therapy (neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy excluded), ECOG ≤ 1. Clinical trial information: NCT 04480502.

Abstract Trial Information Click here to access other published clinical trials. Lessons Learned The results from the liposarcoma cohort of SARC024 confirm previously published data and do not support the routine use of regorafenib in this patient population. Continued exploration of novel therapies, including combination approaches, is warranted for a patient population in whom limited treatment options exist. Background Regorafenib is a multitargeted kinase inhibitor with a kinase profile overlapping, but distinct from, pazopanib, an agent approved for recurrent and metastatic non-gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST), non-adipocytic soft tissue sarcoma. We conducted a randomized, phase II study of regorafenib versus placebo in refractory liposarcoma patients. Methods Patients with advanced or metastatic, treatment-refractory liposarcoma were randomized 1:1 to receive regorafenib 160 mg or placebo once daily (3 weeks on, 1 week off). Patients with well-differentiated liposarcoma only were excluded. Crossover for placebo was allowed upon progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), according to RECIST version 1.1. Results Forty-eight subjects with liposarcoma (34 dedifferentiated, 12 myxoid/round cell, 2 pleomorphic) were enrolled. Median PFS was 1.87 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92–3.67) months for regorafenib versus 2.07 (95% CI, 1.64–3.44) months for placebo; stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.85 (95% CI, 0.46, 1.58), p = .62. No responses were seen on regorafenib. One PR was observed on placebo. Median overall survival was 6.46 (95% CI, 4.16–23.48) months for regorafenib and 4.89 (95% CI, 3.02–9.77) months for placebo, stratified HR, 0.66 (95% CI, 0.31–1.40), p = .28). Treatment-related adverse events were similar to the known safety profile of regorafenib. Conclusion Regorafenib did not appear to improve PFS in treatment-refractory liposarcoma. No new significant safety signals were observed.

11011 Background: CMB305 (C) is an immunotherapy designed to generate an anti-NY-ESO-1 immune response (IR). C consists of a dendritic cell-targeting lentiviral vector encoding NY-ESO-1 gene (LV305), and a TLR-4 agonist NY-ESO-1 recombinant protein plus GLA-SE (G305). A Phase 1 study demonstrated C is safe, generates IR and conveys a median overall survival (mOS) of 23.7 months (15.5, not reached [NR]) for soft tissue sarcomas & 29.2 months (12.2, NR) for synovial sarcoma (SS) (ESMO 2018). We evaluated efficacy and safety of C and atezolizumab (A) vs A alone in NY-ESO-1+ SS and myxoid round cell liposarcoma (MRCL). Methods: A prospective randomized open label phase 2 study of C (LV305 Intradermal Days 0, 14, 42, 70 + G305 Intramuscular Days 28, 56, 84 then q 6wk up to one year (yr)) + A (1200mg IV q3wk) vs A alone in advanced NY-ESO-1+ SS/MRCL. Primary endpoints of OS and progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints of safety, IR, and response rate and post hoc analysis by line of therapy. Results: 88 patients (pts) were enrolled and dosed. Arm C+A: median age 48 yrs, 73% SS, 98% relapsed metastatic, 73% ≥2 prior lines chemotherapy; Arm A: 47 yrs, 67% SS, 84% relapsed metastatic, 53% ≥2 prior lines chemotherapy. Most treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) Grade 1/2, no treatment related deaths. Summary of clinical outcomes. Conclusions: Despite no major differences in PFS and OS between the treatment arms (Arm C+A had more advanced disease and more prior lines of chemotherapy), Arm A +C achieved PRs, a higher level of anti-NY-ESO-1 IR, and pts with IR had numerically superior outcomes. Moreover, the clinical benefit of C+A in earlier lines of therapy warrant further study. Clinical trial information: NCT02609984. [Table: see text]

10521 Background: Sarcomas are rare cancers, with > 50 subtypes, and require multi-disciplinary care. Their management benefits from multi-institutional input due to the paucity of concentrated experience with each subtype. However, sarcoma tumor boards, wherein a patient-specific, consensus treatment approach is determined, are predominantly conducted in isolation at individual centers. Methods: Since March 2010, we have conducted a weekly multi-institutional, multi-disciplinary sarcoma tumor board to combine knowledge and experience in the management of our most challenging patients. The Mayo Clinic bridge links sites by interactive videofeed. Each site may contribute cases. De-identified history, radiology and pathology are reviewed. A didactic series reviews a rotation of seminal papers, newly published research, or our own data. An “Expert Guest" series allows outside experts to connect to one conference. A yearly participant survey assesses quality. Conference is free to sites and is CME accredited. Results: Currently, 8 sarcoma programs connect Mondays from 8-9am ET. Median attendance is 20 (range: 8-27). In 2012, 342 cases were reviewed over 43 conferences (median: 8 cases/conference; range: 4-12 cases/conference). The 2012 survey revealed 96% (25/26) agreed HIPAA rules are followed; 93% (25/27) agreed conference is educational; 93% (25/27) agreed recommendations are evidenced-based or reasonable; 100% (27/27) agreed participants are respectful; and 86% (18/21) agreed input from other sites has changed their management. Staff attendance (quantity) rated as meets/exceeds needs was 100% (25/25) for medical oncology; 96% (26/27) for pathology; 93% (25/27) for orthopedic oncology; 92% (23/25) for radiation oncology, surgical oncology and radiology; and 61% (17/23) for thoracic oncology. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the only weekly multi-institutional sarcoma tumor board in existence. It permits consistent oncology care across a wide geographic area, and is a model for providing consensus recommendations regardless of the remoteness of the patient and care team. Future plans for this group include prospective collection of outcomes data.

10003 Background: Preclinical studies demonstrate synergistic anti-tumor activity by inhibiting mTOR and IGF-1R. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of A12 and TEM in 3 chemo-refractory cohorts: IGF-1R (+) STS (Arm A), IGF-1R (+) bone (Arm B), and IGF-1R (-) bone and STS (Arm C). Methods: An optimal Simon 2 stage design was used for each arm. The primary end-point was progression free survival (PFS) at 12 weeks. Based on historical data, a 40% PFS rate was considered promising and a 20% PFS non-promising (type I/ II error, 0.05/0.10). ≥5 PFSs at 12 weeks were required in the first 19 and ≥16 PFSs were required in a total of 54 pts to consider each arm positive. Key eligibility: measurable disease (RECIST 1.1), age ≥18, 1- 4 priors, ECOG status 0-1. A12 (6 mg/kg) and TEM (25 mg) were administered IV weekly. Pre and post treatment tumor biopsies and plasma for IGF-1 and IGFBP3 were obtained. 20 Sarcoma Centers participated. Results: Starting in 02/2010, 383 pts were tested for IGF-1R by immunohistochemistry (IHC; 54% +) and 171 were treated: mean age 47 (range: 18-80), mean # priors 2.2 (range: 1-4). Grade 3/4 toxicities ≥10%: lymphopenia (12%), mucositis (10%). By intent to treat (ITT) analysis, each arm of the study achieved its primary 12 week PFS end-point (≥16 PFSs): Arm A: 18/56 (32%), Arm B: 19/50 (38%) (4 too early), Arm C: 27/63 (43%). The one-sided 95% CI for 12-week PFS is (0.22, 1), (0.27, 1), and (0.32, 1), respectively. By ITT the median PFS (95% CI) in weeks for each arm is 6.3 (5.9, 12.0), 11.0 (8.0, 18.0) and 11.6 (9.0, 17.9), respectively, and for chondro (n=18), Ewing’s (n=24), and osteo (n=23) only it is 22.6 (5.7, 40.9), 10.4 (5.7, 17.9) and 6.0 (6.0, 18.0), respectively. Westerns on 32 matched pair tumor biopsies indicate inhibition of IGF-1R, pAKT and pS6. Of biopsies on 7 IGF-1R (-) IHC pts (Arm C), 5 were IGF-1R (+) by western. Plasma biomarkers did not correlate with PFS. Conclusions: A12 and TEM met its primary end-point of improved PFS in pts with metastatic sarcoma. This effect was independent of IGF-1R status by IHC. These results support further clinical development of this combination in bone and STS.