Reinke, Denise K.

11005 Background: Pazopanib is approved for soft tissue sarcoma pts after failure of other therapy, but there are few subtype-specific data regarding kinase inhibitor activity. We report on a single arm, phase II trial of REGO in advanced EWS. Methods: EWS pts (age > 18, ECOG 0-2, good organ function) who had at least 1 line of therapy and had PD within 6 mo were eligible. Prior oral kinase inhibitors were not allowed. Initial REGO dose was 160 mg PO QD x21 q28d. Dose reductions were employed for toxicity and AEs. The primary endpoint was PFS at 8 weeks (PFS8w) employing RECIST 1.1. Sample size of 30 allowed determination of the difference between PFS8w of 50% vs 25% with alpha = 0.05 and power of 91%. Results: 30 pts (median age 32, range 19-65; M/F = 20/10; ECOG 0/1/2 = 16/13/1; bone, 12; soft tissue, 18; median prior treatments 5, range 1-10) enrolled at 14 US sites (09/2014-03/2016). Most common grade (G3) toxicities were hypophosphatemia (6), hypertension (2), high ALT (2) and 1 each: fatigue, abd pain, diarrhea, hypokalemia, oral mucositis, neutropenia and rash; no G4 toxicities were noted. 13 pts required ≥1 dose reduction, most commonly hypophosphatemia (n = 7); 2 stopped REGO for toxicity. There was 1 death in the 30 day post study period, not REGO related. Median dose at study end: 140 mg (3.5 tabs, range 80-160 mg) 3 wks on/1wk off. 18/30 pts were without PD at 8 wks. Median PFS: 3.6 mo (95%CI 2.8-3.8 mo). PFS8w by KM was 73% (95%CI 57-89%). Best responses: PR/SD/PD/not evaluable of 3/18/7/2, for RECIST RR 10%. Two pts with PR had EWSR1 translocation by FISH; a third had CIC-DUX4. Median duration of response: 5.5 mo (95%CI 2.9-8.0). Median OS is not reached. Conclusions: The substudy met its primary endpoint. REGO toxicity was similar to that seen previously. Enrollment continues in LPS and OGS cohorts, and is being expanded to further study variant EWS without EWSR1-FLI1 fusion. Study of the existing tissue may elucidate which EWS patients may benefit from REGO. Clinical trial information: NCT02048371.

Purpose Gemcitabine as a single agent and the combination of gemcitabine and docetaxel have activity in patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcoma. To determine if the addition of docetaxel to gemcitabine improved clinical outcome of patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas, we compared a fixed dose rate infusion of gemcitabine versus a lower dose of gemcitabine with docetaxel. Patients and Methods In this open-label phase II clinical trial, the primary end point was tumor response, defined as complete or partial response or stable disease lasting at least 24 weeks. A Bayesian adaptive randomization procedure was used to produce an imbalance in the randomization in favor of the superior treatment, accounting for treatment-subgroup interactions. Results One hundred nineteen of 122 randomly assigned patients had assessable outcomes. The adaptive randomization assigned 73 patients (60%) to gemcitabine-docetaxel and 49 patients (40%) to gemcitabine alone, indicating gemcitabine-docetaxel was superior. The objective Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors response rates were 16% (gemcitabine-docetaxel) and 8% (gemcitabine). Given the data, the posterior probabilities that gemcitabine-docetaxel was superior for progression-free and overall survival were 0.98 and 0.97, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 6.2 months for gemcitabine-docetaxel and 3.0 months for gemcitabine alone; median overall survival was 17.9 months for gemcitabine-docetaxel and 11.5 months for gemcitabine. The posterior probability that patients receiving gemcitabine-docetaxel had a shorter time to discontinuation for toxicity compared with gemcitabine alone was .999. Conclusion Gemcitabine-docetaxel yielded superior progression-free and overall survival to gemcitabine alone, but with increased toxicity. Adaptive randomization is an effective method to reduce the number of patients receiving inferior therapy.