Wolters, Pamela L.

Abstract Purpose: Combined mTOR and MEK inhibition, critical components of the RAS effector pathway underlying the pathogenesis of neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1)–related tumors, caused regression in a malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST) transgenic mouse model. The primary objective was to determine the clinical benefit rate in patients with unresectable/metastatic MPNST. Patients and Methods: The study design was a multi-institutional, open-label, Simon two-stage, phase II study of the MEK inhibitor selumetinib and mTOR inhibitor sirolimus. Patients ≥12 years with histologically confirmed MPNST received selumetinib 50 mg twice daily and sirolimus 4 mg once daily, in continuous 28-day cycles. Correlative studies evaluated patient-reported pain, immune signature in peripheral blood, and cell-free DNA (cfDNA). Results: A total of 21 heavily pretreated patients [seven females; median age, 41 years (range, 16–72); and 14 with NF1] with advanced disease enrolled at five participating sites. Clinical benefit was observed in only one of seven in stage 1 and one of 14 patients in stage 2. The median number of cycles was two (range, 1–6). Most common adverse events (AE) were grade ≤2 gastrointestinal toxicity, acneiform rash, hypertriglyceridemia, mucositis, and transaminase elevation. Unlike the preclinical model, early 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET scan performed during cycle 1 demonstrated partial metabolic responses in five patients (24%), but these did not correlate with objective responses after cycle 2. cfDNA was able to detect MPNST with the potential to be a biomarker of response. Conclusions: The combination was safe, with manageable and expected AEs, but did not meet study parameters for further evaluation in MPNST. Correlative studies were informative and may guide future therapeutic trials of MPNST.

Abstract Plexiform Neurofibromas (PN) are a common manifestation of the genetic disorder neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). These benign nerve sheath tumors often cause significant morbidity, with treatment options limited historically to surgery. There have been tremendous advances over the past two decades in our understanding of PN, and the recent regulatory approvals of the MEK inhibitor selumetinib are reshaping the landscape for PN management. At present, there is no agreed upon PN definition, diagnostic evaluation, surveillance strategy, or clear indications for when to initiate treatment and selection of treatment modality. In this review, we address these questions via consensus recommendations from a panel of multidisciplinary NF1 experts.

Purpose. Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNSTs) are aggressive soft tissue sarcomas. Combining Hsp90 inhibitors to enhance endoplasmic reticulum stress with mTOR inhibition results in dramatic MPNST shrinkage in a genetically engineered MPNST mouse model. Ganetespib is an injectable potent small molecule inhibitor of Hsp90. Sirolimus is an oral mTOR inhibitor. We sought to determine the safety, tolerability, and recommended dose of ganetespib and sirolimus in patients with refractory sarcomas and assess clinical benefits in patients with unresectable/refractory MPNSTs. Patients and Methods. In this multi-institutional, open-label, phase 1/2 study of ganetespib and sirolimus, patients ≥16 years with histologically confirmed refractory sarcoma (phase 1) or MPNST (phase 2) were eligible. A conventional 3 + 3 dose escalation design was used for phase 1. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic measures were evaluated. Primary objectives of phase 2 were to determine the clinical benefit rate (CBR) of this combination in MPNSTs. Patient-reported outcomes assessed pain. Results. Twenty patients were enrolled (10 per phase). Toxicities were manageable; most frequent non-DLTs were diarrhea, elevated liver transaminases, and fatigue. The recommended dose of ganetespib was 200 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 with sirolimus 4 mg orally once daily with day 1 loading dose of 12 mg. In phase 1, one patient with leiomyosarcoma achieved a sustained partial response. In phase 2, no responses were observed. The median number of cycles treated was 2 (1–4). Patients did not meet the criteria for clinical benefit as defined per protocol. Pain ratings decreased or were stable. Conclusion. Despite promising preclinical rationale and tolerability of the combination therapy, no responses were observed, and the study did not meet parameters for further evaluation in MPNSTs. This trial was registered with (NCT02008877).