Jones, Robin L.

11564 Background: Epithelioid sarcoma (ES) is a rare, aggressive soft tissue sarcoma characterized by loss of inhibitor of integrase 1 (INI1), allowing enhancer of zeste homologue 2 (EZH2) to repress cell differentiation and promote tumorigenesis. Tazemetostat (TAZ) is a selective inhibitor of EZH2 approved by the FDA for treatment of patients (pts) aged ≥16 years with metastatic or locally advanced ES ineligible for complete resection. Methods: This open-label, multicenter, multi-cohort phase 2 study (NCT02601950) evaluated safety and efficacy of TAZ in pts with INI1-negative tumors. ES pts were enrolled in Cohorts 5 and 6; pts in Cohort 6 underwent mandatory pre-dose (at screening) and post-dose biopsies (at Day 1 of cycle 2). Herein, we report the interim efficacy and safety data from Cohort 6. Results: As of July 31 2019, 44 pts were enrolled into Cohort 6 and treated with TAZ 800 mg BID. The objective response rate (ORR) was 11.4%; 4 pts (9.1%) had a partial response and 1 pt (2.3%) had a complete response (Table). Another 17 pts (38.6%) had stable disease (SD). 18 pts had progressive disease; 13 of these pts remained on study beyond progression. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) at 56 weeks were 19.4% and 59.4%, respectively. In a pooled posthoc analysis of 106 ES pts from Cohorts 5 (n = 62), and 6, ORR was 13.2%. Grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) were reported in 16 pts (36.4%), most commonly anemia (6.8%; n = 3) and tumor pain (6.8%; n = 3). 3 pts (6.8%) experienced grade 3–4 treatment-related AEs. One pt discontinued study drug and there were no treatment-emergent dose reductions or treatment-related deaths. These safety data from Cohort 6 are consistent with previously reported data from Cohort 5. 19 paired biopsies were included for translational endpoint analyses. Preliminary RNA seq and pathway analyses are currently ongoing and updated data, including additional biomarker data will be presented. Conclusions: Consistent with previously reported data from the completed Cohort 5, TAZ demonstrated clinically meaningful, durable, single agent activity in ES pts. Efficacy data from Cohort 6 continue to mature with 8 patients still on treatment. TAZ was well tolerated with a low incidence of treatment related AEs. Clinical trial information: NCT02601950 . [Table: see text]

11539 Background: Ripretinib is a novel switch-control TKI that broadly inhibits KIT and PDGFRA kinase signaling. In INVICTUS (NCT03353753), a randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled trial of ripretinib in ≥4th-line advanced GIST, ripretinib reduced the risk of disease progression or death by 85% vs PBO with a favorable overall safety profile. Common ( > 20%) adverse events (AEs) included, but were not limited to, alopecia and PPES. Exploratory analyses evaluated the impact of alopecia and PPES on quality of life (QoL). Methods: Patients (pts) with advanced GIST previously treated with at least imatinib, sunitinib, and regorafenib were randomized (2:1) to ripretinib 150 mg QD or PBO. AEs were graded using CTCAE v4 and PROs collected using EQ-5D-5L (EQ5D) and EORTC QLQ-C30 (C30). Repeated measures (RM) models assessed the impact of alopecia and PPES on 5 PROs (EQ5D visual analogue scale; and C30 physical functioning, role functioning, and the overall health and overall QoL questions) within the ripretinib arm. Fixed effects were sex, alopecia/PPES, and ECOG scores at baseline. Results: 128/129 randomized pts received treatment (85 ripretinib 150 mg QD; 43 PBO). Alopecia, regardless of causality, occurred in 44 (51.8%) on ripretinib (34 [40.0%] grade 1; 10 [11.8%] grade 2) and 2 (4.7%) on PBO (both grade 1). PPES occurred in 18 (21.2%) on ripretinib (11 [12.9%] grade 1; 7 [8.2%] grade 2); none on PBO. The median times in days to first occurrence and worst severity grade with ripretinib were 57.0 and 62.5 for alopecia; 56.5 and 57.0 for PPES. The RM models showed a slight trend towards improvement in PRO score over time for pts with alopecia; the only association reaching a P-value of < 0.05 was between alopecia and increased overall QoL. None of the associations between PPES and PRO scores reach P < 0.05. All PRO p-values are nominal, and no statistical significance is being claimed. Conclusions: Ripretinib had a favorable overall safety and tolerability profile. When stratified by alopecia and PPES, patient-reported assessments of function, overall health, and overall QoL were maintained over time. For both alopecia and PPES, onset and maximum severity occurred almost simultaneously, indicating that these events generally did not progressively worsen. These results suggest that alopecia and PPES are manageable and do not have a negative effect on function, overall health, and QoL. Clinical trial information: NCT03353753 .

11535 Background: Ripretinib is a novel switch-control tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) that broadly inhibits KIT and PDGFRA kinase signaling through a dual mechanism of action. In INVICTUS (NCT03353753), a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ripretinib in ≥4th-line advanced GIST, ripretinib reduced the risk of disease progression or death by 85% vs placebo and had a favorable overall safety profile in patients previously treated with ≥3 prior TKIs. Methods: As part of the INVICTUS trial, patient reported outcome (PRO) measures were collected using EQ-5D-5L (EQ5D) and EORTC QLQ-C30 (C30). In prespecified and additional analyses, ANCOVA models were built to compare changes from baseline to cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1) for PRO measures within the ripretinib and placebo arms and determine the difference between treatment arms. PRO measures included the EQ5D visual analogue scale (VAS) and the C30 physical functioning (PF) and role functioning (RF) scales (all scores range from 0–100; higher scores are better). The C30 overall health and overall QoL questions were also assessed (scores range from 1–7; higher scores are better). Fixed effects included treatment arm, number of previous anticancer treatments (3 vs ≥4), and ECOG score at baseline (0 vs 1/2). Results: Overall, 129 patients were randomized and 128 received treatment (85 to ripretinib 150 mg QD; 43 to placebo). All PRO p-values are nominal, and no statistical significance is being claimed. VAS scores improved an average 3.7 points from baseline to C2D1 with ripretinib vs an average decline of 8.9 with placebo (P = 0.004; improvement or no change, 67% vs 41% of patients, respectively). Similarly, the average PF score improved 1.6 points with ripretinib and decreased 8.9 with placebo (P = 0.004; improvement or no change, 68% vs 44%). RF scores also improved an average of 3.5 points with ripretinib vs a decrease of 17.1 with placebo (P = 0.001; improvement or no change, 77% vs 50%). For the overall health and overall QoL questions, scores increased with ripretinib an average of 0.20 and 0.28, respectively, and decreased 0.78 and 0.76 with placebo (both P = 0.001; improvement or no change, 74% vs 47% and 79% vs 59%, respectively). Conclusions: Based on the 5 PRO measures assessed, when compared with placebo and best supportive care, ripretinib provided patient-benefit in advanced GIST with PRO measures of role and physical function, VAS, overall health, and overall QoL remaining stable. Clinical trial information: NCT03353753 .

Purpose. Osteosarcoma is a rare cancer and a third of patients who have completed primary treatment will develop osteosarcoma recurrence. The Src pathway has been implicated in the metastatic behavior of osteosarcoma; about 95% of samples examined express Src or have evidence of downstream activation of this pathway. Saracatinib (AZD0530) is a potent and selective Src kinase inhibitor that was evaluated in adults in Phase 1 studies. The primary goal of this study was to determine if treatment with saracatinib could increase progression-free survival (PFS) for patients who have undergone complete resection of osteosarcoma lung metastases in a double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Patients and Methods. Subjects with recurrent osteosarcoma localized to lung and who had complete surgical removal of all lung nodules were randomized within six weeks after complete surgical resection. Saracatinib, or placebo, was administered at a dose of 175 mg orally, once daily, for up to thirteen 28-day cycles. Results. Thirty-seven subjects were included in the analyses; 18 subjects were randomized to receive saracatinib and 19 to receive placebo. Intent-to-treat analysis demonstrated a median PFS of 19.4 months in the saracatinib treatment group and 8.6 months in the placebo treatment group (p=0.47). Median OS was not reached in either arm. Conclusions. Although saracatinib was well tolerated in this patient population, there was no apparent impact of the drug in this double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial on OS, and Src inhibition alone may not be sufficient to suppress metastatic progression in osteosarcoma. There is a suggestion of potential clinical benefit as evidenced by longer PFS in patients randomized to saracatinib based on limited numbers of patients treated.

TPS10099 Background: PDGFRα is a receptor commonly overexpressed in STS. Olaratumab is a fully human IgG1 MAb which specifically binds to human PDGFRα and blocks PDGFR-mediated signaling pathways. Olaratumab demonstrated significant tumor inhibition as a monotherapy and in combination with standard chemotherapy in preclinical human sarcoma xenograft models. A Phase 1b/2 clinical trial for patients with advanced or metastatic STS is currently enrolling patients in 9 sites across the United States; approximately 45 patients have been randomized. Methods: In Phase 1b, patients received olaratumab (15 mg/kg) via intravenous infusion on Days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle and D (75 mg/m²) 1 hour after olaratumab on Day 1. Phase 1b was completed without encountering dose-limiting toxicities; enrollment into Phase 2 has begun. The primary endpoint of the Phase 2 portion is to compare progression-free survival in patients with advanced STS when treated with D plus olaratumab versus D alone. Planned enrollment goal for Phase 2 is 130 patients. Patients are required to be ≥ 18 years old with ECOG 0-2, have appropriate organ function and histologically confirmed, measurable, and advanced STS. There is no restriction on the number of prior therapies. Patients are randomized 1:1 to either D plus olaratumab (Arm A) at same dose/schedule as in Phase 1b or D alone (Arm B). All patients can receive dexrazoxane. Upon completion of 8 cycles, patients in Arm A continue with olaratumab monotherapy. Patients in Arm B who develop disease progression during or after treatment can subsequently receive olaratumab monotherapy. Patients are stratified to treatment arms according to PDGFRα expression (positive vs. negative), number of previous lines of treatment, sarcoma subtype, and ECOG performance status. Response assessment occurs every 6 weeks. Exploratory analyses include biomarkers of olaratumab pharmacodynamic activity including PDGF ligands, PDGFR downstream molecules, VEGF, and changes in vascularity of tumor specimens.

11003 Background: ES is a rare soft tissue sarcoma that metastasizes in approximately 30% to 50% of cases. More than 90% of ES tumors lack expression of INI1, an important component of epigenetic regulation. Loss of INI1 function allows another epigenetic modifier, EZH2, to become an oncogenic driver in tumor cells. Tazemetostat, a first-in-class, selective, oral inhibitor of EZH2, has demonstrated tumor regression and favorable safety in phase 1/2 trials. Methods: Data from a phase 2 open-label, multicenter trial of pts with locally advanced or metastatic ES are reported. Efficacy was assessed with primary and secondary endpoints including objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1, disease control rate (DCR; objective confirmed response of any duration or stable disease [SD] lasting ≥32 weeks), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS); safety and tolerability were also evaluated. Results: As of September 17, 2018, 62 INI1-negative ES pts were enrolled and treated with tazemetostat 800 mg BID. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 1 (range: 0-9). There were 9/62 (15%) confirmed partial responses (PRs) with an ORR of 15% and DCR of 26%. The DOR ranged from 7.1+ weeks to 103.0+ weeks (median: not reached) with a median OS of 82.4 weeks (95% CI: 47.4, not estimable) for all 62 pts. Tazemetostat was generally well tolerated. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were generally mild to moderate with the most commonly reported adverse events (AEs; ≥10% incidence) regardless of attribution being fatigue (24/62; 39%), nausea (22/62; 35%), and cancer pain (20/62; 32%). Any treatment-related TEAEs of grade ≥3 were reported in 10/62 (16%) pts. TEAEs grade ≥3 reported in ≥2 pts included anemia (6%) and decreased weight (3%). There were no drug-related deaths and a low discontinuation rate (1.7%). Conclusions: In the largest prospective clinical trial of ES to date, tazemetostat achieved disease control in 26% of pts with advanced ES who entered this study. Durable clinical response of the drug was documented. Tazemetostat demonstrated favorable safety with few pts with treatment-related AEs grade ≥3. Clinical trial information: NCT02601950.

Abstract Purpose: LV305 is a modified, third-generation, nonreplicating, integration-deficient lentivirus-based vector designed to selectively transduce dendritic cells in vivo. LV305 induces expression of the New York Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma-1 (NY-ESO-1) cancer testis antigen in dendritic cells, promoting immune responses against NY-ESO-1–expressing tumors. This phase I study evaluated the safety, immunogenicity, and preliminary efficacy of LV305 in patients with sarcoma or other solid tumors. Patients and Methods: Adults with previously treated, advanced, NY-ESO-1–positive solid tumors and limited tumor burden were eligible. LV305 was administered every 3 weeks by intradermal injection in four dose cohorts (Cohort 1: 108 vector genomes (vg) x 3 doses; Cohorts 1A, 2, and 3: 108 vg, 109 vg, 1010 vg x 4 doses). Results: Thirty-nine patients were enrolled: 3 patients each in Cohorts 1, 1A, and 2, and 30 patients in Cohort 3. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Tumor types included sarcoma (n = 24), ovarian (n = 8), melanoma (n = 6), and lung cancer (n = 1). All treatment-related adverse events were grade 1 or 2. Common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (49%), injection site reactions (46%), and myalgia (21%). The disease control rate was 56.4% in all patients and 62.5% in sarcoma patients. One patient with synovial sarcoma achieved a partial response lasting &gt;36 months. Anti–NY-ESO-1-specific CD4+ and/or CD8+ T cells were induced in 57% of evaluable sarcoma patients. Induction of an anti–NY-ESO-1 immune response was associated with improved 1-year survival in an exploratory analysis. Conclusions: This first-in-class, first-in-human study of LV305 demonstrated a favorable safety profile, induction of antigen-specific responses, and potential clinical activity in patients with advanced cancer.

Background Ontuxizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody, targets endosialin (tumor endothelial marker 1 [TEM‐1] or CD248), which is expressed on sarcoma cells and is believed to be involved in tumor angiogenesis. This is the first trial to evaluate ontuxizumab in patients with sarcoma. Methods Part 1 was an open‐label, dose‐finding, safety lead‐in: 4, 6, or 8 mg/kg with gemcitabine and docetaxel (G/D; 900 mg/m 2 gemcitabine on days 1 and 8 and 75 mg/m 2 docetaxel on day 8). In part 2, patients were randomized in a double‐blind fashion in 2:1 ratio to ontuxizumab (8 mg/kg) or a placebo with G/D. Randomization was stratified by 4 histological cohorts. Results In part 2 with 209 patients, no significant difference in progression‐free survival between ontuxizumab plus G/D (4.3 months; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.7‐6.3 months) and the placebo plus G/D (5.6 months; 95% CI, 2.6‐8.3 months) was observed ( P = .67; hazard ratio [HR], 1.07; 95% CI, 0.77‐1.49). Similarly, there was no significant difference in median overall survival between the 2 groups: 18.3 months for the ontuxizumab plus G/D group (95% CI, 16.2‐21.1 months) and 21.1 months for the placebo plus G/D group (95% CI, 14.2 months to not reached; P = .32; HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.82‐1.82). No significant differences between the treatment groups occurred for any efficacy parameter by sarcoma cohort. The combination of ontuxizumab plus G/D was generally well tolerated. Conclusions Ontuxizumab plus G/D showed no enhanced activity over chemotherapy alone in soft‐tissue sarcomas, whereas the safety profile of the combination was consistent with G/D alone.