Kizilbash, Sani

Abstract Background Vorasidenib is Food and Drug Administration‐approved for treatment of grade 2 isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)–mutant gliomas and has demonstrated a benefit in progression‐free survival compared to a placebo. This study assessed the cost‐effectiveness of this treatment strategy compared to standard treatment: observation or chemoradiation (CRT). Methods The authors used an integrated Markov model to compare quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALY) gained and cost‐effectiveness of patients with IDH‐mutated low‐grade glioma (LGG) treated with vorasidenib, observation, or CRT. Outcomes were expressed as incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per QALY gained. Treatment is considered cost‐effective if it meets the commonly accepted willingness‐to‐pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY gained. Results Based on model parameters, vorasidenib demonstrated an ICER of $356,756 per QALY when compared to CRT. When compared to observation, vorasidenib demonstrated an improved ICER of $215,191 per QALY. On one‐way sensitivity analysis compared to observation, median cost of vorasidenib and median overall survival were most likely to affect ICER with only marginal changes on analysis of other model factors. For ICER to become ≤$100,000 compared to observation, the cost of vorasidenib would need to drop to below $14,072 monthly or have a median survival gain of at least 11.9 years. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that vorasidenib was favored in none of 5000 Monte Carlo iterations. Conclusion Using the best available data, the current price of vorasidenib does not meet commonly accepted cost‐effectiveness thresholds in treatment of IDH‐mutated LGGs.

Abstract Background Disruption of the blood–brain barrier (BBB) in high-grade brain tumors is characterized by contrast accumulation on diagnostic imaging. This window of opportunity study correlates contrast imaging features with the tumor distribution of BBB-permeable (levetiracetam) and -impermeable (cefazolin) drugs. Methods Patients with a clinical diagnosis of a high-grade brain tumor underwent MRI for surgical planning. Cefazolin and levetiracetam were administered prior to skin incision, and serial plasma and image-registered tumor samples were collected during the operation. Drug levels were measured by LC-MS/MS, tissue drug levels were corrected for residual blood, and tumor-to-plasma concentration ratios were calculated. Intraoperative microdialysis was performed in a subset of patients to measure the same two drugs. Results Tumor (n = 125) and plasma (n = 261) samples were available for analysis from 42 operative cases. Across all samples, the tumor-to-plasma ratio was significantly lower for cefazolin (marginal mean [MM]: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.11–0.19) as compared to levetiracetam (MM: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.64–0.75; P < .001). When compared between contrast-enhancing and non-enhancing regions, tumor-to-plasma ratios for cefazolin varied by 4.4-fold (0.27, 95% CI: 0.20–0.35 vs. 0.06, 95% CI: 0.04–0.08, respectively; P < .001), and varied for levetiracetam by 1.4-fold (0.88, 95% CI: 0.78–0.97 vs. 0.61, 95% CI: 0.55–0.66, respectively; P < .001). These results were confirmed with the intra-operative microdialysis and a population pharmacokinetic analysis. Conclusions This study demonstrates significant inter- and intra-tumoral heterogeneity in drug delivery for both levetiracetam and cefazolin within high-grade brain tumors that is not necessarily predicted by clinical MR imaging and may reflect tumor-induced changes in both perfusion and BBB integrity.

Abstract Background Dasatinib is an oral inhibitor of the Src kinase family, with preclinical data indicating impact on gliomagenesis, tumor invasion, and radiosensitivity. Methods North Central Cancer Treatment Group N0877 is a phase 1 dose escalation and phase II randomized study evaluating the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and efficacy of dasatinib with radiation and temozolomide (TMZ) for glioblastoma. Following identification of the MTD, adult patients with a histologic diagnosis of glioblastoma were randomized 2:1 between dasatinib given with standard concurrent and adjuvant TMZ, versus placebo with standard concurrent and adjuvant TMZ. Radiation dose was 60 Gy in 30 fractions. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, and quality of life. Results Thirteen patients were enrolled in the phase I component and established the MTD and phase II dose of 150 mg given daily. A total of 204 patients were enrolled in the phase II component. OS was not different between arms (median OS 15.6 months for dasatinib compared to 19.3 months for placebo, hazard ratio:1.21 favoring placebo, 95% CI: 0.88–1.65, log-rank P-value: .238). Similarly, PFS was not significantly different between the dasatinib and placebo arms. There was a significant increase in anemia, nausea, and creatinine elevation with dasatinib, but significantly more grade 3 lymphopenia with placebo. Conclusions The addition of dasatinib to standard chemoradiation did not improve outcomes for patients with glioblastoma. Clinical Trial Identifier NCT00869401.

Purpose: To investigate the molecular characteristics of and potential for precision medicine in KRAS wildtype pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Patients and Methods: We investigated 27 patients with KRASWT PDAC at our institution. Clinical data were obtained via chart review. Tumor specimens for each subject were interrogated for somatic single nucleotide variants, insertion and deletions, and copy number variants by DNA sequencing. Gene fusions were detected from RNA-seq. A patient-derived organoid (PDO) was developed from a patient with a MET translocation and expanded ex vivo to predict therapeutic sensitivity prior to enrollment in a phase 2 clinical trial. Results: Transcriptomic analysis showed our cohort may be stratified by the relative gene expression of the KRAS signaling cascade. The PDO derived from our patient harboring a TFG-MET rearrangement was found to have in vitro sensitivity to the multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor crizotinib. The patient was enrolled in the phase 2 SPARTA clinical trial and received monotherapy with vebrelitinib, a c-MET inhibitor, and achieved a partial and durable response. Conclusions: KRASWT PDAC is molecularly distinct from KRASMUT and enriched with potentially actionable genetic variants. In our study, transcriptomic profiling revealed that the KRAS signaling cascade may play a key role in KRASWT PDAC. Our report of a KRASWT PDAC patient with TFG-MET rearrangement who responded to a cMET inhibitor further supports the pursuit of precision oncology in this sub-population. Identification of targetable mutations, perhaps through approaches like RNA-seq, can help enable precision-driven approaches to select optimal treatment based on tumor characteristics.

Abstract PARP inhibition can enhance the efficacy of temozolomide and prolong survival in orthotopic glioblastoma (GBM) xenografts. The aim of this study was to evaluate the combination of the PARP inhibitor rucaparib with temozolomide and to correlate pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies with efficacy in patient-derived GBM xenograft models. The combination of rucaparib with temozolomide was highly effective in vitro in short-term explant cultures derived from GBM12, and, similarly, the combination of rucaparib and temozolomide (dosed for 5 days every 28 days for 3 cycles) significantly prolonged the time to tumor regrowth by 40% in heterotopic xenografts. In contrast, the addition of rucaparib had no impact on the efficacy of temozolomide in GBM12 or GBM39 orthotopic models. Using Madin-Darby canine kidney (MDCK) II cells stably expressing murine BCRP1 or human MDR1, cell accumulation studies demonstrated that rucaparib is transported by both transporters. Consistent with the influence of these efflux pumps on central nervous system drug distribution, Mdr1a/b−/−Bcrp1−/− knockout mice had a significantly higher brain to plasma ratio for rucaparib (1.61 ± 0.25) than wild-type mice (0.11 ± 0.08). A pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation after a single dose confirmed limited accumulation of rucaparib in the brain is associated with substantial residual PARP enzymatic activity. Similarly, matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometric imaging demonstrated significantly enhanced accumulation of drug in flank tumor compared with normal brain or orthotopic tumors. Collectively, these results suggest that limited drug delivery into brain tumors may significantly limit the efficacy of rucaparib combined with temozolomide in GBM. Mol Cancer Ther; 14(12); 2735–43. ©2015 AACR.