Merker, Vanessa L.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Brigatinib is an oral ALK inhibitor that inhibits multiple tyrosine kinases. We previously published outcomes of patients with NF2-related schwannomatosis treated with brigatinib for a median of 10.4 months. We report updated results of these patients with extended follow-up. METHODS This multicenter, phase II, open-label study included participants ≥12 years with NF2-SWN and progressive target tumors (baskets: VS, NVS, meningioma, or ependymoma). Patients were treated with brigatinib 180 mg daily. Patients discontinued treatment upon progression of target tumors but could continue treatment with isolated progression of non-target tumors if deemed clinically acceptable by the treating team and patient. One target and up to 5 non-target tumors were followed in each participant. Tumor response was evaluated by MRI every 3 months in year 1 and every 6 months thereafter with radiographic response (RR) defined as ≥20% decrease in volume compared to baseline. RESULTS Forty participants were treated for a median of 23 months (range, 3-40 months). Updated imaging data is available on 162 tumors (45 VS, 59 non-VS, 53 meningiomas, and 5 ependymomas). RR rate for all tumors was 28% and was 31% for non-VS, 28% for meningioma, 22% for VS, and 60% for ependymomas. The 12-month freedom from tumor progression was 77.1% for all tumors, 81.5% for non-VS, 78.1% for meningioma, 69.2% for VS, and 100.0% for ependymoma. The 24-month freedom from tumor progression was 73% for all tumors, 81.3% for non-VS, 72.4% for meningioma, 62.4% for VS, and 100.0% for ependymoma. There were no grade 4/5 treatment-related adverse events (AEs). The most common AEs were diarrhea (65%), nausea (40%), muscle cramps (40%), hypertension (35%), increased LDH (35%), increased AST (33%), and increased ALT (25%). CONCLUSION Brigatinib treatment was associated with high rates of tumor stability at 24 months across multiple tumor types in patients with NF2-related schwannomatosis.

Abstract INTRODUCTION NF2-related schwannomatosis (NF2-SWN) predisposes affected individuals to vestibular schwannomas (VS), non-vestibular schwannomas (NVS), meningiomas, and ependymomas. The rarity of NF2-SWN and the presence of multiple tumor types has impeded clinical trials. We conducted a multi-center, adaptive, platform-basket trial to screen multiple drugs against progressive NF2-SWN tumors. We report the final analysis of the first treatment arm with brigatinib, an oral ALK inhibitor that inhibits multiple tyrosine kinases. METHODS This study enrolled participants ≥ 12 years with NF2-SWN and progressive target tumors (baskets: VS, NVS, meningioma, or ependymoma Radiographic response (RR) was defined as ≥ 20% decrease in target tumor volume from baseline. The primary outcome was RR rate. Secondary outcomes included safety, hearing response, and RR in non-target tumors. Tumor response was evaluated by MRI every 3 months in year 1 and every 6 months thereafter. In stage 1, 20 participants received brigatinib 180 mg daily. Interim analysis suggested activity in NVS and meningioma. Thus, an additional 20 participants with progressive meningioma or NVS were enrolled in stage 2. RESULTS Forty participants (median age 26 years, 12 pediatric, 28 female) were treated. Prior treatment included surgery (90%), radiation therapy (20%) and chemotherapy (55%). Target tumors included 10 VS, 9 NVS, 19 meningiomas, and 2 ependymomas. Overall RR rate was 10% for all target tumors (22% for non-VS, 11% for meningioma, 0% for VS, and 0% for ependymomas). There were no grade 4 or 5 treatment-related adverse events (AEs). The most common AEs were diarrhea (63%), nausea (40%), muscle cramps (33%), increased LDH (35%), increased AST (33%), and increased ALT (23%). CONCLUSION Brigatinib treatment was associated with RR in NVS and meningiomas in a heavily pretreated cohort of participants with progressing NF2-SWN tumors. This novel design provides unique ability to assess treatments for hereditary syndromes with multiple primary tumors.

Abstract BACKGROUND The Food and Drug Administration recently issued guidance on conducting qualitative research to support patient-focused drug development. In prior FDA submissions, qualitative data has been critical to demonstrate the content validity of and meaningfulness of change in quantitative trial endpoints. Qualitative patient interviews embedded within neuro-oncology trials can supplement traditional quantitative measures by providing nuanced information on patients’ treatment priorities, benefit/risk assessments, and quality of life. METHODS We interviewed people with neurofibromatosis 2 (NF2) in stage one of the brigatinib arm of a multicenter, phase II, adaptive platform-basket trial for progressive NF2-related tumors (NCT04374305). Transcripts were coded by two analysts using a hybrid inductive/deductive framework; cross-cutting themes were generated using the Framework Method. RESULTS 16/20 trial enrollees participated in interviews May 2021-March 2022. The radiographic response rate (volume shrinkage ≥20% from baseline) at 6 months for target and non-target tumors was 5% and 22%, respectively. However, most participants rated their change in overall status as minimally (10/16) or much (3/16) improved. Several participants acknowledged their tumor size had not changed significantly but felt tumor stability was an improvement over previously accelerated growth rates; this importantly allowed them to avoid or postpone future surgery. Participants also valued prevention of symptomatic decline, minimal impact of side effects on social roles and activities, the convenience of oral medication, and the sense of hope and agency gained from participating in a trial. CONCLUSIONS Virtual, in-depth qualitative interviews were feasible across multiple sites and provided unique information on NF2 patients’ conceptualization of clinical benefit. Qualitative interviews embedded within neuro-oncology trials can reveal 1) whether trial design and choice of outcome measures align with patient priorities; 2) whether and how new treatments improve patients’ quality of life; and 3) what degree of change in quantitative measures such as radiographic progression are clinically meaningful.