Chawla, Sant P.

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).

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.

PURPOSE SARC024 is a phase II clinical trial of the multikinase inhibitor regorafenib in specific sarcoma subtypes, including advanced osteosarcoma. We hypothesized that regorafenib would improve progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with sarcoma and report the results of the osteosarcoma cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS This trial enrolled patients with progressive metastatic osteosarcoma with measurable disease by RECIST who had received at least one prior line of therapy. Patients were randomly assigned at a ratio of one to one to regorafenib or placebo. Crossover was allowed at time of disease progression. PFS was the primary end point of the study, which was powered to detect a difference of at least 3 months in median PFS. RESULTS Forty-two patients from 12 centers were enrolled between September 2014 and May 2018. Median age was 37 years (range, 18 to 76 years). Patients had received an average of 2.3 prior therapy regimens. Ten patients receiving placebo crossed over to active drug at time of progression. Study enrollment was stopped early, after a data safety monitoring committee review. Median PFS was significantly improved with regorafenib versus placebo: 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.0 to 7.6 months) versus 1.7 months (95% CI, 1.2 to 1.8 months), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.85; P = .017). In the context of the crossover design, there was no statistically significant difference in overall survival. Fourteen (64%) of 22 patients initially randomly assigned to regorafenib experienced grade 3 to 4 events attributed to treatment, including one grade 4 colonic perforation. CONCLUSION The study met its primary end point, demonstrating activity of regorafenib in patients with progressive metastatic osteosarcoma. No new safety signals were observed. Regorafenib should be considered a treatment option for patients with relapsed metastatic osteosarcoma.

11006 Background: CMB305 is an active immunotherapy regimen designed to generate and expand anti-NY-ESO-1 T cells. It consists of LV305, a dendritic cell targeting lentiviral vector encoding NY-ESO-1, and a boost with G305, an NY-ESO-1 recombinant protein plus GLA-SE, a TLR-4 agonist. An LV305 phase 1 study demonstrated a 1-yr survival of 81% and induction of anti-NY-ESO-1 T cells in sarcoma patients (pts). This first-in-human study of CMB305 examined safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy in pts with NY-ESO-1 positive (+) solid tumors. Methods: Adults with previously treated NY-ESO-1+ sarcomas, NSCLC, ovarian cancer were enrolled in a 3+3 dose-escalation with an expansion phase 1 study. The CMB305 regimen included 4 intradermal injections of LV305 at 109 or 1010 vector genomes, alternating with 3 intramuscular G305 injections at 250 µg for 3 months, then bimonthly G305 injections up to 1 yr. Results: As of 31Dec2016, 25 pts with STS (15 synovial (SS), 8 myxoid/round cell liposarcoma (MRCL), 2 other) were evaluable for safety; 23 SS/MRCL pts were evaluable for immune response (IR) and efficacy. All SS and MRCL pts received prior therapy for locally advanced/metastatic disease, 67% > = 2 prior chemo regimens. No DLTs were observed; treatment related AEs were grade 1 and 2, except 1 pt with grade 3 SAE (prostatic pain). Of 11 SS/MRCL pts tested, 64% pts developed NY-ESO-1 specific T cells and 72% pts anti-NY-ESO-1 antibodies. T cell receptor sequencing indicated increased clonality, and antigen spreading after CMB305. Best response by immune related response criteria was stable disease in 8/15 (53%) SS pts and 6/8 (75%) MRCL pts. The 3 month PFS rate was 74% and 75% for SS and MRCL pts. Median survival has not been reached with 1-yr survival rate of 86% and 100% for SS and MRCL pts. Conclusions: CMB305 is safe, well tolerated, and demonstrates a survival rate that is favorable when compared with approved agents for recurrent STS. CMB305 resulted in a stronger and broader integrated IR than LV305, including antigen spreading. These data warrant further investigation of CMB305 as a monotherapy in a randomized clinical study in STS. A randomized study of CMB305 in combination with atezolizumab in SS/MRCL pts is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT02387125.

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.

3090 Background: The correlation of immune response (IR) and clinical benefit in patients (pts) who receive active immunotherapy remains controversial. CMB305 is an active immunotherapy designed to generate and expand anti-NY-ESO-1 T cells, consisting of LV305 (a DC targeting lentiviral vector encoding NY-ESO-1) and a boost (NY-ESO-1 recombinant protein plus GLA-SE, a TLR-4 agonist). Phase 1 studies of LV305 and CMB305 evaluated the IR and survival of pts with NY-ESO-1 positive tumors. Methods: 62 pts with recurrent NY-ESO-1 expressing (by IHC) solid tumors were enrolled in 2 Phase 1 trials (31 pts each: 43 sarcomas, 12 ovarian, 4 melanomas, and 3 NSCLC). Peripheral blood was assessed pre and post therapy for anti-NY-ESO-1 T cell responses (IFNγ ELISPOT) and antibodies (Ab) (ELISA) (n = 62), TCR-β CDR3 repertoire and conserved (public) TCR (n = 28), and antigen spreading (ELISA, ELISPOT) (n = 23). Relationship between progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and up to 15 biomarkers were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Preexisting anti-NY-ESO-1 T cells and Ab were identified in 34% and 40% of pts. LV305 and CMB305 induced (de novo or increased) anti-NY-ESO-1 T-cells in 51% and 65% pts, and anti-NY-ESO-1 Ab responses in 13% and 68% pts, respectively. LV305 and CMB305 induced antigen spreading in 17% and 36% pts. TCR clonality increased after CMB305 as compared to LV305. The TCRβ-CDR3 amino acid sequences of three NY-ESO-1 specific TCR clones in a patient with a > 2-year response were fully conserved in 20/28 patients. Biomarkers showing the strongest association with OS and PFS were pre-existing anti-NY-ESO-1 T-cell response and Ab, integrated IR (T cells and antibodies), and NY-ESO-1 expression level. Presence of public TCRs was associated with longer survival, particularly in pts with high ( > 50%) NY-ESO-1 expression. Conclusions: While LV305 and CMB305 are both immunogenic, CMB305 resulted in a stronger and broader integrated IR, including antigen spreading. The three identified survival variables, preexisting and treatment-induced NY-ESO-1 IR and the presence of public TCRs, warrant validation in randomized studies of CMB305.