DuBois, Steven G.

PURPOSE Monoclonal antibodies directed against insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor (IGF-1R) have shown activity in patients with relapsed Ewing sarcoma. The primary objective of Children's Oncology Group trial AEWS1221 was to determine if the addition of the IGF-1R monoclonal antibody ganitumab to interval-compressed chemotherapy improves event-free survival (EFS) in patients with newly diagnosed metastatic Ewing sarcoma. METHODS Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 at enrollment to standard arm (interval-compressed vincristine/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide alternating once every 2 weeks with ifosfamide/etoposide = VDC/IE) or to experimental arm (VDC/IE with ganitumab at cycle starts and as monotherapy once every 3 weeks for 6 months after conventional therapy). A planned sample size of 300 patients was projected to provide 81% power to detect an EFS hazard ratio of 0.67 or smaller for the experimental arm compared with the standard arm with a one-sided α of .025. RESULTS Two hundred ninety-eight eligible patients enrolled (148 in standard arm; 150 in experimental arm). The 3-year EFS estimates were 37.4% (95% CI, 29.3 to 45.5) for the standard arm and 39.1% (95% CI, 31.3 to 46.7) for the experimental arm (stratified EFS-event hazard ratio for experimental arm 1.00; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.33; 1-sided, P = .50). The 3-year overall survival estimates were 59.5% (95% CI, 50.8 to 67.3) for the standard arm and 56.7% (95% CI, 48.3 to 64.2) for the experimental arm. More cases of pneumonitis after radiation involving thoracic fields and nominally higher rates of febrile neutropenia and ALT elevation were reported on the experimental arm. CONCLUSION Ganitumab added to interval-compressed chemotherapy did not significantly reduce the risk of EFS event in patients with newly diagnosed metastatic Ewing sarcoma, with outcomes similar to prior trials without IGF-1R inhibition or interval compression. The addition of ganitumab may be associated with increased toxicity.

PURPOSE The primary aim of this phase III randomized trial was to test whether the addition of vincristine, topotecan, and cyclophosphamide (VTC) to interval compressed chemotherapy improved survival outcomes for patients with previously untreated nonmetastatic Ewing sarcoma. METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to receive standard five-drug interval compressed chemotherapy (regimen A) for 17 cycles or experimental therapy with five cycles of VTC within the 17 cycles (regimen B). Patients were stratified by age at diagnosis (< 18 years and ≥18 years) and tumor site (pelvic bone, nonpelvic bone, and extraosseous). Tumor volume at diagnosis was categorized as < 200 mL or ≥ 200 mL. Local control occurred following six cycles. Histologic response was categorized as no viable or any viable tumor. Event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between randomized groups with stratified log-rank tests. RESULTS Of 642 enrolled patients, 309 eligible patients received standard and 320 received experimental therapy. The 5-year EFS and OS were 78% and 87%, respectively. There was no difference in survival outcomes between randomized groups (5-year EFS regimen A v regimen B, 78% v 79%; P = .192; 5-year OS 86% v 88%; P = .159). Age and primary site did not affect the risk of an EFS event. However, age ≥ 18 years was associated with an increased risk of death at 5 years (hazard ratio 1.84; 95% CI, 1.15 to 2.96; P = .009). The 5-year EFS rates for patients with pelvic, nonpelvic bone, and extraosseous primary tumors were 75%, 78%, and 85%, respectively. Tumor volume ≥ 200 mL was significantly associated with lower EFS. CONCLUSION While VTC added to five-drug interval compressed chemotherapy did not improve survival, these outcomes represent the best survival estimates to date for patients with previously untreated nonmetastatic Ewing sarcoma.

TPS10560 Background: In children, fusions of the NTRK1/2/3 genes (TRK fusions) occur in soft tissue sarcomas, including infantile fibrosarcoma (IFS), congenital mesoblastic nephroma, high- and low-grade gliomas, secretory breast carcinoma, and papillary thyroid cancer. Rarely, TRK fusions also occur in Ph-like acute lymphoblastic leukemia and acute myeloid leukemia. Larotrectinib is a selective TRK inhibitor FDA-approved for the treatment of TRK fusion solid tumors in patients with no satisfactory alternative treatments or whose cancer has progressed following initial treatment. In children, larotrectinib demonstrated a 94% overall response rate (ORR) with a 12-month progression free survival rate of 75% (1). Methods: Patients <30 years with any newly diagnosed unresectable solid tumor or relapsed/refractory acute leukemia with TRK fusions are eligible. TRK fusions must be locally identified in a CLIA/CAP laboratory and are confirmed centrally using a targeted RNA sequencing panel. Patients with high-grade gliomas are excluded. Patients receive larotrectinib 100 mg/m2/dose BID (max of 100 mg/dose) continuously in 28-day cycles. Patients with solid tumors who achieve CR will discontinue larotrectinib at the completion of at least 12 total cycles of therapy and 6 cycles after achieving CR. Those whose tumors become surgically resectable may undergo on study resection and discontinue therapy if an R0/R1 (IFS) or R0 (other tumors) resection is obtained. All other patients will receive 26 cycles in the absence of unacceptable toxicity or progressive disease. The primary endpoint is the ORR to larotrectinib according to RECIST 1.1 in children with IFS. The study uses a Simon 2-stage minimax design, and the regimen will be considered of sufficient interest if 16 of 21 (76%) patients with IFS demonstrate response. Patients with other solid tumors and leukemias will be analyzed in separate cohorts as secondary objectives. Correlative studies include serial sampling of circulating tumor DNA and neurocognitive assessments. This is the first Children’s Oncology Group study to assign frontline therapy based on the presence of a molecular marker independent of histology, and the first clinical trial to evaluate larotrectinib for the treatment of leukemia. Enrollment began in October 2019 (NCT03834961). 1. Tilburg CMv, DuBois SG, Albert CM, et al: Larotrectinib efficacy and safety in pediatric TRK fusion cancer patients. Journal of Clinical Oncology 37:10010-10010, 2019 Clinical trial information: NCT03834961.

10526 Background: Pro-angiogenic factors may represent therapeutic targets in sarcoma. Preclinical studies have demonstrated a potential additive or synergistic interaction between anti-angiogenic agents and chemotherapy. The purpose of this study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), toxicities, pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) effects of PAZIT in patients with advanced sarcoma. Methods: Patients 6-30 years of age with relapsed/refractory sarcomas were eligible. In the initial dose escalation plan (A), patients received pazopanib PO (225-450 mg/m2/dose) on Days 1-21 of 21-day cycles. Pazopanib was combined with fixed doses of irinotecan (IV 50 or PO 90 mg/m2/dose) and temozolomide PO 100 mg/m2/dose on Days 1-5. Due to DLTs, an amendment was made to the dose escalation plan (B) and patients received fixed doses of pazopanib PO (225 mg/m2/dose) on Days 1-21 of 21-day cycles and reduced irinotecan doses (IV 25-37.5 or PO 45-67.5 mg/m2/dose) and temozolomide PO 100 mg/m2/dose on Days 1-5. Oral cephalosporin diarrhea prophylaxis was required. Dose escalation followed a 3+3 design. Correlative studies included PK (pazopanib, irinotecan) and PD (angiogenic factors, ctDNA) effects. Results: Sixteen patients were treated (median age 16 years, range 7-21). The dose levels in the table were evaluated. First cycle DLTs occurred at all dose levels (Table) and included diarrhea, pancreatitis, colitis, neutropenia, hypertension, deep vein thrombosis, and ALT increase. Due to excessive toxicity, an MTD could not be established. One patient with osteosarcoma had a partial response. Four patients had prolonged stable disease > 4 cycles, including 2 patients with Ewing sarcoma (5 and 6 cycles), rhabdomyosarcoma (9 cycles), and desmoplastic small round cell tumor (6 cycles). Mean±SD plasma exposures to pazopanib, irinotecan, and SN-38 in patients treated on dose level 1B (n = 4) on Day 4 were 601±83, 1.4±0.2 and 0.1±0.04 ug/mL*hr, respectively. Analyses of correlative studies are ongoing. Conclusions: Combination PAZIT therapy is not tolerable as evaluated at these doses/schedules. This study provides important toxicity data to inform future clinical trials using combination anti-angiogenic strategies in sarcoma. Clinical trial information: NCT03139331. [Table: see text]

11529 Background: Maximum tumor dimension > 8 cm. and large tumor volume have been reported to be adverse prognostic factors in patients with ES but have not been prospectively evaluated in the context of a phase 3 clinical trial with interval compressed chemotherapy. Methods: COG AEWS1031 (NCT01231906) was a randomized phase 3 clinical trial comparing interval compressed chemotherapy regimens in patients with newly diagnosed localized ES of bone and soft tissue. A correlative objective of AEWS1031 was to evaluate tumor size and volume as prognostic factors. Institution-reported dimensions of the primary tumor from baseline imaging were prospectively collected. For inclusion in this analysis, patients had to have at least 1 tumor dimension reported for tumor size analyses and dimensions in 3 axes for tumor volume analyses. Maximum dimension was dichotomized as less than vs. > / = 8cm. Tumor volume was dichotomized as less than vs. > / = 200 mL. Event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS) from enrollment were calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods and compared between groups using a two-sided log-rank test. Hazard ratios (HR) and confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the Cox model. Results: The 5-year EFS and OS of the 629 eligible patients was 78% (95% CI: 75-81%) and 87% (95% CI: 84-90%) respectively and there was no significant difference in both EFS and OS between the randomized interval compressed chemotherapy arms of AEWS1031. 590 of 629 (94%) patients were evaluable for maximum tumor dimension and 307 (52%) had tumors > / = 8 cm. Patients with tumors > / = 8 cm were at significantly increased risk for EFS events (p = 0.016) with estimated 5-year EFS of 73.7% (95% CI: 68.1 vs.78.4%) vs. 82.9% (95% CI 77.7-87.1%) for patients with tumors < 8 cm [HR: 1.53 (1.08-2.17)]. For tumor volume, 586 of 629 patients (93%) were evaluable and 180 (31%) had tumors > / = 200 mL. Patients with tumor volume > / = 200 mL were at significantly increased risk for EFS events (p = 0.003) with estimated 5-year EFS of 70% (95% CI: 62.3-76.4%) vs. 81.6% (95% CI: 77.2-85.2%) for patients with tumors < 200 mL [HR: 1.69 (1.2-2.39)]. Conclusions: Maximum tumor dimension and tumor volume as defined are both prognostic in patients with newly diagnosed localized ES treated with interval compressed chemotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01231906 .

Abstract Purpose: In phase I testing, alisertib tablets with irinotecan and temozolomide showed significant antitumor activity in patients with neuroblastoma. This study sought to confirm activity of this regimen; evaluate an alisertib oral solution; and evaluate biomarkers of clinical outcomes. Patients and Methods: We conducted a two-stage phase II trial of alisertib tablets (60 mg/m2/dose × 7 days), irinotecan (50 mg/m2/dose i.v. × 5 days), and temozolomide (100 mg/m2/dose orally × 5 days) in patients with relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma. The primary endpoint was best objective response. A separate cohort was treated with alisertib at 45 mg/m2 using oral solution instead of tablets. Exploratory analyses sought to identify predictors of toxicity, response, and progression-free survival (PFS) using pooled data from phase I, phase II, and oral solution cohorts. Results: Twenty and 12 eligible patients were treated in the phase II and oral solution cohorts, respectively. Hematologic toxicities were the most common adverse events. In phase II, partial responses were observed in 19 evaluable patients (21%). The estimated PFS at 1 year was 34%. In the oral solution cohort, 3 patients (25%) had first cycle dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Alisertib oral solution at 45 mg/m2 had significantly higher median Cmax and exposure compared with tablets at 60 mg/m2. Higher alisertib trough concentration was associated with first cycle DLT, whereas MYCN amplification was associated with inferior PFS. Conclusions: This combination shows antitumor activity, particularly in patients with MYCN nonamplified tumors. Data on an alisertib oral solution expand the population able to be treated with this agent.

AbstractBackgroundVorinostat combined with retinoids produces additive antitumor effects in preclinical studies of neuroblastoma. Higher systemic exposures of vorinostat than achieved in pediatric phase I trials with continuous daily dosing are necessary for in vivo increased histone acetylation and cytotoxic activity. We conducted a phase I trial in children with relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of vorinostat on an interrupted schedule, escalating beyond the previously identified pediatric MTD.MethodsIsotretinoin (cis‐13‐retinoic acid) 80 mg/m2/dose was administered by mouth twice daily on days 1–14 in combination with escalating doses of daily vorinostat up to 430 mg/m2/dose (days 1–4; 8–11) in each 28‐day cycle using the standard 3 + 3 design. Vorinostat pharmacokinetic testing and histone acetylation assays were performed.ResultsTwenty‐nine patients with refractory or relapsed neuroblastoma were enrolled and 28 were evaluable for dose escalation decisions. Median number of cycles completed was two (range 1–15); 11 patients received four or more cycles. Three patients experienced cycle 1 dose‐limiting toxicities. A total of 18 patients experienced grade 3/4 toxicities related to study therapy. The maximum intended dose of vorinostat (430 mg/m2/day, days 1–4; 8–11) was tolerable and led to increased histone acetylation in surrogate tissues when compared to lower doses of vorinostat (P = 0.009). No objective responses were seen.ConclusionsIncreased dose vorinostat (430 mg/m2/day) on an interrupted schedule is tolerable in combination with isotretinoin. This dose led to increased vorinostat exposures and demonstrated increased histone acetylation. Prolonged stable disease in patients with minimal residual disease warrants further investigation.

AbstractBackgroundThe prognostic significance of having extraskeletal (EES) versus skeletal Ewing sarcoma (ES) in the setting of modern chemotherapy protocols is unknown. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical characteristics, biologic features, and outcomes for patients with EES and skeletal ES.MethodsPatients had localized ES and were treated on two consecutive protocols using five‐drug chemotherapy (INT‐0154 and AEWS0031). Patients were analyzed based on having an extraskeletal (n = 213) or skeletal (n = 826) site of tumor origin. Event‐free survival (EFS) was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method, compared using the log‐rank test, and modeled using Cox multivariate regression.ResultsPatients with extraskeletal ES (EES) were more likely to have axial tumors (72% vs. 55%; P < 0.001), less likely to have tumors >8 cm (9% vs. 17%; P < 0.01), and less likely to be white (81% vs. 87%; P < 0.001) compared to patients with skeletal ES. There was no difference in key genomic features (type of EWSR1 translocation, TP53 mutation, CDKN2A mutation/loss) between groups. After controlling for age, race, and primary site, EES was associated with superior EFS (hazard ratio = 0.69; 95% confidence interval: 0.50–0.95; P = 0.02). Among patients with EES, age ≥18, nonwhite race, and elevated baseline erythrocyte sedimentation rate were independently associated with inferior EFS.ConclusionClinical characteristics, but not key tumor genomic features, differ between EES and skeletal ES. Extraskeletal origin is a favorable prognostic factor, independent of age, race, and primary site.