Geller, James I.

ABSTRACTBackgroundThe Pediatric Oncology Group P9262 Phase 2 study of single‐agent paclitaxel demonstrated one complete response (CR), one partial response (PR), and four with stable disease (SD) among 15 patients with recurrent Wilms tumor (WT). Based on this activity, paclitaxel‐containing regimens have been used as salvage therapy for treatment‐refractory WT. We conducted a multi‐institutional retrospective study to further characterize the clinical activity of paclitaxel‐containing regimens in recurrent WT.MethodsTwelve institutions submitted anonymized data from patients with relapsed WT treated with paclitaxel. Response after one or two cycles of a paclitaxel‐containing regimen was reported according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors.ResultsTwenty‐eight patients with a median age at diagnosis of 5.5 years (range: 3 months to 31.9 years) were reported. Twenty had non‐anaplastic WT; eight had diffuse anaplasia (DA). Stage at diagnosis was I (n = 1), II (n = 1), III (n = 11), IV (n = 14), and V (n = 1). Patients received a mean of 8.5 anticancer drugs (range: 6–12) before paclitaxel, including eight who received high‐dose therapy/stem cell transplant. Paclitaxel (n = 13) or nab‐paclitaxel (n = 15) were predominantly administered in combination with other agents, most commonly doxorubicin and/or gemcitabine. Eleven of 26 patients with measurable disease had a partial response (7 = non‐anaplastic; 4 = DA), four had stable disease, and 11 had progressive disease. Two patients without measurable disease maintained a complete response for 12 and 16 months. The mean duration without progression was 7.6 months (range: 1–35 months).ConclusionsPaclitaxel‐containing regimens appear to be active against heavily pretreated WT with either non‐anaplastic or DA histology. Prospective studies are warranted to formally evaluate the efficacy of paclitaxel‐based therapies.

Ototoxicity is among the adverse events related to cancer treatment that can have far-reaching consequences and negative impacts on quality-of-life for cancer patients and survivors of all ages. Ototoxicity management (OtoM) comprises the prevention, diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment, including rehabilitation and therapeutic intervention, of individuals who experience hearing loss, tinnitus, or balance/vestibular difficulties following exposures to ototoxic agents, including platinum chemotherapy (cisplatin, carboplatin) and cranial radiation. Despite the well-established physical, socioeconomic, and psychological consequences of hearing and balance dysfunction, there are no widely adopted standards for clinical management of cancer treatment-related ototoxicity. Consensus recommendations and a roadmap are needed to guide development of effective and feasible OtoM programs, direct research efforts, address the needs of caregivers and patients at all stages of cancer care and survivorship. Here we review current evidence and propose near-term to longer-term goals to advance OtoM in five strategic areas: (1) beneficiary awareness, empowerment, and engagement, (2) workforce enhancement, (3) program development, (4) policy, funding, and sustainability, and (5) research and evaluation. The goal is to identify needs and establish a roadmap to guide worldwide adoption of standardized OtoM for cancer treatment and improved outcomes for patients and survivors.

Background Lorvotuzumab mertansine (IMGN901) is an antibody‐drug conjugate linking an antimitotic agent (DM1) to an anti‐CD56 antibody (lorvotuzumab). Preclinical efficacy has been noted in Wilms tumor, rhabdomyosarcoma, and neuroblastoma. Synovial sarcoma, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST), and pleuropulmonary blastoma also express CD56. A phase 2 trial of lorvotuzumab mertansine was conducted to assess its efficacy, recommended phase 2 dose, and toxicities. Methods Eligible patients had relapsed after or progressed on standard therapy for their tumor type. Lorvotuzumab mertansine (110 mg/m 2 per dose) was administered at the adult recommended phase 2 dose intravenously on days 1 and 8 of 21‐day cycles. Dexamethasone premedication was used. Pharmacokinetic samples, peripheral blood CD56‐positive cell counts, and tumor CD56 expression were assessed. Results Sixty‐two patients enrolled. The median age was 14.3 years (range, 2.8‐29.9 years); 35 were male. Diagnoses included Wilms tumor (n = 17), rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 17), neuroblastoma (n = 12), synovial sarcoma (n = 10), MPNST (n = 5), and pleuropulmonary blastoma (n = 1). Five patients experienced 9 dose‐limiting toxicities: hyperglycemia (n = 1), colonic fistula (n = 1) with perforation (n = 1), nausea (n = 1) with vomiting (n = 1), increased alanine aminotransferase in cycle 1 (n = 2), and increased alanine aminotransferase in cycle 2 (n = 1) with increased aspartate aminotransferase (n = 1). Non–dose‐limiting toxicities (grade 3 or higher) attributed to lorvotuzumab mertansine were rare. The median values of the maximum concentration, half‐life, and area under the curve from zero to infinity for DM1 were 0.87 µg/mL, 35 hours, and 27.9 µg/mL h, respectively. Peripheral blood CD56+ leukocytes decreased by 71.9% on day 8. One patient with rhabdomyosarcoma had a partial response, and 1 patient with synovial sarcoma achieved a delayed complete response. Conclusions Lorvotuzumab mertansine (110 mg/m 2 ) is tolerated in children at the adult recommended phase 2 dose; clinical activity is limited.

Abstract Background Axitinib is an oral small molecule that inhibits receptor tyrosine kinases vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1 to 3. A phase 1 and pharmacokinetic (PK) trial evaluating axitinib was conducted in children with refractory solid tumors. Methods Axitinib was administered orally twice daily in continuous 28‐day cycles. Dose levels (2.4 mg/m 2 /dose and 3.2 mg/m 2 /dose) were evaluated using a rolling 6 design. Serial PKs (cycle 1, days 1 and 8) and exploratory biomarkers were analyzed. Results A total of 19 patients were enrolled; 1 patient was ineligible due to inadequate time having elapsed from prior therapy. The median age of the patients was 13.5 years (range, 5‐17 years). Two of 5 patients who were treated at dose level 2 experienced dose‐limiting toxicities (palmar‐plantar erythryodysesthesia syndrome in 1 patient and intratumoral hemorrhage in 1 patient). Frequent (>20%) grade 1 to 2 toxicities during cycle 1 included anemia, anorexia, fatigue, diarrhea, nausea, and hypertension. Nonhematological toxicities of grade ≥3 in subsequent cycles included hypertension and elevated serum lipase. PK analysis demonstrated variability in axitinib exposure, the median time to peak plasma concentration was 2 hours, and the half‐life ranged from 0.7 to 5.2 hours. Exposure and dose were not found to be significantly associated with hypertension. Five patients achieved stable disease for ≥6 cycles as their best response, including patients with malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (1 patient), Ewing sarcoma (1 patient), hepatocellular carcinoma (1 patient), and osteosarcoma (2 patients). One patient with alveolar soft part sarcoma achieved a partial response. Kidney injury biomarkers were found to be elevated at baseline; no trends were identified. Conclusions In children with refractory solid tumors, the maximum tolerated and recommended dose of axitinib appears to be 2.4 mg/m 2 /dose, which provides PK exposures similar to those of adults.

10537 Background: Lorvotuzumab mertansine (IMGN901; LM) is an antibody-drug conjugate, linking anti-mitotic agent (DM1) to an anti-CD56 antibody. Preclinical data show effects in Wilms tumor (WT), rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS), and neuroblastoma (NBL). Synovial sarcoma (SS), MPNST and pleuropulmonary blastoma (PPB) also express CD56. A phase 2 trial assessing the efficacy and tolerability of LM administered at the adult recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) was conducted in children with relapsed tumors. Methods: LM (110 mg/m2/dose) was administered IV on days (d) 1 and 8 of 21 d cycles, with dexamethasone pre-medication. The tolerability of LM was assessed in 6 patients prior to trial activation group-wide. Dose limiting toxicity (DLT) was assessed using CTCAE. Response was assessed by RECIST. Pharmacokinetics (PK) were obtained during cycle 1. Peripheral blood CD56-positive cells were measured d1 and d8 pre-dose. Tumor CD56 expression by immunohistochemistry in archival tissue was scored (0-3+). Results: Sixty-two patients were enrolled. The median (range) age was 14.3 y (2.8–29.9); 35 were male. Diagnoses included WT (17), RMS (17), NBL (12), SS (10), MPNST (5) and PPB (1). One patient was ineligible due to lack of measurable disease. Of 61 eligible patients, 47 were evaluable for toxicity, 50 for response, 50 for tumor CD56 expression; and 18 consented to optional PK. Five patients experienced 9 DLTs: hyperglycemia (1), colonic fistula (1) with perforation (1), nausea (1) with vomiting (1), increased ALT (2 in cycle 1; 1 in cycle 2 with increased AST (1)). Non-dose limiting toxicities (Grade ≥3) attributed to LM included lymphopenia, anemia, vomiting, dehydration, hypokalemia, hyperuricemia, hypophosphatemia. Mean DM1 Cmax, t1/2 and AUC0-∞values were 922 ng/ml, 33 h and 27400 ng/ml*h, respectively. Tumor CD56 expression was 0 (8%), 1+(4%), 2+(12%), 3+(76%). LM and CD56 antibody PK, and response, will be reported. Conclusions: LM (110 mg/m2) is tolerated in children at the adult RP2D. Clinical trial information: NCT 02452554.

AbstractBackgroundThe c‐Met receptor tyrosine kinase is dysregulated in many pediatric cancers. Tivantinib is an oral small molecule that inhibits the c‐Met receptor tyrosine kinase. A phase 1 and pharmacokinetic (PK) trial evaluating tivantinib was conducted in children with relapsed/refractory solid tumors.MethodsOral tivantinib capsules were administered twice daily with food, continuously in 28‐day cycles. Dose levels 170, 200, and 240 mg/m2/dose were evaluated using a rolling‐six design (Part A). In Part B, subjects received tivantinib powder sprinkled on food at the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) from Part A. PK, CYP2C19 genotyping, and baseline tumor tissue c‐Met expression were analyzed.ResultsThirty‐six patients were enrolled: 20 in Part A, 6 in a PK expansion cohort, and 10 in Part B. Fifteen patients had primary central nervous system tumors and 21 had solid tumors. In Part A, there were no dose‐limiting toxicities. One grade 4 intracranial hemorrhage occurred in a patient with a progressive brain tumor in the expanded PK cohort (240 mg/m2). PK analysis showed marked interpatient variability (20‐fold) in the Cmax and AUC0‐8h across all dose levels. Sprinkling tivantinib powder over food did not alter exposure. Membranous and total c‐Met expression was moderate (2), low (4), or not detected (26). Two patients had stable disease as the best response.ConclusionsThe RP2D of tivantinib given with food in children with refractory solid tumors is 240 mg/m2/dose. PK of tivantinib in children demonstrated high variability. Objective responses were not observed in this phase 1 trial.