Italiano, Antoîne

ABSTRACT Introduction Sinonasal sarcomas are exceedingly rare entities, constituting less than 7% of head and neck sarcomas. Their complex histology needs specialized treatment, which is often based on multimodal approaches including surgery, radiation therapy, and/or chemotherapy. This manuscript aims to gather expert opinions to establish common management principles for sinonasal sarcomas. Methods This international consensus followed a modified Delphi method in seven steps, including statements definition by the core group, expert panel recruitment, and a two‐round survey. Sixty‐two statements on sinonasal sarcoma management were developed. Experts from multiple continents participated, and results were anonymized and analyzed between March and May 2025. Results A total of 44 invited experts were recruited, 43.2% otorhinolaryngologists/head and neck surgeons, 31.8% medical oncologists, and 25% radiation oncologists. Participants varied in age and experience, representing Europe (70.5%), North America (18.2%), South America (6.8%), and Asia (4.5%). Among all histologies, biphenotypic sarcoma, chondrosarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, and myofibrosarcoma are principally treated with an upfront surgical management, differently from Ewing sarcoma and rhabdomyosarcoma in which chemotherapy, eventually associated with radiotherapy, is often chosen. In the remaining histologies (angiosarcoma, liposarcoma, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor [MPNST], osteosarcoma, and synovial sarcoma), a precise multimodal treatment is less standardized and needs to be discussed on a case‐by‐case basis. Conclusion Sinonasal sarcomas require a histology‐driven approach to determine upfront treatment, whether surgical, medical, or multimodal. Despite this structured strategy, prognosis remains highly variable across subtypes. Multidisciplinary evaluation and individualized management in referral centers are crucial to address the biological diversity and anatomical complexity of these rare malignancies.

Abstract Oncogenic translocations involving the MET gene have been reported in several cancer types, but detailed clinicogenomic characterization of these cancers is not well defined. In addition, prospective clinical trials evaluating the antitumor activity of MET inhibitors in MET rearrangement–positive cancers are limited. In this study, in a pan-cancer analysis of >46,000 solid tumors with comprehensive genomic profiling, we identified oncogenic MET rearrangements in ∼0.04% of cancers. Preliminary analysis from a phase II clinical trial of the type I MET tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) vebreltinib in MET fusion–positive solid tumors demonstrated an objective response rate of 50% and disease control rate of 79%, with antitumor activity seen in diverse cancer types, including lung adenocarcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, among others. Similar to MET exon 14–altered lung cancer, secondary mutations in the kinase domain can confer resistance to MET TKIs in MET fusion–positive cancers. Overall, these data categorize MET rearrangements as actionable targets in solid tumors. Significance: MET rearrangement–positive cancers are not well-characterized, and optimal treatment strategies are yet to be defined. Through comprehensive genomic analysis, preclinical modeling, and preliminary results of a phase II clinical trial, we demonstrate that MET fusions are a unique molecular subtype of cancers targetable with vebreltinib, a TKI in development.

TPS11588 Background: Imatinib is the worldwide standard for first-line therapy of advanced KIT-mutant GIST. However, secondary resistance mutations in the KIT ATP-binding domain (exons 13, 14), activation loop (exons 17, 18), or both develop and result in loss of imatinib-sensitivity. Bezuclastinib has a highly selective inhibition profile, leading to minimal off-target toxicities and allowing for combination with sunitinib. While no single tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) inhibits all KIT mutations, the combination of bezuclastinib + sunitinib targets commonly occurring primary (exons 9, 11) and secondary (exons 13, 14, 17, and 18) KIT mutations and may provide more durable responses. The early signs of clinical activity, tolerability, and safety observed with the combination thus far in Peak Part 1 (Somaiah et al. [presentation] CTOS 2023. Paper 62) are consistent with the completed Phase 1/2 study (PLX121-01). Methods: Peak (NCT05208047) is a global, randomized, open-label, multi-part Phase 3 study evaluating the efficacy and safety of bezuclastinib + sunitinib versus sunitinib as second-line treatment in adult pts who were intolerant to imatinib or whose tumors had imatinib-resistance. Current Peak study sites are located in North America (3 countries), South America (3 countries), Europe (12 countries), and Asia-Pacific (4 countries). The lead-in portion to test a new formulation of bezuclastinib, (Part 1) completed enrollment in April 2023. Based upon PK and safety, a dose of bezuclastinib 600 mg QD + sunitinib 37.5 mg QD was determined for Part 2 of the Peak study. Part 2 will enroll ~388 pts to be randomized (1:1) to bezuclastinib 600 mg QD + sunitinib 37.5 mg QD or sunitinib 37.5 mg QD alone. Key inclusion: >1 measurable lesion per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) v1.1, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status 0-2, adequate organ function, and prior imatinib therapy (no other prior therapy). Key exclusion: known PDGFR mutations or succinate dehydrogenase deficiency, clinically significant cardiac disease, and use of strong CYP3A4 inhibitors or inducers. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) confirmed by blinded independent central review per mRECIST v1.1. Additional efficacy (including overall survival and objective response rate) and safety endpoints will be evaluated and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) will be collected and assessed. Clinical trial information: NCT05208047 .

Abstract Background: Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1/2 (IDH1/2) is mutated in a subset of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), gliomas, and other solid tumors. LY3410738 is a potent, selective, covalent, dual inhibitor of IDH1/2 mutations (IDH1/2m). LY3410738 binds covalently at a novel binding site, enabling continued potency in preclinical models in the setting of second site IDH resistance mutations. We present initial results from the first-in-human phase 1 study of oral LY3410738 in patients (pts) with IDH1/2m CCA, and IDH1m glioma or other solid tumors. Methods: Dose escalation (3+3 design) evaluated LY3410738 monotherapy in advanced IDHm CCA and other solid tumors (NCT04521686). Key objectives included determining the RP2D, safety, PK, PD (inhibition of plasma D-2-HG), and preliminary antitumor activity. Results: As of 28 July 2022, 80 pts including 42 with CCA (33 IDH1m, 9 IDH2m), 27 with glioma (IDH1m), and 11 other tumor types (IDH1m) received LY3410738 dosed at 25-600 mg QD or 300 mg BID. Pts were median 52 years of age (range, 23-80) with a median of 2 prior therapies (range, 1-7). 19% of CCA pts had received prior IDH1 inhibitor. Median time on treatment was 3.7 months (range, 0.1-19). No DLTs or treatment related deaths were observed; the MTD was not reached. Treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) ≥15% included nausea (35%), vomiting (21%), and decreased appetite (19%) and were mostly grade 1-2. Most frequent grade ≥3 TEAEs >2% were anemia (4%), cholangitis (3%), headache (3%), decreased lymphocyte count (3%), and hyponatremia (3%). LY3410738 exposure was dose proportional. In pts with IDH1m cancers, LY3410738 achieved sustained D-2-HG inhibition at all dose levels, including in pts who received prior IDH1 inhibitor. In pts with IDH2m cancers, a higher dose (≥150 mg daily dose) was required for D-2-HG inhibition. Among the 42 pts with R/R CCA, the best response included 1 PR and 22 SD. Of the 22 glioma pts with contrast enhancing tumors, best response included 3 PR and 9 SD. Conclusions: LY3410738 demonstrated a favorable safety profile with potent and sustained D-2-HG inhibition in pts with IDH1/2m advanced solid tumors. Consistent with the expectations for IDH inhibitor monotherapy in this setting, CCA and glioma pts exhibited prolonged stable disease. RP2D evaluation is ongoing. Updated data on LY3410738 monotherapy will be presented at the meeting. Citation Format: Jordi Rodon, Lipika Goyal, Teresa Macarulla Mercade, Masafumi Ikeda, Shunsuke Kondo, Do-Youn Oh, Li-Yuan Bai, Makoto Ueno, Antoine Italiano, Kyriakos Papadopoulos, David Spigel, Sani H. Kizilbash, Rasha Cosman, Joon Oh Park, Li-Tzong Chen, Tomoya Yokota, Anita A. Turk, Chih-Yi Liao, Rachna Shroff, Anthony El-Khoueiry, Taroh Satoh, Antoine Hollebecque, Mitesh J. Borad, Nilofer Azad, Kurt A. Jaeckle, Herbert H. Loong, Jorge Adeva, Wei Peng Yong, Junjie Zhao, Hui Liu, Anna M. Szpurka, Ivelina Gueorguieva, Kamnesh R. Pradhan, Xiaojian Xu, James J. Harding. A first-in-human phase 1 study of LY3410738, a covalent inhibitor of mutant IDH, in advanced IDH-mutant cholangiocarcinoma and other solid tumors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 2 (Clinical Trials and Late-Breaking Research); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(8_Suppl):Abstract nr CT098.

PURPOSE Antitumor activity in preclinical models and a phase I study of patients with dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DD-LPS) was observed with selinexor. We evaluated the clinical benefit of selinexor in patients with previously treated DD-LPS whose sarcoma progressed on approved agents. METHODS SEAL was a phase II-III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients age 12 years or older with advanced DD-LPS who had received two-five lines of therapy were randomly assigned (2:1) to selinexor (60 mg) or placebo twice weekly in 6-week cycles (crossover permitted). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included for safety analysis (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02606461 ). RESULTS Two hundred eighty-five patients were enrolled (selinexor, n = 188; placebo, n = 97). PFS was significantly longer with selinexor versus placebo: hazard ratio (HR) 0.70 (95% CI, 0.52 to 0.95; one-sided P = .011; medians 2.8 v 2.1 months), as was time to next treatment: HR 0.50 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.66; one-sided P < .0001; medians 5.8 v 3.2 months). With crossover, no difference was observed in overall survival. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events of any grade versus grade 3 or 4 with selinexor were nausea (151 [80.7%] v 11 [5.9]), decreased appetite (113 [60.4%] v 14 [7.5%]), and fatigue (96 [51.3%] v 12 [6.4%]). Four (2.1%) and three (3.1%) patients died in the selinexor and placebo arms, respectively. Exploratory RNA sequencing analysis identified that the absence of CALB1 expression was associated with longer PFS with selinexor compared with placebo (median 6.9 v 2.2 months; HR, 0.19; P = .001). CONCLUSION Patients with advanced, refractory DD-LPS showed improved PFS and time to next treatment with selinexor compared with placebo. Supportive care and dose reductions mitigated side effects of selinexor. Prospective validation of CALB1 expression as a predictive biomarker for selinexor in DD-LPS is warranted.

11564 Background: Epithelioid sarcoma (ES) is a rare, aggressive soft tissue sarcoma characterized by loss of inhibitor of integrase 1 (INI1), allowing enhancer of zeste homologue 2 (EZH2) to repress cell differentiation and promote tumorigenesis. Tazemetostat (TAZ) is a selective inhibitor of EZH2 approved by the FDA for treatment of patients (pts) aged ≥16 years with metastatic or locally advanced ES ineligible for complete resection. Methods: This open-label, multicenter, multi-cohort phase 2 study (NCT02601950) evaluated safety and efficacy of TAZ in pts with INI1-negative tumors. ES pts were enrolled in Cohorts 5 and 6; pts in Cohort 6 underwent mandatory pre-dose (at screening) and post-dose biopsies (at Day 1 of cycle 2). Herein, we report the interim efficacy and safety data from Cohort 6. Results: As of July 31 2019, 44 pts were enrolled into Cohort 6 and treated with TAZ 800 mg BID. The objective response rate (ORR) was 11.4%; 4 pts (9.1%) had a partial response and 1 pt (2.3%) had a complete response (Table). Another 17 pts (38.6%) had stable disease (SD). 18 pts had progressive disease; 13 of these pts remained on study beyond progression. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) at 56 weeks were 19.4% and 59.4%, respectively. In a pooled posthoc analysis of 106 ES pts from Cohorts 5 (n = 62), and 6, ORR was 13.2%. Grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) were reported in 16 pts (36.4%), most commonly anemia (6.8%; n = 3) and tumor pain (6.8%; n = 3). 3 pts (6.8%) experienced grade 3–4 treatment-related AEs. One pt discontinued study drug and there were no treatment-emergent dose reductions or treatment-related deaths. These safety data from Cohort 6 are consistent with previously reported data from Cohort 5. 19 paired biopsies were included for translational endpoint analyses. Preliminary RNA seq and pathway analyses are currently ongoing and updated data, including additional biomarker data will be presented. Conclusions: Consistent with previously reported data from the completed Cohort 5, TAZ demonstrated clinically meaningful, durable, single agent activity in ES pts. Efficacy data from Cohort 6 continue to mature with 8 patients still on treatment. TAZ was well tolerated with a low incidence of treatment related AEs. Clinical trial information: NCT02601950 . [Table: see text]

11003 Background: ES is a rare soft tissue sarcoma that metastasizes in approximately 30% to 50% of cases. More than 90% of ES tumors lack expression of INI1, an important component of epigenetic regulation. Loss of INI1 function allows another epigenetic modifier, EZH2, to become an oncogenic driver in tumor cells. Tazemetostat, a first-in-class, selective, oral inhibitor of EZH2, has demonstrated tumor regression and favorable safety in phase 1/2 trials. Methods: Data from a phase 2 open-label, multicenter trial of pts with locally advanced or metastatic ES are reported. Efficacy was assessed with primary and secondary endpoints including objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1, disease control rate (DCR; objective confirmed response of any duration or stable disease [SD] lasting ≥32 weeks), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS); safety and tolerability were also evaluated. Results: As of September 17, 2018, 62 INI1-negative ES pts were enrolled and treated with tazemetostat 800 mg BID. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 1 (range: 0-9). There were 9/62 (15%) confirmed partial responses (PRs) with an ORR of 15% and DCR of 26%. The DOR ranged from 7.1+ weeks to 103.0+ weeks (median: not reached) with a median OS of 82.4 weeks (95% CI: 47.4, not estimable) for all 62 pts. Tazemetostat was generally well tolerated. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were generally mild to moderate with the most commonly reported adverse events (AEs; ≥10% incidence) regardless of attribution being fatigue (24/62; 39%), nausea (22/62; 35%), and cancer pain (20/62; 32%). Any treatment-related TEAEs of grade ≥3 were reported in 10/62 (16%) pts. TEAEs grade ≥3 reported in ≥2 pts included anemia (6%) and decreased weight (3%). There were no drug-related deaths and a low discontinuation rate (1.7%). Conclusions: In the largest prospective clinical trial of ES to date, tazemetostat achieved disease control in 26% of pts with advanced ES who entered this study. Durable clinical response of the drug was documented. Tazemetostat demonstrated favorable safety with few pts with treatment-related AEs grade ≥3. Clinical trial information: NCT02601950.

11058 Background: Epithelioid sarcoma (ES) is a rare soft tissue sarcoma (STS) typically seen in young adults accounting for < 1% of all STS. While local disease may be indolent, ES can rapidly spread and patients (pts) with distant metastasis are often resistant to systemic treatment with 1 year survival of < 50%. The defining molecular feature of ES is the absence of tumor expression of INI1, a SWI/SNF subunit member involved in chromatin remodeling. Tazemetostat, a potent and selective EZH2 inhibitor, has demonstrated tumor regressions in INI1 negative preclinical malignant rhabdoid tumors (MRT) models and phase 1 clinical activity in MRT and ES pts. The proposed mechanism of tazemetostat sensitivity is INI1 loss inducing compromised SWI/SNF activity and tumor dependence on PRC2 activity (of which EZH2 is the catalytic subunit). Preliminary phase 2 safety and efficacy of tazemetostat in ES pts is reported here. Methods: This is a phase 2 multicenter open-label single arm study of tazemetostat (800 mg po BID) in adult pts with ES whose tumors harbor evidence of INI1 loss. Pts enroll into 1 of 5 cohorts of different tumor types with INI1 loss/reduction, up to 30 pts each, using a 2-stage Green-Dahlberg design. For the ES cohort, primary endpoint is disease control rate (DCR) defined as objective response of any duration or stable disease (SD) lasting ≥32 wks. Success at stage 2 required DCR in ≥5/30 treated pts. Key secondary endpoints include safety/tolerability, ORR, PFS, OS, PK and response biomarkers e.g. H3K27me3. Results: In 31 ES pts with a median of 1 prior systemic therapy, stage 2 DCR criteria was surpassed with a RECIST confirmed PR (4 pts) and SD ≥32 wks (2 pts) observed to date. 13 pts are still on treatment therefore DCR and ORR will be updated. Tazemetostat was well tolerated with grade 1/2 fatigue (39%), nausea (26%) and vomiting (19%) as the most frequently reported AEs regardless of attribution. Conclusions: In the largest prospective clinical trial of ES to date, tazemetostat monotherapy shows promising antitumor activity, including confirmed responses and long-term SD, with favorable safety/tolerability in ES. Enrollment has been expanded to 60 ES pts given the clinical activity described here. Clinical trial information: NCT02601950.