Citations

Abstract Rationale Improved therapeutic options are needed for patients with treatment-refractory nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease caused by Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC). Objectives To evaluate the efficacy and safety of daily amikacin liposome inhalation suspension (ALIS) added to standard guideline-based therapy (GBT) in patients with refractory MAC lung disease. Methods Adults with amikacin-susceptible MAC lung disease and MAC-positive sputum cultures despite at least 6 months of stable GBT were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive ALIS with GBT (ALIS + GBT) or GBT alone. Once-daily ALIS was supplied in single-use vials delivering 590 mg amikacin to the nebulizer. The primary endpoint was culture conversion, defined as three consecutive monthly MAC-negative sputum cultures by Month 6. Measurements and Main Results Enrolled patients (ALIS + GBT, n = 224; GBT-alone, n = 112) were a mean 64.7 years old and 69.3% female. Most had underlying bronchiectasis (62.5%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (14.3%), or both (11.9%). Culture conversion was achieved by 65 of 224 patients (29.0%) with ALIS + GBT and 10 of 112 (8.9%) with GBT alone (odds ratio, 4.22; 95% confidence interval, 2.08–8.57; P < 0.001). Patients in the ALIS + GBT arm versus GBT alone were more likely to achieve conversion (hazard ratio, 3.90; 95% confidence interval, 2.00–7.60). Respiratory adverse events (primarily dysphonia, cough, and dyspnea) were reported in 87.4% of patients receiving ALIS + GBT and 50.0% receiving GBT alone; serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 20.2% and 17.9% of patients, respectively. Conclusions Addition of ALIS to GBT for treatment-refractory MAC lung disease achieved significantly greater culture conversion by Month 6 than GBT alone, with comparable rates of serious adverse events. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02344004).

7503 Background: Prior to use of novel targeted agents for CLL, debate existed regarding the best chemoimmunotherapy regimen to build upon in patients (pts) with non-del(11q) disease. The role of lenalidomide (L) was also not defined. CALGB 10404 was a randomized phase 2 study addressing these questions. Methods: Pts with untreated CLL requiring therapy were randomized to treatment with fludarabine + rituximab (FR), FR + 6 monthly consolidative treatments of L (5 mg days 1-21/28 x 1 then 10 mg days 1-21/28 x 5) (FR+L), or FR + cyclophosphamide (FCR). Based on pretreatment central interphase cytogenetic screening, pts with del(11q22.3) in at least 20% of cells were excluded from the primary analysis, testing whether 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate was improved in non-del(11q) pts within each arm. A target accrual of 103 non-del(11q) pts per arm provided at least 84% power to detect an increase in 2-year PFS rate from 60% to 73%; the critical value was 69% using a single stage design and type I error rate of 4%. Results: A total of 342 non-del(11q) CLL pts were randomized to treatment with FR (n = 123), FR+L (n = 109), or FCR (n = 110). Baseline characteristics were similar across arms. Two-year PFS rates with exact 90% CIs were 64% (57-71%) (FR), 71% (63-78%) (FR+L), and 74% (66-80%) (FCR). Median PFS was significantly shorter with FR compared to FR+L (p = 0.03) and FCR (p < 0.01): 43 (95% CI: 33-50), 66 (95% CI: 45-not reached), and 78 (95% CI: 58-not reached) months respectively. Median overall survival (OS) has not been reached for any arm. OS at 1, 2, and 3 years was similar across arms, although there was a plateau in OS with no events beyond 41 months in the FR+L arm, different from FR/FCR where events continued to occur. The most common adverse events were cytopenias and infections. Conclusions: FR+L and FCR met the protocol defined primary endpoint. FR+L extended PFS relative to FR and a plateau in survival differentiated this arm from the FR/FCR arms. Future studies comparing FR+L to FCR or incorporating L into other novel treatment regimens are justified. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, Celgene. Clinical trial information: NCT00602459.

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.

1005 Background: Evidence-based treatments (tx) for metastatic, HER2+ BCBM are limited. We previously found a central nervous system (CNS) objective response rate (ORR) of 8% (95% CI 2-22%) for the irreversible, EGFR/HER2-targeted kinase inhibitor, neratinib. To enhance CNS activity, we evaluated the combination of neratinib + capecitabine in a subsequent cohort, and report results here. Methods: Pts with measurable BCBM (≥ 1 cm in longest dimension) and no prior lapatinib or capecitabine were eligible. All but 3 had CNS progression after local CNS tx. During 21 day cycles, pts received capecitabine 750 mg/m2 twice daily x 14 days followed by 7 days off + neratinib 240 mg orally once daily. Loperamide prophylaxis (16 mg total daily) was recommended during cycle 1. Brain MRI and non-CNS imaging were repeated every 2 cycles until 18 wks, then every 3 cycles. The primary endpoint was composite CNS ORR, requiring all of the following: ≥50% reduction in volumetric sum of target CNS lesions (central review, VORR), no progression of non-target or non-CNS lesions, no new lesions, no escalating steroids, and no progressive neurologic signs/symptoms. We used a two-stage design with hypotheses ORR 15% and 35% (error rates 5% and 20%), responses in ≥5/19 pts to enter 2ndstage; responses in ≥9/35 [26%] pts to be promising. Results: 39 pts enrolled between 4/2014-11/2016 (2 withdrew before tx, 37 analyzed); median age 51, median prior metastatic lines 2 (range 0-6), 65% had prior WBRT. As of 11/15/16, 23 (62%) patients are alive and 7 remain on protocol tx; median number of cycles initiated = 5 (range 1-26). 18 women (49%) had a VORR (95% CI 32-66%, neurologic exams not yet available on all pts). Overall 12-month survival is 63% (95% CI 43%-77%); 4/7 pts still on protocol therapy have not yet reached 6 cycles. No pts had grade 4 toxicity; 18 (49%) had grade 3 toxicity, with diarrhea most common (32%), and 6 pts discontinued tx for toxicity. Conclusions: The combination of neratinib and capecitabine is active for BCBM with VORR in nearly half of pts, supporting further development of the regimen for BCBM. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Clinical trial information: NCT01494662.

521 Background: S0221 investigated weekly vs q 2 week dosing of doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) and paclitaxel (P) in patients (pts) with high risk early breast cancer as previously reported (JCO 33:58-64, 2015). After enrollment of 2716 pts randomization to the two AC arms was stopped for futility and an additional 578 pts received 4 cycles of q 2 week AC and were randomized to P weekly (Pw) or P q 2 weeks (P2). We report updated results of the original trial design and the first report of the 578 pts treated with AC x 4 and Pw x 12 or P2 x 6. Methods: Between December 2003 and November 2010, 2716 pts were randomized in a 2x2 factorial design to 1) 15 weeks of weekly AC (A 24 mg/m2/week and C 60 mg/m2/day po) vs 6 cycles of q 2 week AC (A 60 mg/m2 and C 600 mg/m2) and 2) Pw (paclitaxel 80 mg/m2/week x 12) vs P2 (paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 q 2 weeks x 6), with growth factor support as previously described. After study amendment 578 patients received 4 cycles of q 2 week AC followed by Pw or P2. Updated survival was assessed using log-rank tests and Cox regression models. Results: At a median follow-up of 8.5 years, among the pts treated in the original protocol, there were no significant differences among the four treatments for DFS (p=0.21) or OS (p=0.08). The triple-negative subset had worse DFS (P<0.001) than the HER2-positive or ER/PR+/HER2- subsets, with 5 year DFS of 75% vs 83% and 84%, respectively. While we previously found in the triple negative subset that the arm using q 2 weeks for both AC and paclitaxel was marginally superior, the differences among the arms are no longer significant for DFS (p=0.12) or OS (p=0.11). Among the 578 pts assigned ACx4 and randomized to Pw v P2 there were no overall differences in DFS (p=0.70) or OS (p=0.63) after 4.4 years median follow-up. Conclusions: There were no significant differences in DFS or OS between any of the schedules with extended follow-up in the original cohort and no difference in outcome by paclitaxel schedule for the 578 additional patients in the revised protocol. Either paclitaxel schedule may be recommended, with selection based on toxicity, cost, or patient preference rather than efficacy. Support: NCI grants CA32102, CA38926, CA21115, CA21076, CA77597, CA25224, CA77202, CCSRI15469, and Amgen, Inc. Clinical trial information: NCT00070564.