Citations

Abstract BACKGROUND: nal-IRI is a liposomal formulation of irinotecan (topoisomerase-1 inhibitor). Preclinical data show that nal-IRI accumulates in BMs and prolongs survival in animal models of BM. Findings from a phase 1 expansion study (NCT01770353), evaluating patients with mBC and active BM, are reported. METHODS: This phase 1 expansion study enrolled patients with mBC who received multiple prior lines of cytotoxic therapy in the metastatic setting, including one cohort with mBC and active BM, defined as radiographic evidence of new or progressive central nervous system (CNS) metastases after radiation therapy with ≥1 lesion of ≥1 cm in the longest dimension on gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Patients received nal-IRI 50 mg/m2 (free-base equivalent; FBE) every two weeks (q2w) as an intravenous infusion over 90 minutes, escalating to 70 mg/m2 FBE q2w, if tolerated. RECIST v1.1 and modified RECIST criteria were used to assses non-CNS and CNS disease, respectively. RESULTS: In total, 30 patients were enrolled (10 with active BM). Median age was 53 years (range 29–70 years) and median number of prior cytotoxic anti-cancer regimens was 3 (range 0–6); 29 patients received ≥1 dose of nal-IRI 50 mg/m2 FBE. Overall, nal-IRI monotherapy appeared to be well tolerated, and achieved ≥30% objective response rates for both CNS and non-CNS disease. Among the 10 patients with active BM, 6 achieved CNS disease control (3 partial responses [PRs] and 3 stable disease [SD]), including one patient with durable CNS SD and non-CNS PR for 2 years. Among 7 patients with serial evaluation of CNS metastases posttreatment, 6 patients achieved a reduction in target CNS lesions compared with baseline. CONCLUSION: Treatment with nal-IRI resulted in CNS disease control among 6 of 10 heavily pretreated patients with mBC and active BM. Further exploration of nal-IRI in patients with mBC and active BM is warranted.

Abstract Objective The primary objective of this proof-of-concept cross-sectional study was to identify a framework for appraising the learning-approaches of undergraduate medical students in a competency based medical curriculum and correlating the results with teaching-approaches, as well as academic performance. The study was pursued at MBRU, which is a medical school in the Middle East with an undergraduate entry medical program. Results Our framework was blueprinted using the Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST) questionnaire, to which we made some modifications such that the overall cogency of the questionnaire wasn’t affected. Initial results with modified ASSIST at MBRU showed that most of our students adopted Deep or Strategic-learning approaches. This observation is in line with other studies in the literature, which shows that modified ASSIST is a suitable tool for mapping generic learning approaches with teaching approaches. Further, based on the insights from our initial results following the implementation of modified ASSIST, we have considered specific pedagogical strategies, in practice at MBRU, which cater to the generic learning approaches of majority of our undergraduate medical students. These pedagogical approaches, A. Feynman’s Technique; and B. Blended learning strategies, if implemented suitably in a curriculum will transform “Surface-learners” to “Deep/Strategic-learners”.

Abstract Background nal-IRI is a liposomal formulation of irinotecan (topoisomerase-1 inhibitor), using intraliposomal stabilisation technology to enable high drug load and in-vivo stability. The expansion of Phase I NCT01770353 evaluated nal-IRI in patients (pts) with mBC. Methods This Phase I expansion study enrolled mBC pts (Cohort 1: ER+ and/or PR+ HER2 BC (C-1); Cohort 2: Triple Negative BC (TNBC, C-2); Cohort 3: BC with active Brain Metastasis (C-3)). Key inclusion criteria: ECOG ≤1; adequate organ function; received >1 to ≤5 prior lines of cytotoxic therapy in metastatic setting, except TNBC pts who could have progressed within 12 months of adjuvant therapy. Pts received nal-IRI 50 mg/m2 (Free-base equivalent, FBE) q2w iv infusion, escalating to 70 mg/m2 FBE q2w, if tolerated. Results 30 pts (10 per cohort) were enrolled: 29 received >1 dose nal-IRI 50 mg/m2 FBE (median age 53 yrs, range 29-70 yrs). Median number of cytotoxic therapies prior to study entry was 3. The most frequent treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were gastrointestinal disorders (all cohorts, 100%), primarily diarrhea (C-1, 100% / C-2, 100% / C-3, 70%), nausea (C-1, 80% / C-2, 56% / C-3, 30%), and vomiting (C-1, 60% / C-2, 33% / C-3, 30%). The incidence of neutropenia was low (C-1, 10% / C-2, 0% / C-3, 10%), all grade 1 / 2. Most common grade 3 TEAEs were diarrhea (28%), nausea (17%), fatigue (14%), hypokalemia (10%) and asthenia (10%), with none reported as grade 4. No grade 5 TEAEs were reported. Partial response (per RECIST) was observed in 10 pts for an objective response rate (ORR) of 35% (C-1, 40% / C-2, 33%) / C-3, 30%). Stable disease was observed in 5 pts (17%). Duration of Response (median, months) was C-1, 7.5 (6.4-13.0) / C-2, 5.6 (3.7-7.4) / C-3, 4.1 (0.0-22.2, extracranial: RECIST) / C-3, 1.8 (0.0-1.9, intracranial: mRECIST). Table 1.Study Demographics, Adverse Events, and Best Overall ResponseDemographicsCohort 1ER+ and/or PR+ Breast Cancern=10Cohort 2Triple Negative Breast Cancern=10Cohort 3Breast Cancer with Active Brain Metastasisn=10Total PopulationN=30Gender, Female, n (%)10 (100%)10 (100%)10 (100%)30 (100%)Age, Years Median (range)56 (49-68)52.5 (37-70)45.5 (29-63)53 (29-70)Race, n (%)WhiteBlack/AfricanOther8 (80%)02 (20%)8 (80%)1 (10%)1 (10%)7 (70%)1 (10%)2 (20%)23(77%)2 (7%)5(16%)Months Since Metastatic diagnosis, Months Median (Range)63.7 (16-87)20.7 (0-34)32.4 (8-55)24.0 (0-87)Number of Prior Cytotoxic Anti-cancer Regimens Median (Range)3.0 (1-6)3.0 (0-5)32.4 (1-6)3.0 (0-6)Safety PopulationCohort 1ER+ and/or PR+ Breast Cancern=10Cohort 2Triple Negative Breast Cancern=9Cohort 3Breast Cancer with Active Brain Metastasisn=10Total PopulationN=29ExposureTreatment Duration, Weeks Median (range)6.1 (0-78)12.3 (0-49)13.9 (1-105)12.3 (0-105)Adverse EventsAny TEAE10 (100%)9 (100%)10 (100%)29 (100%)Grade 38 (80%)6 (67%)10 (100%)20 (69%)Grade 41 (10%)06 (60%)3 (10%)TEAE Related to nal-IRI10 (100%)8 (89%)10 (100%)28 (97%)Grade > 36 (60%)3 (33%)3 (30%)12 (41%)TEAE Related to nal-IRILeading to Dose Adjustment*7 (70%)3 (33%)4 (40%)14 (48%)SAEs6 (60%)4 (44%)7 (70%)17 (59%)SAE Related to nal-IRI4 (40%)1 (11%)1 (10%)6 (21%)Duration of Objective ResponseRECIST 1.1RECIST 1.1RECIST 1.1mRECISTMonths Median (Range)7.5 (6.4-13.0)5.6 (3.7-7.4)4.1 (0.0-22.2)1.84 (0.0-1.9)Best Overall ResponseRECISTRECISTRECISTmRECISTComplete Response (CR)0000Partial Response (PR)4 (40%)3 (33%)3 (30%)3 (30%)Stable Disease (SD)03 (33%)2 (20%)3 (30%)Progressive Disease (PD)5 (50%)2 (22%)3 (30%)2 (20%)Not Evaluable (NE)1 (10%)1 (11%)2 (20%)2 (20%)Objective Response RateCR+PR(95% CI)4 (40%)12.2 -73.83 (33%)7.5-70.73 (30%)6.7-65.33 (30%)(6.7-65.3)*n=1 patient in Cohort 1 discontinued treatment due to TEAE related to treatment with nal-IRI CI, Confidence Interval; nal-IRI, Irinotecan Liposome Injection; SAE, Serious Adverse Event; TEAE, Treatment Emergent Adverse EventSystemic tumor response was evaluated according to RECIST version 1.1CNS tumor response was evaluated according to mRECIST (Anders C. et al., Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2014: 146(3):557-66) Conclusion nal-IRI monotherapy 50g/m2 FBE Q2W appears well tolerated, and achieved >30% ORR for systemic and CNS disease among heavily pre-treated mBC pts regardless of receptor status. Citation Format: Jasgit Sachdev, Pamela Munster, Donald Northfelt, Hyo S. Han, Cynthia MA, Fiona Maxwell, Tiffany Wang, Bruce Belanger, Bin Zhang, Yan Moore, Carey Anders. Phase I expansion study of irinotecan liposome injection (nal-IRI) in patients with metastatic breast cancer (mBC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT048.

Abstract The presence of FMS-like receptor tyrosine kinase-3 internal tandem duplication (FLT3-ITD) mutations in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is associated with poor clinical outcome. FLT3 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), although effective in kinase ablation, do not eliminate primitive FLT3-ITD+ leukemia cells, which are potential sources of relapse. Thus, understanding the mechanisms underlying FLT3-ITD+ AML cell persistence is essential to devise future AML therapies. Here, we show that expression of protein arginine methyltransferase 1 (PRMT1), the primary type I arginine methyltransferase, is increased significantly in AML cells relative to normal hematopoietic cells. Genome-wide analysis, coimmunoprecipitation assay, and PRMT1-knockout mouse studies indicate that PRMT1 preferentially cooperates with FLT3-ITD, contributing to AML maintenance. Genetic or pharmacological inhibition of PRMT1 markedly blocked FLT3-ITD+ AML cell maintenance. Mechanistically, PRMT1 catalyzed FLT3-ITD protein methylation at arginine 972/973, and PRMT1 promoted leukemia cell growth in an FLT3 methylation–dependent manner. Moreover, the effects of FLT3-ITD methylation in AML cells were partially due to cross talk with FLT3-ITD phosphorylation at tyrosine 969. Importantly, FLT3 methylation persisted in FLT3-ITD+ AML cells following kinase inhibition, indicating that methylation occurs independently of kinase activity. Finally, in patient-derived xenograft and murine AML models, combined administration of AC220 with a type I PRMT inhibitor (MS023) enhanced elimination of FLT3-ITD+ AML cells relative to AC220 treatment alone. Our study demonstrates that PRMT1-mediated FLT3 methylation promotes AML maintenance and suggests that combining PRMT1 inhibition with FLT3 TKI treatment could be a promising approach to eliminate FLT3-ITD+ AML cells.

PURPOSE: Quality payment programs aim to adjust payments on the basis of quality and cost; however, few quality metrics exist in radiation oncology. This study evaluates and predicts the top spenders (TS) after radiation therapy (RT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient characteristics, cancer details, treatments, toxicity, and survival data were collected for patients treated with RT at Mayo Clinic from 2007 to 2016. Standardized costs were obtained and adjusted for inflation. TSs were identified as those with greater than 93rd percentile costs (≥ $120,812). Prediction models were developed to predict TSs using training and validation sets using information available at consultation, after RT, and at last follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 15,131 patients were included and 1,065 TSs identified. Mean cost overall was $55,290 (median, $39,996) for all patients. Prediction models 1, 2, and 3 had concordance statistics of 0.83 to 0.83, 0.85 to 0.85, and 0.87 to 0.88, respectively in training and validation, indicating excellent prediction of TSs. Factors that were most predictive of TSs included stage N/A and stage 4 ( v stage 0; odds ratio [OR], 18.23 and 8.44, respectively; P < .001); hematologic, upper GI, skin and lung cancers ( v breast; OR, 11.45, 7.69, 3.81, and 2.43, respectively; P < .01); immunotherapy, surgery, and chemotherapy use (OR, 4.36, 2.51, and 1.61, respectively; P < .01); hospitalizations within 90 days of RT (OR, 2.26; P < .01); or death during the episode (OR, 1.56; P < .01). CONCLUSION: This is the first study of its kind to predict with high accuracy the highest spenders in radiation oncology. These patients may benefit from pre-emptive management to mitigate costs, or may require exclusion or adjustment from quality payment programs.

Background:Mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) occur in ∼4% of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and have been linked with increased transformation to acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Ivosidenib (IVO; AG‐120) is an oral, potent, targeted inhibitor of the mutant IDH1 protein (mIDH1) that is approved for the treatment of adults with mIDH1 relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML. Through inhibition of mIDH1, IVO suppresses production of the oncometabolite 2‐hydroxyglutarate, leading to clinical responses via differentiation of malignant cells.Aims:To report safety and efficacy data from patients with R/R MDS enrolled in the first‐in‐human, phase 1, dose escalation and expansion study of IVO in patients with mIDH1 advanced hematologic malignancies (NCT02074839).Methods:This ongoing study is evaluating the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and clinical activity of IVO. Enrollment was completed on May 8, 2017. In dose escalation, patients received single‐agent IVO orally (dose range, 200–1200 mg daily) in 28‐day cycles. The MTD was not reached and 500 mg QD was selected as the dose for expansion. The overall response rate (ORR) for MDS was defined as complete remission (CR) + partial remission + marrow CR (mCR) according to International Working Group 2006 criteria for MDS. Exploratory biomarker assessments included baseline co‐occurring mutations (next‐generation sequencing panel for hematologic malignancies) and mIDH1 variant allele frequency (VAF) in bone marrow mononuclear cells (BEAMing Digital PCR; lower limit of detection for mIDH1, 0.02–0.04%).Results:Baseline characteristics of the 12 patients with R/R MDS who received 500 mg IVO once daily were: 9 men/3 women; median age 72.5 years (range 52–78), and 42% were ≥75 years of age; median number of prior therapies 1 (range 1–3). As of Nov 2, 2018, 3 of 12 (25.0%) patients remained on treatment; 9 (75.0%) had discontinued (one for allogeneic stem cell transplantation). Median duration of exposure to IVO was 11.4 months (range 3.3–42.5). Adverse events (AEs) of any grade, irrespective of causality, occurring in ≥20% of the 12 patients were diarrhea, fatigue, back pain, rash (n = 4 each, 33.3%), anemia, urinary tract infection, decreased appetite, hypokalemia, arthralgia, dyspnea, pruritus, and hypotension (n = 3 each, 25.0%). No AEs led to permanent discontinuation of treatment. IDH differentiation syndrome was observed in 1 of 12 (8.3%) patients (grade 2). Electrocardiogram QT prolonged was reported in 2 of 12 patients (17%; grade 1 in 1 patient and grade 2 in 1 patient). Five of 12 patients achieved CR (41.7%; 95% CI 15.2%, 72.3%), 1 achieved PR (8.3%), and 5 achieved mCR (41.7%), resulting in an ORR of 91.7% (95% CI 61.5%, 99.8%). The median duration of CR was not estimable (NE) at the time of datacutoff and the median duration of response was 21.4 months (95% CI 2.3, NE). At 12 months, 60.0% of patients remained in CR. Among 5 patients who were transfusion dependent at baseline, 4 became transfusion independent for ≥56 consecutive days on treatment. Baseline co‐occurring mutations and changes in mIDH1 VAF levels will be presented.Summary/Conclusion:In patients with mIDH1 R/R MDS, IVO monotherapy was well tolerated and induced durable remissions and transfusion independence. These findings support the role of IVO as an effective, oral, targeted treatment for patients with mIDH1 R/R MDS.