Citations

Abstract BACKGROUND Selinexor (SEL) is a first-in-class XPO1 inhibitor with potent antitumor activity through the nuclear retention and reactivation of tumor suppressor proteins, reduced translation of oncogenes, and decreased expression of anti-apoptotic proteins. As a single agent, SEL has demonstrated brain penetration and clinically relevant responses in glioblastoma. We seek to enhance the effect and benefit of SEL by priming with temozolomide (TMZ). METHODS Through an NCI Project Team, we developed a multi-institutional phase I/II clinical trial which opened across the NCI Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trial Network. Eligibility included histologically confirmed 1st recurrent MGMT promoter methylated glioblastoma. We evaluated safety, tolerability, and dose finding with an IQ 3 + 3 design of TMZ 150mg/m2 on days 1-5 of a 28-day cycle plus SEL on days 8 and 15. RESULTS From October 2022 to March 2024, we enrolled 12 patients (n=11 evaluable) into phase I of the study. Patient characteristics included 82% male, median age 62 (range 50-77), 64% white. The median number of cycles administered was 6 (range 1-12). Two dose levels (SEL 60mg and SEL 80mg) were evaluated. No dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed. The most common treatment related adverse events were nausea (58%), decreased platelet count (50%), fatigue (50%), constipation (42%), vomiting (25%), decreased lymphocyte count (25%), and decreased neutrophil count (25%). Grade 3+ treatment related adverse events included nausea, grade 3 (n=1); decreased lymphocyte count, grades 3-4 (n=2); and anorexia, grade 3 (n=1). Phase I has completed enrollment and the recommended phase II dose will be SEL 80mg. Additional results will be presented. CONCLUSION Results suggest that a sequential dosing regimen of SEL+TMZ is feasible, well-tolerated, and may minimize the cumulative toxicity of SEL. The phase II randomized portion of this trial is enrolling nationwide and will investigate efficacy and candidate molecular signatures of vulnerability (NCI #10505, NCT05432804).

We assessed the efficacy and safety of combining bevacizumab with temsirolimus in patients with advanced extra-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. This NCI-sponsored multicenter, open-label, phase II study (NCT01010126) enrolled patients with advanced, recurrent, or metastatic extra-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. All patients were treated with temsirolimus and bevacizumab until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Temsirolimus 25 mg was administered i.v. on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 and bevacizumab 10 mg/kg i.v. on days 1 and 15 of a 4-week cycle. Discontinuation of temsirolimus or bevacizumab did not require discontinuation of the other agent. The primary endpoints were objective response rate and 6-month progression-free survival rate. Fifty-nine patients were enrolled in this study, and 54 were evaluated for efficacy and adverse events. While median progression-free survival was 7.1 months, the median duration of treatment with temsirolimus was 3.9 months and that with bevacizumab was 3.5 months. The objective response rate of combination therapy was 2%, and 6-month progression-free survival was 48%. The most frequently reported grade 3–4 adverse events included fatigue (13%), hypertension (13%), and bleeding (13%). Close to 54% of the patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events, refusal of further treatment, or treatment delays. Three deaths occurred in the study, of which two were due to treatment-related bowel perforations. Given the minimal efficacy and increased toxicity seen with the combination of bevacizumab and temsirolimus, we do not recommend the use of this regimen in patients with advanced extra-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Across multiancestry groups, we analyzed Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) associations in over 176,000 individuals with Parkinson’s disease (PD) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) versus controls. We demonstrate that the two diseases share the same protective association at the HLA locus. HLA-specific fine-mapping showed that hierarchical protective effects of HLA-DRB1 *04 subtypes best accounted for the association, strongest with HLA-DRB1 *04:04 and HLA-DRB1 *04:07, and intermediary with HLA-DRB1 *04:01 and HLA-DRB1 *04:03. The same signal was associated with decreased neurofibrillary tangles in postmortem brains and was associated with reduced tau levels in cerebrospinal fluid and to a lower extent with increased Aβ42. Protective HLA-DRB1 *04 subtypes strongly bound the aggregation-prone tau PHF6 sequence, however only when acetylated at a lysine (K311), a common posttranslational modification central to tau aggregation. An HLA-DRB1 *04-mediated adaptive immune response decreases PD and AD risks, potentially by acting against tau, offering the possibility of therapeutic avenues.

5020 Background: V+C was well tolerated in a phase I trial and responses and prolonged disease stabilization were observed in BRCA + patients (pts).To assess the relative contribution of the PARP inhibitor to the efficacy observed for the combination, we conducted a randomized multicenter trial comparing the response rate (RR) of V and C to the RR of C alone in patients with deleterious BRCA mutations and recurrent ovarian, or primary peritoneal, fallopian tube or high-grade serous ovarian cancer. Methods: Pts were ≥ 18 yrs, KPS ≥ 70%, had adequate organ function, prior therapy with PARP inhibitors was allowed.Both drugs were administered orally qd; C 50 mg, V 60 mg; 21 day cycles. Pts were randomized to receive either C alone or V+C. At disease progression, pts on C alone were allowed to cross over to the combination. Radiologic imaging was performed at baseline and q 3 cycles for assessment of response. Dose reduction of V was allowed to 40 mg for gr 3 non-hematologic or gr 4 hematologic toxicities. The study design had an 88% power to detect the difference between a 15% RR for C alone versus 35% for V+C, early closure if fewer responses were observed on the combination arm in the first 65 pts enrolled (half of the total projected accrual). Results: Total of 74 pts were enrolled (36 pts C, 38 pts V+C), median age 58 (37-79 yrs), # of prior therapies: median 4 (1-9), 2 pts had prior PARP therapy. Treatment was well tolerated, Gr ≥ 2 toxicities per arm for initial regimen (# of pts): C alone: lymphopenia (2), mucositis (1); V+C: lymphopenia (4), anemia (2), leucopenia (2), neutropenia (2). Of the 74 pts evaluable for response at the interim analysis, 3 PRs observed in 36 pts on V+C and 5 PRs of 38 pts on C alone arm; thus accrual was stopped. PAR levels assessed by validated ELISA were inhibited (>80%) in PBMCs in 9/10 pts 4 hours post V, no inhibition with C alone. Conclusions: Addition of V, a PARP inhibitor, to C did not improve RR versus C alone. Exomic sequencing, gene expression studies, and Fanconi Anemia triple stain immunofluorescence (FATSI) assay for FancD2 nuclear foci formation using archival tissue are ongoing.