Northfelt, Donald W.

Abstract Introduction Non-Hodgkin lymphoma responds to single agents such as cyclophosphamide, combination therapy such as CVP and immunotherapy with monoclonal antibodies such as rituximab. There is no consensus on the optimal treatment for relapsed low grade or mantle cell lymphoma. Based on the success and tolerability of combining alkylating agents with proteasome inhibitors in multiple myeloma, a phase II clinical trial of rituximab, cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (R-CyBor-D) was designed to explore the efficacy and safety of this combination in relapsed low grade and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). Methods This trial enrolled relapsed patients at Mayo Clinic from October 2008 to March 2014. Eligibility required age≥18; biopsy proven follicular grades 1 or 2 lymphoma (FL), MCL, small lymphocytic lymphoma/chronic lymphocytic leukemia, marginal zone B-cell lymphoma, or Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia (WM); life expectancy >3 months; ECOG PS 0, 1 or 2; measurable disease; Hb ≥8g/dl, ANC ≥1200/uL, platelet ≥75,000/uL, creatinine ≤1.5xULN, total bilirubin ≤1.5xULN, alkaline phosphatase ≤3xULN, AST ≤3xULN; and willingness to sign informed consent. Women of child bearing potential had pregnancy testing and all patients followed recommendations for contraception. Treatment included rituximab 375 mg/m2 IV on day 1 and oral cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2, IV bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2, and oral dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 in a 28-day cycle. Treatment was continued two cycles beyond best response or a maximum of 12 cycles. Allopurinol 300 mg on days 0-14 for the first cycle was strongly recommended. Results 21 patients were enrolled prior to study closure due to slow accrual. Bortezomib was initially given on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 in the first 16 patients, but was subsequently modified to days 1, 8, 15, and 22 due to significant peripheral neuropathy (PN). Median age was 69 years (range 51-80) and 13 (62%) were male. 62% had stage IV disease and 17 (81%) had 2 or more prior treatments with 3 (14%) having prior autologous stem cell transplantation. Histologies included FL-I (n=6), FL-II (n=2), MCL (n=8), and WM (n=5). Patients completed a median of 4 cycles of treatment (range 1-12), discontinuing due to 9 (43%) completion per protocol, 4 (19%) progression, 5 (24%) adverse events, 1 (5%) patient refusal, and 2 (10%) other reasons. Median follow-up is 32.8 months (0.9-54.8). CR or PR as best response was observed in 13 (62%, 95% CI 38-82%; 4 CR [19%], 9 PR [43%]) patients. By histology, CR or PR was observed in 7 (88%) FL patients (4 CR, 3 PR); 2 (25%) MCL patients (both PR), and 4 (80%) WM patients (all PR). CR or PR was observed in 10/16 (62%; 4 CR, 6 PR) before and 3/5 (60%; all PR) after the change in bortezomib schedule. Among 13 patients with CR or PR, median duration of response was 25.9 months (95% CI 8.0-not reached). Median PFS and OS were 11.6 months (95% CI 3.8-not reached) and 54.8 months (95% CI 24.6-54.8), respectively. At least one Gr≥3 adverse event at least possible related was observed in 14 (67%) patients, the most common being leucopenia (7, 33%), neutropenia (7, 33%), thrombocytopenia (6, 29%), anemia (5, 24%), PN (5, 24%), and fatigue (3, 14%). Peripheral sensory neuropathy at least possibly related was Gr1, Gr2, and Gr3 in 5 (24%) patients each, with a lower rate observed for patients after the change in bortezomib schedule (before 13/16 [81%] Gr≥1, after 2/5 [40%] Gr≥1). Among 14 patients who completed a baseline and at least one post-baseline FACT/GOG-NTX additional concerns questionnaire, 10 (71%) reported clinically meaningful (≥3-point) worsening in patient-reported neurotoxicity (8/11 [73%] before and 2/3 [67%] after the change in bortezomib schedule). Conclusions Our results suggest R-CyBor-D is a safe and effective combination in patients with relapsed low grade and mantle cell lymphomas. High response rates were seen in FL and WM. The majority of significant AE’s were hematologic. However, sensory neuropathy was common with twice weekly dosing of bortezomib and lessened with weekly dosing. Determination of optimal treatment regimens in this population remains an unmet need. Additional clinical trials including larger patient numbers are necessary to confirm these observations. This trial was sponsored by Millennium Disclosures Off Label Use: bortezomib was used in combination therapy to treat relapsed low grade lymphomas and Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia. Bergsagel:Novartis: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; OncoEthix: Research Funding; MundiPharma: Research Funding. Tiedemann:Janssen: Honoraria. Reeder:Millennium, Celgene, Novartis: Research Funding.

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.

A robust personalized ctDNA test, TARDIS, achieves high accuracy for residual disease after completion of neoadjuvant therapy.

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 Background A better understanding of social determinants of health and psychosocial and economic sequelae of cancer for an ethnoculturally diverse population is needed. A Patient-Reported Outcomes Quality of Life (PROQOL) instrument has been developed to capture less commonly discussed patient concerns. We sought to adapt this instrument and pilot it in underserved, ethnic minority cancer patients at Maricopa Integrated Health System (MIHS) in Phoenix, AZ. Methods Two focus groups (FG) were conducted to understand patient perspectives of an adapted Spanish version of PROQOL. A revised version based on FG data was then piloted among patients on active cancer treatment. Patients also completed a Linear Analog Scale Assessment (from 1-10) for quality of life (QOL) and its domains. Results All participants in both FG (11/12 female) were Hispanic, with a median age of 53 years. Participants agreed that the domains covered in the PROQOL represented the most important psychosocial needs in their cancer continuum. No difficulty in understanding the individual domains or questions for delving deeper into each domain was noted. Median age of 34 pilot study participants (74% female, 79% Hispanic) was 48 years. 28/34 completed the Spanish version. The most common concerns were ‘Money’ (32%) and ‘Cancer Diagnosis, Treatment and Survivorship’ (32%). Median overall QOL was 8 (range 3-10). Conclusions PROQOL is feasible for systematic capture of patient concerns in underserved, ethnic minority cancer patients. A better understanding of these concerns can help design interventions to improve psychosocial outcomes for the vulnerable groups and decrease disparities in care delivery.

e12003 Background: Irinotecan liposome injection (nal-IRI) uses intraliposomal stabilisation technology to enable high drug load and in-vivo stability. This analysis characterizes the PK profile of nal-IRI in pts with mBC. Methods: The expansion of NCT01770353 enrolled 30 pts with mBC over three cohorts (Cohort 1: ER+ and/or PR+ BC [C-1]; Cohort 2: Triple Negative BC [C-2]; and Cohort 3: BC with active Brain Metastasis [C-3]). Key inclusion criteria: ECOG ≤1; adequate organ function; and >1 and ≤5 prior lines of cytotoxic therapy in metastatic setting. Most pts received nal-IRI 60 mg/m2 salt-based equivalent (50 mg/m2 free base equivalent [FBE]) or 80 mg/m2 (70 mg/m2 FBE) q2w by iv infusion, based on tolerance; 2 pts were treated at 40 mg/m2 (35 mg/m2 FBE). Plasma samples were collected over 360h across cycles 1, 2 &3, and analysed using LC-MS/MS for total irinotecan. Data were analysed by a non-compartmental approach using Phoenix Winnonlin, and were compared with values from studies in other tumor types. Results: 21 patients were evaluable for PK analysis (C-1, n=6; C-2, n=7; and C-3, n=8). No trend for accumulation was observed in cycle 2 or 3, when comparing total irinotecan Cmax & exposure (area under the curve at 168 h [AUC168]) versus cycle 1. At 40-80 mg/m2 (35-70 mg/m2 FBE), Cmax of irinotecan tended to increase proportionally with total dose, and was comparable to studies in other tumour types (see Table). Among 29 pts who received nal-IRI, partial response (per RECIST) was observed in 10 pts. The most related TEAEs (≥ 25%) were diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, hypokalaemia, decreased appetite and fatigue. Stable disease was observed in 5 pts. Conclusions: PK parameters in patients with mBC were comparable to historical studies in patients with other tumour types. The safety profile of nal-IRI monotherapy appeared consistent with gastrointestinal and blood disorders. [Table: see text]

Anastrozole is a widely prescribed aromatase inhibitor for the therapy of estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer. We performed a genome‐wide association study (GWAS) for plasma anastrozole concentrations in 687 postmenopausal women with ER+ breast cancer. The top single‐nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) signal mapped across SLC38A7 (rs11648166, P = 2.3E‐08), which we showed to encode an anastrozole influx transporter. The second most significant signal (rs28845026, P = 5.4E‐08) mapped near ALPPL2 and displayed epistasis with the SLC38A7 signal. Both of these SNPs were cis expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL)s for these genes, and patients homozygous for variant genotypes for both SNPs had the highest drug concentrations, the highest SLC38A7 expression, and the lowest ALPPL2 expression. In summary, our GWAS identified a novel gene encoding an anastrozole transporter, SLC38A7, as well as epistatic interaction between SNPs in that gene and SNPs near ALPPL2 that influenced both the expression of the transporter and anastrozole plasma concentrations.