Adjei, Alex A.

AbstractBackgroundEligibility criteria and endpoints for cancer cachexia trials—and whether weight loss should be included—remain controversial. Although most cachexia trials enrol patients after initial cancer diagnosis, few studies have addressed whether weight loss well after a cancer diagnosis is prognostic.MethodsWe pooled data from non‐small cell lung cancer patients from prospectively conducted trials within the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (1998–2008), a nationally funded infrastructure. We examined (i) weight data availability and weight changes and (ii) survival.ResultsA total of 822 patients were examined. Of these, 659 (80%) were on treatment at the beginning of Cycle 2 of chemotherapy; weight was available for 656 (80%). By Cycles 3 and 4, weight was available for 448 (55%) and 384 (47%), respectively. From baseline to immediately prior to Cycle 2, 208 (32%) gained weight; 225 (34%) lost <2% of baseline weight; and 223 (34% of 656) lost 2% or more. Median survival from the beginning of Cycle 2 was 13.0, 10.9, and 6.9 months for patients with weight gain, weight loss of <2%, and weight loss of 2% or more, respectively. In multivariate analyses, adjusted for age, sex, performance score, type of treatment, and body mass index, weight loss of 2% or more was associated with poor overall survival compared with weight gain [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.66; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.33–2.07; P < 0.001] and compared with weight loss of <2% (HR = 1.57; 95% CI: 1.27–1.95; P < 0.001). Although weight loss of <2% was not associated with poorer overall survival compared with weight gain, it was associated with poorer progression‐free survival (HR = 1.24; 95% CI: 1.01–1.51; P = 0.036). Similar findings were observed in a separate 255‐patient validation cohort.ConclusionsWeight should be integrated into cancer cachexia trials because of its ease of frequent measurement and sustained prognostic association.

Abstract Introduction: Cer is an oral ALK/ROS1 inhibitor. Aberrancies in ALK and ROS1 have been observed in many cancer types and ALK inhibition has synergistic effects with chemotherapy in ALK or ROS1 rearranged tumors in preclinical models. We launched a Phase I study of Cer in combination with Gem-based chemotherapy in advanced solid tumors. Herein we present initial results of this study. Methods: Phase I, dose-escalation study of Cer in combination with A1: Gem 1000 mg IV D1/8/15 q28 days; A2: Gem 1000 mg IV + nanoparticle albumin-bound Paclitaxel 125 mg IV both D1/8/15 q28 days; A3: Gem 1000 mg IV + Cisplatin 60 mg IV D1/8 q21 days in pts with advanced, solid malignancies until disease progression, intolerable toxicity or withdrawal. A 3 + 3 dose-escalation design was used starting at Cer 450 mg once daily (DL1) in all arms; DL2 was 600 mg once daily. Primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of Cer. Key inclusion criteria: diagnosis of advanced solid malignancy for which Gem-based treatment was appropriate, &gt;18 years old, ECOG PS 0/1, adequate bone marrow/renal/liver function. Key exclusion criteria: interstitial lung fibrosis/disease, recent acute coronary event, CHF NYHA III/IV, corrected QTc &gt; 450 ms. Pts in A3 could have up to 2 prior lines of therapy. Prior use of ALK inhibitors allowed. Plasma was collected for PK on C1D1, C2D1, and C1D15. Archival tumor tissue was tested for ALK/ROS1/JNK/MET by IHC. Results: Thirty-eight patients were enrolled with 21 evaluable for dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) in A1 and A3. A2 (n=4) closed to accrual for toxicity. Median age was 61 years. Seven pts (41%) had cholangiocarcinoma. A1 had one DLT (G3 ALT increase) in DL2; MTD was 600 mg. A3 had one DLT in DL1 (G3 acute renal failure) and two DLTs in DL2 (G3 thrombocytopenia and G3 dyspnea); MTD was 450 mg. G3-5 AEs in all pts: anemia (A1: 3/19, A3: 2/15), nausea (A1: 1/19, A3: 2/15), emesis (A1: 1/19, A3: 1/15), neutropenia (A1: 2/19, A3: 8/15), thrombocytopenia (A1: 1/19, A3: 4/15), hyperbilirubinemia (A3: 3/15), pneumonia (A1: 2/19), acute renal failure (A3: 1/15), fatigue (A3: 2/15). Fifteen patients were evaluable for response; the overall response rate was 20% with two PR (pt with head and neck carcinoma in A1 and pt with carcinoma of unknown primary in A3) - and one CR in a pt with cholangiocarcinoma (A3) lasting 10.3 months. Overall, disease control rate was 47%. Of 5 evaluable pts with cholangiocarcinoma 3 had clinical benefit. Median PFS 3.4 mo (A1)/4.8 mo (A3) and OS 13.7 mo (A1)/29.1 mo (A3). PK and IHC data will be presented at the conference. Conclusions: The MTD of Cer is 600 mg in combination with Gem and 450 mg in combination with Gem/Cisplatin. Further evaluation of Cer plus Gem-based chemotherapy is planned in ALK/ROS1 positive cholangiocarcinomas. Citation Format: Christos Fountzilas, Alex Adjei, Mateusz Opyrchal, Rachel Evans, Kristopher Attwood, Andrew Goey, John Wilton, Wen Wee Ma, Renuka Iyer. Ceritinib (Cer) in combination with gemcitabine (Gem)-based chemotherapy in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors, a phase I study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr CT139.

Abstract Prior in vitro work in the human hepatoma cell lines Huh7 and HEP3B indicated that combination treatment of the BH3 mimetic, navitoclax, and the multi-kinase inhibitor, sorafenib, was more effective at inducing apoptosis than either compound alone. This current study was part of a phase I clinical trial to determine the maximum tolerated dose of concurrent navitoclax and sorafenib treatment in patients with relapsed or refractory solid organ tumors and sought to characterize the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of both agents in combination. Cleavage of cytokeratin 18 by caspase 3 was used as a biomarker for therapy-induced activation of apoptosis to determine if combination treatment results in an increase in apoptosis as previously observed in in vitro work. PK were assessed in 26 patients (ages 32 - 80) enrolled in a phase I clinical trial (NCT02143401). 150 mg of oral navitoclax was administered once daily for a seven day run-in (beginning Day -7) prior to 150 mg (Dose level 1) or 200 mg (Dose level 2) navitoclax concomitant treatment with 400 mg of twice daily oral sorafenib (Day 1). Samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were obtained on Day -7 and Day 1 prior to dosing and at 1, 2, 4, 8-12, and 24 hours post dosing. PK parameters were estimated by noncompartmental analysis using Phoenix® WinNonlin® Version 6.4. To examine the PD of both agents in combination, cytokeratin 18 cleavage was quantified by ELISA after the 7-day navitoclax run-in and on Day 2 or 4 and Day 8 of navitoclax and sorafenib combination treatment. PK estimates of maximum concentration, exposure, volume of distribution, and clearance for navitoclax on Day -7 and Day 1 were not significantly different, indicating a lack of navitoclax accumulation. Finally, no correlation was found between navitoclax exposure and apoptosis as indicated by cytokeratin-18 cleavage. This work was supported by the NCI Cancer Center Support Grant P30 CA15083 and NCI Experimental Therapeutics Phase I Grant UM1 CA186686. Citation Format: Emily J. Koubek, Brian A. Costello, Jun Yin, Renee M. McGovern, Sarah A. Buhrow, Renee A. Schoon, Carrie A. Strand, Yixing Jiang, Mitesh J. Borad, Naoko Takebe, Scott H. Kaufmann, Alex A. Adjei, Joel M. Reid. Pharmacokinetic analysis of navitoclax in combination with sorafenib in patients with relapsed or refractory solid organ tumors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr CT114.

Abstract Background: PIM2 is overexpressed in hematopoietic and solid cancers, and is involved in multiple signaling pathways. In hematologic malignancies, PIM2 has been shown to be a pro-survival factor and demonstrated to be a possible therapeutic target. However, the role of PIM2 as a therapeutic target in solid cancers has not been fully elucidated. Methods: PIM2 expression was compared between normal and cancer tissues in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) datasets. Pan-PIM inhibitor treatment, as well as PIM2 overexpression/knockdown technique was utilized to investigate the PIM2 role in solid cancers. Multiple cancer models were utilized for in vitro and in vivo experiments to investigate if PIM2 as a therapeutic target and examine mechanism of anti-tumor activity by JP11646. Results: PIM2 was overexpressed in several types of cancer tissues, including breast, esophageal, head-neck, kidney, liver and endometrial cancers in TCGA. PIM2 overexpression promoted tumor growth in in vivo breast cancer mouse model. PIM2 inhibition by siRNA as well as pan-PIM inhibitor JP11646 activated apoptosis as seen by increased cleaved PARP. JP11646 treatment inhibited cancer cell proliferation in a dose-dependent manner in vitro in various types of solid cancers, including head-neck, ovarian, breast, prostate, liver, pancreatic, colorectal and non-small cell lung cancers. Interestingly, treatment with pan-PIM inhibitor JP11646 resulted in selective downregulation of PIM2 protein expression, but not PIM1 or PIM3 in breast cancer cell lines, BT549 and MDA-MB-231. The treatment also resulted in downregulation of phosphorylated downstream targets, 4EBP1 and TSC2 in breast cancer cells. However, additional proteasome inhibitor treatment blocked PIM2 downregulation and apoptosis activation was not seen. The result suggests that proteasome complex is required for PIM2 degradation which is necessary to induce apoptosis. JP11646 treatment inhibited tumor growth in breast, liver, pancreas, and non-small cell lung cancer in vivo xenograft models and was compared to multiple standard of care treatments showing advantage in lung tumors. Conclusion: We found that PIM2 promoted cancer progression in solid tumors. We show novel mechanism of JP11646 targeting PIM2 for degradation and induction of apoptosis. We show that PIM2 may serve as a novel therapeutic target for multiple types of solid cancers with enhanced therapeutic effect through protein degradation rather than kinase inhibition alone. Citation Format: Eriko Katsuta, Kazuaki Takabe, Alex Adjei, Mateusz Opyrchal. Novel mechanism of PIM2 inhibition leads to significant effect on solid tumors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr 6426.

Abstract Background The federal Right-to-Try (RTT) Act created an alternate regulatory pathway for preapproval access to investigational drugs. A few studies have examined the experiences of physicians with the Food and Drug Administration’s Expanded Access Programs, but to our knowledge, no study has yet to examine their attitudes and experiences toward RTT. Methods This study explored the views of 21 oncologists at a major cancer center with 3 main sites across the United States using semi-structured interviews and qualitative analysis. Participants were selected to have experience with Expanded Access Programs. Results Most oncologists had limited familiarity with RTT, and several reported confusion about the legislation, including whether patients have a right to investigational drugs and an obligation for companies to provide them. Although oncologists were interested in decreased regulatory burdens, 3 areas of concern were articulated: lack of safety and oversight, unclear structure and no provision for data collection, and potential heightening of patient expectations. Only 4 oncologists had experience discussing RTT, and none formally attempted to obtain the drug through this mechanism. Participants questioned the practicality of RTT legislation and suggested alternative ways to improve access. Conclusions The study provides foundational empirical data underlying challenging ambiguities by experienced oncologists familiar with off-trial use of investigational therapeutics and reaffirms the role of physicians and regulatory bodies in mitigating the risks of investigational drugs. Our findings highlight the need for medical centers to inform oncologists about RTT and other preapproval pathways so that they are able to address questions from patients interested in nontrial investigational drugs.

8085 Background: Historically, tumor response has been the primary endpoint in phase II (P2) trials in ED-SCLC. We investigated the suitability of alternate PFS based endpoints to predict OS as early evidence of efficacy in the P2 setting. Methods: Individual patient (pt) data from 942 pts from 11 previously untreated ED-SCLC P2 and phase III (P3) platinum- or paclitaxel-based treatment trials were pooled. Best response (BR), response confirmed (RC), objective status at 16 weeks (RR16), and PFS rate at 5 and 6 months were considered. Percent agreement (PA) and kappa (k) for PFS5, PFS6, BR, RC, and RR16 with OS at 12 months (OS12) was calculated on a per-pt basis and predictive utility was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (A- ROC) curve in logistic models. Cox models were used to assess the prognostic impact of the endpoints on subsequent survival, using landmark analysis. Results: The median OS and PFS were 9.6 m and 5.5 m, respectively. PFS5 and PFS6 had the highest PA, k, and A-ROC values, and were predictive of subsequent survival in the landmark analysis (p <0.0001; c-statistics ≥ 0.60). While RR16 and BR were significantly associated with subsequent survival (p<0.0001, c-statistics of 0.61 and 0.57, respectively) the PA, k, and A-ROC values were lower. Conclusions: PFS rate at 5 and 6 months is more predictive of 12-month OS and subsequent survival than tumor response in untreated ED-SCLC. PFS based endpoints should be routinely used as primary endpoints in P2 trials within ED-SCLC. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

7544 Background: NCCTG N0028 was a trial that determined the MTD of RT that could be given with carboplatin & paclitaxel was 74 Gy/34 fractions. This secondary analysis was performed to determine the survival of pts treated on this trial. Methods: Eligible pts had medically or surgically unresectable NSCLC, PS=0–1, weight loss <10% in the prior 3 months(mo), no prior therapy, adequate laboratory & pulmonary functions. Included were 25 pts with clinical stages I (4pts), II (1 pt), IIIa (12 pts), & IIIb (8 pts). Treatment included: weekly I.V. paclitaxel (50mg/m2) & carboplatin (AUC=2) during RT. The RT included 2 Gy daily to an initial dose of 70 Gy. The total dose was increased in 4 Gy increments until the MTD was determined. RT was delivered with 3-D treatment planning but no elective nodal RT. Three pts received 70 Gy, 18 pts received 74 Gy, & 4 pts received 78Gy. Results: Pts were followed until death or from 10–67 mo (median: 28mo) in those alive at last evaluation. The median survival (MS) of the entire cohort was 42mo. The 5 stages I-II pts had a MS of 53 mo & the 20 stage III pts had MS of 42mo. Conclusions: Standard dose RT is unable to sterilize disease in the majority of pts with unresectable NSCLC. While the addition of chemotherapy has significantly improved survival of these pts, the MS is generally 15–24 mo. These preliminary results suggest higher than standard doses of RT may improve disease control & prolong survival. A phase III trial comparing standard-dose RT(60Gy) to high-dose RT (74Gy) is open and should more definitively address the issue of RT dose with concurrent chemotherapy for unresectable NSCLC. Future technological improvements in imaging & targeting will provide methods to safely administer even greater RT doses which will likely further improve disease control. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Abstract Background: Sex differences in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) outcomes have been described. Immune-related adverse events (IRAEs) have emerged as a serious clinical problem in the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Risk factors for IRAEs and their association with response to therapy remain controversial. Sex differences in innate and adaptive immune responses have been observed but the association of these differences with IRAEs remains unclear. Therefore, we studied sex differences in IRAEs and their association with response to therapy. Methods: All patients with metastatic NSCLC treated with anti-PD1 and anti-PDL1 therapy at Mayo Clinic Rochester and Florida from 2015 to 2018 were reviewed. Patients receiving treatment at an outside facility with history autoimmune disorders or radiation-induced pneumonitis were excluded. Chi-square test was used to estimate differences in categorical data. Kaplan-Meier method was used for time-to-event analysis. Results: A total of 231 patients were identified; 120 (52%) were women and 111 (48%) were men. Baseline characteristics and ICI distribution were similar among groups. Women were more likely to experience IRAEs compared to men (48% vs. 31%, p&lt;0.008). Among patients with IRAEs, women were more likely to be prescribed systemic steroids (63% vs. 41%, p&lt;0.02). On the other hand, no significant differences were observed in the administration of intravenous steroids. Women were more likely to develop pneumonitis (23% vs. 12%, p&lt;0.03) and arthralgias (17% vs. 3%, p&lt;0.04). However, dermatologic toxicities (35% vs. 9%, p&lt;0.002) were more commonly seen in men. In 17% of women the ICI was discontinued due to toxicity (men 7%). Besides sex, no other clinical characteristic was associated with increased IRAEs. Women with IRAEs were more likely to have a radiographic response compared with women without IRAEs (78% vs. 23%, p&lt;0.0001), although this was not observed in men (37% vs. 26%, p&gt;0.22). Better PFS was observed in women with IRAEs (10 months vs. 3.3 months, p&lt;0.0006) compared to women without IRAEs. Conclusions: Women with metastatic NSCLC are more likely to experience IRAEs compared to men. We also observed sex differences in the frequency of certain IRAEs. In addition, an association between IRAEs and response to therapy was observed in women. Larger studies are needed to investigate the mechanisms underlying these associations. Citation Format: Narjust Duma, Abdel-Ghani Azzouqa, Siddhartha Yadav, Kahterine Hoversten, Clay Reed, Andrea Sitek, Elizabeth Enninga, Jonas Paludo, Lisa Kottschade, Aaron Mansfield, Rami Manochakian, Roxana Dronca, Alex Adjei. Sex differences in tolerability and response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2018 Nov 2-5; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2020;29(6 Suppl):Abstract nr A120.