Back to Authors

Kaley, Thomas

0000-0002-2540-8518

A5042155392 | I1334819555

Mayo Clinic

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

Citations 18

CTNI-40. EVALUATING FEASIBILITY AND EFFICIENCY OF PHASE II ADAPTIVE PLATFORM TRIAL DESIGNS BASED ON THE INDIVIDUALIZED SCREENING TRIAL OF INNOVATIVE GLIOBLASTOMA THERAPY (INSIGhT) EXPERIENCE

Neuro-Oncology | November 18, 2021 | Volume: 23 | Issue: Supplement_6 | Pages: vi68-vi69

10.1093/neuonc/noab196.265

Abstract BACKGROUND The Individualized Screening Trial of Innovative Glioblastoma Therapy (INSIGhT) is a phase II platform trial with Bayesian adaptive randomization and deep genomic profiling to more efficiently test experimental agents in newly diagnosed glioblastoma and to prioritize therapies for late-stage testing. METHODS In the ongoing INSIGhT trial, patients with newly diagnosed MGMT-unmethylated glioblastoma are randomized to the control arm or one of three experimental therapy arms (CC-115, abemaciclib, and neratinib). The control arm therapy is radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide, and primary endpoint is overall survival. Randomization has been adapted based on Bayesian estimation of biomarker-specific probability of treatment impact on progression-free survival (PFS). All tumors undergo detailed molecular sequencing, and this is facilitated with the companion ALLELE protocol. To evaluate feasibility of this approach, we assessed the status of this ongoing trial. RESULTS Since INSIGhT was activated 4.3 years ago, it has expanded to include 12 sites across the United States. A total of 247 patients have been enrolled. Randomization probabilities have been repeatedly adjusted over time based upon early PFS results to alter the randomization ratio from standard 1:1:1:1 randomization. All three arms have completed accrual and efficacy estimates are available based upon comparison to the common control arm in context of relevant biomarkers. There are 87 patients alive and in follow-up, and there are ongoing plans to add additional arms to evaluate further treatments in the future. CONCLUSION The INSIGhT trial demonstrates that a multi-center Bayesian adaptive platform trial is a feasible and effective approach to help prioritize therapies and biomarkers for newly diagnosed GBM. The trial has maintained robust accrual, and the simultaneous testing of multiple agents, sharing a common control arm and adaptive randomization serve as features to increase trial efficiency relative to traditional clinical trial designs.
CTNI-05. PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF THE NERATINIB ARM IN THE INDIVIDUALIZED SCREENING TRIAL OF INNOVATIVE GLIOBLASTOMA THERAPY (INSIGHT): A PHASE II PLATFORM TRIAL USING BAYESIAN ADAPTIVE RANDOMIZATION

Neuro-Oncology | November 18, 2021 | Volume: 23 | Issue: Supplement_6 | Pages: vi59-vi59

10.1093/neuonc/noab196.230

Abstract BACKGROUND EGFR is amplified in over 50% of glioblastoma and 20-30% have EGFRvIII mutations. Neratinib is a potent inhibitor of EGFR/HER2 approved for metastatic HER2+ breast cancer. To efficiently evaluate the potential impact of neratinib on overall survival (OS) in newly-diagnosed glioblastoma and to simultaneously develop information regarding potential genomic biomarker associations, neratinib was included as an arm on the Individualized Screening Trial of Innovative Glioblastoma Therapy (INSIGhT) trial. INSIGhT is a phase II platform trial using response adaptive randomization and deep genomic profiling to more efficiently test experimental agents in MGMT unmethylated glioblastoma and accelerate identification of novel therapies for phase III testing. Initial randomization was equal between neratinib, control, and two other experimental arms but subsequent randomization was adapted based on efficacy as determined by progression-free survival (PFS). We report preliminary results for the neratinib arm. METHODS Patients with newly diagnosed MGMT-unmethylated glioblastoma were randomized to receive either radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide or standard radiochemotherapy followed by adjuvant neratinib (240 mg daily). Treatment continued until progression or development of unacceptable toxicities. The primary endpoint was OS. Association between neratinib efficacy and EGFR amplification was also investigated. RESULTS There were 144 patients (70 control; 74 neratinib). Neratinib was reasonably well-tolerated with no new toxicity signals identified. PFS was compared (HR 0.84; p=0.38, logrank test – not significant) between the neratinib (median 6.05 months) and control (median 5.82 months) arms. For patients EGFR pathway activation the PFS HR was 0.53 (p-value=0.03 – significant, median PFS: neratinib, 6.21 months, control, 5.26 months). However, there was no significant improvement in OS in EGFR amplified/mutated patients (HR 1.05; p-value 0.87) between neratinib (median 14.2) compared to the control arm (median 14.6). CONCLUSION Neratinib prolonged PFS in the EGFR positive subpopulation but there was no overall PFS benefit, or any OS improvement.
CTNI-11. CC-115 IN NEWLY DIAGNOSED MGMT UNMETHYLATED GLIOBLASTOMA IN THE INDIVIDUALIZED SCREENING TRIAL OF INNOVATIVE GLIOBLASTOMA THERAPY (INSIGHT): A PHASE II RANDOMIZED BAYESIAN ADAPTIVE PLATFORM TRIAL

Neuro-Oncology | December 4, 2020 | Volume: 22 | Issue: Supplement_2 | Pages: ii43-ii44

10.1093/neuonc/noaa215.178

Abstract BACKGROUND CC-115 is an oral, CNS-penetrant, selective inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin kinase (mTOR) and deoxyribonucleic acid-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PK). Both targets are important in glioblastoma; PI3K/Akt/mTOR signaling is hyperactive in most glioblastomas, and DNA-PK is integral to repair of radiotherapy-mediated DNA damage. To investigate CC-115 in newly diagnosed glioblastoma and explore potential genomic biomarker associations, CC-115 was evaluated in the Individualized Screening Trial of Innovative Glioblastoma Therapy (INSIGhT) trial, an adaptive platform trial designed to efficiently test experimental agents. METHODS Adults with newly diagnosed MGMT-unmethylated glioblastoma, with genomic data available, are eligible for this ongoing trial. Patients are adaptively randomized to one of several experimental arms or the control arm: standard radiotherapy with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide. The primary endpoint is overall survival (OS). Patients randomized to CC-115 (10mg po BID) received it concurrently with radiotherapy and as adjuvant monotherapy. As the first in-human use of CC-115 with radiation, a safety lead-in 3 + 3 design was used. RESULTS Twelve patients were randomized to CC-115; seven patients had possible treatment-related CTCAE grade > 3 toxicity, including four pre-specified dose-limiting toxicities: liver function abnormality (n=1), hyperlipidemia (n=1), lipase elevation (n=1) and cerebral edema (n=1). There was no significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS, median 4.2 months [CC-115] vs. 5.2 months, p=0.9) or OS (median 10.1 months [CC-115] vs. 14.5 months, p=0.9) compared to the 50 patients randomized to the control arm. Based on early PFS results, randomization probability to CC-115 decreased from 25% to < 10% at time of the trial arm closure. CONCLUSION Concurrent and adjuvant CC-115 was associated with toxicity and failed to improve PFS or OS. The INSIGhT trial design allowed for more efficient testing of CC-115, decreasing patients and resources allocated to a therapy that was discontinued due to concerns about toxicity and unfavorable risk-to-benefit ratio.
CTNI-12. PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF THE ABEMACICLIB ARM IN THE INDIVIDUALIZED SCREENING TRIAL OF INNOVATIVE GLIOBLASTOMA THERAPY (INSIGHT): A PHASE II PLATFORM TRIAL USING BAYESIAN ADAPTIVE RANDOMIZATION

Neuro-Oncology | December 4, 2020 | Volume: 22 | Issue: Supplement_2 | Pages: ii44-ii44

10.1093/neuonc/noaa215.179

Abstract BACKGROUND The cyclin D-CDK4/6-Rb pathway is activated in most glioblastomas. Abemaciclib is a potent CDK4/6 inhibitor with good brain penetration approved for ER/PR/HER2- breast cancer. In order to efficiently evaluate the potential impact of abemaciclib on overall survival (OS) in newly diagnosed glioblastoma and to simultaneously develop information regarding potential genomic biomarker associations, abemaciclib was included as an arm on the Individualized Screening Trial of Innovative Glioblastoma Therapy (INSIGhT) trial. INSIGhT is a phase II platform trial using response adaptive randomization and deep genomic profiling to more efficiently test experimental agents in MGMT unmethylated glioblastoma and potentially accelerate identification of novel therapies for phase III testing. Initial randomization was equal between abemaciclib, control, and two other experimental arms but subsequent randomization was adapted based on efficacy as determined by progression-free survival (PFS). Ineffective arms were discontinued and new arms added by protocol amendment. We report preliminary results for the abemaciclib arm which has completed accrual. METHODS Patients with newly diagnosed MGMT-unmethylated glioblastoma were randomized to receive either radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide at standard doses or standard radiochemotherapy followed by adjuvant abemaciclib (150–200 mg orally BID) without temozolomide. Treatment continued until progression or development of unacceptable toxicities. The primary endpoint was OS. Association between abemaciclib efficacy and cyclin D-CDK4/6-Rb pathway genomic alterations was also investigated. RESULTS There were 123 patients (50 control; 73 treated with abemaciclib). Abemaciclib was generally well-tolerated with no new toxicity signals identified. PFS was significantly longer (p=0.03, logrank test) with abemaciclib (median 6.31 months 95% CI [5.29, 8.18]) compared to the control arm (5.16 months 95% CI [4.37, 6.28]). 28/50 control and 36/73 abemaciclib patients remain alive. CONCLUSION Preliminary analysis suggests that abemaciclib increases PFS compared to control. Updated toxicity, PFS and survival data and potential genomic biomarker associations will be presented.
Challenges in the Treatment of Newly Diagnosed and Recurrent Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network | November 5, 2020 | Volume: 18 | Issue: 11 | Pages: 1571-1578

10.6004/jnccn.2020.7667 | PMID 33152700

Primary central nervous system lymphomas (PCNSLs) are rare cancers of the central nervous system (CNS) and are predominantly diffuse large B-cell lymphomas of the activated B-cell (ABC) subtype. They typically present in the sixth and seventh decade of life, with the highest incidence among patients aged >75 years. Although many different regimens have demonstrated efficacy in newly diagnosed and relapsed or refractory PCNSL, there have been few randomized prospective trials, and most recommendations and treatment decisions are based on single-arm phase II trials or even retrospective studies. High-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX; 3–8 g/m2) is the backbone of preferred standard induction regimens. Various effective regimens with different toxicity profiles can be considered that combine other chemotherapies and/or rituximab with HD-MTX, but there is currently no consensus for a single preferred regimen. There is controversy about the role of various consolidation therapies for patients who respond to HD-MTX–based induction therapy. For patients with relapsed or refractory PCNSL who previously experienced response to HD-MTX, repeat treatment with HD-MTX–based therapy can be considered depending on the timing of recurrence. Other more novel and less toxic regimens have been developed that show efficacy in recurrent disease, including ibrutinib, or lenalidomide ± rituximab. There is uniform agreement to delay or avoid whole-brain radiation therapy due to concerns for significant neurotoxicity if a reasonable systemic treatment option exists. This article aims to provide a clinically practical approach to PCNSL, including special considerations for older patients and those with impaired renal function. The benefits and risks of HD-MTX or high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation versus other, better tolerated strategies are also discussed. In all settings, the preferred treatment is always enrollment in a clinical trial if one is available.
Central Nervous System Cancers, Version 3.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network | November 5, 2020 | Volume: 18 | Issue: 11 | Pages: 1537-1570

10.6004/jnccn.2020.0052 | PMID 33152694

The NCCN Guidelines for Central Nervous System (CNS) Cancers focus on management of adult CNS cancers ranging from noninvasive and surgically curable pilocytic astrocytomas to metastatic brain disease. The involvement of an interdisciplinary team, including neurosurgeons, radiation therapists, oncologists, neurologists, and neuroradiologists, is a key factor in the appropriate management of CNS cancers. Integrated histopathologic and molecular characterization of brain tumors such as gliomas should be standard practice. This article describes NCCN Guidelines recommendations for WHO grade I, II, III, and IV gliomas. Treatment of brain metastases, the most common intracranial tumors in adults, is also described.
Alliance A071401: Phase II trial of FAK inhibition in meningiomas with somatic NF2 mutations.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 25, 2020 | Volume: 38 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: 2502-2502

10.1200/jco.2020.38.15_suppl.2502

2502 Background: Patients with progressive or recurrent meningiomas have limited treatment options. Clinical trials of systemic therapies for meningiomas have failed to demonstrate benefit. FAK inhibition has a synthetic lethal relationship with NF2 loss. Given the predominance of NF2 mutations in meningiomas, we evaluated the efficacy of GSK2256098, a FAK inhibitor, as part of the first genomically-driven phase II study in recurrent or progressive grade I-III meningiomas. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) whose tumors screened positively for NF2 mutations were treated with GSK2256098 750mg po bid until progressive disease in 2 separate cohorts: grade I or II/III meningiomas. Two co-primary endpoints were used: progression-free survival at 6 months (PFS6) and response rate (RR) by Macdonald criteria; per study design, the trial would be declared positive if either endpoint was met. RR was evaluated across the overall cohort; PFS6 was evaluated within each subgroup. Historical benchmark data was obtained from Kaley et al. Neuro Oncol 2014. In the grade I group, 12 evaluable pts provided >79% power to detect a PFS6 rate >65% (vs. null hypothesis of 25%; alpha=0.014). In the grade II/III group, 24 evaluable pts provided >85% power to detect a PFS6 >41.5% (vs. null 15%; alpha=0.02). The threshold for promising results for PFS6 was: 7+/12(grade I) and 8+/24(grade II/III) pts. For RR, 36 evaluable pts provided >94% power to detect RR >20% (vs. null 2.5%; alpha= 0.012). Results: Of 322 pts screened for all mutation cohorts of the study, 36 eligible and evaluable pts with NF2 mutations were enrolled. Across all grades, one pt had a partial response and 24 had stable disease as best response to treatment. In Grade I pts, the observed PFS6 rate was 83% (10/12 pts; 95% CI: 52-98%). In Grade II/III pts, the observed PFS6 rate was 33% (8/24 pts; 95% CI: 16-55%). The study met PFS6 efficacy endpoint both for the Grade I and the Grade II/III cohorts. Treatment was well tolerated. Only 7 patients had a maximum grade-3 adverse event that was at least possibly related to treatment; toxicities across these pts included: proteinuria (2), rash (1), pain (1), ALT (1), AST (1), cholecystitis (1), hypertriglyceridemia (1), apraxia (1), and lymphopenia (1) with no grade 4 or 5 events. Conclusions: GSK2256098 had excellent tolerability andresulted in an improved PFS6 rate in pts with recurrent or progressive NF2-mutated meningiomas. Trial endpoint was met. FAK inhibition warrants further evaluation in this patient population. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org Clinical trial information: NCT02523014 .
Proposed response assessment and endpoints for meningioma clinical trials: report from the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group

Neuro-Oncology | August 17, 2018 | Volume: 21 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 26-36

10.1093/neuonc/noy137 | PMID 30137421