Back to Authors

Javle, Milind

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9158-0941

A5054771911 | I1343551460

Mayo Clinic

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

Citations 58

Comparison of the clinical features, treatment patterns, and tumor mutations of patients with intrahepatic (ICC) and extrahepatic (ECC) cholangiocarcinoma.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 4, 2020 | Volume: 38 | Issue: 4_suppl | Pages: 580-580

10.1200/jco.2020.38.4_suppl.580

580 Background: Though studies indicate that the genomic profiles of ICC and ECC are distinct, the clinical features that differentiate them still remain to be well characterized. The purpose of this study was to further analyze these differences and patient treatment patterns in a multi-center cohort. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed at 8 institutions on patients (pts) with ICC or ECC diagnosed after June 2009. Data on demographics, risk factors, treatments, pathology and overall survival (OS) were collected. Tumor genotyping results from CLIA-certified tissue assays were analyzed. Fisher’s exact, Wilcoxon rank sum and log-rank tests were used to compare sub-groups. Results: In a database of 737 pts with cholangiocarcinoma, 538(73%) had ICC and 199(27%) had ECC. Pts with ICC more often presented in later stages, had tumors > 5cm at resection (p < 0.0001) and had metastases to the liver, lymph nodes, lung and/or bone (p < 0.01). Pts with ICC more often received liver directed therapy, targeted therapy and multiple lines of systemic therapy and they more often enrolled in a clinical trial (all p < 0.01). Pts with ECC were more likely to be male, undergo surgery, receive adjuvant chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation (all p < 0.05). Mutation profiling performed in 381 (52%) pts (ICC/ECC = 301/80) showed that pts with ICC were more likely to have IDH1 mutations and FGFR2 fusions, whereas pts with ECC were more likely to have KRAS, APC, SMAD4, WNT, TGFb and TP53 mutations (all < 0.05). Factors that did not differ significantly between pts with ICC and ECC include race, rates of primary sclerosing cholangitis, median diagnosis CA19-9 levels and R1 resection rate. Median OS from diagnosis was 18.9 months in ICC and 17.3 months in ECC (p = 0.8471). Conclusions: While pts with ICC and ECC have some similarities in their clinical features, differences in metastases patterns and molecular profiling significantly impact their management such that pts with ICC receive more liver-directed therapy, targeted therapy and more lines of systemic therapy. Further prospective studies are needed as referral patterns to tertiary care centers may have impacted these results.
Profiling of 3,634 cholangiocarcinomas (CCA) to identify genomic alterations (GA), tumor mutational burden (TMB), and genomic loss of heterozygosity (gLOH).

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 27, 2019 | Volume: 37 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: 4087-4087

10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.4087

4087 Background: The management of CCA has evolved as targeted and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICPI) therapies have emerged. We used comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) to characterize the genomic alterations (GA) that have potential to personalize therapy for CCA. Methods: 3634 CCA underwent hybrid capture based CGP on 0.8-1.1 Mb of the coding genome to identify GAs in exons and select introns in up to 404 genes, TMB, microsatellite status (MSI) and % monoallelic genome (gLOH). PD-L1 expression was determined by IHC (Dako 22C3). Results: 52% of CCA were female with a median age of 62 years (range 16 - > 89). The most common biopsy sites were liver (74%), lymph node (4%), bile duct (3.3%), and lung (2%). MSI-high was rare (1%), 118 and 47 cases had TMB > 10 and > 20 mut/mb respectively. Of the latter, 51% (24/47) were MSI-H. PD-L1 amplification (AMP) was present in 0.27%. Of 490 CCA tested, 43 (9%) were positive for PD-L1 expression. 11% of cases had gLOH > 16%, only 2 cases had both TMB > 20 and gLOH > 16%. GA were most common in TP53 (31%), CDKN2A (29%), KRAS (20%) and ARID1A (17%). Potentially targetable GAs included FGFR2 (11%, 85% fusions), BRAF (5%, 50% V600E), ERBB2 (5%, 72% AMP), MET (2%, 90% AMP), EGFR (0.52%) and rarer ( < 0.5%) FGFR3, RET, FGFR1, ALK, and ROS1 fusions. The FGFR2 fusions had 128 unique 3’ partner genes including BICC1 (26%), CCDC6 (3.2%), AHCYL1 (2.6%) and KIAA1217 (2.6%). FGFR2 fusions occurred in a mutually exclusive fashion from high gLOH (p < 0.002), but not high TMB. GA in IDH1 (15%) were mutually exclusive of FGFR2 fusions (p < 1e-13), but co-occurred with PBRM1 GA (23%, p < 1e-21), ARID1A (26% p < 1e-10). IDH1 GA had gLOH similar to the overall CCA population but were enriched for low TMB (p < 1e-3). Conclusions: Nearly 20% of CCA cases harbor targetable kinase GA, half of which were FGFR2 fusions. Independently, an additional 10% (gLOH) and 1% (high TMB, MSI and/or PD-L1 AMP) may benefit from PARP inhibitors and ICPI respectively. Independently, co-mutation of IDH1 and PBRM1/ARID1A defines a class of CCA that warrants further investigation for sensitivity to PARP inhibitors and may serve as a paradigm for other tumors (ie. gliomas) with a similar co-occurrence landscape.
Gemcitabine, Cisplatin, and nab-Paclitaxel for the Treatment of Advanced Biliary Tract Cancers

JAMA Oncology | April 18, 2019 | Volume: 5 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 824

10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.0270 | PMID 30998813

FOENIX-101: A phase II trial of TAS-120 in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma harboring FGFR2 gene rearrangements.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | January 29, 2019 | Volume: 37 | Issue: 4_suppl | Pages: TPS468-TPS468

10.1200/jco.2019.37.4_suppl.tps468

TPS468 Background: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is a cancer arising from the intrahepatic bile duct. Standard treatment of unresectable, recurrent, or metastatic iCCA is with cytotoxic chemotherapy. FGFR2 gene fusions have been identified as oncogenic drivers in 10–20% of iCCA tumors, but no targeted agents have been established to date. TAS-120 is an investigational irreversible FGFR1–4 inhibitor in development as a once-daily oral treatment for iCCA. Based on initial studies in multiple tumor types expressing FGFR abnormalities, iCCA was identified as a tumor type with potential susceptibility to FGFR inhibition and high unmet need. A phase I portion of the trial with an iCCA expansion cohort demonstrated tolerability and preliminary evidence of clinical efficacy with TAS-120 as a continuous, once-daily oral treatment in patients with iCCA. The most common AEs in the phase I portion of the trial were hyperphosphatemia, a mechanism-based on-target side effect, cutaneous AEs, and gastrointestinal AEs. The phase I portion of the study is continuing to enroll, and final results are anticipated in early 2019. Based on preliminary findings, a phase II portion of the study (FOENIX-101; clinicaltrials.gov registration NCT02052778) has been initiated. Methods: The phase II portion of the trial is a global, single-arm study of TAS-120 in patients with iCCA harboring FGFR2 gene rearrangements. The study will enroll approximately 100 adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic iCCA that progressed after ≥ 1 systemic therapies and with an ECOG PS of 0 or 1. Prior systemic therapy must include gemcitabine plus platinum-based chemotherapy. Screening for FGFR2 gene rearrangements will be performed at a central laboratory. The primary endpoint is objective response rate based on RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints include duration of response, disease control rate, overall survival, progression-free survival, safety, and health-related quality of life. Clinical trial information: NCT02052778.
ClarIDHy: A phase 3 multicenter randomized double-blind study of AG-120 versus placebo in patients with non-resectable or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma with an IDH1 mutation.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | January 2, 2019 | Volume: 36 | Issue: 4_suppl | Pages: TPS545-TPS545

10.1200/jco.2018.36.4_suppl.tps545

TPS545 Background: Advanced cholangiocarcinoma (CC) is a life-threatening disease with limited effective chemotherapy options. Mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (mIDH1) occur in 13–15% of CC cases, and up to 25% of intrahepatic CC cases, leading to epigenetic and genetic changes that promote oncogenesis via production of the oncometabolite 2-hydroxyglutarate (2-HG). AG-120 (ivosidenib), a first-in-class oral mIDH1 inhibitor, displayed a favorable safety profile and clinical activity in a phase 1 study enrolling 73 mIDH1 CC patients who had received ≥1 prior systemic regimen. As of 10 Mar 2017, 4/73 (5%) had a partial response and 41/73 (56%) stable disease. Progression free survival (PFS) rates at 6 months and 12 months were 38.5% and 20.7%, respectively. The 500 mg once daily dose level of AG-120 was selected for further development in mIDH1 CC. Methods: ClarIDHy is a global, phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized (2:1) study of AG-120 (500 mg once daily) vs. matched placebo in 186 mIDH1 CC patients (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02989857). Key eligibility criteria: non-resectable or metastatic CC, documented mIDH1 by central laboratory testing, ECOG performance status 0–1, measurable disease (RECIST v1.1), documented disease progression after ≤2 prior systemic therapies in the advanced setting including at least 1 gemcitabine- or 5-fluorouracil-containing regimen, and no prior mIDH inhibitor therapy. Crossover from placebo to AG-120 will be allowed at time of radiographic disease progression. Primary endpoint: PFS assessed by independent radiologists. Secondary endpoints: safety, tolerability, overall response rate (RECIST 1.1), overall survival, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analyses, and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BIL21 scales). An independent data monitoring committee will monitor the data during study conduct. The ClarIDHy study is currently activated at participating sites in the US, UK, EU, and S. Korea. R eused with permission from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). This abstract was accepted and previously presented at the 2017 ASCO Annual Meeting. All rights reserved. Clinical trial information: NCT02989857.
A phase II trial of gemcitabine (G), cisplatin (C), and nab-paclitaxel (N) in advanced biliary tract cancers (aBTCs): Updated survival analysis.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | January 2, 2019 | Volume: 36 | Issue: 4_suppl | Pages: 350-350

10.1200/jco.2018.36.4_suppl.350

350 Background: BTCs are often diagnosed at an advanced stage and have a poor prognosis. The standard therapy for aBTCs is the combination of GC. However, the median overall survival (mOS) is dismal at 11.7 months (mos) with a median progression free survival (mPFS) of 8 mos. Methods: A single arm, phase II study was conducted at MD Anderson and Mayo Clinic Arizona. Patients (pts) with aBTC were treated at initial dose level of G/C/N (in mg/m2) at 1000/25/125 (n = 30) which was reduced to lower doses due to grade 3/4 hematological (heme) toxicity (tox) - G/C/N: 800/25/100 (n = 30). Cycles were q21 days with restaging q3 cycles until progression. PFS was the primary endpoint (endpt). Using a Bayesian hypothesis test-based design, we assumed mPFS of 8 mos under the null hypothesis (H0), 10 mos under the alternative (H1). Secondary endpts included mOS, RECIST v1.1 response rate (RR), safety and CA19-9 response. Results: 60 pts were enrolled with 51 being response-evaluable having received more than 1 cycle of therapy (age: median 60 yrs [range 31-77], ECOG PS 0/1 (22/38), M/F (33/27), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma/extrahepatic/gallbladder (38/9/13). Median follow-up was 14 mos and median number of treatment (trmt) cycles = 5.24. Pts at initial dose level had significant grade 3/4 heme tox: neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia leading to trmt discontinuation in 6/30 pts. After dose reduction to G/C/N (in mg/m2) at 800/25/100, trmt was better tolerated with only 3 pts experiencing grade 4 heme tox. Non-heme tox were grade 3 in 19 pts: nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, thromboembolic event/CVA, hypokalemia, constipation, cystitis, LFT elevations. The mPFS = 11.4 mos (95% CI: 6.1, 16.1) and mOS = 19.2 (95%CI: 13.6, NA), 1-year survival rate 67.6%. 51 pts evaluable for response: disease control rate (PR+CR+SD)-84.3% and RR-39%. 12 unresectable cases were operated post trmt with 1 pathologic CR. Conclusions: The combination of GCN was well tolerated at adjusted doses and demonstrates encouraging efficacy having met its mPFS endpt and an impressive mOS higher than historical control. These results merit evaluating GC +/-N in a randomized controlled study. Clinical trial information: NCT02392637.
Variations in DNA repair genomic alterations and tumor mutation burden in biliary tract cancer (BTC) subtypes.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | January 2, 2019 | Volume: 36 | Issue: 4_suppl | Pages: 263-263

10.1200/jco.2018.36.4_suppl.263

263 Background: DNA repair genomic alterations (GAs) have been identified in 12% of Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCCA), 26% of extrahepatic CCA (EHCCA) and 8% of gallbladder cancer (GBC) patients (pts) ( Cancer 2016;122:3838–3847). Recently, the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) has described more than 20 mutated DNA repair genes, many of which were not previously represented in prior reports. DNA repair GAs including MSI are associated with higher tumor mutational burden (TMB). Our study aim is to identify variations in the frequency of DNA repair GAs in IHCCA, EHCCA, and GBC. Methods: Hybrid capture-based next-generation sequencing of 422 fixed formalin paraffin embedded (FFPE) tissue blocks of BTC including; 270 IHCCA, 60 EHCCA, and 92 GBC was performed. We included 20 DNA repair genes and classified them as "direct" DNA repair genes ( ATM, ATR, BRCA1, BRCA2, FANCA, FANCD2, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PALB2, POLD1, POLE, PRKDC, RAD50, SLX4) and "caretaker" genes that induce genomic instability ( BAP1, CDK12, MLL3, TP53, BLM). We calculated TMB on 1.1 Mb of sequenced DNA in 205 tissue specimens [138 IHCCA, 23 EHCCA, and 44 GBC] and classified into three groups; high (TMB-H; ≥ 20 mut/Mb), intermediate (TMB-I; 6-19mut/Mb) and low (TMB-L; < 6mut/Mb). Results: A distinct pattern of DNA repair GAs in each tumor type was detected. (Table 1). DNA repair GAs were more commonly noted in both EHCCA and GB (63%) as compared with IHCAA (45.2%) (p= .002). Direct DNA repair GAs were highest within EHCCA (25%), while indirect DNA GAs were predominant in GBC (59.8%) (p= 0.04 and 0.001, respectively). The frequency of TMB-H and TMB-I differed significantly between BTC subtypes. Pts with EHCCA and GBC had significantly higher TMB-H and TMB-I versus IHCCA. Conclusions: The frequency of DNA repair GA’s is higher in EHCCA and GBC as compared with IHCCA. These results may have implications for clinical trials with DNA repair inhibitors and immune checkpoint blockers. [Table: see text]
ClarIDHy: A phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study of AG-120 vs placebo in patients with an advanced cholangiocarcinoma with an IDH1 mutation.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 6, 2018 | Volume: 35 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: TPS4142-TPS4142

10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.tps4142

TPS4142 Background: Advanced cholangiocarcinoma (CC) is a life-threatening disease for which there are limited therapeutic options. Mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (mIDH1) occur in up to 25% of intrahepatic CC cases. mIDH1 lead to epigenetic and genetic changes that promote oncogenesis via production of the oncometabolite, D-2-hydroxyglutarate (2-HG). AG-120 is a first-in-class oral inhibitor of the mIDH1 enzyme, and is being tested in a phase 1 study that enrolled 73 patients (pts) with mIDH1 CC who had received a median of 2 prior therapies (range 1–5). AG-120 has demonstrated a favorable safety profile and clinical activity in this study. Among the 72 efficacy evaluable pts (≥1 post-baseline response assessment or discontinued prematurely), 6% (n = 4) had a confirmed partial response and 56% (n = 40) had stable disease. Progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months was 40% as of Dec 16, 2016. The 500 mg once daily (QD) dose of AG-120 was selected for the ongoing phase 3 study in mIDH1 CC described here. Methods: ClarIDHy is a global, phase 3, multicenter, double-blind study randomizing 186 pts with mIDH1 CC in a 2:1 ratio to AG-120 (500 mg QD) or matched placebo (NCT02989857). Key eligibility criteria: nonresectable or metastatic CC; documented mIDH1 based on central laboratory testing; ECOG 0–1; measurable disease (RECIST v1.1); documented disease progression following ≤2 prior systemic therapies in the advanced setting, including at least 1 gemcitabine- or 5-fluorouracil-containing regimen; and no prior mIDH inhibitor therapy. Crossover from the placebo arm to the AG-120 arm will be permitted. The primary endpoint is PFS as assessed by an independent review. Secondary endpoints include safety, tolerability, overall response rate, overall survival, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses on plasma, and quality of life as assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-BIL21, and EQ-5D-5L instruments. An independent data monitoring committee will monitor the data throughout the study. The ClarIDHy study is currently activated at participating sites in the US and will be activated in centers throughout Europe and in South Korea. Clinical trial information: NCT02989857.
A phase II trial of gemcitabine (G), cisplatin (C), and nab-paclitaxel (N) in advanced biliary tract cancers (aBTCs).

Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 6, 2018 | Volume: 35 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: 4018-4018

10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.4018

4018 Background: BTCs are often diagnosed at an advanced stage and have a poor prognosis. The standard therapy for aBTCs is the combination of GC. However, the median overall survival (mOS) is dismal at 11.7 months (mos) with a median progression free survival (mPFS) of 8 mos. Methods: A single arm, phase II study was conducted at MD Anderson and Mayo Clinic Arizona. Patients (pts) with aBTC were treated at initial dose level of G/C/N (in mg/m2) at 1000/25/125 (n = 27) which was reduced to lower doses due to grade 3/4 hematological (heme) toxicity (tox) - G/C/N: 800/25/100 (n = 33). Cycles were q21 days with restaging q3 cycles until progression. PFS was the primary endpoint (endpt). Using a Bayesian hypothesis test-based design, we assumed mPFS of 8 mos under the null hypothesis (H0), 10 mos under the alternative (H1). Secondary endpts included mOS, RECIST v1.1 response rate (RR), safety and CA19-9 response. Results: 60 pts were enrolled with data on 51 available as of the time of this abstract (age: median 60 yrs [range 31-77], ECOG PS 0/1 (17/34), M/F (30/21), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma/extrahepatic/gallbladder (32/8/11). Median follow-up was 11.5 mos and median number of treatment (trmt) cycles = 5. Pts at initial dose level had significant grade 3/4 heme tox: neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia leading to trmt discontinuation in 6/27 pts. After dose reduction to G/C/N (in mg/m2) at 800/25/100, trmt was better tolerated with only 4 pts experiencing grade 4 heme tox. Non-heme tox were grade 3 in 10 pts: nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, thromboembolic event/CVA, hypokalemia, constipation, cystitis, LFT elevations. In the initial 51 pts, mPFS = 11.4 mos (95% CI: 6.1, not reached) and mOS not reached (estimated > 20 mos, 1-year survival rate 66.7%; 95%CI: 65.9-92.2%). 34 pts evaluable for response: disease control rate (PR+CR+SD)-82.3% and RR-32.3%. 3 unresectable cases were operated post trmt with 1 pathologic CR. Conclusions: The combination of GCN was well tolerated at adjusted doses and demonstrates encouraging preliminary efficacy having met its mPFS endpt and a 1-year survival rate higher than historical control. These results merit evaluating GC +/-N in a randomized controlled study. Clinical trial information: NCT02392637.
SWOG S1310: Randomized phase II trial of single agent MEK inhibitor trametinib vs. 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine in refractory advanced biliary cancer.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 6, 2018 | Volume: 35 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: 4016-4016

10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.4016

4016 Background: No standard treatment options are available for patients with advanced BC who fail gemcitabine/platinum therapy. The rationale for evaluation of trametinib was based on the presence of MAPK alterations and on earlier promising results with other MEK inhibitors in BC. Methods: Pts with histologically proven BC who progressed on gemcitabine/platinum were randomized to trametinib (2mg qd) (Arm A) vs infusional 5FU at 2400 mg/m2 over 46 hours or capecitabine (1000 mg/m2PO days 1-14 BID) (Arm B). Patients were stratified by planned chemotherapy 5FU/LV vs capecitabine; and disease site: cholangiocarcinoma vs gallbladder. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and response rate (RR). 80 eligible patients (40 for each arm) were needed to detect an improvement in median OS from 5 months to 8.25 months (1.65 HR). A planned interim futility analysis of objective response was performed on the first 14 pts registered to the trametinib arm. Results: The study was stopped early based on the lack of measurable response in the trametinib arm. 53 pts were randomized (27 pts in Arm A vs 26 pts in Arm B). Median age was 62 years and the primary sites of tumor were cholangiocarcinoma (77%) and gallbladder (23%). Median OS was 4.3 months (95% CI 3.1-5.1) for Arm A, and 8.0 months (95% CI 3.2-14.6) for Arm B with a HR of 2.02 (95% CI 1.01-4.03, p=0.05). The median PFS was 1.3 months (95% CI 1.2-1.5) for arm A and 2.8 months (95% CI 1.4-6.9) for arm B with a HR of 2.95 (95% CI 1.38-6.30, p=0.01). Overall RR was 8% (95% CI 0%, 19%) in Arm A vs 10% (95% CI 0%, 23%) in Arm B (p>0.99), and 8% vs 45% had stable disease. Eight pts in Arm A experienced treatment-related ≥ grade 3 toxicities, including one death due to vomiting/dehydration. Seven pts in Arm B experienced treatment-related grade 3 toxicities; no higher grade toxicities were reported. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first prospective randomized study of a targeted agent versus chemotherapy for the second line treatment of BC. In this unselected population, the lack of response to trametinib resulted in early closure. The PFS and OS for trametinib were inferior to 5FU. Clinical trial information: 02042443.