Citations

Abstract Background: Abemaciclib is an orally administered, selective CDK4 & 6 inhibitor dosed on a continuous schedule. In patients (pts) with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC), abemaciclib demonstrated clinical activity as monotherapy in MONARCH 1 and efficacy with a generally tolerable safety profile in combination with fulvestrant in MONARCH 2. At the MONARCH 3 (NCT02246621) interim analysis, abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.543; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.409, 0.723; p=.000021) and objective response rate (ORR) (measurable disease: abemaciclib arm, 59.2%; placebo arm, 43.8%; p=.004) with a generally tolerable safety profile as initial treatment for HR+, HER2- ABC. Here we present the MONARCH 3 results from the preplanned final PFS analysis. Methods: MONARCH 3 is a double-blind, Phase 3 study of abemaciclib/placebo (150 mg, twice daily continuous schedule) + NSAI (1 mg anastrozole or 2.5 mg letrozole, daily) in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC who have had no prior systemic therapy for advanced disease. Endocrine therapy (ET) naïve pts or pts with disease relapse >12 months after (neo)adjuvant ET were randomized 2:1 and stratified by metastatic site (visceral, bone-only, or other) and prior ET (aromatase inhibitor, no ET, or other). The primary objective was investigator-assessed PFS. Additional objectives included ORR, clinical benefit rate (CBR), duration of response (DoR), overall survival (OS), and safety and tolerability. The study was powered to 80% at 1-sided α=.025 assuming a HR of 0.67 in favor of abemaciclib + NSAI, with the final analysis at 240 PFS events. Results: 493 pts were randomized to abemaciclib + NSAI (n=328) or placebo + NSAI (n=165). At the final PFS analysis, 246 PFS events had occurred. Abemaciclib + NSAI significantly extended PFS (HR, 0.540; 95% CI, 0.418, 0.698; p=.000002; median: abemaciclib arm, 28.18 vs placebo arm, 14.76 months). PFS was improved across all subgroups. For pts with measurable disease, the ORR was 61.0% in the abemaciclib arm and 45.5% in the placebo arm (p=.003), and the CBR was 79.0% in the abemaciclib arm and 69.7% in the placebo arm (p=.037). The median DoR was 27.39 months in the abemaciclib arm compared to 17.46 months in the placebo arm. OS was immature at the time of analysis. Adverse events were consistent with previous reports. Conclusions: Abemaciclib + NSAI demonstrated a generally tolerable safety profile and was an effective initial treatment for pts with HR+, HER2- ABC, significantly improving PFS and ORR. Citation Format: Matthew P. Goetz, Miguel Martin, Angelo Di Leo, Seock-Ah Im, Ahmad Awada, Tammy Forrester, Martin Frenzel, Joanne Cox, Susana Barriga, Masakazu Toi, Hiroji Iwata, Stephen Johnston. MONARCH 3: Abemaciclib as initial therapy for patients with HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer - Results from the preplanned final PFS analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT040.

Abstract Purpose: Preplanned exploratory analyses were performed to identify biomarkers in circulating tumor cells (CTC) predictive of response to the topoisomerase 1 inhibitor etirinotecan pegol (EP). Experimental Design: The BEACON trial treated patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with EP or treatment of physician's choice (TPC). Blood from 656 of 852 patients (77%) was processed with ApoStream to enrich for CTCs. A multiplex immunofluorescence assay measured expression of candidate response biomarkers [topoisomerase 1 (Top1), topoisomerase 2 (Top2), Ki67, RAD51, ABCG2, γH2AX, and terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase–mediated dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL)] in CTCs. Patients were classified as Top1 low (Top1Lo) or Top1 high (Top1Hi) based on median CTC Top1 expression. Correlation of CTC biomarker expression at baseline, cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1), and cycle 4 day 1 with overall survival (OS) was investigated using Cox regression and Kaplan–Meier analyses. Results: Overall, 98% of samples were successfully processed, of which 97% had detectable CTCs (median, 47–63 CTCs/mL; range, 0–2,020 CTCs/mL). Top1, Top2, and TUNEL expression was detected in 52% to 90% of samples; no significant associations with OS were observed in pretreatment samples for either group. EP-treated patients with low C2D1Top1+ CTCs had improved OS compared with those with higher positivity (14.1 months vs. 11.0 months, respectively; HR, 0.7; P = 0.02); this difference was not seen in TPC-treated patients (HR, 1.12; P = 0.48). Patients whose CTCs decreased from Top1Hi to Top1Lo at C2D1 had the greatest OS benefit from EP (HR, 0.57; P = 0.01). Conclusions: CTC Top1 expression following EP treatment may identify patients with MBC most likely to have an OS benefit. Clin Cancer Res; 24(14); 3348–57. ©2018 AACR.

Abstract Background: The need remains for novel agents that prolong survival and/or improve QOL in women with aBC. EP is a long-acting topoisomerase 1 inhibitor engineered to produce sustained exposure to irinotecan and its active metabolite SN38. Given previous efficacy seen in an earlier phase II trial in MBC, EP 145 mg/m2 every 3 weeks was compared to TPC (one of 7 single-agent regimens) in the randomized phase 3 BEACON study (NCT01492101). As reported at ASCO 2015 (abstract 1001), EP prolonged median overall survival by 2.1 months, although this did not reach statistical significance (12.4 vs 10.3 months; HR 0.87, p=0.08). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events were significantly less common with EP (48% vs 63% with TPC, p<0.001). We now present results of the QOL analyses. Methods: Patients completed validated health-related QoL (HRQoL) questionnaires, EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 3.0) and breast cancer-specific QLQ-BR23, pretreatment and every 8 weeks until progression, death or withdrawal of consent. Questionnaires were scored according to the EORTC manual. For each scale, raw scores were standardized via a linear transformation to a range from 0 to 100. Absolute scores and changes from baseline were analyzed longitudinally and categorically using a 5-point difference calculated by treatment group. Comparisons between treatment groups were conducted to evaluate the differences in global health status, functional scores and symptoms over time. Results: The majority of patients who were randomized (total: 733/852 [86%], EP: 378/429 [88%], TPC: 355/423 [84%]) completed at least one post-baseline HRQoL questionnaire. In the EORTC QLQ-C30, grade ≥ 3 AEs significantly impacted HRQoL measured by global health status and 5 additional functional domains. Of the six domains, compared to TPC in a longitudinal analysis, EP was statistically superior in the mean treatment effect through Week 32 in global health status p=0.02 and physical functioning scale p=0.01. EP was also numerically superior in all other scales. In EORTC QLQ-C30 and BR-23, a total of 13 symptoms were measured and categorically analyzed. There were no treatment differences in 7 of 13 symptom scales. EP was associated with worsening of 3 symptom scales: appetite loss, nausea/vomiting, and diarrhea. TPC was associated with worsening of 2 symptom scales: dyspnea and systemic side effects. Conclusions: In the phase 3 BEACON trial comparing EP to TPC, the more favorable toxicity profile of EP resulted in an improvement in global health status and physical function (results of the symptom scales confirmed the different toxicities of the two arms). EP remains a promising investigational therapy for aBC. Citation Format: Cortes J, Awada A, Perez EA, Rugo HS, Twelves C, Im S-A, Zhao C, Hoch U, Ney J, Hannah AL, O'Shaughnessy J. Impact of treatment on quality of life (QOL) in the BEACON study, a randomized phase III trial of etirinotecan pegol (EP) versus treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in patients (pts) with advanced breast cancer (aBC) whose disease has progressed following anthracycline (A), taxane (T) and capecitabine (C). [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-11-08.

Abstract Background: Etirinotecan pegol (EP) is a long-acting Top1 inhibitor providing sustained levels of active metabolite throughout the entire chemotherapy cycle. The phase 3 BEACON trial compared EP to treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in patients with advanced breast cancer, demonstrating a non-statistically significant 2.1 month difference in survival favoring EP in the intent to treat population. A novel aspect of the BEACON trial is to explore the utility of biomarkers measured in CTCs for predicting efficacy with EP. Pre- and post-treatment CTCs were isolated from blood of 77% of the 852 BEACON patients. Target-specific pharmacodynamic biomarkers for EP measured in CTCs were analyzed to identify patients most responsive to treatment with EP. Methods: Donation of blood samples for CTC analysis was voluntary. Participating BEACON patients had serial (baseline, Cycle 2 Day 1 [C2D1], Cycle 4 Day 1 [C4D1], End of Treatment) 7.5-mL whole blood samples drawn in EDTA tubes and shipped within 96 hours ambient to ApoCell (Houston, TX) for processing. PBMCs were separated by Ficoll® gradient, and CTCs were isolated using ApoStream® technology. Isolated cells were deposited on three slides and stained for DAPI, CD45, cytokeratin markers, as well as Top1, Top2, Ki67, γH2AX, Rad51, ABCG2, and TUNEL. Biomarkers were quantified by iCys® laser scanning cytometer equipped with image analysis software, and correlated with OS using Cox multiple regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses. Results: The CTC substudy yielded 611 pre-treatment, 519 C2D1, 268 C4D1, and 431 End of Treatment samples. Among the successfully processed blood samples, 98% had detectable CTCs, with a median of 63, 46, 51, and 57 CTCs/mL at baseline, C2D1, C4D1, and End of Treatment, respectively. Cox regression analyses of CTC number and percentage of Top1, Top2, Ki67, or TUNEL positive CTCs identified a correlation for post-treatment number of Top1-positive CTCs with OS in patients receiving EP. To assess the impact of Top1-positive CTCs, patients were classified as Top1-High (> median) or Top1-Low (≤ median) based on the percent of Top1-positive CTCs at baseline. Among the Top1-High patients at baseline, significantly improved OS (HR 0.54, p=0.007) was observed for those who converted to Top1-Low after their first treatment with EP (C2D1), but not TPC (HR 1.12, p=0.613). These results suggest that decreased number of Top1-positive CTCs may reflect EP target engagement with Top1, as these patients derived the most benefit from treatment. Conclusions: CTC collection and analysis was successfully incorporated into the phase 3 BEACON study, with 77% patient participation. CTC detection rate using ApoStream® was high, permitting evaluation of biomarkers at baseline and post-treatment. Significantly improved OS was observed in patients who had a decreased number of Top1-positive CTCs following cycle 1 of EP. Citation Format: Rugo HS, Cortes J, Awada A, O'Shaughnessy J, Twelves C, Im S-A, Hannah AL, Lu L, Sy S, Caygill K, Zajchowski D, Davis DW, Hoch U, Perez EA. Early change in topoisomerase 1 (Top1) positive circulating tumor cells (CTCs) is associated with overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced breast cancer after treatment with etirinotecan pegol. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-13-02.

Abstract Background: Etirinotecan pegol (EP) is the first long-acting topoisomerase 1-inhibitor providing sustained level of active metabolite that concentrate in the tumor for an entire chemotherapy cycle. In a Phase 2 study (Lancet Oncology 2013), EP demonstrated a 29% overall response rate in patients with metastatic breast cancer, leading to the Phase 3 global BEACON study in this population. Detection of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) using immunomagnetic EpCAM-based methods have been conceptually accepted as a "liquid tumor biopsy". To circumvent the limited recovery of CTCs these methods provide for molecular profiling applications, we isolated CTCs based on an antibody-independent, continuous flow dielectrophoresis (DEP) technology (ApoStream®). We developed quantitative multiplex immunofluorescent assays for target-specific pharmacodynamics (PD) biomarkers for EP in CTCs isolated pre- and post-treatment. Here we present the distribution of the PD biomarkers in CTC samples collected from BEACON patients. Methods: Donation of blood samples for CTC analysis was voluntary. BEACON patients participating in the substudy had serial (pre-dose, Cycle 2 Day 1, Cycle 4 Day 1, End of Treatment) 7.5-mL whole blood samples drawn in EDTA tubes and shipped ambient to ApoCell (Houston, TX) within 96 hrs for processing. PBMCs were separated by Ficoll® gradient, and CTCs were isolated using ApoStream® technology. Isolated cells were deposited on three slides and stained for DAPI, CD45, and cytokeratin markers, as well as 2-3 of the seven PD markers, and analyzed by iCys® laser scanning cytometer equipped with image analysis software. CTC count, mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) of PD biomarkers, and % marker-positive cells were analyzed for their distribution. Results: 75% of the 852 BEACON patients participated in the CTC substudy, yielding 649 pre-treatment CTC samples. As of Mar14, 538 Cycle 2 Day 1, 281 Cycle 4 Day 1, and 394 End of Treatment samples were collected. 98% of pre-treatment blood samples were successfully processed. 97% had detectable CTCs, with a median of 504 CTCs (interquartile range: 128-1432). PD markers could be analyzed in 83-92% of samples after implementing a minimum requirement of 10 CTCs analyzed. Staining was positive for Top1, Top2, μH2Ax, Rad51, ABCG2, Ki67, and TUNEL in 82%, 71%, 14%, 30%, 20%, 56%, and 94% of samples, respectively. Percent of marker-positive cells varied from 0.2-69%, with 6- to 37-fold interquartile ranges. Median MFI in these cells varied between 25x103 and 100x103, with 1.2- to 1.6-fold interquartile ranges. Conclusions: CTC collection was successfully incorporated into the BEACON study, with 75% patient participation. CTC detection rate using ApoStream® was high, permitting evaluation of biomarkers at baseline and over time. EP target-specific PD biomarkers can be measured in CTCs isolated from patients participating in BEACON and will be assessed for their potential to predict clinical response. Final BEACON efficacy and safety results are expected in early 2015, which will allow further analysis of CTCs with patient outcome (response, PFS, OS) and change in CTCs at time of progression. Citation Format: Edith A Perez, Katie Caygill, Alison L Hannah, Javier Cortes, Ahmad Awada, Joyce O'Shaughnessy, Christopher Twelves, Hope Rugo, Seock-Ah Im, Kenna Anderes, Darren W Davis, Ute Hoch. Etirinotecan pegol target-specific pharmacodynamic biomarkers in circulating tumor cells from patients with metastatic breast cancer in the phase 3 BEACON study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-10-03.

Purpose This phase III randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00337103) compared eribulin with capecitabine in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients and Methods Women with MBC who had received prior anthracycline- and taxane-based therapy were randomly assigned to receive eribulin or capecitabine as their first-, second-, or third-line chemotherapy for advanced/metastatic disease. Stratification factors were human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) status and geographic region. Coprimary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results Median OS times for eribulin (n = 554) and capecitabine (n = 548) were 15.9 and 14.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.00; P = .056). Median PFS times for eribulin and capecitabine were 4.1 and 4.2 months, respectively (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.25; P = .30). Objective response rates were 11.0% for eribulin and 11.5% for capecitabine. Global health status and overall quality-of-life scores over time were similar in the treatment arms. Both treatments had manageable safety profiles consistent with their known adverse effects; most adverse events were grade 1 or 2. Conclusion In this phase III study, eribulin was not shown to be superior to capecitabine with regard to OS or PFS.

Abstract Background: The Phase III trial (NCT00337103) compared eribulin (E) with capecitabine (C) in patients (pts) with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in the 1st-, 2nd-, and 3rd-line setting. Median overall survival (OS) was 15.9 and 14.5 months (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.77, 1.00; P = 0.056) and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.1 and 4.2 months (HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.93, 1.25; P = 0.30) for E and C, respectively. This analysis compares toxicity and efficacy of E and C in relation to age. Material and methods: In this post-hoc exploratory analysis, the effect of age on the incidence of adverse events (AEs), OS, PFS, and objective response rate (ORR) with E and C were analyzed for two age groups: ≤65 years (E, n = 468; C, n = 491) and >65 years (E, n = 86; C, n = 57). For OS and PFS, analyses were stratified by HER2 and geographic region. Results: With increasing age, the proportion of pts with worse performance status (PS ≥1: 54.5% vs 69.2% for ≤65 and >65 years, respectively), ER+ (47.4% vs 57.3%), and PgR+ MBC (41.3% vs 45.5%) increased, and the proportion with triple-negative MBC decreased (26.6% vs 20.3%). With both treatments, AEs were reported in a higher proportion of pts in the older age group, this becoming more apparent for grade 3+ AEs (E: 64.6% vs 70.2%, and C: 45.0% vs 54.4% for ≤65 and >65 respectively). With E, there was a trend for increased incidence of grade 3/4 neutropenia (45.0% vs 50.0%) and leukopenia (13.7% vs 22.6%) but, in contrast, decreased peripheral sensory neuropathy (3.9% vs 1.2%) with increasing age. For C, there was a trend for increased palmar-plantar erythrodysethesia syndrome (total: 44.4% vs 50.9%; grade 3/4: 14.1% vs 17.5%), and grade 3/4 fatigue (1.8% vs 7.0%) and diarrhea (4.7% vs 10.5%) with increasing age; emesis and nausea were similar for both age groups. Dose adjustments due to AEs with E were slightly higher in the older age group: withdrawals 7.4% vs 10.7%; dose reductions 31.1% vs 36.9%; and dose delays 30.9% vs 36.9%. With C, there was a trend for an increased incidence of withdrawals (9.2% vs 21.1%) and dose delays (34.2% vs 49.1%) due to AEs with increasing age: the incidence of dose reductions was slightly higher in the older age group (31.3% vs 36.8%). In an unadjusted analysis, a trend for improved OS with E vs C was observed in both subgroups (≤65 years: median 15.8 vs 14.5 months; HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.78, 1.04; P = 0.16, and >65 years: median 18.4 vs 14.1 months; HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.50, 1.12; P = 0.16). PFS and ORR for E and C were: median PFS: E, 4.0 and 5.4 months; C, 4.2 and 5.9 months; ORR: E, 10.9% and 11.6%; C, 11.6% and 10.5%, in the ≤65 and >65 groups respectively. Conclusions: This exploratory and unadjusted analysis suggests a trend for improved OS with E in both younger and older pts with MBC. With both treatments there was a suggestion that AEs were reported in a higher proportion of pts in the older age group, this becoming more apparent for grade 3+ events. Specifically, these data suggest an increased incidence of grade 3/4 diarrhea, dose delays, and study withdrawal due to AEs in pts treated with C, and potentially suggest that with E there may be less difference between the AE profile in younger vs older pts than with C. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr P3-13-04.

Abstract Background A Phase III trial (Study 301; NCT00337103) in MBC comparing eribulin (E) with capecitabine (C) showed a trend for improved overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.88; 95% CI 0.77, 1.00; P = 0.056) but not progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.93, 1.25; P = 0.30) with E. In order to investigate this apparent discordance, post-hoc analyses assessed the effect of PPT and events defining disease progression on OS. Methods Pts with locally advanced or MBC who had received an anthracycline and a taxane (≤2 prior chemotherapy regimens for advanced disease), were randomized to E (554) or C (548). Co-primary endpoints were OS and PFS. The impact of PPT on OS was assessed by analysis of exploratory PPT subgroups. Analyses of OS sensitivity censoring at time of PPT, and OS adjusted by PPT as a time-dependent covariate in a Cox regression model, were performed. The relationship between OS and progression events (appearance of a “new” lesion or metastasis [NM]; increase in size of pre-existing lesions [IPEL]; or other [death, clinical progression, or censored]) was investigated using Cox regression. Results PPT was received by 70% and 62% of E and C pts, respectively. For E pts, there were no significant OS differences by PPT (Table 1). Excluding 56 pts (22 E, 34 C) who received anti-HER2 therapy as PPT from the intent-to-treat OS analysis, OS was longer with E (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.76, 0.99; nominal P = 0.03). OS sensitivity analysis censoring at time of PPT was consistent with the overall study results (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.65, 1.03). Assessment of the overall effect of PPT, adjusting by PPT as a time-dependent covariate in a Cox regression model, showed that OS was longer with E (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.75, 0.97; nominal P = 0.02). Progression due to NM or IPEL occurred in 271 and 147 of E pts, and 285 and 129 of C pts, respectively. Median OS was similar between arms in pts with IPEL and longer with E vs C in pts with NM (Table 2). Pts who progressed due to NM were at higher risk of death (HR 2.12; 95% CI 1.84, 2.43; nominal P<0.01). Conclusions Treatment with C or any other PPT after progression on E did not account for the trend in OS benefit with E observed in the primary analysis. Pts who progressed with NM had a worse prognosis than those with IPEL. The appearance of NM was highly correlated with OS, and the apparent discordance between PFS and OS seems to be related to these different progression events. Tab 1: OS by PPT after EPPTAll ptsC as 1stOther than C as 1stC at any timeOther than C at any timeNoneN554221169275115164Median OS, months (95% CI)15.9 (15.2, 17.6)18.3 (15.8, 20.9)19.9 (17.6, 24.0)19.6 (17.6, 21.5)18.0 (15.4, 22.7)7.4 (6.2, 9.1) Tab 2: OS by progression event Progression event NMIPELOther ECECECN271285147129136134Median OS, months (95% CI)15.5 (14.2, 17.5)12.9 (11.3, 14.5)17.4 (14.4, 19.7)17.4 (15.3, 20.9)16.7 (14.8, 24.2)15.5 (11.7, 18.3)HR (95% CI)0.81 (0.68, 0.97)1.13 (0.87, 1.46)0.78 (0.59, 1.03)Nominal P -value0.020.350.08Time to NM or death, months (95% CI)5.8 (5.2, 6.5)5.2 (4.3, 5.9)NANAHR (95% CI)0.90 (0.77, 1.05)NANANominal P-value0.17NANA Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr P3-13-03.

Abstract Background: Hsp90 is a molecular chaperone protein required for the stabilization and activation of many proteins, referred to as Hsp90 ‘clients’, such as HER2, HIF1-a, EGFR, ER, PI3K, AKT, P53 and VEGFR. The drug candidate, ganetespib is a novel triazolone inhibitor of Hsp90, with over 700 patients treated to date. Ganetespib has shown activity in preclinical models of HER2+, ER+/PR+ and TNBC. Early clinical trials documented ganetespib single agent activity in heavily pretreated HER2+ and TNBC patients. Ganetespib has been well tolerated in clinical trials with a favorable safety profile. This efficacy-screening study is designed to provide further evidence of ganetespib activity and identify potentially predictive biomarkers in metastatic breast cancer (BC). Methods: The ENCHANT-1 Trial is an international, first-line 2-cohort Phase 2 study in BC patients: Cohort A, HER2 amplified (n = 35), and Cohort B, TNBC (n = 35). Patients who present with previously untreated metastatic disease are eligible for treatment with ganetespib at 150 mg/m2 twice weekly on 3 out of 4 wks, for a total of up to 12 wks. Primary endpoint: ORR assessed using RECIST1.1 criteria. Key secondary endpoints include metabolic response as assessed by PET/CT at wk 3 utilizing modified EORTC criteria. Disease progression (PD) at wk 3 by PET imaging indicates discontinuation of study therapy, and is performed to quickly offer patients with metabolic PD a standard of care treatment. The study is designed as Simon 2-stage requiring at least one OR in 15 patients for the respective cohort to expand to 35 patients. A Steering Committee is established to oversee the overall study and review the interim results. Results: The study was initiated in 23 centers globally. At the time of submission, a total of 17 patients had been enrolled; TNBC (n = 15) and HER2 (n = 2). Here we report the interim analysis in the TNBC cohort. The median age was 54 years (range 30 -77) with ECOG PS 0 (n = 7/15). Most patients (n = 9) presented with de novo metastatic disease. 5 patients were not evaluable for PET assessment (3 had not yet reached wk 3 and 2 withdrawn before wk 3 for clinical progression), and 9 patients were not evaluable for objective response at wk 6 (3 withdrawn before or at wk 3 for clinical progression and 6 had not yet reached wk 6 evaluation). In the 10 patients with evaluable PET imaging, 9 patients achieved metabolic (m) response (2 mPR, 4 mSD with dominant tumor shrinkage and 3 SD) and one patient with mPD. In the 6 patients evaluable for OR at wk 6, one patient achieved PR, 2 SD and 3 PD. Treatment with ganetespib was well tolerated; the most common AEs were mild or moderate diarrhea (8/15, 53%), fatigue (5/15, 33%), decreased appetite (4/15, 27%), insomnia (4/15, 27%), and nausea (4/15, 27%). Conclusion: Ganetespib single agent was generally well tolerated and showed anti-tumor activity TNBC patients as early as 3 weeks following treatment. PET seems to be a good tool to screen antitumor activity of new agents in early settings rather that in heavily pretreated patients. The TNBC cohort has met the protocol criteria for proceeding to stage 2. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr P2-16-23.

Abstract Background NKTR-102 is a next-generation topoisomerase I inhibitor-polymer conjugate with a markedly reduced Cmax and a continuous exposure profile compared to irinotecan. A phase 2 trial of single-agent NKTR-102 compared a dose of 145 mg/m2 every 2w or every 3w in 3rd-line MBC (Awada et al, ASCO 2011). Overall the ORR was 29% (including 3% CR) with the prior ATC subset demonstrating an ORR of 31%. Dosing every 3w was better tolerated; in this arm, median PFS equaled 5.3m and median OS equaled 13.1m. Trial Design: NKTR-102 will be compared to TPC in an open-label, randomized, parallel, two arm multicenter Phase 3 pivotal study in pts with previously treated locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. Key Entry Criteria: Adult females, with ECOG 0 or 1 with adequate liver, kidney and marrow function. All patients must have received prior therapy with an anthracycline (in neo/adjuvant or metastatic setting or both), a taxane (in neo/adjuvant or metastatic setting or both) and capecitabine (in neo/adjuvant or locally advanced/metastatic setting or both) unless not medically appropriate or explicitly contraindicated for the patient. All chemotherapy- and radiation-related toxicities must have resolved to ≤ Grade 1, except for stable sensory neuropathy ≤ Grade 2 and alopecia. Pts with brain metastases may be eligible, if stable for prior 4 weeks without steroids. Pts with Grade ≥ 2 pre-existing diarrhea or receiving chronic anti-diarrheal supportive care are not eligible. Statistical Methods: The primary efficacy endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include ORR by RECIST v1.1 and PFS. Pts will be randomized 1:1 to NKTR-102 given IV at 145 mg/m2 over 90-min every 21 days or TPC. Patients randomized to TPC will receive single agent chemotherapy, limited to choice of one of the following 5 agents: eribulin, ixabepilone, vinorelbine, gemcitabine, or a taxane. The investigator must decide which agent will be given to the patient prior to randomization. Pts will be stratified by geographical region and disease characteristics. Target Accrual: Approximately 840 patients (420 pts per treatment arm) will be randomized in order to obtain 615 deaths (alpha = 0.05; power 90% with one interim analysis scheduled when 50% of the deaths have occurred). PK sampling will be performed in a subset of pts and blood and/or tumor samples are planned for potential predictive markers of response and toxicity. Enrollment is expected to remain open until the end of 2013. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2011;71(24 Suppl):Abstract nr OT3-01-07.