Citations

Abstract BACKGROUND New therapies are needed for meningioma since treatment options are limited once patients have exhausted surgery and radiation. FAK, CDK4/6 and RAF/MEK represent potential targets because of synthetic lethality with NF2, loss of CDKN2A, and activation of MAPK signaling pathway in meningioma, respectively. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of targeting FAK, CDK4/6 and RAF/MEK as monotherapies and combination therapies in traditional and patient-derived cell lines and xenografts. METHODS In vitro, cell viability and proliferation assays were used to test abemaciclib (CDK4/6 inhibitor), defactinib (FAK inhibitor) and VS-6766 (RAF/MEK inhibitor) as monotherapy and in combination. To better recapitulate the meningioma microenvironment, targeted agents were evaluated with Matrigel, an artificial extracellular matrix. The efficacy of VS-4718 (in vivo formulation of defactinib) and abemaciclib were evaluated in a subcutaneous IOMM-lee meningioma model (having CDKN2A loss) in nude mice. Furthermore, we are establishing cell cultures and patient-derived cell and xenograft (PDX) models using freshly-resected tissue from patients with recurrent or high-grade (WHO grade 2-3) meningiomas. RESULTS In vitro evaluation identified the combination of defactinib with abemaciclib resulted in a synergistic decrease in cell viability relative to each monotherapy alone, while the combination of defactinib+VS-6766 was not beneficial. The presence of Matrigel enhanced the sensitivity of all three agents. In vivo, we observed improved survival in mice treated with abemaciclib vs control (45 days vs 26 days; p=0.03), as well as combination of VS-4718 + abemaciclib vs control (44 days vs 26 days; p=0.04, Gehan-Breslow-Wilcoxon test). We did not observe survival extension with VS-4718 monotherapy. Lastly, we successfully established an orthotopic meningioma PDX using a WHO Grade 3 tumor for evaluation of novel therapies in meningioma. CONCLUSION Abemaciclib showed promising efficacy in preclinical meningioma xenografts with CDKN2A loss. Studies to evaluate these therapies in other orthotopic models are underway.

AbstractBackgroundIdentifying patient‐ and disease‐specific characteristics associated with clinical trial enrollment of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer may target efforts to improve accrual.MethodsAlliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (Alliance) trials opened from January 1, 2000, and closed before January 1, 2018, for common AYA cancers were identified. Proportions of AYAs (aged 18–39 years old) versus non‐AYAs (aged ≥40 years old) enrolled by cancer type were summarized by descriptive statistics. Among studies with ≥20 AYAs enrolled, demographic and disease characteristics of AYAs versus non‐AYAs were compared with χ2 and Kruskal–Wallis tests. A qualitative review was also conducted of therapeutic trials included in analysis in PubMed through December 31, 2021, that reported AYA‐specific survival.ResultsAmong 188 trials enrolling 40,396 patients, AYAs represented 11% (4468 of 40,396) of accrual. AYA accrual varied by cancer type (leukemia, 23.6%; breast, 9.9%; lymphoma, 14.8%; colorectal, 6.2%; central nervous system, 8.1%; melanoma, 11.8%; sarcoma, 12%). Across ages, the proportion of Black and Hispanic patients enrolled was 1%–10%. Compared to non‐AYAs, AYAs in breast and colorectal cancer trials were less likely to be White and more likely to be Hispanic. Disease characteristics differed by age for selected trials. Two trials reported AYA‐specific survival, with no significant differences observed by age.ConclusionsAYA accrual to Alliance trials was comparable to or exceeded population‐based, age‐specific prevalence estimates for most cancer types. Greater proportional representation of Hispanic and non‐White patients among AYAs reflects US demographic trends. The small number of minority patients enrolled across ages underscores the persistent challenge of ensuring equitable access to trials, including for AYAs.

PURPOSE The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria for high-grade gliomas (RANO-HGG) and low-grade gliomas (RANO-LGG) were developed to improve reliability of response assessment in glioma trials. Over time, some limitations of these criteria were identified, and challenges emerged regarding integrating features of the modified RANO (mRANO) or the immunotherapy RANO (iRANO) criteria. METHODS Informed by data from studies evaluating the different criteria, updates to the RANO criteria are proposed (RANO 2.0). RESULTS We recommend a standard set of criteria for both high- and low-grade gliomas, to be used for all trials regardless of the treatment modalities being evaluated. In the newly diagnosed setting, the postradiotherapy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), rather than the postsurgical MRI, will be used as the baseline for comparison with subsequent scans. Since the incidence of pseudoprogression is high in the 12 weeks after radiotherapy, continuation of treatment and confirmation of progression during this period with a repeat MRI, or histopathologic evidence of unequivocal recurrent tumor, are required to define tumor progression. However, confirmation scans are not mandatory after this period nor for the evaluation of treatment for recurrent tumors. For treatments with a high likelihood of pseudoprogression, mandatory confirmation of progression with a repeat MRI is highly recommended. The primary measurement remains the maximum cross-sectional area of tumor (two-dimensional) but volumetric measurements are an option. For IDH wild-type glioblastoma, the nonenhancing disease will no longer be evaluated except when assessing response to antiangiogenic agents. In IDH-mutated tumors with a significant nonenhancing component, clinical trials may require evaluating both the enhancing and nonenhancing tumor components for response assessment. CONCLUSION The revised RANO 2.0 criteria refine response assessment in gliomas.

PURPOSE The Individualized Screening Trial of Innovative Glioblastoma Therapy (INSIGhT) is a phase II platform trial that uses response adaptive randomization and genomic profiling to efficiently identify novel therapies for phase III testing. Three initial experimental arms (abemaciclib [a cyclin-dependent kinase [CDK]4/6 inhibitor], neratinib [an epidermal growth factor receptor [EGFR]/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 inhibitor], and CC-115 [a deoxyribonucleic acid–dependent protein kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor]) were simultaneously evaluated against a common control arm. We report the results for each arm and examine the feasibility and conduct of the adaptive platform design. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with newly diagnosed O 6 -methylguanine–DNA methyltransferase-unmethylated glioblastoma were eligible if they had tumor genotyping to identify prespecified biomarker subpopulations of dominant glioblastoma signaling pathways (EGFR, phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, and CDK). Initial random assignment was 1:1:1:1 between control (radiation therapy and temozolomide) and the experimental arms. Subsequent Bayesian adaptive randomization was incorporated on the basis of biomarker-specific progression-free survival (PFS) data. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), and one-sided P values are reported. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT02977780 ). RESULTS Two hundred thirty-seven patients were treated (71 control; 73 abemaciclib; 81 neratinib; 12 CC-115) in years 2017-2021. Abemaciclib and neratinib were well tolerated, but CC-115 was associated with ≥ grade 3 treatment-related toxicity in 58% of patients. PFS was significantly longer with abemaciclib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.06; one-sided P = .046) and neratinib (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.02; one-sided P = .033) relative to the control arm but there was no PFS benefit with CC-115 (one-sided P = .523). None of the experimental therapies demonstrated a significant OS benefit ( P > .05). CONCLUSION The INSIGhT design enabled efficient simultaneous testing of three experimental agents using a shared control arm and adaptive randomization. Two investigational arms had superior PFS compared with the control arm, but none demonstrated an OS benefit. The INSIGhT design may promote improved and more efficient therapeutic discovery in glioblastoma. New arms have been added to the trial.

Abstract BACKGROUND The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria for high-grade gliomas (RANO-HGG) and low-grade gliomas (RANO-LGG) were developed to improve reliability of response assessment in glioma trials. Over time some limitations of these criteria were identified, and uncertainty emerged regarding integrating features of the modified RANO (mRANO) or the immunotherapy RANO (iRANO) criteria. MATERIAL AND METHODS Informed by data from a cohort of glioblastoma patients and other evaluations of RANO criteria that allowed evaluation of features of the different criteria, the RANO working group developed updates to the RANO criteria (RANO 2.0). RESULTS Based on the 2021 WHO classification of gliomas, we recommend a standard set of criteria for both high and low-grade gliomas, to be used for all trials regardless of the treatment modalities being evaluated. In the newly diagnosed setting, the post-radiotherapy MRI, rather than the post-surgical MRI, will be used as the baseline for future comparison. Since the incidence of pseudoprogression is high in the 12 weeks following radiotherapy, continuation of treatment and confirmation of progression during this period with a repeat MRI, or histopathologic evidence of unequivocal recurrent tumor, is required to define tumor progression. However, confirmation scans are not mandatory after this period nor for recurrent tumors. For treatments with a high likelihood of pseudoprogression, mandatory confirmation of progression with a repeat MRI is highly recommended. The primary measurement remains the maximum cross-sectional area of tumor (2-dimensional) but volumetric measurements are an option. For IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, the non-enhancing disease will no longer be evaluated. In IDH-mutated tumors with a significant non-enhancing component, clinical trials may require evaluating both the enhancing and non-enhancing tumor components for response assessment. CONCLUSION These criteria represent a work in progress that will hopefully improve the assessment of response in glioma trials. Future updates will incorporate novel developments, advanced imaging techniques, and endpoints as they become validated.

Abstract The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria for high-grade gliomas (RANO-HGG) and low-grade gliomas (RANO-LGG) were developed to improve the reliability of response assessment in glioma trials. Over time some limitations of these criteria were identified, and uncertainty emerged regarding integrating features of the modified RANO (mRANO) or the immunotherapy RANO (iRANO) criteria. Informed by data from a cohort of glioblastoma patients and other evaluations of RANO criteria that allowed evaluation of features of the different criteria, we propose updates to the RANO criteria (RANO 2.0). Based on the 2021 WHO classification of gliomas, we recommend a standard set of criteria for both high and low-grade gliomas, to be used for all trials regardless of the treatment modalities being evaluated. In the newly diagnosed setting, the post-radiotherapy MRI, rather than the post-surgical MRI, will be used as the baseline for future comparison. Since the incidence of pseudoprogression is high in the 12 weeks following radiotherapy, continuation of treatment and confirmation of progression during this period with a repeat MRI, or histopathologic evidence of unequivocal recurrent tumor, is required to define tumor progression. However, confirmation scans are not mandatory after this period nor for recurrent tumors. For treatments with a high likelihood of pseudoprogression, mandatory confirmation of progression with a repeat MRI is an option. The primary measurement remains the maximum cross-sectional area of tumor (2-dimensional) but volumetric measurements are an option. For IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, the non-enhancing disease will no longer be evaluated. In IDH-mutated tumors with a significant non-enhancing component, clinical trials may require evaluating both the enhancing and non-enhancing tumor components for response assessment.

3109 Background: WSD0922-Fu is an oral, central nervous system (CNS)-penetrant, small molecule, ATP non-competitive, reversible EGFR inhibitor which potently inhibits EGFR aberrations specific to non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and high-grade astrocytoma (HGA). We report initial results of a first-in-human phase 1 dose-escalation trial (NCT04197934) in patients with EGFR aberrant recurrent HGA and NSCLC. Methods: Adult patients with either recurrent EGFR mutant NSCLC with CNS metastases or recurrent EGFR mutant and/or EGFR amplified HGA were enrolled. WSD0922-Fu was orally administered, and dose escalated in cohorts based on a standard 3+3 design to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Toxicities were graded per CTCAE v5.0 and preliminary efficacy was based on modified RANO criteria or RECIST 1.1 as appropriate. Results: 25 patients (17 HGA, 8 NSCLC) were enrolled and treated in six cohorts (40 mg once daily to 320 mg twice daily, 28-day cycles). The median age was 57 years (range 39-75 years). 24% were female and 36% were ECOG 0. For patients with HGA, all patients were previously treated with radiation and temozolomide; the median number of prior lines of systemic therapy was 1 (range 1-4). For patients with NSCLC, all patients were previously treated with an EGFR inhibitor (prior osimertinib 88%); the median number of prior lines of systemic therapy was 1.5 (range 1-6). The median duration of exposure to WSD0922-Fu among all patients was 54 days (range 2-258 days). The most common (≥25%) treatment-related adverse events included fatigue (68%), acneiform rash (68%), diarrhea (52%), nausea (48%) and pruritis (28%). The frequency of severe AEs was dose dependent. The most common Grade 3+ AEs (≥10%) included lymphopenia (16%), acneiform rash (12%), headache (12%) and diarrhea (12%). The MTD was defined as 160 mg twice daily. At Cycle 1 Day 15 for patients treated at this dose level, the mean terminal elimination half-life (%CV) in the plasma was 31.6 h (102%) (median 14.5 h; range 6.2-78.7 h). The mean Cmax, Tmax, oral clearance at steady state, and AUC (0-12 h) (%CV) were 4513 ng/mL (50%), 2.0 hr (69%), 6.9 L/hr/m2 (42%), and 28084 h*ng/mL (52%), respectively. Oral clearance at steady state was inversely related with dose, suggesting either inhibition or saturation of clearance processes. Among patients treated at MTD or higher dose levels and with available response data, 100% (5/5) of patients with NSCLC demonstrated clinical benefit (SD + PR) while 60% of patients had partial responses (intracranial and extracranial). Furthermore, prolonged stable disease (9 cycles) was observed in a patient with EGFRvIII mutant GBM. Conclusions: The MTD for WSD0922-Fu monotherapy is 160 mg BID. Preliminary efficacy was observed in patients with osimertinib-resistant NSCLC and EGFRvIII mutant HGA. Enrollment to expansion cohorts is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT04197934 .

TPS2085 Background: Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common and aggressive form of brain tumor in adults. Despite maximal surgical resection, irradiation, and chemotherapy, median overall survival (OS) remains at only 30 weeks for recurrent GBM (rGBM) patients, emphasizing the need for novel treatments. GBM tumors are immunologically ‘cold,’ in that they have an immune-suppressive microenvironment with a low number of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL). Interleukin 7 (IL-7) plays a key role in T cell development and survival. The physiological level of IL-7 increases to stimulate T cell expansion in lymphopenic condition. Previous studies have shown that lymphopenic GBM patients have shorter survival. However, their IL-7 levels are unexpectedly low. Efineptakin alfa (NT-I7), a long-acting IL-7, has been shown to increase effector CD8 T cells and reduce suppressor T-regulatory cells in murine GBM models, with subsequently improved OS. Further, we recently completed a Phase I study which showed that NT-I7 is safe, well- tolerated, and increased absolute lymphocyte counts (ALC) in newly diagnosed GBM patients. Phase II dosing was determined through this Phase I study reaching maximum tolerated dose. Thus, we hypothesized that NT-I7 may reverse GBM-associated immune suppression and potentiate the effect of an immune checkpoint inhibitor, leading to an increase in TILs and improved survival. Our preliminary data suggests that combining NT-I7 with pembrolizumab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, improves survival in murine glioma models. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of combining NT-I7 and pembrolizumab in rGBM patients. Methods: This is an open-label single arm one-stage Phase II study of NT-I7 and pembrolizumab as neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy with surgery for adult patients with rGBM. We plan to enroll 30 evaluable patients, including a 6-patient safety run-in. Key eligibility criteria include candidates willing to undergo clinically indicated resection or biopsy, age ≥ 18 years, Karnofsky performance status ≥ 70, and dexamethasone dose > 2 mg/day ≤ 2 days prior to registration. The primary endpoint is a 9-month OS rate. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, objective response rate, changes in ALC, and adverse events profile. The correlative endpoints include studies to assess the anti-glioma immune response, changes in T cell subsets, T cell effector function, cytokine analysis, and immunohistochemical analysis of GBM tissue. Longitudinal cerebrospinal fluid proteomics is optional. This study opened on 1/20/2023. Two of the planned 30 patients had been enrolled by submission on 2/14/2023. Clinical trial information: NCT05465954 .

TPS2081 Background: Murine double minute 2 (MDM2) directly regulates the stability of the tumor suppressor p53, and dysregulation of this pathway can critically disrupt cellular response to genomic stress and lead to cell death. BI 907828 is a highly potent inhibitor of the MDM2-p53 interface that triggers accumulation of p53 and subsequent apoptosis in multiple GBM patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) with wild-type p53. Moreover, the combination of BI 907828 and radiotherapy provides significant survival extension in multiple orthotopic GBM PDXs. Methods: An integrated Phase 0/1 trial design is being used to evaluate the potential for BI 907828 to achieve a therapeutic concentration in brain tumor tissue and to test the safety of the combination with radiation. The co-primary endpoints for the Phase 0 study are i) measured total concentration of BI 907828 and ii) calculated unbound concentration of BI 907828 in contrast and non-contrast enhancing regions of tumor. Key inclusion criteria for the Phase 0 study are patients at least 18 years of age, ECOG performance status of 0 or 1, histologic or radiologic new diagnosis of GBM, and planned surgical resection. The first approximately 6 patients enrolled in the Phase 0 will be treated at the starting dose of 30 mg, and the future patients enrolled will be dosed at higher levels (45 mg or 60 mg) provided there are no safety concerns. If dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) are encountered, then a Bayesian Logistic Regression Model (BLRM) with overdose control will be used to guide the dose level decisions for the additional patients. Multiple, image-registered tumor samples and intra-operative plasma samples will be analyzed for BI 907828 by LC-MS/MS. Intra-tumoral variation in BI 907828 will be correlated with pharmacodynamic effects of MDM2 inhibition (elevation of p53, p21, MDM2, GDF15, PUMA). Those patients completing the Phase 0 study and who meet additional eligibility criteria can enroll on the Phase 1a portion of the study. The pathologic inclusion criteria are TP53 wild-type, IDH1/2 wild-type, MGMT unmethylated GBM. Co-primary endpoints for the Phase 1a trial are i) occurrence of DLTs during and within 21 days after completion of radiation therapy, and ii) occurrence of adverse events throughout the treatment period. Tolerability of inter-patient dose-escalation of BI 907828 (30, 45, 60 mg) combined with radiation therapy (60 Gy in 30 fractions) will be evaluated with dose-escalation guided by a two-parameter BLRM with overdose control. Patients will remain on BI 907828 monotherapy following completion of radiotherapy until progression. To date, two patients have enrolled on the Phase 0 study, and one patient went on to enroll on the Phase 1a portion of the study. Clinical trial information: NCT05376800 .