Novel Measurement of the Neutron Magnetic Form Factor from A=3 Mirror Nuclei

The electromagnetic form factors of the proton and neutron encode information on the spatial structure of their charge and magnetization distributions. While measurements of the proton are relatively straightforward, the lack of a free neutron target makes measurements of the neutron's electromagnetic structure more challenging and more sensitive to experimental or model-dependent uncertainties. Various experiments have attempted to extract the neutron form factors from scattering from the neutron in deuterium, with different techniques providing different, and sometimes large, systematic uncertainties. We present results from a novel measurement of the neutron magnetic form factor using quasielastic scattering from the mirror nuclei ^{3}H and ^{3}He, where the nuclear effects are larger than for deuterium but expected to largely cancel in the cross-section ratios. We extracted values of the neutron magnetic form factor for low-to-modest momentum transfer, 0.6 Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

S N Santiesteban University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire 03824, USA
S Li University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire 03824, USA Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720, USA
D Abrams University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22904, USA
S Alsalmi Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 44240, USA King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
D Androic University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
K Aniol California State University, Los Angeles, California 90032, USA
J Arrington Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720, USA Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, Illinois 60439, USA
T Averett William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia 23185, USA
C Ayerbe Gayoso William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia 23185, USA
J Bane University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37966, USA
S Barcus William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia 23185, USA
J Barrow University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37966, USA Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA
A Beck Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA
V Bellini INFN Sezione di Catania, Italy
H Bhatt Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, Mississippi 39762, USA
D Bhetuwal Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, Mississippi 39762, USA
D Biswas Hampton University, Hampton, Virginia 23669, USA
A Camsonne Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
J Castellanos Florida International University, Miami, Florida 33199, USA
J Chen William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia 23185, USA
J-P Chen Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
D Chrisman Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA
M E Christy Hampton University, Hampton, Virginia 23669, USA Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
C Clarke Stony Brook, State University of New York, New York 11794, USA
S Covrig Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
R Cruz-Torres Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720, USA Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA
D Day University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22904, USA
D Dutta Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, Mississippi 39762, USA
E Fuchey University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut 06269, USA
C Gal University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22904, USA
F Garibaldi INFN, Rome, Italy
T N Gautam Hampton University, Hampton, Virginia 23669, USA
T Gogami Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan
J Gomez Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
P Guèye Hampton University, Hampton, Virginia 23669, USA Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA
T J Hague Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 44240, USA
J O Hansen Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
F Hauenstein Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia 23529, USA
W Henry Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122, USA
D W Higinbotham Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
R J Holt Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, Illinois 60439, USA
C Hyde Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia 23529, USA
K Itabashi Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan
M Kaneta Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan
A Karki Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, Mississippi 39762, USA
A T Katramatou Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 44240, USA
C E Keppel Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
P M King Ohio University, Athens, Ohio 45701, USA
L Kurbany University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire 03824, USA
T Kutz Stony Brook, State University of New York, New York 11794, USA
N Lashley-Colthirst Hampton University, Hampton, Virginia 23669, USA
W B Li William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia 23185, USA
H Liu Columbia University, New York, New York 10027, USA
N Liyanage University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22904, USA
E Long University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire 03824, USA
A Lovato Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois 60439, USA Computational Science Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois 60439, USA INFN-TIFPA Trento Institute for Fundamental Physics and Applications, 38123 Trento, Italy
J Mammei University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2, Canada
P Markowitz Florida International University, Miami, Florida 33199, USA
R E McClellan Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
F Meddi INFN, Rome, Italy
D Meekins Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
R Michaels Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
M Mihovilovič Jožef Stefan Institute, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia Institut für Kernphysik, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, DE-55128 Mainz, Germany
A Moyer Christopher Newport University, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
S Nagao Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan
D Nguyen University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22904, USA
M Nycz Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 44240, USA
M Olson Saint Norbert College, De Pere, Wisconsin 54115, USA
L Ou Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA
V Owen William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia 23185, USA
C Palatchi University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22904, USA
B Pandey Hampton University, Hampton, Virginia 23669, USA
A Papadopoulou Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA
S Park Stony Brook, State University of New York, New York 11794, USA
T Petkovic University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
S Premathilake University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22904, USA
V Punjabi Norfolk State University, Norfolk, Virginia 23529, USA
R D Ransome Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08854, USA
P E Reimer Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, Illinois 60439, USA
J Reinhold Florida International University, Miami, Florida 33199, USA
S Riordan Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, Illinois 60439, USA
N Rocco Theoretical Physics Department, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, Illinois 60510, USA
V M Rodriguez División de Ciencias y Tecnología, Universidad Ana G. Méndez, Recinto de Cupey, San Juan 00926, Puerto Rico
A Schmidt Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA
B Schmookler Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA
E P Segarra Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA
A Shahinyan Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia
S Širca Jožef Stefan Institute, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, University of Ljubljana, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
K Slifer University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire 03824, USA
P Solvignon University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire 03824, USA
T Su Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 44240, USA
R Suleiman Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
L Tang Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
Y Tian Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York 13244, USA
W Tireman Northern Michigan University, Marquette, Michigan 49855, USA
F Tortorici INFN Sezione di Catania, Italy
Y Toyama Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan
K Uehara Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan
G M Urciuoli INFN, Rome, Italy
D Votaw Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA
J Williamson University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QQ Scotland, United Kingdom
B Wojtsekhowski Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
S Wood Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, Newport News, Virginia 23606, USA
Z H Ye Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, Illinois 60439, USA Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
J Zhang University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22904, USA
X Zheng University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22904, USA

Collapse

Attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination in adults with haematological malignancies

INTRODUCTION

Despite people with haematological malignancies being particularly vulnerable to severe COVID-19 infection and complications, vaccine hesitancy may be a barrier to optimal vaccination. This study explored attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination in people with haematological malignancies.

METHODS

People with haematological malignancies at nine Australian health services were surveyed between June and October, 2021. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were collected. Attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination were explored using the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale, and the Disease Influenced Vaccine Acceptance Scale-Six. Open-ended comments were qualitatively analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 869 people with haematological malignancies (mean age 64.2 years, 43.6% female) participated. Most participants (85.3%) reported that they had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Participants who were younger, spoke English as a non-dominant language, and had a shorter time since diagnosis were less likely to be vaccinated. Those who were female or spoke English as their non-dominant language reported greater vaccine side-effects concerns. Younger participants reported greater concerns about the vaccine impacting their treatment.

CONCLUSION

People with haematological malignancies reported high vaccine uptake, however, targeted education for specific participant groups may address vaccine hesitancy concerns, given the need for COVID-19 vaccine boosters.

A first-in-human phase 1 study of nofazinlimab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, in advanced solid tumors and in combination with regorafenib in metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

We assessed nofazinlimab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, in solid tumors and combined with regorafenib in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

METHODS

This phase 1 study comprised nofazinlimab dose escalation (phase 1a) and expansion (phase 1b), and regorafenib dose escalation (80 or 120 mg QD, days 1-21 of 28-day cycles) combined with 300-mg nofazinlimab Q4W (part 2a) to determine safety, efficacy, and RP2D.

RESULTS

In phase 1a (N = 21), no dose-limiting toxicity occurred from 1 to 10 mg/kg Q3W, with 200 mg Q3W determined as the monotherapy RP2D. In phase 1b (N = 87), 400-mg Q6W and 200-mg Q3W regimens were found comparable. In part 2a (N = 14), both regimens were deemed plausible RP2Ds. Fatigue was the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event (AE) in this study. Any-grade and grade 3/4 nofazinlimab-related AEs were 71.4% and 14.3%, 56.3% and 5.7%, and 57.1% and 21.4% in phases 1a, 1b, and part 2a, respectively. ORRs were 14.3% and 25.3% in phases 1a and 1b, respectively. In part 2a, no patients had radiological responses.

CONCLUSIONS

Nofazinlimab monotherapy was well tolerated and demonstrated preliminary anti-tumor activity in multiple tumor types. Regorafenib plus nofazinlimab had a manageable safety profile but was not associated with any response in mCRC.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTR ATION

Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03475251).

Selinexor for the treatment of recurrent or metastatic salivary gland tumors: Results from the GEMS-001 clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the activity of selinexor, an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export, in patients with recurrent or metastatic salivary gland tumors (SGT).

METHODS

GEMS-001 is an open-label Phase 2 study for patients with recurrent or metastatic SGT with two parts. In Part 1 of the protocol, patients had tumor samples profiled with targeted next generation sequencing as well as immunohistochemistry for androgen receptor, HER-2 and ALK. For Part 2, patients with no targeted therapies available were eligible to receive selinexor 60 mg given twice weekly every 28 days. The primary endpoint was objective response rate. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and prevalence of druggable alterations across SGT.

RESULTS

One hundred patients were enrolled in GEMS-001 and underwent genomic and immunohistochemistry profiling. A total of 21 patients who lacked available matched therapies were treated with selinexor. SGT subtypes (WHO classification) included adenoid cystic carcinoma (n = 10), salivary duct carcinoma (n = 3), acinic cell carcinoma (n = 2), myoepithelial carcinoma (n = 2), carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma (n = 2) and other (n = 2). Of 18 evaluable patients, stable disease (SD) was observed in 17 patients (94%) (SD ≥6 months in 7 patients (39%)). However, no objective responses were observed. The median PFS was 4.9 months (95% confidence interval, 3.4-10). The most common treatment-related Grade 1-2 adverse events were nausea [17 patients (81%)], fatigue [16 patients (76%)], and dysgeusia [12 patients (57%)]. Most common treatment-related Grade 3-4 adverse events were hyponatremia [3 patients (14%)], neutrophil count decrease [3 patients (14%)] and cataracts [2 patients (10%)]. No treatment-related deaths were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Although tumor reduction was observed across participants, single agent selinexor anti-tumor activity was limited.

The Disease Influenced Vaccine Acceptance Scale-Six (DIVAS-6): Validation of a Measure to Assess Disease-Related COVID-19 Vaccine Attitudes and Concerns

Patients with underlying comorbidities are particularly vulnerable to poor outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection. Despite the context-specific nature of vaccine hesitancy, there are currently no scales that incorporate disease or treatment-related hesitancy factors. We developed a six-item scale assessing disease-related COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and concerns (The Disease Influenced COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance Scale-Six: DIVAS-6). A survey incorporating the DIVAS-6 was completed by 4683 participants with severe and/or chronic illness (3560 cancer; 842 diabetes; 281 multiple sclerosis (MS)). The survey included the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale, demographic, disease-related, and vaccination status questions. The six items loaded onto two factors (disease complacency and vaccine vulnerability) using exploratory factor analysis and exploratory structural equation modeling. The two factors were internally consistent. Measurement invariance analysis showed the two factors displayed psychometric equivalence across the patient groups. Each factor significantly correlated with the two Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine scales, showing convergent validity. The summary score showed acceptable ability to discriminate vaccination status across diseases, with the total sample providing good-to-excellent discriminative ability. The DIVAS-6 has two factors measuring COVID-19 vaccine attitudes and concerns relating to potential complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection due to underlying disease (disease complacency) and vaccine-related impact on disease progression and treatment (vaccine vulnerability). This is the first validated scale to measure disease-related COVID-19 vaccine concerns and has been validated in people with cancer, diabetes, and MS. It is quick to administer and should assist with guiding information delivery about COVID-19 vaccination in medically vulnerable populations.

Recommendations for the use of next-generation sequencing in patients with metastatic cancer in the Asia-Pacific region: a report from the APODDC working group

INTRODUCTION

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) diagnostics have shown clinical utility in predicting survival benefits in patients with certain cancer types who are undergoing targeted drug therapies. Currently, there are no guidelines or recommendations for the use of NGS in patients with metastatic cancer from an Asian perspective. In this article, we present the Asia-Pacific Oncology Drug Development Consortium (APODDC) recommendations for the clinical use of NGS in metastatic cancers.

METHODS

The APODDC set up a group of experts in the field of clinical cancer genomics to (i) understand the current NGS landscape for metastatic cancers in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region; (ii) discuss key challenges in the adoption of NGS testing in clinical practice; and (iii) adapt/modify the European Society for Medical Oncology guidelines for local use. Nine cancer types [breast cancer (BC), gastric cancer (GC), nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC), ovarian cancer (OC), prostate cancer, lung cancer, and colorectal cancer (CRC) as well as cholangiocarcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)] were identified, and the applicability of NGS was evaluated in daily practice and/or clinical research. Asian ethnicity, accessibility of NGS testing, reimbursement, and socioeconomic and local practice characteristics were taken into consideration.

RESULTS

The APODDC recommends NGS testing in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Routine NGS testing is not recommended in metastatic BC, GC, and NPC as well as cholangiocarcinoma and HCC. The group suggested that patients with epithelial OC may be offered germline and/or somatic genetic testing for BReast CAncer gene 1 (BRCA1), BRCA2, and other OC susceptibility genes. Access to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors is required for NGS to be of clinical utility in prostate cancer. Allele-specific PCR or a small-panel multiplex-gene NGS was suggested to identify key alterations in CRC.

CONCLUSION

This document offers practical guidance on the clinical utility of NGS in specific cancer indications from an Asian perspective.

Operational Challenges of an Asia-Pacific Academic Oncology Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

The Asia-Pacific (APAC) region is a major focus for multinational clinical trials, although its cultural, linguistic, economic, and regulatory diversity pose significant challenges for trial conduct, particularly for academic clinical trials.

METHODS

We describe our experience running the investigator-initiated phase III randomized, fully accrued, Aspirin for Dukes C and high-risk Dukes B Colorectal cancer trial (ASCOLT, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00565708, N = 1,587), studying the benefit of aspirin in resected high-risk colorectal cancer. ASCOLT opened in 2008 and is the first large academic adjuvant trial fully conducted in the APAC region. Centrally coordinated by the Trial Management Team at the National Cancer Centre Singapore, it has involved 74 sites across 12 APAC countries/regions, including five middle-income countries.

RESULTS

Challenges encountered included regulatory complexity, communication and logistical barriers, limited funding and resources, disparate experience and infrastructure across sites, recruitment holds because of changes in local laws, patient attrition, and disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Over 100 contracts and 49 ethics board reviews were required, contributing to a lengthy prestudy preparation time of 2 years and start-up times of approximately 6 months per site. Some of the mitigating actions included engaging local cooperative groups (eg, the Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group in Australia and New Zealand) and seven contract research organizations to manage sites, regular communication with the central team, transition to electronic data management, and a centralized drug-dispensing system.

CONCLUSION

To ensure an efficient and patient-centered clinical trials environment in the APAC region and sustained growth, we suggest coordinated approaches to harmonize regulatory processes, APAC academic oncology trials consortia to streamline processes and provide governance, and ongoing commitment from governments, funding agents, and industry.

Abstract P3-07-15: Preliminary data from a Phase 1b dose escalation study of OP-1250, an oral CERAN, in combination with palbociclib in patients with advanced and/or metastatic estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer

Background: OP-1250 is a small molecule oral complete estrogen receptor antagonist (CERAN) that binds the ligand binding domain of the ER and completely blocks ER-driven transcriptional activity. CDK4/6 inhibitors in combination with endocrine therapy have improved progression free survival and overall survival for patients (pts) with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in the first- and second-line settings. However, most patients will progress and newer combinations such as with OP-1250 may provide improved clinical outcome. OP-1250 potently inactivates both wild-type ER and mutant forms of ER. The latter confers ligand independent activity and is a mechanism of resistance to standard of care endocrine therapies. In preclinical studies, OP-1250 in combination with palbociclib demonstrated synergistic activity in models of wild-type ER and those containing ESR1 activating mutations, and in models of brain metastasis. A Phase 1/2 monotherapy study of OP-1250 is ongoing in MBC subjects who have received 1 or more prior endocrine therapies (NCT04505826). Monotherapy is well tolerated and the recommended phase 2 dose is 120 mg QD. The aim of this combination trial is to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of OP-1250 in combination with palbociclib. Methods: Eligibility criteria include pts with MBC or locally advanced breast cancer who have received no more than 1 prior line of endocrine therapy (prior CDK4/6 inhibitors and one line of chemotherapy are permitted) and measurable or non-measurable disease. Using a 3+3 design, cohorts are sequentially enrolled, and pts receive escalating doses of OP-1250 orally QD continuously in combination with 125 mg of palbociclib orally for 21 of 28 days. Pts are evaluable for dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) if >75% of both treatments were administered within the first 28-day treatment cycle. Blood is collected for PK on cycle 1 days 1, 2 and cycle 2 days 15, 16 for OP-1250 and cycle 1 day 15 for palbociclib. PK profiles, exposure parameters, and drug-drug interactions (DDIs) are assessed. Pts are monitored for adverse events (AE) and tumor assessments (RECIST 1.1) are conducted every two cycles. Results: As of July 7, 2022, 9 pts were evaluable for DLTs after 28 days of treatment in dose levels 30 mg, 60 mg, and 90 mg of OP-1250 in combination with palbociclib. No DLTs occurred at any of the dose levels. As of May 13, 2022, of the 7 pt safety data set, the most common Grade 1/2 treatment emergent adverse events (TEAE), which occurred in 2 patients, were nausea, gastroesophageal reflux, vomiting, and fatigue. Grade 3 neutropenia occurred in 4 pts and all were attributed to palbociclib by the investigator. No Grade 4 events were observed. OP-1250 was highly bioavailable and showed dose proportional exposure in combination with palbociclib. The single and multiple dose exposure of OP-1250 was consistent with that observed in the monotherapy study, indicating an absence of effect of palbociclib on OP-1250 PK. 90 mg steady-state evaluation is ongoing. Palbociclib concentrations at steady state did not demonstrate a meaningful difference from published exposure parameters for the three dose levels evaluated, indicating an absence of DDI. Conclusions: In the first three cohorts of OP-1250 and palbociclib, the combination was well tolerated and no DLTs occurred. There were no clinically significant DDIs observed between OP-1250 and palbociclib at the doses evaluated and exposure of each drug was consistent with observed monotherapy exposure levels. Dose escalation of OP-1250 continues to 120 mg, to be followed by dose expansion. Updated data will be presented. (NCT05266105)

Citation Format: Arlene Chan, Daphne Day, Rina Hui, Nicole McCarthy, Rosalind Wilson, Demiana Faltaos, Morena Shaw, Caitlin Murphy. Preliminary data from a Phase 1b dose escalation study of OP-1250, an oral CERAN, in combination with palbociclib in patients with advanced and/or metastatic estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-07-15.

SAFFRON-103: a phase 1b study of the safety and efficacy of sitravatinib combined with tislelizumab in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Some patients with locally advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) respond poorly to anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) treatments. Combination with other agents may improve the outcomes. This open-label, multicenter, phase 1b trial investigated the combination of sitravatinib, a spectrum-selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor, plus anti-PD-1 antibody tislelizumab.

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC were enrolled (Cohorts A, B, F, H, and I; N=22-24 per cohort). Cohorts A and F included patients previously treated with systemic therapy, with anti-PD-(L)1-resistant/refractory non-squamous (cohort A) or squamous (cohort F) disease. Cohort B included patients previously treated with systemic therapy, with anti-PD-(L)1-naïve non-squamous disease. Cohorts H and I included patients without prior systemic therapy for metastatic disease, no prior anti-PD-(L)1/immunotherapy, with PD-L1-positive non-squamous (cohort H) or squamous (cohort I) histology. Patients received sitravatinib 120 mg orally one time per day plus tislelizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks, until study withdrawal, disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. The primary endpoint was safety/tolerability among all treated patients (N=122). Secondary endpoints included investigator-assessed tumor responses and progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 10.9 months (range: 0.4-30.6). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 98.4% of the patients, with ≥Grade 3 TRAEs in 51.6%. TRAEs led to discontinuation of either drug in 23.0% of the patients. Overall response rate was 8.7% (n/N: 2/23; 95% CI: 1.1% to 28.0%), 18.2% (4/22; 95% CI: 5.2% to 40.3%), 23.8% (5/21; 95% CI: 8.2% to 47.2%), 57.1% (12/21; 95% CI: 34.0% to 78.2%), and 30.4% (7/23; 95% CI: 13.2% to 52.9%) in cohorts A, F, B, H, and I, respectively. Median duration of response was not reached in cohort A and ranged from 6.9 to 17.9 months across other cohorts. Disease control was achieved in 78.3-90.9% of the patients. Median PFS ranged from 4.2 (cohort A) to 11.1 months (cohort H).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC, sitravatinib plus tislelizumab was tolerable for most patients, with no new safety signals and overall safety profiles consistent with known profiles of these agents. Objective responses were observed in all cohorts, including in patients naïve to systemic and anti-PD-(L)1 treatments, or with anti-PD-(L)1 resistant/refractory disease. Results support further investigation in selected NSCLC populations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03666143.

Phase 1, open-label, dose-escalation study on the safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of intravenous Coxsackievirus A21 (V937), with or without pembrolizumab, in patients with advanced solid tumors

BACKGROUND

Oncolytic virus V937 showed activity and safety with intratumoral administration. This phase 1 study evaluated intravenous V937±pembrolizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors.

METHODS

Patients had advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), urothelial cancer, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, or melanoma in part A (V937 monotherapy), and metastatic NSCLC or urothelial cancer in part B (V937+pembrolizumab). Prior immunotherapy was permitted >28 days before study treatment. Patients received intravenous V937 on days 1, 3, and 5 (also on day 8 in part B) of the first 21-day cycle and on day 1 of subsequent cycles for eight cycles. Three ascending dose-escalation cohorts were studied. Dose-escalation proceeded if no dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurred in cycle 1 of the previous cohort. In part B, patients also received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks from day 8 for 2 years; dose-expansion occurred at the highest-dose cohort. Serial biopsies were performed.

RESULTS

No DLTs occurred in parts A (n=18) or B (n=85). Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were not observed in part A and were experienced by 10 (12%) patients in part B. The most frequent treatment-related AEs (any grade) in part B were fatigue (36%), pruritus (18%), myalgia (14%), diarrhea (13%), pyrexia (13%), influenza-like illness (12%), and nausea (12%). At the highest tested dose, median intratumoral V937 concentrations were 117,631 copies/mL on day 8, cycle 1 in part A (n=6) and below the detection limit for most patients (86% (19/22)) on day 15, cycle 1 in part B. Objective response rates were 6% (part A), 9% in the NSCLC dose-expansion cohort (n=43), and 20% in the urothelial cancer dose-expansion cohort (n=35).

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous V937+pembrolizumab had a manageable safety profile. Although V937 was detected in tumor tissue, in NSCLC and urothelial cancer, efficacy was not greater than that observed in previous studies with pembrolizumab monotherapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02043665.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy in Oncology: Current Uses and Future Directions: JACC: CardioOncology State-of-the-Art Review

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a major class of immuno-oncology therapeutics that have significantly improved the prognosis of various cancers, both in (neo)adjuvant and metastatic settings. Unlike other conventional therapies, ICIs elicit antitumor effects by enhancing host immune systems to eliminate cancer cells. There are 3 approved ICI classes by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration: inhibitors targeting cytotoxic T lymphocyte associated antigen 4, programmed death 1/programmed death-ligand 1, and lymphocyte-activation gene 3, with many more in development. ICIs are commonly associated with distinct toxicities, known as immune-related adverse events, which can arise during treatment or less frequently be of late onset, usually relating to excessive activation of the immune system. Acute cardiovascular immune-related adverse events such as myocarditis are rare; however, data suggesting chronic cardiovascular sequelae are emerging. This review presents the current landscape of ICIs in oncology, with a focus on important aspects relevant to cardiology.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Australian Patients with Solid Organ Cancers

Background: Vaccination is the cornerstone of the global public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Excess morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 infection is seen in people with cancer. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has been observed in this medically vulnerable population, although associated attitudes and beliefs remain poorly understood. Methods: An online cross-sectional survey of people with solid organ cancers was conducted through nine health services across Australia. Demographics, cancer-related characteristics and vaccine uptake were collected. Perceptions and beliefs regarding COVID-19 vaccination were assessed using the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale and the Disease Influenced Vaccine Acceptance Scale-6. Results: Between June and October 2021, 2691 people with solid organ cancers completed the survey. The median age was 62.5 years (SD = 11.8; range 19–95), 40.9% were male, 71.3% lived in metropolitan areas and 90.3% spoke English as their first language. The commonest cancer diagnoses were breast (36.6%), genitourinary (18.6%) and gastrointestinal (18.3%); 59.2% had localized disease and 56.0% were receiving anti-cancer therapy. Most participants (79.7%) had at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Vaccine uptake was higher in people who were older, male, metropolitan, spoke English as a first language and had a cancer diagnosis for more than six months. Vaccine hesitancy was higher in people who were younger, female, spoke English as a non-dominant language and lived in a regional location, and lower in people with genitourinary cancer. Vaccinated respondents were more concerned about being infected with COVID-19 and less concerned about vaccine safety and efficacy. Conclusions: People with cancer have concerns about acquiring COVID-19, which they balance against vaccine-related concerns about the potential impact on their disease progress and/or treatment. Detailed exploration of concerns in cancer patients provides valuable insights, both for discussions with individual patients and public health messaging for this vulnerable population.

The sleep, cancer and rest (SleepCaRe) trial: Rationale and design of a randomized, controlled trial of cognitive behavioral and bright light therapy for insomnia and fatigue in women with breast cancer receiving chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Insomnia and fatigue symptoms are common in breast cancer. Active cancer treatment, such as chemotherapy, appears to be particularly disruptive to sleep. Yet, sleep complaints often go unrecognised and under treated within routine cancer care. The abbreviated delivery of cognitive behavioral therapy for Insomnia (CBTI) and bright light therapy (BLT) may offer accessible and cost-effective sleep treatments in women receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer.

METHODS

The Sleep, Cancer and Rest (SleepCaRe) Trial is a 6-month multicentre, randomized, controlled, 2 × 2 factorial, superiority, parallel group trial. Women receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy for breast cancer at tertiary Australian hospitals will be randomly assigned 1:1:1:1 to one of four, non-pharmacological sleep interventions: (a) Sleep Hygiene and Education (SHE); (b) CBTI; (c) BLT; (d) CBT-I + BLT combined and simultaneously delivered. Each sleep intervention is delivered over 6 weeks, and will comprise an introductory session, a mid-point phone call, and regular emails. The primary (insomnia, fatigue) and secondary (health-related quality of life, rest activity rhythms, sleep-related impairment) outcomes will be assessed via online questionnaires at five time-points: baseline (t0, prior to intervention), mid-point intervention (t2, Week 4), post-intervention (t3, Week 7), 3-months (t4, Week 18), and 6-months follow-up (t5, Week 30).

CONCLUSIONS

This study will report novel data concerning the comparative and combined efficacy of CBT-I and BLT during chemotherapy. Findings will contribute to the development of evidence-based early sleep and fatigue intervention during chemotherapy for breast cancer. Clinical trial information Registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (http://anzctr.org.au/), Registration Number: ACTRN12620001133921.

A phase I dose-escalation and expansion study of HBM4003, an anti-CTLA-4 heavy chain only monoclonal antibody, in patients with advanced solid tumors

2641

Background: HBM4003 is a fully human heavy chain only monoclonal antibody (HCAb) to CTLA-4, which has been engineered to deplete Treg cells by enhanced antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) activity. In the Phase 1 dose escalation part, HBM4003 showed favorable safety and efficacy profile in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors. Here, we present the updated data from the dose escalation part and most recent safety and clinical activity data from three expansion cohorts of pts with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), melanoma, and renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Methods: In the dose-escalation part, pts were enrolled into 3 dose levels (DL): 0.3mg/kg QW (28-day cycle), 0.45mg/kg Q3W (21-day cycle), and 0.6mg/kg Q3W (21-day cycle). In the dose-expansion part, pts with advanced HCC, melanoma, and RCC received 0.45 mg/kg Q3W (21-day cycle). Tumor measurements were performed every 6 weeks for up to 12 months and subsequently every 12 weeks per RECIST v1.1. Results: In total 60 pts were included for this analysis, including 24 pts with advanced solid tumors in the dose escalation part and 36 pts in the dose expansion part: 18 pts with HCC, 4 pts with melanoma, and 14 pts with RCC, from 12 sites in mainland China, 5 sites in Australia, and 1 site in Hong Kong. 46 pts (77%) received ≥ 2 lines of previous systemic therapies and 37 pts (62%) received previous PD-1/PD-L1 treatment. For the HCC cohort, 19 pts were treated in dose-escalation (1 pt, 0.45 mg/kg Q3W) and dose-expansion parts. All 19 pts received previous PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. 12 pts were evaluable for efficacy. Two had stable disease (SD), 2 pts had partial response (PR) as best response. For 12 evaluable pts, ORR was 16.7% and disease control rate (DCR) was 33.3%. For the RCC cohort, 19 pts were treated in dose-escalation and dose-expansion parts; 18 pts were evaluable for efficacy. Eight had SD as best response; the DCR was 44.4%. Overall, the most common treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) (incidence ≥ 10%) of all grades was rash (16 [26.7%] pts). At the 0.45 mg/kg Q3W DL, the most common TRAE of all grades was hepatic function abnormalities (12 [27.9%] pts) and rash (12 [27.9%] pts). 30 (69.8%) pts reported Gr 1 or 2 TRAEs. Gr ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 4 (9.3%) pts. 1 pt reported Gr 4 TRAE: blood creatine phosphokinase increased. No Gr 5 TRAE was reported. TRAE leading to discontinuation occurred in 4 pts. In mouse model, only tumor infiltrating lymphocytes Treg was depleted upon HBM4003 treatment while no Treg change in blood and spleen. In pts, Treg depletion was observed only in tumor tissue on day 21 post dosing. Overall, HBM4003 demonstrated dose proportional pharmacokinetics and low immunogenicity. Conclusions: HBM4003 showed a favorable safety profile, promising antitumor activity and intratumoral Treg depletion in pts with advanced solid tumors at the 0.45 mg/kg Q3W DL. Clinical trial information: NCT04135261.

Serious Underlying Medical Conditions and COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: A Large Cross-Sectional Analysis from Australia

As COVID-19 vaccinations became available and were proven effective in preventing serious infection, uptake amongst individuals varied, including in medically vulnerable populations. This cross-sectional multi-site study examined vaccine uptake, hesitancy, and explanatory factors amongst people with serious and/or chronic health conditions, including the impact of underlying disease on attitudes to vaccination. A 42-item survey was distributed to people with cancer, diabetes, or multiple sclerosis across ten Australian health services from 30 June to 5 October 2021. The survey evaluated sociodemographic and disease-related characteristics and incorporated three validated scales measuring vaccine hesitancy and vaccine-related beliefs generally and specific to their disease: the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale and the Disease Influenced Vaccine Acceptance Scale-Six. Among 4683 participants (2548 [54.4%] female, 2108 [45.0%] male, 27 [0.6%] other; mean [SD] age, 60.6 [13.3] years; 3560 [76.0%] cancer, 842 [18.0%] diabetes, and 281 [6.0%] multiple sclerosis), 3813 (81.5%) self-reported having at least one COVID-19 vaccine. Unvaccinated status was associated with younger age, female sex, lower education and income, English as a second language, and residence in regional areas. Unvaccinated participants were more likely to report greater vaccine hesitancy and more negative perceptions toward vaccines. Disease-related vaccine concerns were associated with unvaccinated status and hesitancy, including greater complacency about COVID-19 infection, and concerns relating to vaccine efficacy and impact on their disease and/or treatment. This highlights the need to develop targeted strategies and education about COVID-19 vaccination to support medically vulnerable populations and health professionals.

Lower COVID-19 vaccination rates amongst Australians with gastrointestinal (GI) compared to other cancers

648

Background: People with cancer are at higher risk of serious illness and death from COVID-19 infection. We investigated the differences in COVID-19 vaccine uptake and attitudes in people with various solid organ and hematological malignancies. Methods: An online survey of adult patients with cancer attending eight health services across four states in Australia, was conducted from June to September 2021. Demographics, cancer history and vaccination status were recorded. Only completed surveys were analysed. Variables were compared with chi-squared and multivariable analysis using logistic regression. Vaccine hesitancy was assessed using the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale, and the Monash Disease Vaccine Acceptance Scale. T-test analysis was used to examine relationships between the scales and groups. Results: There were 2997 evaluable responses; 53.2% female, 61.8% from metropolitan areas, 27.5% with metastatic solid organ disease and 50.6% on current anti-cancer treatment. Patients with GI cancers comprised 13.5% (n = 405), compared with hematological 28.4%, breast 24.6%, genitourinary 14.1% and other cancer types 19.4%. Vaccination rates were significantly lower for respondents with GI cancers compared to other cancer types (71.6% v 79.3%; p< 0.001). Significant differences in the GI cancer population compared to all others were: more males ( p < 0.001), lower level of education ( p= 0.001), fewer reporting English as first language ( p = 0.02) and shorter time since cancer diagnosis ( p < 0.001). These remained significant after logistic regression. Among GI cancer respondents, factors associated with being vaccinated compared to unvaccinated included: older age ( p < 0.001), higher education level ( p = 0.03) and English as first language ( p = 0.01). There was no significant difference in the scales measuring vaccine hesitancy, confidence and complacency, for the GI cancer population compared to other cancers. As expected, there were significant differences in all scales comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated respondents with GI cancers. Conclusions: In our large, contemporary survey, Australians with GI cancers report lower COVID-19 vaccine uptake compared with patients with other cancer types. We identified demographic and disease related characteristics that contribute to these differences. Interventions and targeted communication are required for people with GI cancers to maximise vaccination uptake in this medically vulnerable group.

COVID-19 vaccination rates, intent, and hesitancy in patients with solid organ and blood cancers: A multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

People with cancer are at higher risk of serious illness and death from COVID-19 infection. We investigated COVID-19 vaccine uptake among patients with solid organ and blood cancers and explored factors related to hesitancy.

METHODS

Cross-sectional online survey of adults with a history of cancer at three health services across metropolitan and regional Victoria. Vaccine hesitancy was measured by the validated Oxford COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale.

RESULTS

There were 1073 respondents: 56% female; median age 62 years (range 23 - 91). Commonest tumor types included breast 29%, gastrointestinal 19%, hematological 15%, genitourinary 15%, and lung 8%. Thirty-six percent had metastatic disease, and 54% were receiving active anticancer treatment. Eighty-four percent of respondents indicated positive intent toward COVID-19 vaccination, 10% were undecided, and 6% indicated negative attitudes. At least one vaccine dose had been received by 65% of respondents, leaving 35% unvaccinated. Fifty-eight percent of unvaccinated patients answered that they would "definitely" or "probably" take a vaccine. Higher vaccine uptake was significantly associated with older age, male gender, English as first language, longer time since cancer diagnosis, and not being on current anticancer treatment. Concerns regarding vaccine side effects, particularly thrombosis, and the desire for clear medical advice were prominent among unvaccinated respondents.

CONCLUSION

Despite being eligible for COVID-19 vaccination since March 2021, a substantial minority of patients with cancer remained unvaccinated as of August 2021. Targeted communication and educational resources addressing vaccine safety in the context of cancer are key to promoting vaccine uptake in this vulnerable population.

Recruitment, outcomes, and toxicity trends in phase I oncology trials: Six-year experience in a large institution

Background

With the rapid influx of novel anti‐cancer agents, phase I clinical trials in oncology are evolving. Historically, response rates on early phase trials have been modest with the clinical benefit and ethics of enrolment debated. However, there is a paucity of real‐world data in this setting.

Aim

To better understand the changing landscape of phase I oncology trials, we performed a retrospective review at our institution to examine patient and trial characteristics, screening outcomes, and treatment outcomes.

Methods and results

We analyzed all consecutive adult patients with advanced solid organ malignancies who were screened across phase I trials from January 2013 to December 2018 at a single institution. During this period, 242 patients were assessed for 28 different trials. Median age was 64 years (range 30–89) with an equal sex distribution. Among 257 screening visits, the overall screen failure rate was 18%, resulting in 212 patients being enrolled onto a study. Twenty‐six trials (93%) involved immunotherapeutic agents or molecular targeted agents either alone or in combination, with only two trials of cytotoxic agents (7%). Twenty‐two (13.4%) of the 209 treated patients experienced a total of 33 grade 3 or higher treatment‐related adverse events. There was one treatment‐related death (0.5%). Of 190 response‐evaluable patients, 7 (4%) had a complete response, 34 (18%) a partial response, and 59 (31%) experienced stable disease for a disease control rate of 53%. The median overall survival for our cohort was 8.0 (95% CI: 6.8–9.2) months.

Conclusion

The profile of phase I trials at our institution are consistent with the changing early drug development landscape. Response rates and overall survival in our cohort are superior to historically reported rates and comparable to contemporaneous studies. Severe treatment‐related toxicity was relatively uncommon, and treatment‐related mortality was rare.

Abstract CT013: Safety/tolerability and preliminary antitumor activity of sitravatinib plus tislelizumab in patients with advanced platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC)

Background: Combining a PD-1 inhibitor and an agent with immune modulatory and antitumor properties may enhance antitumor activity of either agent. Sitravatinib, a spectrum-selective TKI targeting TAM receptors (Tyro3/Axl/MerTK) and VEGFR2, reduces the number of myeloid-derived suppressor cells and regulatory T cells while increasing the ratio of M1/M2-polarized macrophages, which may overcome an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment and augment antitumor immune responses. Tislelizumab, an anti-PD-1 antibody engineered to minimize binding to FcγR on macrophages and abrogate antibody-dependent phagocytosis, has shown single-agent clinical activity in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors. This open-label, multicohort, phase 1b study assessed safety/tolerability and preliminary antitumor activity of sitravatinib + tislelizumab in advanced solid tumors (BGB-900-103; NCT03666143). We report results from the PROC cohort. Methods: Anti-PD-(L)1 antibody-naïve pts with histologically confirmed, advanced PROC (disease progression &lt;6 mo after last platinum treatment) were enrolled. While platinum-resistant pts were included, pts with platinum-refractory disease were excluded. Patients received sitravatinib 120 mg PO QD and tislelizumab 200 mg IV Q3W. Primary endpoint was safety/tolerability of sitravatinib + tislelizumab. Key secondary endpoints were investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST v1.1; overall survival (OS) was also assessed. PD-L1 IHC assay (Ventana SP263) and assessment of plasma VEGF/serum CXCL10 were retrospective. Results: As of Oct 13, 2020, 60 PROC pts were enrolled; 13 (22%) remained on treatment. Median age was 64 yrs (range 26-80); pts received a median of 4 (range 1-11) prior regimens. Median follow-up was 6.0 mo (range 0.2-23.4). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of any grade/grade ≥3 occurred in 97%/68% of pts; TEAEs led to sitravatinib dose reduction in 50% of pts. Nausea (33%), hypertension (18%), and abdominal pain (12%) were the most commonly reported grade ≥3 TEAEs. The 2 fatal AEs (malignant GI obstruction, dyspnea) were deemed unrelated to treatment. Confirmed ORR was 26.4% (95% CI, 15.3-40.3), with 14 pts achieving partial response; DCR was 77.4% (95% CI, 63.8-87.7). Median duration of response was 4.7 mo (95% CI, 2.8-not estimable). There was no clear association between PD-L1 expression and clinical response; plasma VEGF and serum CXCL10 increased after treatment (P&lt;0.0001 for both). Median PFS was 4.1 mo (95% CI, 4.0-5.1); preliminary median OS was 12.9 mo (95% CI, 6.3-17.2). Conclusions: Sitravatinib + tislelizumab was tolerable and showed preliminary antitumor activity in pts with advanced PROC. Further investigation of sitravatinib + tislelizumab in PROC is warranted.

Citation Format: Jeffrey Goh, Jermaine Coward, Bo Gao, Ines P. da Silva, Mark Voskoboynik, Daphne Day, Amy L. Body, Hui K. Gan, Cheng Chen, Xiao Xiang, Cong Fei, Liu Yang, Michael Millward. Safety/tolerability and preliminary antitumor activity of sitravatinib plus tislelizumab in patients with advanced platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr CT013.

Synchronous p16+ nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: a case report and review

We report a case of synchronous p16+ SCC involving both the nasopharynx and base of tongue treated with definitive chemo-radiotherapy with concurrent high dose cisplatin. The nasopharyngeal lesion was detected incidentally on PET/CT imaging. Head and neck clinicians treating p16+ SCC should consider the possibility of synchronous lesions, including lesions which may be located in the lymphoid tissue of the nasopharynx.

Ruling out Color Transparency in Quasielastic ^{12}C(e,e^{'}p) up to Q^{2} of 14.2 (GeV/c)^{2}

Quasielastic ^{12}C(e,e^{'}p) scattering was measured at spacelike 4-momentum transfer squared Q^{2}=8, 9.4, 11.4, and 14.2  (GeV/c)^{2}, the highest ever achieved to date. Nuclear transparency for this reaction was extracted by comparing the measured yield to that expected from a plane-wave impulse approximation calculation without any final state interactions. The measured transparency was consistent with no Q^{2} dependence, up to proton momenta of 8.5  GeV/c, ruling out the quantum chromodynamics effect of color transparency at the measured Q^{2} scales in exclusive (e,e^{'}p) reactions. These results impose strict constraints on models of color transparency for protons.

Probing the Deuteron at Very Large Internal Momenta

We measure ^{2}H(e,e^{'}p)n cross sections at 4-momentum transfers of Q^{2}=4.5±0.5  (GeV/c)^{2} over a range of neutron recoil momenta p_{r}, reaching up to ∼1.0  GeV/c. We obtain data at fixed neutron recoil angles θ_{nq}=35°, 45°, and 75° with respect to the 3-momentum transfer q[over →]. The new data agree well with previous data, which reached p_{r}∼500  MeV/c. At θ_{nq}=35° and 45°, final state interactions, meson exchange currents, and isobar currents are suppressed and the plane wave impulse approximation provides the dominant cross section contribution. We compare the new data to recent theoretical calculations, where we observe a significant discrepancy for recoil momenta p_{r}>700  MeV/c.

Enhanced toxicity with CDK 4/6 inhibitors and palliative radiotherapy: Non-consecutive case series and review of the literature

5•

CDK 4/6 inhibitors are commonly used in patients with advanced hormone receptor positive breast cancer.

5•

Many patients receive palliative radiotherapy for symptomatic disease concomitantly with a CDK 4/6 inhibitor.

5•

There is a paucity of data on the safety of combining a CDK 4/6 inhibitor with palliative radiotherapy.

5•

We report on 5 cases at our institution where enhanced radiotherapy toxicity was observed when RT was delivered during or prior to treatment with a CDK 4/6 inhibitor.

5•

We review pre-clinical and mechanistic data and hypothesise on possible mechanisms for this phenomenon.

Current first-line systemic treatment in most patients with metastatic hormone receptor-positive, HER-2 negative breast cancer is an aromatase inhibitor in combination with a cyclin dependant kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitor. Frequently, these patients require palliative radiotherapy (RT) for symptomatic disease management. There is a paucity of data on the safety of combining a CDK 4/6 inhibitor with palliative RT, with conflicting case reports in the literature. We report on 5 cases at our institution where enhanced radiotherapy toxicity was observed when palliative doses of RT was delivered during or prior to treatment with a CDK 4/6 inhibitor. After review of pre-clinical and mechanistic data, we hypothesise that the effects of CDK4/6 inhibition on normal tissue and the tumour microenvironment may impede tissue recovery and exacerbate acute radiation and radiation recall toxicities. Further studies are required to clarify the potential toxicities of this combination. Clinicians should consider the potential risks when combining CDK 4/6 inhibitors with palliative RT and individualise patient management accordingly.

Phase I trial of alpelisib in combination with concurrent cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy in patients with locoregionally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

BACKGROUND

Deregulation of the PI3K signalling pathway is frequent in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) and may be implicated in radioresistance. We report on the results from a phase I 3 + 3 dose escalation study of alpelisib, a class I α-specific PI3K inhibitor in combination with concurrent cisplatin-based chemoradiation (CRT) in patients with locoregionally advanced SCCHN (LA-SCCHN).

METHODS

Eligible patients had previously untreated LA-SCCHN and were candidates for CRT. The primary objective was to evaluate safety and determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Alpelisib was given orally once daily at two dose levels: 200 mg and 250 mg. CRT consisted of cisplatin 100 mg/m² IV every three weeks and standard fractionation radiotherapy (IMRT) 70 Gy in 35 fractions.

RESULTS

Nine patients were enrolled (six alpelisib 200 mg, three 250 mg). Oropharynx was the primary site in all patients (seven p16-positive; five T1-2N2M0, four T3-4N2-3M0 [AJCC 7th edition]). All patients completed CRT within seven weeks. Grade 3 alpelisib-related toxicities occurred in four patients. No dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was observed at 200 mg among three DLT-evaluable patients. Two of two DLT-evaluable patients treated at 250 mg experienced DLTs (inability to complete ≥75% alpelisib secondary to radiation dermatitis and febrile neutropenia). Thus, RP2D was declared at 200 mg. After median follow-up of 39.7 months, two patients developed pulmonary metastases despite locoregional control. Three-year overall survival was 77.8% (95% CI 36.5%-93.9%).

CONCLUSION

Alpelisib at 200 mg has a manageable safety profile in combination with cisplatin-based CRT in LA-SCCHN.

Survival in Early Phase Immuno-Oncology Trials: Development and Validation of a Prognostic Index

Background

Immuno-oncology (IO) is rapidly evolving in early drug development. We aimed to develop and prospectively validate a prognostic index for patients treated in IO phase I trials to assist with patient selection.

Methods

The development cohort included 192 advanced solid tumor patients treated in 13 IO phase I trials, targeting immune checkpoint and/or co-stimulatory molecules. A prognostic scoring system was developed from multivariate survival analysis of 10 clinical factors, and subsequently validated in two independent validation cohorts (n = 152 and n = 80).

Results

In the development cohort, median age was 57.5 years (range = 20.4-84.8 years). Median progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were 13.4 and 73.6 weeks, respectively, 90-day mortality was 16%, and overall response rate was 20%. In multivariate analysis, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status greater than or equal to 1 (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.8 to 5.7; P < .001), number of metastatic sites greater than 2 (HR = 2.0, 95% CI = 1.3 to 3.1; P = .003), and albumin less than the lower limit of normal (HR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.2 to 2.7; P = .007) were independent prognostic factors; comprising the Princess Margaret Immuno-oncology Prognostic Index (PM-IPI). Patients with a score of 2-3 compared with patients with a score of 0-1 had shorter OS (HR = 3.4, 95% CI = 1.9 to 6.1; P < .001), progression-free survival (HR = 2.3, 95% CI = 1.7 to 3.2; P < .001), higher 90-day mortality (odds ratio = 8.1, 95% CI = 3.0 to 35.4; P < .001), and lower overall response rate (odds ratio = 0.4, 95% CI = 0.2 to 0.8; P = .019). The PM-IPI retained prognostic ability in both validation cohorts and performed better than previously published phase I prognostic scores for predicting OS in all three cohorts.

Conclusions

The PM-IPI is a validated prognostic score for patients treated in phase I IO trials and may aid in improving patient selection.

A versatile Johansson-type tender x-ray emission spectrometer

We present a high energy resolution x-ray spectrometer for the tender x-ray regime (1.6-5.0 keV) that was designed and operated at Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource. The instrument is developed on a Rowland geometry (500 mm of radius) using cylindrically bent Johansson analyzers and a position sensitive detector. By placing the sample inside the Rowland circle, the spectrometer operates in an energy-dispersive mode with a subnatural line-width energy resolution (∼0.32 eV at 2400 eV), even when an extended incident x-ray beam is used across a wide range of diffraction angles (∼30° to 65°). The spectrometer is enclosed in a vacuum chamber, and a sample chamber with independent ambient conditions is introduced to enable a versatile and fast-access sample environment (e.g., solid/gas/liquid samples, in situ cells, and radioactive materials). The design, capabilities, and performance are presented and discussed.

Timing of brain metastases development in metastatic renal cell cancer patients treated with targeted therapies and survival outcomes: An Australian multicenter study

AIM

Targeted therapy (TT) has improved survival for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, survival is usually limited if brain metastases (BMs) develop. We aimed to evaluate survival outcomes in mRCC patients based on timing of BM diagnosis.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter, retrospective study of mRCC patients with BM who received TT at any point between 2005 and 2014. We determined overall survival (OS) from stage IV diagnosis, TT initiation and BM diagnosis, and prognostic factors. Patients were grouped into three categories: synchronous-BM, metachronous-BM diagnosed while conservatively managed (metachronous-BM before TT) and metachronous-BM diagnosed during TT. Survival was calculated by Kaplan-Meier method and predictors were calculated using Cox hazards regression.

RESULTS

Incidence of BM was 17% in mRCC patients treated with TT (two centers). Fifty-four mRCC-BM patients were identified from five tertiary centers. Twenty-eight percentage (15/54) had synchronous-BM, 28% (15/54) had metachranous-BM before TT and 44% (24/54) had metachronous-BM during TT. Most had central nervous system (CNS) symptoms at BM diagnosis (78%; 42/54). Median OS from stage IV diagnosis, TT commencement and BM diagnosis was 28 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 16-43), 19 months (95% CI 9-26) and 9 months (95% CI 5-16), respectively. Synchronous-BM group trended toward poorer survival from TT commencement (P = 0.06). Metachronous-BM during TT group had lower survival from BM diagnosis than synchronous-BM and metachronous-BM before TT group (P < 0.001). Eight of 50 deaths (16%) were from neurological complications. The presence of CNS symptoms did not predict worse survival from stage IV diagnosis (P = 0.73).

CONCLUSION

In patients with mRCC, the development of BM while on TT portends shorter prognosis compared with synchronous diagnosis of BM at stage IV disease or metachronous BM developed prior to commencing TT. The presence of CNS symptoms does not predict worse survival.

Revealing Color Forces with Transverse Polarized Electron Scattering

The Spin Asymmetries of the Nucleon Experiment measured two double spin asymmetries using a polarized proton target and polarized electron beam at two beam energies, 4.7 and 5.9 GeV. A large-acceptance open-configuration detector package identified scattered electrons at 40° and covered a wide range in Bjorken x (0.3<x<0.8). Proportional to an average color Lorentz force, the twist-3 matrix element, d[over ˜]_{2}^{p}, was extracted from the measured asymmetries at Q^{2} values ranging from 2.0 to 6.0  GeV^{2}. The data display the opposite sign compared to most quark models, including the lattice QCD result, and an unexpected scale dependence. Furthermore, when combined with the neutron data in the same Q^{2} range the results suggest a flavor independent average color Lorentz force.

Delayed immune-related adverse events in assessment for dose-limiting toxicity in early phase immunotherapy trials

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy (IO) agents can cause late-onset immune-related adverse events (irAEs). In phase I trials, observation for dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) is typically limited to the first cycle. The incidence of delayed-onset DLTs and their potential impact on dose determination have not been fully elucidated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients enrolled in early phase IO trials at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre between August 2012 and September 2016 were retrospectively reviewed, applying trial-specific definitions for DLTs. A clinically significant AE (csAE) was defined as a treatment-related adverse event requiring corticosteroids, hormone replacement, IO delay or discontinuation.

RESULTS

A total of 352 consecutive trial enrolments in 21 early phase clinical trials were included. Two-hundred seventy-eight patients (79%) received monotherapy and 74 (21%) received combination IO. Two hundred sixty (74%) patients experienced irAEs. There were two protocol-defined DLTs. Twenty (5.7%) patients had 24 csAEs qualifying as DLTs except for occurrence after the protocol-specified DLT period. One-hundred and six (10%) of irAEs were csAEs, including endocrine (26%), respiratory (14%), gastrointestinal (11%), general (10%), dermatological (8%), hepatic (8%), musculoskeletal (6%), pancreatic (6%), haematological, metabolic, neurological, cardiac (each 2%), infective and ocular (each 1%) events. The highest risk of first-onset csAE was during the first 4 weeks compared with the period from 4 weeks to end of treatment (odds ratio 3.13, 95% confidence interval 1.95-5.02). The median time to first onset csAE was significantly shorter with combination than monotherapy IO (32 vs. 146 days, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In our series of early phase IO trials, the risk of csAE was highest during the initial 4 weeks on IO treatment, supporting the use of the conventional DLT period for dose escalation decision. However, there were 24 clinically significant late-onset DLTs in 5.7% of patients. Combination IO was associated with greater risk of and also earlier onset for csAE, which may need to be considered for early phase trial design.

Safety and tolerability of Transcutaneous Vagus Nerve stimulation in humans; a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Transcutaneous Vagus Nerve stimulation (tVNS) may be an alternative to surgically implanted VNS for epilepsy and other diseases. However, its safety and tolerability profile is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We performed a systematic review of treatment harms from tVNS in humans.

METHODS

A systematic published and grey literature search was carried out to identify studies which deployed tVNS in human subjects. Study authors were contacted for safety/tolerability data if these were not available in the publication. Databases were searched from 1966 to May 2017. We noted study type, population, stimulation parameters, type and prevalence of side effects and/or serious adverse events (SAE). We also noted whether side effects/SAE were considered to be related to the tVNS and the proportion of participants dropping out of studies due to side effects.

RESULTS

51 studies were included comprising a total of 1322 human subjects receiving tVNS. The most common side effects were: local skin irritation from electrode placement (240 participants, 18.2%), headache (47, 3.6%) and nasopharyngitis (23, 1.7%). Whilst heterogeneity in overall side effect event rates between studies was not accounted for by the frequency (Hz) or pulse width (ms) of stimulation, a minority (35 participants (2.6%)) dropped out of studies due to side effects. Overall, 30 SAE occurred but only 3 were assessed by the relevant researchers to be possibly caused by tVNS.

CONCLUSION

tVNS is safe and well tolerated at the doses tested in research studies to date.

Tumour- and class-specific patterns of immune-related adverse events of immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or its ligand (PD-L1) produce unique toxicity profiles. The objective of this review was to identify patterns and incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAE) based on tumour type and ICI class.

Methods

Medline, EMBASE and COCHRANE databases were searched to identify prospective monotherapy trials of ICIs from 2003 to November 2015. Paired reviewers selected studies for inclusion and extracted data. Odds ratio (OR), χ2 tests and multivariable regression models were used to analyse for effect size and associations.

Results

We identified 48 trials (6938 patients), including 26 CTLA-4, 17 PD-1, 2 PD-L1 trials, and 3 studies tested both CTLA-4 and PD-1. Grade 3/4 irAE were more common with CTLA-4 mAbs compared with PD-1 (31% versus 10%). All grades colitis (OR 8.7, 95% CI 5.8-12.9), hypophysitis (OR 6.5, 95% CI 3.0-14.3) and rash (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.8-2.3) were more frequent with CTLA-4 mAbs; whereas pneumonitis (OR 6.4, 95% CI 3.2-12.7), hypothyroidism (OR 4.3, 95% CI 2.9-6.3), arthralgia (OR 3.5, 95% CI 2.6-4.8) and vitiligo (OR 3.5, 95% CI 2.3-5.3) were more common with PD-1 mAbs. Comparison of irAE from the three most studied tumour types in PD-1 mAbs trials [melanoma (n = 2048), non-small-cell lung cancer (n = 1030) and renal cell carcinoma (n = 573)] showed melanoma patients had a higher frequency of gastrointestinal and skin irAE and lower frequency of pneumonitis.

Discussion

CTLA-4 and PD-1 mAbs have distinct irAE profiles. Different immune microenvironments may drive histology-specific irAE patterns. Other tumour-dependent irAE profiles may be identified as data emerge from ICI trials.

From Famine to Feast: Developing Early-Phase Combination Immunotherapy Trials Wisely

Not until the turn of this century has immunotherapy become a fundamental component of cancer treatment. While monotherapy with immune modulators, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors, provides a subset of patients with durable clinical benefit and possible cure, combination therapy offers the potential for antitumor activity in a greater number of patients. The field of immunology has provided us with a plethora of potential molecules and pathways to target. This abundance makes it impractical to empirically test all possible combinations efficiently. We recommend that potential immunotherapy combinations be chosen based on sound rationale and available data to address the mechanisms of primary and acquired immune resistance. Novel trial designs may increase the proportion of patients receiving potentially efficacious treatments and, at the same time, better define the balance of clinical activity and safety. We believe that implementing a strategic approach in the early development of immunotherapy combinations will expedite the delivery of more effective therapies with improved safety and durable outcomes.