64 research outputs found

    A Phase I/II Study of GSK525762 Combined with Fulvestrant in Patients with Hormone Receptor-positive/HER2-negative Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer

    No full text
    Fulvestrant; Breast cancerFulvestrant; Cáncer de mamaFulvestrant; Càncer de mamaPurpose: Endocrine-based therapy is the initial primary treatment option for hormone receptor–positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2−) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). However, patients eventually experience disease progression due to resistance to endocrine therapy. Molibresib (GSK525762) is a small-molecule inhibitor of bromodomain and extraterminal (BET) family proteins (BRD2, BRD3, BRD4, and BRDT). Preclinical data suggested that the combination of molibresib with endocrine therapy might overcome endocrine resistance. This study aimed to investigate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and efficacy [objective response rate (ORR)] of molibresib combined with fulvestrant in women with HR+/HER2− mBC. Patients and Methods: In this phase I/II dose-escalation and dose-expansion study, patients received oral molibresib 60 or 80 mg once daily in combination with intramuscular fulvestrant. Patients enrolled had relapsed/refractory, advanced/metastatic HR+/HER2− breast cancer with disease progression on prior treatment with an aromatase inhibitor, with or without a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor. Results: The study included 123 patients. The most common treatment-related adverse events (AE) were nausea (52%), dysgeusia (49%), and fatigue (45%). At a 60-mg dosage of molibresib, >90% of patients experienced treatment-related AE. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related AE were observed in 47% and 48% of patients treated with molibresib 60 mg and molibresib 80 mg, respectively. The ORR was 13% [95% confidence interval (CI), 8–20], not meeting the 25% threshold for proceeding to phase II. Among 82 patients with detected circulating tumor DNA and clinical outcome at study enrollment, a strong association was observed between the detection of copy-number amplification and poor progression-free survival (HR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.73–4.83; P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Molibresib in combination with fulvestrant did not demonstrate clinically meaningful activity in this study.This study was funded by GSK

    A randomized phase II trial investigating the effect of platelet function inhibition on circulating tumor cells in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

    No full text
    peer reviewedBACKGROUND: Blockade of platelet activation and aggregation can inhibit metastasis in preclinical models and is associated with cancer prevention. To test whether disruption of platelet function with clopidogrel and aspirin would decrease the number of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in patients with metastatic breast cancer, a randomized phase II study was performed. METHODS: Patients with metastatic breast cancer who were not currently receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy were eligible. Patients were randomized to receive either clopidogrel and aspirin or to a control group receiving no treatment. Phlebotomy was performed at baseline, at 2 and 4 weeks, and monthly thereafter to obtain specimens to assess CTC, platelet aggregation, and thrombin activity. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with detectable CTCs at 1 month. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were enrolled and 42 were evaluable at 1 month. Baseline CTC numbers were >/= 5 in 13% and >/= 1 in 65% of patients. Despite adequate platelet function inhibition in the treatment group, the proportion of patients with detectable CTCs was similar between the clopidogrel/aspirin and control groups at baseline (P = .21) and 4 weeks (P = .75), showing no treatment effect. Measured endogenous thrombin potential did not correlate with CTC number. No bleeding-related serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred. CONCLUSION: The baseline CTC numbers were lower than expected, decreasing the ability to detect an impact of platelet inhibition on CTCs. Clopidogrel and aspirin were well tolerated. Future studies evaluating the potential therapeutic role of antiplatelet therapy in breast cancer remain of interest, and they may be informed by these results

    Margetuximab Versus Trastuzumab in Patients With Previously Treated HER2-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer (SOPHIA): Final Overall Survival Results From a Randomized Phase 3 Trial

    No full text
    Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Final overall survival (OS) in SOPHIA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02492711), a study of margetuximab versus trastuzumab, both with chemotherapy, in patients with previously treated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive advanced breast cancer, is reported with updated safety. Overall, 536 patients in the intention-to-treat population were randomly assigned to margetuximab (15 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks; n = 266) plus chemotherapy or trastuzumab (6 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks after a loading dose of 8 mg/kg; n = 270) plus chemotherapy. Primary end points were progression-free survival, previously reported, and OS. Final OS analysis was triggered by 385 prespecified events. The median OS was 21.6 months (95% CI, 18.89 to 25.07) with margetuximab versus 21.9 months (95% CI, 18.69 to 24.18) with trastuzumab (hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.17; P = .620). Preplanned, exploratory analysis of CD16A genotyping suggested a possible improvement in OS for margetuximab in CD16A-158FF patients versus trastuzumab (median OS, 23.6 v 19.2 months; HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.00) and a possible improvement in OS for trastuzumab in CD16A-158VV patients versus margetuximab (median OS, 31.1 v 22.0 months; HR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.01 to 3.12). Margetuximab safety was comparable with trastuzumab. Final overall OS analysis did not demonstrate margetuximab advantage over trastuzumab. Margetuximab studies in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer with different CD16A allelic variants are warranted

    Correlation of Somatic Genomic Alterations Between Tissue Genomics and ctDNA Employing Next-Generation Sequencing: Analysis of Lung and Gastrointestinal Cancers

    No full text
    Abstract Next-generation Sequencing (NGS) of cancer tissues is increasingly being carried out to identify somatic genomic alterations that may guide physicians to make therapeutic decisions. However, a single tissue biopsy may not reflect complete genomic architecture due to the heterogeneous nature of tumors. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis is a robust noninvasive method to detect and monitor genomic alterations in blood in real time. We analyzed 28 matched tissue NGS and ctDNA from gastrointestinal and lung cancers for concordance of somatic genomic alterations, driver, and actionable alterations. Six patients (21%) had at least one concordant mutation between tissue and ctDNA sequencing. At the gene level, among all the mutations (n = 104) detected by tissue and blood sequencing, 7.7% (n = 8) of mutations were concordant. Tissue and ctDNA sequencing identified driver mutations in 60% and 64% of the tested samples, respectively. We found high discordance between tissue and ctDNA testing, especially with respect to the driver and actionable alterations. Both tissue and ctDNA NGS detected actionable alterations in 25% of patients. When somatic alterations identified by each test were combined, the total number of patients with actionable mutations increased to 32%. Our data show significant discordance between tissue NGS and ctDNA analysis. These results suggest tissue NGS and ctDNA NGS are complementary approaches rather than exclusive of each other. When performed in isolation, tissue and ctDNA NGS can each potentially miss driver and targetable alterations, suggesting that both approaches should be incorporated to enhance mutation detection rates. Larger prospective studies are needed to better clarify this emerging precision oncology landscape. Mol Cancer Ther; 17(5); 1123–32. ©2018 AACR.</jats:p
    corecore