Maria Schwaederle

Impact of Precision Medicine in Diverse Cancers: A Meta-Analysis of Phase II Clinical Trials

PURPOSE The impact of a personalized cancer treatment strategy (ie, matching patients with drugs based on specific biomarkers) is still a matter of debate. METHODS We reviewed phase II single-agent studies (570 studies; 32,149 patients) published between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2012 (PubMed search). Response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared for arms that used a personalized strategy versus those that did not. RESULTS Multivariable analysis (both weighted multiple linear regression and random effects meta-regression) demonstrated that the personalized approach, compared with a nonpersonalized approach, consistently and independently correlated with higher median RR (31% v 10.5%, respectively; P < .001) and prolonged median PFS (5.9 v 2.7 months, respectively; P < .001) and OS (13.7 v 8.9 months, respectively; P < .001). Nonpersonalized targeted arms had poorer outcomes compared with either personalized targeted therapy or cytotoxics, with median RR of 4%, 30%, and 11.9%, respectively; median PFS of 2.6, 6.9, and 3.3 months, respectively (all P < .001); and median OS of 8.7, 15.9, and 9.4 months, respectively (all P < .05). Personalized arms using a genomic biomarker had higher median RR and prolonged median PFS and OS (all P ≤ .05) compared with personalized arms using a protein biomarker. A personalized strategy was associated with a lower treatment-related death rate than a nonpersonalized strategy (median, 1.5% v 2.3%, respectively; P < .001). CONCLUSION Comprehensive analysis of phase II, single-agent arms revealed that, across malignancies, a personalized strategy was an independent predictor of better outcomes and fewer toxic deaths. In addition, nonpersonalized targeted therapies were associated with significantly poorer outcomes than cytotoxic agents, which in turn were worse than personalized targeted therapy.

Lenalidomide inhibits the proliferation of CLL cells via a cereblon/ p21 WAF1/Cip1 -dependent mechanism independent of functional p53

Lenalidomide has demonstrated clinical activity in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), even though it is not cytotoxic for primary CLL cells in vitro. We examined the direct effect of lenalidomide on CLL-cell proliferation induced by CD154-expressing accessory cells in media containing interleukin-4 and -10. Treatment with lenalidomide significantly inhibited CLL-cell proliferation, an effect that was associated with the p53-independent upregulation of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, p21(WAF1/Cip1) (p21). Silencing p21 with small interfering RNA impaired the capacity of lenalidomide to inhibit CLL-cell proliferation. Silencing cereblon, a known molecular target of lenalidomide, impaired the capacity of lenalidomide to induce expression of p21, inhibit CD154-induced CLL-cell proliferation, or enhance the degradation of Ikaros family zinc finger proteins 1 and 3. We isolated CLL cells from the blood of patients before and after short-term treatment with low-dose lenalidomide (5 mg per day) and found the leukemia cells were also induced to express p21 in vivo. These results indicate that lenalidomide can directly inhibit proliferation of CLL cells in a cereblon/p21-dependent but p53-independent manner, at concentrations achievable in vivo, potentially contributing to the capacity of this drug to inhibit disease-progression in patients with CLL.

Impact of a biomarker-based strategy on oncology drug development: A meta-analysis of clinical trials leading to FDA approval

BACKGROUND In order to ascertain the impact of a biomarker-based (personalized) strategy, we compared outcomes between US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved cancer treatments that were studied with and without such a selection rationale. METHODS Anticancer agents newly approved (September 1998 to June 2013) were identified at the Drugs@FDA website. Efficacy, treatment-related mortality, and hazard ratios (HRs) for time-to-event endpoints were analyzed and compared in registration trials for these agents. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS Fifty-eight drugs were included (leading to 57 randomized [32% personalized] and 55 nonrandomized trials [47% personalized], n = 38 104 patients). Trials adopting a personalized strategy more often included targeted (100% vs 65%, P < .001), oral (68% vs 35%, P = .001), and single agents (89% vs 71%, P = .04) and more frequently permitted crossover to experimental treatment (67% vs 28%, P = .009). In randomized registration trials (using a random-effects meta-analysis), personalized therapy arms were associated with higher relative response rate ratios (RRRs, compared with their corresponding control arms) (RRRs = 3.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.51 to 5.82, vs RRRs = 2.08, 95% CI = 1.76 to 2.47, adjusted P = .03), longer PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.33 to 0.51, vs HR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.53 to 0.65, adjusted P < .001) and a non-statistically significantly longer OS (HR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.61 to 0.83, vs HR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.77 to 0.85, adjusted P = .07) compared with nonpersonalized trials. Analysis of experimental arms in all 112 registration trials (randomized and nonrandomized) demonstrated that personalized therapy was associated with higher response rate (48%, 95% CI = 42% to 55%, vs 23%, 95% CI = 20% to 27%, P < .001) and longer PFS (median = 8.3, interquartile range [IQR] = 5 vs 5.5 months, IQR = 5, adjusted P = .002) and OS (median = 19.3, IQR = 17 vs 13.5 months, IQR = 8, Adjusted P = .04). A personalized strategy was an independent predictor of better RR, PFS, and OS, as demonstrated by multilinear regression analysis. Treatment-related mortality rate was similar for personalized and nonpersonalized trials. CONCLUSIONS A biomarker-based approach was safe and associated with improved efficacy outcomes in FDA-approved anticancer agents.

Use of Liquid Biopsies in Clinical Oncology: Pilot Experience in 168 Patients

Purpose: There is a growing interest in using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing in patients with cancer. Experimental Design: A total of 168 patients with diverse cancers were analyzed. Patients had digital next-generation sequencing (54 cancer-related gene panel including amplifications in ERBB2, EGFR, and MET) performed on their plasma. Type of genomic alterations, potential actionability, concordance with tissue testing, and patient outcome were examined. Results: Fifty-eight percent of patients (98/168) had ≥1 ctDNA alteration(s). Of the 98 patients with alterations, 71.4% had ≥ 1 alteration potentially actionable by an FDA-approved drug. The median time interval between the tissue biopsy and the blood draw was 2.7 months for patients with ≥ 1 alteration in common compared with 14.4 months (P = 0.006) for the patients in whom no common alterations were identified in the tissue and plasma. Overall concordance rates for tissue and ctDNA were 70.3% for TP53 and EGFR, 88.1% for PIK3CA, and 93.1% for ERBB2 alterations. There was a significant correlation between the cases with ≥ 1 alteration with ctDNA ≥ 5% and shorter survival (median = 4.03 months vs. not reached at median follow-up of 6.1 months; P < 0.001). Finally, 5 of the 12 evaluable patients (42%) matched to a treatment targeting an alteration(s) detected in their ctDNA test achieved stable disease ≥ 6 months/partial remission compared with 2 of 28 patients (7.1%) for the unmatched patients, P = 0.02. Conclusions: Our initial study demonstrates that ctDNA tests provide information complementary to that in tissue biopsies and may be useful in determining prognosis and treatment. Clin Cancer Res; 22(22); 5497–505. ©2016 AACR.

On the Road to Precision Cancer Medicine: Analysis of Genomic Biomarker Actionability in 439 Patients

Despite the increased use of molecular diagnostics, the extent to which patients who have these tests harbor potentially actionable aberrations is unclear. We retrospectively reviewed 439 patients with diverse cancers, for whom next-generation sequencing (mostly 236-gene panel) had been performed. Data pertaining to the molecular alterations identified, as well as associated treatment suggestions (on- or off-label, or experimental), were extracted from molecular diagnostic reports. Most patients (420/439; 96%) had at least one molecular alteration: 1,813 alterations (in 207 distinct genes) were identified [the majority being mutations (62%) or amplifications (29%)]. The three most common gene abnormalities were TP53 (44%), KRAS (16%), and PIK3CA (12%). The median number of alterations per patient was 3 (range, 0–16). Nineteen patients (4%) had no alterations; 48 patients (11%) had only one alteration; and 372 patients had two or more abnormalities (85%). The median number of potentially actionable anomalies per patient was 2 (range, 0–8). Most patients (393/439; 90%) had at least one potentially actionable alteration, and in all these cases the aberration could at least be targeted by an experimental drug in a clinical trial. A total of 307 patients (70%) had an alteration that was actionable with an approved drug, but in only 89 patients (20%) was the drug approved for their disease (on-label). Next-generation sequencing identified theoretically actionable aberrations in 90% of our patients. Many of the drugs are, however, experimental or would require off-label use. Strategies to address drug access for patients harboring potentially actionable mutations are needed. Mol Cancer Ther; 14(6); 1488–94. ©2015 AACR.

Fibroblast growth factor receptor signaling in hereditary and neoplastic disease: biologic and clinical implications

Fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) and their receptors (FGFRs) are transmembrane growth factor receptors with wide tissue distribution. FGF/FGFR signaling is involved in neoplastic behavior and also development, differentiation, growth, and survival. FGFR germline mutations (activating) can cause skeletal disorders, primarily dwarfism (generally mutations in FGFR3), and craniofacial malformation syndromes (usually mutations in FGFR1 and FGFR2); intriguingly, some of these activating FGFR mutations are also seen in human cancers. FGF/FGFR aberrations reported in cancers are mainly thought to be gain-of-function changes, and several cancers have high frequencies of FGFR alterations, including breast, bladder, or squamous cell carcinomas (lung and head and neck). FGF ligand aberrations (predominantly gene amplifications) are also frequently seen in cancers, in contrast to hereditary syndromes. There are several pharmacologic agents that have been or are being developed for inhibition of FGFR/FGF signaling. These include both highly selective inhibitors as well as multi-kinase inhibitors. Of note, only four agents (ponatinib, pazopanib, regorafenib, and recently lenvatinib) are FDA-approved for use in cancer, although the approval was not based on their activity against FGFR. Perturbations in the FGFR/FGF signaling are present in both inherited and malignant diseases. The development of potent inhibitors targeting FGF/FGFR may provide new tools against disorders caused by FGF/FGFR alterations.

VEGF-A Expression Correlates with TP53 Mutations in Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: Implications for Antiangiogenesis Therapy

Bevacizumab is one of the most widely used antiangiogenic drugs in oncology, but the overall beneficial effects of this VEGF-A targeting agent are relatively modest, in part due to the lack of a biomarker to select patients most likely to respond favorably. Several molecular aberrations in cancer influence angiogenesis, including mutations in the tumor suppressor gene TP53, which occur frequently in many human malignancies. In this study, we present a multiple regression analysis of transcriptomic data in 123 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) showing that TP53 mutations are associated with higher VEGF-A expression (P = 0.006). This association was interesting given a recent retrospective study showing longer progression-free survival in patients with diverse tumors who receive bevacizumab, if tumors harbor mutant TP53 instead of wild-type TP53. Thus, our current findings linking TP53 mutation with VEGF-A upregulation offered a mechanistic explanation for why patients exhibit improved outcomes after bevacizumab treatment when their tumors harbor mutant TP53 versus wild-type TP53. Overall, this work warrants further evaluation of TP53 as a ready biomarker to predict bevacizumab response in NSCLC and possibly other tumor types.

Squamousness: Next-generation sequencing reveals shared molecular features across squamous tumor types

In order to gain a better understanding of the underlying biology of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), we tested the hypothesis that SCC originating from different organs may possess common molecular alterations. SCC samples (N = 361) were examined using clinical-grade targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS). The most frequent SCC tumor types were head and neck, lung, cutaneous, gastrointestinal and gynecologic cancers. The most common gene alterations were TP53 (64.5% of patients), PIK3CA (28.5%), CDKN2A (24.4%), SOX2 (17.7%), and CCND1 (15.8%). By comparing NGS results of our SCC cohort to a non-SCC cohort (N = 277), we found that CDKN2A, SOX2, NOTCH1, TP53, PIK3CA, CCND1, and FBXW7 were significantly more frequently altered, unlike KRAS, which was less frequently altered in SCC specimens (all P < 0.05; multivariable analysis). Therefore, we identified “squamousness” gene signatures (TP53, PIK3CA, CCND1, CDKN2A, SOX2, NOTCH 1, and FBXW7 aberrations, and absence of KRAS alterations) that were significantly more frequent in SCC versus non-SCC histologies. A multivariable co-alteration analysis established 2 SCC subgroups: (i) patients in whom TP53 and cyclin pathway (CDKN2A and CCND1) alterations strongly correlated but in whom PIK3CA aberrations were less frequent; and (ii) patients with PIK3CA alterations in whom TP53 mutations were less frequent (all P ≤ 0 .001, multivariable analysis). In conclusion, we identified a set of 8 genes altered with significantly different frequencies when SCC and non-SCC were compared, suggesting the existence of patterns for “squamousness.” Targeting the PI3K-AKT-mTOR and/or cyclin pathway components in SCC may be warranted.

Breast Cancer Experience of the Molecular Tumor Board at the University of California, San Diego Moores Cancer Center

PURPOSE Multiplex genomic tests are enabling oncologists to interrogate the DNA of their patients. However, few oncologists are proficient with respect to the implications of complex molecular diagnostics. We initiated a Molecular Tumor Board that focused on individual patients with advanced cancer whose tumors underwent genomic profiling, and here report our experience with breast cancer. METHODS A multidisciplinary team that included physicians, scientists, geneticists, and bioinformatics/pathway specialists attended. All molecular tests were performed in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments environment (next-generation sequencing, 182 or 236 genes). RESULTS Forty of 43 patients (93%; mean age, 59 years) had at least one theoretically actionable aberration (mean, 4.79 anomalies/patient). Median time from ordering to report was 27 days (median of approximately 11 days for specimen acquisition and approximately 14 days for diagnostic processing). Even if we considered distinct abnormalities in a gene as the same, there were only two patients with an identical molecular profile. Seventy-three genes (206 abnormalities; 119 distinct) were aberrant. Seventeen of the 43 patients (40%; median, seven previous therapies in the metastatic setting) were treated in a manner consistent with Molecular Tumor Board discussions; seven (16% of 43, or 41% of 17) achieved stable disease for 6 or more months (n = 2) or partial remission (n = 5). Lack of access to targeted medication was the most common reason that patients could not be treated. CONCLUSION Multidisciplinary molecular tumor boards may help to optimize the management of patients with advanced, heavily pretreated breast cancer who have undergone genomic testing. Facilitating availability of appropriately targeted drugs and clinical trials is needed.

Fibroblast growth factor family aberrations in cancers: clinical and molecular characteristics

Fibroblast growth factor ligands and receptors (FGF and FGFR) play critical roles in tumorigenesis, and several drugs have been developed to target them. We report the biologic correlates of FGF/FGFR abnormalities in diverse malignancies. The medical records of patients with cancers that underwent targeted next generation sequencing (182 or 236 cancer-related genes) were reviewed. The following FGF/FGFR genes were tested: FGF3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 12, 14, 19, 23 and FGFR1, 2, 3, and 4. Of 391 patients, 56 (14.3%) had aberrant FGF (N = 38, all amplifications) and/or FGFR (N = 22 including 5 mutations and one FGFR3-TACC3 fusion). FGF/FGFR aberrations were most frequent in breast cancers (26/81, 32.1%, p = 0.0003). In multivariate analysis, FGF/FGFR abnormalities were independently associated with CCND1/2, RICTOR, ZNF703, RPTOR, AKT2, and CDK8 alterations (all P < 0.02), as well as with an increased median number of alterations (P < 0.0001). FGF3, FGF4, FGF19 and CCND1 were co-amplified in 22 of 391 patients (5.6%, P < 0.0001), most likely because they co-localize on the same chromosomal region (11q13). There was no significant difference in time to metastasis or overall survival when comparing patients harboring FGF/FGFR alterations versus those not. Overall, FGF/FGFR was one of the most frequently aberrant pathways in our population comprising patients with diverse malignancies. These aberrations frequently co-exist with anomalies in a variety of other genes, suggesting that tailored combination therapy may be necessary in these patients.