Purpose: This trial evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and efficacy of selinexor (KPT-330), a novel, oral small-molecule inhibitor of exportin 1 (XPO1/CRM1), and determined the recommended phase II dose. Patients and Methods: In total, 189 patients with advanced solid tumors received selinexor (3 to 85 mg/m²) in 21- or 28-day cycles. Pre- and post-treatment levels of XPO1 mRNA in patient-derived leukocytes were determined by reverse transcriptase quantitative polymerase chain reaction, and tumor biopsies were examined by immunohistochemistry for changes in markers consistent with XPO1 inhibition. Antitumor response was assessed according Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 guidelines. Results: The most common treatment-related adverse events included fatigue (70%), nausea (70%), anorexia (66%), and vomiting (49%), which were generally grade 1 or 2. Most commonly reported grade 3 or 4 toxicities were thrombocytopenia (16%), fatigue (15%), and hyponatremia (13%). Clinically significant major organ or cumulative toxicities were rare. The maximum-tolerated dose was defined at 65 mg/m² using a twice-a-week (days 1 and 3) dosing schedule. The recommended phase II dose of 35 mg/m² given twice a week was chosen based on better patient tolerability and no demonstrable improvement in radiologic response or disease stabilization compared with higher doses. Pharmacokinetics were dose proportional, with no evidence of drug accumulation. Dose-dependent elevations in XPO1 mRNA in leukocytes were demonstrated up to a dose level of 28 mg/m² before plateauing, and paired tumor biopsies showed nuclear accumulation of key tumor-suppressor proteins, reduction of cell proliferation, and induction of apoptosis. Among 157 patients evaluable for response, one complete and six partial responses were observed (n = 7, 4%), with 27 patients (17%) achieving stable disease for ≥ 4 months. Conclusion: Selinexor is a novel and safe therapeutic with broad antitumor activity. Further interrogation into this class of therapy is warranted.

PURPOSE: Sunitinib, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), is approved for advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) after imatinib failure. Ripretinib is a switch-control TKI approved for advanced GIST after prior treatment with three or more TKIs, including imatinib. We compared efficacy and safety of ripretinib versus sunitinib in patients with advanced GIST who were previously treated with imatinib (INTRIGUE, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03673501 ). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Random assignment was 1:1 to once-daily ripretinib 150 mg or once-daily sunitinib 50 mg (4 weeks on/2 weeks off) and stratified by KIT/ platelet-derived growth factor α mutation and imatinib intolerance. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent radiologic review using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Secondary end points included objective response rate by independent radiologic review, safety, and patient-reported outcome measures. RESULTS: Overall, 453 patients were randomly assigned to ripretinib (intention-to-treat [ITT], n = 226; KIT exon 11 ITT, n = 163) or sunitinib (ITT, n = 227; KIT exon 11 ITT, n = 164). Median PFS for ripretinib and sunitinib ( KIT exon 11 ITT) was 8.3 and 7.0 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.16; P = .36); median PFS (ITT) was 8.0 and 8.3 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.33; nominal P = .72). Neither was statistically significant. Objective response rate was higher for ripretinib versus sunitinib in the KIT exon 11 ITT population (23.9% v 14.6%, nominal P = .03). Ripretinib was associated with a more favorable safety profile, fewer grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (41.3% v 65.6%, nominal P < .0001), and better scores on patient-reported outcome measures of tolerability. CONCLUSION: Ripretinib was not superior to sunitinib in terms of PFS. However, meaningful clinical activity, fewer grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events, and improved tolerability were observed with ripretinib.

Soft-tissue sarcoma (sts) is a rare mesenchymal malignancy that accounts for less than 1% of all adult tumours. Despite the successful advancement of localized therapies such as surgery and radiotherapy, these tumours can, for many, recur—often with metastatic disease. In the advanced setting, the role of systemic therapies is modest and is associated with poor survival. With the discovery of immunotherapies in other tumour types such as melanoma and lung cancer, interest has been renewed in exploring immunotherapy in sts. The biology of some stss makes them ripe for immunotherapy intervention; for example, some stss might have chromosomal translocations resulting in pathognomonic fusion products that have been shown to express cancer/testis antigens. Here, we present a targeted review of the published data and ongoing clinical trials for immunotherapies in patients with sarcoma, which comprise immune checkpoint inhibitors, adoptive cell therapies, and cancer vaccines.

Background Overexpression/activation of focal adhesion kinase (FAK) in human malignancies has led to its evaluation as a therapeutic target. We report the first-in-human phase I study of BI 853520, a novel, potent, highly selective FAK inhibitor. Objective Our objectives were to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and to evaluate safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), biomarker expression, and preliminary activity. Patients and Methods The study comprised a standard 3 + 3 dose-escalation phase followed by an expansion phase in patients with selected advanced, nonhematologic malignancies. Results Thirty-three patients received BI 853520 in the dose-escalation phase; the MTD was 200 mg once daily (QD). Dose-limiting toxicities included proteinuria and fatigue, both of which were grade 3. Preliminary PK data supported QD dosing. In the expansion cohort, 63 patients received BI 853520 200 mg QD. Drug-related adverse events (AEs) in > 10% of patients included proteinuria (57%), nausea (57%), fatigue (51%), diarrhea (48%), vomiting (40%), decreased appetite (19%), and peripheral edema (16%). Most AEs were grade 1–2; grade 3 proteinuria, reported in 13 patients (21%), was generally reversible upon treatment interruption. Nineteen patients underwent dose reduction due to AEs, and three drug-related serious AEs were reported, none of which were fatal. Preliminary PD analysis indicated target engagement. Of 63 patients, 49 were evaluable; 17 (27%) achieved a best response of stable disease (4 with 150 + days), and 32 (51%) patients had progressive disease. Conclusions BI 853520 has a manageable and acceptable safety profile, favorable PK, and modest antitumor activity at an MTD of 200 mg QD in patients with selected advanced nonhematologic malignancies. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01335269.

Alveolar soft-part sarcoma (ASPS) is a morphologically distinctive mesenchymal tumor characterized by a canonical ASPL–TFE3 fusion product. In the metastatic setting, standard cytotoxic chemotherapies are typically ineffective. Studies have suggested modest clinical response to multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Here, we report sustained partial responses in two patients with immune checkpoint inhibition treated with either durvalumab (anti–PD-L1) alone or in combination with tremelimumab (anti–CTLA-4), which appeared unrelated to tumor immune infiltrates or mutational burden. Genomic analysis of these patients, and other cases of ASPS, demonstrated molecular mismatch-repair deficiency signatures. These findings suggest that immune checkpoint blockade may be a useful therapeutic strategy for ASPS. Cancer Immunol Res; 6(9); 1001–7. ©2018 AACR.