Summary Background Recurrent gene fusions, such as ROS1 fusions, are oncogenic drivers of various cancers, including non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Up to 36% of patients with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC have brain metastases at the diagnosis of advanced disease. Entrectinib is a ROS1 inhibitor that has been designed to effectively penetrate and remain in the CNS. We explored the use of entrectinib in patients with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC. Methods We did an integrated analysis of three ongoing phase 1 or 2 trials of entrectinib (ALKA-372-001, STARTRK-1, and STARTRK-2). The efficacy-evaluable population included adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC who received entrectinib at a dose of at least 600 mg orally once per day, with at least 12 months' follow-up. All patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2, and previous cancer treatment (except for ROS1 inhibitors) was allowed. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with an objective response (complete or partial response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1) and duration of response, and were evaluated by blinded independent central review. The safety-evaluable population for the safety analysis included all patients with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC in the three trials who received at least one dose of entrectinib (irrespective of dose or duration of follow-up). These ongoing studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02097810 (STARTRK-1) and NCT02568267 (STARTRK-2), and EudraCT, 2012–000148–88 (ALKA-372-001). Findings Patients were enrolled in ALKA-372-001 from Oct 26, 2012, to March 27, 2018; in STARTRK-1 from Aug 7, 2014, to May 10, 2018; and in STARTRK-2 from Nov 19, 2015 (enrolment is ongoing). At the data cutoff date for this analysis (May 31, 2018), 41 (77%; 95% CI 64–88) of 53 patients in the efficacy-evaluable population had an objective response. Median follow-up was 15·5 monhts (IQR 13·4–20·2). Median duration of response was 24·6 months (95% CI 11·4–34·8). In the safety-evaluable population, 79 (59%) of 134 patients had grade 1 or 2 treatment-related adverse events. 46 (34%) of 134 patients had grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events, with the most common being weight increase (ten [8%]) and neutropenia (five [4%]). 15 (11%) patients had serious treatment-related adverse events, the most common of which were nervous system disorders (four [3%]) and cardiac disorders (three [2%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Interpretation Entrectinib is active with durable disease control in patients with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC, and is well tolerated with a manageable safety profile, making it amenable to long-term dosing in these patients. These data highlight the need to routinely test for ROS1 fusions to broaden therapeutic options for patients with ROS1 fusion-positive NSCLC. Funding Ignyta/F Hoffmann-La Roche.

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lanonc/PIIS1470-2045(19)30690-4.pdf

Entrectinib in ROS1 fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: integrated analysis of three phase 1-2 trials.

The challenge of biosimilars.

American Gastroenterological Association Institute Technical Review on the Role of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in the Management of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.

Purpose: To review the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) experience with approvals of new drugs for pediatric oncology and to discuss new regulatory initiatives directed at pediatric oncology. Methods: A retrospective review of FDA archival documents and the published literature. Results: More than 100 drugs have been approved by the Division of Oncology Drug Products of the FDA for the treatment of malignancies. Only 15 have pediatric use information in their labeling, which is less than 50% of the drugs commonly used in the treatment of pediatric malignancies. In the past 20 years, there have been six submissions to the FDA for pediatric oncology indications. To illustrate principles of the approval process, each submission is discussed. Conclusion: Potential reasons for a lack of New Drug Application submissions for pediatric oncology include the small pediatric oncology market compared with the adult oncology market and perceived barriers to performing studies in children. Reasons for failure to appr...

Regulatory Approvals of Pediatric Oncology Drugs: Previous Experience and New Initiatives

At the National Institute of Radiological Sciences (NIRS), more than 8,000 patients have been treated for various tumors with carbon-ion (C-ion) radiotherapy in the past 20 years based on a radiobiologically defined clinical-dose system. Through clinical experience, including extensive dose escalation studies, optimum dose-fractionation protocols have been established for respective tumors, which may be considered as the standards in C-ion radiotherapy. Although the therapeutic appropriateness of the clinical-dose system has been widely demonstrated by clinical results, the system incorporates several oversimplifications such as dose-independent relative biological effectiveness (RBE), empirical nuclear fragmentation model, and use of dose-averaged linear energy transfer to represent the spectrum of particles. We took the opportunity to update the clinical-dose system at the time we started clinical treatment with pencil beam scanning, a new beam delivery method, in 2011. The requirements for the updated system were to correct the oversimplifications made in the original system, while harmonizing with the original system to maintain the established dose-fractionation protocols. In the updated system, the radiation quality of the therapeutic C-ion beam was derived with Monte Carlo simulations, and its biological effectiveness was predicted with a theoretical model. We selected the most used C-ion beam with αr = 0.764 Gy(-1) and β = 0.0615 Gy(-2) as reference radiation for RBE. The C-equivalent biological dose distribution is designed to allow the prescribed survival of tumor cells of the human salivary gland (HSG) in entire spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP) region, with consideration to the dose dependence of the RBE. This C-equivalent biological dose distribution is scaled to a clinical dose distribution to harmonize with our clinical experiences with C-ion radiotherapy. Treatment plans were made with the original and the updated clinical-dose systems, and both physical and clinical dose distributions were compared with regard to the prescribed dose level, beam energy, and SOBP width. Both systems provided uniform clinical dose distributions within the targets consistent with the prescriptions. The mean physical doses delivered to targets by the updated system agreed with the doses by the original system within ± 1.5% for all tested conditions. The updated system reflects the physical and biological characteristics of the therapeutic C-ion beam more accurately than the original system, while at the same time allowing the continued use of the dose-fractionation protocols established with the original system at NIRS.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-9155/60/8/3271/pdf

Reformulation of a clinical-dose system for carbon-ion radiotherapy treatment planning at the National Institute of Radiological Sciences, Japan.

The United States radiation medical countermeasures (MCM) programme for radiological and nuclear incidents has been focusing on developing mitigators for the acute radiation syndrome (ARS) and delayed effects of acute radiation exposure (DEARE), and biodosimetry technologies to provide radiation dose assessments for guiding treatment. Because a nuclear accident or terrorist incident could potentially expose a large number of people to low to moderate doses of ionising radiation, and thus increase their excess lifetime cancer risk, there is an interest in developing mitigators for this purpose. This article discusses the current status, issues, and challenges regarding development of mitigators against radiation-induced cancers. The challenges of developing mitigators for ARS include: the long latency between exposure and cancer manifestation, limitations of animal models, potential side effects of the mitigator itself, potential need for long-term use, the complexity of human trials to demonstrate effectiveness, and statistical power constraints for measuring health risks (and reduction of health risks after mitigation) following relatively low radiation doses (<0.75 Gy). Nevertheless, progress in the understanding of the molecular mechanisms resulting in radiation injury, along with parallel progress in dose assessment technologies, make this an opportune, if not critical, time to invest in research strategies that result in the development of agents to lower the risk of radiation-induced cancers for populations that survive a significant radiation exposure incident.

/pdf/mitigating-the-risk-of-radiation-induced-cancers-limitations-vnl2kt81lm.pdf

Mitigating the risk of radiation-induced cancers: limitations and paradigms in drug development

The majority of children with cancer receive therapy as participants in clinical research protocols coordinated by national pediatric cooperative groups. One of the highest priorities of these groups is the development of novel therapies. Due to differences in the biology of pediatric and adult tumors and in physiology between adults and children, it is usually necessary to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of new drugs separately in adult and pediatric populations. To stimulate the development of new therapies for pediatric indications and encourage the submission of clinical data to support pediatric product labeling, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has undertaken two initiatives. In 1998 the FDA issued a regulation (The 1998 Final Pediatric Rule) that mandated if a drug or biological is under review for a claim and the disease exists in both pediatric and adult populations, pediatric studies must be performed. Section 111 of the FDA Modernization Act of 1997 states that if a drug product has exclusivity based on a patent or marketing license, the exclusivity can be extended by six months for the submission of pediatric data to the FDA. The incentive applies to both approved drugs and those under development. These initiatives are intended to enhance access to new anticancer therapies and promote labeling for pediatric oncology indications.

Pediatric Oncology: Regulatory Initiatives

The attached package contains background information prepared by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the panel members of the advisory committee. The FDA background package often contains assessments and/or conclusions and recommendations written by individual FDA reviewers. Such conclusions and recommendations do not necessarily represent the final position of the individual reviewers, nor do they necessarily represent the final position of the Review Division or Office.

Alla Shapiro

Papers

Mitigating the risk of radiation-induced cancers: limitations and paradigms in drug development

Pediatric Oncology: Regulatory Initiatives

Pediatric Oncology Subcommittee of the Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee