• PomCyDex results in a higher overall response rate than pomalidomide and dexamethasone.• PomCyDex is an effective, all oral regimen for refractory myeloma patients.Pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (PomDex) is standard treatment of lenalidomide refractory myeloma patients who have received >2 prior therapies. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of the addition of oral weekly cyclophosphamide to standard PomDex. We first performed a dose escalation phase 1 study to determine the recommended phase 2 dose of cyclophosphamide in combination with PomDex (arm A). A randomized, multicenter phase 2 study followed, enrolling patients with lenalidomide refractory myeloma. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive pomalidomide 4 mg on days 1 to 21 of a 28-day cycle in combination with weekly dexamethasone (arm B) or pomalidomide, dexamethasone, and cyclophosphamide (PomCyDex) 400 mg orally on days 1, 8, and 15 (arm C). The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR). Eighty patients were enrolled (10 in phase 1 and 70 randomized in phase 2: 36 to arm B and 34 to arm C). The ORR was 38.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23-54.8%) and 64.7% (95% CI, 48.6-80.8%) for arms B and C, respectively (P 5 .035). As of June 2015, 62 of the 70 randomized patients had progressed. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.4 (95% CI, 2.3-5.7) and 9.5 months (95% CI, 4.6-14) for arms B and C, respectively (P 5 .106). Toxicity was predominantly hematologic in nature but was not statistically higher in arm C. The combination of PomCyDex results in a superior ORR and PFS compared with PomDex in patients with lenalidomide refractory multiple myeloma.

BackgroundPreclinical data suggest that sunitinib enhances the efficacy of radiotherapy. We tested the combination of sunitinib and hypofractionated image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) in a cohort of patients with historically incurable distant metastases.MethodsTwenty five patients with oligometastases, defined as 1–5 sites of active disease on whole body imaging, were enrolled in a phase II trial from 2/08 to 9/10. The most common tumor types treated were head and neck, liver, lung, kidney and prostate cancers. Patients were treated with the recommended phase II dose of 37.5 mg daily sunitinib (days 1–28) and IGRT 50 Gy (days 8–12 and 15–19). Maintenance sunitinib was used in 33% of patients. Median follow up was 17.5 months (range, 0.7 to 37.4 months).ResultsThe 18-month local control, distant control, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 75%, 52%, 56% and 71%, respectively. At last follow-up, 11 (44%) patients were alive without evidence of disease, 7 (28%) were alive with distant metastases, 3 (12%) were dead from distant metastases, 3 (12%) were dead from comorbid illness, and 1 (4%) was dead from treatment-related toxicities. The incidence of acute grade ≥ 3 toxicities was 28%, most commonly myelosuppression, bleeding and abnormal liver function tests.ConclusionsConcurrent sunitinib and IGRT achieves major clinical responses in a subset of patients with oligometastases.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00463060

BACKGROUND Filanesib is a kinesin spindle protein inhibitor that has demonstrated encouraging activity in patients with recurrent/refractory multiple myeloma. Preclinical synergy with bortezomib was the rationale for the current phase 1 study. METHODS The current study was a multicenter study with an initial dose‐escalation phase to determine the maximum tolerated dose of 2 schedules of filanesib plus bortezomib with and without dexamethasone, followed by a dose‐expansion phase. RESULTS With the addition of prophylactic filgastrim, the maximum planned dose was attained: 1.3 mg/m2/day of bortezomib plus 40 mg of dexamethasone on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28‐day cycle, with filanesib given intravenously either at a dose of 1.5 mg/m2/day (schedule 1: days 1, 2, 15, and 16) or 3 mg/m2/day (schedule 2: days 1 and 15). The most common adverse events (assessed for severity using version 4.0 of the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) were transient, noncumulative neutropenia and thrombocytopenia with grade 3/4 events reported in 44% (16% in cycle 1 with filgastrim) and 29% of patients, respectively. A low (≤11%) overall rate of nonhematological grade 3/4 toxicity was observed. With a median of 3 prior lines of therapy and 56% of patients with disease that was refractory to proteasome inhibitors, the overall response rate was 20% (55 patients), and was 29% in 14 patients with proteasome inhibitors‐refractory disease receiving filanesib at a dose of ≥1.25 mg/m2 (duration of response, 5.2 to ≥21.2 months). CONCLUSIONS The current phase 1 study established a dosing schedule for the combination of these agents that demonstrated a favorable safety profile with a low incidence of nonhematologic toxicity and manageable hematologic toxicity. The combination of filanesib, bortezomib, and dexamethasone appears to have durable activity in patients with recurrent/refractory multiple myeloma. Cancer 2016;122:3327–3335. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Abstract.A phase II trial was conducted to evaluate the tolerability and efficacy of incorporating cetuximab and simultaneous integrated boost intensity-modulated radiation therapy (SIB-IMRT) into a well-described 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and hydroxyurea (HU)-based chemoradiation regimen. Patients with stage IVA-IVB or high-risk stage III squamous cell carcinomas were enrolled. Prior organ-conserving surgery or induction chemotherapy was allowed. IMRT was administered in 1.5 Gy fractions twice daily on days 1-5 of weeks 1, 3, 5, 7 ± 9 for a total dose of 60-73.5 Gy. Concurrent systemic therapy consisted of 5-FU (600 mg/m 2 ), HU (500 mg BID) and cetuximab (250 mg/m 2 ). p16INK4A expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry. From January 2007 to January 2010, 65 patients (61 with stage IV disease; 31 with oropharyngeal primaries) were enrolled. At a median follow-up of 28 months, 2-year locoregional control, distant control, progression-free survival, event-free survival and overall survival were 79, 83, 72, 63 and 80%, respectively. In 48 patients with available pre-treatment tissue, p16 overexpression was associated with significantly increased distant control (p= 0.03), progression-free survival (p= 0.02), event-free survival (p= 0.007) and overall survival (p=0.03). The most common grade 3-4 toxicities were mucositis (46%), leukopenia (18%), anemia (18%) and dermatitis (17%). Concurrent 5-FU, HU, cetuximab and SIB-IMRT is a highly active regimen, particularly in patients with p16-positive disease.

Background Daratumumab (DARA) is a human IgG1 kappa monoclonal antibody that targets cells expressing CD38, which is highly expressed in multiple myeloma (MM) cells. In the phase 2 MMY2002 (Sirius) trial, treatment with single agent DARA resulted in a 29% overall response rate, with a median PFS of 3.7 months in heavily pretreated MM patients (Lonial S. J Clin Oncol. 2015; 33(suppl): abstrLBA8512). However, CD38 is also expressed on red blood cells (RBCs) and DARA binding to RBCs results in pan-reactivity on RBC panel testing using an indirect antiglobulin test (IAT). Recently, it was reported that treating RBCs with dithiothreitol (DTT) removes DARA to allow for accurate antibody testing (Chapuy CI, et al. Transfusion. 2015;55(6pt2):1545-1554) but also denatures Kell antigen in the process. To date, little is known about the impact of DARA interference with IAT on the outcomes of patients requiring packed RBC (PRBC) transfusions. Methods The frequencies of PRBC transfusions and any transfusion-related adverse events from all 124 patients treated on the Sirius study were obtained from the clinical database as of the data cut off of January 9th, 2015. Although details of transfusions were not prospectively collected, surrogate outcomes of transfusion reactions within 4 weeks of the transfusion were analyzed including change in hemoglobin (Hb), elevated bilirubin, fever, and hypotension. In addition, we evaluated IAT results and transfusion outcomes of the 8 patients treated at our institution. Results During the study, 47 patients received 147 transfusions with a total of 235 units of PRBCs. To date, no transfusion-related reactions were noted. Of the 47 patients, 8 patients were treated at our institution. One patient showed multiple alloantibodies (anti-E, -K, -Jkb, -Fya, -Fy3, -S, Knops) on IAT prior to DARA. This individual and 6 others agglutinated all RBCs on panel testing with weak reactivity at the antihuman globulin phase of testing. Reactivity was enhanced by gel testing compared to reactivity in low ionic strength saline and was unaffected by enzymatic treatment with ficin. Six out of 7 patients had a negative autocontrol. The one patient with a positive autocontrol had a weakly positive direct antiglobulin test with IgG. Six out of these 7 patients with panagglutinin had a positive result on the first IAT after initiation of DARA, ranging from 7 to 175 days (median 49). One patient did not have an IAT after initiation of DARA. A total of 9 leuko-reduced, irradiated, phenotypically matched RBCs were given to 3 patients during DARA treatment, and additional 9 units were given to 3 patients after DARA completion while their IATs remained positive. All transfusions resulted in an appropriate rise in Hb (median 1.0 g/dL, range 0.5-2.7) without any associated transfusion reactions. None of the patients made new unexpected RBC alloantibodies while receiving phenotypically matched RBCs. Conclusion For the 7 patients at our site with IAT testing after DARA treatment, all demonstrated pan-reactivity on RBC panel testing. Treatment with DTT removes this interference but also denatures Kell antigen in the process. Most hospitals do not use DTT as part of routine immunohematology workups; therefore, we recommend obtaining a red cell phenotype prior to initiating DARA treatment and providing phenotypically matched blood thereafter to avoid resultant difficulties in new alloantibody identification and delays in providing compatible PRBCs. Based on a database query of all 124 patients as well as all patients at our site, PRBC transfusions did not appear to be associated with complications. In a MM patient population that will frequently require PRBC transfusion, blood bank and hematologist/oncologist awareness of these findings is important to minimize errors or delays in providing compatible PRBCs. Disclosures Chari: Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Biotest: Other: Institutional Research Funding; Array Biopharma: Consultancy, Other: Institutional Research Funding, Research Funding. Jagannath:Celgene: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; MERCK: Honoraria; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Catamero:Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Lecturer; Onyx: Other: Lecturer; Millennium/Takeda: Other: Lecturer. Verina:Celgene: Other: Lecturer. Doshi:Janssen: Employment. Feng:Janssen: Employment. Uhlar:Janssen: Employment. Khan:Janssen: Employment. Ahmadi:Janssen: Employment. Voorhees:Millennium/Takeda and Novartis: Honoraria; Array Biopharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, and Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Celgene, GlxoSmithKline, and Oncopeptides: Research Funding.