BackgroundPatients with advanced rare cancers have poor prognosis and few treatment options. As immunotherapy is effective across multiple cancer types, we aimed to assess pembrolizumab (programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor) in patients with advanced rare cancers.MethodsIn this open-label, phase 2 trial, patients with advanced rare cancers whose tumors had progressed on standard therapies, if available, within the previous 6 months were enrolled in nine tumor-specific cohorts and a 10th cohort for other rare histologies. Pembrolizumab 200 mg was administered intravenously every 21 days. The primary endpoint was non-progression rate (NPR) at 27 weeks; secondary endpoints were safety and tolerability, objective response rate (ORR), and clinical benefit rate (CBR).ResultsA total of 127 patients treated between August 15, 2016 and July 27, 2018 were included in this analysis. At the time of data cut-off, the NPR at 27 weeks was 28% (95% CI, 19% to 37%). A confirmed objective response (OR) was seen in 15 of 110 (14%) evaluable patients (complete response in one and partial response in 14). CBR, defined as the percentage of patients with an OR or stable disease ≥4 months, was 38% (n=42). Treatment was ongoing in 11 of 15 patients with OR at last follow-up. In the cohort with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the skin, the NPR at 27 weeks was 36%, ORR 31%, and CBR 38%. In patients with adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC), NPR at 27 weeks was 31%, ORR 15%, and CBR 54%. In the patients with carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP), NPR at 27 weeks was 33%, ORR 23%, and CBR 54%. In the paraganglioma–pheochromocytoma cohort, NPR at 27 weeks was 43%, ORR 0%, and CBR 75%. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 66 of 127 (52%) patients, and 12 (9%) had grade ≥3 TRAEs. The most common TRAEs were fatigue (n=25) and rash (n=17). There were six deaths, all of which were unrelated to the study drug.ConclusionsThe favorable toxicity profile and antitumor activity seen in patients with SCC of skin, ACC, CUP, and paraganglioma–pheochromocytoma supports further evaluation of pembrolizumab in this patient population.Trial registration numberNCT02721732

Purpose mTOR inhibitors like temsirolimus may result in undesirable AKT upregulation. Metformin inhibits mTOR through different mechanisms and may enhance temsirolimus’s antitumor activity. We conducted an open-label phase I dose escalation trial of this drug combination in patients with advanced/refractory cancers. Methods Temsirolimus, 25 mg weekly, was combined with an escalating daily dose of metformin (level 1: 500; level 2: 1000; level 3: 1500; level 4: 2000 mg) by utilizing a standard 3+3 trial design. Treatment was administered in 28-day cycles following initial two-week metformin titration during the first cycle. Results Twenty-one patients (median age, 56 years) with sarcoma (n=8), colorectal (n=3), endometrial (n=4), uterine carcinosarcoma (n=2), ovarian (n=2), and other (n=2) cancers were enrolled. Patients had received median of 4 prior systemic treatments. Two dose limiting toxicities were observed (grade 3 mucositis, grade 3 renal failure); both patients continued treatment after dose modification. Fifty-six percent patients had stable disease as best response; clinical benefit rate was 22%. Patients continued treatment for median of 11 weeks. Conclusions Combination temsirolimus/metformin was well tolerated with modestly promising effectiveness among this heavily pretreated patient cohort. We recommend a dose of temsirolimus 25 mg weekly and metformin 2000 mg daily for phase II study.

No abstract

Learning Objectives Assess barriers for advanced cancer patients to participate in phase I trials. Discuss strategies to improve the rate of enrollment of cancer patients in phase I trials.

PurposeComplementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has been popular among patients with cancer for several decades. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the prevalence of CAM use and to identify the factors affecting CAM use in a large patient cohort seen at a comprehensive cancer center in Turkey.Patients and MethodsAn investigator-designed survey was completed by volunteer patients who visited the outpatient clinic in the medical oncology department. CAM use encompassed pharmacologic agents including vitamins, dietary supplements, and herbal products or nonpharmacologic methods like prayer, meditation, hypnosis, massage, or acupuncture.ResultsOf 1,499 patients who answered the survey, 1,433 (96%) used nonpharmacologic CAM and 60 (4%) used pharmacologic CAM (pCAM). The most frequent types of CAM used were prayer (n = 1,433) followed by herbal products (n = 42). pCAM use was not significantly associated with age (P = .63), sex (P = .15), diagnosis (P = .15), or income level (P = .09). However, it was significantly associated with the level of education (P = .0067) and employment status (P < .001). Patients with higher education levels used more pCAM products (P = .025). Among 60 pCAM users, six patients (10%) used pCAM for more than 2 years and 22 (36%) did not consult their physicians about their pCAM use. Only nine patients (15%) reported unpleasant adverse effects related to pCAM.ConclusionAlthough CAM use was high among our patients, prevalence of pCAM use was lower than expected. Patients with higher education levels tended to use more pCAM.