Phase 1/1B trial to assess the activity of entrectinib in children and adolescents with recurrent or refractory solid tumors including central nervous system (CNS) tumors.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
10009 Background: Entrectinib is a CNS-penetrant oral inhibitor of TrkA/B/C, ROS1 and ALK tyrosine kinases. We report the efficacy of entrectinib in children with recurrent/refractory solid or CNS tumors. Methods: Patients ≤ 20y old with recurrent/refractory solid tumors were eligible. After determination of the recommended dose in all-comers, disease-specific expansion cohorts of CNS and solid tumors harboring target aberrations in NTRK1/2/3, ROS1 or ALK, and neuroblastoma (NBL), regardless of mutation spectrum, were enrolled. Response, assessed by Investigator, was classified as complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD) or progressive disease (PD) using RANO for CNS tumors, RECIST for solid tumors, and Curie score for NBL. Results: Between May 2016 and October 2018, 29 patients aged 4.9m–20y (median 7y) were enrolled and 28 were evaluated for response. Entrectinib was well tolerated. Dose limiting toxicities were elevated creatinine, dysgeusia, fatigue and pulmonary edema. The recommended dose was 550 mg/m 2 daily. All responses occurred at doses ≥ 400 mg/m 2 . In CNS tumors (n = 6), all high-grade with gene fusions: 1 achieved a CR ( ETV6-NTRK3); 3 achieved a PR ( TPR-NTRK1, EEF1G-ROS1, EML1-NTRK2); 1 achieved an unconfirmed PR ( GOPC-ROS1); and 1 has yet to be evaluated ( KANK1-NTRK2). In extracranial solid tumors (n = 8), 6 had a fusion of whom 1 achieved a CR ( DCTN1-ALK) and 5 achieved a PR ( TFG1-ROS1, EML4-NTRK3, ETV6-NTRK3, KIF5B-ALK, ETV6-NTRK3). In NBL (n = 15): 1 achieved a CR ( ALK F1174L). Median duration of therapy was 85d (6–592d) for all patients; 56d (6–338d) for non-responders; and 281d (56–592d) for responders. Median time to response was 57d (30–58d). Conclusions: Entrectinib produced striking, rapid and durable responses in all children with refractory CNS and solid tumors harboring NTRK1/2/3, ROS1 or ALK fusions (11 out of 11) as well as in an ALK-mutated NBL. No responses were seen in tumors lacking aberrations in target kinases. These results support the continued evaluation of entrectinib as a targeted therapeutic in solid tumors with NTRK1/2/3, ROS1 and ALK fusions, especially in high-grade CNS neoplasms. Clinical trial information: NCT02650401.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".