MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract B045: Ataxia telangiectasia- and Rad3-related kinase inhibitor (ATRi) camonsertib in combination with low dose gemcitabine in patients with solid tumors with DNA damage response (DDR) aberrations: Preclinical and Phase 1b results

2023· article· en· W4389227555 on OpenAlexaff
Ezra Y. Rosen, Timothy A. Yap, Elisa Fontana, Elizabeth K. Lee, Devalingam Mahalingam, Martin Højgaard, Niharika B. Mettu, Ruth Plummer, Ian M. Silverman, Joseph D. Schonhoft, Emeline Bacqué, Adrian J. Fretland, Gabriela Vilas Bôas Gomez, Danielle Ulanet, Kezhen Fei, Julia Yang, María Koehler, Anne Roulston, Li Li, Michal Zimmermann, Benedito A. Carneiro, Stéphanie Lheureux

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Cancer Therapeutics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTolerabilityMedicineGemcitabineInternal medicineResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsPharmacologyOncologyClinical trialCancerPhases of clinical researchAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Antitumor activity and good tolerability of camonsertib (cam) monotherapy in patients (pts) with recurrent solid tumors was previously reported. Preclinical data showed that cam-related tumor cell death is potentiated by the replication stress-inducing agent gemcitabine (gem) even at low doses, resulting in synergistic combination activity. We evaluated safety/tolerability and efficacy of cam+gem in this Ph1b trial (TRESR; NCT04497116). Methods: A tumor xenograft (Granta-519; ATM loss of function) was tested with a range of cam+gem doses. Pts >18yr, ECOG 0-1, with advanced solid tumors with deleterious DDR alterations were enrolled. Cam (80-120mg) + de-escalating gem doses (1000-100mg/m2) were given over 21- or 28-day (d) cycles (cam d1-2/3 and d8-9/10 or d15-16/17; gem d1 and d8 or d15). Dose decisions followed BOIN methodology. Endpoints were safety/tolerability, recommended Ph2 dose (RP2D), response rate (RECIST v1.1, CA-125 [GCIG], or PSA [PCWG3]), clinical benefit rate (CBR; response or treatment [Tx] duration ≥16 weeks [w] without progression), ctDNA molecular response rate (MRR; best reduction in mean variant allele frequency ≥50%), and cam PK. Replication stress markers were analyzed in surrogate normal tissue. Results: In a tumor xenograft model, low doses of cam (1/3 of maximum tolerated dose [MTD]) and gem (1/20 of MTD) resulted in tumor regression not observed in single agent arms, with good tolerability. As of May 2023, 54 pts were treated with cam+gem in TRESR (ovarian [n=19], pancreatic [n=8], breast [n=6], other [n=21] tumors); enrollment genes included ATM (n=12), BRCA1 (n=18), BRCA2 (n=16), other (n=8). No drug-drug interactions were noted. RECIST v1.1 or CA-125 responses were observed in 5 pts (40 evaluable): 3 cPR, 1 uPR in pts with ovarian (n=2; 1 ATM, 1 BRCA1), endometrial (gPALB2), and breast (gBRCA1) cancers; 1 CA-125 response in a pt (ovarian/gBRCA1) with SD (on Tx 21w+). Four additional pts (uterine carcinosarcoma, ovarian, liver, lung) with SD were on Tx ≥6 months. CBR was 42.4% (14/33) in evaluable pts and 66.7% (8/12) in pts with gynecological cancers. MRR was 58% (7/12) in evaluable pts. Myelotoxicity, the most frequent Tx-related toxicity, improved with decreasing gem doses. Responses were maintained in the 3 pts with cPR following reductions to ≤200mg/m2 gem; the pts with the uPR and CA-125 responses started Tx at 200 and 100mg/m2 gem, respectively. Preliminary RP2D is 80mg cam (50% of monotherapy RP2D) + 400mg/m2 gem, 28d cycle (1w on/1w off). Related Grade 3+ neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia occurred in 44%, 11%, and 0% pts, respectively (n=9). Importantly, neutrophil nadir occurred in the 1w off Tx with quick rebound, alleviating the need for dose modifications. Conclusion: The synergy of low doses of cam+gem, demonstrated in preclinical studies, was confirmed in the clinical setting. A safe and tolerable dose and schedule of the combination was identified. The antitumor efficacy supports further development in pts with gynecological cancers; evaluation at RP2D is ongoing. Citation Format: Ezra Rosen, Timothy A Yap, Elisa Fontana, Elizabeth K Lee, Devalingam Mahalingam, Martin Højgaard, Niharika B Mettu, Gregory M Cote, Ruth Plummer, Ian M Silverman, Joseph D Schonhoft, Emeline Bacque, Adrian J Fretland, Gabriela Gomez, Danielle Ulanet, Kezhen Fei, Julia Yang, Maria Koehler, Anne Roulston, Li Li, Michal Zimmermann, Benedito A Carneiro, Stephanie Lheureux. Ataxia telangiectasia- and Rad3-related kinase inhibitor (ATRi) camonsertib in combination with low dose gemcitabine in patients with solid tumors with DNA damage response (DDR) aberrations: Preclinical and Phase 1b results [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR-NCI-EORTC Virtual International Conference on Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics; 2023 Oct 11-15; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Mol Cancer Ther 2023;22(12 Suppl):Abstract nr B045.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Cancer TherapeuticsSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207