Tumor genomic profiling for personalized oncology therapy is being widely applied in clinical practice even as it is being evaluated more formally in clinical trials. Given the complexities of genomic data and its application to clinical use, molecular tumor boards with diverse expertise can provide guidance to oncologists and patients seeking to implement personalized genetically targeted therapy in practice. A multidisciplinary molecular tumor board reviewed tumor molecular profiling reports from consecutive referrals at the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins over a 3-year period. The tumor board weighed evidence for actionability of genomic alterations identified by molecular profiling and provided recommendations including US Food and Drug Administration-approved drug therapy, clinical trials of matched targeted therapy, off-label use of such therapy, and additional tumor or germline genetic testing. One hundred fifty-five patients were reviewed. Actionable genomic alterations were identified in 132 patients (85%). Off-label therapies were recommended in 37 patients (24%). Eleven patients were treated off-label, and 13 patients were enrolled onto clinical trials of matched targeted therapies. Median progression-free survival of patients treated with matched therapies was 5 months (95% CI, 2.9 months to not reached), and the progression-free survival probability at 6 months was 43%(95% CI, 26% to 71%). Lack of locally available clinical trials was the major limitation on clinical actionability of tumor profiling reports. The molecular tumor board recommended off-label targeted therapies for a quarter of all patients reviewed. Outcomes were heterogeneous, although 43% of patients receiving genomically matched therapy derived clinical benefit lasting at least 6 months. Until more data become available from precision oncology trials, molecular tumor boards can help guide appropriate use of tumor molecular testing to direct therapy.

PURPOSE: Predictive biomarkers to identify patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer who may benefit from targeted therapy alone are required. We hypothesized that early measurements of tumor maximum standardized uptake value corrected for lean body mass (SULmax) on 18F-labeled fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) would predict pathologic complete response (pCR) to pertuzumab and trastuzumab (PT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage II or III, estrogen receptor-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer received four cycles of neoadjuvant PT. 18F-labeled fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography was performed at baseline and 15 days after PT initiation (C1D15). Eighty evaluable patients were required to test the null hypothesis that the area under the curve of percent change in SULmax by C1D15 predicting pCR is ≤ 0.65, with a one-sided type I error rate of 10%. RESULTS: Eighty-eight women were enrolled (83 evaluable), and 85% (75 of 88) completed all four cycles of PT. pCR after PT alone was 22%. Receiver operator characteristic analysis of percent change in SULmax by C1D15 yielded an area under the curve of 0.72 (80% CI, 0.64 to 0.80; one-sided P = .12), which did not reject the null hypothesis. However, between patients who obtained pCR and who did not, a significant difference in median percent reduction in SULmax by C1D15 was observed (63.8% v 41.8%; P = .004) and SULmax reduction ≥ 40% was more prevalent (83% v 52%; P = .03; positive predictive value, 31%). Participants not obtaining a 40% reduction in SULmax by C1D15 were unlikely to obtain pCR (negative predictive value, 91%). CONCLUSION: Although the primary objective was not met, early changes in SULmax predict response to PT in estrogen receptor-negative and HER2-positive breast cancer. Once optimized, this quantitative imaging strategy may facilitate tailoring of therapy in this setting.

Tebotelimab, a bispecific PD-1×LAG-3 DART molecule that blocks both PD-1 and LAG-3, was investigated for clinical safety and activity in a phase 1 dose-escalation and cohort-expansion clinical trial in patients with solid tumors or hematologic malignancies and disease progression on previous treatment. Primary endpoints were safety and maximum tolerated dose of tebotelimab when administered as a single agent (n = 269) or in combination with the anti-HER2 antibody margetuximab (n = 84). Secondary endpoints included anti-tumor activity. In patients with advanced cancer treated with tebotelimab monotherapy, 68% (184/269) experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs; 22% were grade ≥3). No maximum tolerated dose was defined; the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) was 600 mg once every 2 weeks. There were tumor decreases in 34% (59/172) of response-evaluable patients in the dose-escalation cohorts, with objective responses in multiple solid tumor types, including PD-1-refractory disease, and in LAG-3+ non-Hodgkin lymphomas, including CAR-T refractory disease. To enhance potential anti-tumor responses, we tested margetuximab plus tebotelimab. In patients with HER2+ tumors treated with tebotelimab plus margetuximab, 74% (62/84) had TRAEs (17% were grade ≥3). The RP2D was 600 mg once every 3 weeks. The confirmed objective response rate in these patients was 19% (14/72), including responses in patients typically not responsive to anti-HER2/anti-PD-1 combination therapy. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03219268 .