BACKGROUND: Though cancer is more prevalent in the older population, this patient group are underrepresented in phase I oncology trials.
OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the use of a geriatric screening tool (SAOP3) in patients of 70 years of age or older who attended a Phase I Clinical Trials Unit, with the aim of assessing the feasibility of the tool and identifying potential unmet needs in this patient group.
METHODS: Twenty-two patients over the age of 70 completed the SAOP3 questionnaire. Geriatric impairments and needs were analysed with descriptive statistics. Qualitative responses were grouped in themes using structured thematic analysis.
RESULTS: All of patients triggered at least 1 geriatric domain, most commonly mobility. Six core themes were identified as being important to the patient including family, friends and positivity. On cognition assessment over 20% of patients triggered as requiring further cognitive assessment. The group had a relatively high screen fail risk.
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, routine geriatric screening withSAOP3 was feasible and identified areas of patient need. Results highlight the prevalence of psychological distress and cognitive impairment. Geriatric screening offers an opportunity for prehabilitation prior to trial and support during trial participation to optimise safety and improve trial access.

Activated guided irradiation by X-ray (AGuIX) nanoparticles are gadolinium-based agents that have the dual benefit of mimicking the effects of a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) contrast agent used in a clinical routine and enhancing the radiotherapeutic activity of conventional X-rays (for cancer treatment). This \"theragnostic\" action is explained on the one hand by the paramagnetic properties of gadolinium and on the other hand by the generation of high densities of secondary radiation following the interaction of ionizing radiation and high-Z atoms, which leads to enhanced radiation dose deposits within the tumors where the nanoparticles accumulate. Here, we report the results of a phase I trial that aimed to assess the safety and determine the optimal dose of AGuIX nanoparticles in combination with chemoradiation and brachytherapy in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. AGuIX nanoparticles were administered intravenously and appropriately accumulated within tumors on a dose-dependent manner, as assessed by T1-weighted MRI, with a rapid urinary clearance of uncaught nanoparticles. We show that the observed tumor accumulation of the compounds can support precise delineation of functional target volumes at the time of brachytherapy based on gadolinium enhancement. AGuIX nanoparticles combined with chemoradiation appeared well tolerated among the 12 patients treated, with no dose-limiting toxicity observed. Treatment yielded excellent local control, with all patients achieving complete remission of the primary tumor. One patient had a distant tumor recurrence. These results demonstrate the clinical feasibility of using theranostic nanoparticles to augment the accuracy of MRI-based treatments while focally enhancing the radiation activity in tumors.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients are underrepresented in clinical trials, particularly in early-phase studies. Our study assessed the safety and efficacy of novel anti-cancer treatments investigated in early-phase clinical trials, comparing outcomes between younger and elderly patients.
METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed data from patients enrolled in phase I/II trials at our center between January 2014 and April 2021. We evaluated clinicopathologic characteristics, toxicity, and clinical efficacy, categorizing patients into younger (≤ 65 years) and elderly (> 65 years) groups.
RESULTS: 419 patients were included with a median age of 56 years. Among these, 107 (26 %) were older than 65 years. Predominant cancers included breast (48 %), lung (10 %), and melanoma (5 %). Patients were treated in 64 trials, predominantly receiving immunotherapy-based (47 %) or targeted therapy-based (45 %) treatment. Elderly presented with poorer ECOG performance status (P = 0.001) and had fewer prior therapy lines (P = 0.01) than younger patients. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) were similar across age groups (31 % younger vs 33 % elderly; P = 0.7), including in combination therapy scenarios. However, elderly patients experienced more AEs with antibody-drug conjugates compared to younger counterparts (56 % vs 14 %, P = 0.036) and were more likely to discontinue treatment due to toxicity (15 % vs 7 %; P = 0.011). No significant age-related differences in response rates and survival outcomes were observed across treatment modalities, except for immunotherapy-based regimens for which elderly patients exhibited higher response rates, disease control rates, and prolonged progression-free survival.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that elderly exhibit comparable safety and efficacy outcomes to younger patients in early-phase clinical trials for new cancer drugs. This underscores the importance of including elderly patients in phase I/II trials to ensure the generalizability of study results and mitigate age-related disparities in cancer treatment access.

BACKGROUND: In light of the FDA\'s Project Optimus initiative, there is fresh interest in leveraging Patient-reported Outcome (PRO) data to enhance the assessment of tolerability for investigational therapies within early phase dose-finding oncology trials. Typically, dose escalation in most trial designs is solely reliant on clinician assessed adverse events. Research has shown a disparity between patients and clinicians when assessing whether an investigational therapy is tolerable, leading to the recommendation of potentially intolerable doses for further investigation in subsequent trials. It is also increasingly recognized that patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) plays a pivotal role in enriching trial design and conduct. However, to our knowledge, no PPIE has explored the optimal integration of PROs in the development of advanced statistical trial designs within early phase dose-finding oncology trials.
METHODS: A virtual PPIE session was held with nine participants on 18th October 2023 to discuss the incorporation of PROs within a dose-finding trial design. This cross disciplinary session was developed and led by a team of statisticians, clinical specialists, qualitative experts, and trial methodologists. Following the session, in-depth perspectives were provided by two patient advocates who actively engaged in the PPIE session. We discuss the importance of PPIE in shaping advanced dose-finding trial designs, share insights from patients on integrating PROs to inform treatment tolerability, and present a template for meaningful patient involvement in trial design development.
RESULTS: Participants generally supported the introduction of PROs within dose-finding trials but showed some apprehensiveness as to how PROs may reduce the size of the recommended dose (and potentially efficacious effect). Some participants shared that they may be reluctant to record the real severity of their symptoms via PROs if it would mean that they would have to discontinue treatment. They discussed that PROs could be used to assess tolerability rather than toxicity of a dose.
CONCLUSIONS: Amplifying patient voice in the development of patient-centric dose-finding trial designs is now essential. This paper offers an exemplary illustration of how trialists and methodologists can effectively incorporate patient voice in the future development of advanced dose-finding trial designs.
The aim of dose-finding oncology trials is to make sure a treatment is safe, understand its side effects, and recommend the right dose (or doses) for future clinical trials. Traditionally, a patient’s tolerance to treatment is assessed by doctors who evaluate toxicities (side-effects) using established grading guidelines. Research has shown that doctors might not identify all the side effects that patients actually experience during a trial.There is growing interest in the introduction of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) within dose-finding trials. PROs are reports of a patient’s health and well-being experiences which come directly from the patient themselves, usually assessed using a questionnaire.In a dose-finding trial, we start with a low dose of a drug and increase it until too many patients have severe side effects. The highest safe dose is then investigated in a later phase trial.   We are suggesting a new way to do these trials. We want to look at both what doctors see as severe side effects and what patients say. This enables us to recommend a dose that balances both perspectives. We would also like to ask patients what level of risk they are comfortable with regarding severe side effects.In this paper, we highlight the importance of involving patients in creating advanced dose-finding trial designs, particularly with PROs to help decide whether a dose is tolerable for patients. We also share findings of a patient and public involvement and engagement session and provide a guide for meaningful patient involvement in developing trial designs.

Dose selection for investigations of intrinsic and extrinsic factors of pharmacokinetic variability as well as safety is a challenging question in the early clinical stage of drug development. The dose of an investigational product is chosen considering the compound information available to date, feasibility of the assessments, regulatory requirements, and the intent to maximize information for later regulatory submission. This review selected 37 programs as case examples of recently approved drugs to explore the doses selected with focus on studies of drug interaction, renal and hepatic impairment, food effect and concentration-QTc assessment.The review found that regulatory agencies may consider alternative approaches if justified and safe as illustrated in these examples. It is thus recommendable to use the first in human trial as an opportunity to assess QT-prolongation and drug interactions using probes or endogenous markers while maximizing the DDI potential, increasing sensitivity and ensuring safety. Early understanding of dose proportionality assists dose finding and simple and fast to conduct DDI study designs are advantageous. Single dose impairment studies despite non-proportional/time-dependent PK are often acceptability.Overall, the early understanding of the drug\'s safety profile is essential to ensure the safety of doses selected while preventing clinical trials with unnecessary exposure when using high doses or multiple doses. The information collected in this retrospective survey is a good reminder to tailor the early clinical program to the profile and needs of the molecule and consider regulatory opportunities to streamline the development path.

BACKGROUND: HY0721 is a novel inhibitor of sulfonylurea receptor 1-transient receptor potential melastatin 4 (SUR1-TRPM4) for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke. This study aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles of single and multiple intravenous administration of HY0721 in Chinese healthy subjects.
METHODS: The study enrolled 48 and 30 healthy volunteers in the single-ascending dose (SAD) cohort (20, 60, 120, 240, and 320 mg) and multiple-ascending dose (MAD) cohort (60, 120, and 160 mg/bid), respectively, to receive the corresponding dosage of HY0721 or placebo. Safety monitoring included but was not limited to recording adverse events (AEs), vital signs, electrocardiograms, and laboratory tests. The blood samples were collected from subjects to determine the concentrations of HY0721 for PK evaluation.
RESULTS: The administration of HY0721 showed good safety and tolerability up to 320 mg in the SAD study and up to 160 mg twice daily in the MAD study. The most common AE was injection site reaction, and no AE led to discontinuation of administration or subject dropout. The exposures of HY0721 increased greater than dose proportional manner at the dosages of 20 to 320 mg in the SAD study. A linear PK profile was observed following multiple doses ranging from 60 to 160 mg twice daily, with no evidence of accumulation. Additionally, the human effective dose of HY0721 was estimated to be 120 mg.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the intravenous administration of HY0721 is safe and well-tolerated in Chinese healthy subjects and provided 60 to 160 mg b.i.d. as the recommended dosing range for further clinical trials.
BACKGROUND: ChinaDrugTrials.Org.cn; No. CTR20202604, 18 December 2020.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have efficacy in several solid tumors but limited efficacy in glioblastoma (GBM). This study evaluated the safety of anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 ICIs alone or in combination in newly diagnosed GBM after completion of standard radiochemotherapy with the subsequent intent to test combinatorial ICIs in this setting.
METHODS: The primary endpoint was dose limiting toxicity (DLT) for adults with unifocal, supratentorial newly diagnosed GBM after resection and chemoradiation. Ipilimumab and nivolumab were tested separately and in combination with a planned expansion cohort dependent upon DLT results.
RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were enrolled at 9 institutions; 6 to each DLT assessment cohort and 14 to the expansion cohort. Median age: 55 years, 67.7% male, 83.9% white. Treatment was well tolerated with a 16% Grade 4 events; the combination did not have unexpectedly increased toxicity, with no Grade 5 events. One DLT was seen in each single-agent treatment; none were observed in the combination, leading to expanded accrual of the combined treatment. Median follow-up was 19.6 mo. For all patients receiving combination treatment, median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 20.7 mo. and 16.1 mo., respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: IPI and NIVO are safe and tolerable with toxicities similar to those noted with other cancers when given in combination with adjuvant TMZ for newly diagnosed GBM. Combination IPI+NIVO is not substantially more toxic than single agents. These results support a subsequent efficacy trial to test the combination of ICIs in a phase II/III for patients with newly diagnosed GBM.

BACKGROUND: We report data from Stage 1 of an ongoing two-staged, phase I/II randomized clinical trial (NCT05073003) with a 4-component Generalized Modules for Membrane Antigens-based vaccine against Shigella sonnei and S. flexneri 1b, 2a and 3a (altSonflex1-2-3, GSK).
METHODS: 18-50-year-old Europeans (N=102) were randomized (2:1) to receive two injections of altSonflex1-2-3 or placebo at 3- or 6-month interval. Safety and immunogenicity were assessed at pre-specified timepoints.
RESULTS: The most common solicited administration-site event (until 7 days post-each injection) and unsolicited adverse event (until 28 days post-each injection) were pain (altSonflex1-2-3: 97.1%; Placebo: 58.8%) and headache (32.4%; 23.5%), respectively. All serotype-specific functional IgG antibodies peaked 14-28 days post-injection 1 and remained substantially higher than pre-vaccination at 3 or 6 months post-vaccination; the second injection did not boost but restored the initial immune response. The highest seroresponse rates (≥4-fold increase in titers over baseline) were obtained against S. flexneri 2a (ELISA: post-injection 1: 91.0%; post-injection 2 [Day {D}113; D197]: 100%; 97.0%; serum bactericidal activity (SBA): post-injection 1: 94.4%; post-injection 2: 85.7%; 88.9%) followed by S. sonnei (ELISA: post-injection 1: 77.6%; post-injection 2: 84.6%; 78.8%; SBA: post-injection 1: 83.3%; post-injection 2: 71.4%; 88.9%). Immune responses against S. flexneri 1b and S. flexneri 3a, as measured by both ELISA and SBA, were numerically lower compared to those against S. sonnei and S. flexneri 2a.
CONCLUSIONS: No safety signals or concerns were identified. altSonflex1-2-3 induced functional serotype-specific immune responses, allowing further clinical development in the target population.
What is the context? Shigella bacteria cause severe and often bloody diarrhea, called shigellosis, that affects mostly young children and can be life-threatening. Shigellosis is particularly common in low- and middle-income countries due to inadequate sanitation and limited access to healthcare. Since the immune response to Shigella is serotype-specific, an ideal vaccine should include multiple Shigella serotypes to ensure broad protection. What is new? We developed a novel vaccine against Shigella that includes Shigella sonnei and three prevalent Shigella flexneri serotypes. In Stage 1 (phase I) of the study, healthy European adults received two vaccine injections given 3 or 6 months apart. We found that: The vaccine was well tolerated, and no safety signals or concerns were identified.Regardless of the interval between injections, specific antibodies were elicited against all four Shigella serotypes, with highest levels against Shigella flexneri 2a and Shigella sonnei.Functional antibody levels peaked after the first injection, remaining higher than the baseline up to 6 months. A second injection did not boost responses but restored functional antibody levels to those after the first injection. What is the impact? The vaccine can now be tested in Stage 2 (phase II) of the study in Africa, a region highly affected by shigellosis.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer in women, with an estimated 342,000 deaths worldwide in 2020. Current standard of care in the UK for locally advanced cervical cancer is concurrent chemoradiotherapy with weekly cisplatin, yet 5-year overall survival rates are only 65% with a distant relapse rate of 50%. Inhibitors of Apoptosis Proteins (IAPs) are often overexpressed in cancer cells and associated with tumour progression and resistance to treatment. Tolinapant, developed by Astex Pharmaceuticals, is an IAP antagonist with an additional mechanism of action via down-regulation of NF-kB, an important regulator in cervical cancer. Preclinical studies performed using tolinapant in combination with cisplatin and radiotherapy showed inhibition of tumour growth and enhanced survival. There is therefore a strong rationale to combine tolinapant with chemoradiotherapy (CRT).
METHODS: CRAIN is a phase Ib open-label, dose escalation study to characterise the safety, tolerability and initial evidence for clinical activity of tolinapant when administered in combination with cisplatin based CRT. Up to 42 patients with newly diagnosed cervix cancer will be recruited from six UK secondary care sites. The number of participants and the duration of the trial will depend on toxicities observed and dose escalation decisions, utilising a TiTE-CRM statistical design. Treatment will constist of standard of care CRT with 45 Gy external beam radiotherapy given in 25 daily fractions over 5 weeks with weekly cisplatin 40mg/m2. This is followed by brachytherapy for which common schedules will be 28 Gy in 4 fractions high-dose-rate or 34 Gy in 2 fractions pulsed-dose-rate. Tolinapant will be administered in fixed dose capsules taken orally daily for seven consecutive days as an outpatient on alternate weeks (weeks 1, 3, 5) during chemoradiation. Dose levels for tolinapant which will be assessed are: 60 mg; 90 mg (starting level); 120 mg; 150 mg; 180 mg. Escalation will be guided by emerging safety data and decisions by the Safety Review Committee.
CONCLUSIONS: If this trial determines a recommended phase II dose and shows tolinapant to be safe and effective in combination with CRT, it would warrant future phase trials. Ultimately, we hope to provide a synergistic treatment option for these patients to improve outcome.
BACKGROUND: EudraCT Number: 2021-006555-34 (issued 30th November 2021); ISRCTN18574865 (registered 30th August 2022).

Myristoylation, the N-terminal addition of the fatty acid myristate to proteins, regulates membrane-bound signal transduction pathways important in cancer cell biology. This modification is catalyzed by two N-myristoyltransferases, NMT1 and NMT2. Zelenirstat is a first-in-class potent oral small molecule inhibitor of both NMT1 and NMT2 proteins. Patients with advanced solid tumors and relapsed/refractory (R/R) B-cell lymphomas were enrolled in an open label, phase I dose escalation trial of oral daily zelenirstat, administered in 28-day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The endpoints were to evaluate dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) to establish a maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetic parameters, and anticancer activity. Twenty-nine patients were enrolled (25 advanced solid tumor; 4 R/R B-cell lymphoma) and 24 were DLT-evaluable. Dosing ranged from 20 mg once daily (OD) to 210 mg OD without DLT, but gastrointestinal DLTS were seen in the 280 mg cohort. MTD and recommended phase 2 dose were 210 mg OD. Common adverse events were predominantly Gr ≤ 2 nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and fatigue. Plasma concentrations peaked at 2 h with terminal half-lives averaging 10 h. Steady state was achieved by day 15, and higher doses achieved trough concentrations predicted to be therapeutic. Stable disease as best response was seen in eight (28%) patients. Progression-free survival and overall survival were significantly better in patients receiving 210 mg OD compared to those receiving lower doses. Zelenirstat is well-tolerated, achieves plasma exposures expected for efficacy, and shows early signs of anticancer activity. Further clinical development of zelenirstat is warranted.