PURPOSE To analyze the effect of radiation dose escalation to the primary tumor on local tumor control in definitive chemoradiation (dCRT) for patients with esophageal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with medically inoperable and/or irresectable esophageal carcinoma, referred for dCRT, were randomly assigned between a standard dose (SD) of 50.4 Gy/1.8 Gy for 5.5 weeks to the tumor and regional lymph nodes and a high dose (HD) up to a total dose of 61.6 Gy to the primary tumor. Chemotherapy consisted of courses of concurrent carboplatin (area under the curve 2) and paclitaxel (50 mg/m2) in both arms once a week for 6 weeks. The primary end point was local progression-free survival. RESULTS Between September 2012 and June 2018, 260 patients were included. Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) was present in 61% of patients, and 39% had adenocarcinoma (AC). Radiation treatment was completed by 94%, and 85% had at least five courses of chemotherapy. The median follow-up time for all patients was 50 months. The 3-year local progression-free survival (LPFS) was 70% in the SD arm versus 73% in the HD arm (not significant). The LPFS for SCC and AC was 75% versus 79% and 61% versus 61% for SD and HD, respectively (not significant). The 3-year locoregional progression-free survival was 52% and 59% for the SD and HD arms, respectively ( P = .08). Overall, grade 4 and 5 common toxicity criteria were 12% and 5% in the SD arm versus 14% and 10% in the HD arm, respectively ( P = .15). CONCLUSION In dCRT for esophageal cancer, radiation dose escalation up to 61.6 Gy to the primary tumor did not result in a significant increase in local control over 50.4 Gy. The absence of a dose effect was observed in both AC and SCC.

This Phase I study investigated the recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) of inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO), a CD22-directed antibody-drug conjugate, in pediatric patients with multiple-relapsed/refractory (R/R) CD22-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Patients (≥1-<18 years) received three InO doses (Days 1, 8, 15) per course. Dose-escalation was based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) during Course 1 . Dose level 1 (DL1)=1.4 mg/m2 (0.6-0.4-0.4 mg/m2); DL2=1.8 mg/m2 (0.8-0.5-0.5 mg/m2). Secondary endpoints included safety, anti-leukemic activity, and pharmacokinetics. Twenty-five patients (23 evaluable for DLT) were enrolled. In Course 1, first cohort, 1/6 (DL1) and 2/5 (DL2) patients experienced DLTs; subsequent review considered DL2 DLTs to be non-dose-limiting. Dose was de-escalated to DL1 while awaiting protocol amendment to re-evaluate DL2 in a second cohort, where 0/6 (DL1) and 1/6 (DL2) patients had a DLT. Twenty-three patients experienced Grade 3-4 adverse events; hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome was reported in two patients after subsequent chemotherapy. Overall response rate after Course 1 was 80% [95% CI: 59-93%] (20/25 patients; DL1=75% [43-95%], DL2=85% [55-98%]); 84% [60-97%] of responders obtained minimal residual disease-negative CR; 12-month overall survival was 40% [95% CI: 25-66%]. Nine patients received hematopoietic stem cell transplant or chimeric-antigen receptor T-cells after InO. InO median maximum concentrations were comparable to simulated adult concentrations. InO was well tolerated, demonstrating anti-leukemic activity in heavily pre-treated children with CD22-positive R/R ALL. RP2D was established as 1.8 mg/m2/course, as in adults.

No abstract

Inotuzumab Ozogamicin is a CD22-directed antibody conjugated to calicheamicin, approved in adults with relapsed or refractory (R/R) B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (BCP-ALL). Patients aged 1–18 years, with R/R CD22 + BCP-ALL were treated at the RP2D of 1.8 mg/m2. Using a single-stage design, with an overall response rate (ORR) ≤ 30% defined as not promissing and ORR > 55% as expected, 25 patients needed to be recruited to achieve 80% power at 0.05 significance level. Thirty-two patients were enrolled, 28 were treated, 27 were evaluable for response. The estimated ORR was 81.5% (95%CI: 61.9–93.7%), and 81.8% (18/22) of the responding subjects were minimal residual disease (MRD) negative. The study met its primary endpoint. Median follow up of survivors was 16 months (IQR: 14.49–20.07). One year Event Free Survival was 36.7% (95% CI: 22.2–60.4%), and Overall Survival was 55.1% (95% CI: 39.1−77.7%). Eighteen patients received consolidation (with HSCT and/or CAR T-cells therapy). Sinusoidal obstructive syndrome (SOS) occurred in seven patients. MRD negativity seemed correlated to calicheamicin sensitivity in vitro, but not to CD22 surface expression, saturation, or internalization. InO was effective in this population. The most relevant risk was the occurrence of SOS, particularly when InO treatment was followed by HSCT.

Summary No data on inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) in infant acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) have been published to date. We collected data internationally on infants/young children (<3 years) with ALL treated with InO. Fifteen patients (median 4.4 months at diagnosis) received InO due to relapsed or refractory (R/R) disease. Median percentage of CD22+ blasts was 72% (range 40–100%, n = 9). The median dose in the first course was 1.74 mg/m2 (fractionated). Seven patients (47%) achieved complete remission; one additional minimal residual disease (MRD)‐positive patient became MRD‐negative. Six‐month overall survival was 47% (95% confidence interval [CI] 27–80%). Two patients developed veno‐occlusive disease after transplant. Further evaluation of InO in this subgroup of ALL is justified.

Background Adolescents and young adults who had childhood cancer are at increased risk for insomnia, due to being critically ill during an important phase of their life for the development of good sleep habits. Insomnia is disabling and prevalent after childhood cancer (26–29%) and negatively impacts quality of life, fatigue, pain, and general functioning and is often associated with other (mental) health problems. Insomnia and a history of childhood cancer both increase the risk of adverse health outcomes, posing a double burden for adolescents who had childhood cancer. The first-line treatment for insomnia is cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I). However, access to this type of care is often limited. The guided online CBT-I treatment “i-Sleep” has been developed to facilitate access via online care. i-Sleep is shown effective in adult (breast cancer) patients, but it is unknown if iCBT-I is effective in pediatric oncology. Methods/design We developed a youth version of i-Sleep. Our aim is to evaluate its effectiveness in a national randomized-controlled clinical trial comparing iCBT-I to a waiting-list control condition at 3 and 6 months (n = 70). The intervention group will be also assessed at 12 months to see whether the post-test effects are maintained. Adolescents and young adults aged 12–30 years with insomnia, diagnosed with (childhood) cancer, currently at least 6 months since their last cancer treatment will be eligible. Outcomes include sleep efficiency (actigraphic), insomnia severity (self-report), sleep and circadian activity rhythm parameters, fatigue, health-related quality of life, perceived cognitive functioning, chronic distress, depressive and anxiety symptoms, and intervention acceptability. Discussion Insomnia is prevalent in the pediatric oncology population posing a double health burden for adolescents and young adults who had childhood cancer. If guided iCBT-I is effective, guidelines for insomnia can be installed to treat insomnia and potentially improve quality of life and the health of adolescents and young adults who had childhood cancer. Trial registration NL7220 (NTR7419; Netherlands Trial register). Registered on 2 August 2018

Background: Inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) was well tolerated and demonstrated anti-leukemia activity in heavily pre-treated pediatric patients (pts) with CD22-positive relapsed/refractory (R/R) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in the Phase (Ph) I ITCC-059 study. With the established recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) (1.8 mg/m2/course, as in adults) a consecutive Ph II study has been performed, sponsored by Erasmus MC and supported by Pfizer (NTR57360). Study design: Pts aged 1-18 years with R/R CD22+ BCP-ALL were included after informed consent was obtained. Key inclusion criteria included, M2/M3 marrow and adequate liver and kidney function. Overall response rate (ORR) was the primary endpoint, and included CR, CRp (ANC &gt;500/µL but PLT ≤50.000/µL) and CRi (ANC ≤500/µL and/or PLT ≤50,000/µL). Secondary endpoints included safety, minimal residual disease (MRD) levels and durability of response. The study consisted of a single-stage design to test the null hypothesis (H0) ORR ≤30% and the alternative hypothesis of ORR &gt;55%. With 25 pts, the study had 80% power to reject H0 at a significance level of 0.05. Central MRD analysis by flow cytometry was considered negative if &lt;0.01%. Survival analysis used the Kaplan-Meier method. Results are based on a database snapshot on June 30, 2020. Results: 32 pts were enrolled (Jun 2019-Apr 2020), including 2 screen failures and 2 pts who did not start treatment due to rapidly progressive disease. The median age of the 28 treated pts was 7.5 years (range 1-17); 19 pts were male (68%); 6 (21.5%) were primary refractory, 16 (57%) had ≥2nd relapse and 6 (21.5%) had 1st relapse post-HSCT (median 2 prior regimens, range 2-7). 50% of the pts had received a previous HSCT, 3 (11%) CAR T-cell therapy and 7 (25%) blinatumomab. Median baseline WBC was 3.1 x109/L (range 0.7-132). At time of data snapshot, 48 courses of InO were administered (range 1-4 per pt); one pt was still receiving InO. Disease response was not assessed in 1 pt (discontinued early due to sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS)), 27 pts were evaluable for efficacy analyses. Twenty-two pts achieved a response (ORR 81.5%; 95% CI 61.9%, 93.7%), all after the first cycle (CR n=14, CRp n=1, CRi n=7). Hence, the primary objective was achieved (P-value&lt;0.0001). Overall 21/22 (95%) achieved MRD-negativity as best response (of whom 82% after course 1). When combining these results with pts treated at the RP2D in the Ph I study (n=13), 33/40 (82.5%) achieved a response (94% of whom achieved MRD-negativity). Of 9 primary refractory patients included in Ph I and II, 3 (33%) did not respond to InO. The median follow-up time was 7.3 months (mo). The EFS at 6 and 12 mo was 57.9% (95% CI: 40.3−83.3) and 24.8% (95% CI: 9.8−62.9); and OS at 6 and 12 mo was 61.6% (95% CI: 43.3−87.8) and 54.8% (95% CI: 35.9−83.6), respectively. The median EFS was reached at 6.34 mo (95% CI 2.53, NA). The cumulative incidence of non-response or relapse was 32% and 57% at 6 and 12 mo; 3 pts died in CR (2 due to HSCT complications, 1 due to neurological deterioration considered related to previous CNS leukemia and prolonged intrathecal treatment). Nine of 22 responding pts underwent HSCT (median 35 days after the last InO dose, range 20-72); 4 are still in CR. Three responders received consolidation with CAR T (52, 55 and 215 days after last Ino dose), all are still in CR. Four cases of VOD/SOS were reported. One case occurred during InO treatment (gr 3, resolved). Three of 9 transplanted pts (33%) developed post-HSCT SOS. None of these pts received prophylactic defibrotide. One pt, previously transplanted and treated with CAR T, received 1 course of InO prior to a second HSCT and developed SOS (gr 3), ongoing at the time of death due to multiorgan failure. The other 2 pts developed gr 2 SOS after 2 and 3 courses of InO before their first HSCT, both events resolved. All pts had at least 1 adverse event (AE) during the study and 19 pts reported at least 1 of gr 3-4 AE. The most common AE was fever. Detailed data will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion: InO was well tolerated in this Ph II study which confirmed remarkable activity in these heavily pretreated pts. The ORR was 81.5% with 95% MRD-negativity; 55% of pts remained alive after 1 year. Twelve pts proceeded to consolidation treatment (either HSCT or CAR T). In contrast with the Ph I cohort (where no pts developed SOS post 7 HSCTs), 3 cases of SOS were recorded here after 9 HSCTs. A Ph I cohort of this study combining InO with chemotherapy in R/R pediatric ALL is ongoing. Disclosures Brivio: Pfizer Inc.: Other: Erasmus MC received institutional funding for the study from Pfizer. Rossig:BMS: Honoraria; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genetech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; EUSA Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria. Sleight:Pfizer Inc.: Current Employment. Reinhardt:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CLS Behring: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Research Funding; bluebird bio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. von Stackelberg:Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, advisory committees and speakers bureau, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, advisory committees and speakers bureau, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, advisory committees and speakers bureau, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, advisory committees and speakers bureau, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Personal fees, advisory committees and speakers bureau, Speakers Bureau. Zwaan:Servier, Sanofi, Daiichi Sankyo, Novartis, Janssen, Roche, Incyte, Pfizer, Celgene: Consultancy; Pfizer, Celgene, BMS: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Other: Travel funding.

s149 and computed the differences between treatment groups as change from baseline to end of follow up, 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Overall, 555 abstracts were identified and screened, of which seven RCTs that enrolled 388 patients published in English language between 2011 and 2016, met our inclusion criteria. The mean age of participants ranged from 10.3 to 48 years. Duration of interventions ranged from 12 to 48 weeks. Various dose of Vitamin D doses ranging from 7000 to 100,000 IU, with different dosing frequencies were compared to placebo or active comparator. All included studies showed low risk of bias. The meta-analysis results showed that vitamin D therapy compared with control, increased percent naïve CD4: 6.9 (95% CI: 1.35 to 12.51); decreased viral load (copies/mL): -758.00 (95% CI: -1100 to -405.35); decreased total cholesterol: -14.62 (95%CI: -17.92 to -11.32); decreased LDL cholesterol: -15.00 (95% CI: -17.95 to -12.05). Findings on serum glucose, insulin levels and HDL cholesterol, were not statistically significant. There was no data on mortality and HRQL. ConClusions: The current evidence suggest that vitamin D supplementation among HIV/AIDS patients appear to increase CD4 count, decrease viral load and improve serum lipid profile.