Relevance, Risks, and Benefits of Early-Phases Clinical Trials Participations for Patients With Hematological Malignancies From 2008 to 2023.

BACKGROUND: Early-phases clinical trials (Phases 1 and 2) have evolved from a traditional assessment of toxicity to an adaptive approach based on patients' medical needs and access to effective new therapies. The global risks, benefits, and relevance of early-phases clinical trials participation for patients with hematological malignancies remain poorly evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All early-phases clinical trials participations for patients with hematological malignancies, from 2008 to 2023, in a tertiary academic center in Europe, were reviewed. Patient's demographics, tumor type categories, therapeutic responses, mortality, overall survival (OS), and investigational product (IP) were assessed. RESULTS: Over the period 2008-2023, 736 patients participating in 92 different early-phases clinical trials, were analyzed. The most common tumor categories were diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (n = 253; 34.4%), acute myeloid leukemia/myelodysplastic syndrome (n = 164; 22.3%) and multiple myeloma (n = 100; 13.6%). The median OS was 14.8 (95% CI: 12.4-17.9) months and response rate 31.9%, including complete responses in 13.5% of patients. By tumor categories, the highest and lowest median duration of OS were observed for patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (99.8; [95% CI: 47.0-not reached] months) and peripheral T-cell lymphoma (8.9 [95% CI: 5.3-12.0] months), respectively. The on-protocol and treatment-related mortality rates were 5.43% and 0.54%, respectively. Overall response rate was 29.1% including 13.5% of complete response. Overall, 202 (27.5%) patients received an IP later approved by the health authorities, and those patients had better OS (18.2 months vs. 12.1 months HR: 1.160 [95% CI; 0.6977-1.391], p = 0.0283). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, patients with hematologic malignancies who have participated in early-phases clinical trials over the past 15 years have achieved variable therapeutic response rates, acceptable risk/benefit ratio and potentially significant therapeutic advantages. This study provides framework material for hematologists to further discuss clinical trial participation with their patients.

A double-edged sword: unusual multiple severe infections with pralsetinib: a case report and literature review.

Selective rearranged during transfection (RET) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, pralsetinib, demonstrated clinical efficacy and was well tolerated in lung and thyroid cancers with RET gene mutations or fusions in clinical trials. While the latter focused on the risk of pneumonitis, there is a lack of data regarding other types of infectious risks associated with pralsetinib. Herein, we report the case of a 53-year-old patient with a CCDC6-RET fusion neuroendocrine tumor, who achieved a partial response with pralsetinib as the fifth-line therapy. Of particular note, during pralsetinib therapy, the clinical course was complicated by five severe infectious events, namely, two oxygen-requiring pneumonias, two distinct spondylodiscitis, and one pneumocystis. Our study highlights the increased risk of any type of opportunistic infectious event with pralsetinib, but not selpercatinib, which is probably caused by off-target JAK1/2 inhibition.

BRAF + EGFR +/- MEK inhibitors after immune checkpoint inhibitors in BRAF V600E mutated and deficient mismatch repair or microsatellite instability high metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are the guideline endorsed first choice for patients with deficient mismatch repair or microsatellite instability high (dMMR/MSI-H) mCRC, however a significant proportion experience primary or secondary resistance. BRAF V600E mutated (BRAFm) and dMMR/MSI-H mCRC can be treated with BRAF + EGFR inhibitors but specific data on the efficacy after progression to ICIs are missing. METHODS: We collected consecutive patients with BRAFm dMMR/MSI-H mCRC treated from 2017 to 2024 with a combination of BRAFi+EGFRi+/-MEKi, after disease progression on ICIs. A control cohort of BRAFm pMMR/MSS mCRC patients treated with encorafenib+cetuximab+/-binimetinib from 2nd line was used. RESULTS: dMMR/MSI-H (n = 50) BRAFm mCRC patients were more often > 70-year-old, with right-sided primary tumors, without liver but more lymphnode metastases than pMMR/MSS (n = 170). They were treated more frequently beyond 2nd line and 45 % were primary progressors to ICIs. Lower ORR (18 % versus 32 %, p = 0.09) and DCR (60 % versus 73 %, p = 0.11) was seen without reaching significance in dMMR/MSI-H as compared to pMMR/MSS patients. After a median follow-up of 14.04 months, no differences in PFS (median 5.13 versus 4.50 months, HR 0.83, 95 %CI: 0.57-1.20, p = 0.31) and OS (median 10.75 versus 9.11 months, HR 0.89, 95 %CI: 0.59-1.32, p = 0.55) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that BRAFm dMMR/MSI-H mCRC patients benefit from BRAFi+EGFRi+/-MEKi after progression under ICIs. Despite lower ORR and DCR, the outcome is not different from that observed in pMMR/MSS BRAFm CRC and is in line with the results of the BEACON registration trial.

A multicenter study evaluating efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced non-colorectal digestive cancers with microsatellite instability.

BACKGROUND: One randomized phase III trial comparing chemotherapy (CT) with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) has demonstrated significant efficacy of ICI in deficient DNA mismatch repair system/microsatellite instability-high (dMMR/MSI-H) metastatic colorectal cancer. However, few studies have compared ICI with CT in other advanced dMMR/MSI-H digestive tumors. METHODS: In this multicenter study, we included patients with advanced dMMR/MSI-H non-colorectal digestive tumors treated with chemotherapy and/or ICIs. Patients were divided retrospectively into two groups, a CT group and an immunotherapy (IO) group. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). A propensity score approach using the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method was applied to deal with potential differences between the two groups. RESULTS: 133 patients (45.1/27.1/27.8% with gastric/small bowel/other carcinomas) were included. The majority of patients received ICI in 1st (29.1%) or 2nd line (44.4%). The 24-month PFS rates were 7.9% in the CT group and 71.2% in the IO group. Using the IPTW method, IO treatment was associated with better PFS (HR=0.227; 95% CI 0.147-0.351; p < 0.0001). The overall response rate was 26.3% in the CT group versus 60.7% in the IO group (p < 0.001) with prolonged duration of disease control in the IO group (p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, predictive factors of PFS for patients treated with IO were good performance status, absence of liver metastasis and prior primary tumor resection, whereas no association was found for the site of the primary tumor. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of randomized trials, our study highlights the superior efficacy of ICI compared with standard-of-care therapy in patients with unresectable or metastatic dMMR/MSI-H non-colorectal digestive cancer, regardless of tumor type, with acceptable toxicity.

Metastatic site and clinical outcome of patients with deficient mismatch repair metastatic colorectal cancer treated with an immune checkpoint inhibitor in the first-line setting.

PURPOSE: Only one-half of deficient mismatch repair (d-MMR) metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRC) demonstrate durable responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Given preclinical data indicating that liver metastases sequester activated CD8+ T cells from systemic circulation, we examined clinical outcome by metastatic site. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a retrospective cohort of patients with d-MMR mCRCs treated at multiple centers in France (n = 66), we sought to validate data from a U.S. cohort, and performed pooled analysis (n = 104). All patients received first-line ICI monotherapy. Metastatic site was analyzed in relationship to tumor response (RECIST version 1.1), and with progression-free survival (PFS) by multivariable stratified Cox regression after adjustment for covariates. RESULTS: Objective responses were achieved in 38/66 (58%) of patients in the validation cohort. Best tumor response included 13 (20%) complete responses (CR), 25 (38%) partial responses (PR), 16 (25%) stable disease, and 11 (17%) progressive disease (PD). One-year and 5-year PFS rates were 73% and 67%, respectively; 18 (27%) patients progressed during immunotherapy. Best tumor response was attenuated in patients with liver metastasis (P = 0.03). Presence of liver metastasis, but not other sites, was associated with significantly poorer PFS after adjustment for covariates (HRadj 2.82; 95%CI, 1.08-7.39; Padj=0.03). In a pooled analysis, liver metastasis remained significantly and independently associated with poorer PFS (HRadj 3.18; 95%CI, 1.52-6.67; Padj=0.002) and with attenuated tumor best response (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Metastasis to the liver, but not other sites, was validated as an independent factor associated with poorer response and survival after ICI treatment in d-MMR mCRCs. These data underscore the need for novel therapeutic strategies in these patients.

Primary resistance to immunotherapy in patients with a dMMR/MSI metastatic gastrointestinal cancer: who is at risk? An AGEO real-world study.

BACKGROUND: The outstanding efficacy of immunotherapy in metastatic dMMR/MSI gastro-intestinal (GI) cancers has led to a rapid increase in the number of patients treated. However, 20-30% of patients experience primary resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIPR) and need better characterization. METHODS: This AGEO real-world study retrospectively analyzed the efficacy and safety of ICIs and identified clinical variables associated with ICIPR in patients with metastatic dMMR/MSI GI cancers treated with immunotherapy between 2015 and 2022. RESULTS: 399 patients were included, 284 with colorectal cancer (CRC) and 115 with non-CRC, mostly treated by an anti-PD(L)1 (88.0%). PFS at 24 months was 55.8% (95CI [50.8-61.2]) and OS at 48 months was 59.1% (95CI [53.0-65.9]). ORR was 51.0%, and 25.1% of patients were ICIPR. There was no statistical difference in ORR, DCR, PFS, or OS between CRC and non-CRC groups. In multivariable analysis, ICIPR was associated with ECOG-PS ≥ 2 (OR = 3.36), liver metastases (OR = 2.19), peritoneal metastases (OR = 2.00), ≥1 previous line of treatment (OR = 1.83), and age≤50 years old (OR = 1.76). CONCLUSION: These five clinical factors associated with primary resistance to ICIs should be considered by physicians to guide treatment choice in GI dMMR/MSI metastatic cancer patients.

Chemotherapy and Immune Checkpoint Blockade for Gastric and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma.

Importance: Combining immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) with chemotherapy improves outcomes in patients with metastatic gastric and gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) adenocarcinoma; however, whether this combination has activity in the perioperative setting remains unknown. Objective: To evaluate the safety and preliminary activity of perioperative chemotherapy and ICB followed by maintenance ICB in resectable G/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This investigator-initiated, multicenter, open-label, single-stage, phase 2 nonrandomized controlled trial screened 49 patients and enrolled 36 patients with resectable G/GEJ adenocarcinoma from February 10, 2017, to June 17, 2021, with a median (range) follow-up of 35.2 (17.4-73.0) months. Thirty-four patients were deemed evaluable for efficacy analysis, with 28 (82.4%) undergoing curative resection. This study was performed at 4 referral institutions in the US. Interventions: Patients received 3 cycles of capecitabine, 625 mg/m2, orally twice daily for 21 days; oxaliplatin, 130 mg/m2, intravenously and pembrolizumab, 200 mg, intravenously with optional epirubicin, 50 mg/m2, every 3 weeks before and after surgery with an additional cycle of pembrolizumab before surgery. Patients received 14 additional doses of maintenance pembrolizumab. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. Secondary end points included overall response rate, disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: A total of 34 patients (median [range] age, 65.5 [25-90] years; 23 [67.6%] male) were evaluable for efficacy. Of these patients, 28 (82.4%) underwent curative resection, 7 (20.6%; 95% CI, 10.1%-100%) achieved pCR, and 6 (17.6%) achieved a pathologic near-complete response. Of the 28 patients who underwent resection, 4 (14.3%) experienced disease recurrence. The median DFS and OS were not reached. The 2-year DFS was 67.8% (95% CI, 0.53%-0.87%) and the OS was 80.6% (95% CI, 0.68%-0.96%). Treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events for evaluable patients occurred in 20 patients (57.1%), and 12 (34.3%) experienced immune-related grade 3 or higher adverse events. Conclusion and Relevance: In this trial of unselected patients with resectable G/GEJ adenocarcinoma, capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and pembrolizumab resulted in a pCR rate of 20.6% and was well tolerated. This trial met its primary end point and supports the development of checkpoint inhibition in combination with perioperative chemotherapy in locally advanced G/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02918162.

Immunosuppressant mycophenolate mofetil for patients with steroid-refractory immune-related hepatitis induced by checkpoint inhibitors in oncology.

BACKGROUND: Immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) hepatitis, which does not improve with steroids and requires additional immunosuppressant, is defined as steroid-refractory ICI hepatitis. The outcome of patients with steroid-refractory ICI hepatitis remains poorly determined. Herein, we investigated the incidence, clinical features, and outcome of patients treated with second-line immunosuppressant for steroid-refractory ICI hepatitis. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of patients who presented ICI hepatitis from 1st June 2016 to 30th September 2022. Steroid-refractory ICI hepatitis was defined as no clinical and biological improvement after systemic steroid therapy ≥1 mg/kg/d. Main objectives were to assess the frequency and risk factors associated with steroid-refractory ICI hepatitis and to evaluate the efficacy of second-line immunosuppressants. RESULTS: In total, 130 patients with grade ≥3 ICI hepatitis were screened, of them 60 (46.2%) were treated with systemic steroids. In total, 11/130 (8.5%) had steroid-refractory hepatitis. Statistically significant factors associated with steroid-refractory hepatitis included previous liver comorbidities (54.5% versus 11.6%; p < 0.01), hyperbilirubinemia (p < 0.001), and general symptoms (fever, jaundice, ascites, and/or encephalopathy) associated with hepatitis (72.7% versus 30.8%; p = 0.015). The 11 patients with steroid-refractory hepatitis were treated with mycophenolate mofetil. In total, resolution or return to grade ≤1 for hepatitis was observed in 81.8% (9/11) of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Steroid-refractory ICI hepatitis accounted for 8.5% of patients with grade ≥3 immune-related hepatitis and was statistically associated with previous liver comorbidities, hyperbilirubinemia, and general symptoms. Mycophenolate mofetil was a suitable option of therapy for steroid-refractory ICI hepatitis.

Complete pathological response after chemotherapy or immune checkpoint inhibitors in deficient MMR metastatic colorectal cancer: Results of a retrospective multicenter study.

About 5% of the patients with metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRC) present microsatellite instability (MSI)/deficient mismatch repair system (dMMR). While metastasectomy is known to improve overall and progression-free survival in mCRC, specific results in selected patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC are lacking. Our study aimed to describe metastasectomy results, characterize histological response and evaluate pathological complete response (pCR) rate in patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC. We retrospectively reviewed data from all consecutive patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC who underwent surgical metastasectomy between January 2010 and June 2021 in 17 French centers. Primary outcome was to assess the pCR rate defined by tumor regression grade (TRG) 0. Secondary endpoints included relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS), and explored TRG as predictive factor for RFS and OS. Among the 88 patients operated, 109 metastasectomies were performed in 81 patients after neoadjuvant treatment [chemotherapy ± targeted therapy (CTT): 69, 85.2%; immunotherapy (ICI): 12, 14.8%], and pCR was achieved in 13 (16.1%) patients. Among the latter, pCR rate were 10.2% in the patients having received CTT (N = 7) and 50.0% in the patients treated with ICI (N = 6). Radiological response did not predict TRG. With a median follow-up of 57.9 (IQR 34.2-81.6) months, median RFS was 20.2 (15.4-not reached) months, median OS was not reached. Major pathological responses (TRG0 + TRG1) were significantly associated with longer RFS (HR 0.12, 95% CI 0.03-0.55; P = .006). The pCR rate of 16.1% achieved with neoadjuvant treatment in patients with dMMR/MSI mCRC is consistent with previously reported rates in pMMR/MSS mCRC. Immunotherapy showed better pCR rate than chemotherapy ± targeted therapy. Further prospective trials are needed to validate immunotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment in resectable/potentially resectable dMMR/MSI mCRC and identify predictive factors for pCR.

Profile and outcome of cancer patients enrolled in contemporary phase I trials.

BACKGROUND: Phase I trials historically involved heavily pretreated patients (pts) with no more effective therapeutic options available and with poor expected outcomes. There are scare data regarding profile and outcomes of pts enrolled into modern phase I trials. Here, we sought to provide an overview of pts' profile and outcome into phase I trials at Gustave Roussy (GR). METHODS: This is a monocentric retrospective study, including all pts enrolled into phase I trials at GR from 2017 to 2021. Data regarding pts' demographics, tumour types, investigational treatments and survival outcomes were collected. RESULTS: In total, 9482 pts were referred for early phase trials; 2478 pts were screened, among which 449 (18.1%) failed screening; 1693 pts finally received at least one treatment dose as part of a phase I trial. Median age of pts was 59 years old (range, 18-88) and most common tumour types included gastrointestinal (25.3%), haematological (15%), lung (13.6%), genitourinary (10.5%) and gynaecologic cancers (9.4%). Amongst all pts treated and evaluable for response (1634 pts), objective response rate was 15.9% and disease control rate was 45.4%. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were, respectively, 2.6 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.3; 2.8) and 12.4 months (95% CI, 11.7; 13.6). CONCLUSION: As compared with historical data, our study shows that outcomes of pts included into modern phase I trials have improved and that these trials constitute nowadays a valid and safe therapeutic option. These updated data provide facts for adapting the methodology, role and place of phase I trials over the next years.

Cytotoxic chemotherapy potentiates the immune response and efficacy of combination CXCR4/PD-1 inhibition in models of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Purpose: The CXCL12-CXCR4 chemokine axis plays a significant role in modulating T-cell infiltration into the pancreatic tumor microenvironment. Despite promising preclinical findings, clinical trials combining inhibitors of CXCR4 (AMD3100/BL-8040) and anti-programmed death 1/ligand1 (anti-PD1/PD-L1) have failed to improve outcomes. Experimental Design: We utilized a novel ex vivo autologous patient-derived immune/organoid (PDIO) co-culture system using human peripheral blood mononuclear cells and patient derived tumor organoids, and in vivo the autochthonous LSL-KrasG12D/+; LSL-Trp53R172H/+; Pdx-1-Cre (KPC) pancreatic cancer mouse model to interrogate the effects of either monotherapy or all combinations of gemcitabine, AMD3100, and anit-PD1 on CD8+ T cell activation and survival. Results: We demonstrate that disruption of the CXCL12-CXCR4 axis using AMD3100 leads to increased migration and activation of CD8+ T-cells. In addition, when combined with the cytotoxic chemotherapy gemcitabine, CXCR4 inhibition further potentiated CD8+ T-cell activation. We next tested the combination of gemcitabine, CXCR4 inhibition, and anti-PD1 in the KPC pancreatic cancer mouse model and demonstrate that this combination markedly impacted the tumor immune microenvironment by increasing infiltration of natural killer cells, the ratio of CD8+ to regulatory T-cells, and tumor cell death while decreasing tumor cell proliferation. Moreover, this combination extended survival in KPC mice. Conclusions: These findings suggest that combining gemcitabine with CXCR4 inhibiting agents and anti-PD1 therapy controls tumor growth by reducing immunosuppression and potentiating immune cell activation and therefore may represent a novel approach to treating pancreatic cancer.

Treatments after Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Patients with dMMR/MSI Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Several studies reported improved outcomes with conventional treatments (CT, i.e., chemotherapy ± targeted therapy) administered after immune checkpoints inhibitors (ICI) in certain tumor types. No data are available concerning patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) harboring mismatch repair deficiency/microsatellite instability (dMMR/MSI). We aimed to assess the outcomes of dMMR/MSI mCRC pts receiving CT after ICI failure. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective multicenter study investigating the outcomes of all dMMR/MSI mCRC pts who received post-ICI CT between 2015 and 2020. RESULTS: 31 pts (male 61%, median age 56 years) were included. ICI was an anti-PD(L)1 monotherapy in 71% of pts, and 61% received >2 lines before post-ICI CT. The overall response rate and disease control rate were 13% and 45%, with a median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival of 2.9 and 7.4 months, respectively. No association of the outcomes with either ICI efficacy or anti-angiogenic agents was observed. Prolonged PFS (range 16.1-21.3 months) was observed in 4 pts (13%). CONCLUSIONS: Although conducted on a limited number of patients, our results do not support an association of previous ICI treatment with an enhanced efficacy of CT in dMMR/MSI mCRC. However, prolonged disease control was observed in several cases, suggesting that some pts might derive an unexpected benefit from post-ICI treatments.

Future of immunotherapy in pancreas cancer and the trials, tribulations and successes thus far.

Pancreas ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has a dismal prognosis with a 5-year survival rate of 10%. Currently, chemotherapy remains the standard of care for systemic treatment. Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors unfortunately has not been found to be effective in the treatment of PDAC to date, likely due to the highly desmoplastic and immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME). Treatment targeting pathways against the immunosuppressive mechanisms of PDAC are of mounting interest to improve outcomes in PDAC. In this review, we discuss prior efforts and the current state of immunotherapy in PDAC. We will also review the emerging targets and treatments with significant clinical potential for the treatment of PDAC such as: CD40 pathway, the adenosine pathway, the CXCR4/CXCL12 axis, the CCR2/CCL2 axis, IDO pathway, and others.