Circulating T cell status and molecular imaging may predict clinical benefit of neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade in oral cancer.

BACKGROUND: Addition of neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibition to standard-of-care interventions for locally advanced oral cancer could improve clinical outcome. METHODS: In this study, 16 evaluable patients with stage III/IV oral cancer were treated with one dose of 480 mg nivolumab 3 weeks prior to surgery. Primary objectives were safety, feasibility, and suitability of programmed death receptor ligand-1 positron emission tomography (PD-L1 PET) as a biomarker for response. Imaging included 18F-BMS-986192 (PD-L1) PET and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET before and after nivolumab treatment. Secondary objectives included clinical and pathological response, and immune profiling of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) for response prediction. Baseline tumor biopsies and postnivolumab resection specimens were evaluated by histopathology. RESULTS: Grade III or higher adverse events were not observed and treatment was not delayed in relation to nivolumab administration and other study procedures. Six patients (38%) had a pathological response, of whom three (19%) had a major (≥90%) pathological response (MPR). Tumor PD-L1 PET uptake (quantified using standard uptake value) was not statistically different in patients with or without MPR (median 5.3 vs 3.4). All major responders showed a significantly postnivolumab decreased signal on FDG PET. PBMC immune phenotyping showed higher levels of CD8+ T cell activation in MPR patients, evidenced by higher baseline expression levels of PD-1, TIGIT, IFNγ and lower levels of PD-L1. CONCLUSION: Together these data support that neoadjuvant treatment of advanced-stage oral cancers with nivolumab was safe and induced an MPR in a promising 19% of patients. Response was associated with decreased FDG PET uptake as well as activation status of peripheral T cell populations.

In vitro T cell responses to PD-1 blockade are reduced by IFN-α but do not predict therapy response in melanoma patients.

PD-1 blockade therapy has revolutionized melanoma treatment, but still not all patients benefit and pre-treatment identification of those patients is difficult. Increased expression of inflammatory markers such as interleukin (IL)-6 in blood of patients correlates with poor treatment response. We set out to study the effect of inflammatory cytokines on PD-1 blockade in vitro. For this, we studied the effect of IL-6 and type I interferon (IFN) in vitro on human T cells in a mixed leukocyte reaction (MLR) in the absence or presence of PD-1 blockade. While IL-6 reduced IFN-γ secretion by T cells in both the presence and absence of PD-1 blockade, IFN-α specifically reduced the IFN-γ secretion only in the presence of PD-1 blockade. IFN-α reduced T cell proliferation independent of PD-1 blockade and reduced the percentage of cells producing IFN-γ only in the presence of PD-1 blockade. Next we determined the type I IFN score in a cohort of 22 melanoma patients treated with nivolumab. In this cohort, we did not find a correlation between clinical response and type I IFN score, nor between clinical response and IFN-γ secretion in vitro in a MLR in the presence of PD-1 blockade. We conclude that IFN-α reduces the effectiveness of PD-1 blockade in vitro, but that in this cohort, type I IFN score in vivo, nor IFN-γ secretion in vitro in a MLR in the presence of PD-1 blockade correlated to decreased therapy responses in patients.

Unveiling the altered metabolic pathways induced by nivolumab in non-small cell lung cancer via GC-MS metabolomics approach coupled with multivariate analysis.

This research investigates the effects of the immunotherapeutic agent nivolumab on the metabolism of lung cancer cells (NCI-H1975) using GC-MS metabolomic profiling. Multivariate analysis such as unsupervised PCA and supervised OPLS-DA along with univariate analysis and pathway analysis were employed to explore the metabolomic data and identify altered metabolic pathways induced by nivolumab treatment. The study revealed distinct metabolic alterations in cancer cells, linked to proliferative and survival advantages, such as enhanced glycolysis, increased glutaminolysis, and modified amino acid metabolism. Key findings indicate elevated levels of glycolysis-related metabolites (glycine, alanine, pyruvate, and lactate) and TCA cycle intermediates (succinate, fumarate, malate) in cancer cells, with a significant decrease following nivolumab treatment. Additionally, lower levels of aspartic acid and citrate in cancer cells imply altered nucleotide synthesis and fatty acid production essential for tumor growth. Treatment with nivolumab also reduced oleic acid levels, indicative of its effect on disrupted lipid metabolism. Our research shows nivolumab's potential to modify metabolic pathways involved in lung cancer progression, suggesting its dual role in cancer therapy: as an immune response modulator and a metabolic pathway disruptor.

Nivolumab plus relatlimab in patients with previously treated microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient metastatic colorectal cancer: the phase II CheckMate 142 study.

BACKGROUND: Programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors, including nivolumab, have demonstrated long-term survival benefit in previously treated patients with microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). PD-1 and lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) are distinct immune checkpoints that are often co-expressed on tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and contribute to tumor-mediated T-cell dysfunction. Relatlimab is a LAG-3 inhibitor that has demonstrated efficacy in combination with nivolumab in patients with melanoma. Here, we present the results from patients with MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC treated with nivolumab plus relatlimab in the CheckMate 142 study. METHODS: In this open-label, phase II study, previously treated patients with MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC received nivolumab 240 mg plus relatlimab 160 mg intravenously every 2 weeks. The primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: A total of 50 previously treated patients received nivolumab plus relatlimab. With median follow-up of 47.4 (range 43.9-49.2) months, investigator-assessed ORR was 50% (95% CI 36% to 65%) and disease control rate was 70% (95% CI 55% to 82%). The median time to response per investigator was 2.8 (range 1.3-33.1) months, and median duration of response was 42.7 (range 2.8-47.0+) months. The median progression-free survival per investigator was 27.5 (95% CI 5.3 to 43.7) months with a progression-free survival rate at 3 years of 38%, and median overall survival was not reached (95% CI 17.2 months to not estimable), with a 56% overall survival rate at 3 years. The most common any-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were diarrhea (24%), asthenia (16%), and hypothyroidism (12%). Grade 3 or 4 TRAEs were reported in 14% of patients, and TRAEs of any grade leading to discontinuation were observed in 8% of patients. No treatment-related deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab plus relatlimab provided durable clinical benefit and was well tolerated in previously treated patients with MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02060188.

Pseudoprogression in a patient with metastatic melanoma treated with PD-1 and LAG-3 inhibition.

Pseudoprogression encapsulates a process of temporary radiographic growth followed by subsequent regression of metastatic melanoma lesions in response to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB), such as the combination of anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 therapy. This occurs in approximately 5-10% of ICB-treated patients, but has not yet been described in the context of novel combination therapies. Here, we report a case of an 89-year-old patient with metastatic melanoma to the liver, lung and lymph nodes, who underwent treatment with Opdualag (combining anti-PD-1 nivolumab and anti-lymphocyte-activation gene 3 relatlimab ICBs), and developed pseudoprogression after two cycles of therapy. The patient experienced a radiographic increase in liver metastatic lesion size, but was found to have a subsequent reduction in these lesions. The patient has been on therapy for 18 months without evidence of disease progression and continues to be clinically well-appearing.

Nivolumab plus cabozantinib versus sunitinib for first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma: extended follow-up from the phase III randomised CheckMate 9ER trial.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab plus cabozantinib (NIVO + CABO) was approved for first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) based on superiority versus sunitinib (SUN) in the phase III CheckMate 9ER trial (18.1 months median survival follow-up per database lock date); efficacy benefit was maintained with an extended 32.9 months of median survival follow-up. We report updated efficacy and safety after 44.0 months of median survival follow-up in intent-to-treat (ITT) patients and additional subgroup analyses, including outcomes by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic risk score. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with treatment-naïve aRCC received NIVO 240 mg every 2 weeks plus CABO 40 mg once daily or SUN 50 mg for 4 weeks (6-week cycles), until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity (maximum NIVO treatment, 2 years). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) per blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) per BICR, and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Overall, 323 patients were randomised to NIVO + CABO and 328 to SUN. Median PFS was improved with NIVO + CABO versus SUN [16.6 versus 8.4 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49-0.71]; median OS favoured NIVO + CABO versus SUN (49.5 versus 35.5 months; HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.56-0.87). ORR (95% CI) was higher with NIVO + CABO versus SUN [56% (50% to 62%) versus 28% (23% to 33%)]; 13% versus 5% of patients achieved complete response, and median duration of response was 22.1 months versus 16.1 months, respectively. PFS and OS favoured NIVO + CABO over SUN across intermediate, poor and intermediate/poor IMDC risk subgroups; higher ORR and complete response rates were seen with NIVO + CABO versus SUN regardless of IMDC risk subgroup. Any-grade (grade ≥3) treatment-related adverse events occurred in 97% (67%) versus 93% (55%) of patients treated with NIVO + CABO versus SUN. CONCLUSIONS: After extended follow-up, NIVO + CABO maintained survival and response benefits; safety remained consistent with previous follow-ups. These results continue to support NIVO + CABO as a first-line treatment for aRCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03141177.

Treatment-free survival outcomes from the phase II study of nivolumab and salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab in advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (HCRN GU16-260-Cohort A).

BACKGROUND: As part of a partitioned survival analysis, treatment-free survival (TFS) can characterize the overall survival time patients spend between the cessation of immunotherapy and the start of subsequent therapy; both with and without toxicity. Significant TFS was reported for the nivolumab/ipilimumab arms of the CheckMate 067 and 214 trials for patients with advanced melanoma or renal cell carcinoma (aRCC), respectively, where immunotherapy was often halted for toxicity rather than a predefined treatment endpoint. We therefore sought to assess TFS in the HCRN GU16-260 trial, which was designed to reduce toxicity and cap immunotherapy duration. METHODS: Data were analyzed from 128 patients with clear-cell aRCC treated with first-line nivolumab monotherapy for up to 2 years. Salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab for up to 1 year was provided to eligible patients with disease progression at any point or stable disease at 48 weeks (29% of patients). TFS was defined as the area between Kaplan-Meier curves for a time from registration to protocol therapy cessation and for a time from registration to subsequent systemic therapy initiation or death, estimated from 36-month mean times. The time on or off protocol treatment with grade 3+treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) was also captured. RESULTS: At 36 months from enrollment, 68.3% of patients were alive: 96.8% of International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) favorable-risk patients and 56.6% of those with intermediate/poor-risk, respectively. The 36-month mean time on protocol therapy was 11.5 months including 0.6 months with grade 3+TRAEs (16.0 months for favorable-risk patients and 9.6 months for intermediated/poor-risk patients). The 36-month mean TFS for the whole population was 9.4 months (12.9 months including 1.5 months with grade 3+TRAEs for favorable-risk and 8.0 months including 1.0 months with grade 3+TRAEs for intermediate/poor-risk). At 36 months, 65.6% of favorable-risk patients and 27.1% of intermediate/poor-risk patients were alive and subsequent systemic treatment-free. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab monotherapy with salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab in non-responders is an active treatment approach in treatment-naïve patients with aRCC and, similar to nivolumab/ipilimumab in CheckMate 214, results in substantial TFS and toxicity-free TFS. TFS was greatest in patients with favorable-risk disease, supporting the use of an immunotherapy-only regimen in this population.

Final results of urelumab, an anti-CD137 agonist monoclonal antibody, in combination with cetuximab or nivolumab in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted treatments for cancer is common; thus, novel immunotherapy agents are needed. Urelumab is a monoclonal antibody agonist that binds to CD137 receptors expressed on T cells. Here, we report two studies that evaluated urelumab in combination with cetuximab or nivolumab in patients with select, advanced solid tumors. METHODS: CA186-018: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) were treated in a dose-evaluation phase with urelumab 0.1 mg/kg (urelumab-0.1) every 3 weeks (Q3W)+cetuximab 250 mg/m2 (cetuximab-250) weekly; and in a dose-expansion phase with urelumab 8 mg flat dose (urelumab-8) Q3W+cetuximab-250 weekly. CA186-107: The dose-escalation phase included patients with previously treated advanced solid tumors (or treated or treatment-naive melanoma); patients received urelumab 3 mg flat dose (urelumab-3) or urelumab-8 every 4 weeks+nivolumab 3 mg/kg (nivolumab-3) or 240 mg (nivolumab-240) every 2 weeks. In the expansion phase, patients with melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, or SCCHN were treated with urelumab-8+nivolumab-240. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability, and the secondary endpoint included efficacy assessments. RESULTS: CA186-018: 66 patients received study treatment. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were fatigue (75%; n=3) with urelumab-0.1+cetuximab-250 and dermatitis (45%; n=28) with urelumab-8+cetuximab-250. Three patients (5%) discontinued due to TRAE(s) (with urelumab-8+cetuximab-250). One patient with SCCHN had a partial response (objective response rate (ORR) 5%, with urelumab-8+cetuximab-250).CA186-107: 134 patients received study treatment. Fatigue was the most common TRAE (32%; n=2 with urelumab-3+nivolumab-3; n=1 with urelumab-8+nivolumab-3; n=40 with urelumab-8+nivolumab-240). Nine patients (7%) discontinued due to TRAE(s) (n=1 with urelumab-3+nivolumab-3; n=8 with urelumab-8+nivolumab-240). Patients with melanoma naive to anti-PD-1 therapy exhibited the highest ORR (49%; n=21 with urelumab-8+nivolumab-240). Intratumoral gene expression in immune-related pathways (CD3, CD8, CXCL9, GZMB) increased on treatment with urelumab+nivolumab. CONCLUSIONS: Although the addition of urelumab at these doses was tolerable, preliminary response rates did not indicate an evident additive benefit. Nevertheless, the positive pharmacodynamics effects observed with urelumab and the high response rate in treatment-naive patients with melanoma warrant further investigation of other anti-CD137 agonist agents for treatment of cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT02110082; NCT02253992.

How to use anti-PD-1 therapy in gastric cancer: the approach in the United States.

Gastric cancer is a leading global cause of cancer-related mortality. In the past, survival achieved in metastatic disease with chemotherapy was less than 1 year. The advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors has changed the treatment of gastric cancer. With demonstration of single agent activity for anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1) agents in gastric cancer with a particularly high degree of activity in microsatellite instability (MSI) high cancers, global clinical trials added nivolumab and pembrolizumab to first line chemotherapy. Improvements in progression free survival, overall survival and increased response rates led to regulatory approval of these agents in the U.S. The benefit in survival seems limited, however, to patients with programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) positive or MSI high cancers. Adjuvant therapy with nivolumab improved disease-free survival after chemoradiotherapy and surgery in esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma in patients with residual disease resected at surgery, and is a new care standard. Results of ongoing trials adding immune checkpoint inhibitors to perioperative chemotherapy in gastric cancer are anxiously awaited. In locally advanced MSI high gastric cancer, immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy is being explored as preoperative therapy given the demonstration of a high degree of pathologic complete response to these agents. Some trials may offer patients nonoperative management if a complete response is achieved.

Modified FOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab with and without nivolumab for first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: phase 2 results from the CheckMate 9X8 randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Standard first-line therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) include fluoropyrimidine-containing regimens with oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan and a biologic agent. Immunotherapy may enhance antitumor activity in combination with standard therapies in patients with mCRC. Here, we present phase 2 results of nivolumab plus standard-of-care therapy (SOC; 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin/bevacizumab) versus SOC in the first-line treatment of patients with mCRC (CheckMate 9X8). METHODS: CheckMate 9X8 was a multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 2/3 trial. Eligible patients were at least 18 years of age with unresectable mCRC and no prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive nivolumab 240 mg plus SOC or SOC alone every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1. Secondary endpoints included PFS by investigator assessment; objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate, duration of response, and time to response, all by BICR and investigator assessments; overall survival; and safety. Preplanned exploratory biomarker analyses were also performed. RESULTS: From February 2018 through April 2019, 310 patients were enrolled, of which 195 patients were randomized to nivolumab plus SOC (n=127) or SOC (n=68). At 21.5-month minimum follow-up, PFS with nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC did not meet the prespecified threshold for statistical significance; median PFS by BICR was 11.9 months in both arms (HR, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.53 to 1.23); p=0.30). Higher PFS rates after 12 months (18 months: 28% vs 9%), higher ORR (60% vs 46%), and durable responses (median 12.9 vs 9.3 months) were observed with nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 75% versus 48% of patients; no new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The CheckMate 9X8 trial investigating first-line nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC in patients with mCRC did not meet its primary endpoint of PFS by BICR. Nivolumab plus SOC showed numerically higher PFS rates after 12 months, a higher response rate, and more durable responses compared with SOC alone, with acceptable safety. Further investigation to identify subgroups of patients with mCRC that may benefit from nivolumab plus SOC versus SOC in the first-line setting is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03414983.

Retrospective comparison of a weight-based dose every 2 weeks with a fixed dose every month: a real-life analysis of nivolumab in the treatment of advanced melanoma.

Nivolumab was first authorized at a weight-based dose (WBD) of 3 mg/kg every two weeks (Q2W). Since 2017, a fixed dose (FD) regimen [first 240 mg Q2W and then 480 mg per month (Q4W)] was allowed. The objective of the study was to compare a WBD regimen and an FD regimen with regard to effectiveness and safety. We conducted a single-center, retrospective, real-life study of consecutive adult patients who had received a WBD of nivolumab or an FD of 480 mg Q4W. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of grade ≥3 immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The secondary endpoints were overall survival and cost of the treatment. In all, 342 patients were included: 71 in the WBD cohort and 271 in the FD cohort. Of these patients, 201 patients (59.6%) experienced an irAE, and 24 of these events were graded as ≥3. At 12 months, there was no significant difference in irAE occurrence between the two cohorts [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.54 (0.21-1.36), P  = 0.19]. The 12-month overall survival rate was significantly lower in the WBD cohort ( P  < 0.001). Switching from a fortnightly weight dose to a fixed monthly dose halves the cost of hospitalization. Our results did not show a significant difference between WBD and FD cohort in the occurrence of severe irAEs. However overall survival appeared to be significantly higher in FD group. Some clinical trials are investigating a hybrid dosing regimen in which a WBD is capped by an FD. The present results need to be confirmed in prospective studies.

The combination treatment of oncolytic adenovirus H101 with nivolumab for refractory advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: an open-label, single-arm, pilot study.

BACKGROUND: H101, an innovative oncolytic adenovirus, has shown potential in modifying the tumor microenvironment from immunologically 'cold' to 'hot'. When combined with nivolumab, a programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor, this synergy may offer substantial therapeutic benefits beyond the capabilities of each agent alone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this pilot study, we assessed the efficacy and safety of combining H101 with nivolumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who failed prior systemic therapy. The participants received initial oncolytic virus (OV) pretreatment with intratumoral H101 injections (5.0 × 1011 vp/0.5 ml/vial, two vials per lesion) on days 1 and 3. Combination therapy started on day 8, with H101 administered every 2 or 4 weeks and nivolumab (240 mg) injections every 2 weeks. Treatment continued up to 12 months or until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, consent withdrawal, or study conclusion. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Between March 2020 and March 2022, 18 of 21 screened patients were assessable, showing an ORR of 11.1% [two cases of partial response (PR) and five cases of stable disease], with extrahepatic injections often leading to favorable outcomes. The disease control rate stood at 38.9%, with a 6-month survival rate of 88.9%. Median progression-free survival was 2.69 months, and overall survival (OS) was 15.04 months. Common adverse events included low-grade fever (100%) and pain related to centesis (33.3%), and no grade 3/4 events were reported. Significantly, local H101 injection showed potential in reversing immune checkpoint inhibitor resistance, evidenced by over 2.5 years of extended OS in PR cases with low α-fetoprotein. Additionally, decreasing neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio during OV pretreatment may predict positive outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the potential efficacy of combining H101 with nivolumab in treating refractory advanced HCC, with well-tolerated toxicities.

Interaction between NSCLC Cells, CD8+ T-Cells and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Potentiates Coagulation and Promotes Metabolic Remodeling-New Cues on CAT-VTE.

BACKGROUND: Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are frequent cancer-related complications associated with high mortality; thus, this urges the identification of predictive markers. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) used in cancer immunotherapy allow T-cell activation against cancer cells. Retrospective studies showed increased VTE following ICI administration in some patients. Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients are at high risk of thrombosis and thus, the adoption of immunotherapy, as a first-line treatment, seems to be associated with coagulation-fibrinolysis derangement. METHODS: We pharmacologically modulated NSCLC cell lines in co-culture with CD8+ T-cells (TCD8+) and myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs), isolated from healthy blood donors. The effects of ICIs Nivolumab and Ipilimumab on NSCLC cell death were assessed by annexin V and propidium iodide (PI) flow cytometry analysis. The potential procoagulant properties were analyzed by in vitro clotting assays and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs). The metabolic remodeling induced by the ICIs was explored by 1H nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. RESULTS: Flow cytometry analysis showed that TCD8+ and ICIs increase cell death in H292 and PC-9 cells but not in A549 cells. Conditioned media from NSCLC cells exposed to TCD8+ and ICI induced in vitro platelet aggregation. In A549, Podoplanin (PDPN) levels increased with Nivolumab. In H292, ICIs increased PDPN levels in the absence of TCD8+. In PC-9, Ipilimumab decreased PDPN levels, this effect being rescued by TCD8+. MDSCs did not interfere with the effect of TCD8+ in the production of TF or PDPN in any NSCLC cell lines. The exometabolome showed a metabolic remodeling in NSCLC cells upon exposure to TCD8+ and ICIs. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides some insights into the interplay of immune cells, ICIs and cancer cells influencing the coagulation status. ICIs are important promoters of coagulation, benefiting from TCD8+ mediation. The exometabolome analysis highlighted the relevance of acetate, pyruvate, glycine, glutamine, valine, leucine and isoleucine as biomarkers. Further investigation is needed to validate this finding in a cohort of NSCLC patients.

Multiomic molecular characterization of the response to combination immunotherapy in MSS/pMMR metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combinations represent an emerging treatment strategies in cancer. However, their efficacy in microsatellite stable (MSS) or mismatch repair-proficient (pMMR) colorectal cancer (CRC) is variable. Here, a multiomic characterization was performed to identify predictive biomarkers associated with patient response to ICI combinations in MSS/pMMR CRC for the further development of ICI combinations. METHODS: Whole-exome sequencing, RNA sequencing, and multiplex fluorescence immunohistochemistry of tumors from patients with MSS/pMMR CRC, who received regorafenib plus nivolumab (REGONIVO) or TAS-116 plus nivolumab (TASNIVO) in clinical trials were conducted. Twenty-two and 23 patients without prior ICI from the REGONIVO and TASNIVO trials were included in this study. A biomarker analysis was performed using samples from each of these studies. RESULTS: The epithelial-mesenchymal transition pathway and genes related to cancer-associated fibroblasts were upregulated in the REGONIVO responder group, and the G2M checkpoint pathway was upregulated in the TASNIVO responder group. The MYC pathway was upregulated in the REGONIVO non-responder group. Consensus molecular subtype 4 was significantly associated with response (p=0.035) and longer progression-free survival (p=0.006) in the REGONIVO trial. CD8+ T cells, regulatory T cells, and M2 macrophages density was significantly higher in the REGONIVO trial responders than in non-responders. Mutations in the POLE gene and patient response were significantly associated in the TASNIVO trial; however, the frequencies of other mutations or tumor mutational burden were not significantly different between responders and non-responders in either trial. CONCLUSIONS: We identified molecular features associated with the response to the REGONIVO and TASNIVO, particularly those related to tumor microenvironmental factors. These findings are likely to contribute to the development of biomarkers to predict treatment efficacy for MSS/pMMR CRC and future immunotherapy combinations for treatment.

Remarkable response to pazopanib plus vivolumab in a patient with pericardial synovial sarcoma carrying a novel genotype BRCA2 c.968dupT: A case report.

Pericardial synovial sarcomas (PSS) have a low incidence rate and are highly invasive with a dismal prognosis. Standard treatment includes surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy but with limited response. Here, we report the case of a 15-year-old nonsmoking youngster diagnosed with PSS who developed disease relapsed from surgery after 1 month. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) using baseline tissue was performed, and BRCA2 c.968dupT was detected. Then pazopanib (a multitargeted inhibitor) plus nivolumab (an immune checkpoint inhibitor) was administered, with a partial response and progression-free survival of 14 months. BRCA2 c.968dupT has not previously been reported in PSS and its response to targeted combination immunotherapy are not well characterized. Here, we report the efficacy of pazopanib combined with nivolumab in a PSS patient harboring BRCA2 c.968dupT and also provide the clinical evidence of the utility of NGS in exploring actionable mutations for solid tumor. Combination therapy based on immunotherapy may be a potential treatment choice for PSS harboring BRCA2 mutation.

Immunomodulatory response to neoadjuvant nivolumab in non-metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Novel perioperative strategies are needed to reduce recurrence rates in patients undergoing nephrectomy for high-risk, non-metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). We conducted a prospective, phase I trial of neoadjuvant nivolumab prior to nephrectomy in 15 evaluable patients with non-metastatic ccRCC. We leveraged tissue from that cohort to elucidate the effects of PD-1 inhibition on immune cell populations in ccRCC and correlate the evolving immune milieu with anti-PD-1 response. We found that nivolumab durably induces a pro-inflammatory state within the primary tumor, and baseline immune infiltration within the primary tumor correlates with nivolumab responsiveness. Nivolumab increases CTLA-4 expression in the primary tumor, and subsequent nephrectomy increases circulating concentrations of sPD-L1, sPD-L3 (sB7-H3), and s4-1BB. These findings form the basis to consider neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) for high-risk ccRCC while the tumor remains in situ and provide the rationale for perioperative strategies of novel ICI combinations.

Neoadjuvant nivolumab plus bevacizumab therapy improves the prognosis of triple-negative breast cancer in humanized mouse models.

BACKGROUND: The combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors and anti-angiogenic agents has been proposed as a promising strategy to improve the outcome of advanced triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, further investigation is warranted to elucidate the specific mechanisms underlying the effects of combination therapy and its potential as neoadjuvant therapy for early-stage TNBC. METHODS: In this study, we constructed humanized mouse models by engrafting the human immune system into severely immunodeficient mice and subsequently implanting TNBC cells into the model. The mice were treated with neoadjuvant combination therapy (bevacizumab combined with nivolumab), followed by in vivo imaging system to assess tumor recurrence and metastasis after surgery. The immune microenvironment of tumors was analyzed to investigate the potential mechanisms. Furthermore, we verified the impact of extending the interval before surgery or administering adjuvant therapy after neoadjuvant therapy on the prognosis of mice. RESULTS: Neoadjuvant combination therapy significantly inhibited tumor growth, prevented recurrence and metastasis by normalizing tumor vessels and inducing robust CD8+ T cell infiltration and activation in primary tumors (p < 0.001). In vivo experiments demonstrated that prolonging the interval before surgery or administering adjuvant therapy after neoadjuvant therapy did not enhance its efficacy. CONCLUSION: The preclinical study has demonstrated the therapeutic efficacy and mechanism of neoadjuvant combination therapy (nivolumab plus bevacizumab) in treating early TNBC.

Model-Informed Clinical Pharmacology Profile of a Novel Fixed-Dose Combination of Nivolumab and Relatlimab in Adult and Adolescent Patients with Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: Progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly improved with nivolumab 480 mg plus relatlimab 160 mg fixed-dose combination (FDC) every 4 weeks (Q4W) versus nivolumab alone in patients with previously untreated advanced melanoma in RELATIVITY-047. In addition, RELATIVITY-020 (Part D) demonstrated a manageable safety profile and potential for durable response with nivolumab plus relatlimab in previously treated patients. Here, we evaluate the clinical pharmacology profile (CPP) of nivolumab plus relatlimab to support the approved regimen for adult and adolescent patients with advanced melanoma and its continued clinical development in solid tumors. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The pharmacokinetics (PK) and immunogenicity of relatlimab and nivolumab were assessed using data from RELATIVITY-047 and RELATIVITY-020. Patients with advanced solid tumors received relatlimab alone or nivolumab plus relatlimab as single-agent vials (SAV) or FDC. PK was characterized using a population PK (popPK) model. RESULTS: Relatlimab demonstrated nonlinear and time-varying PK. Nonlinearity in relatlimab PK represented approximately 31% of total CL of relatlimab 160 mg Q4W. Relatlimab PK was dose proportional at doses ≥160 mg Q4W. Geometric mean exposures were similar for SAV and FDC cohorts receiving equivalent dosing regimens. No dose adjustment was required for covariates. Incidence of relatlimab antidrug antibodies was <6% for nivolumab plus relatlimab and had no clinically meaningful impact. There was no PK-related drug interaction of nivolumab plus relatlimab. CONCLUSIONS: The CPP of relatlimab alone or in combination with nivolumab supports the approved dosing in advanced melanoma and the continued evaluation of nivolumab and relatlimab across other solid tumors. See related commentary by Gopalakrishnan and Amaria, p. 2862.

Ipilimumab and nivolumab combined with anthracycline-based chemotherapy in metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: a randomized phase 2b trial.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown minimal clinical activity in hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer (HR+mBC). Doxorubicin and low-dose cyclophosphamide are reported to induce immune responses and counter regulatory T cells (Tregs). Here, we report the efficacy and safety of combined programmed cell death protein-1/cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 blockade concomitant with or after immunomodulatory chemotherapy for HR+mBC. METHODS: Patients with HR+mBC starting first-/second- line chemotherapy (chemo) were randomized 2:3 to chemotherapy (pegylated liposomal doxorubicin 20 mg/m2 every second week plus cyclophosphamide 50 mg by mouth/day in every other 2-week cycle) with or without concomitant ipilimumab (ipi; 1 mg/kg every sixth week) and nivolumab (nivo; 240 mg every second week). Patients in the chemo-only arm were offered cross-over to ipi/nivo without chemotherapy. Co-primary endpoints were safety in all patients starting therapy and progression-free survival (PFS) in the per-protocol (PP) population, defined as all patients evaluated for response and receiving at least two treatment cycles. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate, clinical benefit rate, Treg changes during therapy and assessment of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), mutational burden and immune gene signatures as biomarkers. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients were randomized and received immune-chemo (N=49) or chemo-only (N=33), 16 patients continued to the ipi/nivo-only cross-over arm. Median follow-up was 41.4 months. Serious adverse events occurred in 63% in the immune-chemo arm, 39% in the chemo-only arm and 31% in the cross-over-arm. In the PP population (N=78) median PFS in the immune-chemo arm was 5.1 months, compared with 3.6 months in the chemo-only arm, with HR 0.94 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.51). Clinical benefit rates were 55% (26/47) and 48% (15/31) in the immune-chemo and chemo-only arms, respectively. In the cross-over-arm (ipi/nivo-only), objective responses were observed in 19% of patients (3/16) and clinical benefit in 25% (4/16). Treg levels in blood decreased after study chemotherapy. High-grade immune-related adverse events were associated with prolonged PFS. PD-L1 status and mutational burden were not associated with ipi/nivo benefit, whereas a numerical PFS advantage was observed for patients with a high Treg gene signature in tumor. CONCLUSION: The addition of ipi/nivo to chemotherapy increased toxicity without improving efficacy. Ipi/nivo administered sequentially to chemotherapy was tolerable and induced clinical responses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03409198.