An Illustrative Case of Combination Cabozantinib/Nivolumab for Progressive Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC).

We report a case using combination cabozantinib plus nivolumab to salvage disease control in a patient with refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma. The patient had previously experienced disease progression from high-dose interleukin-2, sunitinib, pazopanib, cabozantinib, and nivolumab, all given sequentially. Combination cabozantinib plus nivolumab resulted in 22 months of disease control. Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors including cabozantinib have immunomodulatory effects when combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors, with multiple ongoing phase III trials exploring the cabozantinib plus nivolumab combination in the first-line setting. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of progression on nivolumab and cabozantinib when given as sequential monotherapies but stable disease on combination cabozantinib plus nivolumab.

Salvage Ipilimumab plus Nivolumab after Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 Therapy in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Combination anti-PD-(L)1/CTLA-4 blockade is approved in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the first-line setting or after sorafenib, but whether this treatment has efficacy after prior anti-PD-(L)1 therapy is unknown. We performed a multicenter retrospective review of patients with advanced HCC treated with ipilimumab plus nivolumab after prior anti-PD-(L)1 therapy, excluding patients with prior anti-CTLA-4 treatment. Of the 32 patients who met our inclusion criteria, prior anti-PD-(L)1 regimens included atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (50%, n = 16), other anti-VEGF plus anti-PD-(L)1 combinations (31%, n = 10), and anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy (19%, n = 6). The median number of prior systemic therapies was 2 (range, 1-8). The objective response rate with ipilimumab plus nivolumab by RECIST 1.1 was 22% [1 complete response (3%), 6 partial response (19%), 8 stable disease (25%), 16 progressive disease (50%), and 1 not evaluable (NE) (3%)], and objective response was associated with improved progression-free survival and overall survival. Immune-related adverse events were reported in 13 patients (41%), with no new safety signals. This study demonstrates that ipilimumab plus nivolumab has efficacy in patients with HCC who have received prior anti-PD-(L)1 therapy, suggesting that failure to respond to prior PD-(L)1 blockade should not preclude treatment with salvage ipilimumab plus nivolumab. Prospective studies are needed to define the optimal sequence of therapies. Significance: Anti-PD-(L)1 containing regimens are the preferred first-line treatment for advanced HCC, but whether salvage with PD-(L)1/CTLA-4 blockade is effective in patients who have failed prior anti-PD-(L)1 therapy is unknown. Our study demonstrates that ipilimumab plus nivolumab has clinical activity in patients with advanced HCC previously treated with anti-PD-(L)1 therapy, supporting the continued use of this regimen in the late-line setting after prior anti-PD-(L)1 exposure.

Evaluation of tumor microenvironment and biomarkers of immune checkpoint inhibitor response in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy combinations including ipilimumab and nivolumab are now the standard of care for untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Biomarkers of response are lacking to predict patients who will have a favorable or unfavorable response to immunotherapy. This study aimed to use the OmniSeq transcriptome-based platform to develop biomarkers of response to immunotherapy. METHODS: Two cohorts of patients were retrospectively collected. These included an investigational cohort of patients with mRCC treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy from five institutions, and a subsequent validation cohort of patients with mRCC treated with combination ipilimumab and nivolumab from two institutions (Duke Cancer Institute and Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Center). Tissue-based RNA sequencing was performed using the OmniSeq Immune Report Card on banked specimens to identify gene signatures and immune checkpoints associated with differential clinical outcomes. A 5-gene expression panel was developed based on the investigational cohort and was subsequently evaluated in the validation cohort. Clinical outcomes including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were extracted by retrospective chart review. Objective response rate (ORR) was assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) V.1.1. RESULTS: The initial investigation cohort identified 86 patients with mRCC who received nivolumab (80%, 69/86), ipilimumab/nivolumab (14%, 12/86), or pembrolizumab (6%, 5/86). A gene expression score was created using the top five genes found in responders versus non-responders (FOXP3, CCR4, KLRK1, ITK, TIGIT). The ORR in patients with high gene expression (GEhigh) on the 5-gene panel was 29% (14/48), compared with low gene expression (GElow) 3% (1/38, χ2 p=0.001). The validation cohort was comprised of 62 patients who received ipilimumab/nivolumab. There was no difference between GEhigh and GElow in terms of ORR (44% vs 38.5%), PFS (HR 1.5, 95% CI 0.58 to 3.89), or OS (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.83). Similarly, no differences in ORR, PFS or OS were observed when patients were stratified by tumor mutational burden (high=top 20%), PD-L1 (programmed death-ligand 1) expression by immunohistochemistry or RNA expression, or CTLA-4 (cytotoxic T-lymphocytes-associated protein 4) RNA expression. The International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk score was prognostic for OS but not PFS. CONCLUSION: A 5-gene panel that was associated with improved ORR in a predominantly nivolumab monotherapy population of patients with mRCC was not predictive for radiographic response, PFS, or OS among patients with mRCC treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab.

A Multi-institutional, Retrospective Analysis of Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma to Bone Treated with Combination Ipilimumab and Nivolumab.

BACKGROUND: Bone metastases (BM) in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients are associated with poor outcomes. There are limited published data on outcomes in these patients with immunotherapy agents. We present a multi-institutional, retrospective analysis of metastatic RCC patients with BM treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab (I + N). OBJECTIVE: Patient, tumor, and treatment-related variables were retrospectively collected from electronic medical records of patients with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of RCC and at least one radiographically confirmed BM prior to initiation of I + N. Best objective response was assessed by clinical chart review, imaging reports, and treating physician evaluation; progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were recorded as of 31 December 2020. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient characteristics and BM-related variables. Kaplan-Meier method and Mantel-Haenszel log-rank test were used to compare survival among groups. Cox regression univariable and multivariable models were used to correlate patient- and treatment-related variables to outcomes. RESULTS: Eighty patients with RCC and BM treated with I + N were identified. Patients were predominantly male and Caucasian presenting primarily with IMDC intermediate or poor-risk clear-cell RCC. Best response to I + N was progressive disease (46%), stable disease (28%), partial response (21%), and not evaluable (5%). Median PFS was 6.1 months (95% CI 3.8-8.9 months) with the majority of patients (65%) discontinuing I + N due to disease progression. Median OS was 25.6 months (95% CI 14.9-NA) with median follow-up of 25.2 months. A multivariable regression model for PFS showed several variables to be significantly associated with worse PFS including female gender [p = 0.02; hazard ratio (HR) 2.16; 95% CI 1.14-4.12], metastases to other sites (p = 0.006; HR 2.12; 95% CI 1.24-3.62) and presence of BM to ribs (p = 0.0007; HR 2.61; 95% CI 1.50-4.52). A multivariable Cox model of OS showed no prior radiation therapy to BM (p = 0.02; HR 2.17; 95% CI 1.13-4.17) and presence of liver metastases (p = 0.0006; HR 3.19; 95% CI 1.65-6.19) to be significantly associated with worse OS. CONCLUSION: RCC patients with ≥ 1 BM who received I + N therapy had a relatively low response rate, PFS, and OS. Strategies to improve outcomes in this subset of patients are needed.

Clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma and brain metastasis treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab.

The combination of ipilimumab plus nivolumab (I+N) has greatly improved outcomes in patients with intermediate or poor-risk untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, little is known about the outcomes of patients with brain metastasis (BrM) treated with I+N. A search was performed to retrospectively identify all patients with mRCC treated with I+N in the Duke Cancer Institute and the Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Center, followed by a chart review. Patients were included if they had BrM at the time of I+N initiation. Cohort characteristics are summarized with descriptive statistics. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS) and global, intracranial, and extracranial progression-free survival (PFS) for the cohort and log rank test was used to compare OS and PFS between patient groups. Radiographic response was categorized by RECIST. Fisher's exact test was used to correlate patient factors with radiographic response. From October 2017 to December 2020, 19 patients with BrM received I+N for mRCC with a median follow-up time of 27.1 months (range 15.0-35.6). By International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk criteria, 16% had favorable, 58% had intermediate, and 26% had poor-risk disease. 68% were systemic therapy naïve, and 77% of patients had clear cell histology. 95% had received local CNS directed therapy with surgery, radiotherapy, or both. The objective response rate was 44% (0% complete response) with three of six patients treated in the second line or greater setting experiencing a partial response. The median PFS was 7.6 months (95% CI 5.6 to 14.9). The median extracranial PFS was 8.5 months (95% CI 5.6 to 19.7), and median intracranial PFS was 14.7 months (95% CI 7.2 to not reached). No variables assessed were significantly associated with radiographic response (gender, IMDC risk, presence of bone metastasis, line of therapy, or presence of immune related adverse events). In our retrospective cohort of patients with mRCC with BrM, I+N, in combination with CNS-directed local therapy, appears to have clinical efficacy as previously described with responses seen beyond the first-line setting. Further investigation is warranted in this population given exclusion from prior clinical trials.

Predictive Value of Combining Biomarkers for Clinical Outcomes in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: A high tumor mutational burden (TMB) (≥10 mut/Mb) has been associated with improved clinical benefit in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and is a tumor agnostic indication for pembrolizumab across tumor types. We explored whether combining TMB with programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and pretreatment neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was associated with improved outcomes in ICI-treated NSCLC. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients treated with ICI with Foundation One genomic testing, including TMB. Optimal cutoff for prediction of response by TMB was determined by receiver operating characteristic analysis, and area under the curve (AUC) was calculated for all 3 biomarkers and combinations. Cox model was used to assess prognostic factors of overall survival (OS) and time to progression (TTP). Survival cutoffs calculated with Kaplan-Meier survival curves were TMB ≥10 mut/Mb, PD-L1 ≥50%, NLR <5, and combined biomarkers. RESULTS: Data from 88 patients treated were analyzed. The optimal TMB cutoff was 9.24 mut/Mb (AUC, 0.62), improving to 0.74 combining all 3 biomarkers. Adjusted Cox model showed that TMB ≥10 mut/Mb was an independent factor of OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.31; 95% confidence interval; 0.14-0.69; P = .004) and TTP (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.27-0.77; P = .003). The combination of high TMB with positive PD-L1 and low NLR was significantly associated with OS (P = .038) but not TTP. CONCLUSIONS: TMB has modest predictive and prognostic power for clinical outcomes after ICI treatment. The combination of TMB, PD-L1, and NLR status improves this power.

LRP1B mutations are associated with favorable outcomes to immune checkpoint inhibitors across multiple cancer types.

BACKGROUND: Low-density lipoprotein receptor-related protein 1b (encoded by LRP1B) is a putative tumor suppressor, and preliminary evidence suggests LRP1B-mutated cancers may have improved outcomes with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective pan-cancer analysis of patients with LRP1B alterations treated with ICI at Duke University, Johns Hopkins University (JHU) and University of Michigan (UM). The primary objective was to assess the association between overall response rate (ORR) to ICI and pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) LRP1B alterations compared with LRP1B variants of unknown significance (VUS). Secondary outcomes were the associations with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) by LRP1B status. RESULTS: We identified 101 patients (44 Duke, 35 JHU, 22 UM) with LRP1B alterations who were treated with ICI. The most common tumor types by alteration (P/LP vs VUS%) were lung (36% vs 49%), prostate (9% vs 7%), sarcoma (5% vs 7%), melanoma (9% vs 0%) and breast cancer (3% vs 7%). The ORR for patients with LRP1B P/LP versus VUS alterations was 54% and 13%, respectively (OR 7.5, 95% CI 2.9 to 22.3, p=0.0009). P/LP LRP1B alterations were associated with longer PFS (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.68, p=0.0003) and OS (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.01, p=0.053). These results remained consistent when excluding patients harboring microsatellite instability (MSI) and controlling for tumor mutational burden (TMB). CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter study shows significantly better outcomes with ICI therapy in patients harboring P/LP versus VUS LRP1B alterations, independently of TMB/MSI status. Further mechanistic and prospective validation studies are warranted.

Association of baseline neutrophil-to-eosinophil ratio with response to nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The identification of biomarkers to select patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) most likely to respond to combination immunotherapy (IO) is needed. We sought to investigate an association of the baseline neutrophil-to-eosinophil ratio (NER) with outcomes to nivolumab plus ipilimumab for patients with mRCC. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients with clear cell mRCC treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab from Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center and Duke Cancer Institute. Patients with prior receipt of immunotherapy and those without available baseline complete blood count with differential were excluded. Patients were divided into groups by the median baseline NER and analyzed for overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR). Patients were also divided by median baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and analyzed for clinical outcome. Further analyses of patients above/below the median NER and NLR were performed in subgroups of IMDC intermediate/poor risk, IMDC favorable risk, and treatment naïve patients. RESULTS: A total of 110 patients were included: median age was 61 years and 75% were treatment naïve. The median NER (mNER) at baseline was 26.4. The ORR was 40% for patients with mNER (OR 2.39, p = 0.04). The median PFS for patients with mNER (HR 0.50, p < 0.01). Median OS was not reached (NR) for patients with mNER (HR 0.31, p < 0.01). The median NLR (mNLR) was 3.42. While patients with mNLR group. CONCLUSIONS: A lower baseline NER was associated with improved clinical outcomes (PFS, OS, and ORR) in patients with mRCC treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, and prospective validation of the baseline NER as a predictive biomarker for response to immunotherapy-based combinations in mRCC is warranted.

Combination antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibition and anti-PD1 immunotherapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A retrospective analysis of safety, tolerance, and clinical outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Two separate antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immunotherapy (IO) combinations are FDA-approved as front-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Little is known about off-protocol and post-front-line experience with combination TKI-IO approaches. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of mRCC patients who received combination TKI-IO post-first-line therapy between November 2015 and January 2019 at MD Anderson Cancer Center and Duke Cancer Institute. Chart review detailed patient characteristics, treatments, toxicity, and survival. Independent radiologists, blinded to clinical data, assessed best radiographic response using RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: We identified 48 mRCC patients for inclusion: median age 65 years, 75.0% clear cell histology, 68.8% IMDC intermediate risk, and median two prior systemic therapies. TKI-IO combinations included nivolumab-cabozantinib (N +C; 24 patients), nivolumab-pazopanib (N+P; 13), nivolumab-axitinib (6), nivolumab-lenvatinib (2), and nivolumab-ipilimumab-cabozantinib (3). The median progression-free survival was 11.6 months and the median overall survival was not reached. Response data were available in 45 patients: complete response (CR; n = 3, 6.7%), partial response (PR; 20, 44.4%), stable disease (SD; 19, 42.2%), and progressive disease (3, 6.7%). Overall response rate was 51% and disease control rate (CR+PR+SD) was 93%. Only one patient had a grade ≥3 adverse event. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first case series reporting off-label use of combination TKI-IO for mRCC. TKI-IO combinations, particularly N+P and N+C, are well tolerated and efficacious. Although further prospective research is essential, slow disease progression on IO or TKI monotherapy may be safely controlled with addition of either TKI or IO.

Novel therapies are changing treatment paradigms in metastatic prostate cancer.

Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains a terminal diagnosis with an aggressive disease course despite currently approved therapeutics. The recent successful development of poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors for patients with mCRPC and mutations in DNA damage repair genes has added to the treatment armamentarium and improved personalized treatments for prostate cancer. Other promising therapeutic agents currently in clinical development include the radiotherapeutic 177-lutetium-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-617 targeting PSMA-expressing prostate cancer and combinations of immunotherapy with currently effective treatment options for prostate cancer. Herein, we have highlighted the progress in systemic treatments for mCRPC and the promising agents currently in ongoing clinical trials.

High Expression of miR-532-5p, a Tumor Suppressor, Leads to Better Prognosis in Ovarian Cancer Both In Vivo and In Vitro.

Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death for gynecologic cancers, ranking fifth overall for cancer-related death among women. The identification of biomarkers and the elucidation of molecular mechanisms for improving treatment options have received extensive efforts in ovarian cancer research. miRNAs have high potential to act as both ovarian cancer biomarkers and as critical regulators of ovarian tumor behavior. We comprehensively analyzed global mRNA, miRNA expression, and survival data for ovarian cancer from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) to pinpoint miRNAs that play critical roles in ovarian cancer survival through their effect on mRNA expression. We performed miRNA overexpression and gene knockdown experiments to confirm mechanisms predicted in our bioinformatics approach. We established that overexpression of miR-532-5p in OVCAR-3 cells resulted in a significant decrease in cell viability over a 96-hour time period. In the TCGA ovarian cancer dataset, we found 67 genes whose expression levels were negatively correlated with miR-532-5p expression and correlated with patient survival, such as WNT9A, CSNK2A2, CHD4, and SH3PXD2A The potential miR-532-5p-regulated gene targets were found to be enriched in the Wnt pathway. Overexpression of miR-532-5p through miRNA mimic caused downregulation of CSNK2A2, CHD4, and SH3PXD2A in the OVCAR-3 cell line. We have discovered and validated the tumor-suppressing capabilities of miR-532-5p both in vivo through TCGA analysis and in vitro through ovarian cancer cell lines. Our work highlights the potential clinical importance of miR-532-5p expression in ovarian cancer patients. Mol Cancer Ther; 15(5); 1123-31. ©2016 AACR.