A Phase 1/2 study of the PD-L1 inhibitor, BGB-A333, alone and in combination with the PD-1 inhibitor, tislelizumab, in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Many patients do not respond or eventually relapse on treatment with programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) checkpoint inhibitors due to secondary or acquired resistance; therefore, there is a need to investigate novel PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. METHODS: This open-label, non-randomised study investigated the safety and anti-tumour activity of BGB-A333, a PD-L1 inhibitor, alone and in combination with tislelizumab in patients with advanced solid tumours with progression during/after standard therapy. The primary objectives were to determine the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D), safety and tolerability for BGB-A333 alone and in combination with tislelizumab (Phase 1a/1b) and to determine the overall response rate (ORR) with BGB-A333 plus tislelizumab (Phase 2). RESULTS: Overall, 39 patients across Phase 1a (N = 15), 1b (N = 12) and 2 (N = 12) were enroled. In Phase 1a, an RP2D of 1350 mg was determined. In Phase 1a and 1b/2, serious treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in five and eight patients, respectively. Two patients experienced TEAEs that led to death. In Phase 2, the ORR was 41.7% (n = 5/12; 95% confidence interval: 15.17%, 72.33%). CONCLUSIONS: TEAEs reported with BGB-A333 were consistent with other PD-L1 inhibitors. Encouraging preliminary anti-tumour activity was observed with BGB-A333 in combination with tislelizumab. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03379259.

A first-in-human phase 1 study of nofazinlimab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, in advanced solid tumors and in combination with regorafenib in metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: We assessed nofazinlimab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, in solid tumors and combined with regorafenib in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: This phase 1 study comprised nofazinlimab dose escalation (phase 1a) and expansion (phase 1b), and regorafenib dose escalation (80 or 120 mg QD, days 1-21 of 28-day cycles) combined with 300-mg nofazinlimab Q4W (part 2a) to determine safety, efficacy, and RP2D. RESULTS: In phase 1a (N = 21), no dose-limiting toxicity occurred from 1 to 10 mg/kg Q3W, with 200 mg Q3W determined as the monotherapy RP2D. In phase 1b (N = 87), 400-mg Q6W and 200-mg Q3W regimens were found comparable. In part 2a (N = 14), both regimens were deemed plausible RP2Ds. Fatigue was the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event (AE) in this study. Any-grade and grade 3/4 nofazinlimab-related AEs were 71.4% and 14.3%, 56.3% and 5.7%, and 57.1% and 21.4% in phases 1a, 1b, and part 2a, respectively. ORRs were 14.3% and 25.3% in phases 1a and 1b, respectively. In part 2a, no patients had radiological responses. CONCLUSIONS: Nofazinlimab monotherapy was well tolerated and demonstrated preliminary anti-tumor activity in multiple tumor types. Regorafenib plus nofazinlimab had a manageable safety profile but was not associated with any response in mCRC. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTR ATION: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03475251).

First-in-human, phase I/IIa study of CRLX301, a nanoparticle drug conjugate containing docetaxel, in patients with advanced or metastatic solid malignancies.

Background This was a phase I/IIa study to investigate the tolerability, efficacy and pharmacokinetics (PK)/ pharmacodynamics (PD) of CRLX301, CDP-based nanoparticle formulation of docetaxel. Methods The study was conducted in two parts. In part 1, dose-escalation using a standard 3 + 3 design was performed in two dosing schedules (every week (QW) and every 3 weeks (Q3W)). Part 2 was comprised of a dose expansion at 75 mg/m2 Q3W. PK studies were performed on both dosing schedules. Results Forty-two patients were recruited onto the study with a median age of 64(range 38-76); median number of prior systemic therapies was 5(range 0-10). Grade 3/4 treatment-related toxicities included: neutropenia (21.4 %), infusion related reaction (11.9 %), anemia (7.1 %), fatigue (4.8 %), diarrhea (4.8 %), and peripheral neuropathy (4.8 %). The maximum tolerated dose was 75 mg/m2 given on the Q3W schedule and was not determined on the QW schedule. In this heavily pre-treated population, four patients (12.9 %) achieved stable disease (SD) ≥ 4 months and 2 patients (6.5 %) achieved partial response (PR) for a clinical benefit rate (CBR) of 19.4 % (6/31 patients). The PRs were seen in prostate and breast adenocarcinoma (one each). CRLX301 exhibited some PK advantages over docetaxel including higher retention of drug in plasma, slower clearance and controlled slow release of docetaxel from the carrier. Conclusions In this heavily pretreated patient population, the safety profile was acceptable for CRLX301 therapy. There was some evidence of preliminary tumor efficacy, but further work is necessary to find the optimal dose and schedule of this formulation.Clinicaltrials.gov trial registration number: NCT02380677 (Date of registration: March 2, 2015).

Pamiparib in combination with tislelizumab in patients with advanced solid tumours: results from the dose-escalation stage of a multicentre, open-label, phase 1a/b trial.

BACKGROUND: Rationale exists for combined treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in a variety of solid tumours. This study aimed to investigate the safety and antitumour effects of pamiparib, an oral PARP 1/2 inhibitor, combined with tislelizumab, a humanised anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, in patients with advanced solid tumours and to determine the optimum doses for further evaluation. METHODS: We did a multicentre, open-label, phase 1a/b study at five academic sites or community oncology centres in Australia. We recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) with advanced solid tumours who had received one or more previous lines of therapy, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 1 or less, and a life expectancy of 12 weeks or more. Patients were enrolled into one of five dose-escalation cohorts, with dose-escalation done in a 3 + 3 design. Cohorts 1-3 received intravenous tislelizumab 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks plus 20, 40, or 60 mg oral pamiparib twice daily, respectively; cohorts 4 and 5 received 200 mg intravenous tislelizumab every 3 weeks plus 40 or 60 mg oral pamiparib twice daily, respectively. The primary endpoints of the phase 1a dose-escalation part of the study were safety and tolerability, including the occurrence of dose-limiting toxicities and determination of the maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase 2 dose. All primary endpoints were analysed in the safety analysis set, which included all patients who received at least one dose of tislelizumab or pamiparib, with the exception of the occurrence of dose-limiting toxicities, which was analysed in the dose-limiting toxicity analysis set, which included all patients who received at least 90% of the first scheduled tislelizumab dose and at least 75% of scheduled pamiparib doses, or who had a dose-limiting toxicity event during cycle 1. Reported here are results of the phase 1a dose-escalation stage of the trial. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02660034, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Jan 22, 2016, and May 16, 2017, we enrolled 49 patients (median age 63 years [IQR 55-67]), all of whom received at least one dose of pamiparib or tiselzumab. Four patients had dose-limiting toxicities (intractable grade 2 nausea [n=1] and grade 3 rash [n=1] in cohort 4, and grade 2 nausea and vomiting [n=1] and grade 4 immune-mediated hepatitis [n=1] in cohort 5). The recommended phase 2 dose was tislelizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks plus pamiparib 40 mg twice daily (the dose given in cohort 4). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were nausea (in 31 [63%] of 49 patients), fatigue (26 [53%]), diarrhoea (17 [35%]), and vomiting (15 [31%]). 23 (47%) of 49 patients had immune-related adverse events, of whom nine (39%) had asymptomatic grade 3-4 hepatic immune-related adverse events, which were reversible with corticosteroid treatment. The most common adverse event of grade 3 or worse severity was anaemia (in six [12%] patients) and no grade 5 adverse events were reported. Hepatitis or autoimmune hepatitis was the only serious adverse event to occur in two or more patients (in four [8%] patients). At a median follow-up of 8·3 months (IQR 4·8-12·8), ten (20%) of 49 patients achieved an objective response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) version 1.1, including two complete responses and eight partial responses. INTERPRETATION: Pamiparib with tislelizumab was generally well tolerated and associated with antitumour responses and clinical benefit in patients with advanced solid tumours supporting further investigation of the combination of pamiparib with tislelizumab. FUNDING: BeiGene.

A phase IIa study of HA-irinotecan, formulation of hyaluronic acid and irinotecan targeting CD44 in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer.

Preclinical studies in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) have shown that hyaluronic acid (HA) can be effectively used to deliver chemotherapy and selectively decrease CD44 expressing (stem cell-like) tumour cells. The current study aimed to replicate these findings and obtain data on safety and activity of HA-irinotecan (HA-IR). Eligible patients with extensive stage SCLC were consented. A safety cohort (n = 5) was treated with HA-IR and Carboplatin (C). Subsequently, the patients were randomised 1:1 to receive experimental (HA-IR + C) or standard (IR + C) treatment, to a maximum of 6 cycles. The second line patients were added to the study and treated with open label HA-IR + C. Tumour response was measured after every 2 cycles. Baseline tumour specimens were stained for CD44s and CD44v6 expression. Circulating tumour cells (CTCs) were enumerated before each treatment cycle. Out of 39 patients screened, 34 were evaluable for the study. The median age was 66 (range 39-83). The overall response rates were 69% and 75% for experimental and standard arms respectively. Median progression free survival was 42 and 28 weeks, respectively (p = 0.892). The treatments were well tolerated. The incidence of grade III/IV diarrhea was more common in the standard arm, while anaemia was more common in the experimental arm. IHC analysis suggested that the patients with CD44s positive tumours may gain survival benefit from HA-IR. HA-IR is well tolerated and active in ES-SCLC. The effect of HA-IR on CD44s + cancer stem-like cells provide an early hint towards a potential novel target.

A phase 1, first-in-human study of AMG 900, an orally administered pan-Aurora kinase inhibitor, in adult patients with advanced solid tumors.

Background Aurora kinase overexpression or amplifications are associated with high proliferation, poor prognosis, and therapeutic resistance in human tumors. AMG 900 is an investigational, oral, selective pan-Aurora kinase inhibitor. Methods This first-in-human trial included dose-escalation and dose-expansion phases ( ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT00858377). Dose escalation evaluated the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of AMG 900 in advanced solid tumors and determined the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) with/without granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis. Dose expansion evaluated clinical activity in three tumor types: taxane- and platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, taxane-resistant triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), and castration-resistant and taxane- or cisplatin/etoposide-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). AMG 900 was administered 4 days on/10 days off at 1-50 mg/day during escalation and at the MTD with G-CSF during expansion. Results AMG 900 showed rapid absorption with fast clearance, supporting once-daily dosing. The MTD was 25 mg/day, increasing to 40 mg/day with G-CSF. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events included neutropenia (37%), anemia (23%), leukopenia (14%), and thrombocytopenia (12%). During dose expansion, 3/29 (10.3%, 95% CI: 2.0%-28.0%) evaluable patients with ovarian cancer experienced partial response by central imaging per RECIST 1.1; median duration of response was 24.1 weeks (95% CI: 16.1-34.1). Seven patients (24.1%, 95% CI: 10.3%-43.5%) experienced partial response per Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup criteria; 5/9 patients positive for p53 expression responded to treatment. No objective responses were observed in patients with TNBC or CRPC per RECIST 1.1. Conclusions AMG 900 40 mg/day with G-CSF had manageable toxicity and demonstrated single-agent activity in patients with heavily pretreated, chemotherapy-resistant ovarian cancer.

A gut microbial signature for combination immune checkpoint blockade across cancer types.

Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte protein 4 (CTLA-4) can induce remarkable, yet unpredictable, responses across a variety of cancers. Studies suggest that there is a relationship between a cancer patient's gut microbiota composition and clinical response to ICB; however, defining microbiome-based biomarkers that generalize across cohorts has been challenging. This may relate to previous efforts quantifying microbiota to species (or higher taxonomic rank) abundances, whereas microbial functions are often strain specific. Here, we performed deep shotgun metagenomic sequencing of baseline fecal samples from a unique, richly annotated phase 2 trial cohort of patients with diverse rare cancers treated with combination ICB (n = 106 discovery cohort). We demonstrate that strain-resolved microbial abundances improve machine learning predictions of ICB response and 12-month progression-free survival relative to models built using species-rank quantifications or comprehensive pretreatment clinical factors. Through a meta-analysis of gut metagenomes from a further six comparable studies (n = 364 validation cohort), we found cross-cancer (and cross-country) validity of strain-response signatures, but only when the training and test cohorts used concordant ICB regimens (anti-PD-1 monotherapy or combination anti-PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4). This suggests that future development of gut microbiome diagnostics or therapeutics should be tailored according to ICB treatment regimen rather than according to cancer type.

A Phase Ib/II Trial of Combined BRAF and EGFR Inhibition in BRAF V600E Positive Metastatic Colorectal Cancer and Other Cancers: The EVICT (Erlotinib and Vemurafenib In Combination Trial) Study.

PURPOSE: BRAF V600E mutant metastatic colorectal cancer represents a significant clinical problem, with combination approaches being developed clinically with oral BRAF inhibitors combined with EGFR-targeting antibodies. While compelling preclinical data have highlighted the effectiveness of combination therapy with vemurafenib and small-molecule EGFR inhibitors, gefitinib or erlotinib, in colorectal cancer, this therapeutic strategy has not been investigated in clinical studies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a phase Ib/II dose-escalation/expansion trial investigating the safety/efficacy of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib and EGFR inhibitor erlotinib. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients with BRAF V600E positive metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and 7 patients with other cancers were enrolled. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed in escalation, with vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily with erlotinib 150 mg daily selected as the recommended phase II dose. Among 31 evaluable patients with mCRC and 7 with other cancers, overall response rates were 32% [10/31, 16% (5/31) confirmed] and 43% (3/7), respectively, with clinical benefit rates of 65% and 100%. Early ctDNA dynamics were predictive of treatment efficacy, and serial ctDNA monitoring revealed distinct patterns of convergent genomic evolution associated with acquired treatment resistance, with frequent emergence of MAPK pathway alterations, including polyclonal KRAS, NRAS, and MAP2K1 mutations, and MET amplification. CONCLUSIONS: The Erlotinib and Vemurafenib In Combination Trial study demonstrated a safe and novel combination of two oral inhibitors targeting BRAF and EGFR. The dynamic assessment of serial ctDNA was a useful measure of underlying genomic changes in response to this combination and in understanding potential mechanisms of resistance.

Treatment Characteristics and Real-World Progression-Free Survival in Patients With Unresectable Stage III NSCLC Who Received Durvalumab After Chemoradiotherapy: Findings From the PACIFIC-R Study.

INTRODUCTION: The phase 3 PACIFIC trial established consolidation therapy with durvalumab as standard of care for patients with unresectable, stage III NSCLC and no disease progression after definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT). The observational PACIFIC-R study assesses the real-world effectiveness of durvalumab in patients from an early access program. Here, we report treatment characteristics and a preplanned analysis of real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS). METHODS: PACIFIC-R (NCT03798535) is an ongoing, international, retrospective study of patients who started durvalumab (intravenously; 10 mg/kg every 2 wk) within an early access program between September 2017 and December 2018. The primary end points are investigator-assessed rwPFS and overall survival (analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method). RESULTS: As of November 30, 2020, the full analysis set comprised 1399 patients from 11 countries (median follow-up duration, 23.5 mo). Patients received durvalumab for a median of 11.0 months. Median rwPFS was 21.7 months (95% confidence interval: 19.1-24.5). RwPFS was numerically longer among patients who received concurrent versus sequential CRT (median, 23.7 versus 19.3 mo) and among patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 expression greater than or equal to 1% versus less than 1% (22.4 versus 15.6 mo). Overall, 16.5% of the patients had adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation; 9.5% of all patients discontinued because of pneumonitis or interstitial lung disease. CONCLUSIONS: Consolidation durvalumab after definitive CRT was well tolerated and effective in this large, real-world cohort study of patients with unresectable, stage III NSCLC. As expected, rwPFS was longer among patients who received concurrent versus sequential CRT and patients with higher programmed cell death-ligand 1 expression. Nevertheless, favorable rwPFS outcomes were observed regardless of these factors.

A tailored approach to horizon scanning for cancer medicines.

BACKGROUND: Horizon scanning (HS) is the systematic identification of emerging therapies to inform policy and decision-makers. We developed an agile and tailored HS methodology that combined multi-criteria decision analysis weighting and Delphi rounds. As secondary objectives, we aimed to identify new medicines in melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer and colorectal cancer most likely to impact the Australian government's pharmaceutical budget by 2025 and to compare clinician and consumer priorities in cancer medicine reimbursement. METHOD: Three cancer-specific clinician panels (total n = 27) and a consumer panel (n = 7) were formed. Six prioritisation criteria were developed with consumer input. Criteria weightings were elicited using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Candidate medicines were identified and filtered from a primary database and validated against secondary and tertiary sources. Clinician panels participated in a three-round Delphi survey to identify and score the top five medicines in each cancer type. RESULTS: The AHP and Delphi process was completed in eight weeks. Prioritisation criteria focused on toxicity, quality of life (QoL), cost savings, strength of evidence, survival, and unmet need. In both curative and non-curative settings, consumers prioritised toxicity and QoL over survival gains, whereas clinicians prioritised survival. HS results project the ongoing prevalence of high-cost medicines. Since completion in October 2021, the HS has identified 70 % of relevant medicines submitted for Pharmaceutical Benefit Advisory Committee assessment and 60% of the medicines that received a positive recommendation. CONCLUSION: Tested in the Australian context, our method appears to be an efficient and flexible approach to HS that can be tailored to address specific disease types by using elicited weights to prioritise according to incremental value from both a consumer and clinical perspective. POLICY SUMMARY: Since HS is of global interest, our example provides a reproducible blueprint for adaptation to other healthcare settings that integrates consumer input and priorities.

Recruitment, outcomes, and toxicity trends in phase I oncology trials: Six-year experience in a large institution.

BACKGROUND: With the rapid influx of novel anti-cancer agents, phase I clinical trials in oncology are evolving. Historically, response rates on early phase trials have been modest with the clinical benefit and ethics of enrolment debated. However, there is a paucity of real-world data in this setting. AIM: To better understand the changing landscape of phase I oncology trials, we performed a retrospective review at our institution to examine patient and trial characteristics, screening outcomes, and treatment outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed all consecutive adult patients with advanced solid organ malignancies who were screened across phase I trials from January 2013 to December 2018 at a single institution. During this period, 242 patients were assessed for 28 different trials. Median age was 64 years (range 30-89) with an equal sex distribution. Among 257 screening visits, the overall screen failure rate was 18%, resulting in 212 patients being enrolled onto a study. Twenty-six trials (93%) involved immunotherapeutic agents or molecular targeted agents either alone or in combination, with only two trials of cytotoxic agents (7%). Twenty-two (13.4%) of the 209 treated patients experienced a total of 33 grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events. There was one treatment-related death (0.5%). Of 190 response-evaluable patients, 7 (4%) had a complete response, 34 (18%) a partial response, and 59 (31%) experienced stable disease for a disease control rate of 53%. The median overall survival for our cohort was 8.0 (95% CI: 6.8-9.2) months. CONCLUSION: The profile of phase I trials at our institution are consistent with the changing early drug development landscape. Response rates and overall survival in our cohort are superior to historically reported rates and comparable to contemporaneous studies. Severe treatment-related toxicity was relatively uncommon, and treatment-related mortality was rare.

Leveraging Comprehensive Cancer Registry Data to Enable a Broad Range of Research, Audit and Patient Support Activities.

Traditional cancer registries have often been siloed efforts, established by single groups with limited objectives. There is the potential for registry data to support a broad range of research, audit and education initiatives. Here, we describe the establishment of a series of comprehensive cancer registries across the spectrum of common solid cancers. The experience and learnings of each registry team as they develop, implement and then use collected data for a range of purposes, that informs the conduct and output of other registries in a virtuous cycle. Each registry is multi-site, multi-disciplinary and aims to collect data of maximal interest and value to a broad range of enquiry, which would be accessible to any researcher with a high-quality proposal. Lessons learnt include the need for careful and continuous curation of data fields, with regular database updates, and the need for a continued focus on data quality. The registry data as a standalone resource has supported numerous projects, but linkage with external datasets with patients in common has enhanced the audit and research potential. Multiple projects have linked registry data with matched tissue specimens to support prognostic and predictive biomarker studies, both validation and discovery. Registry-based biomarker trials have been successfully supported, generating novel and practice-changing data. Registry-based clinical trials, particularly randomised studies exploring the optimal use of available therapy options are now complementing the research conducted in traditional clinical trials. More recent projects supported by the registries include health economic studies, personalised patient education material, and increased consumer engagement, including consumer entered data.

Phase I/IIa Trial of BMS-986148, an Anti-mesothelin Antibody-drug Conjugate, Alone or in Combination with Nivolumab in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: To assess the safety and tolerability of BMS-986148, a mesothelin-directed antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) ± nivolumab, in patients with selected tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In an international phase I/IIa study [NCT02341625 (CA008-002)], patients received BMS-986148 monotherapy (0.1-1.6 mg/kg intravenously (i.v.) every 3 weeks or 0.4 or 0.6 mg/kg i.v. once weekly; n = 96) or BMS-986148 0.8 mg/kg + nivolumab 360 mg i.v. every 3 weeks (n = 30). The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability. RESULTS: In CA008-002, the most common (≥ 10%) treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) included increased aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, and alkaline phosphatase. Grade 3/4 TRAEs occurred in 42 patients (49%) receiving BMS-986148 every 3 weeks monotherapy, three (25%) receiving BMS-986148 once-weekly monotherapy, and 10 (33%) receiving BMS-986148 + nivolumab every 3 weeks. Overall, 17 of 126 patients (13%) discontinued because of a TRAE. The MTD of BMS-986148 was 1.2 mg/kg i.v. every 3 weeks. The safety profile of BMS-986148 + nivolumab was similar to that of BMS-986148 monotherapy (0.8 mg/kg). Active ADC exposures increased in a dose-proportional manner with both dosing regimens (every 3 weeks and once weekly). Preliminary clinical activity was observed with BMS-986148 ± nivolumab. No association between mesothelin expression and response was detected. CONCLUSIONS: BMS-986148 ± nivolumab demonstrated a clinically manageable safety profile and preliminary evidence of clinical activity, supporting additional studies combining directed cytotoxic therapies with checkpoint inhibitors as potential multimodal therapeutic strategies in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BMS-986012, an Anti-Fucosyl-GM1 Monoclonal Antibody as Monotherapy or in Combination With Nivolumab in Relapsed/Refractory SCLC: Results From a First-in-Human Phase 1/2 Study.

Introduction: Fucosyl-GM1 is a monosialoganglioside with limited expression in healthy tissues and high expression on SCLC cells. BMS-986012 is a nonfucosylated, first-in-class, fully human immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody that binds to fucosyl-GM1. Methods: CA001-030 is a phase 1/2, first-in-human study of BMS-986012 as monotherapy or in combination with nivolumab for adults with relapsed or refractory SCLC. Safety is the primary end point. Additional end points include objective response rate, duration of response, progression-free survival, pharmacokinetics, and overall survival. Results: Patients (BMS-986012 monotherapy, n = 77; BMS-986012 + nivolumab, n = 29) were predominantly of male sex (58%), 63 years old (mean), current or past tobacco users (97%), and treated previously with first-line systemic therapy (99%). The most common treatment-related adverse event was pruritus (n = 95 [90%]). Grade 4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 2% (n = 2) of patients. The objective response rate (95% confidence interval [CI]) was higher with BMS-986012 plus nivolumab (38% [20.7%-57.7%]) than with monotherapy (4% [0.8%-11.0%]). Median (95% CI) duration of response with BMS-986012 plus nivolumab was 26.4 (4.4-not reached) months. Progression-free survival (95% CI) at 24 weeks with monotherapy and BMS-986012 plus nivolumab was 12.2% (6.0%-20.7%) and 39.3% (21.7%-56.5%), respectively. The pharmacokinetics profile of monotherapy and BMS-986012 plus nivolumab suggested dose proportionality across the tested dose range. Median overall survival (95% CI) with monotherapy and BMS-986012 plus nivolumab was 5.4 (4.0-7.3) and 18.7 (8.2-37.3) months, respectively. Conclusions: BMS-986012 in combination with nivolumab represents a well-tolerated, potential new therapy for relapsed or refractory SCLC. BMS-986012 is currently being explored in combination with carboplatin, etoposide, and nivolumab as a first-line therapy in extensive-stage SCLC (NCT04702880).

Combination immunotherapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with rare gynecological malignancies: results of the CA209-538 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with rare cancers represent 55% of all gynecological malignancies and have poor survival outcomes due to limited treatment options. Combination immunotherapy with the anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1) antibody nivolumab and the anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (anti-CTLA-4) antibody ipilimumab has demonstrated significant clinical efficacy across a range of common malignancies, justifying evaluation of this combination in rare gynecological cancers. METHODS: This multicenter phase II study enrolled 43 patients with advanced rare gynecological cancers. Patients received induction treatment with nivolumab and ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg/kg and 1 mg/kg, respectively, every 3 weeks for four doses. Treatment was continued with nivolumab monotherapy at 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks until disease progression or a maximum of 2 years. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with disease control at week 12 (complete response, partial response or stable disease (SD) by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumor V.1.1). Exploratory evaluations correlated clinical outcomes with tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and tumor mutational burden (TMB). RESULTS: The objective response rate in the radiologically evaluable population was 36% (12/33 patients) and in the intention-to-treat population was 28% (12/43 patients), with additional 7 patients obtaining SD leading to a disease control rate of 58% and 44%, respectively. Durable responses were seen across a range of tumor histologies. Thirty-one (72%) patients experienced an immune-related adverse event (irAE) with a grade 3/4 irAE observed in seven (16%) patients. Response rate was higher among those patients with baseline PD-L1 expression (≥1% on tumor cells) but was independent of TMB. CONCLUSIONS: Ipilimumab and nivolumab combination treatment has significant clinical activity with a favorable safety profile across a range of advanced rare gynecological malignancies and warrants further investigation in these tumor types.

Impact of Radiotherapy on the Efficacy and Toxicity of anti-PD-1 Inhibitors in Metastatic NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: The impact of radiotherapy (RT) on the efficacy and toxicity of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified patients with metastatic NSCLC treated with the anti-programmed death 1 antibodies nivolumab or pembrolizumab between January 2016 and May 2019 at 3 tertiary centers, who were also treated with palliative RT either during or within 3 months of starting anti-programmed death 1 treatment. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and treatment history were collected. Response rates, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed and correlated with RT use. RESULTS: A total of 269 patients were identified, with a median follow-up of 19.4 months. The median age was 70 years (range, 35-90 years), and they were 63% male, 60% smokers, and 65% had adenocarcinoma histology. At the commencement of ICI treatment, the majority (86%) had ≥ 1 line of prior therapy and 34% had brain metastases. A total of 102 (38%) patients received RT within 3 months of starting ICI or subsequently during ICI treatment. Of patients that received RT, 86 (84%) received conventional hypofractionated RT, and, in the majority, 81 (79%) the intent of RT was symptom control. The use of RT did not increase grade 3/4 immune-related adverse events. The overall median PFS was 2.0 months (95% confidence interval, 1.3-2.6 months) and the median OS was 9.0 months (95% confidence interval, 6.4-9.5 months). There were no significant differences in median PFS (3.0 vs. 2.0 months; P = .515) and median OS (9.0 vs. 9.0 months; P = .917) in the patients who received RT versus those that did not. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with metastatic NSCLC, the addition of RT to ICI was not associated with increased toxicity or improved survival.

Combination immunotherapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab in patients with advanced adrenocortical carcinoma: a subgroup analysis of CA209-538.

Background: Adrenocortical carcinoma is a rare malignancy, with poor prognosis and limited treatment options for patients with advanced disease. Chemotherapy is the current standard first-line treatment, providing only a modest survival benefit. There is only limited treatment experience with immunotherapy using single-agent anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. To date no clinical trials have been reported using combination immunotherapy with anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 blockade in this patient population. Methods: CA209-538 is a prospective multicentre clinical trial in patients with advanced rare cancers. Participants received the anti-PD-1 antibody nivolumab (3 mg/kg IV) and the anti-CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab (1 mg/kg IV) every three weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg/kg IV) every two weeks and continued for up to 96 weeks, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Response was assessed every 12 weeks by RECIST version 1.1. Primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate (complete response, partial response, stable disease at 12 weeks). Results: Six patients with adrenocortical carcinoma were enrolled and received treatment. Two patients (33%) have an ongoing partial response (10 and 25 months +) and two patients (33%) stable disease leading to a disease control rate of 66%. Both responders had tumors with a microsatellite instable phenotype. One patient rapidly progressed shortly after enrollment into the trial and did not undergo restaging. Immunotherapy-related toxicity was reported in all patients, with four patients (67%) experiencing grade 3/4 hepatitis leading to discontinuation of treatment. Conclusions: This is the first treatment experience using ipilimumab and nivolumab combination immunotherapy in patients with advanced adrenocortical carcinoma. Durable responses have been observed in a subset of patients suggesting that this treatment regimen should be further investigated in this patient population.

Duration of dexamethasone administration for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting - A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is the most common non-haematological toxicity of chemotherapy. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing short course (1-2 days) with long course (3+ days) dexamethasone in preventing CINV was performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement. RESULTS: 1535 articles were screened to identify the 11 studies included in the review. Nine studies of 1892 patients were included in meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in complete response of nausea and vomiting between a short or long course of dexamethasone (RR 0.98, 95 % CI 0.89-1.07, p = 0.58). There was a lower risk of adverse events with a short course of dexamethasone (RR 0.80, 95 % CI 0.64-0.99, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference between a short or long course of dexamethasone in preventing nausea or vomiting, but a short course was associated with fewer adverse effects. PROSPERO protocol: CRD42019133785.

Evaluation of Combination Nivolumab and Ipilimumab Immunotherapy in Patients With Advanced Biliary Tract Cancers: Subgroup Analysis of a Phase 2 Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Biliary tract cancers represent a rare group of malignant conditions with very limited treatment options. Patients with advanced disease have a poor outcome with current therapies. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination immunotherapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with advanced biliary tract cancers. Design, Setting, and Participants: The CA209-538 prospective multicenter phase 2 nonrandomized clinical trial included patients with advanced rare cancers including patients with biliary tract cancers. This subgroup analysis evaluated 39 patients from CA209-538 with biliary tract cancers who were enrolled from December 2017 to December 2019. Most of the patients (n = 33) had experienced disease progression after 1 or more lines of therapy and had tumor tissue available for biomarker research. Interventions: Patients received treatment with nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg/kg and ipilimumab at 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for 4 doses, followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks and continued for up to 96 weeks until disease progression or the development of unacceptable toxic events. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was disease control rate (complete remission, partial remission, or stable disease) as assessed by RECIST 1.1. Results: Among the 39 patients included in this subgroup analysis of a phase 2 clinical trial (20 men, 19 women; mean [range] age, 65 [37-81] years), the objective response rate was 23% (n = 9) with a disease control rate of 44% (n = 17); all responders had received prior chemotherapy, and none had a microsatellite unstable tumor. Responses were exclusively observed in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma. The median duration of response was not reached (range, 2.5 to ≥23 months). The median progression-free survival was 2.9 months (95% CI, 2.2-4.6 months), and overall survival was 5.7 months (95% CI, 2.7-11.9 months). Immune-related toxic events were reported in 49% of patients (n = 19), with 15% (n = 6) experiencing grade 3 or 4 events. Conclusions and Relevance: This subgroup analysis of a phase 2 clinical trial found that combination immunotherapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab was associated with substantial positive outcomes patients with advanced biliary tract cancers. This treatment compares favorably to single-agent anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1) therapy and warrants further investigation. Ongoing translational research is focused on identifying biomarkers that can predict treatment response. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02923934.