Tumor-Naïve Circulating Tumor DNA as an Early Response Biomarker for Patients Treated With Immunotherapy in Early Phase Clinical Trials.

PURPOSE: To evaluate early circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) kinetics using a tumor-naïve assay and correlate it with clinical outcomes in early phase immunotherapy (IO) trials. METHODS: Plasma samples were analyzed using a 425-gene next-generation sequencing panel at baseline and before cycle 2 (3-4 weeks) in patients with advanced solid tumors treated with investigational IO agents. Variant allele frequency (VAF) for mutations in each gene, mean VAF (mVAF) from all mutations, and change in mVAF between both time points were calculated. Hyperprogression (HyperPD) was measured using Matos and Caramella criteria. RESULTS: A total of 162 plasma samples were collected from 81 patients with 27 different tumor types. Patients were treated in 37 different IO phase I/II trials, 72% of which involved a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor. ctDNA was detected in 122 plasma samples (75.3%). A decrease in mVAF from baseline to precycle 2 was observed in 24 patients (37.5%) and was associated with longer progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.77; P < .01) and overall survival (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.3 to 0.96; P = .03) compared with an increase. These differences were more marked if there was a >50% decrease in mVAF for both progression-free survival (HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.62; P < .001) and overall survival (HR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.6; P = .001). No differences in mVAF changes were observed between the HyperPD and progressive disease patients. CONCLUSION: A decrease in ctDNA within 4 weeks of treatment was associated with treatment outcomes in patients in early phase IO trials. Tumor-naïve ctDNA assays may be useful for identifying early treatment benefits in phase I/II IO trials.

Patient-centered trials in oncology: Time for a change.

Patient-centered trials are pivotal to advancing the oncology field efficiently. However, in recent years, there has been a shift away from patient-centered approaches. In this commentary, we describe common non-patient-centric practices of contemporary trials, discuss their implications, and propose potential solutions to relocate patients to the center of trials where they belong.

When Less May Be Enough: Dose Selection Strategies for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Focusing on AntiPD-(L)1 Agents.

Early clinical trials investigating antiPD(L)-1 agents rarely reached a maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and efficacy signals were observed even at the lowest dose levels. Most extended treatment intervals investigated indicated that these drugs do not follow a direct dose-toxicity or dose-efficacy relationship. Within this context and considering the high cost of antiPD(L)-1 agents, there is a significant debate on whether lower doses or the administration of such agents at an extended interval should be prospectively evaluated in already-approved agents, or at least be considered in novel combination trials involving antiPD(L)-1 drugs. Herein, we review the dosing, overall response rates, and incidence of treatment-related adverse events of antiPD(L)-1 agents in early dose-escalation trials and discuss the appropriateness of recommended Phase 2 dose selection as well as the final regulatory approved doses of such agents. Efficacy and safety data from randomized dose-range Phase 2 trials and real-world data (RWD) on the usage of lower doses and/or non-standard extended treatment intervals are also examined. As the accumulating evidence suggests lower doses or extended dosing intervals of antiPD(L)-1 may achieve a similar clinical benefit in comparison to the currently approved doses, we address the clinical and financial toxicity implications of using potentially higher doses than necessary. Last, we discuss ways to resolve the current dosing conundrum of antiPD-(L)1 agents such as performing near-equivalence studies and propose a framework for future development of immunotherapeutics to find the lowest efficacious dose instead of MTD.

A risk stratification model for toxicities in phase 1 immunotherapy trials.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the increased number of novel immunotherapy (IO) agents under current development, their toxicity profile remains to be fully elucidated. METHODS: An IO risk stratification model was developed based on 5 different variables: treatment-related deaths; rate of grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events or treatment-emergent adverse events; grade ≥2 encephalopathy or central nervous system toxicity; grade ≥2 cytokine release syndrome; and the number and type of dose-limiting toxicity. Phase 1 IO trials published from January 2014 to December 2020 were reviewed and categorised based on our risk stratification model into three categories: low-, intermediate- and high-risk. Clinical trial variables were associated with the high-risk category. To review the quality of reporting across phase 1 IO trials, a subset of studies was further examined by the use of the ASCO/SITC Trial Reporting in Immuno-Oncology (TRIO) standards. RESULTS: Different IO compounds demonstrated diverse risk profiles. In multivariable analysis, combination versus IO single agent treatment, and testing IO agents different from anti-programmed death-1/programmed death ligand-1 (anti-PD1/L1), anti-cytotoxic t-lymphocyte antigen-4 (anti-CTLA4) antibodies and anti-cancer vaccines were associated with a higher toxicity risk. None of the studies examined in our dataset reported all the items included in the TRIO standards. CONCLUSIONS: Our results have important implications for future clinical trial design. Additionally, standards for reporting are urgently needed.

Impact of pharmacodynamic biomarkers in immuno-oncology phase 1 clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Phase 1 immuno-oncology (IO) trials frequently involve pharmacodynamic (PD) biomarker assessments involving tumour biopsies and/or blood collection, with increasing use of molecular imaging. PD biomarkers are set to play a fundamental role in early drug development of immuno-oncology (IO) agents. In the IO era, the impact of PD biomarkers for confirmation of biologic activity and their role in subsequent drug development have not been investigated. METHODS: Phase 1 studies published between January 2014 and December 2020 were reviewed. Studies that reported on-treatment PD biomarkers [tissue-derived (tissue-PD), blood-based (blood-PD) and imaging-based (imaging-PD)] were analysed. PD biomarker results and their correlation with clinical activity endpoints were evaluated. Authors' statements on the influence of PD biomarkers on further drug development decisions, and subsequent citations of PD biomarker study results were recorded. RESULTS: Among 386 trials, the most frequent IO agent classes evaluated were vaccines (32%) and PD-(L)1 inhibitors (25%). No PD biomarker assessments were reported in 100 trials (26%). Of the remaining 286, blood-PD, tissue-PD, and imaging-PD data were reported in 270 (94%), 94 (33%), and 12 (4%) trials, respectively. Assessments of more than one PD biomarker type were reported in 82 studies (29%). Similar proportions of blood-PD (9%), tissue-PD (7%), and imaging-PD studies (8%) had positive results that correlated with clinical activity. Results of 22 PD biomarker studies (8%) were referenced in subsequent clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Most phase 1 IO studies performed PD biomarker assessments. Overall, positive PD biomarker results were infrequently correlated with clinical activity or cited in subsequent trials, suggesting a limited impact on subsequent drug development. With emerging health regulatory emphasis on optimal dose selection based on PD activity, more informative and integrative multiplexed assays that capture the complexity of tumour-host immunity interactions are warranted to improve phase 1 IO trial methodology.

Assessing Oncologists' Attitudes Concerning Comprehensive Genomic Profiling in Stage IV Lung Adenocarcinoma in Brazil.

Introduction: Advances in comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) of lung adenocarcinomas (LUADs) led to personalized treatment for patients. This study evaluated medical oncologists' attitudes toward CGP in a scenario where sponsored funding for CGP was available. Methods: We designed an online survey assessing CGP use and treating physicians' confidence, composed of three self-confidence domains, which are as follows: confidence in interpreting CGP results, confidence in treating oncogenic-driven LUAD, and confidence in managing tyrosine kinase inhibitor adverse events. The survey was distributed to medical oncologists who treat lung cancer in Brazil. Comparisons between groups were performed using the chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Univariable and multivariable (adjusted OR) analyses were performed. Results: Among 104 respondents who treat patients with lung cancer, 55% were from the Southeast region, 28% had high lung cancer clinical load, and 33% had in-house molecular testing. More than half (51%) of the participants request CGP systematically to stage IV LUAD. As for provider confidence, 67% stated being confident in all three domains: 76% confident in interpreting CGP, 84% confident in treating oncogenic-driven LUAD, and 81% in managing tyrosine kinase inhibitor adverse events. Providers' confidence was associated with systematically requesting CGP to stage IV LUAD (p = 0.013). After controlling for the variables of interest, systematic requesting CGP for stage IV LUAD revealed a significant association with the provider's confidence (adjusted OR = 0.35, p = 0.028, 95% CI: 0.14-0.84). The major challenge for properly requesting CGP was the long turnaround time and the fear of treatment delays. Conclusions: Even though CGP for stage IV LUAD in Brazil is fully sponsored, only half of the oncologists in our survey systematically request it.. Requesting CGP was associated with providers' confidence. Improving access and promoting providers' awareness of CGP utility is necessary to increase CGP use and better inform treatment decisions.

Beyond immune checkpoint blockade: emerging immunological strategies.

The success of checkpoint inhibitors has accelerated the clinical implementation of a vast mosaic of single agents and combination immunotherapies. However, the lack of clinical translation for a number of immunotherapies as monotherapies or in combination with checkpoint inhibitors has clarified that new strategies must be employed to advance the field. The next chapter of immunotherapy should examine the immuno-oncology therapeutic failures, and consider the complexity of immune cell-cancer cell interactions to better design more effective anticancer drugs. Herein, we briefly review the history of immunotherapy and checkpoint blockade, highlighting important clinical failures. We discuss the critical aspects - beyond T cell co-receptors - of immune processes within the tumour microenvironment (TME) that may serve as avenues along which new therapeutic strategies in immuno-oncology can be forged. Emerging insights into tumour biology suggest that successful future therapeutics will focus on two key factors: rescuing T cell homing and dysfunction in the TME, and reappropriating mononuclear phagocyte function for TME inflammatory remodelling. New drugs will need to consider the complex cell networks that exist within tumours and among cancer types.

Contemporary dose-escalation methods for early phase studies in the immunotherapeutics era.

Phase 1 dose-escalation trials are crucial to drug development by providing a framework to assess the toxicity of novel agents in a stepwise and monitored fashion. Despite widely adopted, rule-based dose-escalation methods (such as 3 + 3) are limited in finding the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and tend to treat a significant number of patients at subtherapeutic doses. Newer methods of dose escalation, such as model-based and model-assisted designs, have emerged and are more accurate in finding MTD. However, these designs have not yet been broadly embraced by investigators. In this review, we summarise the advantages and disadvantages of contemporary dose-escalation methods, with emphasis on model-assisted designs, including time-to-event designs and hybrid methods involving optimal biological dose (OBD). The methods reviewed include mTPI, keyboard, BOIN, and their variations. In addition, the challenges of drug development (and dose-escalation) in the era of immunotherapeutics are discussed, where many of these agents typically have a wide therapeutic window. Fictional examples of how the dose-escalation method chosen can alter the outcomes of a phase 1 study are described, including the number of patients enrolled, the trial's timeframe, and the dose level chosen as MTD. Finally, the recent trends in dose-escalation methods applied in phase 1 trials in the immunotherapeutics era are reviewed. Among 856 phase I trials from 2014 to 2019, a trend towards the increased use of model-based and model-assisted designs over time (OR = 1.24) was detected. However, only 8% of the studies used non-rule-based dose-escalation methods. Increasing familiarity with such dose-escalation methods will likely facilitate their uptake in clinical trials.

Real World Outcomes and Hepatotoxicity of Infliximab in the Treatment of Steroid-Refractory Immune-Related Adverse Events.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Current guidelines state that infliximab is contraindicated for the treatment of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related hepatitis (ir-hepatitis) due to the risk of inducing further liver damage. As this recommendation is largely based on the use of infliximab for rheumatologic diseases, we evaluated the efficacy and hepatotoxicity of infliximab in patients with steroid-refractory immune-related adverse events (irAEs). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients treated with infliximab for irAEs at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. To assess hepatotoxicity, we compared the mean value of ALT, AST, and total bilirubin (BT) before and after infliximab treatment. We used logistic regression to assess factors associated with infliximab efficacy. RESULTS: Between January 2010 and February 2019, 56 patients were identified. The median age of the patients was 63 (27-84) years. Colitis was the most frequent toxicity (66%), followed by pneumonitis (11%). Infliximab was used to treat ir-hepatitis in one patient. The median number of infliximab doses was 1 (1-3) and led to toxicity resolution in 43 (76%) patients. The mean ALT, AST, and BT levels before and after infliximab treatment were not statistically different. The patient treated for ir-hepatitis had a complete recovery, with no incremental liver toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: In this dose-limited setting, infliximab was effective in resolving irAEs and did not induce hepatotoxicity.

Systematic SARS-CoV-2-testing for asymptomatic cancer patients treated at a public healthcare tertiary centre in Brazil.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has had enormous consequences in Brazil and worldwide. Patients with cancer affected by COVID-19 are at a higher risk of developing complications and worse outcomes compared to the non-cancer population, particularly the ones on active systemic treatment. Considering the COVID-19's high transmissibility in asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic patients, we sought to determine the prevalence of COVID-19 infection in patients with solid cancers receiving systemic therapy in a Brazilian public health hospital. Furthermore, we studied whether socio-economic status was associated with prevalence. METHODS: Consecutive asymptomatic patients undergoing treatment for solid tumours at the chemotherapy and infusion centre of Hospital de Base were enrolled. Patients were prospectively tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 RNA real-time polymerase chain reaction with nasal and oropharyngeal swabs immediately prior to treatment. A socio-economic survey was carried out prior to testing. Demographic and socio-economic characteristics were summarised in means, medians and proportions. RESULTS: From 6 to 13 October 2020, 148 asymptomatic patients were identified. Of those, 41 were excluded, leaving 107 eligible patients. The mean age of the population was 58 years (SD ± 12.6); 54% were female and 90% were self-identified as White. The most common cancer sites were gastrointestinal tract (36%) and breast (25%). Most patients had a metastatic disease (59%) and were on anticancer treatment involving chemotherapy (95%). Regarding socio-economic status, 46% of our population had either primary school or illiterate as their highest educational level. In terms of monthly income, 92% had a personal income inferior to U$380 and 88% a household income inferior to U$585. Of the 107 patients tested, only 1 (0.9%) was positive for COVID-19. This is a 48-year-old man living in an urban area, with primary school educational level and a monthly personal income inferior to U$390. CONCLUSION: Despite a high prevalence of COVID-19 in Brazil, our cohort demonstrated a low prevalence of COVID-19 (0.9%) amongst asymptomatic patients with cancer. We hypothesise that patients with cancer, independent of their socio-economic status, are aware of the increased risk of developing a severe disease and are adherent to physical distancing, masking and hygiene measures.

Bugs as drugs: The role of microbiome in cancer focusing on immunotherapeutics.

The human microbiome comprising microorganisms, their collective genomes and metabolic products has gained tremendous research interest in oncology, as multiple cohorts and case studies have demonstrated discernible interpatient differences in this ecosystem based on clinical variables including disease type, stage, diet, antibiotic usage, cancer treatments, therapeutic responses and toxicities. The modulation of the gut microbiome is the subject of many ongoing preclinical and clinical investigations, through the manipulation of diet, as well as the use of prebiotics, probiotics, specific antibiotics, fecal microbial transplantation, microbial consortia and stool substitutes. Standardization and quality control are needed to maximize the information being generated in this growing field, ranging from technical assays to measure microbiome composition, to methodological aspects in the analysis and reporting of results. Proof-of-mechanism and proof-of-concept clinical trials with appropriate controls are needed to confirm or refute the feasibility, safety and ultimately the clinical utility of human microbiome modulation in cancer patients.

Genomic Landscape of Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumor‒Like Melanoma.

Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST)-like melanoma is a rare malignancy with overlapping characteristics of both neural sarcoma and melanoma. Although the genomics of cutaneous melanoma has been extensively studied, those of MPNST-like melanoma have not. To characterize the genomic landscape of MPNST-like melanoma, we performed a single-center, retrospective cohort study at a tertiary academic cancer center. Consecutive patients with a confirmed histologic diagnosis of MPNST-like melanoma were screened, and those whose tissues were locally available were included in this analysis. Archival tissue from six patients (eight samples) was submitted for whole-exome and transcriptome sequencing analysis. We compared these data with available genomic studies of cutaneous melanoma and MPNST. NF1 was altered (mutated, deleted, or amplified) in 67% of patients. Genes related to cell cycle regulation were frequently altered, with frequent deletion of ZNF331, which, to the best of our knowledge, has not been previously described in cutaneous melanoma. The serine protease inhibitor SERPINB4 was deleted in 100% of the patients. We show that MPNST-like melanoma presents overlapping genomic features with cutaneous melanoma and MPNST, but it is unique by the frequency of loss of function of ZNF331 and SERPINB4.

Development of a Metastatic Uveal Melanoma Prognostic Score (MUMPS) for Use in Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM) is a rare disease. There are limited data on prognostic clinical factors for overall survival (OS) in patients with mUM treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Retrospective and non-randomized prospective studies have reported response rates of 0-17% for anti-PD1/L1 ± anti-CTLA4 ICI in mUM, indicating a potential benefit only in a subset of patients. This study evaluates the characteristics associated with ICI benefit in patients with mUM. We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study of patients with mUM who received anti-PD1/L1 ± anti-CTLA4 ICI between 2014-2019. Clinical and genomic characteristics were collected from a chart review. Treatment response and clinical progression were determined by physician assessment. Multivariable Cox regression models and Kaplan-Meier log-rank tests were used to assess differences in clinical progression-free survival (cPFS) and OS between groups and identify clinical variables associated with ICI outcomes. We identified 71 mUM patients who received 75 lines of ICI therapy. Of these, 54 received anti-PD1/L1 alone, and 21 received anti-PD1/L1 + anti-CTLA4. Patient characteristics were: 53% female, 48% were 65 or older, 72% received one or fewer lines of prior therapy. Within our cohort, 53% of patients had developed metastatic disease <2 years after their initial diagnosis. Bone metastases were present in 12% of patients. The median cPFS was 2.7 months, and the median OS was 10.0 months. In multivariable analyses for both cPFS and OS, the following variables were associated with a good prognosis: ≥2 years from the initial diagnosis to metastatic disease (n = 25), LDH < 1.5 × ULN (n = 45), and absence of bone metastases (n = 66). We developed a Metastatic Uveal Melanoma Prognostic Score (MUMPS). Patients were divided into 3 MUMPS groups based on the number of the above-mentioned prognostic variables: Poor prognosis (0-1), Intermediate prognosis (2) and Good prognosis (3). Good prognosis patients experienced longer cPFS (6.0 months) and OS (34.5 months) than patients with intermediate (2.3 months cPFS, 9.4 months OS) and poor prognosis disease (1.8 months cPFS, 3.9 months OS); p < 0.0001. We developed MUMPS-a prognostic score based on retrospective data that is comprised of 3 readily available clinical variables (time to metastatic diagnosis, presence of bone metastases, and LDH). This MUMPS score has a potential prognostic value. Further validation in independent datasets is warranted to determine the role of this MUMPS score in selecting ICI treatment management for mUM.

Applications of Circulating Tumor DNA in a Cohort of Phase I Solid Tumor Patients Treated With Immunotherapy.

Background: The correlation between blood-based tumor mutation burden (bTMB) and tissue-based tumor mutation burden(tTMB) has not been broadly tested in a multicancer cohort. Here, we assess the correlation between bTMB with tTMB in phase I trial patients treated with immunotherapy. As an exploratory analysis, we evaluated circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) dynamics in responders. Methods: Patients treated with immunotherapy at the Princess Margaret phase I trials unit were enrolled. Pretreatment plasma ctDNA and matched normal blood controls were collected. Available archival tissue formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples were analyzed. A 425-gene panel was used to sequence both ctDNA and FFPE samples. Samples with TMB within the highest tertile were considered as high TMB. Results: Thirty-eight patients were accrued from 25 different trials, 86.8% of which involved an anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agent. Thirty patients (78.9%) had detectable mutations in ctDNA, of which the median (range) bTMB was 5 (1-53) mutations per megabase (mut/Mb). Of the 22 patients with available FFPE samples, mutations were detected in 21 (95.4%); the median (range) tTMB was 6 (2-124) mut/Mb. Among the 16 patients with detectable mutations in both FFPE and ctDNA, a statistically significant correlation between bTMB and tTMB was observed (ρ = 0.71; P = .002). High TMB was not associated with better survival. All 3 responders had a decrease in the variant allele frequency of mutations detected in ctDNA at a second timepoint relative to baseline, indicating a potential early marker of response. Conclusions: In this small series, bTMB correlated with tTMB. An on-treatment decrease in VAF of mutations detected in ctDNA at baseline was observed in responders. Larger studies to verify our findings are warranted.

CANDIED: A Pan-Canadian Cohort of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Induced Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-induced insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) is a rare but potentially fatal immune-related adverse event (irAE). In this multicentre retrospective cohort study, we describe the characteristics of ICI-induced IDDM in patients treated across five Canadian cancer centres, as well as their tumor response rates and survival. In 34 patients identified, 25 (74%) were male and 19 (56%) had melanoma. All patients received anti-programed death 1 (anti-PD1) or anti-programmed death ligand-1 (anti-PD-L1)-based therapy. From ICI initiation, median time to onset of IDDM was 2.4 months (95% CI 1.1-3.6). Patients treated with anti-PD1/PD-L1 in combination with an anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 antibody developed IDDM earlier compared with patients on monotherapy (1.4 vs. 3.9 months, p = 0.05). Diabetic ketoacidosis occurred in 21 (62%) patients. Amongst 30 patients evaluable for response, 10 (33%) had a complete response and another 10 (33%) had a partial response. Median overall survival was not reached (95% CI NE; median follow-up 31.7 months). All patients remained insulin-dependent at the end of follow-up. We observed that ICI-induced IDDM is an irreversible irAE and may be associated with a high response rate and prolonged survival.

Efficacy of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in the treatment of older adults with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) - an International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Older adults with metastatic renal cell carcinoma(mRCC) are underrepresented in immune-checkpoint inhibitor(ICI) registration trials. Here we compare the efficacy of ICI treatments in older vs. younger adults with mRCC. METHODS: Using the International mRCC Database Consortium(IMDC), patients treated with a PD(L)-1 based ICI were identified. Older adult was defined as ≥70-years at the time of treatment. Descriptive statistics were summarized in means, medians, and proportions. Effectiveness endpoints included overall survival (OS), time-to-treatment failure(TTF), time-to-next treatment(TNT), and overall response rate(ORR). Hazards ratios were adjusted(aHR) for IMDC risk factors, histology, line of treatment and older age. RESULTS: Of 1427 included patients, 397(28%) were older adults. ICI was used as 1st line(1 L) in 40%, 2nd line(2 L) in 49% and 3rd line(3 L) in 11% of patients. In univariable analysis, older adults had inferior OS compared to younger adults(25.1 m vs. 30.8 m, p < 0.01). There were no significant differences in TTF (6.9 m vs. 6.9 m, p = 0.4) or TNT(9.1 m vs 10 m, p = 0.3) between groups. In multivariable analyses, older age was not independently associated with worse OS(aHR = 1.02, p = 0.8), TTF(aHR = 0.95, p = 0.6) or TNT(aHR = 0.93, p = 0.5). Older adults had a lower ORR compared to younger adults(24% vs. 31%, p = 0.01), which was mainly driven by responses in 1 L(31% vs. 44%, p = 0.02) and not observed in 2 L/3 L. CONCLUSIONS: After multivariable analyses, older adults with mRCC treated with ICI had no difference in OS, TTF or TNT when compared to younger adults. Our data support that chronological older age should not preclude patients from receiving ICI based therapies.

Antitumor immune effects of preoperative sitravatinib and nivolumab in oral cavity cancer: SNOW window-of-opportunity study.

BACKGROUND: Sitravatinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets TYRO3, AXL, MERTK and the VEGF receptor family, is predicted to increase the M1 to M2-polarized tumor-associated macrophages ratio in the tumor microenvironment and have synergistic antitumor activity in combination with anti-programmed death-1/ligand-1 agents. SNOW is a window-of-opportunity study designed to evaluate the immune and molecular effects of preoperative sitravatinib and nivolumab in patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: Patients with newly-diagnosed untreated T2-4a, N0-2 or T1 >1 cm-N2 oral cavity carcinomas were eligible. All patients received sitravatinib 120 mg daily from day 1 up to 48 hours pre-surgery and one dose of nivolumab 240 mg on day 15. Surgery was planned between day 23 and 30. Standard of care adjuvant radiotherapy was given based on clinical stage. Tumor photographs, fresh tumor biopsies and blood samples were collected at baseline, at day 15 after sitravatinib alone, and at surgery after sitravatinib-nivolumab combination. Tumor flow cytometry, multiplex immunofluorescence staining and single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNAseq) were performed on tumor biopsies to study changes in immune-cell populations. Tumor whole-exome sequencing and circulating tumor DNA and cell-free DNA were evaluated at each time point. RESULTS: Ten patients were included. Grade 3 toxicity occurred in one patient (hypertension); one patient required sitravatinib dose reduction, and one patient required discontinuation and surgery delay due to G2 thrombocytopenia. Nine patients had clinical-to-pathological downstaging, with one complete response. Independent pathological treatment response (PTR) assessment confirmed a complete PTR and two major PTRs. With a median follow-up of 21 months, all patients are alive with no recurrence. Circulating tumor DNA and cell-free DNA dynamics correlated with clinical and pathological response and distinguished two patient groups with different tumor biological behavior after sitravatinib alone (1A) versus sitravatinib-nivolumab (1B). Tumor immunophenotyping and scRNAseq analyses revealed differential changes in the expression of immune cell populations and sitravatinib-targeted and hypoxia-related genes in group 1A vs 1B patients. CONCLUSIONS: The SNOW study shows sitravatinib plus nivolumab is safe and leads to deep clinical and pathological responses in oral cavity carcinomas. Multi-omic biomarker analyses dissect the differential molecular effects of sitravatinib versus the sitravatinib-nivolumab and revealed patients with distinct tumor biology behavior. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03575598.

Designing circulating tumor DNA-based interventional clinical trials in oncology.

Circulating tumor (ct) DNA is a powerful tool that can be used to track cancer beyond a single snapshot in space and time. It has potential applications in detecting minimal residual disease and predicting relapse, in selecting patients for tailored treatments, and in revealing mechanisms of response or resistance. Here, we discuss the incorporation of ctDNA into clinical trials.

Complete metastasectomy in renal cell carcinoma: a propensity-score matched by the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium prognostic model.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated overall survival (OS) benefit of complete metastasectomy (CM) in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) using a propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis to balance groups by age, gender and by the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium prognostic model (IMDC). METHODS: We included patients (pts) treated at the AC Camargo Cancer Center between 2007 and 2016. Pairs were matched by age, gender and IMDC. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate OS on CM and no-CM group. RESULTS: We found 116 pts with clear cell mRCC. After PSM, the number was reduced to 74 (37 CM, 37 no-CM). The median OS for CM and no-CM was 98.3 months and 40.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio 0.24 95%CI 0.11-0.53 p < 0.001). The OS benefit of CM was confirmed on favourable and intermediate IMDC but was absent on poor IMDC. The CM group received less systemic therapy than the no-CM group. Ten pts in the CM group still have no evidence of disease (NED). CONCLUSION: After matching for age, gender and IMDC, we found CM impacts on OS and also diminishes the need for systemic treatment. Survival benefit was confirmed for favourable/intermediate IMDC but not for the poor IMDC prognostic model. Further studies correlating IMDC and metastasectomy are needed to guide clinical decision-making.