Cholangitis and Interruptions of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Associate with Reduced Overall and Progression-Free Survival in Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Interrupting chemotherapy may explain the reduced overall survival (OS) in patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) with cholangitis. Endoscopic biliary decompression (BD) with metallic stents results in fewer chemotherapy interruptions and a lower cholangitis rate compared with plastic stents. We aimed to determine the impact of cholangitis, neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) interruptions and biliary stent choice on PC patients' survival. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 162 patients with cancer of the head of the pancreas undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy after NAT and BD documenting progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. Data on BD, cholangitis, stent type, surgical radicality, and chemotherapy were collected. Survival was estimated based on the Kaplan-Meier method by using the log-rank test and multivariate Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Median OS and PFS for patients with cholangitis (n = 33, 20%) were 26 and 8 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 20-32 and 5-10 months), respectively, compared with 36 and 17 months (95% CI 31-41 and 12-21 months; p < 0.001 for OS; p = 0.002 for PFS) for patients without cholangitis. Among patients without NAT interruptions median OS and PFS were 35 and 17 months (95% CI 31-40 and 12-21 months), falling to 26 and 7 months (95% CI 18-30 and 5-10 months) among those who experienced an NAT interruption caused by biliary stent failure (n = 26, 16%) (p = 0.039 for OS; p < 0.001 for PFS). We found no difference in OS or PFS between stent types. CONCLUSIONS: Cholangitis and NAT interruptions reduce OS and PFS among PC patients.

The impact of implementing current treatment modalities and female sex on gastric cancer outcomes, 2000-2016: a longitudinal nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The implementation of current treatment modalities and their impact on nationwide gastric cancer outcomes remain poorly understood. Biological differences between females and males could impact survival. We aimed to analyze rates of gastric surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy as well as changes in overall survival among gastric cancer patients diagnosed between 2000-2008 and 2009-2016, respectively, in Finland. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data on gastric cancer patients were collected from national registries. Cox regression analysis and the Kaplan-Meier method were used to analyze differences in survival. RESULTS: We identified 9223 histologically confirmed gastric cancer patients. The rate of gastric surgery decreased from 44% (n = 2282) to 34% (n = 1368; p < 0.001). The proportion of gastric surgery patients who underwent preoperative oncological treatment increased from 0.5% (n = 12) to 16.2% (n = 222) between the calendar periods (p < 0.001) and stood at 30% in 2016. The median overall survival (OS) improved from 30 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 28-33] to 38 months (95%CI 33-42; p = 0.006) and the period 2009-2016 independently associated with a lower risk of death [hazard ratio (HR) 0.78, 95%CI 0.70-0.87] among patients who underwent gastric surgery. Females exhibited a lower risk of death (HR 0.88, 95%CI 0.81-0.97) among patients who underwent gastric surgery. CONCLUSION: Preoperative oncological treatment was gradually introduced into clinical practice and OS among gastric surgery patients improved. Moreover, female surgical patients exhibited a better survival than male patients.

First-in-human phase 1 study of budigalimab, an anti-PD-1 inhibitor, in patients with non-small cell lung cancer and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Budigalimab is a humanized, recombinant immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1). We present the safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetic (PK), and pharmacodynamic data from patients enrolled in the head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) expansion cohorts of the phase 1 first-in-human study of budigalimab monotherapy (NCT03000257; registered 15 December 2016). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with recurrent/metastatic HNSCC or locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC naive to PD-1/PD-1-ligand inhibitors were enrolled; patients were not selected on the basis of oncogene driver mutations or PD-L1 status. Budigalimab was administered at 250 mg intravenously Q2W or 500 mg intravenously Q4W until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoints were safety and PK; the secondary endpoint was efficacy. Exploratory endpoints included biomarker assessments. RESULTS: In total, 81 patients were enrolled (HNSCC: N = 41 [PD-L1 positive: n = 19]; NSCLC: N = 40 [PD-L1 positive: n = 16]); median treatment duration was 72 days (range, 1-617) and 71 days (range, 1-490) for the HNSCC and NSCLC cohorts, respectively. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse event was anemia (HNSCC: n = 9, 22%; NSCLC: n = 5, 13%). Both dosing regimens had comparable drug exposure and increased interferon gamma-induced chemokines, monokine induced by gamma interferon, and interferon-gamma-inducible protein 10. Objective response rates were 13% (90% CI, 5.1-24.5) in the HNSCC cohort and 19% (90% CI, 9.2-32.6) in the NSCLC cohort. Median progression-free survival was 3.6 months (95% CI, 1.7-4.7) and 1.9 months (95% CI, 1.7-3.7) in the HNSCC and NSCLC cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The safety, efficacy and biomarker profiles of budigalimab are similar to other PD-1 inhibitors. Development of budigalimab in combination with novel anticancer agents is ongoing.

C-reactive protein and immune-related adverse events as prognostic biomarkers in immune checkpoint inhibitor treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients.

BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing need to identify biomarkers for correct patient selection for immune-oncology treatments in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The aim of our study was to evaluate the prognostic role of elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) values and immune-related adverse events (irAEs) to indicate immune checkpoint inhibitors' (ICIs) efficacy in nivolumab-treated mRCC patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from 96 mRCC patients treated with nivolumab at Comprehensive Cancer Center, Helsinki University Hospital in a real-life setting were collected between 2006 and 2020 retrospectively. Patients' baseline CRP, on-treatment (<12 weeks) CRP, and reported irAE association to median survival and outcome were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression. RESULTS: Patients with elevated baseline CRP were associated with worse overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) when compared with normal baseline CRP. This significant correlation was also observed with patients with elevated on-treatment CRP. In multivariate survival analyses both elevated baseline and on-treatment CRP had shorter OS and PFS than patients with normal CRP: hazard ratio (HR) 2.84 (95% CI 1.48-5.42), HR 3.68 (95% CI 1.92-7.03) and PFS: HR 1.77 (95% CI 1.06-2.97), HR 2.88 (95% CI 1.75-4.73), respectively. A significant difference in OS was also seen between patients without irAE and with irAE during treatment. In multivariate survival analyses, patients without irAE had shorter OS HR 1.93 (95% CI 1.03-3.62) compared with patients with reported irAE. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated baseline CRP, on-treatment CRP, and absence of irAE correlate with poor outcome in nivolumb-treated mRCC patients. These results suggest that monitoring CRP values as well as potential irAEs during treatment may be of use in clinical decision making.

Gallbladder cancer epidemiology, treatment and survival in Southern Finland - a population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is a rare malignancy in Western population with poor prognosis. This study aimed to investigate the trends in GBC incidence, treatment pattern, and survival in Finland. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with primary GBC in a geographically defined area (Southern Finland Regional Cancer Center) during 2006-2017 were identified. RESULTS: Final cohort included 270 patients with GBC. The incidence was 1.32/100,000 persons, and it decreased 6.8 cases per million personyears during the study period. One hundred fifty-one (56%) patients were diagnosed at Stage IV. Fifty-one patients (19%) underwent curative-intent resection with 96% R0-resection rate. The median overall survival was 7.1 months and 5-year overall survival 11.6% for all patients, and 67.7 months and 56.8% after curative-intent resection, respectively. No improvement was noted over time in overall survival in patients with GBC, or in subgroups of different stages of GBC. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of GBC is slightly decreasing in Southern Finland, but survival has not improved over time.

Nivolumab versus everolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: Updated results with long-term follow-up of the randomized, open-label, phase 3 CheckMate 025 trial.

BACKGROUND: CheckMate 025 has shown superior efficacy for nivolumab over everolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) along with improved safety and tolerability. This analysis assesses the long-term clinical benefits of nivolumab versus everolimus. METHODS: The randomized, open-label, phase 3 CheckMate 025 trial (NCT01668784) included patients with clear cell aRCC previously treated with 1 or 2 antiangiogenic regimens. Patients were randomized to nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) or everolimus (10 mg once a day) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were the confirmed objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). RESULTS: Eight hundred twenty-one patients were randomized to nivolumab (n = 410) or everolimus (n = 411); 803 patients were treated (406 with nivolumab and 397 with everolimus). With a minimum follow-up of 64 months (median, 72 months), nivolumab maintained an OS benefit in comparison with everolimus (median, 25.8 months [95% CI, 22.2-29.8 months] vs 19.7 months [95% CI, 17.6-22.1 months]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.62-0.85) with 5-year OS probabilities of 26% and 18%, respectively. ORR was higher with nivolumab (94 of 410 [23%] vs 17 of 411 [4%]; P < .001). PFS also favored nivolumab (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.99; P = .0331). The most common treatment-related adverse events of any grade were fatigue (34.7%) and pruritus (15.5%) with nivolumab and fatigue (34.5%) and stomatitis (29.5%) with everolimus. HRQOL improved from baseline with nivolumab but remained the same or deteriorated with everolimus. CONCLUSIONS: The superior efficacy of nivolumab over everolimus is maintained after extended follow-up with no new safety signals, and this supports the long-term benefits of nivolumab monotherapy in patients with previously treated aRCC. LAY SUMMARY: CheckMate 025 compared the effects of nivolumab (a novel immunotherapy) with those of everolimus (an older standard-of-care therapy) for the treatment of advanced kidney cancer in patients who had progressed on antiangiogenic therapy. After 5 years of study, nivolumab continues to be better than everolimus in extending the lives of patients, providing a long-lasting response to treatment, and improving quality of life with a manageable safety profile. The results demonstrate that the clinical benefits of nivolumab versus everolimus in previously treated patients with advanced kidney cancer continue in the long term.

Cabozantinib versus Everolimus in Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib is an oral, small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) as well as MET and AXL, each of which has been implicated in the pathobiology of metastatic renal-cell carcinoma or in the development of resistance to antiangiogenic drugs. This randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial evaluated the efficacy of cabozantinib, as compared with everolimus, in patients with renal-cell carcinoma that had progressed after VEGFR-targeted therapy. METHODS: We randomly assigned 658 patients to receive cabozantinib at a dose of 60 mg daily or everolimus at a dose of 10 mg daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary efficacy end points were overall survival and objective response rate. RESULTS: Median progression-free survival was 7.4 months with cabozantinib and 3.8 months with everolimus. The rate of progression or death was 42% lower with cabozantinib than with everolimus (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45 to 0.75; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 21% with cabozantinib and 5% with everolimus (P<0.001). A planned interim analysis showed that overall survival was longer with cabozantinib than with everolimus (hazard ratio for death, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.89; P=0.005) but did not cross the significance boundary for the interim analysis. Adverse events were managed with dose reductions; doses were reduced in 60% of the patients who received cabozantinib and in 25% of those who received everolimus. Discontinuation of study treatment owing to adverse events occurred in 9% of the patients who received cabozantinib and in 10% of those who received everolimus. CONCLUSIONS: Progression-free survival was longer with cabozantinib than with everolimus among patients with renal-cell carcinoma that had progressed after VEGFR-targeted therapy. (Funded by Exelixis; METEOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01865747.).

Neoadjuvant therapy offers longer survival than upfront surgery for poorly differentiated and higher stage pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer remains controversial. Our aim was to assess differences in survival, disease recurrence and histopathological tumor characteristics between patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy followed by subsequent surgery and patients undergoing upfront surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Out of 399 consecutive pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients operated at Helsinki University Hospital in 2000-2015, 75 borderline resectable patients were treated with neoadjuvant therapy. Resectable propensity scored patients (n = 150) underwent upfront surgery. Neoadjuvant therapy consisted of folfirinox, single gemcitabine or combined with cisplatin, nab-paclitaxel or capecitabine with or without radiation. Survival was calculated with Kaplan-Meier and compared with the Breslow test. Survival was determined from the start of treatment, being the first day of treatment for patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy and the date of surgery for others. RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2015 median disease-specific survival (DSS) [34 vs. 26 months, p = .016] and disease-free survival (DFS) [22 vs. 13 months, p = .001] were longer in patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy than in those undergoing upfront surgery. Survival differences were not significant in the 2000s but were, in turn, among patients treated in the 2010s with better survival for patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy [DSS 35 vs. 26 months, p = .008 and DFS 25 vs. 13 months, p = .001]. Especially patients with poorly differentiated G3 tumors [DSS 30 vs. 11 months, p = .004 and DFS 21 vs. 7 months, p = .001] and higher stage IIB-III [DSS 34 vs. 20 months, p = .006 and DFS 21 vs. 10 months, p = .001] had longer survival when treated with neoadjuvant therapy. CONCLUSIONS: PDAC patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy had longer DSS and DFS than those undergoing upfront surgery. Neoadjuvant therapy benefits especially borderline resectable patients with higher stage and poorly differentiated tumors.

Cabozantinib versus everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma (METEOR): final results from a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib is an oral inhibitor of tyrosine kinases including MET, VEGFR, and AXL. The randomised phase 3 METEOR trial compared the efficacy and safety of cabozantinib versus the mTOR inhibitor everolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who progressed after previous VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor treatment. Here, we report the final overall survival results from this study based on an unplanned second interim analysis. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned (1:1) patients aged 18 years and older with advanced or metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma, measurable disease, and previous treatment with one or more VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors to receive 60 mg cabozantinib once a day or 10 mg everolimus once a day. Randomisation was done with an interactive voice and web response system. Stratification factors were Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group and the number of previous treatments with VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival as assessed by an independent radiology review committee in the first 375 randomly assigned patients and has been previously reported. Secondary endpoints were overall survival and objective response in all randomly assigned patients assessed by intention-to-treat. Safety was assessed per protocol in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. The study is closed for enrolment but treatment and follow-up of patients is ongoing for long-term safety evaluation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01865747. FINDINGS: Between Aug 8, 2013, and Nov 24, 2014, 658 patients were randomly assigned to receive cabozantinib (n=330) or everolimus (n=328). The median duration of follow-up for overall survival and safety was 18·7 months (IQR 16·1-21·1) in the cabozantinib group and 18·8 months (16·0-21·2) in the everolimus group. Median overall survival was 21·4 months (95% CI 18·7-not estimable) with cabozantinib and 16·5 months (14·7-18·8) with everolimus (hazard ratio [HR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·53-0·83]; p=0·00026). Cabozantinib treatment also resulted in improved progression-free survival (HR 0·51 [95% CI 0·41-0·62]; p<0·0001) and objective response (17% [13-22] with cabozantinib vs 3% [2-6] with everolimus; p<0·0001) per independent radiology review among all randomised patients. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were hypertension (49 [15%] in the cabozantinib group vs 12 [4%] in the everolimus group), diarrhoea (43 [13%] vs 7 [2%]), fatigue (36 [11%] vs 24 [7%]), palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (27 [8%] vs 3 [1%]), anaemia (19 [6%] vs 53 [17%]), hyperglycaemia (3 [1%] vs 16 [5%]), and hypomagnesaemia (16 [5%] vs none). Serious adverse events grade 3 or worse occurred in 130 (39%) patients in the cabozantinib group and in 129 (40%) in the everolimus group. One treatment-related death occurred in the cabozantinib group (death; not otherwise specified) and two occurred in the everolimus group (one aspergillus infection and one pneumonia aspiration). INTERPRETATION: Treatment with cabozantinib increased overall survival, delayed disease progression, and improved the objective response compared with everolimus. Based on these results, cabozantinib should be considered as a new standard-of-care treatment option for previously treated patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Patients should be monitored for adverse events that might require dose modifications. FUNDING: Exelixis Inc.

Sunitinib-induced hypertension, neutropaenia and thrombocytopaenia as predictors of good prognosis in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical significance of hypertension (HTN), neutropaenia and thrombocytopaenia as possible new biomarkers of sunitinib efficacy in non-trial patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 181 consecutive patients with mRCC were treated with sunitinib; 39 (22%) received sunitinib 50 mg/day 4 weeks on/2 weeks off, 80 (44%) received 37.5 mg/day continuously and 62 (34%) received 25 mg/day continuously as their starting dose. Treatment-induced adverse events (AEs) and their impact on outcome were analysed on multiple sunitinib doses. RESULTS: During sunitinib treatment 60 patients (33%) developed ≥grade 2 HTN, 88 (49%) ≥grade 2 neutropaenia and 135 (75%) ≥grade 1 thrombocytopaenia. These AEs were associated significantly with longer progression-free survival (PFS; 15.7 vs 6.7; 14.6 vs 6.9; 10.4 vs 4.2 months, respectively; P < 0.001) and overall survival (OS; 37.5 vs 16.2; 33.7 vs 13.2; 22.3 vs 13.2 months, respectively, P ≤ 0.008). Although only neutropaenia was associated with a significantly improved PFS and OS in all sunitinib doses, a similar trend was also seen with HTN and thrombocytopaenia in all sunitinib doses. In multivariate analysis, HTN and neutropaenia were significantly associated with PFS and OS and thrombocytopaenia was significantly associated with PFS. In a 12-week landmark analysis, HTN and thrombocytopaenia were significantly associated with PFS and OS. Patients who developed all three AEs (a favourable biomarker profile) had significantly better outcome than patients without these AEs (a poor biomarker profile); response rate 47% vs 4%, median PFS 27.1 vs 3.5 months and OS not reached vs 5.3 months (all P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: HTN, neutropaenia and thrombocytopaenia were all biomarkers of sunitinib efficacy in patients with mRCC. Our results may help to individualise sunitinib dosing during therapy based on these common sunitinib-related AEs.

Pazopanib after sunitinib failure in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib is a standard agent for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The objective of the study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of pazopanib in the treatment of patients whose mRCC either progressed on sunitinib or who discontinued sunitinib due to adverse effects. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-one consecutive mRCC patients who received pazopanib after sunitinib failure were included in this retrospective single center study. Pazopanib was continued until disease progression or intolerance. Treatment response was evaluated every 8-12 weeks according to the RECIST criteria. Adverse events were recorded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. RESULTS: Six patients (19%, 95% CI 12-26%) achieved partial response with pazopanib, 18 (58%) had stable disease, and seven (23%) progressive disease as their best response. Of the 14 patients who received pazopanib as their second-line therapy, six (43%) responded as compared with no responses among 17 patients treated in a later line (p = 0.004). The median progression-free survival time was 7.4 months after starting pazopanib (range, 0.9-15.6 months). Patients who received pazopanib as second-line treatment had median progression-free survival of 11.0 months as compared with 3.8 months among those who received pazopanib in a later line (p = 0.031). Only one (3%) patient discontinued pazopanib due to an adverse event. The most commonly recorded adverse events were anemia, thrombocytopenia, diarrhea, fatigue, and elevation of serum creatinine concentration. Six (19%) patients had one or more grade 3 or 4 adverse events recorded. CONCLUSION: Pazopanib has clinical activity in mRCC as second-line agent after sunitinib failure suggesting lack of complete cross-resistance. Pazopanib was associated with acceptable toxicity, and may be considered as an option after sunitinib failure.

Nivolumab monotherapy or combination with ipilimumab with or without cobimetinib in previously treated patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (CheckMate 032).

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer is one of the deadliest cancer types and represents a major unmet medical need. CheckMate 032 investigated safety and efficacy of nivolumab monotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab with/without cobimetinib in advanced/metastatic solid tumors, including pancreatic cancer. METHODS: In the original pancreatic cancer cohort, previously treated patients (≥1 prior regimen) with advanced/metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were assigned to nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (monotherapy arm) or nivolumab 1 mg/kg and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg or 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (combination arm). A subsequent modified pancreatic cohort (one or two prior regimens) received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks, ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks, and cobimetinib 60 mg orally once daily for 21 days on and 7 days off (triplet arm). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), PFS rate, overall survival (OS), OS rate, safety, and tolerability. Additionally, ORR, PFS, and duration of response were assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) in the triplet arm. RESULTS: 18 patients received nivolumab monotherapy, 21 received nivolumab plus ipilimumab, and 30 received nivolumab plus ipilimumab plus cobimetinib. In the triplet arm, partial responses were observed in two patients per investigator (ORR 6.7% (95% CI 0.8% to 22.1%)) and in three patients per BICR (ORR 10% (95% CI 2.1% to 26.5%)); no responses were observed in the other arms. Median (95% CI) PFS per investigator was 1.4 (1.3 to 2.0), 1.4 (1.2 to 2.7), and 3.0 (1.5 to 4.1) months for the monotherapy, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, and triplet arms, respectively. Median (95% CI) OS was 5.1 (2.0 to 9.0) months, 4.0 (1.9 to 5.6) months, and 6.2 (3.9 to 11.4) months, respectively. Most treatment-related adverse events were grade 2 or less. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab with or without ipilimumab did not elicit objective responses in previously treated patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, although three confirmed partial responses and manageable safety were observed with cobimetinib-containing triplet therapy. The small sample size and differences in baseline disease-specific characteristics between arms limit interpretation of these results.

Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic head cancer (NORPACT-1): a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients undergoing resection for pancreatic cancer, adjuvant modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) improves overall survival compared with alternative chemotherapy regimens. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX with the standard strategy of upfront surgery in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: NORPACT-1 was a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial done in 12 hospitals in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1, and had a resectable tumour of the pancreatic head radiologically strongly suspected to be pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Participants were randomly assigned (3:2 before October, 2018, and 1:1 after) to the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group or upfront surgery group. Patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group received four neoadjuvant cycles of FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus then 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h on day 1 of each 14-day cycle), followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients in the upfront surgery group underwent surgery and then received adjuvant chemotherapy. Initially, adjuvant chemotherapy was gemcitabine plus capecitabine (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 over 30 min on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle and capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice daily for 3 weeks with 1 week of rest in each 28-day cycle; four cycles in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group, six cycles in the upfront surgery group). A protocol amendment was subsequently made to permit use of adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h on day 1 of each 14-day cycle; eight cycles in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group, 12 cycles in the upfront surgery group). Randomisation was performed with a computerised algorithm that stratified for each participating centre and used a concealed block size of two to six. Patients, investigators, and study team members were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival at 18 months. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol populations. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one cycle of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02919787, and EudraCT, 2015-001635-21, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Feb 8, 2017, and April 21, 2021, 77 patients were randomly assigned to receive neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and 63 to undergo upfront surgery. All patients were included in the ITT analysis. For the per-protocol analysis, 17 (22%) patients were excluded from the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group (ten did not receive neoadjuvant therapy, four did not have pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and three received another neoadjuvant regimen), and eight (13%) were excluded from the upfront surgery group (seven did not have pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and one did not undergo surgical exploration). 61 (79%) of 77 patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group received neoadjuvant therapy. The proportion of patients alive at 18 months by ITT was 60% (95% CI 49-71) in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group versus 73% (62-84) in the upfront surgery group (p=0·032), and median overall survival by ITT was 25·1 months (95% CI 17·2-34·9) versus 38·5 months (27·6-not reached; hazard ratio [HR] 1·52 [95% CI 1·00-2·33], log-rank p=0·050). The proportion of patients alive at 18 months in per-protocol analysis was 57% (95% CI 46-67) in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group versus 70% (55-83) in the upfront surgery group (p=0·14), and median overall survival in per-protocol population was 23·0 months (95% CI 16·2-34·9) versus 34·4 months (19·4-not reached; HR 1·46 [95% CI 0·99-2·17], log-rank p=0·058). In the safety population, 42 (58%) of 73 patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 19 (40%) of 47 patients in the upfront surgery group had at least one grade 3 or worse adverse event. 63 (82%) of 77 patients in the neoadjuvant group and 56 (89%) of 63 patients in the upfront surgery group had resection (p=0·24). One sudden death of unknown cause and one COVID-19-related death occurred after the first cycle of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX. Adjuvant chemotherapy was initiated in 51 (86%) of 59 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 44 (90%) of 49 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the upfront surgery group (p=0·56). Adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX was given to 13 (25%) patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 19 (43%) patients in the upfront surgery group. During adjuvant chemotherapy, neutropenia (11 [22%] patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and five [11%] in the upfront surgery group) was the most common grade 3 or worse adverse event. INTERPRETATION: This phase 2 trial did not show a survival benefit from neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma compared with upfront surgery. Implementation of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX was challenging. Future trials on treatment sequencing in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma should be biomarker driven. FUNDING: Norwegian Cancer Society, South Eastern Norwegian Health Authority, The Sjöberg Foundation, and Helsinki University Hospital Research Grants.

Safety, efficacy, and biological data of T cell-enabling oncolytic adenovirus TILT-123 in advanced solid cancers from the TUNIMO monotherapy phase I trial.

PURPOSE: TILT-123 (igrelimogene litadenorepvec) is an oncolytic adenovirus armed with tumor necrosis factor alpha and interleukin-2, designed to induce T-cell infiltration and cytotoxicity in solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: TUNIMO (NCT04695327) was a single-arm, multicenter phase I dose escalation trial designed to assess safety of TILT-123 in advanced solid cancers refractory to standard therapy. Patients received intravenous and intratumoral TILT-123. The primary endpoint was safety by adverse events (AEs), laboratory values, vital signs, and electrocardiograms. Secondary endpoints included tumor response, pharmacokinetics, and predictive biomarkers. RESULTS: 20 patients were enrolled, with median age of 58 years. Most prevalent cancer types included sarcomas (35%), melanomas (15%) and ovarian cancers (15%). No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The most frequent treatment related AEs included fever (16.7%), chills (13.0%) and fatigue (9.3%). 10 patients were evaluable for response on day 78 with RECIST 1.1, iRECIST or PET-based evaluation. The disease control rate by PET was 6/10 (60% of evaluable patients) and 2/10 by RECIST 1.1 and iRECIST (20% of evaluable patients). Tumor size reductions occurred in both injected and non-injected lesions. TILT-123 was detected in injected and non-injected tumors, and virus was observed in blood after intravenous and intratumoral injections. Treatment resulted in reduction of lymphocytes in blood, with concurrent lymphocyte increases in tumors, findings compatible with trafficking. CONCLUSIONS: TILT-123 was safe and able to produce anti-tumor effects in local and distant lesions in heavily pre-treated patients. Good tolerability of TILT-123 facilitates combination studies, several of which are ongoing (NCT04217473, NCT05271318, NCT05222932, NCT06125197).

Single-cell characterization of anti-LAG-3 and anti-PD-1 combination treatment in patients with melanoma.

BackgroundRelatlimab plus nivolumab (anti-lymphocyte-activation gene 3 plus anti-programmed death 1 [anti-LAG-3+anti-PD-1]) has been approved by the FDA as a first-line therapy for stage III/IV melanoma, but its detailed effect on the immune system is unknown.MethodsWe evaluated blood samples from 40 immunotherapy-naive or prior immunotherapy-refractory patients with metastatic melanoma treated with anti-LAG-3+anti-PD-1 in a phase I trial using single-cell RNA and T cell receptor sequencing (scRNA+TCRαß-Seq) combined with other multiomics profiling.ResultsThe highest LAG3 expression was noted in NK cells, Tregs, and CD8+ T cells, and these cell populations underwent the most significant changes during the treatment. Adaptive NK cells were enriched in responders and underwent profound transcriptomic changes during the therapy, resulting in an active phenotype. LAG3+ Tregs expanded, but based on the transcriptome profile, became metabolically silent during the treatment. Last, higher baseline TCR clonality was observed in responding patients, and their expanding CD8+ T cell clones gained a more cytotoxic and NK-like phenotype.ConclusionAnti-LAG-3+anti-PD-1 therapy has profound effects on NK cells and Tregs in addition to CD8+ T cells.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01968109)FundingCancer Foundation Finland, Sigrid Juselius Foundation, Signe and Ane Gyllenberg Foundation, Relander Foundation, State funding for university-level health research in Finland, a Helsinki Institute of Life Sciences Fellow grant, Academy of Finland (grant numbers 314442, 311081, 335432, and 335436), and an investigator-initiated research grant from BMS.

Long-term nationwide trends in the treatment of and outcomes among pancreatic cancer patients.

Whilst treatment modalities for pancreatic cancer patients have evolved in recent years, their impact on outcomes remains relatively unexamined on a national scale. We aimed to analyse changes in overall survival and trends in surgical and oncological treatments in pancreatic cancer patients diagnosed in the periods 2000 through 2008 and 2009 through 2016 in Finland. We collected data for pancreatic cancer patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2016, gathering data from the Finnish national registries on surgeries, oncological treatments and time of death. Follow-up continued through the end of 2018. We compared patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2008 to those diagnosed between 2009 through 2016. Our study comprised 14 712 pancreatic cancer patients. There was no significant change in the national resection rate (8.1% vs 8.0%, p = 0.690). In radical surgery patients, median survival improved from 20 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 18-22) to 28 months (CI 25-31) (p < 0.001), with 1-year survival ranging from 70% to 81%. In the no-surgery group, median survival slightly improved from 3.1 months (CI 3.0-3.3) to 3.3 months (CI 3.1-3.4) (p < 0.001). The proportion of radical surgery patients receiving preoperative oncological treatment increased from 4% to 13% (p < 0.001) and only postoperative treatment from 25% to 47% (p < 0.001). Whilst the resection rate did not increase, the prognosis of pancreatic cancer patients improved, particularly amongst radical surgery patients resulting most likely from the fact that a larger proportion of patients receive more effective oncological treatments.

Evolution and modulation of antigen-specific T cell responses in melanoma patients.

Analyzing antigen-specific T cell responses at scale has been challenging. Here, we analyze three types of T cell receptor (TCR) repertoire data (antigen-specific TCRs, TCR-repertoire, and single-cell RNA + TCRαß-sequencing data) from 515 patients with primary or metastatic melanoma and compare it to 783 healthy controls. Although melanoma-associated antigen (MAA) -specific TCRs are restricted to individuals, they share sequence similarities that allow us to build classifiers for predicting anti-MAA T cells. The frequency of anti-MAA T cells distinguishes melanoma patients from healthy and predicts metastatic recurrence from primary melanoma. Anti-MAA T cells have stem-like properties and frequent interactions with regulatory T cells and tumor cells via Galectin9-TIM3 and PVR-TIGIT -axes, respectively. In the responding patients, the number of expanded anti-MAA clones are higher after the anti-PD1(+anti-CTLA4) therapy and the exhaustion phenotype is rescued. Our systems immunology approach paves the way for understanding antigen-specific responses in human disorders.

Safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of budigalimab with rovalpituzumab tesirine in patients with small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Agents targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) have been approved as monotherapy for patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC). In preclinical models, the combined targeting of PD-1 and delta-like protein 3 resulted in enhanced antitumor activity. Herein, we report results from the expansion arm of study NCT03000257 evaluating the combination of the anti-PD-1 antibody budigalimab and the targeted antibody-drug conjugate rovalpituzumab tesirine (Rova-T) in patients with previously treated SCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This expansion arm of a multicenter, open-label, multi-arm, first-in-human phase 1 clinical trial enrolled adult patients with progressive SCLC. The primary objective was to assess safety and tolerability. Patients received budigalimab 375 mg via intravenous infusion every 3 weeks, and Rova-T was administered as a dose of 0.3 mg/kg intravenously, on day 1 of the first and third 3-week cycle. RESULTS: As of October 2019, 31 patients with SCLC were enrolled and treated with budigalimab plus Rova-T. The combination was tolerated, with the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (in >30%) being pleural effusion, fatigue, and cough. The overall response rate was 24.1%, with one confirmed complete response and six confirmed partial responses. The overall response rate in patients with high delta-like protein 3 expression was similar (21.1%). The median progression-free survival was 3.48 months. CONCLUSION: Combination therapy with budigalimab and Rova-T had promising efficacy and appeared to be tolerated in patients with SCLC. Although Rova-T development has been discontinued, development of budigalimab combined with other anticancer agents is ongoing. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03000257 Statement on originality of the work The manuscript represents original work and has not been submitted for publication elsewhere nor previously published. Statement of prior presentation Data from this study were previously presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress 2019.

ODM-204, a Novel Dual Inhibitor of CYP17A1 and Androgen Receptor: Early Results from Phase I Dose Escalation in Men with Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Most prostate cancer patients develop castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) after androgen deprivation therapy treatment. CRPC growth is mediated mostly by androgen receptor signalling driven by primary androgens synthesised largely by the CYP17A1 enzyme. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety profile and dose-limiting toxicities of ODM-204. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this open, uncontrolled, nonrandomised, multicentre, tolerability and pharmacokinetic first-in-man phase I dose escalation study, patients with metastatic CRPC were randomised to receive ODM-204 in sequential cohorts of five dose levels (ie, 50, 100, 200, 300, and 500mg twice daily) concomitantly with prednisone. INTERVENTION: ODM-204, a novel, orally administered, investigational, nonsteroidal dual inhibitor of CYP17A1 and androgen receptor. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: ODM-204 plasma concentrations, serum testosterone, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels were evaluated and imaging of lesions was performed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of the 23 patients enrolled into the study, 60.9% experienced mild adverse effects considered to be related to the study treatment, which were fatigue, increased/decreased appetite, nausea, asthenia, diarrhoea, and weight decrease. ODM-204 area under the curve (AUC0-12) values increased dose dependently until the 300mg dose. The AUC was lower on day 8 after repeated dosing compared with day 1 from the 200mg dose upwards. Decreases in testosterone levels were seen with ODM-204 treatment confirming androgen deprivation. Of the patients, 13% also demonstrated a >50% decrease in PSA at week 12 and continued ODM-204 treatment for over a year. CONCLUSIONS: ODM-204 was well tolerated up to the highest evaluated dose. There were decreases in both testosterone and PSA levels, suggesting preliminary antitumour activity in the treatment of CRPC. The pharmacokinetic properties of the molecule, however, prevent further development. PATIENT SUMMARY: This study looked at the safety of ODM-204, a novel dual inhibitor of CYP17A1 and the androgen receptor, in castration-resistant prostate cancer patients. ODM-204 treatment was found to be well tolerated, and it also reduced both serum testosterone and prostate-specific antigen levels, but the properties of the molecule prevent further development.

Phase I/IIa, open-label, multicentre study to evaluate the optimal dosing and safety of ODM-203 in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Genetic alterations in fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) signalling are observed in various tumours. We report a first-in-human phase I/IIa trial evaluating tolerability, pharmacokinetics and preliminary antitumour activity of ODM-203, a novel FGFR and VEGFR inhibitor. METHODS: Open-label, non-randomised, multicentre, phase I/IIa dose escalation and expansion study in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumours. RESULTS: Overall, 84 patients received treatment; optimal tablet dose was found to be 400 mg/day with food. All patients experienced at least one adverse event; the majority (89.2%) were grade 1 or 2% and 70.4% were considered treatment related. The most commonly reported events were bilirubin increase-related events (75%) and diarrhoea (50%).Overall response rate was 9.2% and median progression-free survival was 16.1 and 12.4 weeks for patients with aberrant or non-aberrant FGFR tumours. Median time on treatment was 10.1 weeks for all patients and 14.5 weeks for patients who received 400 mg tablets. CONCLUSION: This study suggests ODM-203 400 mg/day results in sufficient plasma concentrations and acceptable tolerability in most patients. Preliminary signs of therapeutic activity of ODM-203 in patients with solid tumours was observed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02264418.