Cancer biomarkers: Emerging trends and clinical implications for personalized treatment.

The integration of cancer biomarkers into oncology has revolutionized cancer treatment, yielding remarkable advancements in cancer therapeutics and the prognosis of cancer patients. The development of personalized medicine represents a turning point and a new paradigm in cancer management, as biomarkers enable oncologists to tailor treatments based on the unique molecular profile of each patient's tumor. In this review, we discuss the scientific milestones of cancer biomarkers and explore future possibilities to improve the management of patients with solid tumors. This progress is primarily attributed to the biological characterization of cancers, advancements in testing methodologies, elucidation of the immune microenvironment, and the ability to profile circulating tumor fractions. Integrating these insights promises to continually advance the precision oncology field, fostering better patient outcomes.

New promises and challenges in the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Targeted therapies and immunotherapies have radically improved treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Tyrosine kinase inhibitors targeting oncogenic driver mutations continue to evolve over multiple generations to enhance effectiveness and tackle drug resistance. Immune checkpoint inhibitors remain integral for the treatment of NSCLCs that do not have specific actionable genetic mutations. Antibody-drug conjugates and bispecific antibodies are being integrated into treatment guidelines, and emerging therapies include T-cell engagers, cellular therapies, cancer vaccines, and external devices. Despite these advances, challenges remain in identifying predictive biomarkers to individually tailor treatments, abrogate resistance, reduce costs, and ensure optimal cancer treatment accessibility.

Identifying the drivers of overall rating of cancer care: Insights from the second wave of the Swiss Cancer Patient Experiences study.

BACKGROUND: Patient experience surveys gather information on various aspects of care via numerous survey items. Identifying the most critical areas of patient experience to prioritize for quality care improvement can be challenging. The objective of this study was to determine which care experience items are the drivers influencing patients' overall rating of cancer care. METHODS: Data from 2750 adult patients with cancer from the second wave of the Swiss Cancer Patient Experiences study were analyzed. This cross-sectional survey was conducted in eight Swiss hospitals from September 2021 to February 2022. Stepwise logistic regression examined the relationship between overall care rating and 29 patient experience items covering different patient-centered care dimensions while adjusting for sociodemographic and health variables. RESULTS: Overall, patients rated their cancer care experience at 8.9 out of 10. Stepwise regression identified seven drivers contributing to overall care rating. The strongest drivers were "professionals worked well together" (odds ratio [OR], 4.81) and "tests were not repeated" (OR, 2.09) from the coordination and integration dimension, "offered support for symptoms during treatment" (OR, 2.11) from the physical comfort dimension, followed by "hospital staff ensured available home support" (OR, 1.99), "offered to see health professional for concerns" (OR, 1.91), "treatment options were explained" (OR, 1.75), and "involved in treatment decisions as desired" (OR, 1.68). CONCLUSIONS: This study evaluated the care experiences of patients with cancer with a comprehensive tool that identified seven key factors independently associated with overall care rating. By concentrating on these areas, hospitals can not only improve the patient care experience but also efficiently allocate resources to quality improvement initiatives.

KRAS and TP53 co-mutation predicts benefit of immune checkpoint blockade in lung adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Predictive biomarkers in use for immunotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer are of limited sensitivity and specificity. We analysed the potential of activating KRAS and pathogenic TP53 mutations to provide additional predictive information. METHODS: The study cohort included 713 consecutive immunotherapy patients with advanced lung adenocarcinomas, negative for actionable genetic alterations. Additionally, two previously published immunotherapy and two surgical patient cohorts were analyzed. Therapy benefit was stratified by KRAS and TP53 mutations. Molecular characteristics underlying KRASmut/TP53mut tumours were revealed by the analysis of TCGA data. RESULTS: An interaction between KRAS and TP53 mutations was observed in univariate and multivariate analyses of overall survival (Hazard ratio [HR] = 0.56, p = 0.0044 and HR = 0.53, p = 0.0021) resulting in a stronger benefit for KRASmut/TP53mut tumours (HR = 0.71, CI 0.55-0.92). This observation was confirmed in immunotherapy cohorts but not observed in surgical cohorts. Tumour mutational burden, proliferation, and PD-L1 mRNA were significantly higher in TP53-mutated tumours, regardless of KRAS status. Genome-wide expression analysis revealed 64 genes, including CX3CL1 (fractalkine), as specific transcriptomic characteristic of KRASmut/TP53mut tumours. CONCLUSIONS: KRAS/TP53 co-mutation predicts ICI benefit in univariate and multivariate survival analyses and is associated with unique molecular tumour features. Mutation testing of the two genes can be easily implemented using small NGS panels.

Calls to action on lung cancer management and research.

Lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally, remains a pressing health issue despite significant medical advances. The New York Lung Cancer Foundation brought together experts from academia, the pharmaceutical and biotech industries as well as organizational leaders and patient advocates, to thoroughly examine the current state of lung cancer diagnosis, treatment, and research. The goal was to identify areas where our understanding is incomplete and to develop collaborative public health and scientific strategies to generate better patient outcomes, as highlighted in our "Calls to Action." The consortium prioritized 8 different calls to action. These include (1) develop strategies to cure more patients with early-stage lung cancer, (2) investigate carcinogenesis leading to lung cancers in patients without a history of smoking, (3) harness precision medicine for disease interception and prevention, (4) implement solutions to deliver prevention measures and effective therapies to individuals in under-resourced countries, (5) facilitate collaborations with industry to collect and share data and samples, (6) create and maintain open access to big data repositories, (7) develop new immunotherapeutic agents for lung cancer treatment and prevention, and (8) invest in research in both the academic and community settings. These calls to action provide guidance to representatives from academia, the pharmaceutical and biotech industries, organizational and regulatory leaders, and patient advocates to guide ongoing and planned initiatives.

Multicenter Study on Tumor Budding in Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Comparison Between Biopsy and Resection With Interobserver Variability Assessment.

Grading lung squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC) is controversial and not universally accepted. The histomorphologic feature of tumor budding (TB) is an established independent prognostic factor in colorectal cancer, and its importance is growing in other solid cancers, making it a candidate for inclusion in tumor grading schemes. We aimed to compare TB between preoperative biopsies and resection specimens in pulmonary squamous cell carcinoma and assess interobserver variability. A retrospective cohort of 249 consecutive patients primarily resected with LUSC in Bern (2000-2013, n = 136) and Lausanne (2005-2020, n = 113) with available preoperative biopsies was analyzed for TB and additional histomorphologic parameters, such as spread through airspaces and desmoplasia, by 2 expert pathologists (M.M., C.N.). Results were correlated with clinicopathologic parameters and survival. In resection specimens, peritumoral budding (PTB) score was low (0-4 buds/0.785 mm2) in 47.6%, intermediate (5-9 buds/0.785 mm2) in 27.4%, and high (≥10 buds/0.785 mm2) in 25% of cases (median bud count, 5; IQR, 0-26). Both the absolute number of buds and TB score were similar when comparing tumor edge and intratumoral zone (P = .192) but significantly different from the score obtained in the biopsy (P < .001). Interobserver variability was moderate, regardless of score location (Cohen kappa, 0.59). The discrepant cases were reassessed, and consensus was reached in all cases with identification of causes of discordance. TB score was significantly associated with stage (P = .002), presence of lymph node (P = .033), and distant metastases (P = .020), without significant correlation with overall survival, tumor size, or pleural invasion. Desmoplasia was significantly associated with higher PTB (P < .001). Spread through airspaces was present in 34% and associated with lower PTB (P < .001). To conclude, despite confirming TB as a reproducible factor in LUSC, we disclose areas of scoring ambiguity. Preoperative biopsy evaluation was insufficient in establishing the final TB score of the resected tumor.

[Oncology: what's new in 2023]. / Oncologie: ce qui a changé en 2023.

The oncology field continues its remarkable evolution over the years, with promising advances leading to innovative and individualized treatments. The development of new molecules, the identification of new therapeutic targets and the search for new sequences or combinations promise to revolutionize cancer treatments and contribute to improving survival rates, patients' quality of life and to open new perspective in oncology research. In this article, the newest data released in 2023 are reviewed.

Le domaine de l'oncologie poursuit son évolution remarquable au fil des années, avec des avancées prometteuses ouvrant la voie à des traitements novateurs et individualisés. L'élaboration de nouvelles molécules, l'identification de nouvelles cibles thérapeutiques et la recherche de nouvelles séquences ou combinaisons de traitements promettent de révolutionner la prise en charge du cancer et de contribuer à améliorer les taux de survie, la qualité de vie des patients et à ouvrir de nouvelles perspectives dans la recherche en oncologie. Dans cet article, les nouveautés parues en 2023 sont passées en revue.

High-dose alectinib for RET fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancer in the Blood First Assay Screening Trial.

Introduction: This paper presents results from Cohort B (rearranged during transfection [RET], fusion-positive) of the Blood First Assay Screening Trial in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) screened for genetic alterations using blood-based next-generation sequencing. Material and methods: Adults with advanced RET fusion-positive NSCLC received alectinib 900 mg twice daily (BID) in Phase I. Enrolment closed prematurely with Phase II uninitiated. Results: Among eight treated patients, confirmed best overall responses in evaluable patients were stable disease (4/5) and progressive disease (1/5). One dose-limiting toxicity (death, unknown cause) was considered by the investigator to be related to treatment and underlying disease. Serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred in five patients, and SAEs that may be related to treatment occurred in two patients. Conclusions: Alectinib showed limited activity in advanced RET fusion-positive NSCLC, and further investigation was not conducted due to the development of selective RET inhibitors pralsetinib and selpercatinib. No new safety signals were observed, and the safety profile of alectinib was in line with previous reports at the 600 mg BID dose.

Face to face among different chemo-immunotherapy combinations in the first line treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Results of an international expert panel meeting by the italian association of thoracic oncology (AIOT).

BACKGROUND: The combination of platinum-based chemotherapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is a standard of care option in the front-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Positive efficacy and safety results have been demonstrated with different chemo-ICI combinations in the corresponding clinical trials, however no randomized prospective comparison is available and there is no evidence on how to choose among the available regimens. METHODS: A virtual International Expert Panel took place in July 2023 to review data on chemo-ICI regimens available in the first-line setting in patients with NSCLC, and reach common considerations both in clinical practice and in research setting. RESULTS: Overall, all panelists agreed that safety of the chemo-immunotherapy combination regimens is supported by reviewed data, showing no additional toxicity concerns over those of the individual components of each regimen and highlighting differences in toxicity profile based on ICI component (single anti-PD-1 versus double anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4). Among disease characteristics, PD-L1 value (<1%) but not histology was considered a potential selection factor in favor of the combination with dual ICI. With regards to clinical features, the panelists agreed that chemotherapy, whichever the ICI combination regimen, remains the backbone to counteract disease-related symptoms included those conditioning worse performance status. The panelists defined high, medium, and low priorities in clinical research. High priority was attributed to prospectively evaluating the impact of the addition of anti-CTLA-4 on brain metastasis, biomarker subgroups, and the optimal duration and schedule of combination regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the available evidence, the panelists reached common considerations on strengths and differences between chemotherapy plus single agent ICI and chemotherapy plus double agent ICIs in patients with advanced NSCLC. In the absence of direct comparison, different toxicity profile and subgroup analysis by PD-L1 are considered as the main potential features to select among the two regimens, however to be confirmed by recommended prospective randomized clinical research.

Beyond Chemoimmunotherapy in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: New Frontiers, New Challenges.

Chemoimmunotherapy is currently the preferred first-line treatment option for the majority of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer without driver genetic alterations. Most of these patients, however, will experience disease progression within the first year after treatment initiation and both patients and their physicians will be confronted with the dilemma of the optimal second-line treatment. Identification of molecular targets, such as KRASG12C, BRAFV600X, METexon14, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 mutations, and RET rearrangements offer therapeutic opportunities in pretreated patients with corresponding alterations. For those tumors that do not harbor oncogenic drivers, second-line treatment with docetaxel remains the current standard of care despite modest efficacy. Strategies to challenge docetaxel include the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with tyrosine inhibitors of multiple kinases or with DNA damage response inhibitors, antibody-drug conjugates, and locoregional treatments for oligoprogressive disease. Next-generation immunotherapy strategies, such as T-cell engagers, immune-mobilizing monoclonal T-cell receptors, chimeric antigen receptor cell therapy, tumor infiltrating lymphocytes, and T-cell receptor cell therapy are being currently investigated in the quest to reverse resistance to ICIs. Importantly, the advent of these new agents heralds a novel spectrum of toxicities that require both the physician's and the patient's education. Herein, we review current and future strategies aiming to outperform docetaxel after chemoimmunotherapy failure, and we provide practical information on how to best communicate to our patients the unique toxicity aspects associated with immunotherapy.

Long-Term Results of Stereotactic Radiotherapy in Patients with at Least 10 Brain Metastases at Diagnosis.

PURPOSE: to evaluate an SRT approach in patients with at least 10 lesions at the time of BM initial diagnosis. METHODS: This is a monocentric prospective cohort of patients treated by SRT, followed by a brain MRI every two months. Subsequent SRT could be delivered in cases of new BMs during follow-up. The main endpoints were local control rate (LCR), overall survival (OS), and strategy success rate (SSR). Acute and late toxicity were evaluated. RESULTS: Seventy patients were included from October 2014 to January 2019, and the most frequent primary diagnosis was non-small-cell lung cancer (N = 36, 51.4%). A total of 1174 BMs were treated at first treatment, corresponding to a median number of 14 BMs per patient. Most of the patients (N = 51, 72.6%) received a single fraction of 20-24 Gy. At 1 year, OS was 62.3%, with a median OS of 19.2 months, and SSR was 77.8%. A cumulative number of 1537 BM were treated over time, corresponding to a median cumulative number of 16 BM per patient. At 1-year, the LCR was 97.3%, with a cumulative incidence of radio-necrosis of 2.1% per lesion. Three patients (4.3%) presented Grade 2 toxicity, and there was no Grade ≥ 3 toxicity. The number of treated BMs and the treatment volume did not influence OS or SSR (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: SRT was highly efficient in controlling the BM, with minimal side effects. In this setting, an SRT treatment should be proposed even in patients with ≥10 BMs at diagnosis.

Lurbinectedin in patients with small cell lung cancer with chemotherapy-free interval ≥30 days and without central nervous metastases.

OBJECTIVES: This report focuses on lurbinectedin activity and safety in a subgroup of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients from a Basket phase 2 study (Trigo et al. Lancet Oncology 2020;21:645-654) with chemotherapy-free interval (CTFI) ≥ 30 days. This pre-planned analysis was requested for obtaining regulatory approval of lurbinectedin in Switzerland. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with extensive-stage SCLC, no central nervous system (CNS) metastases, and disease progression after platinum-containing therapy were included. Topotecan data from a contemporary, randomized, controlled phase 3 study (ATLANTIS) were used as indirect external control in a matched patient population (n = 98 patients). RESULTS: Lurbinectedin showed a statistically significant higher overall response rate (ORR) by investigator assessment (IA) compared to topotecan subgroup (41.0 % vs. 25.5 %; p = 0.0382); higher ORR by Independent Review Committee (IRC) (33.7 % vs. 25.5 %); longer median duration of response (IA: 5.3 vs. 3.9 months; IRC: 5.1 vs. 4.3 months), and longer median overall survival (10.2 vs. 7.6 months). Grade ≥ 3 hematological abnormalities were remarkably lower with lurbinectedin: anemia 12.0 % vs. 54.1 %; leukopenia 30.1 % vs. 68.4 %; neutropenia 47.0 % vs. 75.5 %, and thrombocytopenia 6.0 % vs. 52.0 %. Febrile neutropenia was observed at a higher incidence with topotecan (6.1 % vs. 2.4 % with lurbinectedin) despite that the use of growth-colony stimulating factors was mandatory with topotecan. CONCLUSION: With the limitations of an indirect comparison, however using recent and comparable SCLC datasets, this post hoc analysis shows that SCLC patients with CTFI ≥ 30 days and no CNS metastases have a positive benefit/risk ratio with lurbinectedin, superior to that observed with topotecan.

Primary prophylaxis with mTOR inhibitor enhances T cell effector function and prevents heart transplant rejection during talimogene laherparepvec therapy of squamous cell carcinoma.

The application of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibition (mTORi) as primary prophylactic therapy to optimize T cell effector function while preserving allograft tolerance remains challenging. Here, we present a comprehensive two-step therapeutic approach in a male patient with metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and heart transplantation followed with concomitant longitudinal analysis of systemic immunologic changes. In the first step, calcineurin inhibitor/ mycophenolic acid is replaced by the mTORi everolimus to achieve an improved effector T cell status with increased cytotoxic activity (perforin, granzyme), enhanced proliferation (Ki67) and upregulated activation markers (CD38, CD69). In the second step, talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) injection further enhances effector function by switching CD4 and CD8 cells from central memory to effector memory profiles, enhancing Th1 responses, and boosting cytotoxic and proliferative activities. In addition, cytokine release (IL-6, IL-18, sCD25, CCL-2, CCL-4) is enhanced and the frequency of circulating regulatory T cells is increased. Notably, no histologic signs of allograft rejection are observed in consecutive end-myocardial biopsies. These findings provide valuable insights into the dynamics of T cell activation and differentiation and suggest that timely initiation of mTORi-based primary prophylaxis may provide a dual benefit of revitalizing T cell function while maintaining allograft tolerance.

A pharmacist-led interprofessional medication adherence program improved adherence to oral anticancer therapies: The OpTAT randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral anticancer therapies such as protein kinase inhibitors (PKIs) are increasingly prescribed in cancer care. We aimed to evaluate the impact of a pharmacist-led interprofessional medication adherence program (IMAP) on patient implementation (dosing history), persistence (time until premature cessation of the treatment) and adherence to 27 PKIs prescribed for various solid cancers, as well as the impact on patients' beliefs about medicines (BAM) and quality of life (QoL). METHODS: Patients (n = 118) were randomized 1:1 into two arms. In the intervention arm, pharmacists supported patient adherence through monthly electronic and motivational feedback, including educational, behavioral and affective components, for 12 months. The control arm received standard care plus EM without intervention. All PKIs were delivered in electronic monitors (EMs). Medication implementation and adherence were compared between groups using generalized estimating equation models, in which relevant covariables were included; persistence was compared with Kaplan‒Meier curves. Information on all treatment interruptions was compiled for the analysis. Questionnaires to evaluate BAM and QoL were completed among patients who refused and those who accepted to participate at inclusion, 6 and 12 months post-inclusion or at study exit. RESULTS: Day-by-day PKI implementation was consistently higher and statistically significant in the intervention arm (n = 58) than in the control arm (n = 60), with 98.1% and 95.0% (Δ3.1%, 95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference 2.5%; 3.7%) implementation at 6 months, respectively. The probabilities of persistence and adherence were not different between groups, and no difference was found between groups for BAM and QoL scores. No difference in BAM or QoL was found among patients who refused versus those who participated. The intervention benefited mostly men (at 6 months, Δ4.7%, 95% CI 3.4%; 6.0%), those younger than 60 years (Δ4.0%, 95% CI 3.1%; 4.9%), those who had initiated PKI more than 60 days ago before inclusion (Δ4.5%, 95% CI 3.6%; 5.4%), patients without metastasis (Δ4.5%, 95% CI 3.4%; 5.7%), those who were diagnosed with metastasis more than 2 years ago (Δ5.3%, 95% CI 4.3%; 6.4%) and those who had never used any adherence tool before inclusion (Δ3.8%, 95% CI 3.1%; 4.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The IMAP, led by pharmacists in the context of an interprofessional collaborative practice, supported adherence, specifically implementation, to PKIs among patients with solid cancers. To manage adverse drug events, PKI transient interruptions are often mandated as part of a strategy for treatment and adherence optimization according to guidelines. Implementation of longer-term medication adherence interventions in the daily clinic may contribute to the improvement of progression-free survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04484064.

NTRK gene fusion testing and management in lung cancer.

Neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusions are recurrent oncogenic drivers found in a variety of solid tumours, including lung cancer. Several tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitors have been developed to treat tumours with NTRK gene fusions. Larotrectinib and entrectinib are first-generation TRK inhibitors that have demonstrated efficacy in patients with TRK fusion lung cancers. Genomic testing is recommended for all patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer for optimal drug therapy selection. Multiple testing methods can be employed to identify NTRK gene fusions in the clinic and each has its own advantages and limitations. Among these assays, RNA-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) can be considered a gold standard for detecting NTRK gene fusions; however, several alternatives with minimally acceptable sensitivity and specificity are also available in areas where widespread access to NGS is unfeasible. This review highlights the importance of testing for NTRK gene fusions in lung cancer, ideally using the gold-standard method of RNA-based NGS, the various assays that are available, and treatment algorithms for patients.

Entrectinib in ROS1-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer: the phase 2/3 BFAST trial.

Although comprehensive biomarker testing is recommended for all patients with advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) before initiation of first-line treatment, tissue availability can limit testing. Genomic testing in liquid biopsies can be utilized to overcome the inherent limitations of tissue sampling and identify the most appropriate biomarker-informed treatment option for patients. The Blood First Assay Screening Trial is a global, open-label, multicohort trial that evaluates the efficacy and safety of multiple therapies in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC and targetable alterations identified by liquid biopsy. We present data from Cohort D (ROS1-positive). Patients ≥18 years of age with stage IIIB/IV, ROS1-positive NSCLC detected by liquid biopsies received entrectinib 600 mg daily. At data cutoff (November 2021), 55 patients were enrolled and 54 had measurable disease. Cohort D met its primary endpoint: the confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by investigator was 81.5%, which was consistent with the ORR from the integrated analysis of entrectinib (investigator-assessed ORR, 73.4%; data cutoff May 2019, ≥12 months of follow-up). The safety profile of entrectinib was consistent with previous reports. These results demonstrate consistency with those from the integrated analysis of entrectinib in patients with ROS1-positive NSCLC identified by tissue-based testing, and support the clinical value of liquid biopsies to inform clinical decision-making. The integration of liquid biopsies into clinical practice provides patients with a less invasive diagnostic method than tissue-based testing and has faster turnaround times that may expedite the reaching of clinical decisions in the advanced/metastatic NSCLC setting. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03178552 .

Obinutuzumab Pretreatment as a Novel Approach to Mitigate Formation of Anti-Drug Antibodies Against Cergutuzumab Amunaleukin in Patients with Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: The immunocytokine cergutuzumab amunaleukin (CEA-IL2v) showed manageable safety and favorable pharmacodynamics in phase I/Ib trials in patients with advanced/metastatic carcinoembryonic antigen-positive (CEA+) solid tumors, but this was accompanied by a high incidence of anti-drug antibodies (ADA). We examined B-cell depletion with obinutuzumab as a potential mitigation strategy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Preclinical data comparing B-cell depletion with rituximab versus obinutuzumab are summarized. Substudies of phase I/Ib trials investigated the effect of obinutuzumab pretreatment on ADA development, safety, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity of CEA-IL2v ± atezolizumab in patients with advanced/metastatic or unresectable CEA+ solid tumors who had progressed on standard of care. RESULTS: Preclinical data showed superior B-cell depletion with obinutuzumab versus rituximab. In clinical studies, patients received CEA-IL2v monotherapy with (n = 16) or without (n = 6) obinutuzumab pretreatment (monotherapy study), or CEA-IL2v + atezolizumab + obinutuzumab pretreatment (n = 5; combination study). In the monotherapy study, after four cycles (every 2 weeks treatment), 0/15 evaluable patients administered obinutuzumab pretreatment had ADAs versus 4/6 patients without obinutuzumab. Obinutuzumab pretreatment with CEA-IL2v monotherapy showed no new safety signals and pharmacodynamic data suggested minimal impact on T cells and natural killer cells. Conversely, increased liver toxicity was observed in the combination study (CEA-IL2v + atezolizumab + obinutuzumab pretreatment). CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary findings suggest that obinutuzumab pretreatment before CEA-IL2v administration in patients with CEA+ solid tumors may be a feasible and potent ADA mitigation strategy, with an acceptable safety profile, supporting broader investigation of obinutuzumab pretreatment for ADA mitigation in other settings.

Safety of pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy in a pooled analysis of phase 3 clinical trials of melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The safety profile of adjuvant pembrolizumab was evaluated in a pooled analysis of 4 phase 3 clinical trials. METHODS: Patients had completely resected stage IIIA, IIIB, or IIIC melanoma per American Joint Committee on Cancer, 7th edition, criteria (AJCC-7; KEYNOTE-054); stage IIB or IIC melanoma per AJCC-8 (KEYNOTE-716); stage IB, II, or IIIA non-small cell lung cancer per AJCC-7 (PEARLS/KEYNOTE-091); or postnephrectomy/metastasectomy clear cell renal cell carcinoma at increased risk of recurrence (KEYNOTE-564). Patients received adjuvant pembrolizumab 200 mg (2 mg/kg up to 200 mg for pediatric patients) or placebo every 3 weeks for approximately 1 year. Adverse events (AEs) were summarized for patients who received ≥ 1 dose of treatment. RESULTS: Data were pooled from 4125 patients treated with pembrolizumab (n = 2060) or placebo (n = 2065). Median (range) duration of treatment was 11.1 months (0.0-18.9) with pembrolizumab and 11.2 months (0.0-18.1) with placebo. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 78.6 % (1620/2060) of patients in the pembrolizumab group (grade 3-5, 16.3 % [336/2060]) and 58.7 % (1212/2065) in the placebo group (grade 3-5, 3.5 % [72/2065]). Immune-mediated AEs (e.g. adrenal insufficiency, hypophysitis, and thyroiditis) occurred in 36.2 % (746/2060) of patients in the pembrolizumab group (grade 3-5, 8.6 % [177/2060]) and 8.4 % (174/2065) in the placebo group (grade 3-5, 1.1 % [23/2065]). Of patients with ≥ 1 immune-mediated AE or infusion reaction, systemic corticosteroids were required for 35.2 % (268/761) and 20.2 % (39/193) of patients in the pembrolizumab and placebo groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant pembrolizumab demonstrated a manageable safety profile that was comparable to prior reports in advanced disease.