Nivolumab Combination Therapy in Advanced Esophageal Squamous-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: First-line chemotherapy for advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma results in poor outcomes. The monoclonal antibody nivolumab has shown an overall survival benefit over chemotherapy in previously treated patients with advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned adults with previously untreated, unresectable advanced, recurrent, or metastatic esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive nivolumab plus chemotherapy, nivolumab plus the monoclonal antibody ipilimumab, or chemotherapy. The primary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival, as determined by blinded independent central review. Hierarchical testing was performed first in patients with tumor-cell programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of 1% or greater and then in the overall population (all randomly assigned patients). RESULTS: A total of 970 patients underwent randomization. At a 13-month minimum follow-up, overall survival was significantly longer with nivolumab plus chemotherapy than with chemotherapy alone, both among patients with tumor-cell PD-L1 expression of 1% or greater (median, 15.4 vs. 9.1 months; hazard ratio, 0.54; 99.5% confidence interval [CI], 0.37 to 0.80; P<0.001) and in the overall population (median, 13.2 vs. 10.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.74; 99.1% CI, 0.58 to 0.96; P = 0.002). Overall survival was also significantly longer with nivolumab plus ipilimumab than with chemotherapy among patients with tumor-cell PD-L1 expression of 1% or greater (median, 13.7 vs. 9.1 months; hazard ratio, 0.64; 98.6% CI, 0.46 to 0.90; P = 0.001) and in the overall population (median, 12.7 vs. 10.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.78; 98.2% CI, 0.62 to 0.98; P = 0.01). Among patients with tumor-cell PD-L1 expression of 1% or greater, a significant progression-free survival benefit was also seen with nivolumab plus chemotherapy over chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.65; 98.5% CI, 0.46 to 0.92; P = 0.002) but not with nivolumab plus ipilimumab as compared with chemotherapy. The incidence of treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 was 47% with nivolumab plus chemotherapy, 32% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, and 36% with chemotherapy alone. CONCLUSIONS: Both first-line treatment with nivolumab plus chemotherapy and first-line treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab resulted in significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma, with no new safety signals identified. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 648 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03143153.).

Atezolizumab plus modified docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil as first-line treatment for advanced anal cancer (SCARCE C17-02 PRODIGE 60): a randomised, non-comparative, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: The modified docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil (mDCF) regimen has shown efficacy and safety as first-line treatment for advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus, making it a standard regimen. Inhibitors of programmed cell death protein 1 and its ligand, such as pembrolizumab, nivolumab, retifanlimab, avelumab, and atezolizumab, have shown some antitumour activity as monotherapy in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus that is refractory to chemotherapy. This phase 2 study evaluated the combination of mDCF and atezolizumab as first-line treatment in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, non-comparative, phase 2 study, participants from 21 centres (academic, private, and community hospitals and cancer research centres) across France with chemo-naive, metastatic, or unresectable locally advanced recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the anus, aged 18 years or older, and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, were randomly allocated (2:1) to receive either atezolizumab (800 mg intravenously every 2 weeks up to 1 year) plus mDCF (eight cycles of 40 mg per m2 docetaxel and 40 mg per m2 cisplatin on day 1 and 1200 mg per m2 per day of fluorouracil for 2 days, every 2 weeks intravenously; group A) or mDCF alone (group B). Randomisation was done centrally using a minimisation technique and was stratified by age (<65 years vs ≥65 years) and disease status. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed 12-month progression-free survival in the modified intention-to-treat population in group A (35% for the null hypothesis and 50% for the alternative hypothesis). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03519295, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: 97 evaluable participants (64 in group A and 33 in group B) were enrolled between July 3, 2018, and Aug 19, 2020. The median follow-up was 26·5 months (95% CI 24·8-28·4). The median age of participants was 64·1 years (IQR 56·2-71·6), and 71 (73%) were female. 12-month progression-free survival was 45% (90% CI 35-55) in group A and 43% (29-58) in group B. In participants with a PD-L1 combined positive score of 5 or greater, 12-month progression-free survival was 70% (95% CI 47-100) in group A and 40% (19-85) in group B (interaction p=0·051) Both groups showed high compliance. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were observed in 39 (61%) participants in group A and 14 (42%) in group B. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (nine [14%] participants in group A vs five [15%] in group B), anaemia (nine [14%] vs one [3%]), fatigue (three [5%] vs four [12%]), and diarrhoea (seven [11%] vs one [3%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 16 (25%) participants in group A and four (12%) in group B, and these were mDCF-related in seven (11%) participants in group A and four (12%) in group B. Atezolizumab-related serious adverse events occurred in nine (14%) participants in group A, including grade 2 infusion-related reaction in three (5%), grade 3 infection in two (3%), and grade 2 colitis, grade 3 acute kidney injury, grade 3 sarcoidosis, and a grade 4 platelet count decrease each in one participant (2%). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Despite a higher incidence of adverse events, combining atezolizumab with mDCF is feasible, with similar dose intensity in both groups, although the primary efficacy endpoint was not met. The predictive value of a PD-L1 combined positive score of 5 or greater now needs to be confirmed in future studies. FUNDING: GERCOR, Roche.

T cell-inflamed gene expression profile and PD-L1 expression and pembrolizumab efficacy in advanced esophageal cancer.

Aim: Investigate the relationship between response to pembrolizumab and expression of the 18-gene T cell-inflamed gene expression profile (TcellinfGEP) or PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) in esophageal cancer. Materials & methods: This analysis included heavily pretreated patients with advanced/metastatic esophageal/gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma who received pembrolizumab in the single-arm, phase II study KEYNOTE-180. PD-L1 CPS was evaluated with PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx. Results: In patients with squamous cell carcinoma, trends toward enrichment for responders were observed for patients with PD-L1 CPS ≥10 tumors. In patients with adenocarcinoma, a trend was observed for TcellinfGEP but not for PD-L1. Conclusion: TcellinfGEP and PD-L1 CPS may enrich for responders to pembrolizumab in patients with esophageal cancer. Clinical trial registration: NCT02559687 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

FOLFIRINOX De-Escalation in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Multicenter Real-Life Study.

BACKGROUND: Our study describes the feasibility and efficacy of a first-line FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil [5FU], folinic acid, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) induction chemotherapy (CT) followed by de-escalation as a maintenance strategy for advanced pancreatic cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study was conducted from January 2011 to December 2018. FOLFIRINOX de-escalation was defined as stopping oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan after at least four cycles of FOLFIRINOX, without evidence of disease progression. Maintenance schedules were fluoropyrimidine monotherapy (intravenous or oral [capecitabine]), FOLFOX (5FU, oxaliplatin), or FOLFIRI (5FU, irinotecan). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were first progression-free survival (PFS1), second progression-free survival (PFS2), and toxicity. RESULTS: Among 321 patients treated with FOLFIRINOX, 147 (45.8%) were included. Median OS was 16.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.7-20.3) and median PFS1 was 9.4 months (95% CI, 8.5-10.4). The preferred maintenance regimen was FOLFIRI in 66 (45%) patients versus 5FU monotherapy in 52 (35%) and FOLFOX in 25 (17%) patients. Among 118 patients who received maintenance CT with FOLFIRI or 5FU, there was no difference in PFS1 (median, 9.0 vs. 10.1 months, respectively; p = .33) or OS (median, 16.6 vs. 18.7 months; p = .86) between the two maintenance regimens. Reintroduction of FOLFIRINOX was performed in 20.2% of patients, with a median PFS2 of 2.8 months (95% CI, 2.0-22.3). The rates of grade 3-4 toxicity were significantly higher with FOLFIRI maintenance CT than with 5FU (41% vs. 22%; p = .03), especially for neuropathy (73% vs. 9%). CONCLUSION: 5FU monotherapy maintenance appeared to be as effective as FOLFIRI, in a FOLFIRINOX de-escalation strategy, which is largely used in France. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: FOLFIRINOX de-escalation and maintenance is a feasible strategy in advanced pancreatic cancer that decreases chemotherapy toxicity to improve both survival and quality of life. Survivals in patients with maintenance therapy are clinically meaningful. Fluoropyrimidine monotherapy maintenance seems to be as efficient as FOLFIRI and should be a reference arm in future pancreatic cancer maintenance trials.

Atezolizumab plus modified docetaxel-cisplatin-5-fluorouracil (mDCF) regimen versus mDCF in patients with metastatic or unresectable locally advanced recurrent anal squamous cell carcinoma: a randomized, non-comparative phase II SCARCE GERCOR trial.

BACKGROUND: Modified docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (mDCF) regimen has become a new standard for the treatment of metastatic or unresectable locally advanced recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) after demonstrating improved efficacy (12-month PFS of 47%) in the Epitopes-HPV02 trial. Antibodies targeting the checkpoint inhibitor (CKI) programmed cell death protein-1 (PD1) have demonstrated the efficacy as monotherapies in second-line treatment of SCCA. The aim of this study is to evaluate the combination of atezolizumab and mDCF as first-line chemotherapy in a non-comparative multicentre randomized phase II study of advanced SCCA patients. METHODS: Patients with chemo-naive advanced histologically proven SCCA, metastatic or unresectable locally advanced recurrence, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-performance status (ECOG-PS) < 2 will be eligible. The primary endpoint is a 12-month PFS rate. Using one-arm non-parametric survival with unilateral alpha type I error of 5% and a statistical power of 80%, the upper critical value for the 12-month PFS rate is 47% to reject H0. Assuming 5% lost to follow-up, 99 patients will be randomized on a 2:1 basis, 66 to the experimental arm (arm A, mDCF plus atezolizumab) and 33 to the standard arm (arm B, mDCF). In both arms, 8 cycles of mDCF will be administered. In arm A, patients receive mDCF with a fixed dose of atezolizumab (800 mg every 2 weeks) and are followed up to 1 year. Secondary endpoints are overall survival, PFS, response rate, safety, health-related quality of life, and an extensive biomarker programme and its correlation with the treatment efficacy. DISCUSSION: Although the Epitopes-HPV02 trial has changed long-lasting prognosis of patients with SCCA in advanced stage disease, more than 50% of patients will progress at 12 months. The purpose of the SCARCE trial to establish the addition of atezolizumab to mDCF as a new standard in this rare disease. Associated biomarker studies and the control arm could contribute to better understanding of the potential synergic and tumour resistance mechanisms in SCCA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03519295.

Docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil chemotherapy for metastatic or unresectable locally recurrent anal squamous cell carcinoma (Epitopes-HPV02): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of anal squamous cell carcinoma has been increasing markedly in the past few decades. Currently, there is no validated treatment for advanced-stage anal squamous cell carcinoma. Therefore, we aimed to validate the clinical activity and safety of docetaxel, cisplatin, and fluorouracil (DCF) chemotherapy in patients with metastatic or unresectable locally recurrent anal squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: We did a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study. We recruited patients from 25 academic hospitals, cancer research centres, and community hospitals in France who were aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed anal squamous cell carcinoma, with metastatic disease or with unresectable local recurrence; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1; and with at least one evaluable lesion according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1). Chemotherapy-naive patients received either six cycles of standard DCF (75 mg/m2 docetaxel and 75 mg/m2 cisplatin on day 1 and 750 mg/m2 per day of fluorouracil for 5 days, every 3 weeks) or eight cycles of modified DCF (40 mg/m2 docetaxel and 40 mg/m2 cisplatin on day 1 and 1200 mg/m2 per day of fluorouracil for 2 days, every 2 weeks), which were administered intravenously. The choice between the standard versus modified regimens was recommended based on, but not limited to, age (≤75 years vs >75 years) and ECOG performance status (0 vs 1). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival at 12 months from the first DCF cycle; for the primary endpoint to be met, at least 11 (17%) of 66 enrolled patients had to be alive without disease progression at 12 months. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in a modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients who were evaluable for progression at 12 months who received at least one cycle of DCF. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02402842, and the final results are presented here. FINDINGS: Between Sept 17, 2014, and Dec 7, 2016, we enrolled 69 patients. Of these patients, three did not receive DCF. Of the 66 patients who received treatment, 36 received the standard DCF regimen and 30 received modified DCF. The primary endpoint was met: 31 (47%) of 66 patients were alive and progression free at 12 months. 22 (61%) of 36 patients who received the standard DCF regimen and 18 (60%) of 30 patients who received the modified DCF regimen had disease progression at data cutoff. 46 (70%) of 66 patients had at least one grade 3-4 adverse event (30 [83%] of 36 in the standard DCF regimen and 16 [53%] of 30 in the modified DCF regimen). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (15 [23%]; eight [22%] for standard DCF vs seven [23%] for modified DCF), diarrhoea (12 [18%]; nine [25%] vs three [10%]), asthenia (ten [15%]; eight [22%] vs two [7%]), anaemia (ten [15%]; six [17%] vs four [13%]), lymphopenia (eight [12%]; three [8%] vs five [17%]), mucositis (seven [11%]; seven [19%] vs none), and vomiting (seven [11%]; five [14%] vs two [7%]). No grade 4 non-haematological adverse events and febrile neutropenia were observed with modified DCF, whereas three (8%) grade 4 non-haematological adverse events and five (14%) cases of febrile neutropenia were reported with standard DCF. 97 serious adverse events were reported (69 in patients who received the standard DCF regimen [61 drug-related] and 28 in those given the modified DCF regimen [14 drug-related]). No treatment-related deaths were recorded. INTERPRETATION: Compared with standard DCF, modified DCF provided long-lasting response with good tolerability in patients with metastatic or unresectable locally recurrent anal squamous cell carcinoma with ECOG performance status of 0-1 in the first-line setting, and therefore could be considered as a new standard of care for these patients. Regarding the elevated risk of high-grade and serious adverse events and febrile neutropenia, standard DCF cannot be recommended in this situation. FUNDING: Besançon University Hospital and Ligue contre le cancer Grand-Est.

Docetaxel, Cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DCF) chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic or unresectable locally recurrent anal squamous cell carcinoma: a phase II study of French interdisciplinary GERCOR and FFCD groups (Epitopes-HPV02 study).

BACKGROUND: The squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) is a rare disease, but its incidence is markedly increasing. About 15% of patients are diagnosed at metastatic stage, and more than 20% with a localized disease treated by chemoradiotherapy (CRT) will recur. In advanced SCCA, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (CF) combination is the standard option but complete response is a rare event and the prognosis remains poor with most disease progression occurring within the first 12 months. We have previously published the potential role of the addition of docetaxel (D). Among 8 consecutive patients with advanced recurrent SCCA after CRT, the DCF regimen induced a complete response in 4 patients, including 3 pathological complete responses. Then, the Epitopes-HPV02 study was designed to confirm the interest of DCF regimen in SCCA patients. METHODS: This multicentre phase II trial assesses the DCF regimen in advanced SCCA patients. Main eligibility criteria are: histologically proven SCCA, unresectable locally advanced recurrent or metastatic disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-performance status (ECOG-PS) <2, and being eligible for DCF. Patients receive either 6 cycles of standard DCF or 8 cycles of modified DCF depending on age (> vs. ≤ 75 years-old) and ECOG-PS (0 vs. 1). The trial was set up based on a Simon's optimal two-stage design for phase II trials, allowing an early futility interim analysis. The primary endpoint is the observed progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 12 months from the first DCF cycle. A PFS rate below 10% is considered uninteresting, while a PFS rate above 25% is expected. With a unilateral alpha error of 5% and a statistical power of 90%, 66 evaluable patients should be included. Main secondary endpoints are overall survival, PFS, response rate, safety, health-related quality of life, and the correlation of biomarkers with treatment efficacy. DISCUSSION: Since the recommended CF regimen is based in a small retrospective analysis and generates a low rate of complete responses, the Epitopes-HPV02 study will establish a new standard in case of a positive result. Associated biomarker studies will contribute to understand the underlying mechanism of resistance and the role of immunity in SCCA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02402842 , EudraCT: 2014-001789-81.

First-Line Chemotherapy for Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Clinico-Biological Predictors of Disease Control.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify predictors of tumor control (TC) in metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients receiving first-line chemotherapy. METHODS: A development cohort of 68 patients from a prospective multicenter trial (NCT01248299) was used to identify predictors of TC at first radiological tumor assessment and to generate a predictive score for TC. That score was applied in an independent retrospective single-center validation cohort of 60 consecutive patients. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis identified three predictors of TC: body mass index ≥18.5 (OR 4.5, 95% CI 0.91-22.5), absence of bone metastasis (OR 4.6, 95% CI 0.91-23.2) and albumin ≥35 g/l (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.0-12.1). Based on the presence or absence of these three independent prognosticators, we built a predictive model using a score from 0 to 3. In the development cohort, the TC rates were 14.3 and 78.0% and in the validation cohort 12.5 and 44.2%, for scores of 0-1 and 2-3, respectively. With negative predictive values of 85 and 88% in the development and validation cohorts, respectively, we were able to identify patients with a very low probability of TC. CONCLUSION: We have developed and validated a score that can be easily determined at the bedside to predict TC in metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients.

Preoperative chemoradiation with paclitaxel-carboplatin or with fluorouracil-oxaliplatin-folinic acid (FOLFOX) for resectable esophageal and junctional cancer: the PROTECT-1402, randomized phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Often curative treatment for locally advanced resectable esophageal or gastro-esophageal junctional cancer consists of concurrent neoadjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy followed by surgery. Currently, one of the most commonly used chemotherapy regimens in this setting is a combination of a fluoropyrimidin and of a platinum analogue. Due to the promising results of the recent CROSS trial, another regimen combining paclitaxel and carboplatin is also widely used by European and American centers. No clinical study has shown the superiority of one treatment over the other. The objective of this Phase II study is to clarify clinical practice by comparing these two chemotherapy treatments. Our aim is to evaluate, in operable esophageal and gastro-esophageal junctional cancer, the complete resection rate and severe postoperative morbidity rate associated with these two neoadjuvant chemotherapeutic regimens (carboplatin-paclitaxel or fluorouracil-oxaliplatin-folinic acid) when each is combined with the radiation regime utilized in the CROSS trial. METHODS/DESIGN: PROTECT is a prospective, randomized, multicenter, open arms, phase II trial. Eligible patients will have a histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma and be treated with neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy followed by surgery for stage IIB or stage III resectable esophageal cancer. A total of 106 patients will be randomized to receive either 3 cycles of FOLFOX combined to concurrent radiotherapy (41.4 Grays) or carboplatin and paclitaxel with the same radiation regimen, using a 1:1 allocation ratio. DISCUSSION: This ongoing trial offers the unique opportunity to compare two standards of chemotherapy delivered with a common regimen of preoperative radiation, in the setting of operable locally advanced esophageal or gastro-esophageal junctional tumors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02359968 (ClinicalTrials.gov) (registration date: 9 FEB 2015), EudraCT: 2014-000649-62 (registration date: 10 FEB 2014).

Nivolumab plus chemotherapy or ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (CheckMate 648): 29-month follow-up from a randomized, open-label, phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: First-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab both demonstrated significant overall survival (OS) benefit versus chemotherapy in previously untreated patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in the CheckMate 648 trial, leading to approvals of both nivolumab-containing regimens in many countries. We report longer-term follow-up data. METHODS: This open-label, phase III trial (NCT03143153) enrolled adults with previously untreated, unresectable, advanced, recurrent, or metastatic ESCC. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to nivolumab plus chemotherapy, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, or chemotherapy. Primary endpoints were OS and progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review. Hierarchical testing was performed first in patients with tumor cell programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of ≥1% and then in the overall population. RESULTS: A total of 970 patients were randomly assigned. After 29 months of minimum follow-up, nivolumab plus chemotherapy continued to demonstrate improvement in OS versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.59 [95% CI: 0.46-0.76]) in patients with tumor cell PD-L1 expression of ≥1% and in the overall population (HR = 0.78 [95% CI: 0.65-0.93]) and with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (HR = 0.62 [95% CI: 0.48-0.80]) in patients with tumor cell PD-L1 expression of ≥1% and in the overall population (HR = 0.77 [95% CI: 0.65-0.92]). In patients with tumor cell PD-L1 expression of ≥1%, nivolumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated PFS benefit versus chemotherapy (HR = 0.67 [95% CI: 0.51-0.89]); PFS benefit was not observed with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (HR = 1.04 [95% CI: 0.79-1.36]). Among all treated patients (n = 936), Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 151 (49%, nivolumab plus chemotherapy), 105 (32%, nivolumab plus ipilimumab), and 110 (36%, chemotherapy) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab plus chemotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful OS benefit versus chemotherapy with no new safety signals identified with longer follow-up, further supporting use as first-line standard treatment options for patients with advanced ESCC.

FOLFIRI Plus Durvalumab With or Without Tremelimumab in Second-Line Treatment of Advanced Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: The PRODIGE 59-FFCD 1707-DURIGAST Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Efficacy of second-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric or gastrooesphageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma remains limited. Ojectives: To determine the efficacy of 1 or 2 immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with FOLFIRI (leucovorin [folinic acid], fluorouracil, and irinotecan) in the treatment of advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: The PRODIGE 59-FFCD 1707-DURIGAST trial is a randomized, multicenter, noncomparative, phase 2 trial, conducted from August 27, 2020, and June 4, 2021, at 37 centers in France that included patients with advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma who had disease progression after platinum-based first-line chemotherapy. Intervention: Patients were randomized to receive FOLFIRI plus durvalumab (anti-programmed cell death 1 [PD-L1]) (FD arm) or FOLFIRI plus durvalumab and tremelimumab (anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 [CTLA-4]) (FDT arm). The efficacy analyses used a clinical cutoff date of January 9, 2023. Main outcome and Measures: The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) at 4 months according to RECIST 1.1 criteria evaluated by investigators. Results: Overall, between August 27, 2020, and June 4, 2021, 96 patients were randomized (48 in each arm). The median age was 59.7 years, 28 patients (30.4%) were women and 49 (53.3%) had GEJ tumors. Four month PFS was 44.7% (90% CI, 32.3-57.7) and 55.6% (90% CI, 42.3-68.3) in the FD and FDT arms, respectively. The primary end point was not met. Median PFS was 3.8 and 5.4 months, objective response rates were 34.7% and 37.7%, and median overall survival was 13.2 and 9.5 months in the FD and FDT arms, respectively. Disease control beyond 1 year was 14.9% in the FD arm and 24.4% in the FDT arm. Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events were observed in 22 (47.8%) patients in each arm. A combined positive score (CPS) PD-L1 of 5 or higher was observed in 18 tumors (34.0%) and a tumor proportion score (TPS) PD-L1 of 1% or higher in 13 tumors (24.5%). Median PFS according to CPS PD-L1 was similar (3.6 months for PD-L1 CPS ≥5 vs 5.4 months for PD-L1 CPS <5) by contrast for TPS PD-L1 (6.0 months for PD-L1 TPS ≥1% vs 3.8 months for PD-L1 TPS <1%). Conclusions and Relevance: Combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors with FOLFIRI in second-line treatment for advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma showed an acceptable safety profile but antitumor activity only in a subgroup of patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03959293.

Safety of FOLFIRI + Durvalumab +/- Tremelimumab in Second Line of Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Safety Run-In from the Randomized Phase II Study DURIGAST PRODIGE 59.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) as monotherapy in 2nd line treatment for gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma is low, with no evaluation of efficacy and safety of ICI combined with chemotherapy. The DURIGAST PRODIGE 59 study is a randomised, multicentre, phase II study designed to assess the efficacy and safety of the combination of FOLFIRI + Durvalumab +/- Tremelimumab as 2nd line treatment of patients with advanced gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Here, we report data from the safety run-in phase with FOLFIRI Durvalumab (arm A) or FOLFIRI Durvalumab and Tremelimumab (arm B). Among the 11 patients included, 63.6% experienced at least one grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs) related to the treatment, most frequently neutropenia (36.4%). There was only one immune-related AE (grade 2 hyperthyroidism). Ten serious AEs were described among six patients, but only two were related to the treatment, due to the chemotherapy. One seizure epilepsy related to a brain metastasis was observed, but was not related by the investigator to the treatment. However, the Independent Data Monitoring Committee recommended brain imaging at inclusion. This safety run-in phase demonstrates an expected safety profile of FOLFIRI with Durvalumab +/- Tremelimumab combination allowing the randomised phase II.

Second-line treatment after docetaxel, cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil in metastatic squamous cell carcinomas of the anus. Pooled analysis of prospective Epitopes-HPV01 and Epitopes-HPV02 studies.

BACKGROUND: Squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) is a rare disease often diagnosed at a localised stage. For locally advanced recurrence or metastatic disease, DCF (docetaxel, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil) demonstrated high efficacy and became one of the standard regimens. However, there is no standard of care in the second line. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the Epitopes-HPV01 and Epitopes-HPV02 prospective trials, 115 patients with advanced SCCA were treated with a DCF regimen in the first line. In these studies, second-line data were registered per protocol. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of >40 months, at progression, 73 patients received a second-line (L2) treatment. In this L2 population, median overall survival (mOS) was 13.5 months (95%CI 9.4-19.8), and median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 5.7 months (3.4-7.3) in L2. Fourteen patients presented an oligometastatic progression and were treated with an ablative treatment (surgery or radiotherapy); mOS was 48.3 months (NE-NE), and mPFS was 31.3 months (23.2-NE). Fifty-nine patients received a systemic treatment (chemotherapy or immunotherapy); mOS was 11 months (8.4-15.4) and mPFS was 4.9 months (3.3-7). The most frequent chemotherapy regimens were the reintroduction of DCF, paclitaxel, FOLFIRI and mitomycin plus fluoropyrimidine. No significant difference was observed between regimens (p = 0.26). Six patients received anti-PD1/L1-based immunotherapy. CONCLUSION: Second-line treatments are effective in patients with SCCA. Ablative treatment is feasible and is probably the best option for patients with oligometastatic progression. If this is not possible, systemic therapy by an anti-PD1/L1 immunotherapy or chemotherapy can be recommended. Reintroduction of DCF, paclitaxel, FOLFIRI or mitomycin-C plus fluoropyrimidine are possible options.

PD-1 Blockade in Solid Tumors with Defects in Polymerase Epsilon.

Missense mutations in the polymerase epsilon (POLE) gene have been reported to generate proofreading defects resulting in an ultramutated genome and to sensitize tumors to checkpoint blockade immunotherapy. However, many POLE-mutated tumors do not respond to such treatment. To better understand the link between POLE mutation variants and response to immunotherapy, we prospectively assessed the efficacy of nivolumab in a multicenter clinical trial in patients bearing advanced mismatch repair-proficient POLE-mutated solid tumors. We found that only tumors harboring selective POLE pathogenic mutations in the DNA binding or catalytic site of the exonuclease domain presented high mutational burden with a specific single-base substitution signature, high T-cell infiltrates, and a high response rate to anti-PD-1 monotherapy. This study illustrates how specific DNA repair defects sensitize to immunotherapy. POLE proofreading deficiency represents a novel agnostic biomarker for response to PD-1 checkpoint blockade therapy. SIGNIFICANCE: POLE proofreading deficiency leads to high tumor mutational burden with high tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and predicts anti-PD-1 efficacy in mismatch repair-proficient tumors. Conversely, tumors harboring POLE mutations not affecting proofreading derived no benefit from PD-1 blockade. POLE proofreading deficiency is a new tissue-agnostic biomarker for cancer immunotherapy. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1397.

FOLFIRINOX relative dose intensity and disease control in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) treated with FOLFIRINOX experience adverse events requiring dose reduction. We aimed to assess the association between relative dose intensity (RDI) and disease control in a European setting. METHODS: We retrospectively included patients with advanced PA treated with three or more cycles of FOLFIRINOX between 2011 and 2018 in six French centers. We computed the cumulative single-agent RDI (csRDI) before the first reassessment for each FOLFIRINOX agent (oxaliplatin, irinotecan, 5FU bolus, and 5FU intravenous infusion) and the cumulative multi-drug RDI (cmRDI) of their combination. The association between RDI and disease control or objective response at first reassessment was evaluated using multivariable logistic regression models controlling for performance status, liver metastases, and center. RESULTS: We included 243 patients. Median csRDIs were 81%, 79%, 75%, and 85% for oxaliplatin, irinotecan, 5FU bolus, and 5FU intravenous infusion, respectively. Median cmRDI was 80%. None of the RDIs was significantly associated with disease control or objective response. Including RDI in a clinical model did not improve its ability to predict disease control; the area under the curve was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73-0.85) with RDI versus 0.78 (95% CI: 0.72-0.85) without. Similar results were observed for the objective response. CONCLUSION: Pragmatic dose adjustments of FOLFIRINOX should be made by oncologists without considering a loss of effect.

Avelumab versus standard second line treatment chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with microsatellite instability: The SAMCO-PRODIGE 54 randomised phase II trial.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have failed in treating metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients except those with dMMR/MSI tumors. However, until very recently we had only non-comparative promising data in this population with anti-programmed cell death 1/ programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD1/PD-L1) antibodies alone or combined with anti- cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA4) antibodies. This comparative phase II trial (NCT03186326), conducted in more than 100 centers in France, will include dMMR/MSI mCRC patients with progression after a first-line treatment with chemotherapy ± targeted therapies, to evaluate efficacy and safety of the anti-PDL1 Avelumab versus a standard second-line treatment. Main inclusion criteria were patients aged 18 to 75 years, ECOG performance status ≤2, dMMR/MSI mCRC and failure of a standard first-line regimen. Patient will be randomised to receive Avelumab 10 mg/kg versus standard second-line doublet chemotherapy plus a targeted agent according to tumor RAS status. Patients will be followed for 4 years. A gain of 5 months in median PFS is expected in favour of the Avelumab arm (12 vs 7 months; HR=0.58). Secondary endpoints include objective response rate, overall survival, quality of life and toxicity. In addition, circulating tumour DNA and microbiota will be explored to test their potential prognostic and predictive values. The study was opened in March 2018.

Feasibility of liver transient elastography with FibroScan using a new probe for obese patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Liver stiffness measurement (LSM) failure when using transient elastography occurs in 2-10% of patients, and is generally related to obesity. The aim of this prospective study was to assess the feasibility of LSM when using a new XL probe on patients with a body mass index (BMI) > or =30 kg/m(2). METHODS: For each patient, LSM was performed using both M probe (currently available and dedicated to patients with standard morphology) and XL probe (dedicated to overweighed patients). A blood sample was taken to assess usual biological variables and simple readily available fibrosis blood tests. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients were included (27 men, mean age 52 years, mean BMI 40.5 kg/m(2)). LSM was successful (10 valid measurements) in 45% of the cases with the M probe, vs 76% of the cases with the XL probe (P<0.001). Fifty-nine percent of those who could not be measured (<10 valid measurements) using the M probe could successfully be measured using the XL probe. In the 44 patients successfully measured with both probes, LSM was correlated with the platelet count, prothrombin time, gamma-glutamyltransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, fasting glucose, AST platelet ratio index, Forns score and FIB-4. CONCLUSION: The new XL probe allows providing a higher rate of LSM than the M probe in patients with an increased BMI and shows promising results for the evaluation of liver fibrosis.

Erythrocyte-encapsulated asparaginase (eryaspase) combined with chemotherapy in second-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer: An open-label, randomized Phase IIb trial.

PURPOSE: This Phase IIb (NCT02195180) open-label study evaluated erythrocyte-encapsulated asparaginase (eryaspase) in combination with chemotherapy in second-line advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Eligible patients were randomized 2:1 to either eryaspase in combination with gemcitabine or mFOLFOX6 (eryaspase arm), or to gemcitabine or mFOLFOX6 alone (control arm). Co-primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with low asparagine synthetase (ASNS) expression. Secondary endpoints included OS and PFS in the entire population. RESULTS: 141 patients were randomized (eryaspase arm, n = 95; control arm, n = 46). Median OS and PFS in patients with low ASNS expression were 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.1-8.8) in the eryaspase arm versus 4.9 months (3.1-7.1) in the control arm (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.39-1.01; P = 0.056) and 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.8-3.4) in the eryaspase arm versus 1.8 months (1.4-3.8) in the control arm (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.40-1.12; P = 0.127), respectively. In the entire population, median OS and PFS for the eryaspase arm versus control were 6.0 months versus 4.4 months (HR, 0.60; P = 0.008) and 2.0 months versus 1.6 months (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37-0.84; P = 0.005), respectively. The combination of eryaspase and chemotherapy was well tolerated. The most frequent Grade 3/4 adverse events in the eryaspase arm (n = 93) were gamma-glutamyltransferase increase (16 [17.2%]), neutropenia (12 [12.9%]), and physical health deterioration (12 [12.9%]). CONCLUSION: Eryaspase in combination with chemotherapy is associated with improvements in OS and PFS, irrespective of ASNS expression in second-line advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. A Phase III trial is underway.

Pooled analysis of 115 patients from updated data of Epitopes-HPV01 and Epitopes-HPV02 studies in first-line advanced anal squamous cell carcinoma.

AIMS: The addition of docetaxel to cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (DCF) has shown promising efficacy in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA). Preliminary results of Epitopes-HPV01 study showed a high rate of long-lasting complete response to DCF. The prospective, multicenter, Epitopes-HPV02 trial then confirmed the high efficacy of the modified DCF (mDCF) regimen in terms of complete response rate and long-term survival in metastatic or non-resectable locally advanced recurrent SCCA. Here, we present updated results of the Epitopes-HPV01 and Epitopes-HPV02 studies. PATIENTS & METHODS: Epitopes-HPV01 is a prospective study performed by the regional cancer network of Franche-Comté, France. Epitopes-HPV02 is a phase II study supported by two French collaborative oncological groups, performed in 25 centers. Both studies included patients with metastatic, or with unresectable local recurrent SCCA, treated with DCF regimen. RESULTS: In Epitopes-HPV01, 51 patients were enrolled between September 2012 and January 2019, and 49 patients were included for analysis; while 69 patients were included between September 2014 and December 2016 in Epitopes-HPV02, and 66 patients for analysis. Pooled analysis of 115 patients showed a median progression-free survival of 12.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 10.6-16.1] [11.0 months (9.3-16.0) in -HPV02, and 15.6 months (11.2-34.5) in -HPV01, (p = 0.06)]. The median overall survival was 39.2 months (26.0-109.1) [36.3 in -HPV02 (25.2-NR), and 61.1 months (21.4-120.0) in -HPV01 (p = 0.62)]. Objective response rate was 87.7% (90.9% in -HPV02 and 83.3% in -HPV01) with 40.3% of complete response (45.5% in -HPV02 and 33.3% in -HPV01). No differences were observed between standard DCF (n = 54) and mDCF (n = 58) in terms of OS (p = 0.57) and PFS (p = 0.99). 5-years PFS and OS rates were 24.5% and 44.4%, respectively, in the whole population. No treatment-related death was observed. CONCLUSION: Updated results of Epitopes-HPV01 and 02 studies, as well as the pooled analysis, confirm mDCF as a standard treatment in patients with advanced SCCA.