Outcomes in the Asian subgroup of the phase III randomised HIMALAYA study of tremelimumab plus durvalumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In the global, phase III HIMALAYA study in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab) improved overall survival (OS) vs. sorafenib; durvalumab was noninferior to sorafenib. HBV is the predominant HCC aetiology in most of Asia vs. HCV or nonviral aetiologies in Western countries and Japan. This analysis evaluated safety and efficacy outcomes for STRIDE and durvalumab monotherapy vs. sorafenib, in HIMALAYA participants enrolled in Asia, excluding Japan. METHODS: In HIMALAYA, participants were randomised to STRIDE, durvalumab, or sorafenib. The Asian subgroup in this analysis included participants enrolled in Hong Kong, India, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. OS, objective response rate (ORR; per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1), and safety were assessed in the Asian subgroup and in an exploratory subgroup of participants in Hong Kong and Taiwan. RESULTS: The Asian subgroup included 479 participants randomised to STRIDE (n=156), durvalumab (n=167), or sorafenib (n=156). OS was improved for STRIDE vs. sorafenib (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.52-0.89]). The OS HR for durvalumab vs. sorafenib was 0.83 (95% CI 0.64-1.06). In Hong Kong and Taiwan (n=141), OS HRs for STRIDE vs. sorafenib and durvalumab vs. sorafenib were 0.44 (95% CI 0.26-0.77) and 0.64 (95% CI 0.37-1.08), respectively. In the Asian subgroup, ORR (including unconfirmed responses) was numerically higher for STRIDE (28.2%) and durvalumab (18.6%) vs. sorafenib (9.0%), and Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were numerically lower for STRIDE (19.9%) and durvalumab (13.3%) vs. sorafenib (30.5%). CONCLUSIONS: STRIDE improved outcomes vs. sorafenib in the Asian subgroup. These results support the benefits of STRIDE for participants with uHCC globally, including the Asia-Pacific region. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT03298451 IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: The global, phase III HIMALAYA study found that the STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab) regimen improved overall survival (OS), including long-term OS, vs. sorafenib, and that durvalumab monotherapy was noninferior to sorafenib in participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). However, there are differences in the aetiology and clinical practices related to HCC in parts of Asia, compared to Western countries and Japan, which could lead to differences in treatment outcomes between these regions. The results of this analysis demonstrate the benefits of STRIDE for participants in the Asia-Pacific region, consistent with the full, global study population. Overall, these findings continue to support the use of STRIDE in a diverse population, reflective of uHCC globally.

Recent Progress in Systemic Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have several systemic treatment options. There are many known risk factors for HCC, and although some, such as hepatitis C, are now treatable, others are not. For example, metabolic dysfunction-related chronic liver disease is increasing in incidence and has no specific treatment. Underlying liver disease, drug resistance, and an increasing number of treatment options without specific biomarkers are all challenges in selecting the best treatment for each patient. Conventional chemotherapy is almost never used for advanced-stage disease, which instead is treated with immunotherapy, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and VEGF inhibitors. Immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting various receptors have been or are currently undergoing clinical evaluation. Ongoing trials with three-drug regimens may be the future of advanced-stage HCC treatment. Other immune-modulatory approaches of chimeric antigen receptor-modified T cells, bispecific antibodies, cytokine-induced killer cells, natural killer cells, and vaccines are in early-stage clinical trials. Targeted therapies remain limited for HCC but represent an area of potential growth. As we shift away from first-line sorafenib for advanced HCC, clinical trial control arms should comprise a standard treatment other than sorafenib, one that is a better comparator for advancing therapies.

Novel low-avidity glypican-3 specific CARTs resist exhaustion and mediate durable antitumor effects against HCC.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Chimeric antigen receptor engineered T cells (CARTs) for HCC and other solid tumors are not as effective as they are for blood cancers. CARTs may lose function inside tumors due to persistent antigen engagement. The aims of this study are to develop low-affinity monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and low-avidity CARTs for HCC and to test the hypothesis that low-avidity CARTs can resist exhaustion and maintain functions in solid tumors, generating durable antitumor effects. METHODS AND RESULTS: New human glypican-3 (hGPC3) mAbs were developed from immunized mice. We obtained three hGPC3-specific mAbs that stained HCC tumors, but not the adjacent normal liver tissues. One of them, 8F8, bound an epitope close to that of GC33, the frequently used high-affinity mAb, but with approximately 17-fold lower affinity. We then compared the 8F8 CARTs to GC33 CARTs for their in vitro function and in vivo antitumor effects. In vitro, low-avidity 8F8 CARTs killed both hGPC3high and hGPC3low HCC tumor cells to the same extent as high-avidity GC33 CARTs. 8F8 CARTs expanded and persisted to a greater extent than GC33 CARTs, resulting in durable responses against HCC xenografts. Importantly, compared with GC33 CARTs, there were 5-fold more of 8F8-BBz CARTs in the tumor mass for a longer period of time. Remarkably, the tumor-infiltrating 8F8 CARTs were less exhausted and apoptotic, and more functional than GC33 CARTs. CONCLUSION: The low-avidity 8F8-BBz CART resists exhaustion and apoptosis inside tumor lesions, demonstrating a greater therapeutic potential than high-avidity CARTs.

Plain language summary of the TOPAZ-1 study: durvalumab and chemotherapy for advanced biliary tract cancer.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary describing the results of a Phase III study called TOPAZ-1. The study looked at treatment with durvalumab (a type of immunotherapy) and chemotherapy to treat participants with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). Advanced BTC is usually diagnosed at late stages of disease, when it cannot be cured by surgery. This study included participants with advanced BTC who had not received previous treatment, or had their cancer come back at least 6 months after receiving treatment or surgery that aimed to cure their disease. Participants received treatment with durvalumab and chemotherapy or placebo and chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to find out if treatment with durvalumab and chemotherapy could increase the length of time that participants with advanced BTC lived, compared with placebo and chemotherapy. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY?: Participants who took durvalumab and chemotherapy had a 20% lower chance of experiencing death at any point in the study compared with participants who received placebo and chemotherapy. The side effects experienced by participants were similar across treatment groups, and less than 12% of participants in either treatment group had to stop treatment due to treatment-related side effects. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: Overall, these results support durvalumab and chemotherapy as a new treatment option for people with advanced BTCs. Based on the results of this study, durvalumab is now approved for the treatment of adults with advanced BTCs in combination with chemotherapy by government organizations in Europe, the United States and several other countries.

Surgical resection criteria and neoadjuvant therapies for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

The staging of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is complex, and there is no consensus among international cancer groups on how to most appropriately select candidates with nonmetastatic disease for surgical resection. Factors contributing to a higher stage of disease include larger tumor size, multiple tumors, vascular invasion (either portal venous or arterial), biliary invasion, involvement of local hepatic structures, serosal invasion, and regional lymph node metastases. For patients selected to undergo surgery, it is well-documented that R0 resection translates to a survival benefit. Estimating the risk of post-hepatectomy liver failure and post-surgical residual liver function is vital and may preclude some patients with significant tumor burden from undergoing surgery. Numerous serum and biliary biomarkers of the disease can help detect recurrence in patients undergoing surgical resection. Systemic and locoregional neoadjuvant treatments to facilitate better surgical outcomes have yielded mixed results regarding improving resectability and overall survival. Additional research is needed to identify optimal neoadjuvant treatment approaches and to evaluate which patients will benefit most from these strategies. Therapies targeting genetic mutations and protein aberrations found by tumor molecular profiling may offer additional options for future neoadjuvant treatment.

Treatment with a Cholecystokinin Receptor Antagonist, Proglumide, Improves Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Antibodies in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third leading cause of cancer-associated deaths worldwide. Treatment with immune checkpoint antibodies has shown promise in advanced HCC, but the response is only 15-20%. We discovered a potential target for the treatment of HCC, the cholecystokinin-B receptor (CCK-BR). This receptor is overexpressed in murine and human HCC and not in normal liver tissue. Mice bearing syngeneic RIL-175 HCC tumors were treated with phosphate buffer saline (PBS; control), proglumide (a CCK-receptor antagonist), an antibody to programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1Ab), or the combination of proglumide and the PD-1Ab. In vitro, RNA was extracted from untreated or proglumide-treated murine Dt81Hepa1-6 HCC cells and analyzed for expression of fibrosis-associated genes. RNA was also extracted from human HepG2 HCC cells or HepG2 cells treated with proglumide and subjected to RNA sequencing. Results showed that proglumide decreased fibrosis in the tumor microenvironment and increased the number of intratumoral CD8+ T cells in RIL-175 tumors. When proglumide was given in combination with the PD-1Ab, there was a further significant increase in intratumoral CD8+ T cells, improved survival, and alterations in genes regulating tumoral fibrosis and epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition. RNAseq results from human HepG2 HCC cells treated with proglumide showed significant changes in differentially expressed genes involved in tumorigenesis, fibrosis, and the tumor microenvironment. The use of the CCK receptor antagonist may improve efficacy of immune checkpoint antibodies and survival in those with advanced HCC.

Addition of ramucirumab or merestinib to standard first-line chemotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Biliary tract cancers are aggressive, rare, gastrointestinal malignancies with a poor prognosis; approximately half of patients with these cancers survive for less than 1 year after diagnosis with advanced disease. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ramucirumab or merestinib in addition to first-line cisplatin-gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study at 81 hospitals across 18 countries. We enrolled patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed, non-resectable, recurrent, or metastatic biliary tract adenocarcinoma, who were treatment-naive, aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, estimated life expectancy of 3 months or more, and measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (2:1:2:1) to receive either intravenous ramucirumab 8 mg/kg or placebo (on days 1 and 8 in 21-day cycles) or oral merestinib 80 mg or placebo (once daily) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, or patient or investigator request for discontinuation. All participants received intravenous cisplatin 25 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 (on days 1 and 8 in 21-day cycles), for a maximum of eight cycles. Randomisation was done by an interactive web response system using a permuted block method (blocks of six) and was stratified by primary tumour site, geographical region, and presence of metastatic disease. Participants, investigators, and the study funder were masked to treatment assignment within the intravenous and oral groups. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (in the intention-to-treat population). The safety analysis was done in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02711553, and long-term follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between May 25, 2016, and Aug 8, 2017, 450 patients were assessed for eligibility and 309 (69%) were enrolled and randomly assigned to ramucirumab (n=106), merestinib (n=102), or pooled placebo (n=101); 306 received at least one dose of study treatment. The median follow-up time for progression-free survival at data cutoff (Feb 16, 2018) was 10·9 months (IQR 8·1-14·1). Median progression-free survival was 6·5 months (80% CI 5·7-7·1) in the ramucirumab group, 7·0 months (6·2-7·1) in the merestinib group, and 6·6 months (5·6-6·8) in the pooled placebo group (ramucirumab vs placebo hazard ratio 1·12 [80% CI 0·90-1·40], two-sided stratified p=0·48; merestinib vs placebo 0·92 [0·73-1·15], two-sided stratified p=0·64). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (51 [49%] of 104 patients in the ramucirumab group; 48 [47%] of 102 in the merestinib group; and 33 [33%] of 100 in the pooled placebo group), thrombocytopenia (36 [35%]; 19 [19%]; and 17 [17%]), and anaemia (28 [27%]; 16 [16%]; and 19 [19%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 53 (51%) patients in the ramucirumab group, 56 (55%) in the merestinib group, and 48 (48%) in the pooled placebo group. Treatment-related deaths (deemed related by the investigator) occurred in one (1%) of 104 patients in the ramucirumab group (cardiac arrest) and two (2%) of 102 patients in the merestinib group (pulmonary embolism [n=1] and sepsis [n=1]). INTERPRETATION: Adding ramucirumab or merestinib to first-line cisplatin-gemcitabine was well tolerated, with no new safety signals, but neither improved progression-free survival in patients with molecularly unselected, locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer. The role of these targeted inhibitors remains investigational, highlighting the need for further understanding of biliary tract malignancies and the contribution of molecular selection. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Atezolizumab with or without bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (GO30140): an open-label, multicentre, phase 1b study.

BACKGROUND: Dual blockade of PD-L1 and VEGF has enhanced anticancer immunity through multiple mechanisms and augmented antitumour activity in multiple malignancies. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) alone and combined with bevacizumab (anti-VEGF) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: GO30140 is an open-label, multicentre, multiarm, phase 1b study that enrolled patients at 26 academic centres and community oncology practices in seven countries worldwide. The study included five cohorts, and the two hepatocellular carcinoma cohorts, groups A and F, are described here. Inclusion criteria for these two groups included age 18 years and older; histologically, cytologically, or clinically (per American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases criteria) confirmed unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma that was not amenable to curative treatment; no previous systemic treatment; and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. In group A, all patients received atezolizumab (1200 mg) and bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) intravenously every 3 weeks. In group F, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous atezolizumab (1200 mg) plus intravenous bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) every 3 weeks or atezolizumab alone by interactive voice-web response system using permuted block randomisation (block size of two) and stratification factors of geographical region; macrovascular invasion, extrahepatic spread, or both; and baseline α-fetoprotein concentration. Primary endpoints were confirmed objective response rate in all patients who received the combination treatment for group A and progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population in group F, both assessed by an independent review facility according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. In both groups, safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of any study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02715531, and is closed to enrolment. FINDINGS: In group A, 104 patients were enrolled between July 20, 2016, and July 31, 2018, and received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. With a median follow-up of 12·4 months (IQR 8·0-16·2), 37 (36%; 95% CI 26-46) of 104 patients had a confirmed objective response. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were hypertension (13 [13%]) and proteinuria (seven [7%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 25 (24%) patients and treatment-related deaths in three (3%) patients (abnormal hepatic function, hepatic cirrhosis, and pneumonitis). In group F, 119 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned (60 to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab; 59 to atezolizumab monotherapy) between May 18, 2018, and March 7, 2019. With a median follow-up of 6·6 months (IQR 5·5-8·5) for the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 6·7 months (4·2-8·2) for the atezolizumab monotherapy group, median progression-free survival was 5·6 months (95% CI 3·6-7·4) versus 3·4 months (1·9-5·2; hazard ratio 0·55; 80% CI 0·40-0·74; p=0·011). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events in group F were hypertension (in three [5%] patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group; none in the atezolizumab monotherapy group) and proteinuria (in two [3%] patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group; none in the atezolizumab monotherapy group). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in seven (12%) patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and two (3%) patients in the atezolizumab monotherapy group. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Our study shows longer progression-free survival with a combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab than with atezolizumab alone in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma not previously treated with systemic therapy. Therefore, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab might become a promising treatment option for these patients. This combination is being compared with standard-of-care sorafenib in a phase 3 trial. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.

Workup and Management of Immune-Mediated Hepatobiliary Pancreatic Toxicities That Develop During Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Treatment.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of a wide range of cancer types, including hepatocellular carcinoma. Workup and management of immune-mediated hepatitis, pancreatitis, or cholangitis that develops during immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment can be challenging. Immune-mediated hepatitis can be particularly challenging if patients have underlying viral hepatitis or autoimmune hepatitis. Patients with positive hepatitis B virus DNA should be referred to a hepatologist for antiviral therapy prior to immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. With untreated hepatitis C virus (HCV) and elevated liver enzymes, a liver biopsy should be obtained to differentiate between HCV infection and immune-mediated hepatitis due to anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) therapy. If autoimmune serologies are negative, then this supports a case of immune-mediated hepatitis secondary to anti-PD-1 therapy, rather than autoimmune hepatitis. In this case, an empiric steroid therapy is reasonable; however, if the patient does not respond to steroid therapy in 3-5 days, then liver biopsy should be pursued. The incidence of immune checkpoint-induced pancreatitis is low, but when it does occur, diagnosis is not straightforward. Although routine monitoring of pancreatic enzymes is not generally recommended, when pancreatitis is suspected, serum levels of amylase and lipase should be checked. Once confirmed, a steroid or other immunosuppressant (if steroids are contraindicated) should be administered along with close monitoring, and a slow tapering dosage once the pancreatitis is under control. Patients should then be monitored for recurrent pancreatitis. Finally, immune therapy-related cholangitis involves elevated bilirubin and alkaline phosphatase and, once diagnosed, is managed in the same way as immune-mediated hepatitis. KEY POINTS: Immune-mediated hepatitis, pancreatitis, and cholangitis are found in patients receiving or who have previously received immune checkpoint inhibitors. To work up immune-mediated hepatitis, viral, and autoimmune serologies, liver imaging will help to differentiate immune-mediated hepatitis from hepatitis of other etiology. Hepatology consult may be considered in patients with a history of chronic liver disease who developed hepatitis during immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. Liver biopsy should be considered to clarify the diagnosis for case in which the hepatitis is refractory to steroid or immunosuppressant treatment. Immune-mediated pancreatitis is treated with steroid or other immunosuppressant with a slow tapering and should be monitored for recurrence.

Workup and Management of Immune-Mediated Colitis in Patients Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

As the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors for several different malignancies becomes more mainstream, their side-effect profile raises new challenges. In 2011, the Food and Drug Administration approved the first checkpoint inhibitor for the treatment of advanced melanoma, and since then, checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy in many other tumor types. Given the frequent use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in a wide range of cancers today, the diagnosis and management of their immune-mediated toxicities need special attention. One of the most common is immune-mediated colitis. Workup and management of immune-mediated colitis can be challenging and is the purpose of this review. KEY POINTS: Rate of immune mediated colitis differ from different kind of immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. To work up immune-mediated colitis, tests to rule out infectious etiologies of diarrhea, colonoscopy and abdominal image will help to differentiate immune mediated colitis from colitis from other etiology. Patients with mild colitis can be managed with supportive therapies alone, but more severe cases may require immunomodulators such as steroid. Refractory cases may require tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, such as infliximab in addition to steroid treatment.

First-in-Human Phase I Study of Merestinib, an Oral Multikinase Inhibitor, in Patients with Advanced Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this nonrandomized, open-label, phase I study (NCT01285037) was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of merestinib, an oral antiproliferative and antiangiogenic kinase inhibitor, and to determine a recommended phase II dose and schedule for patients with advanced cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, nonrandomized, open-label, phase I study of oral merestinib consisting of six parts: dose escalation (part A), followed by a four-cohort dose-confirmation study (part B) and subsequently a four-part dose expansion and combination safety testing of merestinib with standard doses of cetuximab (part C), cisplatin (part D), gemcitabine and cisplatin (part E), and ramucirumab (part F) in patients with specific types of advanced cancers. Safety, tolerability, antitumor activity, and pharmacokinetics were evaluated in all cohorts. RESULTS: The dose escalation, confirmation, and expansion results support the dosing of merestinib at 120 mg once daily, based on acceptable exposure and safety at this dose. One complete response was observed in a patient with cholangiocarcinoma, and three patients with cholangiocarcinoma achieved a partial response. Overall, 60 (32%) of the 186 patients enrolled in the study had a best response of stable disease. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that merestinib has a tolerable safety profile and potential anticancer activity and warrants further clinical investigation. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Merestinib treatment in patients with advanced cancer demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and potential antitumor activity, supporting its future development in specific disease populations as a monotherapy and/or in combination with other therapies.

An endogenous DNA adduct as a prognostic biomarker for hepatocarcinogenesis and its prevention by Theaphenon E in mice.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, mainly because of its poor prognosis. A valid mechanism-based prognostic biomarker is urgently needed. γ-hydroxy-1,N2 -propanodeoxyguanosine (γ-OHPdG) is an endogenously formed mutagenic DNA adduct derived from lipid peroxidation. We examined the relationship of γ-OHPdG with hepatocarcinogenesis in two animal models and its potential role as a prognostic biomarker for recurrence in HCC patients. Bioassays were conducted in xeroderma pigmentosum group A knockout mice and diethylnitrosamine-injected mice, both prone to HCC development. γ-OHPdG levels in the livers of these animals were determined. The effects of antioxidant treatments on γ-OHPdG and hepatocarcinogenesis were examined. Using two independent sets of HCC specimens from patients, we examined the relationship between γ-OHPdG and survival or recurrence-free survival. γ-OHPdG levels in liver DNA showed an age-dependent increase and consistently correlated with HCC development in all three animal models. Theaphenon E treatment significantly decreased γ-OHPdG levels in the liver DNA of xeroderma pigmentosum group A knockout mice and remarkably reduced HCC incidence in these mice to 14% from 100% in the controls. It also effectively inhibited HCC development in the diethylnitrosamine-injected mice. Using clinical samples from two groups of patients, our study revealed that higher levels of γ-OHPdG are strongly associated with low survival (P < 0.0001) and low recurrence-free survival (P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: These results support γ-OHPdG as a mechanism-based, biologically relevant biomarker for predicting the risk of HCC and its recurrence. (Hepatology 2018;67:159-170).

A phase 1 study of cetuximab and lapatinib in patients with advanced solid tumor malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Acquired resistance to antiepidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) therapy may be caused by EGFR-v-erb-b2 avian erythroblastic leukemia viral oncogene homolog 2 (ErbB2) heterodimerization and pathway reactivation. In preclinical studies, inhibiting ErbB2 blocked this resistance mechanism and resensitized cells to anti-EGFR therapy. Cetuximab targets EGFR, whereas lapatinib inhibits both EGFR and ErbB2. The objective of this phase 1 trial was to assess the safety, dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and maximum tolerated doses (MTDs) of cetuximab and lapatinib in patients with solid tumors. METHODS: Patients received standard weekly cetuximab with escalating lapatinib doses of 750 mg, 1000 mg, or 1250 mg daily in 3-week cycles. DLTs were monitored through the end of cycle 2. Pretreatment and post-treatment tumor biopsies and germline DNA samples were obtained for correlative studies. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled, and 18 patients each were evaluable for toxicity and response. Fifty-nine percent of patients had received prior anti-EGFR therapy. Common toxicities included rash and diarrhea. No patient experienced a DLT at the highest dose level, and no grade 4 toxicity was observed. Response included no complete responses, 3 partial responses, 9 patients with stable disease, and 6 patients with disease progression, for an overall response rate of 17% and a clinical benefit rate of 67%. The clinical benefit rate in patients who had previously received anti-EGFR therapy was 70%. The mean treatment duration was 4.7 cycles (range, 1-14 cycles). Decreased expression of EGFR/ErbB2 pathway components after treatment was correlated with response, whereas increased expression in the PI3K, Jak/Stat, and MAPK pathways occurred in nonresponders. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of cetuximab and lapatinib was well tolerated, had the expected toxicities, and exhibited notable clinical activity, including in patients who had received previous anti-EGFR therapy. Further clinical study of this combination is warranted.

Safety and efficacy of tigatuzumab plus sorafenib as first-line therapy in subjects with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A phase 2 randomized study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Tigatuzumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that acts as a death receptor-5 agonist and exerts tumour necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand-like activity. In this phase II study, safety and tolerability of the combination of tigatuzumab and sorafenib was evaluated in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: Adults with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, measurable disease, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score⩽1 were enrolled. Eligible subjects were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to tigatuzumab (6 mg/kg loading, 2 mg/kg/week maintenance) plus sorafenib 400 mg twice daily; tigatuzumab (6 mg/kg loading, 6 mg/kg/week maintenance) plus sorafenib 400 mg twice daily; or sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. The primary end point was time to progression. Secondary end points included overall survival and safety. RESULTS: 163 subjects were randomized to treatment. Median time to progression was 3.0 months in the tigatuzumab 6/2 mg/kg combination group (p=0.988 vs. sorafenib), 3.9 months in the tigatuzumab 6/6 mg/kg combination group (p=0.586 vs. sorafenib), and 2.8 months in the sorafenib alone group. Median overall survival was 12.2 months in the tigatuzumab 6/6 mg/kg combination group (p=0.659 vs. sorafenib), vs. 8.2 months in both other treatment groups (p=0.303, tigatuzumab 6/2 mg/kg combination vs. sorafenib). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, diarrhea, and decreased appetite. CONCLUSIONS: Tigatuzumab combined with sorafenib vs. sorafenib alone in adults with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma did not meet its primary efficacy end point, although tigatuzumab plus sorafenib is well tolerated in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Transcriptional regulation of STAT3 by SPTBN1 and SMAD3 in HCC through cAMP-response element-binding proteins ATF3 and CREB2.

The cytoskeletal protein Spectrin, beta, non-erythrocytic 1 (SPTBN1), an adapter protein to SMAD3 in TGF-ß signaling, may prevent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development by downregulating the expression of signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3). To elucidate the as yet undefined mechanisms that regulate this process, we demonstrate that higher levels of STAT3 transcription are found in livers of heterozygous SPTBN1(+/-) mice as compared to that of wild type mice. We also found increased levels of STAT3 mRNA, STAT3 protein, and p-STAT3 in human HCC cell-lines after knockdown of SPTBN1 or SMAD3, which promoted cell colony formation. Inhibition of STAT3 overrode the increase in cell colony formation due to knockdown of SPTBN1 or SMAD3. We also found that inhibition of SPTBN1 or SMAD3 upregulated STAT3 promoter activity in HCC cell-lines, which is dependent upon the cAMP-response element (CRE) and STAT-binding element (SBE) sites of the STAT3 promoter. Mechanistically, suppression of SPTBN1 and SMAD3 augmented the transcription of STAT3 by upregulating the CRE-binding proteins ATF3 and CREB2 and augmented the binding of those proteins to the regions within or upstream of the CRE site of the STAT3 promoter. Finally, in human HCC tissues, SPTBN1 expression correlated negatively with expression levels of STAT3, ATF3, and CREB2; SMAD3 expression correlated negatively with STAT3 expression; and the level of phosphorylated SMAD3 (p-SMAD3) correlated negatively with ATF3 and CREB2 protein levels. SPTBN1 and SMAD3 collaborate with CRE-binding transcription factors to inhibit STAT3, thereby preventing HCC development.

Advances in Immunotherapy for Transplant Oncology.

The increasing incidence of global cancer rates has created an entirely new demand for curative treatment modalities to improve patient outcomes [...].

Durvalumab or placebo plus gemcitabine and cisplatin in participants with advanced biliary tract cancer (TOPAZ-1): updated overall survival from a randomised phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: In the preplanned interim analysis of the TOPAZ-1 study, durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin significantly improved overall survival versus placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin in participants with advanced biliary tract cancer. We aimed to report updated overall survival and safety data from TOPAZ-1 with additional follow-up and data maturity beyond the interim analysis. METHODS: TOPAZ-1 was a phase 3, randomised, double-masked, placebo-controlled, global study done at 105 sites in 17 countries. Participants aged 18 years or older with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic biliary tract cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) to durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin or placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin using a computer-generated randomisation scheme, stratified by disease status and primary tumour location. Participants received durvalumab (1500 mg) or placebo on day 1 of each cycle every 3 weeks for up to eight cycles, plus gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) and cisplatin (25 mg/m2) intravenously on days 1 and 8 of each cycle every 3 weeks for up to eight cycles, followed by durvalumab (1500 mg) or placebo monotherapy every 4 weeks until disease progression or other discontinuation criteria were met. Investigators and participants were masked to study treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival. TOPAZ-1 met its primary endpoint at the preplanned interim analysis, and the study is active but no longer recruiting participants. Updated overall survival and safety data from TOPAZ-1, with additional follow-up (data cutoff Feb 25, 2022) and data maturity beyond the interim analysis, are reported here. Efficacy was assessed in the full analysis set (all randomly assigned participants). Safety was assessed in the safety analysis set (all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment). The TOPAZ-1 study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03875235. FINDINGS: From April 16, 2019, to Dec 11, 2020, 914 participants were enrolled, 685 of whom were randomly assigned (341 to the durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group and 344 to the placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group). 345 (50%) participants were male and 340 (50%) were female. Median follow-up at the updated data cutoff was 23·4 months (95% CI 20·6-25·2) in the durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group and 22·4 months (21·4-23·8) in the placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group. At the updated data cutoff, 248 (73%) participants in the durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group and 279 (81%) participants in the placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group had died (median overall survival 12·9 months [95% CI 11·6-14·1] vs 11·3 months [10·1-12·5]; hazard ratio 0·76 [95% CI 0·64-0·91]). Kaplan-Meier-estimated 24-month overall survival rates were 23·6% (95% CI 18·7-28·9) in the durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group and 11·5% (7·6-16·2) in the placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group. Maximum grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 250 (74%) of 338 participants in the durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group and 257 (75%) of 342 in the placebo plus gemcitabine-cisplatin group. The most common maximum grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were decreased neutrophil count (70 [21%] vs 86 [25%]), anaemia (64 [19%] vs 64 [19%]), and neutropenia (63 [19%] vs 68 [20%]). INTERPRETATION: Durvalumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin showed robust and sustained overall survival benefit with no new safety signals. Findings continue to support the regimen as a standard of care for people with untreated, advanced biliary tract cancer. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Synergistic inhibition of hepatocellular carcinoma growth by cotargeting chromatin modifying enzymes and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerases.

UNLABELLED: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a particularly lethal form of cancer, yet effective therapeutic options for advanced HCC are limited. The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerases (PARPs) and histone deacetylases (HDACs) are emerging to be among the most promising targets in cancer therapy, and sensitivity to PARP inhibition depends on homologous recombination (HR) deficiency and inhibition of HDAC activity blocks the HR pathway. Here, we tested the hypothesis that cotargeting both enzymatic activities could synergistically inhibit HCC growth and defined the molecular determinants of sensitivity to both enzyme inhibitors. We discovered that HCC cells have differential sensitivity to the HDAC inhibitor suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA) and PARP inhibitor olaparib, and identified one pair of cell lines, termed SNU-398 and SNU-449, with sensitive versus resistant phenotype to both enzyme inhibitors, respectively. Coadministration of SAHA and olaparib synergistically inhibited the growth of SNU-398 but not SNU-449 cells, which was associated with increased apoptosis and accumulated unrepaired DNA damage. Multiple lines of evidence demonstrate that the hepatic fibrosis/hepatic stellate cell activation may be an important genetic determinant of cellular sensitivity to both enzymatic inhibitors, and coordinate activation or inactivation of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) and cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP)-mediated signaling pathways are involved in cell response to SAHA and olaparib treatment. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that combination therapy with both enzyme inhibitors may be a strategy for therapy of sensitive HCC cells, and identification of these novel molecular determinants may eventually guide the optimal use of PARP and HDAC inhibitors in the clinic.

TKIs beyond immunotherapy predict improved survival in advanced HCC.

PURPOSE: For patients with advanced HCC, predictors of immunotherapy response are scarce, and the benefits of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment after immunotherapy are unclear. We explored whether clinical features, such as target lesion response, immune-mediated toxicity, or subsequent TKI therapy predict immunotherapy response. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 77 patients with advanced HCC receiving immunotherapy. Patient characteristics and outcomes were assessed using various statistical methods, including the log-rank test and Kaplan-Meier methods. Cox proportional hazard modeling was used for multivariable survival analysis. RESULTS: For all patients, median overall survival (mOS) was 13 months (95% CI 8-19), and median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 6 months (95% CI 4-10). Patients with partial response (PR) and stable disease (SD) compared to progressive disease (PD) had prolonged mPFS (27 vs. 5 vs. 1 month(s), p < 0.0001) and mOS (not met vs. 11 vs. 3 months, p < 0.0001). Patients with vs. without immune-mediated toxicities trended towards longer mPFS (9 vs. 4 months p = 0.133) and mOS (17 vs. 9 months; p = 0.095). Patients who did vs. did not receive a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) after immunotherapy had a significantly improved mOS (19 vs. 5 months, p = 0.0024)). Based on multivariate modeling, the hazard ratio (HR) of overall survival (OS) of patients receiving TKI vs. no TKI was 0.412 (p = 0.0043). CONCLUSION: We show that disease control predicts prolonged mOS and mPFS. Furthermore, TKI therapy administered after immunotherapy predicts prolonged mOS in patients with advanced HCC.

Bridging and downstaging with TACE in early and intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma: Predictors of receiving a liver transplant.

Background and Aims: In patients with surgically unresectable early and intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), only liver transplant (LT) offers a cure. Locoregional therapies, such as transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), are widely used to bridge patients waiting for an LT or downstage tumors beyond Milan Criteria (MC). However, there are no formal guidelines on the number of TACE procedures patients should receive. Our study explores the extent to which repeated TACE might offer diminishing gains toward LT. Approach: We retrospectively analyzed 324 patients with BCLC stage A and B HCC who had received TACE with the intention of disease downstaging or bridging to LT. In addition to baseline demographics, we collected data on LT status, survival, and the number of TACE procedures. Overall survival (OS) rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and correlative studies were calculated using chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Results: Out of 324 patients, 126 (39%) received an LT, 32 (25%) of whom had responded favorably to TACE. LT significantly improved OS: HR 0.174 (0.094-0.322, P < .001). However, the LT rate significantly decreased if patients received ≥3 vs < 3 TACE procedures (21.6% vs 48.6%, P < .001). If their cancer was beyond MC after the third TACE, the LT rate was 3.7%. Conclusions: An increased number of TACE procedures may have diminishing returns in preparing patients for LT. Our study suggests that alternatives to LT, such as novel systemic therapies, should be considered for patients whose cancers are beyond MC after three TACE procedures.