Early drug development in solid tumours: analysis of National Cancer Institute-sponsored phase 1 trials.

BACKGROUND: The low expectation of clinical benefit from phase 1 cancer therapeutics trials might negatively affect patient and physician participation, study reimbursement, and slow the progress of oncology research. Advances in cancer drug development, meanwhile, might have favourably improved treatment responses; however, little comprehensive data exist describing the response and toxicity associated with phase 1 trials across solid tumours. The aim of the study is to evaluate the trend of toxicity and response in phase 1 trials for solid tumours over time. METHODS: We analysed patient-level data from the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program of the National Cancer Institute-sponsored investigator-initiated phase 1 trials for solid tumours, from Jan 1, 2000, to May 31, 2019. We assessed risks of treatment-related death (grade 5 toxicity ratings possibly, probably, or definitely attributable to treatment), all on-treatment deaths (deaths during protocol treatment regardless of attribution), grade 3-4 toxicity, and proportion of overall response (complete response and partial response) and complete response rate in the study periods of 2000-05, 2006-12, and 2013-2019, and evaluated their trends over time. We also analysed cancer type-specific and investigational agent-specific response, and analysed the trend of response in each cancer type over time. Univariate associations of overall response rates with patients' baseline characteristics (age, sex, performance status, BMI, albumin concentration, and haemoglobin concentration), enrolment period, investigational agents, and trial design were assessed using risk ratio based on the modified Poisson regression model. FINDINGS: We analysed 465 protocols that enrolled 13 847 patients using 261 agents. 144 (31%) trials used a monotherapy and 321 (69%) used combination therapies. The overall treatment-related death rate was 0·7% (95% CI 0·5-0·8) across all periods. Risks of treatment-related deaths did not change over time (p=0·52). All on-treatment death risk during the study period was 8·0% (95% CI 7·6-8·5). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were haematological; grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 2336 (16·9%) of 13 847 patients, lymphopenia in 1230 (8·9%), anaemia in 894 (6·5%), and thrombocytopenia in 979 (7·1%). The overall response rate for all trials during the study period was 12·2% (95% CI 11·5-12·8; 1133 of 9325 patients) and complete response rate was 2·7% (2·4-3·0; 249 of 9325). Overall response increased from 9·6% (95% CI 8·7-10·6) in 2000-05 to 18·0% (15·7-20·5) in 2013-19, and complete response rates from 2·5% (2·0-3·0) to 4·3% (3·2-5·7). Overall response rates for combination therapy were substantially higher than for monotherapy (15·8% [15·0-16·8] vs 3·5% [2·8-4·2]). The overall response by class of agents differed across diseases. Anti-angiogenesis agents were associated with higher overall response rate for bladder, colon, kidney and ovarian cancer. DNA repair inhibitors were associated with higher overall response rate in ovarian and pancreatic cancer. The rates of overall response over time differed markedly by disease; there were notable improvements in bladder, breast, and kidney cancer and melanoma, but no change in the low response of pancreatic and colon cancer. INTERPRETATION: During the past 20 years, the response rate in phase 1 trials nearly doubled without an increase in the treatment-related death rate. However, there is significant heterogeneity in overall response by various factors such as cancer type, investigational agent, and trial design. Therefore, informed decision making is crucial for patients before participating in phase 1 trials. This study provides updated encouraging outcomes of modern phase 1 trials in solid tumours. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute.

Relugolix in Clinical Practice: The Best Route for All?

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been a mainstay of prostate cancer treatment for decades. Relugolix was FDA-approved in 2020 and is currently the only ADT option via an oral route. While the opportunity to use an oral medication for this indication has some advantages, a balanced discussion is required to understand in what clinical settings this agent truly has benefit over long-acting injectable formulations of ADT. Furthermore, patient preference, compliance, financial toxicity, and perhaps most importantly, pharmacologic characteristics must be considered.

Avelumab in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is incurable, and median overall survival is less than 2½ years. Although monoclonal antibodies that block PD-1/PD-L1 interactions are active in microsatellite unstable/mismatch repair deficient tumors, a growing dataset shows that most patients with microsatellite stable/mismatch repair proficient tumors will not benefit from the blockade of PD-1/PD-L1 interactions. Here we present results from patients with mCRC (n = 22) treated with the anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody avelumab. METHODS: Patients received treatment on a phase I, open-label, dose-escalation trial via a consecutive parallel-group expansion in colorectal cancer. Patients aged 18 years and older with mCRC measurable by RECIST v1.1 who had received at least 1 line of systemic therapy for metastatic disease enrolled. Patients with prior immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment were excluded. Patients received avelumab 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate. RESULTS: Twenty-two participants received treatment from July 2013 to August 2014. There were no objective responses and median progression-free survival was 2.1 months (95% CI: 1.4-5.5 months). There were 5 grade 3 treatment-related adverse events: GGT elevation (n = 2), PRESS (n = 1), lymphopenia (n = 1), and asymptomatic amylase/lipase elevation (n = 1). CONCLUSION: As demonstrated with other anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies, avelumab is not active in unselected patients with mCRC (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01772004).

A Phase I Single-Arm Study of Biweekly NHS-IL12 in Patients With Metastatic Solid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: NHS-IL12 is a first-in-class, recombinant fusion protein composed of the human monoclonal antibody NHS76 (binds exposed DNA/histones at sites of intratumoral necrosis) fused to 2 IL-12 heterodimers. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of NHS-IL12 monotherapy given subcutaneously (SC) every 4 weeks was previously reported. The study was expanded to include a high-exposure cohort with NHS-IL12 SC every 2 weeks (q2w). METHODS: This single-arm, phase I trial evaluated NHS-IL12 12 µg/kg SC q2w or 16.8µg/kg SC q2w in patients with metastatic solid tumors. The primary endpoint was safety. RESULTS: Using a 3+3 design, 13 patients with advanced cancer were enrolled and 12 were dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) evaluable. There was 1 DLT (Grade 3 aspartate transaminase/alanine transaminase [AST/ALT] elevation). Other grade 3 toxicities included: flu-like symptoms 1/13 (8%), decreased absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) 1/13 (8%), decreased white blood cell count (WBC) 1/13 (8%), but most adverse events reported were low grade and self-limiting grade. Fifty percent of evaluable patients (6/12) experienced stable disease (SD) with 42% (5/12) developing progressive disease (PD) at the first restaging. CONCLUSION: Biweekly NHS-IL12 was well tolerated in this small phase I study. Additional studies incorporating NHS-IL12 with other immunomodulating agents are underway. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01417546).

A Single-arm Phase II Study Combining NLG207, a Nanoparticle Camptothecin, with Enzalutamide in Advanced Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Post-Enzalutamide.

BACKGROUND: Despite the clinical efficacy of enzalutamide monotherapy in patients with advanced prostate cancer, therapeutic resistance and disease progression are inevitable. We proposed a study to evaluate NLG207, a nanoparticle-drug conjugate (NDC) of the potent topoisomerase I inhibitor camptothecin, in combination with enzalutamide, in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) following progression on enzalutamide. METHODS: This was a single-arm, optimal two-stage, phase II study to evaluate the efficacy of NLG207 in combination with enzalutamide in patients with mCRPC who received prior enzalutamide. A lead-in dose escalation evaluated the recommended phase 2 dose of NLG207 in combination with enzalutamide. Patients received NLG207 via IV infusion every 2 weeks and enzalutamide 160 mg orally once daily. RESULTS: Between March 2019 and June 2021, four patients were accrued to the lead-in dose escalation. Two of the four patients were evaluable and both experienced DLTs at the NLG207 12 mg/m2 dose level; one DLT was related to a dose delay for noninfective cystitis and myelosuppression, the other a grade 3 noninfective cystitis. Further evaluation of NLG207 in combination with enzalutamide was halted and the study was ultimately terminated. PSA declines from baseline were observed in two patients. CONCLUSION: NLG207 12 mg/m2 in combination with enzalutamide was not well tolerated in patients with mCRPC following several lines of the standard of care therapy. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03531827.

A Randomized Phase II Trial of mFOLFOX6 + Bevacizumab Alone or with AdCEA Vaccine + Avelumab Immunotherapy for Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: FOLFOX plus bevacizumab is a standard of care (SOC) for first-line treatment of microsatellite-stable metastatic colorectal cancer (MSS mCRC). This study randomized patients to SOC or SOC plus avelumab (anti-PD-L1) plus CEA-targeted vaccine. METHODS: Patients with untreated MSS mCRC enrolled to a lead-in arm assessing safety of SOC + immuno-oncology agents (IO). Next, patients were randomized to SOC or SOC + IO. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Multiple immune parameters were analyzed. RESULTS: Six patients enrolled to safety lead-in, 10 randomized to SOC, and 10 to SOC + IO. There was no difference in median PFS comparing SOC versus SOC + IO (8.8 months (95% CI: 3.3-17.0 months) versus 10.1 months (95% CI: 3.6-16.1 months), respectively; hazard ratio 1.061 [P = .91; 95% CI: 0.380-2.966]). The objective response rate was 50% in both arms. Of patients analyzed, most (8/11) who received SOC + IO developed multifunctional CD4+/CD8+ T-cell responses to cascade antigens MUC1 and/or brachyury, compared to 1/8 who received SOC alone (P = .020). We detected post-treatment changes in immune parameters that were distinct to the SOC and SOC + IO treatment arms. Accrual closed after an unplanned analysis predicted a low likelihood of meeting the primary endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: SOC + IO generated multifunctional MUC1- and brachyury-specific CD4+/CD8+ T cells despite concurrent chemotherapy. Although a tumor-directed immune response is necessary for T-cell-mediated antitumor activity, it was not sufficient to improve PFS. Adding agents that increase the number and function of effector cells may be required for clinical benefit.

Study to Compare Capsule and Liquid Formulations of Enzalutamide After Single-Dose Administration Under Fasting Conditions in Prostate Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: Limited evidence suggests an acceptable pharmacokinetic profile when enzalutamide is administered via a liquid formulation extracted from the commercially available liquid-filled soft-gelatin capsules. Tolerability may limit use in clinical practice. BACKGROUND: Enzalutamide is an established standard-of-care treatment for advanced prostate cancer with a commercially available formulation that may be inconvenient for some patients. We proposed a study to evaluate the bioequivalence of a liquid formulation to provide an alternative method of administration. METHODS: This was a single-dose, randomized, open-label, two-way crossover pilot bioequivalence study to compare two oral formulations of enzalutamide: four enzalutamide 40 mg liquid-filled soft-gelatin capsules (commercially available) administered whole versus enzalutamide 160 mg liquid (extracted from capsules) administered via oral syringe. To assess bioequivalence, patients were randomized to receive a single dose of one formulation, then cross over to receive the alternative formulation following a 42-day washout period; serial plasma samples were collected over the course of 24 hours, followed by collections at 3, 8, and 42 days after the dose for both formulations. Bioequivalence of the formulations was assessed via comparisons of area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) calculations per U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance. The study also assessed the safety and tolerability of the formulations. RESULTS: The study failed to meet proposed accrual, with only one patient enrolled, thus limiting the bioequivalence evaluation. Based on the data from a single patient, the drug exposure (measured by AUC) of enzalutamide and N-desmethyl enzalutamide (primary active metabolite) for the liquid formulation was 112% and 117%, respectively, compared with the capsule formulation. Although both formulations appeared well tolerated with no adverse events reported, the tolerability assessment questionnaire revealed an unpleasant taste of the liquid formulation. CONCLUSION: Preliminary evidence suggests a similar pharmacokinetic profile when administering liquid extracted from enzalutamide soft-gelatin capsules compared with intact capsules in patients with prostate cancer.

Cabozantinib plus docetaxel and prednisone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of cabozantinib combined with docetaxel. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a phase 1/2 multicentre study in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Docetaxel (75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks with daily prednisone 10 mg) was combined with escalating doses of daily cabozantinib (20, 40 and 60 mg). Based on the results of the phase 1 study, the investigation was expanded into a randomized study of docetaxel with prednisone (hereafter 'docetaxel/prednisone') plus the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of cabozantinib compared with docetaxel/prednisone alone. RESULTS: A total of 44 men with mCRPC were enrolled in this phase 1/2 trial. An MTD of 40 mg cabozantinib plus docetaxel/prednisone was determined. Dose-limiting toxicities were neutropenic fever and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, and there was one death attributable to a thromboembolic event. In addition, grade 3 or 4 myelosuppression, hypophosphataemia and neuropathy were seen in three or more patients. In the phase 1 study, the median time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) time were 13.6 and 16.3 months, respectively. In the phase 2 study, which was terminated early because of poor accrual, the median TTP and OS favoured the combination (n = 13) compared to docetaxel/prednisone alone (n = 12; 21.0 vs 6.6 months; P = 0.035 and 23.8 vs 15.6 months; P = 0.072, respectively). CONCLUSION: Despite the limited number of patients in this study, preliminary data suggest that cabozantinib can be safely added to docetaxel/prednisone with possible enhanced efficacy.

Cabozantinib in patients with platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma: an open-label, single-centre, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib is a multikinase inhibitor of MET, VEGFR, AXL, and RET, which also has an effect on the tumour immune microenvironment by decreasing regulatory T cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells. In this study, we examined the activity of cabozantinib in patients with metastatic platinum-refractory urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: This study was an open-label, single-arm, three-cohort phase 2 trial done at the National Cancer Institute (Bethesda, MD, USA). Eligible patients were 18 years or older, had histologically confirmed urothelial carcinoma or rare genitourinary tract histologies, Karnofsky performance scale index of 60% or higher, and documented disease progression after at least one previous line of platinum-based chemotherapy (platinum-refractory). Cohort one included patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma with measurable disease as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Two additional cohorts that enrolled in parallel (patients with bone-only urothelial carcinoma metastases and patients with rare histologies of the genitourinary tract) were exploratory. Patients received cabozantinib 60 mg orally once daily in 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate by RECIST in cohort one. Response was assessed in all patients who met the eligibility criteria and who received at least 8 weeks of therapy. All patients who received at least one dose of cabozantinib were included in the safety analysis. This completed study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01688999. FINDINGS: Between Sept 28, 2012, and Oct, 20, 2015, 68 patients were enrolled on the study (49 in cohort one, six in cohort two, and 13 in cohort three). All patients received at least one dose of cabozantinib. The median follow-up was 61·2 months (IQR 53·8-70·0) for the 57 patients evaluable for response. In the 42 evaluable patients in cohort one, there was one complete response and seven partial responses (objective response rate 19%, 95% CI 9-34). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were fatigue (six [9%] patients), hypertension (five [7%]), proteinuria (four [6%]), and hypophosphataemia (four [6%]). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Cabozantinib has single-agent clinical activity in patients with heavily pretreated, platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma with measurable disease and bone metastases and is generally well tolerated. Cabozantinib has innate and adaptive immunomodulatory properties providing a rationale for combining cabozantinib with immunotherapeutic strategies. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute Intramural Program and the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program.

Endocrine-Related Adverse Events Related to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Proposed Algorithms for Management.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have proven to be effective for various advanced neoplasia. Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) as a result of increased T cell activation are unique and potentially life-threating toxicities associated with the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors. Multiple endocrine irAEs, including primary hyperthyroidism and hypothyroidism, thyroiditis, primary adrenal insufficiency, type 1 diabetes mellitus, and hypophysitis, have been reported with the use of various immune checkpoint inhibitors. In some cases, these irAEs can lead to discontinuation of treatment. Here we propose for the general oncologist algorithms for managing endocrine irAEs to aid in the clinical care of patients receiving immunotherapy. KEY POINTS: There is a relative high risk of endocrine immune-related adverse events (irAEs) during therapy with checkpoint inhibitors, particularly when combination therapy is implemented. Patients treated with anti-CTLA-4 antibodies have an increased risk of hypophysitis, whereas patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies have a higher risk of primary thyroid dysfunction. Rarely, patients develop T1DM and central diabetes insipidus, and hypoparathyroidism is a rare occurrence. A growing clinical understanding of endocrine irAEs has led to effective treatment strategies with hormone replacement.

A Phase I Trial Using a Multitargeted Recombinant Adenovirus 5 (CEA/MUC1/Brachyury)-Based Immunotherapy Vaccine Regimen in Patients with Advanced Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: Concurrent ETBX-011, ETBX-051, and ETBX-061 can be safely administered to patients with advanced cancer. All patients developed CD4+ and/or CD8+ T-cell responses after vaccination to at least one tumor-associated antigen (TAA) encoded by the vaccine; 5/6 patients (83%) developed MUC1-specific T cells, 4/6 (67%) developed CEA-specific T cells, and 3/6 (50%) developed brachyury-specific T cells. The presence of adenovirus 5-neutralizing antibodies did not prevent the generation of TAA-specific T cells. BACKGROUND: A novel adenovirus-based vaccine targeting three human tumor-associated antigens-CEA, MUC1, and brachyury-has demonstrated antitumor cytolytic T-cell responses in preclinical animal models of cancer. METHODS: This open-label, phase I trial evaluated concurrent administration of three therapeutic vaccines (ETBX-011 = CEA, ETBX-061 = MUC1 and ETBX-051 = brachyury). All three vaccines used the same modified adenovirus 5 (Ad5) vector backbone and were administered at a single dose level (DL) of 5 × 1011 viral particles (VP) per vector. The vaccine regimen consisting of all three vaccines was given every 3 weeks for three doses then every 8 weeks for up to 1 year. Clinical and immune responses were evaluated. RESULTS: Ten patients enrolled on trial (DL1 = 6 with 4 in the DL1 expansion cohort). All treatment-related adverse events were temporary, self-limiting, grade 1/2 and included injection site reactions and flu-like symptoms. Antigen-specific T cells to MUC1, CEA, and/or brachyury were generated in all patients. There was no evidence of antigenic competition. The administration of the vaccine regimen produced stable disease as the best clinical response. CONCLUSION: Concurrent ETBX-011, ETBX-051, and ETBX-061 can be safely administered to patients with advanced cancer. Further studies of the vaccine regimen in combination with other agents, including immune checkpoint blockade, are planned.

Phase I Trial of a Modified Vaccinia Ankara Priming Vaccine Followed by a Fowlpox Virus Boosting Vaccine Modified to Express Brachyury and Costimulatory Molecules in Advanced Solid Tumors.

LESSONS LEARNED: Modified vaccinia Ankara-Bavarian Nordic (MVA-BN)-Brachyury followed by fowlpox virus-BN-Brachyury was well tolerated upon administration to patients with advanced cancer. Sixty-three percent of patients developed CD4+ and/or CD8+ T-cell responses to brachyury after vaccination. BN-Brachyury vaccine also induced T-cell responses against CEA and MUC1, which are cascade antigens, that is, antigens not encoded in the vaccines. BACKGROUND: Brachyury, a transcription factor, plays an integral role in the epithelial-mesenchymal transition, metastasis, and tumor resistance to chemotherapy. It is expressed in many tumor types, and rarely in normal tissues, making it an ideal immunologic target. Bavarian Nordic (BN)-Brachyury consists of vaccination with modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA) priming followed by fowlpox virus (FPV) boosting, each encoding transgenes for brachyury and costimulatory molecules. METHODS: Patients with metastatic solid tumors were treated with two monthly doses of MVA-brachyury s.c., 8 × 108 infectious units (IU), followed by FPV-brachyury s.c., 1 × 109 IU, for six monthly doses and then every 3 months for up to 2 years. The primary objective was to determine safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Eleven patients were enrolled from March 2018 to July 2018 (one patient was nonevaluable). No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The most common treatment-related adverse event was grade 1/2 injection-site reaction observed in all patients. Best overall response was stable disease in six patients, and the 6-month progression-free survival rate was 50%. T cells against brachyury and cascade antigens CEA and MUC1 were detected in the majority of patients. CONCLUSION: BN-Brachyury vaccine is well tolerated and induces immune responses to brachyury and cascade antigens and demonstrates some evidence of clinical benefit.

Avelumab for metastatic or locally advanced previously treated solid tumours (JAVELIN Solid Tumor): a phase 1a, multicohort, dose-escalation trial.

BACKGROUND: Avelumab (MSB0010718C) is a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody that binds to PD-L1, inhibiting its binding to PD-1, which inactivates T cells. We aimed to establish the safety and pharmacokinetics of avelumab in patients with solid tumours while assessing biological correlatives for future development. METHODS: This open-label, single-centre, phase 1a, dose-escalation trial (part of the JAVELIN Solid Tumor trial) assessed four doses of avelumab (1 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg, 10 mg/kg, and 20 mg/kg), with dose-level cohort expansions to provide additional safety, pharmacokinetics, and target occupancy data. This study used a standard 3 + 3 cohort design and assigned patients sequentially at trial entry according to the 3 + 3 dose-escalation algorithm and depending on the number of dose-limiting toxicities during the first 3-week assessment period (the primary endpoint). Patient eligibility criteria included age 18 years or older, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, metastatic or locally advanced previously treated solid tumours, and adequate end-organ function. Avelumab was given as a 1-h intravenous infusion every 2 weeks. Patients in the dose-limiting toxicity analysis set were assessed for the primary endpoint of dose-limiting toxicity, and all patients enrolled in the dose-escalation part were assessed for the secondary endpoints of safety (treatment-emergent and treatment-related adverse events according to National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0), pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles (immunological effects), best overall response by Response Evaluation Criteria, and antidrug antibody formation. The population for the pharmacokinetic analysis included a subset of patients with rich pharmacokinetic samples from two selected disease-specific expansion cohorts at the same study site who had serum samples obtained at multiple early timepoints. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01772004. Patient recruitment to the dose-escalation part reported here is closed. FINDINGS: Between Jan 31, 2013, and Oct 8, 2014, 53 patients were enrolled (four patients at 1 mg/kg, 13 at 3 mg/kg, 15 at 10 mg/kg, and 21 at 20 mg/kg). 18 patients were analysed in the dose-limiting toxicity analysis set: three at dose level 1 (1 mg/kg), three at dose level 2 (3 mg/kg), six at dose level 3 (10 mg/kg), and six at dose level 4 (20 mg/kg). Only one dose-limiting toxicity occurred, at the 20 mg/kg dose, and thus the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. In all 53 enrolled patients (the safety analysis set), common treatment-related adverse events (occurring in >10% of patients) included fatigue (21 patients [40%]), influenza-like symptoms (11 [21%]), fever (8 [15%]), and chills (6 [11%]). Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in nine (17%) of 53 patients, with autoimmune disorder (n=3), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (n=2), and increased aspartate aminotransferase (n=2) each occurring in more than one patient (autoimmune disorder in two patients at 10 mg/kg and one patient at 20 mg/kg, increased blood creatine phosphokinase in two patients at 20 mg/kg, and increased aspartate aminotransferase in one patient at 1 mg/kg, and one patient at 10 mg/kg). Six (11%) of 53 patients had a serious treatment-related adverse event: autoimmune disorder (two [13%]), lower abdominal pain (one [7%]), fatigue (one [7%]), and influenza-like illness (one [7%]) in three patients treated at 10 mg/kg dose level, and autoimmune disorder (one [5%]), increased amylase (one [5%]), myositis (one [5%]), and dysphonia (one [5%]) in three patients who received the 20 mg/kg dose. We recorded some evidence of clinical activity in various solid tumours, with partial confirmed or unconfirmed responses in four (8%) of 53 patients; 30 (57%) additional patients had stable disease. Pharmacokinetic analysis (n=86) showed a dose-proportional exposure between doses of 3 mg/kg and 20 mg/kg and a half-life of 95-99 h (3·9-4·1 days) at the 10 mg/kg and 20 mg/kg doses. Target occupancy was greater than 90% at doses of 3 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg. Antidrug antibodies were detected in two (4%) of 53 patients. No substantial differences were found in absolute lymphocyte count or multiple immune cell subsets, including those expressing PD-L1, after treatment with avelumab. 31 (58%) of 53 patients in the overall safety population died; no deaths were related to treatment on study. INTERPRETATION: Avelumab has an acceptable toxicity profile up to 20 mg/kg and the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Based on pharmacokinetics, target occupancy, and immunological analysis, we chose 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks as the dose for further development and phase 3 trials are ongoing. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute and Merck KGaA.

The evolving role of immunotherapy in prostate cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In recent clinical trials, immunotherapeutic agents have demonstrated promising results for the treatment of prostate cancer. This review discusses emerging immunotherapies for prostate cancer and their evolving role in sequencing and combination therapy. RECENT FINDINGS: Therapeutic vaccines including PROSTVAC and DCVAC/PCa have completed promising phase 2 trials for the treatment of prostate cancer and phase 3 trials are underway. Recent evidence supports a synergistic relationship between immunotherapy agents themselves, antiandrogens and with cytotoxic chemotherapy. Prostate cancer patients with good prognostic factors, such as minimal disease burden, appear to achieve the optimal benefit from immunotherapy. SUMMARY: Therapeutic cancer vaccines and immunomodulating agents have demonstrated activity in the treatment of prostate cancer. Immunotherapies may alter the prostate tumor microenvironment and ongoing studies aim to provide guidance on effective sequencing and combination strategies.

Phase II trial of docetaxel, bevacizumab, lenalidomide and prednisone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and clinical efficacy of two anti-angiogenic agents, bevacizumab and lenalidomide, with docetaxel and prednisone. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer enrolled in this open-label, phase II study of lenalidomide with bevacizumab (15 mg/kg), docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) ) and prednisone (10 mg daily). Docetaxel and bevacizumab were administered on day 1 of a 3-week treatment cycle. To establish safety, lenalidomide dosing in this combination was escalated in a conventional 3 + 3 design (15, 20 and 25 mg daily for 2 weeks followed by 1 week off). Patients received supportive measures including prophylactic pegfilgrastim and enoxaparin. The primary endpoints were safety and clinical efficacy. RESULTS: A total of 63 patients enrolled in this trial. Toxicities were manageable with most common adverse events (AEs) being haematological, and were ascertained by weekly blood counts. Twenty-nine patients (46%) had grade 4 neutropenia, 20 (32%) had grade 3 anaemia and seven (11%) had grade 3 thrombocytopenia. Despite frequent neutropenia, serious infections were rare. Other common non-haematological grade 3 AEs included fatigue (10%) and diarrhoea (10%). Grade 2 AEs in >10% of patients included anorexia, weight loss, constipation, osteonecrosis of the jaw, rash and dyspnoea. Of 61 evaluable patients, 57 (93%), 55 (90%) and 33 (54%) had PSA declines of >30, >50 and >90%, respectively. Of the 29 evaluable patients, 24 (86%) had a confirmed radiographic partial response. The median times to progression and overall survival were 18.2 and 24.6 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: With appropriate supportive measures, combination angiogenesis inhibition can be safely administered and potentially provide clinical benefit. These hypothesis-generating data would require randomized trials to confirm the findings.

Enzalutamide Monotherapy in the EMBARK Trial Should Be Practice-changing and Existing Data Suggest How to Mitigate Toxicity.

Data from the EMBARK trial demonstrate the potential of enzalutamide monotherapy as an effective treatment for biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (BCR) without the side effects of testosterone-lowering therapy. Unfortunately, concerns about gynecomastia and how to manage this treatment-related toxicity have diminished enthusiasm. Existing data may offer an alternative scheduling strategy for enzalutamide monotherapy in BCR.

Final Results From a Phase I Trial and Expansion Cohorts of Cabozantinib and Nivolumab Alone or With Ipilimumab for Advanced/Metastatic Genitourinary Tumors.

PURPOSE: Cabozantinib and nivolumab (CaboNivo) alone or with ipilimumab (CaboNivoIpi) have shown promising efficacy and safety in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC), metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), and rare genitourinary (GU) tumors in a dose-escalation phase I study. We report the final data analysis of the safety, overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) of the phase I patients and seven expansion cohorts. METHODS: This is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, phase I trial. CaboNivo doublet expansion cohorts included (1) mUC, (2) mRCC, and (3) adenocarcinoma of the bladder/urachal; CaboNivoIpi triplet expansion cohorts included (1) mUC, (2) mRCC, (3) penile cancer, and (4) squamous cell carcinoma of the bladder and other rare GU tumors (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02496208). RESULTS: The study enrolled 120 patients treated with CaboNivo (n = 64) or CaboNivoIpi (n = 56), with a median follow-up of 49.2 months. In 108 evaluable patients (CaboNivo n = 59; CaboNivoIpi n = 49), the ORR was 38% (complete response rate 11%) and the median duration of response was 20 months. The ORR was 42.4% for mUC, 62.5% for mRCC (n = 16), 85.7% for squamous cell carcinoma of the bladder (n = 7), 44.4% for penile cancer (n = 9), and 50.0% for renal medullary carcinoma (n = 2). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 84% of CaboNivo patients and 80% of CaboNivoIpi patients. CONCLUSION: CaboNivo and CaboNivoIpi demonstrated clinical activity and safety in patients with multiple GU malignancies, especially clear cell RCC, urothelial carcinoma, and rare GU tumors such as squamous cell carcinoma of the bladder, small cell carcinoma of the bladder, adenocarcinoma of the bladder, renal medullary carcinoma, and penile cancer.

Avelumab in Men With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer, Enriched for Patients Treated Previously With a Therapeutic Cancer Vaccine.

Therapeutic cancer vaccines including sipuleucel- T , a prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) targeted vaccine that improves survival in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), can produce immune responses that translate to clinical benefit. The effects of sequential checkpoint inhibitors after therapeutic vaccine on immune responses are unknown. Avelumab is an anti-programmed death ligand-1 monoclonal antibody evaluated in patients with mCRPC in the JAVELIN solid tumor phase 1 trial expansion cohort, enriched for patients with a previous therapeutic prostate cancer-targeted vaccine. mCRPC patients received intravenous avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks with imaging every 6 weeks. Peripheral blood T-cell responses to PAP and to PA2024, the peptide containing PAP utilized by the vaccine, were evaluated pre and posttreatment. Eighteen patients enrolled, and previous treatments included abiraterone or enzalutamide in 14 (78%), therapeutic cancer vaccine in 14 (78%), and chemotherapy in 4 (22%). Avelumab had a manageable safety profile. There were no sustained prostate specific antigen decreases. Of 17 patients evaluable for best overall response by RECISTv1.1, 12 had stable disease (SD) and 5 had progressive disease. Seven patients had SD for >24 weeks posttreatment. Fourteen patients had previously received therapeutic cancer vaccines. Eleven (79%) had SD as the best overall response. Of these 14 patients, 9 had previously received sipuleucel T . Analysis of antigen-specific T-cell responses pre and postavelumab treatment did not demonstrate changes in interferon-γ production or proliferation in response to PAP or PA2024. This unplanned analysis does not support the use of sequential therapeutic cancer vaccine therapy followed by programmed death ligand-1 inhibition in mCRPC.