Individualised neoantigen therapy mRNA-4157 (V940) plus pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab monotherapy in resected melanoma (KEYNOTE-942): a randomised, phase 2b study.

BACKGROUND: Checkpoint inhibitors are standard adjuvant treatment for stage IIB-IV resected melanoma, but many patients recur. Our study aimed to evaluate whether mRNA-4157 (V940), a novel mRNA-based individualised neoantigen therapy, combined with pembrolizumab, improved recurrence-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival versus pembrolizumab monotherapy in resected high-risk melanoma. METHODS: We did an open-label, randomised, phase 2b, adjuvant study of mRNA-4157 plus pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients, enrolled from sites in the USA and Australia, with completely resected high-risk cutaneous melanoma. Patients with completely resected melanoma (stage IIIB-IV) were assigned 2:1 to receive open-label mRNA-4157 plus pembrolizumab or pembrolizumab monotherapy. mRNA-4157 was administered intramuscularly (maximum nine doses) and pembrolizumab intravenously (maximum 18 doses) in 3-week cycles. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This ongoing trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03897881. FINDINGS: From July 18, 2019, to Sept 30, 2021, 157 patients were assigned to mRNA-4157 plus pembrolizumab combination therapy (n=107) or pembrolizumab monotherapy (n=50); median follow-up was 23 months and 24 months, respectively. Recurrence-free survival was longer with combination versus monotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] for recurrence or death, 0·561 [95% CI 0·309-1·017]; two-sided p=0·053), with lower recurrence or death event rate (24 [22%] of 107 vs 20 [40%] of 50); 18-month recurrence-free survival was 79% (95% CI 69·0-85·6) versus 62% (46·9-74·3). Most treatment-related adverse events were grade 1-2. Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 25% of patients in the combination group and 18% of patients in the monotherapy group, with no mRNA-4157-related grade 4-5 events. Immune-mediated adverse event frequency was similar for the combination (37 [36%]) and monotherapy (18 [36%]) groups. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant mRNA-4157 plus pembrolizumab prolonged recurrence-free survival versus pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with resected high-risk melanoma and showed a manageable safety profile. These results provide evidence that an mRNA-based individualised neoantigen therapy might be beneficial in the adjuvant setting. FUNDING: Moderna in collaboration with Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Rahway, NJ, USA.

Efficacy of Selpercatinib in RET-Altered Thyroid Cancers.

BACKGROUND: RET mutations occur in 70% of medullary thyroid cancers, and RET fusions occur rarely in other thyroid cancers. In patients with RET-altered thyroid cancers, the efficacy and safety of selective RET inhibition are unknown. METHODS: We enrolled patients with RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer with or without previous vandetanib or cabozantinib treatment, as well as those with previously treated RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer, in a phase 1-2 trial of selpercatinib. The primary end point was an objective response (a complete or partial response), as determined by an independent review committee. Secondary end points included the duration of response, progression-free survival, and safety. RESULTS: In the first 55 consecutively enrolled patients with RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer who had previously received vandetanib, cabozantinib, or both, the percentage who had a response was 69% (95% confidence interval [CI], 55 to 81), and 1-year progression-free survival was 82% (95% CI, 69 to 90). In 88 patients with RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer who had not previously received vandetanib or cabozantinib, the percentage who had a response was 73% (95% CI, 62 to 82), and 1-year progression-free survival was 92% (95% CI, 82 to 97). In 19 patients with previously treated RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer, the percentage who had a response was 79% (95% CI, 54 to 94), and 1-year progression-free survival was 64% (95% CI, 37 to 82). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or higher were hypertension (in 21% of the patients), increased alanine aminotransferase level (in 11%), increased aspartate aminotransferase level (in 9%), hyponatremia (in 8%), and diarrhea (in 6%). Of all 531 patients treated, 12 (2%) discontinued selpercatinib owing to drug-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 1-2 trial, selpercatinib showed durable efficacy with mainly low-grade toxic effects in patients with medullary thyroid cancer with and without previous vandetanib or cabozantinib treatment. (Funded by Loxo Oncology and others; LIBRETTO-001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03157128.).

Epacadostat Plus Pembrolizumab and Chemotherapy for Advanced Solid Tumors: Results from the Phase I/II ECHO-207/KEYNOTE-723 Study.

BACKGROUND: Epacadostat, an oral, selective inhibitor of IDO1, has shown activity when administered with pembrolizumab. We evaluated the addition of chemotherapy to epacadostat and pembrolizumab in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors. One proposed mechanism of resistance to PD-1 checkpoint inhibition is through immunosuppression mediated by L-kynurenine. IDO1, indoleamine-2,3-dioxygenase 1 is the rate-limiting enzyme catalyzing the conversion of L-tryptophan to L-kynurenine. If IDO1 is a mechanism of tumor escape from checkpoint inhibition, then addition of an IDO1 inhibitor with a PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor could enable tumor response to immunotherapy. METHODS: Patients received one of 7 tumor-appropriate chemotherapy regimens. Pembrolizumab 200 mg was infused intravenously every 3 weeks. Epacadostat 100 mg was administered orally twice daily. The primary objectives of phase I were determining safety/tolerability and defining the maximum tolerated or pharmacologically active dose of epacadostat. Phase II of the study was designed to enroll efficacy-expansion cohorts and to assess changes in the tumor and tumor microenvironment via mandatory-biopsy cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 70 patients were enrolled. Twelve patients were enrolled in the phase II mandatory-biopsy cohorts. Due to early study closure, efficacy expansion did not enroll. Grades 3 and 4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 78.6% of patients. Neutropenia and disease progression were the only grades 3 and 4 TEAEs reported in ≥10.0% of patients. One treatment-related death was reported. The ORR was 31.4% across all treatment groups. CONCLUSION: The combination of epacadostat 100 mg bid with pembrolizumab and chemotherapy had an acceptable safety profile. This regimen showed antitumor activity across multiple types of advanced or metastatic solid tumors (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03085914).

Long-term avelumab in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: summaries and post hoc analyses from JAVELIN Solid Tumor.

Background: This study examined patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who received long-term avelumab (anti-PD-L1) in a large phase Ib trial (JAVELIN Solid Tumor). Methods: Patients receiving >2 years of avelumab were reviewed and exploratory descriptive analyses were conducted. Results: Individuals with varying baseline characteristics who had received up to 6 years of avelumab were reviewed. Overall, 37/340 (10.9%) had received ≥2 years of treatment; in this subgroup, best response was complete response in 5.4%, partial response in 59.5% and stable disease in 29.7%; 51.4% had continued treatment beyond disease progression. Conclusions: In this study, 11% of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer received ≥2 years of avelumab treatment and experienced prolonged response or continued clinical benefit. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02395172 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Pralsetinib for RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ARROW): a multi-cohort, open-label, phase 1/2 study.

BACKGROUND: Oncogenic alterations in RET have been identified in multiple tumour types, including 1-2% of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and antitumour activity of pralsetinib, a highly potent, oral, selective RET inhibitor, in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC. METHODS: ARROW is a multi-cohort, open-label, phase 1/2 study done at 71 sites (community and academic cancer centres) in 13 countries (Belgium, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Netherlands, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, the UK, and the USA). Patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours, including RET fusion-positive NSCLC, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 (later limited to 0-1 in a protocol amendment) were enrolled. In phase 2, patients received 400 mg once-daily oral pralsetinib, and could continue treatment until disease progression, intolerance, withdrawal of consent, or investigator decision. Phase 2 primary endpoints were overall response rate (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1·1 and assessed by blinded independent central review) and safety. Tumour response was assessed in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC and centrally adjudicated baseline measurable disease who had received platinum-based chemotherapy or were treatment-naive because they were ineligible for standard therapy. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03037385, and enrolment of patients with treatment-naive RET fusion-positive NSCLC was ongoing at the time of this interim analysis. FINDINGS: Of 233 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC enrolled between March 17, 2017, and May 22, 2020 (data cutoff), 92 with previous platinum-based chemotherapy and 29 who were treatment-naive received pralsetinib before July 11, 2019 (efficacy enrolment cutoff); 87 previously treated patients and 27 treatment-naive patients had centrally adjudicated baseline measurable disease. Overall responses were recorded in 53 (61%; 95% CI 50-71) of 87 patients with previous platinum-based chemotherapy, including five (6%) patients with a complete response; and 19 (70%; 50-86) of 27 treatment-naive patients, including three (11%) with a complete response. In 233 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC, common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (43 patients [18%]), hypertension (26 [11%]), and anaemia (24 [10%]); there were no treatment-related deaths in this population. INTERPRETATION: Pralsetinib is a new, well-tolerated, promising, once-daily oral treatment option for patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC. FUNDING: Blueprint Medicines.

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in patients with either treatment-naive or previously treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (Study 111/KEYNOTE-146): a phase 1b/2 study.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), there is an unmet need for options to address disease progression during or after treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Pembrolizumab and lenvatinib are active as monotherapies in RCC; thus, we aimed to evaluate the combination of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in these patients. METHODS: We report results of the metastatic RCC cohort from an open-label phase 1b/2 study of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in patients aged at least 18 years with selected solid tumours and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1. Oral lenvatinib at 20 mg was given once daily along with intravenous pembrolizumab at 200 mg once every 3 weeks. Patients remained on study drug treatment until disease progression, development of unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. Efficacy was analysed in patients with clear cell metastatic RCC receiving study drug by previous therapy grouping: treatment naive, previously treated ICI naive (previously treated with at least one line of therapy but not with an anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 ICI), and ICI pretreated (ie, anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1) patients. Safety was analysed in all enrolled and treated patients. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate at week 24 per immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (irRECIST) by investigator assessment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02501096) and with the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT2017-000300-26), and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between July 21, 2015, and Oct 16, 2019, 145 patients were enrolled in the study. Two patients had non-clear cell RCC and were excluded from the efficacy analysis (one in the treatment-naive group and one in the ICI-pretreated group); thus, the population evaluated for efficacy comprised 143 patients (n=22 in the treatment-naive group, n=17 in the previously treated ICI-naive group, and n=104 in the ICI-pretreated group). All 145 enrolled patients were included in the safety analysis. The median follow-up was 19·8 months (IQR 14·3-28·4). The number of patients with an objective response at week 24 by irRECIST was 16 (72·7%, 95% CI 49·8-89·3) of 22 treatment-naive patients, seven (41·2%, 18·4-67·1) of 17 previously treated ICI-naive patients, and 58 (55·8%, 45·7-65·5) of 104 ICI-pretreated patients. Of 145 patients, 82 (57%) had grade 3 treatment-related adverse events and ten (7%) had grade 4 treatment-related adverse events. The most common grade 3 treatment-related adverse event was hypertension (30 [21%] of 145 patients). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 36 (25%) patients, and there were three treatment-related deaths (upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage, sudden death, and pneumonia). INTERPRETATION: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab showed encouraging antitumour activity and a manageable safety profile and might be an option for post-ICI treatment of metastatic RCC. FUNDING: Eisai and Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Characterization and Management of Adverse Reactions in Patients with Advanced Endometrial Carcinoma Treated with Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab.

BACKGROUND: The combination of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab has shown efficacy in treatment of advanced endometrial carcinoma (that is not microsatellite instability-high or mismatch repair deficient) following prior systemic therapy in any setting in the open-label, single-arm, phase Ib/II Study 111/KEYNOTE-146. With the exception of hypothyroidism, the safety profile of the combination was comparable to that of each monotherapy. Given the medical complexity and fragility of patients with endometrial carcinoma, further characterization of adverse reactions (ARs) associated with treatment will help health care professionals to optimize treatment with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab combination therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In Study 111/KEYNOTE-146, patients received lenvatinib at a starting dose of 20 mg orally once daily and pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks. Selected ARs (hypertension, fatigue, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, decreased appetite/weight loss, hypothyroidism, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, musculoskeletal pain, stomatitis, and proteinuria) were chosen for detailed post hoc analyses. RESULTS: Median times to first onset of the selected ARs in this analysis all occurred within the first 10 weeks of treatment. Of the selected ARs, grade ≥3 severity of fatigue, hypertension, and nausea occurred in ≥5% of patients. Overall incidence of hypothyroidism was 51%, primarily of grade 2 severity (46%). Most of the ARs assessed were managed with a combination of study drug dose modifications and concomitant medications. CONCLUSION: No new safety signals were identified and the toxicity profile in this study was manageable with supportive medications, dose interruptions, and/or lenvatinib dose reductions. This analysis provides AR management guidance for patients with endometrial cancer receiving lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab combination therapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab has shown efficacy in the treatment of patients with advanced endometrial carcinoma (that is, not microsatellite instability-high or mismatch repair deficient) following at least one prior systemic therapy in any setting. Patients may experience toxicity associated with this combination, including adverse reactions of hypertension, fatigue, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, decreased appetite/weight loss, hypothyroidism, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, musculoskeletal pain, stomatitis, and proteinuria. These adverse reactions may be managed with a combination of concomitant supportive care medications and judicious lenvatinib dose modifications. This article provides context and guidance for the recognition and management of adverse reactions in patients receiving lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab.

The LEAP program: lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab for the treatment of advanced solid tumors.

Tumor progression and immune evasion result from multiple oncogenic and immunosuppressive signals within the tumor microenvironment. The combined blockade of VEGF and inhibitory immune checkpoint signaling has been shown to enhance immune activation and tumor destruction in preclinical models. The LEAP clinical trial program is evaluating the safety and efficacy of lenvatinib (a multikinase inhibitor) plus pembrolizumab (a PD-1 inhibitor) across several solid tumor types. Preliminary results from ongoing trials demonstrate robust antitumor activity and durable responses across diverse tumor types with a manageable safety profile. Thus, lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab is anticipated to be an important potential new regimen for several solid cancers that currently have limited therapeutic options. Clinical trial registration: NCT03884101, NCT03713593, NCT03820986, NCT03776136, NCT03797326, NCT03829319, NCT03829332, NCT03976375, NCT04428151, NCT04199104, NCT03898180, NCT04246177 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Safety profile of avelumab in patients with advanced solid tumors: A pooled analysis of data from the phase 1 JAVELIN solid tumor and phase 2 JAVELIN Merkel 200 clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Antibodies targeting the programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)/programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) checkpoint may cause adverse events (AEs) that are linked to the mechanism of action of this therapeutic class and unique from those observed with conventional chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumors who were enrolled in the phase 1 JAVELIN Solid Tumor (1650 patients) and phase 2 JAVELIN Merkel 200 (88 patients) trials received avelumab, a human anti-PD-L1 IgG1 antibody at a dose of 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) were graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0). In post hoc analyses, immune-related AEs (irAEs) were identified via an expanded AE list and medical review, and infusion-related reactions (IRRs) occurring ≤2 days after infusion and symptoms occurring ≤1 day after infusion and resolving ≤2 days after onset were identified based on prespecified Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) terms. RESULTS: Of the 1738 patients analyzed, grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 177 (10.2%); the most common were fatigue (17 patients; 1.0%) and IRR (10 patients; 0.6%). TRAEs led to discontinuation in 107 patients (6.2%) and death in 4 patients (0.2%). Grade ≥3 irAEs occurred in 39 patients (2.2%) and led to discontinuation in 34 patients (2.0%). IRRs or related symptoms occurred in 439 patients (25.3%; grade 3 in 0.5% [9 patients] and grade 4 in 0.2% [3 patients]). An IRR occurred at the time of first infusion in 79.5% of 439 patients who had an IRR, within the first 4 doses in 98.6% of 439 patients who had an IRR, and led to discontinuation in 35 patients (2.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Avelumab generally was found to be well tolerated and to have a manageable safety profile. A minority of patients experienced grade ≥3 TRAEs or irAEs, and discontinuation was uncommon. IRRs occurred mainly at the time of first infusion, and repeated events were infrequent. Cancer 2018;124:2010-7. © 2018 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

Lenvatinib versus placebo in radioiodine-refractory thyroid cancer.

BACKGROUND: Lenvatinib, an oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2, and 3, fibroblast growth factor receptors 1 through 4, platelet-derived growth factor receptor α, RET, and KIT, showed clinical activity in a phase 2 study involving patients with differentiated thyroid cancer that was refractory to radioiodine (iodine-131). METHODS: In our phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study involving patients with progressive thyroid cancer that was refractory to iodine-131, we randomly assigned 261 patients to receive lenvatinib (at a daily dose of 24 mg per day in 28-day cycles) and 131 patients to receive placebo. At the time of disease progression, patients in the placebo group could receive open-label lenvatinib. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included the response rate, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival was 18.3 months in the lenvatinib group and 3.6 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.21; 99% confidence interval, 0.14 to 0.31; P<0.001). A progression-free survival benefit associated with lenvatinib was observed in all prespecified subgroups. The response rate was 64.8% in the lenvatinib group (4 complete responses and 165 partial responses) and 1.5% in the placebo group (P<0.001). The median overall survival was not reached in either group. Treatment-related adverse effects of any grade, which occurred in more than 40% of patients in the lenvatinib group, were hypertension (in 67.8% of the patients), diarrhea (in 59.4%), fatigue or asthenia (in 59.0%), decreased appetite (in 50.2%), decreased weight (in 46.4%), and nausea (in 41.0%). Discontinuations of the study drug because of adverse effects occurred in 37 patients who received lenvatinib (14.2%) and 3 patients who received placebo (2.3%). In the lenvatinib group, 6 of 20 deaths that occurred during the treatment period were considered to be drug-related. CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib, as compared with placebo, was associated with significant improvements in progression-free survival and the response rate among patients with iodine-131-refractory thyroid cancer. Patients who received lenvatinib had more adverse effects. (Funded by Eisai; SELECT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01321554.).

Academic Cancer Center Phase I Program Development.

Multiple factors critical to the effectiveness of academic phase I cancer programs were assessed among 16 academic centers in the U.S. Successful cancer centers were defined as having broad phase I and I/II clinical trial portfolios, multiple investigator-initiated studies, and correlative science. The most significant elements were institutional philanthropic support, experienced clinical research managers, robust institutional basic research, institutional administrative efforts to reduce bureaucratic regulatory delays, phase I navigators to inform patients and physicians of new studies, and a large cancer center patient base. New programs may benefit from a separate stand-alone operation, but mature phase I programs work well when many of the activities are transferred to disease-oriented teams. The metrics may be useful as a rubric for new and established academic phase I programs. The Oncologist 2017;22:369-374.

Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma: 2-year overall survival outcomes in a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Results from phase 2 and 3 trials in patients with advanced melanoma have shown significant improvements in the proportion of patients achieving an objective response and prolonged progression-free survival with the combination of nivolumab (an anti-PD-1 antibody) plus ipilimumab (an anti-CTLA-4 antibody) compared with ipilimumab alone. We report 2-year overall survival data from a randomised controlled trial assessing this treatment in previously untreated advanced melanoma. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial (CheckMate 069) we recruited patients from 19 specialist cancer centres in two countries (France and the USA). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with previously untreated, unresectable stage III or IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive an intravenous infusion of nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus placebo, every 3 weeks for four doses. Subsequently, patients assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, whereas patients allocated to ipilimumab alone received placebo every 2 weeks during this phase. Randomisation was done via an interactive voice response system with a permuted block schedule (block size of six) and stratification by BRAF mutation status. The study funder, patients, investigators, and study site staff were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint, which has been reported previously, was the proportion of patients with BRAFV600 wild-type melanoma achieving an investigator-assessed objective response. Overall survival was an exploratory endpoint and is reported in this Article. Efficacy analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population, whereas safety was assessed in all treated patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01927419, and is ongoing but no longer enrolling patients. FINDINGS: Between Sept 16, 2013, and Feb 6, 2014, we screened 179 patients and enrolled 142, randomly assigning 95 patients to nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 47 to ipilimumab alone. In each treatment group, one patient no longer met the study criteria following randomisation and thus did not receive study drug. At a median follow-up of 24·5 months (IQR 9·1-25·7), 2-year overall survival was 63·8% (95% CI 53·3-72·6) for those assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 53·6% (95% CI 38·1-66·8) for those assigned to ipilimumab alone; median overall survival had not been reached in either group (hazard ratio 0·74, 95% CI 0·43-1·26; p=0·26). Treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were reported in 51 (54%) of 94 patients who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab compared with nine (20%) of 46 patients who received ipilimumab alone. The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were colitis (12 [13%] of 94 patients) and increased alanine aminotransferase (ten [11%]) in the combination group and diarrhoea (five [11%] of 46 patients) and hypophysitis (two [4%]) in the ipilimumab alone group. Serious grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 34 (36%) of 94 patients who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab (including colitis in ten [11%] of 94 patients, and diarrhoea in five [5%]) compared with four (9%) of 46 patients who received ipilimumab alone (including diarrhoea in two [4%] of 46 patients, colitis in one [2%], and hypophysitis in one [2%]). No new types of treatment-related adverse events or treatment-related deaths occurred in this updated analysis. INTERPRETATION: Although follow-up of the patients in this study is ongoing, the results of this analysis suggest that the combination of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab might lead to improved outcomes compared with first-line ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma. The results suggest encouraging survival outcomes with immunotherapy in this population of patients. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Open-label, multicenter, phase 1 study of alisertib (MLN8237), an aurora A kinase inhibitor, with docetaxel in patients with solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to determine the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of alisertib (MLN8237) in combination with docetaxel and to identify a recommended dose for the combination. METHODS: Adults with metastatic cancer were treated on 21-day cycles with alisertib (10, 20, 30, or 40 mg) twice daily on days 1 to 7 or days 1 to 5 and with docetaxel (75 or 60 mg/m(2) ) on day 1. The primary objectives were to assess the safety and tolerability of the combination and to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) for future studies. Secondary objectives included an efficacy assessment and PK analyses of docetaxel and alisertib. RESULTS: Forty-one patients participated. Eight dose levels were explored with various doses of alisertib and docetaxel. The dose-limiting toxicities were neutropenic fever, neutropenia without fever, stomatitis, and urinary tract infection. The RP2D of this combination was 20 mg of alisertib twice daily on days 1 to 7 and intravenous docetaxel at 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 in 21-day cycles. Eight of the 28 patients (29%) who were efficacy-evaluable had objective responses. These included 1 complete response in a patient with bladder cancer, 6 partial responses in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer, and 1 partial response in a patient with angiosarcoma. Concomitant administration of alisertib did not produce any clinically meaningful change in docetaxel PK. CONCLUSIONS: Alisertib at 20 mg twice daily on days 1 to 7 with intravenous docetaxel at 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 in a 21-day cycle was well tolerated, and the combination demonstrated antitumor activity. Cancer 2016;122:2524-33. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

The ploidy conveyor of mature hepatocytes as a source of genetic variation.

Mononucleated and binucleated polyploid hepatocytes (4n, 8n, 16n and higher) are found in all mammalian species, but the functional significance of this conserved phenomenon remains unknown. Polyploidization occurs through failed cytokinesis, begins at weaning in rodents and increases with age. Previously, we demonstrated that the opposite event, ploidy reversal, also occurs in polyploid hepatocytes generated by artificial cell fusion. This raised the possibility that somatic 'reductive mitoses' can also happen in normal hepatocytes. Here we show that multipolar mitotic spindles form frequently in mouse polyploid hepatocytes and can result in one-step ploidy reversal to generate offspring with halved chromosome content. Proliferating hepatocytes produce a highly diverse population of daughter cells with multiple numerical chromosome imbalances as well as uniparental origins. Our findings support a dynamic model of hepatocyte polyploidization, ploidy reversal and aneuploidy, a phenomenon that we term the 'ploidy conveyor'. We propose that this mechanism evolved to generate genetic diversity and permits adaptation of hepatocytes to xenobiotic or nutritional injury.

Characteristics and Survival Outcomes of Patients With Metastatic RET Fusion-Positive Solid Tumors Receiving Non-RET Inhibitor Standards of Care in a Real-World Setting.

PURPOSE: RET fusions are oncogenic drivers across different solid tumors. However, the genomic landscape and natural history of patients with RET fusion-positive solid tumors are not well known. We describe the clinical characteristics of RET tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-naïve patients with RET fusion-positive solid tumors (excluding non-small-cell lung cancer [NSCLC]), treated in a real-world setting and assess the prognostic effect of RET fusions. METHODS: Data for RET TKI-naïve patients with metastatic solid tumors (excluding NSCLC) who had ≥one Foundation Medicine comprehensive genomic profiling test (January 1, 2011-March 31, 2022) were obtained from a deidentified nationwide (US-based) clinicogenomic database. The primary objective of this study was to compare the overall survival (OS) of patients with RET fusion-positive tumors versus matched patients with RET wild-type (RET-WT) tumors. Patients with RET-WT solid tumors were matched (4:1) to patients with RET fusion-positive tumors on the basis of preselected covariates. RESULTS: The study population included 26 patients in the RET fusion-positive cohort, 7,220 patients in the RET-WT cohort (before matching), and 104 patients in the matched RET-WT cohort. Co-occurring genomic alterations were rare in the RET fusion-positive cohort. Median OS was consistently lower in patients with RET fusion-positive tumors versus those with RET-WT tumors, using three different analyses (hazard ratios, 2.0, 1.7, and 2.2). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that RET fusions represent a negative prognostic factor in patients with metastatic solid tumors and highlight the need for wider genomic testing and use of RET-specific TKIs that could improve patient outcomes. Our study also highlights the value of real-world data when studying rare cancers or cancers with rare genomic alterations.

Vandetanib in locally advanced or metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer refractory to radioiodine therapy.

The VERIFY study aimed to determine the efficacy of vandetanib in patients with differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) that is either locally advanced or metastatic and refractory to radioiodine (RAI) therapy. Specifically, VERIFY is a randomized, double-blind, multicenter phase III trial aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of vandetanib in tyrosine kinase inhibitor-naive patients with locally advanced or metastatic RAI-refractory DTC with documented progression (NCT01876784). Patients were randomized 1:1 to vandetanib or placebo. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included best objective response rate, overall survival (OS), safety, and tolerability. Patients continued to receive randomized treatment until disease progression or for as long as they were receiving clinical benefit unless criteria for treatment discontinuation were met. Following randomization, 117 patients received vandetanib, and 118 patients received a placebo. Median PFS was 10.0 months in the vandetanib group and 5.7 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.55-1.03; P = 0.080). OS was not significantly different between treatment arms. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) of grade ≥3 were reported in 55.6% of patients in the vandetanib arm and 25.4% in the placebo arm. Thirty-three deaths (28.2%; one related to study treatment) occurred in the vandetanib arm compared with 16 deaths (13.6%; two related to treatment) in the placebo arm. No statistically significant improvement was observed in PFS in treatment versus placebo in patients with locally advanced or metastatic, RAI-refractory DTC. Moreover, active treatment was associated with more adverse events and more deaths than placebo, though the difference in OS was not statistically significant.

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

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

Evaluation of potential biomarkers for lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab among patients with advanced endometrial cancer: results from Study 111/KEYNOTE-146.

BACKGROUND: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab demonstrated clinically meaningful benefit in patients with previously treated advanced endometrial carcinoma in Study 111/KEYNOTE-146 (NCT02501096). In these exploratory analyses from this study, we evaluated the associations between clinical outcomes and gene expression signature scores and descriptively summarized response in biomarker subpopulations defined by tumor mutational burden (TMB) and DNA variants for individual genes of interest. METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed metastatic endometrial carcinoma received oral lenvatinib 20 mg once daily plus intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for 35 cycles. Archived formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue was obtained from all patients. T-cell-inflamed gene expression profile (TcellinfGEP) and 11 other gene signatures were evaluated by RNA sequencing. TMB, hotspot mutations in PIK3CA (oncogene), and deleterious mutations in PTEN and TP53 (tumor suppressor genes) were evaluated by whole-exome sequencing (WES). RESULTS: 93 and 79 patients were included in the RNA-sequencing-evaluable and WES-evaluable populations, respectively. No statistically significant associations were observed between any of the RNA-sequencing signature scores and objective response rate or progression-free survival. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values for response ranged from 0.39 to 0.54; all 95% CIs included 0.50. Responses were seen regardless of TMB (≥175 or <175 mutations/exome) and mutation status. There were no correlations between TcellinfGEP and TMB, TcellinfGEP and microvessel density (MVD), or MVD and TMB. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrated efficacy for lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab regardless of biomarker status. Results from this study do not support clinical utility of the evaluated biomarkers. Further investigation of biomarkers for this regimen is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02501096.

Baseline biomarkers of efficacy and on-treatment immune-profile changes associated with bempegaldesleukin plus nivolumab.

In PIVOT IO 001 (NCT03635983), the combination of the investigational interleukin-2 agonist bempegaldesleukin (BEMPEG) with nivolumab (NIVO) had no added clinical benefit over NIVO monotherapy in unresectable/metastatic melanoma. Pre-defined baseline and on-treatment changes in selected biomarkers were analyzed to explore the potential mechanisms underlying the clinical observations. In each treatment arm, higher baseline tumor mutational burden or immune infiltration/inflammation was associated with improved efficacy compared with lower levels. On-treatment peripheral biomarker changes showed that BEMPEG + NIVO increased all immune cell subset counts interrogated, including regulatory T cells. This was followed by attenuation of the increase in CD8 + T cells, conventional CD4 + T cells, and systemic interferon gamma levels at later treatment cycles in the combination arm. Changes in tumor biomarkers were comparable between arms. These biomarker results help provide a better understanding of the mechanism of action of BEMPEG + NIVO and may help contextualize the clinical observations from PIVOT IO 001.

Pralsetinib in Patients with Advanced/Metastatic Rearranged During Transfection (RET)-Altered Thyroid Cancer: Updated Efficacy and Safety Data from the ARROW Study.

Background: Rearranged during transfection (RET) alterations are targetable oncogenic drivers in thyroid cancer. Primary data from the open-label, phase 1/2 ARROW study demonstrated clinical activity and manageable safety with pralsetinib, a selective RET inhibitor, in patients with advanced/metastatic RET-altered thyroid cancer. We present an updated analysis with more patients and longer follow-up. Methods: Adult patients with advanced/metastatic RET-mutant medullary thyroid cancer (MTC) or RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer who initiated oral pralsetinib at 400 mg once daily were included. Primary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review (per RECIST v1.1) and safety. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival. Responses were assessed in three cohorts of patients with baseline measurable disease: patients with RET-mutant MTC who had received prior cabozantinib and/or vandetanib (C/V), treatment-naïve patients with RET-mutant MTC, and patients with previously treated RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were an exploratory endpoint. Results: As of October 18, 2021, the measurable disease population comprised of 61 patients with RET-mutant MTC and prior C/V, 62 treatment-naïve patients with RET-mutant MTC, and 22 patients with RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer who had received prior systemic therapy, including radioactive iodine. The ORR was 55.7% [confidence interval; 95% CI: 42.4-68.5] in patients with RET-mutant MTC and prior C/V, 77.4% [95% CI: 65.0-87.1] in treatment-naïve patients with RET-mutant MTC, and 90.9% [95% CI: 70.8-98.9] in patients with previously treated RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer. Median DoR and median PFS were both 25.8 months in patients with RET-mutant MTC and prior C/V, not reached in treatment-naïve patients with RET-mutant MTC, and 23.6 and 25.4 months, respectively, in patients with previously treated RET fusion-positive thyroid cancer. In the RET-altered thyroid cancer safety population (N = 175), 97.1% of patients reported a treatment-related adverse event (TRAE); these led to discontinuation in 5.7% and dose reduction in 52.6% of patients. There was one death (0.6%) due to a TRAE. PROs improved or remained stable after pralsetinib treatment. Conclusions: In this updated analysis of the ARROW study, pralsetinib continued to show deep and durable clinical activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with advanced/metastatic RET-altered thyroid cancer. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03037385.