Enhancing Adoptive Cell Transfer with Combination BRAF-MEK and CDK4/6 Inhibitors in Melanoma.

Despite the success of immune checkpoint inhibitors that target cytotoxic lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) and programmed-cell-death-1 (PD-1) in the treatment of metastatic melanoma, there is still great need to develop robust options for patients who are refractory to first line immunotherapy. As such there has been a resurgence in interest of adoptive cell transfer (ACT) particularly derived from tumor infiltrating lymphocytes. Moreover, the addition of cyclin dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) have been shown to greatly extend duration of response in combination with BRAF-MEK inhibitors (BRAF-MEKi) in pre-clinical models of melanoma. We therefore investigated whether combinations of BRAF-MEK-CDK4/6i and ACT were efficacious in murine models of melanoma. Triplet targeted therapy of BRAF-MEK-CDK4/6i with OT-1 ACT led to sustained and robust anti-tumor responses in BRAFi sensitive YOVAL1.1. We also show that BRAF-MEKi but not CDK4/6i enhanced MHC Class I expression in melanoma cell lines in vitro. Paradoxically CDK4/6i in low concentrations of IFN-γ reduced expression of MHC Class I and PD-L1 in YOVAL1.1. Overall, this work provides additional pre-clinical evidence to pursue combination of BRAF-MEK-CDK4/6i and to combine this combination with ACT in the clinic.

Melanoma brain metastases that progress on BRAF-MEK inhibitors demonstrate resistance to ipilimumab-nivolumab that is associated with the Innate PD-1 Resistance Signature (IPRES).

BACKGROUND: Melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) are a challenging clinical problem with high morbidity and mortality. Although first-line dabrafenib-trametinib and ipilimumab-nivolumab have similar intracranial response rates (50%-55%), central nervous system (CNS) resistance to BRAF-MEK inhibitors (BRAF-MEKi) usually occurs around 6 months, and durable responses are only seen with combination immunotherapy. We sought to investigate the utility of ipilimumab-nivolumab after MBM progression on BRAF-MEKi and identify mechanisms of resistance. METHODS: Patients who received first-line ipilimumab-nivolumab for MBMs or second/third line ipilimumab-nivolumab for intracranial metastases with BRAFV600 mutations with prior progression on BRAF-MEKi and MRI brain staging from March 1, 2015 to June 30, 2018 were included. Modified intracranial RECIST was used to assess response. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded samples of BRAFV600 mutant MBMs that were naïve to systemic treatment (n=18) or excised after progression on BRAF-MEKi (n=14) underwent whole transcriptome sequencing. Comparative analyses of MBMs naïve to systemic treatment versus BRAF-MEKi progression were performed. RESULTS: Twenty-five and 30 patients who received first and second/third line ipilimumab-nivolumab, were included respectively. Median sum of MBM diameters was 13 and 20.5 mm for the first and second/third line ipilimumab-nivolumab groups, respectively. Intracranial response rate was 75.0% (12/16), and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 41.6 months for first-line ipilimumab-nivolumab. Efficacy of second/third line ipilimumab-nivolumab after BRAF-MEKi progression was poor with an intracranial response rate of 4.8% (1/21) and median PFS of 1.3 months. Given the poor activity of ipilimumab-nivolumab after BRAF-MEKi MBM progression, we performed whole transcriptome sequencing to identify mechanisms of drug resistance. We identified a set of 178 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between naïve and MBMs with progression on BRAF-MEKi treatment (p value <0.05, false discovery rate (FDR) <0.1). No distinct pathways were identified from gene set enrichment analyses using Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes, Gene Ontogeny or Hallmark libraries; however, enrichment of DEG from the Innate Anti-PD1 Resistance Signature (IPRES) was identified (p value=0.007, FDR=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Second-line ipilimumab-nivolumab for MBMs after BRAF-MEKi progression has poor activity. MBMs that are resistant to BRAF-MEKi that also conferred resistance to second-line ipilimumab-nivolumab showed enrichment of the IPRES gene signature.

Rheumatic immune-related adverse events secondary to anti-programmed death-1 antibodies and preliminary analysis on the impact of corticosteroids on anti-tumour response: A case series.

IMPORTANCE: Rheumatic immune-related adverse events (irAEs) occur in approximately 10-20% of anti-programmed death 1 (anti-PD1)-treated cancer patients. There are limited data on the natural history, optimal treatment and long-term oncological outcomes of patients with rheumatic irAEs. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to describe the spectrum and natural history of rheumatic irAEs and the potential impact of rheumatic irAEs and immunomodulators on anti-PD1 tumour efficacy. METHODS: Cancer patients with pre-existing rheumatic disease before anti-PD1 therapy or de novo rheumatic irAEs on anti-PD1 therapy were retrospectively reviewed across three sites. Patient demographics, treatment history, anti-PD1 irAEs, and anti-PD1 responses were evaluated. Relationships between the development or pre-existence of rheumatic irAE, use of immunomodulatory agents and outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: This multicenter case series describes 36 cancer patients who had rheumatic disease before anti-PD1 therapy (n = 12) or developed de novo rheumatic irAEs (n = 24). Thirty-four of the 36 patients sustained rheumatic irAEs (median time to rheumatic irAE: 14.5 weeks), including 24 de novo (18 inflammatory arthritis, three myositis, two polymyalgia rheumatica, one fasciitis) and 10 flares in 12 patients with pre-existing rheumatic disease. Corticosteroids were used in 30 of 36 patients (median duration: 10 months), and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were used in 14 of 36 patients (median duration: 5.5 months). The objective response rate to anti-PD1 therapy was 69% (n = 25/36) overall and 81% (n = 21/26) in the melanoma subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Rheumatic irAEs are often chronic and require prolonged immunomodulatory therapy. Prospective studies are required to define optimal management of rheumatic irAEs that maintain long-term anticancer outcomes.

Melanoma: the intersection of molecular targeted therapy and immune checkpoint inhibition.

Melanoma is at the forefront of development of systemic therapeutics with both molecular targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors as cornerstones of treatment. Although responses to molecularly targeted therapy is largely from blockade of oncogenic pathways, evidence is emerging of the immunomodulatory effects from BRAF inhibition. Additionally programmed-death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors have revolutionized the treatment of melanoma and are set to pave future improvements in other solid tumors. Combinations of PD-1 inhibitors with novel immune checkpoints or with molecularly targeted therapies are under investigation and may improve on the considerable progress made.

Marked functional improvement after combined chemoradiotherapy for cervical spine glioblastoma causing quadriparesis in an adolescent.

Primary spinal glioblastoma (GBM) is a rare spinal tumour and is considered to have poor prognosis. We describe a case of a 17-year-old adolescent boy with a cervical spine GBM presenting with neck pain and right upper limb weakness. Initial spinal MRI demonstrated a 4.5 cm lesion extending from C2 to C5 suspicious for demyelination. Despite high-dose corticosteroids, his weakness progressed resulting in quadriparesis. Subsequent laminectomy and biopsy confirmed spinal GBM. Shortly after surgery the patient continued to deteriorate and was essentially bedbound. Standard chemoradiotherapy as per the Stupp protocol, together with multimodal rehabilitation, resulted in substantial functional improvement within 6 weeks of initiation. Continued functional improvement was observed for a period of 11 months. Although an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score of 4 would normally preclude chemoradiotherapy, a prolonged response to treatment and return to independent function were observed.