Phase 1 Randomized Trial of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Followed by Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab or Nivolumab Alone in Advanced/Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Immunotherapy has emerged as a promising therapeutic option for advanced or unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, survival remains poor with only a subset of patients deriving benefit. This trial investigated the safety and efficacy of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) with immunotherapy in HCC. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In this multicenter phase 1 randomized trial, patients with advanced or unresectable HCC received liver SBRT (40 Gy in 5 fractions) followed by either nivolumab alone or nivolumab plus ipilimumab. The primary endpoint was dose-limiting toxicity occurring within 6 months of SBRT. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate, progression-free survival, overall survival (OS), distant disease control, and local control of the irradiated tumor. Disease status and response endpoints were assessed radiographically every 8 weeks until progression or initiation of nonprotocol therapy. Response was determined using both RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) 1.1 and iRECIST. RESULTS: Fourteen patients were enrolled across 3 centers. Thirteen patients were evaluated for study endpoints. The study was closed early because of slow accrual. The median follow-up time was 42.7 months. Dose-limiting toxicities within 6 months occurred in 2 (15.4%) of 13 patients: 1 of 6 patients in the nivolumab arm (16.7%; 90% confidence interval [CI], 0.9%-58.2%) and 1 of 7 patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab arm (14.3%; 90% CI, 0.7%-52.1%). Grade 3 adverse events occurred in 8 (61.6%), 5 (71.4%), and 3 (50.0%) patients in the overall nivolumab plus ipilimumab and nivolumab cohorts. Grade 3 hepatotoxicity occurred in 4 (30.8%), 3 (42.9%), and 1 (16.7%) patients in the respective cohorts. Clinical outcomes favored the nivolumab plus ipilimumab arm compared with nivolumab alone, including an overall response rate of 57% (4 of 7 patients; 90% CI, 23%-87%) versus 0% (0 of 6 patients; 90% CI, 0%-39%), median progression-free survival of 11.6 months (90% CI, 4.5 months to not reached) versus 2.7 months (90% CI, 1.3-4.7 months), and median OS of 41.6 months (90% CI, 4.5 months to not reached) versus 4.7 months (90% CI, 2.0-16.2 months) (all P < .05). With combination immunotherapy, 3-year OS was 57% (90% CI, 23%-81%), with 2 patients alive after 42.7 months without progression and negative PET. CONCLUSIONS: In this first prospective trial investigating the combination of SBRT and immunotherapy for HCC, multimodal therapy demonstrated acceptable safety. SBRT with nivolumab plus ipilimumab compared favorably to outcomes of immunotherapy alone and warrants further investigation.

A prospective clinical and transcriptomic feasibility study of oral-only hormonal therapy with radiation for unfavorable prostate cancer in men 70 years of age and older or with comorbidity.

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves outcomes in unfavorable-risk prostate cancer (PCa) treated with radiation therapy (RT). It was hypothesized that replacing luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists with a 5-α-reductase inhibitor (5-ARI) would improve hormonal health-related quality of life (HRQOL) without differentially suppressing androgen-responsive (AR) gene expression. METHODS: Patients with localized unfavorable-risk PCa, aged ≥70 years or Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≥2 were treated with oral ADT (oADT), consisting of 4 months of bicalutamide, a 5-ARI, and RT at 78 Gy. The primary end point was Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite HRQOL at 6 months ≤30%, and improvement compared with a synchronous standard of care (SOC) cohort receiving 4 months of bicalutamide and long-term LHRH agonist with RT. RNA sequencing was performed from matched pre-/post-ADT prostate tumor biopsies in a subset of men. Differential gene and pathway expressional changes were examined using gene set enrichment. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2018, 40 and 30 men were enrolled in the oADT and SOC cohorts, respectively. Median follow-up was 40 months. Those with ≤30% decline in hormonal HRQOL at 6 months was 97% (oADT) and 93% (SOC). The average 6-month hormonal decline was 1% (oADT) versus 12% (SOC; P = .04). The 4-year freedom from biochemical failure was 88% (oADT) versus 81% (SOC; P = .48). RNA sequencing (n = 9) showed similar numbers of downregulated and upregulated genes between the treatment groups (fold-change = 2; false-discovery rate-adjusted P ≤ .05). Both treatments comparably decreased the expression of 20 genes in canonical androgen receptor signaling. CONCLUSIONS: For men with PCa undergoing RT, oral versus standard ADT may improve 6-month QOL and appears to have a similar impact on androgen-responsive gene expression.

A Phase 1 Trial Assessing the Safety and Tolerability of a Therapeutic DNA Vaccination Against HPV16 and HPV18 E6/E7 Oncogenes After Chemoradiation for Cervical Cancer.

PURPOSE: This study assessed the safety and tolerability of therapeutic immunization against the human papillomavirus (HPV) viral oncoproteins E6 and E7 in patients with cervical cancer after chemoradiation. METHODS AND MATERIALS: MEDI0457 (INO-3112) is a DNA-based vaccine targeting E6 and E7 of HPV-16/18 that is coinjected with an IL-12 plasmid followed by electroporation with the CELLECTRA 5P device. At 2 to 4 weeks after chemoradiation, patients with newly diagnosed stage IB1-IVA (cohort 1) or persistent/recurrent (cohort 2) cervical cancers were treated with 4 immunizations of MEDI0457 every 4 weeks. The primary endpoints were incidence of adverse events and injection site reactions. Immune responses against HPV antigens were measured by ELISpot for interferon-γ (IFNγ), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for antibody responses and multiplexed immunofluorescence for immune cells in cervical biopsy specimens. RESULTS: Ten patients (cohort 1, n = 7; cohort 2, n = 3) with HPV16 (n = 7) or HPV18 (n = 3) cervical cancers received MEDI0457 after chemoradiation. Treatment-related adverse events were all grade 1, primarily related to the injection site. Eight of 10 patients had detectable cellular or humoral immune responses against HPV antigens after chemoradiation and vaccination: 6 of 10 patients generated anti-HPV antibody responses and 6 of 10 patients generated IFNγ-producing T cell responses. At the completion of chemoradiation and vaccination, cervical biopsy specimens had detectable CD8+ T cells and decreased PD-1+CD8+, PD-L1+CD8+, and PD-L1+CD68+ subpopulations. All patients cleared detectable HPV DNA in cervical biopsies by completion of chemoradiation and vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant MEDI0457 is safe and well tolerated after chemoradiation for locally advanced or recurrent cervical cancers, supporting further investigation into combining tumor-specific vaccines with radiation therapy.

A prospective trial of stereotactic body radiation therapy for unresectable pancreatic cancer testing ablative doses.

BACKGROUND: We explored the safety and efficacy of ablative doses of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for unresectable pancreatic cancer. METHODS: This phase I/II trial included patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer previously treated with any number of cycles of induction chemotherapy. Patients were enrolled according to a 3+3 dose escalation design at 10, 12.5, and 15 Gy ×3, with subsequent patients at the maximally tolerated dose (MTD). Treatment was delivered to gross tumor delineated with MRI fusion using image-guidance to fiducial markers. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as grade 3+ toxicity within 30 days. Secondary endpoints included late gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, freedom from local failure (FFLF), and survival. RESULTS: Fifteen patients received a median 10 cycles of chemotherapy. There were no DLTs, and the MTD was 15 Gy ×3. Thirty-day toxicity included grade 2 nausea (46%) and grade 2 diarrhea (7%). Median survival after SBRT was 12.8 months (23 months after diagnosis) and median relapse-free survival was 7 months. At 1-year, FFLF was 80%. Four patients had grade 3+ GI bleeding after 30 days (median 6 months). Grade 3+ GI bleeding was associated with tumor volume (P=0.01), heterogeneity of dose within the planning target volume (PTV) (V120, P=0.03), and duodenal dose (V26-30 Gy, P<0.2). CONCLUSIONS: This aggressive SBRT regimen demonstrated limited 30-day morbidity, a moderate degree of local control, and a moderate risk for late GI bleeding. Further work is necessary to define the most appropriate hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) regimen in the ablative dose range.

Pretreatment multiparametric MRI is independently associated with biochemical outcome in men treated with radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the utility of pre-treatment multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in a modern cohort of intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with primary radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: One hundred twenty three men with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) intermediate or high-risk prostate cancer were treated with primary EBRT and/or brachytherapy and had evaluable pre-treatment mpMRI with endorectal coil. Images were assessed for the presence of radiographic extraprostatic extension (rEPE), seminal vesicle invasion (rSVI), lymph node involvement (LNI), sextant involvement, and largest axial tumor diameter. Imaging characteristics were analyzed along with clinical risk factors against freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF). Median follow-up time was 50 months. RESULTS: Fourteen (11%) men developed biochemical failure. The 5-year FFBF was 94% in intermediate-risk patients and 82% in high-risk patients (p < 0.01). mpMRI findings including rEPE (29% vs. 66%, p < 0.01), rSVI (6% vs. 25%, p < 0.01), LNI (1% vs. 30%, p < 0.01), and largest axial tumor size> 15 mm (27% vs. 48%, p = 0.02) were identified in men with intermediate vs. high risk prostate cancer, respectively. mpMRI features associated with 5-y FFBF biochemical failure on univariate analysis included rEPE (80% vs 98%), rSVI (55% vs. 96%), LNI (65% vs. 93%), and largest axial tumor size >15mm (81% vs. 94%, all p < 0.01). Men without any high risk MRI finding had a 5-y FFBF of 100% vs. 81% (p < 0.01). Adverse imaging features (HR 8.9, p < 0.01) were independently associated with biochemical failure in a bivariate model analyzed alongside clinical risk category (HR 3.2, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-treatment mpMRI findings are strongly associated with biochemical outcomes in a modern cohort of intermediate and high-risk patients treated with primary radiotherapy. mpMRI may aid risk stratification beyond clinical risk factors in men treated with radiation therapy; further study is warranted to better understand how mpMRI can be used to individualize therapy.