Assessing the use of anti-PD1 monotherapy as adjuvant therapy and determinants of treatment choice in stage III cutaneous melanoma in the US.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to describe real-world adjuvant therapy (AT) use by disease substage and assess determinants of treatment choice among patients with stage III melanoma. METHODS: This non-interventional retrospective study included survey responses and data from patient records provided by US medical oncologists. Survey responses, patient demographic/clinical characteristics, treatment utilization, and reasons for treatment were reported descriptively. The association between patient and disease characteristics and AT selection was assessed using logistic and multinomial regression models, overall and stratified by AJCC8 substage (IIIA vs. IIIB/C/D) and type of AT received (anti-PD1 monotherapy, BRAF/MEK, no AT), respectively. RESULTS: In total 152 medical oncologists completed the survey and reviewed the charts of 507 patients (168 stage IIIA; 339 stages IIIB/IIIC/IIID); 405 (79.9%) patients received AT (360/405 (88.9%) received anti-PD1 therapy; 45/405 (11.1%) received BRAF/MEK therapy). Physicians reported clinical guidelines (61.2%), treatment efficacy (37.5%), and ECOG performance status (31.6%) as drivers of AT prescription. Patient-level data confirmed that improving patient outcomes (79%) was the main reason for anti-PD1 prescription; expected limited treatment benefit (37%), patient refusal (36%), and toxicity concerns (30%) were reasons for not prescribing AT. In multivariable analyses stage IIIB/IIIC/IIID disease significantly increased the probability of receiving AT (odds ratio [OR] 1.74) and anti-PD1 therapy (OR 1.82); ECOG 2/3 and Medicaid/no insurance decreased the probability of AT receipt (OR 0.37 and 0.42, respectively) and anti-PD1 therapy (OR 0.41 and 0.42, respectively) among all patients and patients with stage IIIA disease. CONCLUSION: Most patients were given AT with a vast majority treated with an anti-PD1 therapy. Physician- and patient-level evidence confirmed the impact of disease substage on AT use, with stage IIIA patients, patients without adequate insurance coverage, and worse ECOG status having a lower probability of receiving AT.

Seven-Year Follow-Up of the Phase III KEYNOTE-006 Study: Pembrolizumab Versus Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Immune checkpoint inhibitors have led to unprecedented prolongation of overall survival (OS) for patients with advanced melanoma. Five-year follow-up of KEYNOTE-006 showed pembrolizumab prolonged survival versus ipilimumab. Efficacy results with 7-year follow-up are presented. At data cutoff (April 19, 2021), median follow-up was 85.3 months (range, 0.03-90.8 months). Median OS was 32.7 months for pembrolizumab versus 15.9 months for ipilimumab (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.83); 7-year OS was 37.8% and 25.3%, respectively. OS HRs favored pembrolizumab regardless of BRAF status or prior BRAF/MEK-inhibitor treatment and prognostic characteristics (elevated lactate dehydrogenase, large tumor size, and brain metastasis). Median modified progression-free survival (mPFS) was 9.4 months for pembrolizumab versus 3.8 months for ipilimumab; 7-year mPFS was 23.8% and 13.3%, respectively. In patients who completed ≥94 weeks of pembrolizumab, the 5-year OS was 92.9% and the 5-year mPFS was 70.1%. The objective response rate with second-course pembrolizumab (n = 16) was 56% (95% CI, 30 to 80) and the 2-year mPFS was 62.5%. These findings confirm that pembrolizumab provides long-term survival benefit in advanced melanoma.

Time and productivity loss associated with immunotherapy infusions for the treatment of melanoma in the United States: a survey of health care professionals and patients.

INTRODUCTION: A new dosing schedule for the oncology immunotherapy pembrolizumab, every 6 weeks (Q6W), has been approved by the U.S. FDA, reducing the frequency of visits to infusion centers. We quantified the time spent by oncologists, nurses, patients, and caregivers per melanoma-related immunotherapy infusion visit to evaluate its potential impact. METHODS: Surveys were self-completed by 100 oncologists, 101 oncology nurses, and 100 patients with melanoma across the U.S. to quantify the time spent per infusion visit with pembrolizumab (Q3W or Q6W), nivolumab (Q2W or Q4W), or nivolumab+ipilimumab (nivolumab in combination: Q3W; nivolumab maintenance: Q2W or Q4W). Time measures included traveling, waiting, consultation, infusion, post-treatment observation, and caregiving. Respondents were also surveyed regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on infusion treatments. RESULTS: Responses deemed valid were provided by 89 oncologists, 93 nurses, and 100 patients. For each new [returning] patient treated with pembrolizumab, nivolumab or nivolumab+ipilimumab, oncologists reported to spend an average of 90 [64], 87 [60] and 101 [69] minutes per infusion visit (p-value for between-group difference = 0.300 [0.627]). For first [subsequent] treatment cycles, nurses reported spending 160 [145] average minutes per visit for nivolumab+ipilimumab, versus roughly 120 [110] for the single agents (p-value for between-group difference = 0.018 [0.022]). Patients reported to spend an average of 263, 382, and 224 minutes per visit at the center for pembrolizumab (N = 47), nivolumab (n = 34), and nivolumab+ipilimumab (n = 15) respectively (p-value for between-group difference = 0.0002). Patients also reported that their unpaid (N = 20) and paid caregivers (N = 41) spent with them an average of 966 and 333 minutes, respectively, from the day before to the day after the infusion visit. CONCLUSION: Less frequent immunotherapy infusion visits may result in substantial time savings for oncologists, nurses, patients, and caregivers.

Five-Year Analysis of Adjuvant Pembrolizumab or Placebo in Stage III Melanoma.

Pembrolizumab or Placebo in Stage III MelanomaPatients with stage III melanoma randomly received adjuvant pembrolizumab or placebo. Five-year recurrence-free survival was 55.4% (95% CI, 50.8 to 59.8) versus 38.3% (33.9 to 42.7) and 5-year metastasis-free survival was 60.6% (56.0 to 64.9) versus 44.5% (39.9 to 48.9) for adjuvant pembrolizumab and placebo, respectively. No new safety signals were associated with adjuvant pembrolizumab.

Mogamulizumab versus vorinostat in previously treated cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (MAVORIC): an international, open-label, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous T-cell lymphomas are rare non-Hodgkin lymphomas with substantial morbidity and mortality in advanced disease stages. We compared the efficacy of mogamulizumab, a novel monoclonal antibody directed against C-C chemokine receptor 4, with vorinostat in patients with previously treated cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. METHODS: In this open-label, international, phase 3, randomised controlled trial, we recruited patients with relapsed or refractory mycosis fungoides or Sézary syndrome at 61 medical centres in the USA, Denmark, France, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland, the UK, Japan, and Australia. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years (in Japan, ≥20 years), had failed (for progression or toxicity as assessed by the principal investigator) at least one previous systemic therapy, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 1 or less and adequate haematological, hepatic, and renal function. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive voice web response system to mogamulizumab (1·0 mg/kg intravenously on a weekly basis for the first 28-day cycle, then on days 1 and 15 of subsequent cycles) or vorinostat (400 mg daily). Stratification was by cutaneous T-cell lymphoma subtype (mycosis fungoides vs Sézary syndrome) and disease stage (IB-II vs III-IV). Since this study was open label, patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by investigator assessment in the intention-to-treat population. Patients who received one or more doses of study drug were included in the safety analyses. This study is ongoing, and enrolment is complete. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01728805. FINDINGS: Between Dec 12, 2012, and Jan 29, 2016, 372 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive mogamulizumab (n=186) or vorinostat (n=186), comprising the intention-to-treat population. Two patients randomly assigned to mogamulizumab withdrew consent before receiving study treatment; thus, 370 patients were included in the safety population. Mogamulizumab therapy resulted in superior investigator-assessed progression-free survival compared with vorinostat therapy (median 7·7 months [95% CI 5·7-10·3] in the mogamulizumab group vs 3·1 months [2·9-4·1] in the vorinostat group; hazard ratio 0·53, 95% CI 0·41-0·69; stratified log-rank p<0·0001). Grade 3-4 adverse events of any cause were reported in 75 (41%) of 184 patients in the mogamulizumab group and 76 (41%) of 186 patients in the vorinostat group. The most common serious adverse events of any cause were pyrexia in eight (4%) patients and cellulitis in five (3%) patients in the mogamulizumab group; and cellulitis in six (3%) patients, pulmonary embolism in six (3%) patients, and sepsis in five (3%) patients in the vorinostat group. Two (67%) of three on-treatment deaths with mogamulizumab (due to sepsis and polymyositis) and three (33%) of nine on-treatment deaths with vorinostat (two due to pulmonary embolism and one due to bronchopneumonia) were considered treatment-related. INTERPRETATION: Mogamulizumab significantly prolonged progression-free survival compared with vorinostat, and could provide a new, effective treatment for patients with mycosis fungoides and, importantly, for Sézary syndrome, a subtype that represents a major therapeutic challenge in cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. FUNDING: Kyowa Kirin.

An Open-Label, Dose-Escalation Phase I Study of Anti-TYRP1 Monoclonal Antibody IMC-20D7S for Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Melanoma.

PURPOSE: Tyrosinase-related protein-1 (TYRP1) is a transmembrane glycoprotein that is specifically expressed in melanocytes and melanoma cells. Preclinical data suggest that mAbs targeting TYRP1 confer antimelanoma activity. IMC-20D7S is a recombinant human IgG1 mAb targeting TYRP1. Here, we report the first-in-human phase I/Ib trial of IMC-20D7S. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The primary objective of this study was to establish the safety profile and the MTD of IMC-20D7S. Patients with advanced melanoma who progressed after or during at least one line of treatment or for whom standard therapy was not indicated enrolled in this standard 3 + 3 dose-escalation, open-label study. IMC-20D7S was administered intravenously every 2 or 3 weeks. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were enrolled. The most common adverse events were fatigue and constipation experienced by nine (33%) and eight (30%) patients, respectively. There were no serious adverse events related to treatment, no discontinuations of treatment due to adverse events, and no treatment-related deaths. Given the absence of dose-limiting toxicities, an MTD was not defined, but a provisional MTD was established at the 20 mg/kg every 2-week dose based on serum concentration and safety data. One patient experienced a complete response. A disease control rate, defined as stable disease or better, of 41% was observed. CONCLUSION: IMC-20D7S is well tolerated among patients with advanced melanoma with evidence of antitumor activity. Further investigation of this agent as monotherapy in selected patients or as part of combination regimens is warranted. Clin Cancer Res; 22(21); 5204-10. ©2016 AACR.

Clinical and Translational Results of a Phase II, Randomized Trial of an Anti-IGF-1R (Cixutumumab) in Women with Breast Cancer That Progressed on Endocrine Therapy.

PURPOSE: This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of cixutumumab, a human anti-insulin-like growth factor receptor 1 (IGF-1R) monoclonal IgG1 antibody, and explored potential biomarkers in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer that progressed on antiestrogen therapy received (2:1 randomization) cixutumumab 10 mg/kg and the same antiestrogen (arm A) or cixutumumab alone (arm B) every 2 weeks (q2w). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. Correlative analyses of IGF-1R, total insulin receptor (IR), and IR isoforms A (IR-A) and B (IR-B) expression in tumor tissue were explored. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients were randomized (arm A, n = 62; arm B, n = 31). Median PFS was 2.0 and 3.1 months for arm A and arm B, respectively. Secondary efficacy measures were similar between the arms. Overall, cixutumumab was well tolerated. IGF-1R expression was not associated with clinical outcomes. Regardless of the treatment, lower IR-A, IR-B, and total IR mRNA expression in tumor tissue was significantly associated with longer PFS [IR-A: HR, 2.62 (P = 0.0062); IR-B: HR, 2.21 (P = 0.0202); and total IR: HR, 2.18 (P = 0.0230)] and OS [IR-A: HR, 2.94 (P = 0.0156); IR-B: HR, 2.69 (P = 0.0245); and total IR: HR, 2.72 (P = 0.0231)]. CONCLUSIONS: Cixutumumab (10 mg/kg) with or without antiestrogen q2w had an acceptable safety profile, but no significant clinical efficacy. Patients with low total IR, IR-A, and IR-B mRNA expression levels had significantly longer PFS and OS, independent of the treatment. The prognostic or predictive value of IR as a biomarker for IGF-1R-targeted therapies requires further validation.

Icrucumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1, in the treatment of patients with advanced solid malignancies: a Phase 1 study.

BACKGROUND: IMC-18F1 (icrucumab), a human monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1 (VEGFR-1), potently inhibits ligand-dependent phosphorylation of VEGFR-1 and downstream signaling, making icrucumab an attractive candidate for antitumor activity. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to determine the safety profile and maximum tolerated dose of icrucumab in patients with advanced solid tumors that were previously unresponsive to standard therapy or for which no standard therapy was available. METHODS: In this open-label, dose-escalation, Phase 1 study, patients received icrucumab intravenously weekly at 2, 3, 6, and 12 mg/kg (Cohorts 1-4), every other week (q2w) at 15 mg/kg (Cohort 5), or every third week at 20 mg/kg (Cohort 6). Patients received icrucumab until evidence of progressive disease or other withdrawal criteria were met. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients received icrucumab. The most common adverse events were fatigue, nausea, peripheral edema, anemia, dyspnea, and vomiting. No dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed in Cohorts 1-5. Two DLTs were observed in Cohort 6 (anemia and hyponatremia), and enrollment was stopped. No patient demonstrated an immunogenic response. Overall, icrucumab exhibited nonlinear pharmacokinetics at doses >6 mg/kg. Six patients (23.1 %) achieved stable disease with median duration of 11.1 weeks (range = 10.3-18.7 weeks); tumor types were thyroid, melanoma, colorectal (3 patients), and small-cell lung cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Icrucumab was safely administered weekly at doses of 2-12 mg/kg and q2w at a dose of 15 mg/kg with no DLTs. Based on achievement of stable disease, icrucumab has potential for antitumor activity against advanced solid tumors.