Toripalimab, a therapeutic monoclonal anti-PD-1 antibody with high binding affinity to PD-1 and enhanced potency to activate human T cells.

Over the past decade, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved immune checkpoint inhibitors that target programmed death-1 (PD-1) have demonstrated significant clinical benefit particularly in patients with PD-L1 expressing tumors. Toripalimab is a humanized anti-PD-1 antibody, approved by FDA for first-line treatment of nasopharyngeal carcinoma in combination with chemotherapy. In a post hoc analysis of phase 3 studies, toripalimab in combination with chemotherapy improved overall survival irrespective of PD-L1 status in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (JUPITER-02), advanced non-small cell lung cancer (CHOICE-01) and advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (JUPITER-06). On further characterization, we determined that toripalimab is molecularly and functionally differentiated from pembrolizumab, an anti-PD-1 mAb approved previously for treating a wide spectrum of tumors. Toripalimab, which binds the FG loop of PD-1, has 12-fold higher binding affinity to PD-1 than pembrolizumab and promotes significantly more Th1- and myeloid-derived inflammatory cytokine responses in healthy human PBMCs in vitro. In an ex vivo system employing dissociated tumor cells from treatment naïve non-small cell lung cancer patients, toripalimab induced several unique genes in IFN-γ and immune cell pathways, showed different kinetics of activation and significantly enhanced IFN-γ signature. Additionally, binding of toripalimab to PD-1 induced lower levels of SHP1 and SHP2 recruitment, the negative regulators of T cell activation, in Jurkat T cells ectopically expressing PD-1. Taken together, these data demonstrate that toripalimab is a potent anti-PD-1 antibody with high affinity PD-1 binding, strong functional attributes and demonstrated clinical activity that encourage its continued clinical investigation in several types of cancer.

Toripalimab Plus Chemotherapy for Recurrent or Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: The JUPITER-02 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: There are currently no therapies approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Gemcitabine-cisplatin is the current standard of care for the first-line treatment of recurrent or metastatic NPC (RM-NPC). Objective: To determine whether toripalimab in combination with gemcitabine-cisplatin will significantly improve progression-free survival and overall survival as first-line treatment for RM-NPC, compared with gemcitabine-cisplatin alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: JUPITER-02 is an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind phase 3 study conducted in NPC-endemic regions, including mainland China, Taiwan, and Singapore. From November 10, 2018, to October 20, 2019, 289 patients with RM-NPC with no prior systemic chemotherapy in the RM setting were enrolled from 35 participating centers. Interventions: Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive toripalimab (240 mg [n = 146]) or placebo (n = 143) in combination with gemcitabine-cisplatin for up to 6 cycles, followed by maintenance with toripalimab or placebo until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or completion of 2 years of treatment. Main Outcome: Progression-free survival as assessed by a blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included objective response rate, overall survival, progression-free survival assessed by investigator, duration of response, and safety. Results: Among the 289 patients enrolled (median age, 46 [IQR, 38-53 years; 17% female), at the final progression-free survival analysis, toripalimab treatment had a significantly longer progression-free survival than placebo (median, 21.4 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.37-0.73]). With a median survival follow-up of 36.0 months, a significant improvement in overall survival was identified with toripalimab over placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63 [95% CI, 0.45-0.89]; 2-sided P = .008). The median overall survival was not reached in the toripalimab group, while it was 33.7 months in the placebo group. A consistent effect on overall survival, favoring toripalimab, was found in subgroups with high and low PD-L1 (programmed death-ligand 1) expression. The incidence of all adverse events, grade 3 or greater adverse events, and fatal adverse events were similar between the 2 groups. However, adverse events leading to discontinuation of toripalimab or placebo (11.6% vs 4.9%), immune-related adverse events (54.1% vs 21.7%), and grade 3 or greater immune-related adverse events (9.6% vs 1.4%) were more frequent in the toripalimab group. Conclusions and Relevance: The addition of toripalimab to chemotherapy as first-line treatment for RM-NPC provided statistically significant and clinically meaningful progression-free survival and overall survival benefits compared with chemotherapy alone, with a manageable safety profile. These findings support the use of toripalimab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin as the new standard of care for this patient population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03581786.

Safety, Efficacy, and Biomarker Analysis of Toripalimab in Patients with Previously Treated Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: Results from a Multicenter Phase II Trial POLARIS-03.

PURPOSE: Immunotherapy offers a second-line option for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) who failed standard therapy, but the biomarkers for predicting response remain to be explored. This study aims to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and correlative biomarker of toripalimab in patients with previously treated mUC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with mUC received toripalimab 3 mg/kg Q2W. Clinical response was assessed every 8 weeks by an independent review committee per RECIST v1.1. Tumor PD-L1 expression, tumor mutational burden (TMB), and other biomarkers were evaluated. RESULTS: Among the intention-to-treat population (n = 151), 85% of the patients experienced treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) and 20% experienced grade 3 and above TRAE. The objective response rate (ORR) was 26% with a disease control rate (DCR) of 45%. The median duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were 19.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 13.9-not estimable], 2.3 months (95% CI, 1.8-3.6), and 14.4 months (95% CI, 9.3-23.1), respectively. Both PD-L1+ and TMB-high (10 mutations/Mb as the cutoff) patients had better ORR than PD-L1- patients (42% vs. 17%, P = 0.002) and TMB-low patients (48% vs. 22%, P = 0.014), respectively. The TMB-high group also showed better PFS (12.9 vs. 1.8 months, P < 0.001) and OS (not reached versus 10.0 months, P = 0.018) than the TMB-low group. CONCLUSIONS: Toripalimab has demonstrated encouraging clinical activity in the second-line treatment of mUC with a manageable safety profile. PD-L1 expression and TMB were two independent biomarkers in the study.

Toripalimab or placebo plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment in advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a multicenter randomized phase 3 trial.

Gemcitabine-cisplatin (GP) chemotherapy is the standard first-line systemic treatment for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (RM-NPC). In this international, double-blind, phase 3 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03581786), 289 patients with RM-NPC and no previous chemotherapy for recurrent or metastatic disease were randomized (1/1) to receive either toripalimab, a monoclonal antibody against human programmed death-1 (PD-1), or placebo in combination with GP every 3 weeks for up to six cycles, followed by monotherapy with toripalimab or placebo. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by a blinded independent review committee according to RECIST v.1.1. At the prespecified interim PFS analysis, a significant improvement in PFS was detected in the toripalimab arm compared to the placebo arm: median PFS of 11.7 versus 8.0 months, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.52 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.36-0.74), P = 0.0003. An improvement in PFS was observed across key subgroups, including PD-L1 expression. As of 18 February 2021, a 40% reduction in risk of death was observed in the toripalimab arm compared to the placebo arm (HR = 0.603 (95% CI: 0.364-0.997)). The incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) (89.0 versus 89.5%), AEs leading to discontinuation of toripalimab/placebo (7.5 versus 4.9%) and fatal AEs (2.7 versus 2.8%) was similar between the two arms; however, immune-related AEs (39.7 versus 18.9%) and grade ≥3 infusion reactions (7.5 versus 0.7%) were more frequent in the toripalimab arm. In conclusion, the addition of toripalimab to GP chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for patients with RM-NPC provided superior PFS compared to GP alone, and with a manageable safety profile.

Systematic Review of PD-1/PD-L1 Inhibitors in Oncology: From Personalized Medicine to Public Health.

BACKGROUND: To review and summarize all U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals of programmed death (PD)-1 and PD-ligand 1 blocking antibodies (collectively referred to as PD-[L]1 inhibitors) over a 6-year period and corresponding companion/complementary diagnostic assays. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To determine the indications and pivotal trials eligible for inclusion, approval letters and package inserts available on Drugs@FDA were evaluated for approved PD-[L]1 inhibitors to identify all new indications granted from the first approval of a PD-[L]1 inhibitor on September 4, 2014, through September 3, 2020. The corresponding FDA drug and device reviews from the marketing applications for the approved indications were identified through FDA internal records. Two reviewers independently extracted information for the endpoints, efficacy data, basis for approval, type of regulatory approval, and corresponding in vitro diagnostic device test. The results were organized by organ system and tumor type. RESULTS: Of 70 Biologic Licensing Application or supplement approvals that resulted in new indications, 32 (46%) were granted based on response rate (ORR) and durability of response, 26 (37%) on overall survival, 9 (13%) on progression-free survival, 2 (3%) on recurrence-free survival, and 1 (1%) on complete response rate. Most ORR-based approvals were granted under the accelerated approval provisions and were supported with prolonged duration of response. Overall, 21% of approvals were granted with a companion diagnostic. Efficacy results according to tumor type are discussed. CONCLUSION: PD-[L]1 inhibitors are an effective anticancer therapy in a subset of patients. This class of drugs has provided new treatment options for patients with unmet need across a wide variety of cancer types. Yet, the modest response rates in several tumor types signal a lack of understanding of the biology of these diseases. Further preclinical and clinical investigation may be required to identify a more appropriate patient population, particularly as drug development continues and additional treatment alternatives become available. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The number of PD-[L]1 inhibitors in drug development and the associated companion and complementary diagnostics have led to regulatory challenges and questions regarding generalizability of trial results. The interchangeability of PD-L1 immunohistochemical assays between PD-1/PD-L1 drugs is unclear. Furthermore, robust responses in some patients with low levels of PD-L1 expression have limited the use of PD-L1 as a predictive biomarker across all cancers, particularly in the setting of diseases with few alternative treatment options. This review summarizes the biomarker thresholds and assays approved as complementary and companion diagnostics and provides regulatory perspective on the role of biomarkers in oncology drug development.

FDA Supplemental Approval Summary: Lenvatinib for the Treatment of Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

On August 16, 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved lenvatinib (Lenvima, Eisai Inc.) for first-line treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Approval was based on an international, multicenter, randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial (REFLECT; NCT01761266) conducted in 954 patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable HCC. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive lenvatinib (12 mg orally once daily for patients with a baseline body weight ≥60 kg and 8 mg orally once daily for patients with a baseline body weight <60 kg) or sorafenib (400 mg orally twice daily) until radiological disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. REFLECT demonstrated that lenvatinib was noninferior but not statistically superior to sorafenib for overall survival (OS; hazard ratio, [HR] 0.92; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.79-1.06), with median OS of 13.6 and 12.3 months in the lenvatinib and sorafenib arms, respectively. REFLECT also demonstrated statistically significant improvements in investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.57-0.77]; p < 0.001), corresponding to median PFS of 7.4 and 3.7 months and overall response rate of 24.1% vs 9.2% per modified RECIST for HCC (mRECIST) in the lenvatinib and sorafenib arms, respectively. Consistent results were observed by an independent review facility per RECISTv1.1 and per mRECIST. The most common adverse reactions observed in the lenvatinib-treated patients (≥20%) in decreasing frequency were hypertension, fatigue, diarrhea, decreased appetite, arthralgia/myalgia, decreased weight, abdominal pain, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, proteinuria, dysphonia, hemorrhagic events, hypothyroidism, and nausea. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This article describes the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's review of data from a single trial, REFLECT, that supported the approval of lenvatinib, as a single agent, for the first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). REFLECT was an open-label, noninferiority trial that randomized 954 patients with HCC who were ineligible for liver-directed therapy with no prior systemic therapy for HCC to lenvatinib or sorafenib. REFLECT demonstrated that lenvatinib-treated patients had similar survival, more responses, and longer time to progression than those receiving sorafenib. Serious side effects were more common among lenvatinib-treated patients. Lenvatinib is an effective treatment for patients with previously untreated HCC.

FDA Oncology Center of Excellence Project Renewal: Engaging the Oncology Community to Update Product Labeling for Older Oncology Drugs.

The FDA conducts independent reviews of scientific data obtained with investigational drug products to ensure that they are safe and effective. As a result of this process, FDA-approved product labeling is generated that is considered one of the most trusted sources of information for use of an approved drug. But FDA approval is only the beginning of the life cycle of a new drug; the first oncology drugs now have more than 7 decades of clinical experience in the postmarketing setting. Due, in part, to lack of incentives, some companies may not seek inclusion of new data, other than new safety information, in FDA-approved product labeling. Ensuring that product labeling provides adequate directions for use is important for all drugs, including older therapies that may form the backbone of many standard combination regimens for pediatric and adult cancers. Project Renewal is an FDA Oncology Center of Excellence pilot program that leverages expertise from the clinical and scientific oncology communities to review published literature and generate a drug-specific product report summarizing data that may support updates to FDA-approved product labeling. This article provides a broad overview of Project Renewal's collaborative pilot process for identifying and assessing literature supporting potential labeling updates, while engaging the oncology community to increase awareness of FDA's evidentiary standards and deliberative processes used when considering the addition of new indications and dosing regimens to product labeling.

Neoadjuvant Therapy for Melanoma: A U.S. Food and Drug Administration-Melanoma Research Alliance Public Workshop.

Tremendous progress has been made in treating patients with metastatic melanoma over the past decade. In that timeframe, the FDA has approved 12 novel treatments for patients with advanced unresectable melanoma, comprising both kinase-targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), and five treatments for adjuvant (postoperative) use in patients with high-risk resectable stage III melanoma. It is not known whether outcomes can be further improved by administering kinase inhibitors or ICI in the neoadjuvant (presurgical) setting in patients with high-risk resectable melanomas. Noting research community interest in exploring the neoadjuvant approach for treating melanoma and recognizing that early harmonization of methodologies may expedite the development of therapeutics in this space, the FDA and Melanoma Research Alliance convened a public workshop on November 6, 2019, in National Harbor, Maryland, to discuss key issues. The workshop consisted of 23 faculty and included more than 250 live participants. Topics discussed included opportunities for advancing novel endpoints for regulatory purposes as well as translational research, clinical trial design considerations, and strategies for optimizing patient selection while mitigating risk.

FDA Approval Summary: Entrectinib for the Treatment of NTRK gene Fusion Solid Tumors.

The FDA-approved entrectinib on August 15, 2019, for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients 12 years of age and older with solid tumors that have a neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusion without a known acquired resistance mutation, are metastatic or where surgical resection is likely to result in severe morbidity, and have progressed following treatment or have no satisfactory alternative therapy. Approval was based on demonstration of a durable overall response rate of 57% (95% confidence interval: 43-71), including a complete response rate of 7%, among 54 entrectinib-treated patients with 10 different tumor types harboring an NTRK fusion enrolled in one of three single-arm clinical trials. The durations of response ranged from 2.8 months to 26.0+ months; 68% of responses lasted ≥ 6 months. The most serious toxicities of entrectinib are congestive heart failure, central nervous system effects, skeletal fractures, hepatotoxicity, hyperuricemia, QT prolongation, and vision disorders. Adverse reactions were manageable through dose interruptions (46%), dose reductions (29%), or discontinuation of entrectinib (9%). This is the third approval of a cancer drug for treatment of a tissue agnostic, biomarker-defined cancer.

Immune Response Evaluation and Treatment with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Beyond Clinical Progression: Response Assessments for Cancer Immunotherapy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review provides a comprehensive assessment of recent literature reports describing atypical response patterns observed with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), modifications to response evaluation criteria for ICIs, and treatment beyond progression in clinical trials. RECENT FINDINGS: Certain response patterns such as durable response, pseudoprogression, hyperprogression, and dissociated responses can be seen with ICI treatment. These patterns carry differing prognoses and are associated with varied factors. There are multiple modifications of standard Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) that have been proposed to better characterize immunotherapy response; however, standard RECIST1.1 remains most commonly used in clinical trials. Treatment beyond progression varies in frequency and benefit depending on assessment criteria and cancer type. Future research incorporating modified imaging criteria and biomarker assessments may serve to clarify who will benefit most from treatment beyond progression.

FDA Accelerated Approval of Pembrolizumab for Recurrent Locally Advanced or Metastatic Merkel Cell Carcinoma.

On December 19, 2018, the Food and Drug Administration granted accelerated approval to pembrolizumab (KEYTRUDA, Merck & Co. Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ) for adult and pediatric patients with recurrent locally advanced or metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC). Approval was based on Cancer Immunotherapy Trials Network protocol 9, also known as KEYNOTE-017 (NCT02267603), a multicenter, nonrandomized, open-label trial that enrolled 50 patients with recurrent locally advanced or metastatic MCC who had not received prior systemic therapy for their advanced disease. The major efficacy outcome measures were overall response rate (ORR) and response duration assessed by blinded independent central review per RECIST 1.1. The ORR was 56% (95% confidence interval: 41, 70) with a complete response rate of 24%. The median response duration was not reached. Among the 28 patients with responses, 96% had response durations of greater than 6 months and 54% had response durations of greater than 12 months. The most common adverse reactions of pembrolizumab reported in at least 20% of patients who received pembrolizumab as a single agent were fatigue, musculoskeletal pain, decreased appetite, pruritus, diarrhea, nausea, rash, pyrexia, cough, dyspnea, constipation, pain, and abdominal pain. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This report presents key information on the basis for the Food and Drug Administration's accelerated approval of pembrolizumab for the treatment of recurrent locally advanced or metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma, including efficacy and safety information. This approval provides patients and physicians with an additional treatment option for this aggressive and life-threatening carcinoma.

Evaluation of Serious Postmarket Safety Signals Within 2 Years of FDA Approval for New Cancer Drugs.

BACKGROUND: We examined how often new serious safety signals were identified by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration within the first 2 years after approval for new molecular entities (NMEs) for treatment of cancer that required specific regulatory actions described here. METHODS: We identified, for all NMEs approved for treatment of cancer or malignant hematology indications between 2010 and 2016, substantial safety-related changes within the first 2 years after approval, which included a new Boxed Warning or Warning and Precaution; requirement for (or modification of existing) Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS); and withdrawal from the market because of safety concerns. RESULTS: Fifty-five NMEs were approved between 2010 and 2016: 32 (58%) under regular approval (RA) and 23 (42%) under accelerated approval (AA). Of these 55 NMEs, 9 (16%) had substantial safety-related changes after approval. Across all 55 NMEs, one was temporarily withdrawn from the market for safety reasons (1.8%); one (1.8%) required a new REMS; nine required labeling revisions-new Boxed Warnings were required for two NMEs (3.6%), and new Warnings and Precautions subsections were required for eight (14.6%). One drug (ponatinib) was responsible for several of the substantial safety-related changes (withdrawal, REMS, Boxed Warnings). One of 32 NMEs approved under RA required a new Warning and Precaution, whereas 7 of 23 NMEs approved under AA had substantial safety-related changes in the first 2 years after approval. CONCLUSION: Based on our analysis we conclude that although there was a greater incidence of substantial safety-related changes to AA drugs versus RA drugs, the majority of these were changes to the Warnings and Precautions and did not substantially alter the benefit-risk profile of the drug. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The majority of new cancer drugs (84%) approved in the U.S. do not have new substantial safety information being added to the label within the first 2 years of approval. Unprecedented efficacy seen in contemporary cancer drug development has led to early availability of effective cancer therapies based on large effects in smaller populations. More limited premarket safety data require diligent postmarketing safety surveillance as we continue to learn and update drug labeling throughout the product lifecycle.

Comparison of iRECIST versus RECIST V.1.1 in patients treated with an anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 antibody: pooled FDA analysis.

BACKGROUND: Response criteria developed when cytotoxic chemotherapy was the predominant therapeutic modality to treat patients with cancer, do not capture the full spectrum of tumor response patterns observed with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibody treatment. iRECIST was developed to capture both typical and atypical response patterns. METHODS: Target, non-target, and new lesion measurements for 7920 patients receiving anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibody (n=4751) or anti-CTLA-4 antibody (n=613) or undergoing chemotherapy (n=2556) from 14 randomized controlled trials submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration were used to calculate the best overall response, objective response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) per iRECIST (iPFS) and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST). Associations between either PFS or iPFS and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using the method adopted by Oba et al.1 RESULTS: Among 4751 anti-PD-1/PD-L1-antibody treated patients, 31.5% (95% CI 30.2% to 32.9%) and 30.5% (95% CI 29.2% to 31.8%) achieved an objective response per iRECIST or RECIST V.1.1, respectively. OS among the 48 patients with objective response by iRECIST only resembled that in patients with responses per RECIST V.1.1. The association between iPFS and OS was R2=0.277 and that between PFS and OS was R2=0.260. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies with initial progressive disease per RECIST V.1.1 can experience prolonged stability or substantial reductions in tumor burden per iRECIST, atypical response patterns associated with prolonged OS. In the subgroup of patients with atypical responses, the application of iRECIST retrospectively in the evaluation of the objective response durations and the magnitude of PFS results in large differences compared with RECIST V.1.1. For the overall pooled population, the magnitude of these differences was modest, although a large proportion of patients had no further tumor assessments following RECIST V.1.1-defined progressive disease. Prospective studies employing iRECIST will be required to assess whether this response criteria more fully captures the benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement outcomes by procedure location: Catheterization laboratory versus operating room.

BACKGROUND: The impact of procedure location on clinical outcomes after TAVR remains unclear. We aimed to compare short-term outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in the catheterization laboratory (CATH) versus surgical operating room (OR). METHODS: A retrospective review of 63,581 trans-femoral TAVR patients using balloon-expandable valves from 2015 to 2018 were captured utilizing the TVT Registry. Propensity score matching was performed using 24 covariates resulting in 2 risk-adjusted groups. Patients were further stratified by STS Risk Score with outcomes compared. RESULTS: Propensity score matching resulted in 24,160 risk-matched CATH and OR patient pairs. Short-term clinical outcomes including all-cause mortality, stroke, major vascular complications, life-threatening bleeding, and new dialysis were similar between CATH and OR (p = all ns). There was no difference in conversion to open heart surgery between CATH and OR with both occurring at a very low rate (0.4% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.07). Moreover, the 30-day survival post-conversion was similar whether TAVR was performed in CATH versus OR (43.3% and 49.7%, p = 0.28). When stratified by STS Risk Score, there was no difference in conversion to surgery or 30-day mortality in low and intermediate risk patients between CATH and OR. For high risk patients, however, conversion to surgery was lower in CATH vs. OR (0.2% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.04) with no difference in 30-day survival (46% vs. 43%, p = 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Procedure location has minimal impact on TAVR procedural and 30-day outcomes with a very low conversion to open surgery rate between CATH versus OR for low, intermediate, and high-risk patients.

Prognostic Value of the Lung Immune Prognostic Index for Patients Treated for Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

IMPORTANCE: Previous studies have suggested the importance of the baseline derived neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (dNLR) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level as prognostic markers. The lung immune prognostic index (LIPI) was shown to be associated with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) among patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) but not cytotoxic chemotherapy (CCT). OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the LIPI is associated with long-term outcomes in pooled analyses of clinical studies of ICI and targeted therapy (TT) for patients with mNSCLC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: An exploratory pooled analysis was performed of the LIPI on data from 11 randomized clinical multinational trials evaluating ICIs and TT submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2017, for 4914 patients with mNSCLC. Lung immune prognostic index scores were calculated based on the dNLR and the LDH level per previous publications to generate good, intermediate, and poor composite scores. Multivariable Cox proportional PFS and OS hazard ratios were generated for the dNLR, the LDH level, age, smoking status, histologic characteristics, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Overall survival and PFS and their association with good, intermediate, or poor prognostic LIPI scores. RESULTS: Eleven mNSCLC randomized trials were analyzed, including 3987 patients with available data. In 5 ICI trials comprising 2440 patients, 1368 patients received ICIs and 1072 patients received CCT. In 6 TT trials comprising 1547 patients, 1110 patients received TT and 437 patients received CCT. A good LIPI score was associated with better OS among patients receiving ICIs (hazard ratio, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.28-0.42), TT (hazard ratio, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.21-0.37), and CCT (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.40-0.60 in ICI trials; hazard ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.27-0.61 in TT trials) than those with poor LIPI scores. Similar findings were observed in terms of PFS (ICIs: hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.48-0.72; TT: hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.37-0.57; and CCT: hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45-0.68 in ICI trials; hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.38-0.69 in TT trials). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The baseline LDH level and dNLR are important prognostic biomarkers irrespective of treatment modality for patients with mNSCLC. As further prospective clinical trial information is collected, the role of the LIPI score can be better defined.

FDA Approval Summary: Pembrolizumab for the Treatment of Microsatellite Instability-High Solid Tumors.

The FDA approved pembrolizumab on May 23, 2017, for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with unresectable or metastatic, microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H), or mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) solid tumors that have progressed following prior treatment and who have no satisfactory alternative treatment options and for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic MSI-H or dMMR colorectal cancer that has progressed following treatment with a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan. The FDA granted the approval based on an understanding of the biology of MSI-H/dMMR across different tumors along with the clinically important effects on overall response rate (ORR) observed in patients who were enrolled in 1 of 5 single-arm clinical trials. The ORR was 39.6% among 149 patients with 15 different tumor types (95% confidence interval, 31.7-47.9), with a 7% complete response rate. The duration of response ranged from 1.6+ months to 22.7+ months, with 78% of responses lasting ≥6 months. Overall, the adverse event profile of pembrolizumab was similar to the adverse event profile observed across prior trials that supported the approval of pembrolizumab in other indications. This approval of pembrolizumab is the first time that the FDA has approved a cancer treatment for an indication based on a common biomarker rather than the primary site of origin.

FDA Approval Summary: Pembrolizumab for Recurrent Locally Advanced or Metastatic Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma Expressing PD-L1.

On September 22, 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval for pembrolizumab (Keytruda, Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ) for the treatment of patients with recurrent, locally advanced or metastatic, gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma with disease progression on or after two or more systemic therapies, including fluoropyrimidine- and platinum-containing chemotherapy and, if appropriate, HER2/neu-targeted therapy, and whose tumors express programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), as determined by an FDA-approved test. Approval was based on demonstration of durable overall response rate (ORR) in a multicenter, open-label, multicohort trial (KEYNOTE-059/Cohort 1) that enrolled 259 patients with locally advanced or metastatic gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma. Among the 55% (n = 143) of patients whose tumors expressed PD-L1 based on a combined positive score ≥1 and either were microsatellite stable or had undetermined microsatellite instability or mismatch repair status, the confirmed ORR as determined by blinded independent central review was 13.3% (95% CI, 8.2-20.0); 1.4% had complete responses. Response durations ranged from 2.8+ to 19.4+ months; 11 patients (58%) had response durations of 6 months or longer, and 5 patients (26%) had response durations of 12 months or longer. The most common (≥20%) adverse reactions of pembrolizumab observed in KEYNOTE-059/Cohort 1 were fatigue, decreased appetite, nausea, and constipation. The most frequent (≥2%) serious adverse drug reactions were pleural effusion, pneumonia, dyspnea, pulmonary embolism, and pneumonitis. Pembrolizumab was approved concurrently with the PD-L1 immunohistochemistry 22C3 pharmDx test (Dako, Agilent, Santa Clara, CA) for selection of patients with gastric cancer for treatment with pembrolizumab based on PD-L1 tumor expression. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This report presents key information on the basis for Food and Drug Administration approval of pembrolizumab for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma whose tumors express PD-L1. The report discusses the basis for limiting the indication to patients with PD-L1-expressing tumors and the basis for recommending that PD-L1 status be assessed using a fresh tumor specimen if PD-L1 expression is not detected in an archival gastric or GEJ cancer specimen.

Overview of Oncology and Hematology Drug Approvals at US Food and Drug Administration Between 2008 and 2016.

BACKGROUND: We previously conducted an overview of oncology products reviewed by the Office of Oncology Drug Products in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research at the US Food and Drug Administration for marketing approval and the regulatory actions taken during July 2005 to December 2007. There is a need to understand if the changes in the laws, regulations, and the organization that occurred after 2007 had any impact on the regulatory drug approvals. We present a detailed overview of hematology and oncology products reviewed by Office of Oncology Drug Products and Office of Hematology and Oncology Drug Products. METHODS: We identified all oncology-hematology applications that were submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2016, and reviewed the approval actions taken. RESULTS: During the study period, the Office of Hematology and Oncology Products approved 239 applications that supported 260 new indications. Of the 239 applications approved, 141 were approved via priority review and 98 were approved via standard review. Fifty-three of these applications were granted accelerated approval, 29 were converted from accelerated approval to regular approval, and 157 received regular approval. Since its promulgation in 2013, breakthrough designation status has been granted to 25.7% of applications. A variety of endpoints were used to support these approvals. CONCLUSION: During the study period, despite changes in the regulations and organization, the Office of Hematology and Oncology Products consistently utilized regulatory mechanisms that expedite the development and approval of promising oncology and hematology drug products resulting in the approval of 260 new indications.

FDA analyses of survival in older adults with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in controlled trials of PD-1/PD-L1 blocking antibodies.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with newly diagnosed non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), approximately 70% occur in those above 65 years of age and more than half are metastatic or locally advanced NSCLC. METHODS: Retrospective analyses pooling data across 4 randomized clinical trials comparing programmed death 1 receptor (PD-1) or programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) to docetaxel for the treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC with disease progression on or after a platinum-containing therapy were conducted. Demographics, efficacy, and safety data from these trials were pooled and aggregated based on age. The relative treatment effects on overall survival (OS) across age groups were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier methodology. A meta-analysis was performed comparing OS across age groups treated with PD-1/PD-L1 blocking antibodies compared with those treated with docetaxel, as a common control arm across trials. A Cox Proportional Hazards model, stratified by clinical trial, was used and a univariate and multivariate adjusted analysis of OS to further identify trends in efficacy across age groups. RESULTS: Among patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 blocking antibodies enrolled across the 4 clinical trials, 42% were >65 years of age, 99% had ECOG performance status of 0-1, 75% had received 1 prior therapy, and 76% were diagnosed with Stage IV disease. In the pooled analysis of 2,824 patients across both arms, the treatment effects in age-defined subgroups were similar, with a hazard ratios (HR), unadjusted or adjusted, for OS of 0.71 (95% confidence interval 0.63, 0.80) in patients <65 years and 0.66 (0.57, 0.76) in patients ≥65 years of age. In patients ≥70 years, the HR for OS was 0.67 (0.55. 0.82) and in patients ≥ 75 years, the HR was 0.81 (0.58, 1.13). Estimated median OS in patients receiving PD-1/PD-L1 blocking antibodies versus docetaxel was 14.5 months versus 8.8 months in patients <65 years, 14.2 months versus 9 months in patients ≥65 years, 14.1 versus 9.2 months in patients ≥70 years, and 14.7 versus 9.5 months in the patients ≥75years. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events with PD-1/PD-L1 blocking antibodies were less frequent in patients ≥75 years (23%) compared to patients> 65 year ( 49%) and <65 years (47%), as were serious adverse events (30%, 32.5%, 15%); however, treatment-emergent adverse events leading to discontinuation of treatment (7%, 7%, and 5%) in those subgroups ≤65 years, >65 years, and >75 years, respectively, were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Patients 65 and older with advanced and metastatic NSCLC, including those ≥75 years, seem to derive similar survival benefits from treatment with PD-1/PD-L1 blocking antibodies as patients <65 years of age. Patients 75 and older enrolled on these trials appear to tolerate PD-1/PD-L1 blocking antibodies and have a lower incidence of grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse events compared to the subgroup of patients <65 years of age.