Comparison of SP263 and 22C3 immunohistochemistry PD-L1 assays for clinical efficacy of adjuvant atezolizumab in non-small cell lung cancer: results from the randomized phase III IMpower010 trial.

BACKGROUND: Tumor samples from the phase III IMpower010 study were used to compare two programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry assays (VENTANA SP263 and Dako 22C3) for identification of PD-L1 patient subgroups (negative, positive, low, and high expression) and their predictive value for adjuvant atezolizumab compared with best supportive care (BSC) in resectable early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: PD-L1 expression was assessed by the SP263 assay, which measured the percentage of tumor cells with any membranous PD-L1 staining, and the 22C3 assay, which scored the percentage of viable tumor cells showing partial or complete membranous PD-L1 staining. RESULTS: When examining the concordance at the PD-L1-positive threshold (SP263: tumor cell (TC)≥1%; 22C3: tumor proportion score (TPS)≥1%), the results were concordant between assays for 83% of the samples. Similarly, at the PD-L1-high cut-off (SP263: TC≥50%; 22C3: TPS≥50%), the results were concordant between assays for 92% of samples. The disease-free survival benefit of atezolizumab over BSC was comparable between assays for PD-L1-positive (TC≥1% by SP263: HR, 0.58 (95% CI: 0.40 to 0.85) vs TPS≥1% by 22C3: HR, 0.65 (95% CI: 0.45 to 0.95)) and PD-L1-high (TC≥50% by SP263: HR, 0.27 (95% CI: 0.14 to 0.53) vs TPS≥50% by 22C3: HR, 0.31 (95% CI: 0.16 to 0.60)) subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The SP263 and 22C3 assays showed high concordance and a comparable clinical predictive value of atezolizumab at validated PD-L1 thresholds, suggesting that both assays can identify patients with early-stage NSCLC most likely to experience benefit from adjuvant atezolizumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02486718.

Association of baseline systemic corticosteroid use with overall survival and time to next treatment in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy in real-world US oncology practice for advanced non-small cell lung cancer, melanoma, or urothelial carcinoma.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) have expanded treatment options for patients with solid tumors. Systemic corticosteroids (CSs) have an indispensable role in cancer care, but CS-related immunosuppression may counteract the CPI-driven antitumor immune response. This retrospective study investigated the association between baseline CS use (bCS; ≤14 days before, ≤30 days after CPI initiation) and clinical outcomes in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC), melanoma (aMel), or urothelial carcinoma (aUC). We analyzed data from the Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived de-identified database for adults diagnosed with aNSCLC, aMel, or aUC between January 2011 and June 2017 who received ≥1 CPI monotherapy in any treatment line. Associations of bCS use with overall survival (OS) and time to next treatment (TTNT) were estimated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics (i.e., ECOG performance status, site of metastases). In total, 2,213 patients were diagnosed with aNSCLC (n = 862), aMel (n = 742), or aUC (n = 609) and received ≥1 CPI administration. Most patients (67%-95%) received CSs, many during the baseline period (19%-30%). Patients with bCS use had shorter median OS than those with no bCS use for aNSCLC (6.6 vs 10.6 months; P= .00018), aMel (16.4 vs 21.5; P= .095), and aUC (4.1 vs 7.7; P= .0012). bCS use was associated with shorter OS (not significant for aMel) and TTNT in adjusted multivariable analyses, and clinical outcomes were not explained by prior CS use or other measured confounders. These findings suggest a potential association between bCS use and decreased CPI effectiveness, warranting further investigation.

Atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib as first-line treatment for unresectable advanced BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma (IMspire150): primary analysis of the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: IMspire150 aimed to evaluate first-line combination treatment with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors and immune checkpoint therapy in BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced or metastatic melanoma. METHODS: IMspire150 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study done at 112 institutes in 20 countries. Patients with unresectable stage IIIc-IV, BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma were randomly assigned 1:1 to 28-day cycles of atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (atezolizumab group) or atezolizumab placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (control group). In cycle 1, all patients received vemurafenib and cobimetinib only; atezolizumab placebo was added from cycle 2 onward. Randomisation was stratified by lactate dehydrogenase concentration and geographical region. Blinding for atezolizumab was achieved by means of an identical intravenous placebo, and blinding for vemurafenib was achieved by means of a placebo tablet. The primary outcome was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. This trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908672) is ongoing but no longer recruiting patients. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2017, and April 26, 2018, 777 patients were screened and 514 were enrolled and randomly assigned to the atezolizumab group (n=256) or control group (n=258). At a median follow-up of 18·9 months (IQR 10·4-23·8), progression-free survival as assessed by the study investigator was significantly prolonged with atezolizumab versus control (15·1 vs 10·6 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0·78; 95% CI 0·63-0·97; p=0·025). Common treatment-related adverse events (>30%) in the atezolizumab and control groups were blood creatinine phosphokinase increased (51·3% vs 44·8%), diarrhoea (42·2% vs 46·6%), rash (40·9%, both groups), arthralgia (39·1% vs 28·1%), pyrexia (38·7% vs 26·0%), alanine aminotransferase increased (33·9% vs 22·8%), and lipase increased (32·2% vs 27·4%); 13% of patients in the atezolizumab group and 16% in the control group stopped all treatment because of adverse events. INTERPRETATION: The addition of atezolizumab to targeted therapy with vemurafenib and cobimetinib was safe and tolerable and significantly increased progression-free survival in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes in Patients Receiving Trastuzumab/Pertuzumab-Based Chemotherapy: A TRYPHAENA Substudy.

Background: There is an urgent requirement to identify biomarkers to tailor treatment in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-amplified early breast cancer treated with trastuzumab/pertuzumab-based chemotherapy. Methods: Among the 225 patients randomly assigned to trastuzumab/pertuzumab concurrently or sequentially with an anthracycline-containing regimen or concurrently with an anthracycline-free regimen in the Tryphaena trial, we determined the percentage of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) at baseline in 213 patients, of which 126 demonstrated a pathological complete response (pCR; ypT0/is ypN0), with 28 demonstrating event-free survival (EFS) events. We investigated associations between baseline TIL percentage and either pCR or EFS after adjusting for clinicopathological characteristics using logistic and Cox regression models, respectively. To understand TIL biology, we evaluated associations between baseline TILs and baseline tumor gene expression data (800 gene set by NanoString) in a subset of 173 patients. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Among the patients with measurable TILs at baseline, the median level was 14.1% (interquartile range = 7.1%-32.4%). After adjusting for clinicopathological characteristics, baseline percentage TIL was not associated with pCR (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for every 10-percentage unit increase in TILs = 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.95 to 1.31, P = .17). At a median follow-up of 4.7 years, for every increase in baseline TILs of 10%, there was a 25% reduction in the hazard for an EFS event (aOR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.56 to 1.00, P = .05) after adjusting for baseline clinicopathological characteristics and pCR. Additionally, genes associated with epithelial-mesenchymal transition, angiogenesis, and T-cell inhibition such as SNAIL1, ZEB1, NOTCH3, and B7-H3 were statistically significantly inversely correlated with percentage TIL. Conclusions: Baseline TIL percentage provides independent prognostic information in patients treated with trastuzumab/pertuzumab-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy. However, further validation is required.

Pharmacokinetic and exposure-response analyses of pertuzumab in combination with trastuzumab and docetaxel during neoadjuvant treatment of HER2+ early breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The NeoSphere trial evaluated pertuzumab in the neoadjuvant setting [early breast cancer (EBC)] with pathological complete response (pCR) as the primary efficacy end point. This analysis of pertuzumab aimed to (1) compare its pharmacokinetics (PK) in patients with EBC versus advanced cancers, (2) to further evaluate PK drug-drug interactions (DDIs) when given in combination with trastuzumab, and (3) to assess the relationship between exposure and efficacy to assess the clinical dosing regimen in the EBC patients. METHODS: Pertuzumab serum concentration data from 180 patients in NeoSphere were compared to historical observations and potential DDI was assessed, by applying simulation techniques using a population PK model. The impact of pertuzumab exposure on pCR rate was evaluated using a logit response model (n = 88). RESULTS: The observed PK matched the population PK model simulations, confirming that the PK in neoadjuvant EBC appear to be in agreement with the historical observations. No evidence of a DDI effect of trastuzumab or docetaxel on pertuzumab was observed supporting the doses when given in combination. In NeoSphere >90% of EBC patients achieved the non-clinical target serum concentration. There was no association between the pertuzumab serum concentration and pCR within the range observed in this study (20-100 µg/mL) supporting no dose adjustments needed for patients with lower exposure. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis further supports the lack of DDI between the two therapeutic proteins and the appropriateness of the approved fixed non-body-weight-adjusted pertuzumab dose in the treatment of neoadjuvant EBC with pertuzumab in combination with trastuzumab and docetaxel.

5-year analysis of neoadjuvant pertuzumab and trastuzumab in patients with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer (NeoSphere): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: In the primary analysis of the NeoSphere trial, patients given neoadjuvant pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel showed a significantly improved pathological complete response compared with those given trastuzumab and docetaxel after surgery. Here, we report 5-year progression-free survival, disease-free survival, and safety. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised trial in hospitals and medical clinics, treatment-naive adults with locally advanced, inflammatory, or early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive four neoadjuvant cycles of trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose, followed by 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) plus docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks, increasing to 100 mg/m(2) from cycle 2 if tolerated; group A), pertuzumab (840 mg loading dose, followed by 420 mg every 3 weeks) and trastuzumab plus docetaxel (group B), pertuzumab and trastuzumab (group C), or pertuzumab and docetaxel (group D). After surgery, patients received three cycles of FEC (fluorouracil 600 mg/m(2), epirubicin 90 mg/m(2), and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2)) every 3 weeks (patients in group C received four cycles of docetaxel prior to FEC), and trastuzumab 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks to complete 1 year's treatment (17 cycles in total). Randomisation was done by a central centre using dynamic allocation, stratified by operable, locally advanced, and inflammatory breast cancer, and by oestrogen and/or progesterone receptor positivity. Safety analyses were done according to treatment received. The primary endpoint (pathological complete response) was previously reported; secondary endpoints reported here are 5-year progression-free survival (analysed in the intention-to-treat population) and disease-free survival (analysed in patients who had surgery). Secondary and exploratory analyses were not powered for formal statistical hypothesis testing, and therefore results are for descriptive purposes only. The study ended on Sept 22, 2014 (last patient, last visit). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00545688. FINDINGS: Between Dec 17, 2007, and Dec 22, 2009, 417 eligible patients were randomly assigned to group A (107 patients), group B (107 patients), group C (107 patients), or group D (96 patients). One patient in group A withdrew before treatment. One patient assigned to group D received group A treatment, one patient assigned to group D received group B treatment, and one patient assigned to group B received group C treatment. At clinical cutoff, 87 patients had progressed or died. 5-year progression-free survival rates were 81% (95% CI 71-87) for group A, 86% (77-91) for group B, 73% (64-81) for group C, and 73% (63-81) for group D (hazard ratios 0·69 [95% CI 0·34-1·40] group B vs group A, 1·25 [0·68-2·30] group C vs group A, and 2·05 [1·07-3·93] group D vs group B). Disease-free survival results were consistent with progression-free survival results and were 81% (95% CI 72-88) for group A, 84% (72-91) for group B, 80% (70-86) for group C, and 75% (64-83) for group D. Patients who achieved total pathological complete response (all groups combined) had longer progression-free survival compared with patients who did not (85% [76-91] in patients who achieved total pathological response vs 76% [71-81] in patients who did not achieve total pathological response; hazard ratio 0·54 [95% CI 0·29-1·00]). There were no new or long-term safety concerns and tolerability was similar across groups (neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment periods combined). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (group A: 71 [66%] of 107 patients; group B: 59 [55%] of 107; group C: 40 [37%] of 108; group D: 60 [64%] of 94), febrile neutropenia (group A: 10 [9%]; group B: 12 [11%]; group C: 5 [5%]; group D: 15 [16%]), and leucopenia (group A: 13 [12%]; group B: 6 [6%]; group C: 4 [4%]; group D: 8 [9%]). The number of patients with one or more serious adverse event was similar across groups (19-22 serious adverse events per group in 18-22% of patients). INTERPRETATION: Progression-free survival and disease-free survival at 5-year follow-up show large and overlapping CIs, but support the primary endpoint (pathological complete response) and suggest that neoadjuvant pertuzumab is beneficial when combined with trastuzumab and docetaxel. Additionally, they suggest that total pathological complete response could be an early indicator of long-term outcome in early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Population pharmacokinetic and covariate analysis of pertuzumab, a HER2-targeted monoclonal antibody, and evaluation of a fixed, non-weight-based dose in patients with a variety of solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To characterize the population pharmacokinetics (PK) of pertuzumab across clinical trials in a variety of solid tumors, evaluate the potential impact of patient characteristics on PK, and confirm the appropriateness of the fixed (non-weight-based) dose. METHODS: Pertuzumab concentration data collected following intravenous administration during eleven phase I/II studies and the pivotal phase III trial CLEOPATRA were analyzed using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. The potential impact of patient and laboratory characteristics and HER2 target-related variables on pertuzumab PK were investigated in a covariate analysis. The final model was used to confirm selection of fixed, non-weight-based dosing of pertuzumab, and to compare pertuzumab PK in CLEOPATRA with the other studies. RESULTS: The analysis included 4,525 serum concentration measurements from 481 patients with solid tumors. Pertuzumab PK in the 2-25 mg/kg dose range was described by a two-compartment linear model with first-order elimination. The elimination clearance and central compartment volume were 0.235 L/day, and 3.11 L, respectively, and the terminal elimination half-life was 18.0 days. Baseline serum albumin and lean body weight had statistically significant effects on pertuzumab clearance; however, simulations showed that the magnitude of their effects on pertuzumab exposure was minimal compared with overall variability and was not clinically relevant. Thus, variations in these factors do not require dose adjustments. CONCLUSIONS: The fixed, non-weight-based dosing of pertuzumab, 840 mg loading dose followed by a 420 mg maintenance dose every 3 weeks, in patients with the solid tumors in this analysis is well supported by the population pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation results.

Evaluating the predictive value of biomarkers for efficacy outcomes in response to pertuzumab- and trastuzumab-based therapy: an exploratory analysis of the TRYPHAENA study.

INTRODUCTION: Molecular markers that predict responses to particular therapies are invaluable for optimization of patient treatment. The TRYPHAENA study showed that pertuzumab and trastuzumab with chemotherapy was an efficacious and tolerable combination for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer in the neoadjuvant setting. We analyzed whether particular biomarkers correlated with the responses observed and therefore may predict outcomes in patients given pertuzumab plus trastuzumab. METHODS: We describe the analysis of a panel of biomarkers including HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN), and phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha (PIK3CA) by qRT-PCR, immunohistochemistry (IHC), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and PCR-based mutational analyses as appropriate. For each marker analyzed, patients were categorized into 'low' (generally below median) or 'high' (generally above median) subgroups at baseline and post-treatment. RESULTS: Correlation of marker subgroups with the achievement of a pathological complete response (pCR) (ypT0/is) was analyzed. HER2 protein and mRNA expression levels were associated with pCR rate in two of the three study arms and the pooled analyses. Correlations of biomarker status with pCR occurred in one individual arm only and the pooled analyses with EGFR and PTEN; however, interpretation of these results is limited by a strong imbalance in patient numbers between the high and low subgroups and inconsistency between arms. We also found no association between expression levels of TOP2A and pCR rate in either the anthracycline-containing or free arms of TRYPHAENA. CONCLUSIONS: According to these analyses, and in line with other analyses of pertuzumab and trastuzumab in the neoadjuvant setting, we conclude that HER2 expression remains the only marker suitable for patient selection for this regimen at present. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The TRYPHAENA study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00976989, on September 14 2009.

Absence of pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction of pertuzumab with trastuzumab and docetaxel.

Pertuzumab is a novel antihuman epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) humanized monoclonal antibody. Combined with trastuzumab plus docetaxel, pertuzumab improved progression-free and overall survival versus trastuzumab plus docetaxel in the phase III CLEOPATRA trial (NCT00567190) in first-line HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Thirty-seven patients participated in a pharmacokinetic (PK)/corrected QT interval substudy of CLEOPATRA, which evaluated potential PK drug-drug interaction (DDI). PK parameters were calculated using noncompartmental methods, and DDI analyses were carried out. In the presence of trastuzumab and docetaxel, the mean pertuzumab Cmin and Cmax in cycle 3 were 63.6 and 183 µg/ml, respectively. The pertuzumab concentrations observed were consistent with simulations from a validated population PK model, indicating that trastuzumab and docetaxel did not alter pertuzumab PK. Comparison of geometric least-squares mean PK parameters between arms showed no impact of pertuzumab on the PK of trastuzumab or docetaxel. In conclusion, no PK DDI was observed when pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel were combined for the treatment of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.

A phase Ib, dose-finding study of erlotinib in combination with a fixed dose of pertuzumab in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pertuzumab, a dimerization inhibitor of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), has demonstrated pharmacodynamic activity, with stable disease in non-small-cell lung cancer. Combining erlotinib and pertuzumab may enhance antitumor activity. This study aimed to establish the recommended dosing of the erlotinib and pertuzumab combination; assess safety, preliminary efficacy, and pharmacokinetics; and analyze biomarkers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifteen patients with stage IIIb/IV non-small-cell lung cancer who failed chemotherapy were recruited. The patients received erlotinib (days -8 to -1), then combination therapy (21-day cycles for 6 cycles). Pertuzumab was given intravenous at 840 mg, then 420 mg once every three weeks, with erlotinib given daily (100 or 150 mg). RESULTS: No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Adverse events were generally grade 1/2 and manageable. The objective response rate was 20% (3/15 patients; 2 responders had mutant HER1, 1 responder had wild-type HER1), median overall progression-free survival was 9.3 weeks. High HER1, HER2, and HER3 messenger RNA expression correlated with increased progression-free survival. Combination therapy did not affect erlotinib's pharmacokinetics; however, pertuzumab mean exposures (maximum concentration, 231 mg/L; area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 21 days, 1780 mg*d/L) were slightly higher than in previous studies. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy was well tolerated in patients with good performance status, with encouraging efficacy. A loading dose of pertuzumab 840 mg followed by 420 mg once every three weeks plus daily erlotinib 150 mg appears to be the most appropriate regimen for this combination.

Phase II trial of pertuzumab and trastuzumab in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer that progressed during prior trastuzumab therapy.

UNLABELLED: PURPOSE; Pertuzumab, a human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -targeted monoclonal antibody, potently inhibits HER2 dimerization and HER-mediated signaling pathways. Pertuzumab and the approved HER2-targeted monoclonal antibody trastuzumab have complementary mechanisms of action and result in enhanced antitumor activity when combined. This phase II trial assessed the efficacy and safety profile of the combination in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer whose disease had progressed during prior trastuzumab-based therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, open-label, single-arm, Simon two-stage study. Patients with advanced HER2-positive breast cancer in whom disease progression had occurred during prior trastuzumab-based therapy received trastuzumab weekly (4 mg/kg loading dose, then 2 mg/kg every week) or every 3 weeks (8 mg/kg loading dose, then 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) and pertuzumab every 3 weeks (840 mg loading dose, then 420 mg every 3 weeks). Treatment continued until disease progression or excessive toxicity. RESULTS: All 66 patients were assessable for efficacy and safety. The objective response rate was 24.2%, and the clinical benefit rate was 50%. Five patients (7.6%) experienced a complete response, 11 patients (16.7%) experienced a partial response, and 17 patients (25.8%) experienced stable disease of > or = 6 months. Median progression-free survival was 5.5 months. Overall, the combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab was well tolerated, and adverse events were mild to moderate. Cardiac dysfunction was minimal, and no patients withdrew as a result of cardiac-related adverse events. CONCLUSION: The combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab is active and well tolerated in patients with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer who had experienced progression during prior trastuzumab therapy.

Antiangiogenic, bioreductive and gene therapy approaches to the treatment of hypoxic tumours.

Quinone based bioreductive drugs have, potentially, a very versatile use in cancer chemotherapy. They can be activated by DT-diaphorase and hence can be used to target tumour types rich in this (O2)-independent reductase enzyme. Small molecular modifications can substantially reduce specificity for DT-diaphorase and under these circumstances the quinones become much less toxic in air but retain their potent cytotoxic effects under hypoxic conditions. Our understanding of the reductive (bio) chemistry of indolequinones, in particular, has subsequently allowed us to develop a platform technology where almost any therapeutic entity can potentially be delivered, selectively, to hypoxic tumours. Antiangiogenic approaches are currently receiving a substantial amount of attention and this review brings their development into context in view of the hypoxia dependence for neovascularization. Lastly, the use of bioreductive drugs when combined with hypoxia-mediated gene therapy is described. Such an approach provides a unique dual level of specificity for targeting hypoxic tumours and potentially can provide substantial therapeutic benefit.

Synthesis and enzymatic evaluation of pyridinium-substituted uracil derivatives as novel inhibitors of thymidine phosphorylase.

A series of water soluble N(1)- and C(6)-substituted uracil pyridinium compounds were prepared as potential inhibitors of thymidine phosphorylase (TP). The C(6)-uracil substituted derivatives were the most active. 1-[(5-Chloro-2,4-dihydroxypyrimidin-6-yl)methyl]pyridinium chloride, was identified as the best inhibitor being 5-fold more potent than the known inhibitor, 6-amino-5-bromouracil.