Phase I/II sequencing study of azacitidine, epacadostat, and pembrolizumab in advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1), an interferon-inducible enzyme, contributes to tumor immune intolerance. Immune checkpoint inhibition may increase interferon levels; combining IDO1 inhibition with immune checkpoint blockade represents an attractive strategy. Epigenetic agents trigger interferon responses and may serve as an immunotherapy priming method. We evaluated whether epigenetic therapy plus IDO1 inhibition and immune checkpoint blockade confers clinical benefit to patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: ECHO-206 was a Phase I/II study where treatment-experienced patients with advanced solid tumors (N = 70) received azacitidine plus an immunotherapy doublet (epacadostat [IDO1 inhibitor] and pembrolizumab). Sequencing of treatment was also assessed. Primary endpoints were safety/tolerability (Phase I), maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or pharmacologically active dose (PAD; Phase I), and investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR; Phase II). RESULTS: In Phase I, no dose-limiting toxicities were reported, the MTD was not reached; a PAD was not determined. ORR was 5.7%, with four partial responses. The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (42.9%) and nausea (42.9%). Twelve (17.1%) patients experienced ≥1 fatal AE, one of which (asthenia) was treatment-related. CONCLUSIONS: Although the azacitidine-epacadostat-pembrolizumab regimen was well tolerated, it was not associated with substantial clinical response in patients with advanced solid tumors previously exposed to immunotherapy.

Pembrolizumab in Microsatellite-Instability-High Advanced Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Programmed death 1 (PD-1) blockade has clinical benefit in microsatellite-instability-high (MSI-H) or mismatch-repair-deficient (dMMR) tumors after previous therapy. The efficacy of PD-1 blockade as compared with chemotherapy as first-line therapy for MSI-H-dMMR advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer is unknown. METHODS: In this phase 3, open-label trial, 307 patients with metastatic MSI-H-dMMR colorectal cancer who had not previously received treatment were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive pembrolizumab at a dose of 200 mg every 3 weeks or chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil-based therapy with or without bevacizumab or cetuximab) every 2 weeks. Patients receiving chemotherapy could cross over to pembrolizumab therapy after disease progression. The two primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival. RESULTS: At the second interim analysis, after a median follow-up (from randomization to data cutoff) of 32.4 months (range, 24.0 to 48.3), pembrolizumab was superior to chemotherapy with respect to progression-free survival (median, 16.5 vs. 8.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 0.80; P = 0.0002). The estimated restricted mean survival after 24 months of follow-up was 13.7 months (range, 12.0 to 15.4) as compared with 10.8 months (range, 9.4 to 12.2). As of the data cutoff date, 56 patients in the pembrolizumab group and 69 in the chemotherapy group had died. Data on overall survival were still evolving (66% of required events had occurred) and remain blinded until the final analysis. An overall response (complete or partial response), as evaluated with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, was observed in 43.8% of the patients in the pembrolizumab group and 33.1% in the chemotherapy group. Among patients with an overall response, 83% in the pembrolizumab group, as compared with 35% of patients in the chemotherapy group, had ongoing responses at 24 months. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 22% of the patients in the pembrolizumab group, as compared with 66% (including one patient who died) in the chemotherapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab led to significantly longer progression-free survival than chemotherapy when received as first-line therapy for MSI-H-dMMR metastatic colorectal cancer, with fewer treatment-related adverse events. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme and by Stand Up to Cancer; KEYNOTE-177 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02563002.).

First-in-human study of oleclumab, a potent, selective anti-CD73 monoclonal antibody, alone or in combination with durvalumab in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: CD73 upregulation in tumors leads to local immunosuppression. This phase I, first-in-human study evaluated oleclumab (MEDI9447), an anti-CD73 human IgG1λ monoclonal antibody, alone or with durvalumab in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC), pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), or epidermal growth factor receptor-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Patients received oleclumab 5-40 mg/kg (dose-escalation) or 40 mg/kg (dose-expansion) intravenously every 2 weeks (Q2W), alone (escalation only) or with durvalumab 10 mg/kg intravenously Q2W. RESULTS: 192 patients were enrolled, 66 during escalation and 126 (42 CRC, 42 PDAC, 42 NSCLC) during expansion. No dose-limiting toxicities occurred during escalation. In the monotherapy and combination therapy escalation cohorts, treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 55 and 54%, respectively, the most common being fatigue (17 and 25%). In the CRC, PDAC, and NSCLC expansion cohorts, 60, 57, and 45% of patients had TRAEs, respectively; the most common were fatigue (15%), diarrhea (9%), and rash (7%). Free soluble CD73 and CD73 expression on peripheral T cells and tumor cells showed sustained decreases, accompanied by reduced CD73 enzymatic activity in tumor cells. Objective response rate during escalation was 0%. Response rates in the CRC, PDAC, and NSCLC expansion cohorts were 2.4% (1 complete response [CR]), 4.8% (1 CR, 1 partial response [PR]), and 9.5% (4 PRs), respectively; 6-month progression-free survival rates were 5.4, 13.2, and 16.0%. CONCLUSIONS: Oleclumab ± durvalumab had a manageable safety profile, with pharmacodynamic activity reflecting oleclumab's mechanism of action. Evidence of antitumor activity was observed in tumor types that are generally immunotherapy resistant. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02503774; date of registration, July 17, 2015.

Safety and efficacy of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma with brain metastases: CheckMate 920.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) has demonstrated long-term efficacy and safety in patients with previously untreated, advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Although most phase 3 clinical trials exclude patients with brain metastases, the ongoing, multicohort phase 3b/4 CheckMate 920 trial (ClincalTrials.gov identifier NCT02982954) evaluated the safety and efficacy of NIVO + IPI in a cohort that included patients with aRCC and brain metastases, as reported here. METHODS: Patients with previously untreated aRCC and asymptomatic brain metastases received NIVO 3 mg/kg plus IPI 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks × 4 followed by NIVO 480 mg every 4 weeks. The primary end point was the incidence of grade ≥3 immune-mediated adverse events (imAEs) within 100 days of the last dose of study drug. Key secondary end points were progression-free survival and the objective response rate according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (both determined by the investigator). Exploratory end points included overall survival, among others. RESULTS: After a minimum follow-up of 24.5 months (N = 28), no grade 5 imAEs occurred. The most common grade 3 and 4 imAEs were diarrhea/colitis (n = 2; 7%) and hypophysitis, rash, hepatitis, and diabetes mellitus (n = 1 each; 4%). The objective response rate was 32% (95% CI, 14.9%-53.5%) with a median duration of response of 24.0 months; 4 of 8 responders remained without reported progression. Seven patients (25%) had intracranial progression. The median progression-free survival was 9.0 months (95% CI, 2.9-12.0 months), and the median overall survival was not reached (95% CI, 14.1 months to not estimable). CONCLUSIONS: In patients who had previously untreated aRCC and brain metastases-a population with a high unmet medical need that often is underrepresented in clinical trials-the approved regimen of NIVO + IPI followed by NIVO showed encouraging antitumor activity and no new safety signals.

Epacadostat Plus Pembrolizumab and Chemotherapy for Advanced Solid Tumors: Results from the Phase I/II ECHO-207/KEYNOTE-723 Study.

BACKGROUND: Epacadostat, an oral, selective inhibitor of IDO1, has shown activity when administered with pembrolizumab. We evaluated the addition of chemotherapy to epacadostat and pembrolizumab in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors. One proposed mechanism of resistance to PD-1 checkpoint inhibition is through immunosuppression mediated by L-kynurenine. IDO1, indoleamine-2,3-dioxygenase 1 is the rate-limiting enzyme catalyzing the conversion of L-tryptophan to L-kynurenine. If IDO1 is a mechanism of tumor escape from checkpoint inhibition, then addition of an IDO1 inhibitor with a PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor could enable tumor response to immunotherapy. METHODS: Patients received one of 7 tumor-appropriate chemotherapy regimens. Pembrolizumab 200 mg was infused intravenously every 3 weeks. Epacadostat 100 mg was administered orally twice daily. The primary objectives of phase I were determining safety/tolerability and defining the maximum tolerated or pharmacologically active dose of epacadostat. Phase II of the study was designed to enroll efficacy-expansion cohorts and to assess changes in the tumor and tumor microenvironment via mandatory-biopsy cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 70 patients were enrolled. Twelve patients were enrolled in the phase II mandatory-biopsy cohorts. Due to early study closure, efficacy expansion did not enroll. Grades 3 and 4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 78.6% of patients. Neutropenia and disease progression were the only grades 3 and 4 TEAEs reported in ≥10.0% of patients. One treatment-related death was reported. The ORR was 31.4% across all treatment groups. CONCLUSION: The combination of epacadostat 100 mg bid with pembrolizumab and chemotherapy had an acceptable safety profile. This regimen showed antitumor activity across multiple types of advanced or metastatic solid tumors (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03085914).

Pegilodecakin as monotherapy or in combination with anti-PD-1 or tyrosine kinase inhibitor in heavily pretreated patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: Final results of cohorts A, G, H and I of IVY Phase I study.

Interleukin (IL)-10 has anti-inflammatory and CD8+ T-cell-stimulating properties. Pegilodecakin (pegylated recombinant human IL-10) induces intratumoral antigen-specific CD8 + T-cells and upregulates IFNγ and major histocompatibility complexes (MHC) I and II. Pegilodecakin has single-agent activity with manageable toxicity in advanced renal cell carcinama (aRCC) (data cutoff 24 March 2016). Pegilodecakin with pembrolizumab or nivolumab revealed clinical activity in aRCC (data cutoff 1 July 2018). Here, we report for the first time the results of pegilodecakin+ pazopanib, and final results for monotherapy and long-term follow-up with pegilodecakin + anti-programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD-1) inhibitors (data cutoff 19 February 2019). Phase 1/1b multi-cohort dose escalation IVY study enrolled 353 patients. Sixty-six patients with aRCC were treated with pegilodecakin alone or with pazopanib or anti-PD-1 inhibitor in cohorts A, G, H and I (data cutoff 19 February 2019). Primary endpoints included safety and tolerability. Secondary endpoint was tumor response by immune-related response criteria (irRC). Pegilodecakin plus nivolumab or pembrolizumab yielded median progression-free survival (mPFS) of 13.9 months and 6-month PFS probability of 60%, 76% 1-year overall survival (OS) probability and 61% 2-year OS probability. Pegilodecakin monotherapy produced mPFS of 1.8 months, 6-month PFS probability 25%, 1-year OS 50%, and 2-year OS 17%. Median OS was not reached in both combinations. Objective response rates (ORRs) were 33% with pazopanib and 43% with anti-PD-1. Most common Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events included anemia, thrombocytopenia and hypertriglyceridemia. In these heavily pretreated renal cell carcinama cohorts of IVY, pegilodecakin+anti-PD-1 inhibitor showed promising clinical activity. Safety profile of pegilodecakin alone and with anti-PD-1 inhibitors was consistent as previously reported.

FOLFOXIRI-Bevacizumab or FOLFOX-Panitumumab in Patients with Left-Sided RAS/BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Based Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Doublets plus anti-epidermal growth factor receptors (EGFRs) are the preferred upfront option for patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Initial therapy with FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab is superior to doublets plus bevacizumab independently from primary tumor sidedness and RAS/BRAF status. No randomized comparison between FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab versus doublets plus anti-EGFRs is available in left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We selected patients with left-sided RAS and BRAF wild-type mCRC treated with first-line FOLFOX-panitumumab or FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab in five randomized trials: Valentino, TRIBE, TRIBE2, STEAM, and CHARTA. A propensity score-based analysis was performed to compare FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab with FOLFOX-panitumumab. RESULTS: A total of 185 patients received FOLFOX-panitumumab and 132 received FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 13.3 and 33.1 months in the FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab group compared with 11.4 and 30.3 months in the FOLFOX-panitumumab group (propensity score-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for PFS, 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64-1.04; p = .11; propensity score-adjusted HR for OS, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.59-1.08; p = .14). No significant differences in overall response rate and disease control rate were observed. A statistically nonsignificant difference in favor of FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab was observed for OS after secondary resection of metastases. Chemotherapy-related adverse events were more frequent in the FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab group, with specific regard to grade 3 and 4 neutropenia (48% vs. 26%, adjusted p = .001). CONCLUSION: Although randomized comparison is lacking, both FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab and FOLFOX-panitumumab are valuable treatment options in left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A propensity score-based analysis of five trials was performed to compare FOLFOX-panitumumab versus FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab in left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). No significant differences were observed, but FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab achieved numerically superior survival outcomes versus FOLFOX-panitumumab. Chemotherapy-related adverse events were more frequent in the FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab group. These observations suggest that although doublet chemotherapy plus anti-EGFRs remains the preferred treatment in patients with left-sided RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC, FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab is a valuable option able to provide similar, if not better, outcomes at the price of a moderate increase in toxicity and may be adopted based on patients' preference and potential impact on quality of life.

Phase 1 cohort expansion study of LY3023414, a dual PI3K/mTOR inhibitor, in patients with advanced mesothelioma.

BACKGROUND LY3023414 is a selective, ATP competitive inhibitor of class I PI3K isoforms, mTORC1/2 and DNA-PK. A Phase 1 dose escalation, 200 mg twice daily (BID) of LY3023414 was the determined recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). We report the antitumor activity and safety of LY3023414 monotherapy in patients with advanced mesothelioma.METHODS Patients enrolled had advanced malignant pleural or peritoneal mesothelioma with measurable disease, ECOG PS 0-1, were refractory or ineligible to receive standard therapies. Patients received LY3023414 200 mg BID. This dose expansion cohort is intended to evaluate preliminary antitumor activity of LY3023414 by overall response rate. Safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics were assessed. Biomarkers associated with treatment response was an exploratory endpoint. RESULTS Forty-two patients received LY3023414 for a median duration of 11.2 weeks (range: 1.1-53.0). One patient had a confirmed partial response (PR) (ORR 2.4%). Three patients had an unconfirmed PR. Seventeen patients had stable disease (SD) (DCR 43%). Most common adverse events (AEs) included fatigue (43%), nausea (43%), decreased appetite (38%), vomiting (33%), and diarrhea (29%). AEs were mostly mild or moderate. Grade ≥ 3 AEs were reported for 21% of patients with fatigue as the most frequent event (10%). Alterations of BAP1 were identified in 11/19 patients as the most common molecular aberration, followed by SETD2 and NF2 alterations. No obvious pattern of genetic changes/mutations in single genes or pathways was associated with anti-tumor activity. CONCLUSION LY3023414 monotherapy (200 mg BID) demonstrated an acceptable and manageable safety profile with limited single-agent activity in patients with advanced mesothelioma. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01655225; Date of registration: 19 July 2012.

A phase Ib open-label dose escalation study of the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of cobimetinib (GDC-0973) and ipatasertib (GDC-0068) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: This Phase Ib study explored combination dosing of the allosteric MEK1/2 inhibitor cobimetinib and the ATP-competitive pan-AKT inhibitor ipatasertib. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled to two dose escalation arms, each using a 3 + 3 design in 28-day cycles. In Arm A, patients received concurrent cobimetinib and ipatasertib on days 1-21. In Arm B, cobimetinib was administered intermittently with ipatasertib for 21 days. Primary objectives evaluated dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), maximum tolerated doses (MTD), and the recommended Phase II dose (RP2D). Secondary objectives included analysis of pharmacokinetic parameters, MAPK and PI3K pathway alterations, changes in tissue biomarkers, and preliminary anti-tumor efficacy. Expansion cohorts included patients with PTEN-deficient triple-negative breast cancer and endometrial cancer. RESULTS: Among 66 patients who received ≥1 dose of study drug, all experienced an adverse event (AE). Although no DLTs were reported, 6 patients experienced Cycle 1 DLT-equivalent AEs. The most common treatment-related AEs were diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, dermatitis acneiform, and fatigue. Thirty-five (53%) patients experienced drug-related AEs of ≥ grade 3 severity. Cobimetinb/ipatasertib MTDs were 60/200 mg on Arm A and 150/300 mg on Arm B; the latter was chosen as the RP2D. No pharmacokinetic interactions were identified. Biomarker analyses indicated pathway blockade and increases in IFNγ and PD-L1 gene expression following the combination. Three patients with endometrial or ovarian cancer achieved partial response, all with PTEN-low disease and two with tumor also harboring KRAS mutation. CONCLUSION: There was limited tolerability and efficacy for this MEK and AKT inhibitor combination. Nonetheless, pharmacodynamic analyses indicated target engagement and suggest rationale for further exploration of cobimetinib or ipatasertib in combination with other anticancer agents. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01562275.

Immunologic and tumor responses of pegilodecakin with 5-FU/LV and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

Background Treatment options for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are limited and checkpoint blockade inhibitors have been disappointing in this disease. Pegilodecakin has demonstrated single agent anti-tumor activity in immune-sensitive tumors. Phase 1 and preclinical data indicate synergy of pegilodecakin with 5-FU and platins. We assessed the safety and activity of pegilodecakin+FOLFOX in patients with PDAC. Methods IVY (NCT02009449) was an open-label phase 1b trial in the United States. Here we report on all enrolled patients from cohort C. Heavily pretreated patients were treated with pegilodecakin (self-administered subcutaneously daily at 2.5, 5, or 10 µg/kg) + 5-flurouracil/leucovorin/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX), dosed per manufacturers prescribing information, until tumor progression. Eligible patients had measurable disease per immune-related response criteria (irRC), were ≥ 18 years of age, and had ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were evaluated for primary(safety) and secondary (tumor response per irRC) endpoints. Results From 5 August 2014-12 July 2016, 39 patients enrolled in cohort C. All patients were evaluable for safety. In this advanced population, regimen had manageable toxicities with no immune-related adverse events (irAEs) greater than grade 1. The most common grade 3/4/5 TEAEs were thrombocytopenia (21[53.8%] of 39) and anemia (17[43.6%] of 39). In evaluable PDAC patients, the best overall response of pegilodecakin+FOLFOX was 3(14%) with CRs in 2(9%) patients. Conclusions Pegilodecakin+FOLFOX had an acceptable tolerability profile in PDAC, with no substantial irAEs seen, and promising efficacy with the combination yielding a 2-year OS of 24% (95% CI 10-42). These data led to the phase 3 study with pegilodecakin+FOLFOX as second-line therapy of PDAC (SEQUOIA).

Effect of Celecoxib vs Placebo Added to Standard Adjuvant Therapy on Disease-Free Survival Among Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer: The CALGB/SWOG 80702 (Alliance) Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Aspirin and cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) inhibitors have been associated with a reduced risk of colorectal polyps and cancer in observational and randomized studies. The effect of celecoxib, a COX-2 inhibitor, as treatment for nonmetastatic colon cancer is unknown. Objective: To determine if the addition of celecoxib to adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) improves disease-free survival in patients with stage III colon cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cancer and Leukemia Group B (Alliance)/Southwest Oncology Group 80702 was a 2 × 2 factorial design, phase 3 trial conducted at 654 community and academic centers throughout the United States and Canada. A total of 2526 patients with stage III colon cancer were enrolled between June 2010 and November 2015 and were followed up through August 10, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive adjuvant FOLFOX (every 2 weeks) for 3 vs 6 months with or without 3 years of celecoxib (400 mg orally daily; n = 1263) vs placebo (n = 1261). This report focuses on the results of the celecoxib randomization. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was disease-free survival, measured from the time of randomization until documented recurrence or death from any cause. Secondary end points included overall survival, adverse events, and cardiovascular-specific events. Results: Of the 2526 patients who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 61.0 years [11 years]; 1134 women [44.9%]), 2524 were included in the primary analysis. Adherence with protocol treatment, defined as receiving celecoxib or placebo for more than 2.75 years or continuing treatment until recurrence, death, or unacceptable adverse events, was 70.8% for patients treated with celecoxib and 69.9% for patients treated with placebo. A total of 337 patients randomized to celecoxib and 363 to placebo experienced disease recurrence or died, and with 6 years' median follow-up, the 3-year disease-free survival was 76.3% for celecoxib-treated patients vs 73.4% for placebo-treated patients (hazard ratio [HR] for disease recurrence or death, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.76-1.03; P = .12). The effect of celecoxib treatment on disease-free survival did not vary significantly according to assigned duration of adjuvant chemotherapy (P for interaction = .61). Five-year overall survival was 84.3% for celecoxib vs 81.6% for placebo (HR for death, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72-1.04; P = .13). Hypertension (any grade) occurred while treated with FOLFOX in 14.6% of patients in the celecoxib group vs 10.9% of patients in the placebo group, and a grade 2 or higher increase in creatinine levels occurred after completion of FOLFOX in 1.7% vs 0.5% of patients, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with stage III colon cancer, the addition of celecoxib for 3 years, compared with placebo, to standard adjuvant chemotherapy did not significantly improve disease-free survival. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01150045.

Margetuximab plus pembrolizumab in patients with previously treated, HER2-positive gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma (CP-MGAH22-05): a single-arm, phase 1b-2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Margetuximab, a novel, investigational, Fc-engineered, anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody, is designed to more effectively potentiate innate immunity than trastuzumab. We aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and antitumour activity of margetuximab plus pembrolizumab (an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody) in previously treated patients with HER2-positive gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: CP-MGAH22-05 was a single-arm, open-label, phase 1b-2 dose-escalation and cohort expansion study done at 11 academic centres in the USA and Canada and 15 centres in southeast Asia (Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore) that enrolled men and women aged 18 years or older with histologically proven, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic, HER2-positive, PD-L1-unselected gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, who had progressed after at least one previous line of therapy with trastuzumab plus chemotherapy in the locally advanced unresectable or metastatic setting. In the dose-escalation phase, nine patients were treated: three received margetuximab 10 mg/kg intravenously plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks and six received the recommended phase 2 dose of margetuximab 15 mg/kg plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks. An additional 86 patients were enrolled in the phase 2 cohort expansion and received the recommended phase 2 dose. The primary endpoints were safety and tolerability, assessed in the safety population (patients who received at least one dose of either margetuximab or pembrolizumab) and the objective response rate as assessed by the investigator according to both Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, in the response-evaluable population (patients with measurable disease at baseline and who received the recommended phase 2 dose of margetuximab and pembrolizumab). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02689284. Recruitment for the trial has completed and follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Feb 11, 2016, and Oct 2, 2018, 95 patients were enrolled. Median follow-up was 19·9 months (IQR 10·7-23·1). The combination therapy showed acceptable safety and tolerability; there were no dose-limiting toxicities in the dose-escalation phase. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (four [4%]) and infusion-related reactions (three [3%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in nine (9%) patients. No treatment-related deaths were reported. Objective responses were observed in 17 (18·48%; 95% CI 11·15-27·93) of 92 evaluable patients. INTERPRETATION: These findings serve as proof of concept of synergistic antitumour activity with the combination of an Fc-optimised anti-HER2 agent (margetuximab) along with anti-PD-1 checkpoint blockade (pembrolizumab). FUNDING: MacroGenics.

First-in-human, dose-escalation, phase 1 study of anti-angiopoietin-2 LY3127804 as monotherapy and in combination with ramucirumab in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: This is the first-in-human study of novel anti-angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) monoclonal antibody LY3127804 as monotherapy and in combination with ramucirumab in advanced solid tumours. METHODS: Patients received intravenous LY3127804 monotherapy (4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 27 mg/kg) in part A; LY3127804 (8, 12, 16, 20 and 27 mg/kg) with 8 mg/kg ramucirumab in part B; and LY3127804 (20 mg/kg) with 12 mg/kg ramucirumab in part C. Treatments were administered every 2 weeks (Q2W) during 28-day cycles. Dose-escalation was based on cycle 1 dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were treated in part A (n = 20), part B (n = 35) and part C (n = 7). Constipation, diarrhoea and fatigue were the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in part A; hypertension and peripheral oedema were the most frequent TEAE in parts B and C. No DLT was observed and maximum tolerated dose for LY3127804 was not reached. Four patients achieved partial response with combination therapy (clear cell endometrial carcinoma, cervix squamous cell carcinoma, carcinoma of unknown primary and gastroesophageal junction carcinoma), 29 achieved stable disease, and 24 had progressive disease. CONCLUSIONS: LY3127804 monotherapy and its combination with ramucirumab are well tolerated. LY3127804 20 mg/kg was the recommended Phase 2 dose.

Safety and Efficacy of Andecaliximab (GS-5745) Plus Gemcitabine and Nab-Paclitaxel in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Results from a Phase I Study.

BACKGROUND: Matrix metalloproteinase 9 (MMP9) expression in the tumor microenvironment is implicated in multiple protumorigenic processes. Andecaliximab (GS-5745), a monoclonal antibody targeting MMP9 with high affinity and selectivity, was evaluated in combination with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase I study was completed in two parts: part A was a dose-finding, monotherapy phase that enrolled patients with advanced solid tumors, and part B examined andecaliximab in combination with chemotherapy in specific patient cohorts. In the cohort of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (n = 36), andecaliximab 800 mg every 2 weeks was administered in combination with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel. Patients were treated until unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, disease progression, or death. Efficacy, safety, and biomarker assessments were performed. RESULTS: Andecaliximab combined with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel appeared to be well tolerated and did not demonstrate any unusual toxicities in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (75.0%), alopecia (55.6%), peripheral edema (55.6%), and nausea (50.0%). Median progression-free survival was 7.8 months (90% confidence interval, 6.9-11.0) with an objective response rate of 44.4% and median duration of response of 7.6 months. Maximal andecaliximab target binding, defined as undetectable, andecaliximab-free MMP9 in plasma, was observed. CONCLUSION: Andecaliximab in combination with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel demonstrates a favorable safety profile and clinical activity in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The combination of andecaliximab, a novel, first-in-class inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase 9, with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma provided a median progression-free survival of 7.8 months and objective response rate of 44.4%. The majority of systemic biomarkers related to matrix metalloproteinase 9 activity and immune suppression increased at 2 months, whereas biomarkers related to tumor burden decreased. Although this study demonstrates promising results with andecaliximab plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, andecaliximab was not associated with a survival benefit in a phase III study in patients with advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction carcinoma.

The McCAVE Trial: Vanucizumab plus mFOLFOX-6 Versus Bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX-6 in Patients with Previously Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma (mCRC).

BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab, a VEGF-A inhibitor, in combination with chemotherapy, has proven to increase progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival in multiple lines of therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The angiogenic factor angiopoetin-2 (Ang-2) is associated with poor prognosis in many cancers, including mCRC. Preclinical models demonstrate improved activity when inhibiting both VEGF-A and Ang-2, suggesting that the dual VEGF-A and Ang-2 blocker vanucizumab (RO5520985 or RG-7221) may improve clinical outcomes. This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of vanucizumab plus modified (m)FOLFOX-6 (folinic acid (leucovorin), fluorouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin) versus bevacizumab/mFOLFOX-6 for first-line mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients received mFOLFOX-6 and were randomized 1:1 to also receive vanucizumab 2,000 mg or bevacizumab 5 mg/kg every other week. Oxaliplatin was given for eight cycles; other agents were continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity for a maximum of 24 months. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-nine patients were randomized (vanucizumab, n = 94; bevacizumab, n = 95). The number of PFS events was comparable (vanucizumab, n = 39; bevacizumab, n = 43). The hazard ratio was 1.00 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.58; p = .98) in a stratified analysis based on number of metastatic sites and region. Objective response rate was 52.1% and 57.9% in the vanucizumab and bevacizumab arm, respectively. Baseline plasma Ang-2 levels were prognostic in both arms but not predictive for treatment effects on PFS of vanucizumab. The incidence of adverse events of grade ≥3 was similar between treatment arms (83.9% vs. 82.1%); gastrointestinal perforations (10.8% vs. 8.4%) exceeded previously reported rates in this setting. Hypertension and peripheral edema were more frequent in the vanucizumab arm. CONCLUSION: Vanucizumab/mFOLFOX-6 did not improve PFS and was associated with increased rates of antiangiogenic toxicity compared with bevacizumab/mFOLFOX-6. Our results suggest that Ang-2 is not a relevant therapeutic target in first-line mCRC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This randomized phase II study demonstrates that additional angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2) inhibition does not result in superior benefit over anti-VEGF-A blockade alone when each added to standard chemotherapy. Moreover, the performed pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis revealed that vanucizumab was bioavailable and affected its intended target, thereby strongly suggesting that Ang-2 is not a relevant therapeutic target in the clinical setting of treatment-naïve metastatic colorectal cancer. As a result, the further clinical development of the dual VEGF-A and Ang-2 inhibitor vanucizumab was discontinued.

A phase 1 dose-escalation study of checkpoint kinase 1 (CHK1) inhibitor prexasertib in combination with p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (p38 MAPK) inhibitor ralimetinib in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer.

Purpose The primary objective was to determine the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of checkpoint kinase 1 inhibitor, prexasertib, in combination with the p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase inhibitor, ralimetinib, which may be safely administered to patients with advanced cancer. Methods This Phase 1, nonrandomized, open-label, dose-escalation study of prexasertib+ralimetinib included patients with advanced and/or metastatic cancer, followed by a planned cohort expansion in patients with colorectal or non-small-cell lung cancer with KRAS and/or BRAF mutations. Intravenous prexasertib was administered at 60 mg/m2 (days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle), together with oral ralimetinib every 12 h (days 1 to 14 at 100 mg [Cohort 1, n = 3] or 200 mg [Cohort 2, n = 6]). Dose escalations for each agent were planned using a model-based 3 + 3 escalation paradigm. Safety was assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.0X. Tumor response was determined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1. Results Nine patients were treated; 3 experienced dose-limiting toxicities, all in Cohort 2, prohibiting further dose escalation. The most common ≥Grade 3 adverse event was neutrophil count decreased; other reported ≥Grade 3 hematological toxicities included febrile neutropenia and anemia. The pharmacokinetics of prexasertib+ralimetinib was comparable to the monotherapy population profile for each agent. One patient achieved a best overall response of stable disease (for 2 cycles); there were no complete/partial responses. Conclusions This study did not achieve its primary objective of establishing an RP2D of combination prexasertib + ralimetinib that could be safely administered to patients with advanced cancer.

Phase Ib study of the MEK inhibitor cobimetinib (GDC-0973) in combination with the PI3K inhibitor pictilisib (GDC-0941) in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Purpose We investigated the combination of the MEK inhibitor, cobimetinib, and the pan-PI3K inhibitor, pictilisib, in an open-label, phase Ib study. Experimental Design Patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled in 3 dose escalation schedules: (1) both agents once-daily for 21-days-on 7-days-off ("21/7"); (2) intermittent cobimetinib and 21/7 pictilisib ("intermittent"); or (3) both agents once-daily for 7-days-on 7-days-off ("7/7"). Starting doses for the 21/7, intermittent, and 7/7 schedules were 20/80, 100/130, and 40/130 mg of cobimetinib/pictilisib, respectively. Nine indication-specific expansion cohorts interrogated the recommended phase II dose and schedule. Results Of 178 enrollees (dose escalation: n = 98), 177 patients were dosed. The maximum tolerated doses for cobimetinib/pictilisib (mg) were 40/100, 125/180, and not reached, for the 21/7, intermittent, and 7/7 schedules, respectively. Six dose-limiting toxicities included grade 3 (G3) elevated lipase, G4 elevated creatine phosphokinase, and G3 events including fatigue concurrent with a serious adverse event (SAE) of diarrhea, decreased appetite, and SAEs of hypersensitivity and dehydration. Common drug-related adverse events included nausea, fatigue, vomiting, decreased appetite, dysgeusia, rash, and stomatitis. Pharmacokinetic parameters of the drugs used in combination were unaltered compared to monotherapy exposures. Confirmed partial responses were observed in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma (n = 1) and KRAS-mutant endometrioid adenocarcinoma (n = 1). Eighteen patients remained on study ≥6 months. Biomarker data established successful blockade of MAP kinase (MAPK) and PI3K pathways. The metabolic response rate documented by FDG-PET was similar to that observed with cobimetinib monotherapy. Conclusions Cobimetinib and pictilisib combination therapy in patients with solid tumors had limited tolerability and efficacy.

Meta-analysis examining overall survival in patients with pancreatic cancer treated with second-line 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin-based therapy after failing first-line gemcitabine-containing therapy: effect of performance status and comparison with other regimens.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis and few choices of therapy. For patients with adequate performance status, FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel are preferred first-line treatment. 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU)-based therapy (e.g. FOLFIRI, OFF, or FOLFOX) are often used in patients who previously received gemcitabine-based regimens. A systematic review was conducted of the safety and efficacy of FOLFOX for metastatic pancreatic cancer following prior gemcitabine-based therapy. A Bayesian fixed-effect meta-analysis with adjustment of patient performance status (PS) was conducted to evaluate overall survival (OS) and compare outcomes with nanoliposomal irinotecan combination therapy. METHODS: PubMed.gov , FDA.gov , ClinicalTrials.gov , congress abstracts, Cochrane.org library, and EMBASE database searches were conducted to identify randomized controlled trials of advanced/metastatic disease, prior gemcitabine-based therapy, and second-line treatment with 5-FU and oxaliplatin. The database search dates were January 1, 1990-June 30, 2019. Endpoints were OS and severe treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Trial-level PS scores were standardized by converting Karnofsky grade scores to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Grade, and overall study-weighted PS was calculated based on weighted average of all patients. RESULTS: Of 282 studies identified, 11 randomized controlled trials (N = 454) were included in the meta-analysis. Baseline weighted PS scores predicted OS in 10 of the 11 studies, and calculated PS scores of 1.0 were associated with a median OS of 6.3 months (95% posterior interval, 5.4-7.4). After adjusting for baseline PS, FOLFOX had a similar treatment effect profile (median OS, range 2.6-6.7 months) as 5-FU/leucovorin plus nanoliposomal irinotecan therapy (median OS, 6.1 months; 95% confidence interval 4.8-8.9). Neutropenia and fatigue were the most commonly reported Grade 3-4 TRAEs associated with FOLFOX. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline PS is a strong prognostic factor when interpreting the efficacy of 5-FU and oxaliplatin-based therapy of pancreatic cancer after progression on first-line gemcitabine-based regimens. When baseline PS is considered, FOLFOX has a similar treatment effect as 5-FU and nanoliposomal irinotecan therapy and a comparable safety profile. These findings suggest that 5-FU and oxaliplatin-based therapies remain an acceptable and alternative second-line treatment option for patients with pancreatic cancer and adequate PS (e.g. ECOG 0-1) following gemcitabine treatment.

Atezolizumab with or without cobimetinib versus regorafenib in previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (IMblaze370): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Microsatellite-stable metastatic colorectal cancer is typically unresponsive to immunotherapy. This phase 3 study was designed to assess atezolizumab plus cobimetinib in metastatic colorectal cancer. Here, we report the comparison of atezolizumab plus cobimetinib or atezolizumab monotherapy versus regorafenib in the third-line setting. METHODS: IMblaze 370 is a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial, done at 73 academic medical centres and community oncology practices in 11 countries. Patients aged at least 18 years with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer, baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and disease progression on or intolerance to at least two previous systemic chemotherapy regimens were enrolled. We used permuted-block randomisation (block size four) to assign patients (2:1:1) via an interactive voice and web response system to atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously every 2 weeks) plus cobimetinib (60 mg orally once daily for days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle), atezolizumab monotherapy (1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks), or regorafenib (160 mg orally once daily for days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle). Stratification factors were extended RAS status (wild-type vs mutant) and time since diagnosis of first metastasis (<18 months vs ≥18 months). Recruitment of patients with high microsatellite instability was capped at 5%. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in the population of patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. IMblaze370 is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02788279. FINDINGS: Between July 27, 2016, and Jan 19, 2017, 363 patients were enrolled (183 patients in the atezolizumab plus cobimetinib group, 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 90 in the regorafenib group). At data cutoff (March 9, 2018), median follow-up was 7·3 months (IQR 3·7-13·6). Median overall survival was 8·87 months (95% CI 7·00-10·61) with atezolizumab plus cobimetinib, 7·10 months (6·05-10·05) with atezolizumab, and 8·51 months (6·41-10·71) with regorafenib; the hazard ratio was 1·00 (95% CI 0·73-1·38; p=0·99) for the combination versus regorafenib and 1·19 (0·83-1·71; p=0·34) for atezolizumab versus regorafenib. Grade 3-4 adverse events were reported in 109 (61%) of 179 patients in the atezolizumab plus cobimetinib group, 28 (31%) of 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 46 (58%) of 80 in the regorafenib group. The most common all-cause grade 3-4 adverse events in the combination group were diarrhoea (20 [11%] of 179), anaemia (ten [6%]), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (12 [7%]), and fatigue (eight [4%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 71 (40%) of 179 patients in the combination group, 15 (17%) of 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 18 (23%) of 80 in the regorafenib group. Two treatment-related deaths occurred in the combination group (sepsis) and one in the regorafenib group (intestinal perforation). INTERPRETATION: IMblaze370 did not meet its primary endpoint of improved overall survival with atezolizumab plus cobimetinib or atezolizumab versus regorafenib. The safety of atezolizumab plus cobimetinib was consistent with those of the individual drugs. These results underscore the challenge of expanding the benefit of immunotherapy to patients whose tumours have lower baseline levels of immune inflammation, such as those with microsatellite-stable metastatic colorectal cancer. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd/Genentech Inc.

Ramucirumab plus pembrolizumab in patients with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, gastro-oesophageal cancer, or urothelial carcinomas (JVDF): a multicohort, non-randomised, open-label, phase 1a/b trial.

BACKGROUND: Pre-clinical and clinical evidence suggests that simultaneous blockade of VEGF receptor-2 (VEGFR-2) and PD-1 or PD-L1 enhances antigen-specific T-cell migration, antitumour activity, and has favourable toxicity. In this study, we aimed to assess the safety and preliminary antitumour activity of ramucirumab (an IgG1 VEGFR-2 antagonist) combined with pembrolizumab (an IgG4 PD-1 antagonist) in patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, non-small-cell lung cancer, or urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: We did a multicohort, non-randomised, open-label, phase 1a/b trial at 16 academic medical centres, hospitals, and clinics in the USA, France, Germany, Spain, and the UK. We enrolled adult patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (cohorts A and B), non-small-cell lung cancer (cohort C), or urothelial carcinoma (cohort D), whose disease had progressed on one or two lines of previous therapy (for those with gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma) or one to three lines of previous therapy (for those with non-small-cell lung cancer and urothelial carcinoma) that included platinum (for all tumour types) or fluoropyrimidine or both (for gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma). Eligibility criteria included presence of measurable disease and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1. Patients with previously untreated gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma and non-small-cell lung cancer were also enrolled (in two additional separate cohorts); the results for these cohorts will be reported separately. The first 21-day treatment cycle was a dose-limiting toxicity observation period (phase 1a; safety run-in), followed by a phase 1b cohort expansion stage. Pembrolizumab 200 mg was administered intravenously on day 1, and intravenous ramucirumab was administered at 8 mg/kg on days 1 and 8 for cohort A or at 10 mg/kg on day 1 for cohorts B, C, and D, every 3 weeks, until disease progression or other discontinuation criteria were met. The primary endpoint was the safety and tolerability of ramucirumab in combination with pembrolizumab assessed by the incidence of adverse events in both phase 1a and 1b and as dose-limiting toxicities during phase 1a. The safety and activity analysis set included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02443324, and is no longer enrolling patients. FINDINGS: Between July 30, 2015 and June 24, 2016, we enrolled and treated 92 patients (41 with gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, 27 with non-small-cell lung cancer, and 24 with urothelial carcinoma). Median follow-up was 32·8 months (IQR 28·1-33·6). During the first cycle of treatment (phase 1a safety run-in; n=11), one patient with gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma who received the 8 mg/kg dose of ramucirumab had grade 3 abdominal pain, colitis, hepatitis, interstitial lung disease, and jaundice, and grade 4 cholestasis, and died on treatment on day 40; the death was deemed related to progressive disease. No additional dose-limiting toxicities occurred and the decision was made to maintain the full planned doses of ramucirumab and pembrolizumab in phase 1b (n=81). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 75 (82%) of 92 patients, the most common of which was fatigue (in 33 patients [36%]), predominantly of grade 1 or 2 severity. 22 patients (24%) had one or more treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse, most commonly hypertension (six patients; 7%) and colitis (five patients; 5%). Serious adverse events occurred in 53 (58%) of 92 patients, and were deemed related to treatment in 22 (24%) patients. The most common treatment-related serious adverse events were abdominal pain in patients with gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (in three [7%] of 41 patients); asthenia and myocardial infarction in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (two [7%] of 27 patients), and colitis in patients with urothelial carcinoma (two [8%] of 24 patients). Six (7%) of 92 patients discontinued treatment because of treatment-related adverse events, and one death (from pulmonary sepsis in a patient with gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma) was deemed related to treatment. The number of patients achieving an objective response was three (7%; 95% CI 1·5-19·9) of 41 in the gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma cohort, eight (30%; 13·8-50·2) of 27 in the non-small-cell lung cancer cohort, and three (13%, 2·7-32·4) in the urothelial carcinoma cohort. INTERPRETATION: Ramucirumab in combination with pembrolizumab showed a manageable safety profile with favourable antitumour activity in patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, non-small-cell lung cancer, and urothelial carcinoma. Our results contribute to the growing evidence that supports dual inhibition of the VEGF-VEGFR2 and PD-1-PD-L1 pathways. This combination could be further explored with or without chemotherapy, especially for patients with tumours for which single-agent checkpoint inhibitors have shown no additional benefit over chemotherapy. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company, and Merck and Co.