BRN2 suppresses apoptosis, reprograms DNA damage repair, and is associated with a high somatic mutation burden in melanoma.

Whether cell types exposed to a high level of environmental insults possess cell type-specific prosurvival mechanisms or enhanced DNA damage repair capacity is not well understood. BRN2 is a tissue-restricted POU domain transcription factor implicated in neural development and several cancers. In melanoma, BRN2 plays a key role in promoting invasion and regulating proliferation. Here we found, surprisingly, that rather than interacting with transcription cofactors, BRN2 is instead associated with DNA damage response proteins and directly binds PARP1 and Ku70/Ku80. Rapid PARP1-dependent BRN2 association with sites of DNA damage facilitates recruitment of Ku80 and reprograms DNA damage repair by promoting Ku-dependent nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) at the expense of homologous recombination. BRN2 also suppresses an apoptosis-associated gene expression program to protect against UVB-, chemotherapy- and vemurafenib-induced apoptosis. Remarkably, BRN2 expression also correlates with a high single-nucleotide variation prevalence in human melanomas. By promoting error-prone DNA damage repair via NHEJ and suppressing apoptosis of damaged cells, our results suggest that BRN2 contributes to the generation of melanomas with a high mutation burden. Our findings highlight a novel role for a key transcription factor in reprogramming DNA damage repair and suggest that BRN2 may impact the response to DNA-damaging agents in BRN2-expressing cancers.

Circulating galectin-1 delineates response to bevacizumab in melanoma patients and reprograms endothelial cell biology.

Blockade of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signaling with bevacizumab, a humanized anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody (mAb), or with receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors, has improved progression-free survival and, in some indications, overall survival across several types of cancers by interrupting tumor angiogenesis. However, the clinical benefit conferred by these therapies is variable, and tumors from treated patients eventually reinitiate growth. Previously we demonstrated, in mouse tumor models, that galectin-1 (Gal1), an endogenous glycan-binding protein, preserves angiogenesis in anti-VEGF-resistant tumors by co-opting the VEGF receptor (VEGFR)2 signaling pathway in the absence of VEGF. However, the relevance of these findings in clinical settings is uncertain. Here, we explored, in a cohort of melanoma patients from AVAST-M, a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled phase 3 trial of adjuvant bevacizumab versus standard surveillance, the role of circulating plasma Gal1 as part of a compensatory mechanism that orchestrates endothelial cell programs in bevacizumab-treated melanoma patients. We found that increasing Gal1 levels over time in patients in the bevacizumab arm, but not in the observation arm, significantly increased their risks of recurrence and death. Remarkably, plasma Gal1 was functionally active as it was able to reprogram endothelial cell biology, promoting migration, tubulogenesis, and VEGFR2 phosphorylation. These effects were prevented by blockade of Gal1 using a newly developed fully human anti-Gal1 neutralizing mAb. Thus, using samples from a large-scale clinical trial from stage II and III melanoma patients, we validated the clinical relevance of Gal1 as a potential mechanism of resistance to bevacizumab treatment.

Binimetinib in combination with nivolumab or nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with previously treated microsatellite-stable metastatic colorectal cancer with RAS mutations in an open-label phase 1b/2 study.

BACKGROUND: In patients with previously treated RAS-mutated microsatellite-stable (MSS) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), a multicenter open-label phase 1b/2 trial was conducted to define the safety and efficacy of the MEK1/MEK2 inhibitor binimetinib in combination with the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) nivolumab (anti-PD-1) or nivolumab and another ICI, ipilimumab (anti-CTLA4). METHODS: In phase 1b, participants were randomly assigned to Arm 1A (binimetinib 45 mg twice daily [BID] plus nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks [Q4W]) or Arm 1B (binimetinib 45 mg BID plus nivolumab 480 mg Q4W and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 8 weeks [Q8W]) to determine the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of binimetinib. The MTD/RP2D was defined as the highest dosage combination that did not cause medically unacceptable dose-limiting toxicities in more than 35% of treated participants in Cycle 1. During phase 2, participants were randomly assigned to Arm 2A (binimetinib MTD/RP2D plus nivolumab) or Arm 2B (binimetinib MTD/RP2D plus nivolumab and ipilimumab) to assess the safety and clinical activity of these combinations. RESULTS: In phase 1b, 21 participants were randomized to Arm 1A or Arm 1B; during phase 2, 54 participants were randomized to Arm 2A or Arm 2B. The binimetinib MTD/RP2D was determined to be 45 mg BID. In phase 2, no participants receiving binimetinib plus nivolumab achieved a response. Of the 27 participants receiving binimetinib, nivolumab, and ipilimumab, the overall response rate was 7.4% (90% CI: 1.3, 21.5). Out of 75 participants overall, 74 (98.7%) reported treatment-related adverse events (AEs), of whom 17 (22.7%) reported treatment-related serious AEs. CONCLUSIONS: The RP2D binimetinib regimen had a safety profile similar to previous binimetinib studies or nivolumab and ipilimumab combination studies. There was a lack of clinical benefit with either drug combination. Therefore, these data do not support further development of binimetinib in combination with nivolumab or nivolumab and ipilimumab in RAS-mutated MSS mCRC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03271047 (09/01/2017).

Multi-cancer early detection test in symptomatic patients referred for cancer investigation in England and Wales (SYMPLIFY): a large-scale, observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Analysis of circulating tumour DNA could stratify cancer risk in symptomatic patients. We aimed to evaluate the performance of a methylation-based multicancer early detection (MCED) diagnostic test in symptomatic patients referred from primary care. METHODS: We did a multicentre, prospective, observational study at National Health Service (NHS) hospital sites in England and Wales. Participants aged 18 or older referred with non-specific symptoms or symptoms potentially due to gynaecological, lung, or upper or lower gastrointestinal cancers were included and gave a blood sample when they attended for urgent investigation. Participants were excluded if they had a history of or had received treatment for an invasive or haematological malignancy diagnosed within the preceding 3 years, were taking cytotoxic or demethylating agents that might interfere with the test, or had participated in another study of a GRAIL MCED test. Patients were followed until diagnostic resolution or up to 9 months. Cell-free DNA was isolated and the MCED test performed blinded to the clinical outcome. MCED predictions were compared with the diagnosis obtained by standard care to establish the primary outcomes of overall positive and negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity. Outcomes were assessed in participants with a valid MCED test result and diagnostic resolution. SYMPLIFY is registered with ISRCTN (ISRCTN10226380) and has completed follow-up at all sites. FINDINGS: 6238 participants were recruited between July 7 and Nov 30, 2021, across 44 hospital sites. 387 were excluded due to staff being unable to draw blood, sample errors, participant withdrawal, or identification of ineligibility after enrolment. Of 5851 clinically evaluable participants, 376 had no MCED test result and 14 had no information as to final diagnosis, resulting in 5461 included in the final cohort for analysis with an evaluable MCED test result and diagnostic outcome (368 [6·7%] with a cancer diagnosis and 5093 [93·3%] without a cancer diagnosis). The median age of participants was 61·9 years (IQR 53·4-73·0), 3609 (66·1%) were female and 1852 (33·9%) were male. The MCED test detected a cancer signal in 323 cases, in whom 244 cancer was diagnosed, yielding a positive predictive value of 75·5% (95% CI 70·5-80·1), negative predictive value of 97·6% (97·1-98·0), sensitivity of 66·3% (61·2-71·1), and specificity of 98·4% (98·1-98·8). Sensitivity increased with increasing age and cancer stage, from 24·2% (95% CI 16·0-34·1) in stage I to 95·3% (88·5-98·7) in stage IV. For cases in which a cancer signal was detected among patients with cancer, the MCED test's prediction of the site of origin was accurate in 85·2% (95% CI 79·8-89·3) of cases. Sensitivity 80·4% (95% CI 66·1-90·6) and negative predictive value 99·1% (98·2-99·6) were highest for patients with symptoms mandating investigation for upper gastrointestinal cancer. INTERPRETATION: This first large-scale prospective evaluation of an MCED diagnostic test in a symptomatic population demonstrates the feasibility of using an MCED test to assist clinicians with decisions regarding urgency and route of referral from primary care. Our data provide the basis for a prospective, interventional study in patients presenting to primary care with non-specific signs and symptoms. FUNDING: GRAIL Bio UK.

Interferon-Gamma-Producing CD8+ Tissue Resident Memory T Cells Are a Targetable Hallmark of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The pathogenesis of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-colitis remains incompletely understood. We sought to identify key cellular drivers of ICI-colitis and their similarities to idiopathic ulcerative colitis, and to determine potential novel therapeutic targets. METHODS: We used a cross-sectional approach to study patients with ICI-colitis, those receiving ICI without the development of colitis, idiopathic ulcerative colitis, and healthy controls. A subset of patients with ICI-colitis were studied longitudinally. We applied a range of methods, including multiparameter and spectral flow cytometry, spectral immunofluorescence microscopy, targeted gene panels, and bulk and single-cell RNA sequencing. RESULTS: We demonstrate CD8+ tissue resident memory T (TRM) cells are the dominant activated T cell subset in ICI-colitis. The pattern of gastrointestinal immunopathology is distinct from ulcerative colitis at both the immune and epithelial-signaling levels. CD8+ TRM cell activation correlates with clinical and endoscopic ICI-colitis severity. Single-cell RNA sequencing analysis confirms activated CD8+ TRM cells express high levels of transcripts for checkpoint inhibitors and interferon-gamma in ICI-colitis. We demonstrate similar findings in both anti-CTLA-4/PD-1 combination therapy and in anti-PD-1 inhibitor-associated colitis. On the basis of our data, we successfully targeted this pathway in a patient with refractory ICI-colitis, using the JAK inhibitor tofacitinib. CONCLUSIONS: Interferon gamma-producing CD8+ TRM cells are a pathological hallmark of ICI-colitis and a novel target for therapy.

Lag3: From Bench to Bedside.

The introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors represented a breakthrough treatment for metastatic melanoma, but the effect of these agents is not limited to a single cancer type. Promising results have been reported in various solid tumors, for example, lung cancer. The success of these drugs depends on the activation of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and primary and acquired resistance have been reported alongside a high rate of immune-related adverse events when agents targeting different immune checkpoints are given in combination. Numerous other targets have been investigated to overcome the resistance, improve the activity, and reduce the toxicity of checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Among these, the most promising is Lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3), a transmembrane protein involved in cytokine release and inhibitory signaling in T cells. Preclinical data showed that LAG-3 is a negative regulator of both CD4+ T cell and CD8+ T cell and the activity on CD8+ T cell is independent of CD4+ activation. On the CD8+ T cell, LAG-3 activation abrogates the antigen presentation whereas on the CD4+ T cell, arrests the S phase of the cell cycle. The blockade of LAG-3 has been tested in several combination therapies, and recent clinical data showed a good safety profile and a synergistic effect with anti-PD-1, suggesting that this combination could become a standard treatment for metastatic melanoma. In this review, we report the available preclinical data and the new clinical data on LAG-3 blockade in different solid tumors, and we discuss LAG-3 as potential prognostic and predictive factor, together with possible future applications.

Phase 1 study of the ATR inhibitor berzosertib (formerly M6620, VX-970) combined with gemcitabine ± cisplatin in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Berzosertib (formerly M6620, VX-970) is a highly potent and selective, first-in-class inhibitor of ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related protein kinase (ATR). We assessed multiple ascending doses of berzosertib + gemcitabine ± cisplatin in patients with resistant/refractory advanced solid tumours. METHODS: We evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK) and preliminary efficacy of intravenous berzosertib + gemcitabine ± cisplatin using a standard 3 + 3 dose-escalation design. The starting doses were berzosertib 18 mg/m2, gemcitabine 875 mg/m2 and cisplatin 60 mg/m2. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients received berzosertib + gemcitabine and eight received berzosertib + gemcitabine + cisplatin. Four patients receiving berzosertib + gemcitabine had a total of seven dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and three receiving berzosertib + gemcitabine + cisplatin had a total of three DLTs. Berzosertib 210 mg/m2 (days 2 and 9) + gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 (days 1 and 8) Q3W was established as the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D); no RP2D was determined for berzosertib + gemcitabine + cisplatin. Neither gemcitabine nor cisplatin affected berzosertib PK. Most patients in both arms achieved a best response of either partial response or stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: Berzosertib + gemcitabine was well tolerated in patients with advanced solid tumours and showed preliminary efficacy signs. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER: NCT02157792.

Checkpoint-blocker-induced autoimmunity is associated with favourable outcome in metastatic melanoma and distinct T-cell expression profiles.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) activate CD8+ T cells, eliciting both anti-cancer activity and immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The relationship of irAEs with baseline parameters and clinical outcome is unclear. METHODS: Retrospective evaluation of irAEs on survival was performed across primary (N = 144) and secondary (N = 211) independent cohorts of patients with metastatic melanoma receiving single agent (pembrolizumab/nivolumab-sICB) or combination (nivolumab and ipilimumab-cICB) checkpoint blockade. RNA from pre-treatment and post-treatment CD8+ T cells was sequenced and differential gene expression according to irAE development assessed. RESULTS: 58.3% of patients developed early irAEs and this was associated with longer progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) across both cohorts (log-rank test, OS: P < 0.0001). Median survival for patients without irAEs was 16.6 months (95% CI: 10.9-33.4) versus not-reached (P = 2.8 × 10-6). Pre-treatment monocyte and neutrophil counts, but not BMI, were additional predictors of clinical outcome. Differential expression of numerous gene pathway members was observed in CD8+ T cells according to irAE development, and patients not developing irAEs demonstrating upregulated CXCR1 pre- and post-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Early irAE development post-ICB is associated with favourable survival in MM. Development of irAEs is coupled to expression of numerous gene pathways, suggesting irAE development in-part reflects baseline immune activation.

Comparative efficacy and safety of adjuvant nivolumab versus other treatments in adults with resected melanoma: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies are approved for adjuvant treatment of patients with resected melanoma; however, they have not been compared in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nivolumab with other approved treatments using available evidence from RCTs in a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted through May 2019 to identify relevant RCTs evaluating approved adjuvant treatments. Outcomes of interest included recurrence-free survival (RFS)/disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), all-cause grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs), discontinuations, and discontinuations due to AEs. Time-to-event outcomes (RFS/DFS and DMFS) were analyzed both assuming that hazard ratios (HRs) are constant over time and that they vary. RESULTS: Of 26 identified RCTs, 19 were included in the NMA following a feasibility assessment. Based on HRs for RFS/DFS, the risk of recurrence with nivolumab was similar to that of pembrolizumab and lower than that of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, ipilimumab 10 mg/kg, or interferon. Risk of recurrence with nivolumab was similar to that of dabrafenib plus trametinib at 12 months, however, was lower beyond 12 months (HR [95% credible interval] at 24 months, 0.46 [0.27-0.78]; at 36 months, 0.28 [0.14-0.59]). Based on HRs for DMFS, the risk of developing distant metastases was lower with nivolumab than with ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or interferon and was similar to dabrafenib plus trametinib. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant therapy with nivolumab provides an effective treatment option with a promising risk-benefit profile.

Long-term real-world experience with ipilimumab and non-ipilimumab therapies in advanced melanoma: the IMAGE study.

BACKGROUND: Ipilimumab has shown long-term overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced melanoma in clinical trials, but robust real-world evidence is lacking. We present long-term outcomes from the IMAGE study (NCT01511913) in patients receiving ipilimumab and/or non-ipilimumab (any approved treatment other than ipilimumab) systemic therapies. METHODS: IMAGE was a multinational, prospective, observational study assessing adult patients with advanced melanoma treated with ipilimumab or non-ipilimumab systemic therapies between June 2012 and March 2015 with ≥3 years of follow-up. Adjusted OS curves based on multivariate Cox regression models included covariate effects. Safety and patient-reported outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: Among 1356 patients, 1094 (81%) received ipilimumab and 262 (19%) received non-ipilimumab index therapy (systemic therapy [chemotherapy, anti-programmed death 1 antibodies, or BRAF ± MEK inhibitors], radiotherapy, and radiosurgery). In the overall population, median age was 64 years, 60% were male, 78% were from Europe, and 78% had received previous treatment for advanced melanoma. In the ipilimumab-treated cohort, 780 (71%) patients did not receive subsequent therapy (IPI-noOther) and 314 (29%) received subsequent non-ipilimumab therapy (IPI-Other) on study. In the non-ipilimumab-treated cohort, 205 (78%) patients remained on or received other subsequent non-ipilimumab therapy (Other-Other) and 57 (22%) received subsequent ipilimumab therapy (Other-IPI) on study. Among 1151 patients who received ipilimumab at any time during the study (IPI-noOther, IPI-Other, and Other-IPI), 296 (26%) reported CTCAE grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events, most occurring in year 1. Ipilimumab-treated and non-ipilimumab-treated patients who switched therapy (IPI-Other and Other-IPI) had longer OS than those who did not switch (IPI-noOther and Other-Other). Patients with prior therapy who did not switch therapy (IPI-noOther and Other-Other) showed similar OS. In treatment-naive patients, those in the IPI-noOther group tended to have longer OS than those in the Other-Other group. Patient-reported outcomes were similar between treatment cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: With long-term follow-up (≥ 3 years), safety and OS in this real-world population of patients treated with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg were consistent with those reported in clinical trials. Patient-reported quality of life was maintained over the study period. OS analysis across both pretreated and treatment-naive patients suggested a beneficial role of ipilimumab early in treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01511913. Registered January 19, 2012 - Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01511913.

A Phase 2a cohort expansion study to assess the safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy of CXD101 in patients with advanced solid-organ cancer expressing HR23B or lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: This Phase 2a dose expansion study was performed to assess the safety, tolerability and preliminary efficacy of the maximum tolerated dose of the oral histone de-acetylase (HDAC) inhibitor CXD101 in patients with relapsed / refractory lymphoma or advanced solid organ cancers and to assess HR23B protein expression by immunohistochemistry as a biomarker of HDAC inhibitor sensitivity. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid-organ cancers with high HR23B expression or lymphomas received CXD101 at the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Key exclusions: corrected QT > 450 ms, neutrophils < 1.5 × 109/L, platelets < 75 × 109/L, ECOG > 1. Baseline HR23B expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients enrolled between March 2014 and September 2019, 47 received CXD101 (19 solid-organ cancer, 28 lymphoma). Thirty-four patients received ≥80% RP2D. Baseline characteristics: median age 57.4 years, median prior lines 3, male sex 57%. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (32%), thrombocytopenia (17%), anaemia (13%), and fatigue (9%) with no deaths on CXD101. No responses were seen in solid-organ cancers, with disease stabilisation in 36% or patients; the overall response rate in lymphoma was 17% with disease stabilisation in 52% of patients. Median progression-free survival was 1.2 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2-5.4) in solid-organ cancers and 2.6 months (95%CI 1.2-5.6) in lymphomas. HR23B status did not predict response. CONCLUSIONS: CXD101 showed acceptable tolerability with efficacy seen in Hodgkin lymphoma, T-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma. Further studies assessing combination approaches are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01977638 . Registered 07 November 2013.

Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab in resected stage IIIB-C and stage IV melanoma (CheckMate 238): 4-year results from a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Previously, findings from CheckMate 238, a double-blind, phase 3 adjuvant trial in patients with resected stage IIIB-C or stage IV melanoma, showed significant improvements in recurrence-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival with nivolumab versus ipilimumab. This report provides updated 4-year efficacy, initial overall survival, and late-emergent safety results. METHODS: This multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial was done in 130 academic centres, community hospitals, and cancer centres across 25 countries. Patients aged 15 years or older with resected stage IIIB-C or IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive nivolumab or ipilimumab via an interactive voice response system and stratified according to disease stage and baseline PD-L1 status of tumour cells. Patients received intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or intravenous ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, and then every 12 weeks until 1 year of treatment, disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival by investigator assessment, and overall survival was a key secondary endpoint. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned patients). All patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the safety analysis. The results presented in this report reflect the 4-year update of the ongoing study with a database lock date of Jan 30, 2020. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02388906. FINDINGS: Between March 30 and Nov 30, 2015, 906 patients were assigned to nivolumab (n=453) or ipilimumab (n=453). Median follow-up was 51·1 months (IQR 41·6-52·7) with nivolumab and 50·9 months (36·2-52·3) with ipilimumab; 4-year recurrence-free survival was 51·7% (95% CI 46·8-56·3) in the nivolumab group and 41·2% (36·4-45·9) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71 [95% CI 0·60-0·86]; p=0·0003). With 211 (100 [22%] of 453 patients in the nivolumab group and 111 [25%] of 453 patients in the ipilimumab group) of 302 anticipated deaths observed (about 73% of the originally planned 88% power needed for significance), 4-year overall survival was 77·9% (95% CI 73·7-81·5) with nivolumab and 76·6% (72·2-80·3) with ipilimumab (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·66-1·14]; p=0·31). Late-emergent grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in three (1%) of 452 and seven (2%) of 453 patients. The most common late-emergent treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported were diarrhoea, diabetic ketoacidosis, and pneumonitis (one patient each) in the nivolumab group, and colitis (two patients) in the ipilimumab group. Two previously reported treatment-related deaths in the ipilimumab group were attributed to study drug toxicity (marrow aplasia in one patient and colitis in one patient); no further treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: At a minimum of 4 years' follow-up, nivolumab demonstrated sustained recurrence-free survival benefit versus ipilimumab in resected stage IIIB-C or IV melanoma indicating a long-term treatment benefit with nivolumab. With fewer deaths than anticipated, overall survival was similar in both groups. Nivolumab remains an efficacious adjuvant treatment for patients with resected high-risk melanoma, with a safety profile that is more tolerable than that of ipilimumab. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical.

Intratumoural immunotherapies for unresectable and metastatic melanoma: current status and future perspectives.

The emergence of human intratumoural immunotherapy (HIT-IT) is a major step forward in the management of unresectable melanoma. The direct injection of treatments into melanoma lesions can cause cell lysis and induce a local immune response, and might be associated with a systemic immune response. Directly injecting immunotherapies into tumours achieves a high local concentration of immunostimulatory agent while minimising systemic exposure and, as such, HIT-IT agents are associated with lower toxicity than systemic immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs), enabling their potential use in combination with other therapies. Consequently, multiple HIT-IT agents, including oncolytic viruses, pattern-recognition receptor agonists, injected CPIs, cytokines and immune glycolipids, are under investigation. This review considers the current clinical development status of HIT-IT agents as monotherapy and in combination with systemic CPIs, and the practical aspects of administering and assessing the response to these agents. The future of HIT-IT probably lies in its use in combination with systemic CPIs; data from Phase 2 trials indicate a synergy between HIT-IT and CPIs. Data also suggest that the addition of HIT-IT to a CPI might generate responses in CPI-refractory tumours, thereby overcoming resistance and addressing a current unmet need in unresectable and metastatic melanoma for treatment options following progression after CPI treatment.

Adjuvant Nivolumab versus Ipilimumab in Resected Stage III or IV Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab and ipilimumab are immune checkpoint inhibitors that have been approved for the treatment of advanced melanoma. In the United States, ipilimumab has also been approved as adjuvant therapy for melanoma on the basis of recurrence-free and overall survival rates that were higher than those with placebo in a phase 3 trial. We wanted to determine the efficacy of nivolumab versus ipilimumab for adjuvant therapy in patients with resected advanced melanoma. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 906 patients (≥15 years of age) who were undergoing complete resection of stage IIIB, IIIC, or IV melanoma to receive an intravenous infusion of either nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 weeks (453 patients) or ipilimumab at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks for four doses and then every 12 weeks (453 patients). The patients were treated for a period of up to 1 year or until disease recurrence, a report of unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. The primary end point was recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: At a minimum follow-up of 18 months, the 12-month rate of recurrence-free survival was 70.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 66.1 to 74.5) in the nivolumab group and 60.8% (95% CI, 56.0 to 65.2) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 0.65; 97.56% CI, 0.51 to 0.83; P<0.001). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported in 14.4% of the patients in the nivolumab group and in 45.9% of those in the ipilimumab group; treatment was discontinued because of any adverse event in 9.7% and 42.6% of the patients, respectively. Two deaths (0.4%) related to toxic effects were reported in the ipilimumab group more than 100 days after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing resection of stage IIIB, IIIC, or IV melanoma, adjuvant therapy with nivolumab resulted in significantly longer recurrence-free survival and a lower rate of grade 3 or 4 adverse events than adjuvant therapy with ipilimumab. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 238 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02388906 ; Eudra-CT number, 2014-002351-26 .).

Immunophenotypes of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Meta-analysis of transcriptional subtypes.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the most common malignancy of the pancreas and has one of the highest mortality rates of any cancer type with a 5-year survival rate of <5%. Recent studies of PDAC have provided several transcriptomic classifications based on separate analyses of individual patient cohorts. There is a need to provide a unified transcriptomic PDAC classification driven by therapeutically relevant biologic rationale to inform future treatment strategies. Here, we used an integrative meta-analysis of 353 patients from four different studies to derive a PDAC classification based on immunologic parameters. This consensus clustering approach indicated transcriptomic signatures based on immune infiltrate classified as adaptive, innate and immune-exclusion subtypes. This reveals the existence of microenvironmental interpatient heterogeneity within PDAC and could serve to drive novel therapeutic strategies in PDAC including immune modulation approaches to treating this disease.

A phase 1 study to assess the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of CXD101 in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: In the current study, the authors sought to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the novel class 1 selective histone deacetylase inhibitor CXD101 in a dose escalation study in patients with advanced solid tumors or recurrent/refractory lymphoma. METHODS: The authors escalated the dose of CXD101 from 1 mg twice daily orally for 5 days in a 21-day cycle (3+3 design). RESULTS: A total of 39 patients were enrolled, 36 of whom received CXD101. Of the 30 patients in the escalation cohort, 29 were evaluable for determination of the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). DLTs were noted at doses of 16 mg twice daily (1 of 6 patients), 20 mg twice daily (1 of 6 patients), and 24/25 mg twice daily (2 of 5 patients, both of whom developed neutropenic fever). The MTD was 20 mg twice daily, which achieved maximal plasma concentrations (±standard deviation) of 231±76 nM to 342±126 nM, which was within the biologically active range. Six patients received 20 mg twice daily in an expansion cohort. The most frequent adverse events were fatigue, nausea, and reversible cytopenia. Key grade 3 to 4 adverse events (according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events criteria [version 4.03]) included thrombocytopenia (11%), neutropenia (17%), and neutropenic fever (2%) across the 133 CXD101 cycles given. The toxicity profile was similar to that of licensing studies with other histone deacetylase inhibitors. In 22 evaluable patients receiving a dose of ≥16 mg twice daily (17 of whom had lymphoma and 5 of whom had solid tumors), 3 partial responses (2 in patients with classic Hodgkin lymphoma after allogenic stem cell transplantation and 1 in a patient with angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma) and 1 complete response (in a patient with follicular lymphoma) were noted (overall response rate of 18%) in addition to 9 patients who achieved durable stable disease. Responses were noted predominantly among patients with lymphoma (tumor reduction noted in 63% of patients on standard computed tomography). CONCLUSIONS: The MTD in the current study was found to be 20 mg twice daily. Encouraging and durable activity was observed in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma, T-cell lymphoma, and follicular lymphoma.

Focused Ultrasound Hyperthermia for Targeted Drug Release from Thermosensitive Liposomes: Results from a Phase I Trial.

Purpose To demonstrate the feasibility and safety of using focused ultrasound planning models to determine the treatment parameters needed to deliver volumetric mild hyperthermia for targeted drug delivery without real-time thermometry. Materials and Methods This study was part of the Targeted Doxorubicin, or TARDOX, phase I prospective trial of focused ultrasound-mediated, hyperthermia-triggered drug delivery to solid liver tumors ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02181075). Ten participants (age range, 49-68 years; average age, 60 years; four women) were treated from March 2015 to March 2017 by using a clinically approved focused ultrasound system to release doxorubicin from lyso-thermosensitive liposomes. Ultrasonic heating of target tumors (treated volume: 11-73 cm3 [mean ± standard deviation, 50 cm3 ± 26]) was monitored in six participants by using a minimally invasive temperature sensor; four participants were treated without real-time thermometry. For all participants, CT images were used with a patient-specific hyperthermia model to define focused ultrasound treatment plans. Feasibility was assessed by comparing model-prescribed focused ultrasound powers to those implemented for treatment. Safety was assessed by evaluating MR images and biopsy specimens for evidence of thermal ablation and monitoring adverse events. Results The mean difference between predicted and implemented treatment powers was -0.1 W ± 17.7 (n = 10). No evidence of focused ultrasound-related adverse effects, including thermal ablation, was found. Conclusion In this 10-participant study, the authors confirmed the feasibility of using focused ultrasound-mediated hyperthermia planning models to define treatment parameters that safely enabled targeted, noninvasive drug delivery to liver tumors while monitored with B-mode guidance and without real-time thermometry. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Dickey and Levi-Polyachenko in this issue.

Temporal validation of metabolic nodal response of esophageal cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy as an independent predictor of unresectable disease, survival, and recurrence.

OBJECTIVES: We recently described metabolic nodal stage (mN) and response (mNR) of cancer of the esophagus and gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) using 18F-FDG PET-CT as new markers of disease progression, recurrence, and death. We aimed to validate our findings. METHODS: Our validation cohort comprised all patients consecutive to our discovery cohort, staged before and after NAC using PET-CT from 2014 to 2017. Multivariate binary logistic and Cox regression were performed. RESULTS: Fifty-one of the 200 patients had FDG-avid nodes after NAC (25.5%; i.e., lack of complete mNR), and were more likely to progress during NAC to incurable disease on PET-CT or at surgery: odds ratio 3.84 (1.46-10.1; p = 0.006). In 176 patients undergoing successful resection, patients without complete mNR had a worse prognosis: disease-free survival hazard ratio 2.46 (1.34-4.50); p = 0.004. These associations were independent of primary tumor metabolic, pathological response, and stage. In a hybrid pathological/metabolic nodal stage, avid nodal metastases conferred a worse prognosis than non-avid metastases. Lack of complete mNR predicted recurrence or death at 1 and 2 years: positive predictive values 44.4% (31.7-57.8) and 74.1% (56.6-86.3) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides temporal validation for mNR as a new and independent predictive and prognostic marker of esophageal and GEJ cancer treated with NAC and surgery, although external validation is required to assess generalizability. mNR may provide surrogate information regarding the phenotype of metastatic cancer clones beyond the mere presence of nodal metastases, and might be used to better inform patients, risk stratify, and personalize management, including adjuvant therapy. KEY POINTS: • We previously described metabolic nodal response (mNR) of esophageal cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy using 18 F-FDG PET-CT as a predictor of unresectable disease, early recurrence, and death. • We report the first validation of these findings. In an immediately consecutive cohort, we found consistent proportions of patients with and without mNR, and associations with abandoned resection, early recurrence, and death. • This supports mNR as a new and actionable biomarker in esophageal cancer. Although external validation is required, mNR may provide surrogate information about the chemosensitivity of metastatic subclones, and the means to predict treatment success, guide personalized therapy, and follow-up.

Routinely staging gastric cancer with 18F-FDG PET-CT detects additional metastases and predicts early recurrence and death after surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) is typically considered to have minimal yield in gastric cancer, and so is not consistently recommended by international guidelines. However, its yield is considerable in esophageal and junctional cancer, identifying unsuspected metastases and risk-stratifying patients using metabolic nodal stage (mN). We aimed to determine the contemporary utility of routine 18F-FDG PET-CT in gastric cancer. METHODS: We routinely stage patients with non-junctional gastric cancer with PET-CT, provided initial CT does not demonstrate unequivocal metastases. We performed a retrospective study of all such patients staged in our institution from January 2007 to July 2016. Our primary endpoint was detection of incurable disease. Our secondary endpoint was disease-free survival following gastrectomy. Decision theory, economic, and predictive models were generated. RESULTS: The primary tumor was FDG-avid in 225/279 patients (80.6%). Seventy-two (25.8%) had FDG-avid nodes (resectable by D2 lymphadenectomy). This was not influenced by the Lauren classification. Unsuspected metastases were identified in 20 patients (7.2%). In 13 (4.7%), these would not have been otherwise identified. Decision theory and economic modeling supported routine PET-CT. Patients with FDG-avid nodes were more likely to have incurable disease (51.4% versus 15.5%; p < 0.001), and a worse prognosis if not: multivariate hazard ratio 2.19 (1.23-3.91; p = 0.008). Prognosis worsened with mN stage. CONCLUSIONS: PET-CT appears useful when used routinely for non-junctional gastric cancer, and should be considered in international recommendations. Any extra costs appear small and offset by avoiding futile investigations and radical treatment. mN stage identifies patients at risk of early recurrence and death. KEY POINTS: • PET-CT is typically not considered useful when staging gastric cancer. We describe a retrospective study of 279 patients routinely staged with PET-CT in the absence of metastases on CT. • The primary tumor was avid in 80% of patients. Twenty-five percent had resectable avid nodes. PET-CT identified previously unsuspected metastases in 7% of patients, which would likely not have been identified by conventional staging without PET-CT in 5%. These patients were much more likely to have avid nodes. • Beyond avoiding futile investigations and radical treatment in this 5%, we found patients with FDG-avid nodes (metabolic nodal stage, mN) to have a worse disease-free survival after gastrectomy.

Correction to: Will the reformed Cancer Drugs Fund address the most common types of uncertainty? An analysis of NICE cancer drug appraisals.

.