Pembrolizumab for the First-Line Treatment of Recurrent Locally Advanced or Metastatic Merkel Cell Carcinoma: Results from the Single-Arm, Open-Label, Phase III KEYNOTE-913 Study.

BACKGROUND: The phase III KEYNOTE-913 study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab as first-line therapy in patients with advanced Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC). OBJECTIVE: The aim was to report results from the primary analysis of KEYNOTE-913. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with recurrent locally advanced or metastatic MCC received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 35 treatments (~ 2 years). The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary end points were duration of response (DOR) and progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST v1.1 by BICR, overall survival (OS), and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients were treated with pembrolizumab. The median time from first dose to data cutoff (February 15, 2024) was 50.3 months (range 38.7-59.4). The ORR was 49% (95% confidence interval [CI] 35-63), with 12 complete responses and 15 partial responses. The median DOR was 39.8 months (range 4.8-52.5+), and the 24-month DOR rate was 69%. The median PFS was 9.3 months (95% CI 3-26), and the 24-month PFS rate was 39%. The median OS was 24.3 months (95% CI 12.4 to not reached), and the 24-month OS rate was 51%. Any-grade treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 38 patients (69%); 13 patients (24%) experienced grade 3-5 AEs. The most common treatment-related AEs were fatigue (n = 12 [22%]), pruritus (n = 12 [22%]), and lipase increase (n = 10 [18%]). One patient died of treatment-related Guillain-Barré syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab provided durable antitumor activity and promising survival and had a manageable safety profile in patients with recurrent locally advanced or metastatic MCC, supporting its use in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03783078.

Final, 10-Year Outcomes with Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Previous results from this trial showed longer overall survival after treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or with nivolumab monotherapy than with ipilimumab monotherapy in patients with advanced melanoma. Given that patients with advanced melanoma are living longer than 7.5 years, longer-term data were needed to address new clinically relevant questions. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with previously untreated advanced melanoma, in a 1:1:1 ratio, to one of the following regimens: nivolumab (1 mg per kilogram of body weight) plus ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 2 weeks; nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 2 weeks plus placebo; or ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 3 weeks for four doses plus placebo. Treatment was continued until the occurrence of disease progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. Randomization was stratified according to BRAF mutation status, metastasis stage, and programmed death ligand 1 expression. Here, we report the final, 10-year results of this trial, including results for overall survival and melanoma-specific survival, as well as durability of response. RESULTS: With a minimum follow-up of 10 years, median overall survival was 71.9 months with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, 36.9 months with nivolumab, and 19.9 months with ipilimumab. The hazard ratio for death was 0.53 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44 to 0.65) for nivolumab plus ipilimumab as compared with ipilimumab and was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.52 to 0.76) for nivolumab as compared with ipilimumab. Median melanoma-specific survival was more than 120 months with nivolumab plus ipilimumab (not reached, with 37% of the patients alive at the end of the trial), 49.4 months with nivolumab, and 21.9 months with ipilimumab. Among patients who had been alive and progression-free at 3 years, 10-year melanoma-specific survival was 96% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, 97% with nivolumab, and 88% with ipilimumab. CONCLUSIONS: The final trial results showed a continued, ongoing survival benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and with nivolumab monotherapy, as compared with ipilimumab monotherapy, in patients with advanced melanoma. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and others; CheckMate 067 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01844505.).

Randomized, open-label, phase 2 study of nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab monotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors of high tumor mutational burden.

BACKGROUND: Checkpoint inhibitor therapy has demonstrated overall survival benefit in multiple tumor types. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) is a predictive biomarker for response to immunotherapies. This study evaluated the efficacy of nivolumab+ipilimumab in multiple tumor types based on TMB status evaluated using either tumor tissue (tTMB) or circulating tumor DNA in the blood (bTMB). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic or unresectable solid tumors with high (≥10 mutations per megabase) tTMB (tTMB-H) and/or bTMB (bTMB-H) who were refractory to standard therapies were randomized 2:1 to receive nivolumab+ipilimumab or nivolumab monotherapy in an open-label, phase 2 study (CheckMate 848; NCT03668119). tTMB and bTMB were determined by the Foundation Medicine FoundationOne® CDx test and bTMB Clinical Trial Assay, respectively. The dual primary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) in patients with tTMB-H and/or bTMB-H tumors treated with nivolumab+ipilimumab. RESULTS: In total, 201 patients refractory to standard therapies were randomized: 135 had tTMB-H and 125 had bTMB-H; 82 patients had dual tTMB-H/bTMB-H. In patients with tTMB-H, ORR was 38.6% (95% CI 28.4% to 49.6%) with nivolumab+ipilimumab and 29.8% (95% CI 17.3% to 44.9%) with nivolumab monotherapy. In patients with bTMB-H, ORR was 22.5% (95% CI 13.9% to 33.2%) with nivolumab+ipilimumab and 15.6% (95% CI 6.5% to 29.5%) with nivolumab monotherapy. Early and durable responses to treatment with nivolumab+ipilimumab were seen in patients with tTMB-H or bTMB-H. The safety profile of nivolumab+ipilimumab was manageable, with no new safety signals. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with metastatic or unresectable solid tumors with TMB-H, as determined by tissue biopsy or by blood sample when tissue biopsy is unavailable, who have no other treatment options, may benefit from nivolumab+ipilimumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03668119.

A Multidisciplinary Approach to Improve the Management of Immune-Checkpoint Inhibitor-Related Pneumonitis.

Purpose: Treatment with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can be associated with a wide spectrum of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Among irAEs, immune-mediated pneumonitis (im-PN) is a rare but potentially life-threatening side effect. TPrompt multidisciplinary diagnosis and effective management of im-PN may be essential to avoid severe complications and allowing resumation of therapy. Patients and Methods: We collected a case series of skin (melanoma, cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma-CSCC), lung, and mesothelioma cancer patients (pts), treated with ICI at the Center for Immuno-Oncology University Hospital of Siena, Italy, and diagnosed with im-PN. Clinical and radiologic data were thoroughly collected, as well as bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) samples; im-PN was graded using CTCAE v. 5.0. Radiological patterns were reported according to the Fleischner Society classification. Results: From January 2014 to February 2023, 1004 patients with melanoma (522), CSCC (42), lung (342) or mesothelioma (98) were treated with ICI (619 monotherapy; 385 combination). Among treated patients, 24 (2%) developed an im-PN and 58% were symptomatic. Im-PN were classified as grades G1 (10) and G2 (14). Prompt steroid treatment led to complete resolution of im-PN in 21 patients, with a median time to resolution of 14 weeks (range: 0.4-51). Twelve patients resumed ICI therapy once fully-recovered and 2 experienced a recurrence that completely resolved with steroids after resumption of treatment. Three radiologic patterns were identified: organizational pneumonia-like (67%), pulmonary eosinophilia (29%), and hypersensitivity pneumonitis (4%). Furthermore, BAL analysis performed in 8 (33%) patients showed an inflammatory lymphocytic infiltrate, predominantly consisting of foam cell-like macrophage infiltrates in 6 cases. Notably, transmission electron microscopy evaluation performed in 2 patients revealed a scenario suggestive of a drug-mediated toxicity. Conclusion: Im-PN is a rare but challenging side effect of ICI therapy, with variable time of onset and with heterogeneous clinical and radiological presentations. A multidisciplinary assessment is mandatory to optimize the clinical management of im-PN.

Improving Influenza Vaccination Coverage in Patients with Cancer: A Position Paper from a Multidisciplinary Expert Group.

Patients with cancer can be immunocompromised because of their disease and/or due to anticancer therapy. In this population, severe influenza virus infections are associated with an elevated risk of morbidity and mortality. Influenza vaccination is therefore highly recommended in cancer patients, including those receiving anticancer therapy. However, vaccination coverage remains far below the recommended target for vulnerable subjects. Six specialists in oncology, hematology, immunology, and public health/vaccinology convened with the objective of developing strategies, based on evidence and clinical experience, for improving influenza vaccination coverage in cancer patients. This viewpoint provides an overview of current influenza vaccination recommendations in cancer patients, discusses barriers to vaccination coverage, and presents strategies for overcoming said barriers. New immunization issues raised by the COVID-19 pandemic are also addressed. Future directions include improving public education on influenza vaccination, providing the media with accurate information, improving knowledge among healthcare professionals, improving access to vaccines for cancer patients, co-administration of the influenza and COVID-19 vaccines, increased collaboration between oncologists and other health professionals, increased accessibility of digital vaccination registries to specialists, shared information platforms, and promoting immunization campaigns by healthcare systems with the support of scientific societies.

Epigenetic remodeling to improve the efficacy of immunotherapy in human glioblastoma: pre-clinical evidence for development of new immunotherapy approaches.

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a highly aggressive primary brain tumor, that is refractory to standard treatment and to immunotherapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Noteworthy, melanoma brain metastases (MM-BM), that share the same niche as GBM, frequently respond to current ICI therapies. Epigenetic modifications regulate GBM cellular proliferation, invasion, and prognosis and may negatively regulate the cross-talk between malignant cells and immune cells in the tumor milieu, likely contributing to limit the efficacy of ICI therapy of GBM. Thus, manipulating the tumor epigenome can be considered a therapeutic opportunity in GBM. METHODS: Microarray transcriptional and methylation profiles, followed by gene set enrichment and IPA analyses, were performed to study the differences in the constitutive expression profiles of GBM vs MM-BM cells, compared to the extracranial MM cells and to investigate the modulatory effects of the DNA hypomethylating agent (DHA) guadecitabine among the different tumor cells. The prognostic relevance of DHA-modulated genes was tested by Cox analysis in a TCGA GBM patients' cohort. RESULTS: The most striking differences between GBM and MM-BM cells were found to be the enrichment of biological processes associated with tumor growth, invasion, and extravasation with the inhibition of MHC class II antigen processing/presentation in GBM cells. Treatment with guadecitabine reduced these biological differences, shaping GBM cells towards a more immunogenic phenotype. Indeed, in GBM cells, promoter hypomethylation by guadecitabine led to the up-regulation of genes mainly associated with activation, proliferation, and migration of T and B cells and with MHC class II antigen processing/presentation. Among DHA-modulated genes in GBM, 7.6% showed a significant prognostic relevance. Moreover, a large set of immune-related upstream-regulators (URs) were commonly modulated by DHA in GBM, MM-BM, and MM cells: DHA-activated URs enriched for biological processes mainly involved in the regulation of cytokines and chemokines production, inflammatory response, and in Type I/II/III IFN-mediated signaling; conversely, DHA-inhibited URs were involved in metabolic and proliferative pathways. CONCLUSIONS: Epigenetic remodeling by guadecitabine represents a promising strategy to increase the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy of GBM, supporting the rationale to develop new epigenetic-based immunotherapeutic approaches for the treatment of this still highly deadly disease.

Immunotherapy in melanoma: Can we predict response to treatment with circulating biomarkers?

Melanoma is the most aggressive form of skin cancer, representing approximately 4% of all cutaneous neoplasms and accounting for up to 80% of deaths. Advanced stages of melanoma involve metastatic processes and are associated with high mortality and morbidity, mainly due to the rapid dissemination and heterogeneous responses to current therapies, including immunotherapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are currently used in the treatment of metastatic melanoma (MM) and despite being linked to an increase in patient survival, a high percentage of them still do not benefit from it. Accordingly, the number of therapeutic regimens for MM patients using ICIs either alone or in combination with other therapies has increased, together with the need for reliable biomarkers that can both predict and monitor response to ICIs. In this context, circulating biomarkers, such as DNA, RNA, proteins, and cells, have emerged due to their ability to reflect disease status. Moreover, blood tests are minimally invasive and provide an attractive option to detect biomarkers, avoiding stressful medical procedures. This systematic review aims to evaluate the possibility of a non-invasive biomarker signature that can guide therapeutic decisions. The studies reported here offer valuable insight into how circulating biomarkers can have a role in personalized treatments for melanoma patients receiving ICIs therapy, emphasizing the need for rigorous clinical trials to confirm findings and establish standardized procedures.

Immunotherapy in cutaneous melanoma and biologics in psoriatic disease: similarities and differences from a clinical multidisciplinary perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Immunomodulating therapies harness the power of the immune system to combat disease. In advanced melanoma, immune checkpoint inhibitors have significantly improved survival outcomes by activating the immune system to recognize and eliminate cancer cells. In psoriasis, interleukin inhibitors effectively suppress inflammation and improve disease symptoms. AREAS COVERED: We provide a meta-opinion-based consensus paper on the analogies and differences in treatment mechanisms, duration, frequency between immunotherapy for advanced melanoma and biologics for psoriasis. Combining the current scientific evidence with expert insights, we provide valuable guidance for future research and decision-making processes. EXPERT OPINION: The development of immunological treatments in melanoma and psoriasis has revolutionized dermatology, but the quest for tailored therapies that maximize efficacy continues. Managing cutaneous exacerbations during melanoma immunotherapy in psoriatic patients remains challenging. Similarly, treating oncologic psoriasis patients resistant to traditional therapies requires individualized approaches. Research is needed to identify response predictors in both conditions and address the sustainability of healthcare systems due to the high cost of biologics. Drug delay studies for psoriasis and longer follow-up evaluations after immunotherapy discontinuation in melanoma are essential for optimizing treatment outcomes and resource allocation.

The future of targeting cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein-4: Is there a role?

The 2022 yearly Think Tank Meeting in Siena, Tuscany (Italy), organized by the Italian Network for Tumor Biotherapy (NIBIT) Foundation, the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy and the World Immunotherapy Council, included a focus on the future of integrating and expanding the use of targeting cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4). The conference members exchanged their views on the lessons from targeting CTLA-4 and compared the effect to the impact of blocking Programmed cell death protein 1 (PD1) or its ligand (PDL1). The increasing experience with both therapeutic approaches and their combination suggests that targeting CTLA-4 may lead to more durable responses for a sizeable proportion of patients, though the specific mechanism is not entirely understood. Overcoming toxicity of blocking CTLA-4 is currently being addressed with different doses and dose regimens, especially when combined with PD1/PDL1 blocking antibodies. Novel therapeutics targeting CTLA-4 hold the promise to reduce toxicities and thus allow different combination strategies in the future. On the whole, the consent was that targeting CTLA-4 remains an important strategy to improve the efficacy of cancer immunotherapies.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in melanoma patients with asymptomatic brain metastases: 7-year outcomes and quality of life from the multicenter phase III NIBIT-M2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The primary analysis of the phase III NIBIT-M2 study showed a 41% 4-year overall survival (OS) of melanoma patients with asymptomatic brain metastases treated with ipilimumab plus nivolumab. METHODS: Here, we report the 7-year efficacy outcomes and the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) analyses of the NIBIT-M2 study. RESULTS: As of May 1, 2023, at a median follow-up of 67 months (mo), the median OS was 8.5 (95% CI: 6.6-10.3), 8.2 (95% CI: 2.1-14.3) and 29.2 (95% CI: 0-69.9) mo for the fotemustine (F) Arm A, ipilimumab plus fotemustine Arm B, and ipilimumab plus nivolumab Arm C, respectively. The 7-year OS rate was 10.0% (95% CI: 0-22.5) in Arm A, 10.3% (95% CI: 0-22.6) in Arm B, and 42.8% (95% CI: 23.4-62.2) in Arm C. HRQoL was preserved in all treatment arms. Most functional scales evaluated from baseline to W12 were preserved, with a lower mean score decrease for EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 and an increase for EORTC QLQ-Brain neoplasm (BN20) in patients receiving ipilimumab plus nivolumab. CONCLUSIONS: With the longest follow-up available to date in melanoma patients with asymptomatic brain metastases, the NIBIT-M2 study continues to show persistent therapeutic efficacy of I ipilimumab plus nivolumab while preserving HRQoL.

Guadecitabine plus ipilimumab in unresectable melanoma: five-year follow-up and integrated multi-omic analysis in the phase 1b NIBIT-M4 trial.

Association with hypomethylating agents is a promising strategy to improve the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors-based therapy. The NIBIT-M4 was a phase Ib, dose-escalation trial in patients with advanced melanoma of the hypomethylating agent guadecitabine combined with the anti-CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab that followed a traditional 3 + 3 design (NCT02608437). Patients received guadecitabine 30, 45 or 60 mg/m2/day subcutaneously on days 1 to 5 every 3 weeks starting on week 0 for a total of four cycles, and ipilimumab 3 mg/kg intravenously starting on day 1 of week 1 every 3 weeks for a total of four cycles. Primary outcomes of safety, tolerability, and maximum tolerated dose of treatment were previously reported. Here we report the 5-year clinical outcome for the secondary endpoints of overall survival, progression free survival, and duration of response, and an exploratory integrated multi-omics analysis on pre- and on-treatment tumor biopsies. With a minimum follow-up of 45 months, the 5-year overall survival rate was 28.9% and the median duration of response was 20.6 months. Re-expression of immuno-modulatory endogenous retroviruses and of other repetitive elements, and a mechanistic signature of guadecitabine are associated with response. Integration of a genetic immunoediting index with an adaptive immunity signature stratifies patients/lesions into four distinct subsets and discriminates 5-year overall survival and progression free survival. These results suggest that coupling genetic immunoediting with activation of adaptive immunity is a relevant requisite for achieving long term clinical benefit by epigenetic immunomodulation in advanced melanoma patients.

Activating Inducible T-cell Costimulator Yields Antitumor Activity Alone and in Combination with Anti-PD-1 Checkpoint Blockade.

In recent years, there has been considerable interest in mAb-based induction of costimulatory receptor signaling as an approach to combat cancer. However, promising nonclinical data have yet to translate to a meaningful clinical benefit. Inducible T-cell costimulator (ICOS) is a costimulatory receptor important for immune responses. Using a novel clinical-stage anti-ICOS immunoglobulin G4 mAb (feladilimab), which induces but does not deplete ICOS+ T cells and their rodent analogs, we provide an end-to-end evaluation of the antitumor potential of antibody-mediated ICOS costimulation alone and in combination with programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) blockade. We demonstrate, consistently, that ICOS is expressed in a range of cancers, and its induction can stimulate growth of antitumor reactive T cells. Furthermore, feladilimab, alone and with a PD-1 inhibitor, induced antitumor activity in mouse and humanized tumor models. In addition to nonclinical evaluation, we present three patient case studies from a first-time-in-human, phase I, open-label, dose-escalation and dose-expansion clinical trial (INDUCE-1; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02723955), evaluating feladilimab alone and in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. Preliminary data showing clinical benefit in patients with cancer treated with feladilimab alone or in combination with pembrolizumab was reported previously; with example cases described here. Additional work is needed to further validate the translation to the clinic, which includes identifying select patient populations that will benefit from this therapeutic approach, and randomized data with survival endpoints to illustrate its potential, similar to that shown with CTLA-4 and PD-1 blocking antibodies. Significance: Stimulation of the T-cell activation marker ICOS with the anti-ICOS agonist mAb feladilimab, alone and in combination with PD-1 inhibition, induces antitumor activity across nonclinical models as well as select patients with advanced solid tumors.

First-Line, Fixed-Duration Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Followed by Nivolumab in Clinically Diverse Patient Populations With Unresectable Stage III or IV Melanoma: CheckMate 401.

PURPOSE: To address the paucity of data in patients with historically poor outcomes, we conducted the single-arm phase IIIb CheckMate 401 study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of nivolumab plus ipilimumab followed by nivolumab monotherapy in clinically diverse patient populations with advanced melanoma. METHODS: Treatment-naive patients with unresectable stage III-IV melanoma received nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks (four doses) followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg (240 mg following a protocol amendment) once every 2 weeks for ≤24 months. The primary end point was the incidence of grade 3-5 select treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Overall survival (OS) was a secondary end point. Outcomes were evaluated in subgroups defined by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), brain metastasis status, and melanoma subtype. RESULTS: In total, 533 patients received at least one dose of study drug. Grade 3-5 select TRAEs affecting the GI (16%), hepatic (15%), endocrine (11%), skin (7%), renal (2%), and pulmonary (1%) systems occurred in the all-treated population; similar incidence rates were observed across all subgroups. At 21.6 months' median follow-up, 24-month OS rates were 63% in the all-treated population, 44% in the ECOG PS 2 subgroup (including patients with cutaneous melanoma only), 71% in the brain metastasis subgroup, 36% in the ocular/uveal melanoma subgroup, and 38% in the mucosal melanoma subgroup. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab followed by nivolumab monotherapy was tolerable in patients with advanced melanoma and poor prognostic characteristics. Efficacy was similar between the all-treated population and patients with brain metastases. Reduced efficacy was observed in patients with ECOG PS 2, ocular/uveal melanoma, and/or mucosal melanoma, highlighting the continued need for novel treatment options for these difficult-to-treat patients.

First-in-human phase Ib trial of M9241 (NHS-IL12) plus avelumab in patients with advanced solid tumors, including dose expansion in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In preclinical studies, combining M9241 (a novel immunocytokine containing interleukin (IL)-12 heterodimers) with avelumab (anti-programmed death ligand 1 antibody) resulted in additive or synergistic antitumor effects. We report dose-escalation and dose-expansion results from the phase Ib JAVELIN IL-12 trial investigating M9241 plus avelumab. METHODS: In the dose-escalation part of JAVELIN IL-12 (NCT02994953), eligible patients had locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors; in the dose-expansion part, eligible patients had locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) that had progressed with first-line therapy. Patients received M9241 at 4, 8, 12, or 16.8 µg/kg every 4 weeks (Q4W) plus avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W, dose levels (DLs) 1-4) or M9241 16.8 µg/kg Q4W plus avelumab 800 mg once a week for 12 weeks followed by Q2W (DL5/dose expansion). Primary endpoints for the dose-escalation part were adverse events (AEs) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and those for the dose-expansion part were confirmed best overall response (BOR) per investigator (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1) and safety. The dose-expansion part followed a two-stage design; 16 patients were enrolled and treated in stage 1 (single-arm part). A futility analysis based on BOR was planned to determine whether stage 2 (randomized controlled part) would be initiated. RESULTS: At data cut-off, 36 patients had received M9241 plus avelumab in the dose-escalation part. All DLs were well tolerated; one DLT occurred at DL3 (grade 3 autoimmune hepatitis). The maximum-tolerated dose was not reached, and DL5 was declared the recommended phase II dose, considering an observed drug-drug interaction at DL4. Two patients with advanced bladder cancer (DL2 and DL4) had prolonged complete responses. In the dose-expansion part, no objective responses were recorded in the 16 patients with advanced UC; the study failed to meet the criterion (≥3 confirmed objective responses) to initiate stage 2. Any-grade treatment-related AEs occurred in 15 patients (93.8%), including grade ≥3 in 8 (50.0%); no treatment-related deaths occurred. Exposures for avelumab and M9241 concentrations were within expected ranges. CONCLUSIONS: M9241 plus avelumab was well tolerated at all DLs, including the dose-expansion part, with no new safety signals. However, the dose-expansion part did not meet the predefined efficacy criterion to proceed to stage 2.

From Co-Stimulation to Co-Inhibition: A Continuum of Immunotherapy Care Toward Long-Term Survival in Melanoma.

Harnessing the immune system with immune-checkpoint(s) blockade (ICB) has dramatically changed the treatment landscape of advanced melanoma patients in the last decade. Indeed, durable clinical responses and long-term survival can be achieved with anti-Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte Antigen-4 (CTLA-4) and anti-Programmed cell Death-1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibodies (mAb) either alone or in combination. Despite these unprecedented results, due to intrinsic or acquired resistance to ICB-based immunotherapy, about half of metastatic melanoma (MM) patients neither respond to therapy nor experience durable clinical benefit or long-term survival. To improve the efficacy of ICB therapy among a larger proportion of MM patients, in addition to the targeting of immune-checkpoint(s) inhibitors (ICI) such as CTLA-4 or PD-1, several co-stimulatory molecules, such as Inducible T-cell COStimulator (ICOS), CD137 and OX40, have been investigated in MM, with initial signs of activity. Thus, a number of MM patients have been exposed to co-inhibitory and co-stimulatory mAb in the course of their disease. Being aware of the clinical outcome of such patients may pave the way to novel and more effective clinical approaches and therapeutic sequences for MM patients. Here we report a paradigmatic clinical case of a cutaneous MM patient who achieved multiple and durable complete responses, leading to an extraordinary long-term survival with sequential ICB therapies, suggesting the possibility to build a highly effective continuum of care with co-inhibitory and co-stimulatory therapeutic mAb.

Rational Use of Monoclonal Antibodies as Therapeutic Treatment in an Oncologic Patient with Long COVID.

We present the case of a 76-year-old male patient persistently infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the setting of a stage IIIC cutaneous melanoma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). Due to the persistent coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), all cancer treatments were discontinued. Because of the worsening of his clinical state and the persistence of SARS-CoV-2 positivity for more than six months, the patient was treated with sotrovimab, which was ineffective due to resistance mutations acquired during that time. In order to resume cancer treatment and make the patient free from SARS-CoV-2, an in vitro screening of Evusheld monoclonal antibodies (tixagevumab-cilgavimab) against the viral strains isolated from the subject was performed. The promising results obtained during in vitro testing led to the authorization of the off-label use of Evusheld, which made the patient negative for SARS-CoV-2, thus, allowing him to resume his cancer treatment. This study highlights the Evusheld monoclonal antibodies' efficacy, not only in prevention but also in successful therapy against prolonged COVID-19. Therefore, testing neutralizing monoclonal antibodies in vitro against SARS-CoV-2 mutants directly isolated from patients could provide useful information for the treatment of people affected by long COVID.

Guadecitabine increases response to combined anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 treatment in mouse melanoma in vivo by controlling T-cells, myeloid derived suppressor and NK cells.

BACKGROUND: The combination of Programmed Cell Death 1 (PD-1) and Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte Antigen 4 (CTLA-4) blockade has dramatically improved the overall survival rate for malignant melanoma. Immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) limit the tumor's immune escape yet only for approximately a third of all tumors and, in most cases, for a limited amount of time. Several approaches to overcome resistance to ICBs are being investigated among which the addition of epigenetic drugs that are expected to act on both immune and tumor cells. Guadecitabine, a dinucleotide prodrug of a decitabine linked via phosphodiester bond to a guanosine, showed promising results in the phase-1 clinical trial, NIBIT-M4 (NCT02608437). METHODS: We used the syngeneic B16F10 murine melanoma model to study the effects of immune checkpoint blocking antibodies against CTLA-4 and PD-1 in combination, with and without the addition of Guadecitabine. We comprehensively characterized the tumor's and the host's responses under different treatments by flow cytometry, multiplex immunofluorescence and methylation analysis. RESULTS: In combination with ICBs, Guadecitabine significantly reduced subcutaneous tumor growth as well as metastases formation compared to ICBs and Guadecitabine treatment. In particular, Guadecitabine greatly enhanced the efficacy of combined ICBs by increasing effector memory CD8+ T cells, inducing effector NK cells in the spleen and reducing tumor infiltrating regulatory T cells and myeloid derived suppressor cells (MDSC), in the tumor microenvironment (TME). Guadecitabine in association with ICBs increased serum levels of IFN-γ and IFN-γ-induced chemokines with anti-angiogenic activity. Guadecitabine led to a general DNA-demethylation, in particular of sites of intermediate methylation levels. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate Guadecitabine as a promising epigenetic drug to be added to ICBs therapy.

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, including patients with ECOG performance status 2 and other special populations: CheckMate 817.

BACKGROUND: CheckMate 817, a phase 3B study, evaluated flat-dose nivolumab plus weight-based ipilimumab in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, in this research, we report on first-line treatment in patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 0-1 (cohort A) and special populations (cohort A1: ECOG PS 2; or ECOG PS 0-1 with untreated brain metastases, renal impairment, hepatic impairment, or controlled HIV infection). METHODS: Cohorts A and A1 received nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade 3-4 and grade 5 immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs; adverse events (AEs) deemed potentially immune-related, occurring <100 days of last dose, and treated with immune-modulating medication (except endocrine events)) and treatment-related select AEs (treatment-related AEs with potential immunological etiology requiring frequent monitoring/intervention, reported between first dose and 30 days after the last dose) in cohort A; efficacy endpoints were secondary/exploratory. In cohort A1, safety/efficacy assessment was exploratory. RESULTS: The most common grade 3-4 IMAEs were pneumonitis (5.1%), diarrhea/colitis (4.9%), and hepatitis (4.6%) in cohort A (N=391) and diarrhea/colitis (3.5%), hepatitis (3.5%), and rash (3.0%) in cohort A1 (N=198). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related select AEs were hepatic (5.9%), gastrointestinal (4.9%), and pulmonary (4.6%) events in cohort A and gastrointestinal (4.0%), skin (3.5%), and endocrine (3.0%) events in cohort A1. No grade 5 IMAEs or treatment-related select AEs occurred. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 4 (1.0%) and 3 (1.5%) patients in cohorts A and A1, respectively. Three-year overall survival (OS) rates were 33.7% and 20.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Flat-dose nivolumab plus weight-based ipilimumab was associated with manageable safety and durable efficacy in cohort A, consistent with data from phase 3 metastatic NSCLC studies. Special populations of cohort A1 including patients with ECOG PS 2 or ECOG PS 0-1 with untreated brain metastases had manageable treatment-related toxicity and clinically meaningful 3-year OS rate. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02869789.

Multicenter International Study of the Consensus Immunoscore for the Prediction of Relapse and Survival in Early-Stage Colon Cancer.

Background: The prognostic value of Immunoscore was evaluated in Stage II/III colon cancer (CC) patients, but it remains unclear in Stage I/II, and in early-stage subgroups at risk. An international Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) study evaluated the pre-defined consensus Immunoscore in tumors from 1885 AJCC/UICC-TNM Stage I/II CC patients from Canada/USA (Cohort 1) and Europe/Asia (Cohort 2). METHODS: Digital-pathology is used to quantify the densities of CD3+ and CD8+ T-lymphocyte in the center of tumor (CT) and the invasive margin (IM). The time to recurrence (TTR) was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), prognosis in Stage I, Stage II, Stage II-high-risk, and microsatellite-stable (MSS) patients. RESULTS: High-Immunoscore presented with the lowest risk of recurrence in both cohorts. In Stage I/II, recurrence-free rates at 5 years were 78.4% (95%-CI, 74.4−82.6), 88.1% (95%-CI, 85.7−90.4), 93.4% (95%-CI, 91.1−95.8) in low, intermediate and high Immunoscore, respectively (HR (Hi vs. Lo) = 0.27 (95%-CI, 0.18−0.41); p < 0.0001). In Cox multivariable analysis, the association of Immunoscore to outcome was independent (TTR: HR (Hi vs. Lo) = 0.29, (95%-CI, 0.17−0.50); p < 0.0001) of the patient's gender, T-stage, sidedness, and microsatellite instability-status (MSI). A significant association of Immunoscore with survival was found for Stage II, high-risk Stage II, T4N0 and MSS patients. The Immunoscore also showed significant association with TTR in Stage-I (HR (Hi vs. Lo) = 0.07 (95%-CI, 0.01−0.61); P = 0.016). The Immunoscore had the strongest (69.5%) contribution χ2 for influencing survival. Patients with a high Immunoscore had prolonged TTR in T4N0 tumors even for patients not receiving chemotherapy, and the Immunoscore remained the only significant parameter in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: In early CC, low Immunoscore reliably identifies patients at risk of relapse for whom a more intensive surveillance program or adjuvant treatment should be considered.