Real-world Data of Nivolumab for Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Netherlands: An Analysis of Toxicity, Efficacy, and Predictive Markers.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab, a programmed death 1 inhibitor, has been approved as second-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in Europe since 2016. We investigated the toxicity and efficacy of nivolumab as well as potential predictive biomarkers in the Dutch population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective, multicenter study of the Dutch national registry of nivolumab for the treatment of advanced RCC. The main outcome parameters included toxicity, objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), and time to treatment failure (TTF). In addition, potential predictive and prognostic biomarkers for outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Data on 264 patients were available, of whom 42% were International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) poor risk at start of nivolumab, 16% had ≥ 3 lines of previous therapy, 7% had non-clear-cell RCC, 11% had brain metastases, and 20% were previously treated with everolimus. Grade 3/4 immune-related adverse events occurred in 15% of patients. The median OS was 18.7 months (95% confidence interval, 13.7-23.7 months). Progression occurred in 170 (64.4%) of 264 patients, with a 6-and 12-months TTP of 49.8% and 31.1%, respectively. The ORR was 18.6% (49 of 264; 95% confidence interval, 14%-23%). Elevated baseline lymphocytes were associated with improved PFS (P = .038) and elevated baseline lactate dehydrogenase with poor OS, PFS, and TTF (P = .000). On-treatment increase in eosinophils by week 8 predicted improved OS (P = .003), PFS (P = .000), and TTF (P = .014), whereas a decrease of neutrophils was associated with significantly better TTF (P = .023). CONCLUSIONS: The toxicity and efficacy of nivolumab for metastatic RCC after previous lines of therapy are comparable with the results in the pivotal phase III trial and other real-world data. On-treatment increase in eosinophil count is a potential biomarker for efficacy and warrants further investigation.

Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) therapy in metastatic melanoma: boosting of neoantigen-specific T cell reactivity and long-term follow-up.

Treatment of metastatic melanoma with autologous tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) is currently applied in several centers. Robust and remarkably consistent overall response rates, of around 50% of treated patients, have been observed across hospitals, including a substantial fraction of durable, complete responses. PURPOSE: Execute a phase I/II feasibility study with TIL therapy in metastatic melanoma at the Netherlands Cancer Institute, with the goal to assess feasibility and potential value of a randomized phase III trial. EXPERIMENTAL: Ten patients were treated with TIL therapy. Infusion products and peripheral blood samples were phenotypically characterized and neoantigen reactivity was assessed. Here, we present long-term clinical outcome and translational data on neoantigen reactivity of the T cell products. RESULTS: Five out of 10 patients, who were all anti-PD-1 naïve at time of treatment, showed an objective clinical response, including two patients with a complete response that are both ongoing for more than 7 years. Immune monitoring demonstrated that neoantigen-specific T cells were detectable in TIL infusion products from three out of three patients analyzed. For six out of the nine neoantigen-specific T cell responses detected in these TIL products, T cell response magnitude increased significantly in the peripheral blood compartment after therapy, and neoantigen-specific T cells were detectable for up to 3 years after TIL infusion. CONCLUSION: The clinical results from this study confirm the robustness of TIL therapy in metastatic melanoma and the potential role of neoantigen-specific T cell reactivity. In addition, the data from this study supported the rationale to initiate an ongoing multicenter phase III TIL trial.

Identification of the optimal combination dosing schedule of neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab in macroscopic stage III melanoma (OpACIN-neo): a multicentre, phase 2, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The outcome of patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma is poor. Neoadjuvant treatment with ipilimumab plus nivolumab at the standard dosing schedule induced pathological responses in a high proportion of patients in two small independent early-phase trials, and no patients with a pathological response have relapsed after a median follow up of 32 months. However, toxicity of the standard ipilimumab plus nivolumab dosing schedule was high, preventing its broader clinical use. The aim of the OpACIN-neo trial was to identify a dosing schedule of ipilimumab plus nivolumab that is less toxic but equally effective. METHODS: OpACIN-neo is a multicentre, open-label, phase 2, randomised, controlled trial. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years, had a WHO performance status of 0-1, had resectable stage III melanoma involving lymph nodes only, and measurable disease according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Patients were enrolled from three medical centres in Australia, Sweden, and the Netherlands, and were randomly assigned (1:1:1), stratified by site, to one of three neoadjuvant dosing schedules: group A, two cycles of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg once every 3 weeks intravenously; group B, two cycles of ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks intravenously; or group C, two cycles of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks directly followed by two cycles of nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks intravenously. The investigators, site staff, and patients were aware of the treatment assignment during the study participation. Pathologists were masked to treatment allocation and all other data. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with grade 3-4 immune-related toxicity within the first 12 weeks and the proportion of patients achieving a radiological objective response and pathological response at 6 weeks. Analyses were done in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02977052, and is ongoing with an additional extension cohort and to complete survival analysis. FINDINGS: Between Nov 24, 2016 and June 28, 2018, 105 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 89 (85%) eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to one of the three groups. Three patients were excluded after randomisation because they were found to be ineligible, and 86 received at least one dose of study drug; 30 patients in group A, 30 in group B, and 26 in group C (accrual to this group was closed early upon advice of the Data Safety Monitoring Board on June 4, 2018 because of severe adverse events). Within the first 12 weeks, grade 3-4 immune-related adverse events were observed in 12 (40%) of 30 patients in group A, six (20%) of 30 in group B, and 13 (50%) of 26 in group C. The difference in grade 3-4 toxicity between group B and A was -20% (95% CI -46 to 6; p=0·158) and between group C and group A was 10% (-20 to 40; p=0·591). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were elevated liver enzymes in group A (six [20%)]) and colitis in group C (five [19%]); in group B, none of the grade 3-4 adverse events were seen in more than one patient. One patient (in group A) died 9·5 months after the start of treatment due to the consequences of late-onset immune-related encephalitis, which was possibly treatment-related. 19 (63% [95% CI 44-80]) of 30 patients in group A, 17 (57% [37-75]) of 30 in group B, and nine (35% [17-56]) of 26 in group C achieved a radiological objective response, while pathological responses occurred in 24 (80% [61-92]) patients in group A, 23 (77% [58-90]) in group B, and 17 (65% [44-83]) in group C. INTERPRETATION: OpACIN-neo identified a tolerable neoadjuvant dosing schedule (group B: two cycles of ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg) that induces a pathological response in a high proportion of patients and might be suitable for broader clinical use. When more mature data confirm these early observations, this schedule should be tested in randomised phase 3 studies versus adjuvant therapies, which are the current standard-of-care systemic therapy for patients with stage III melanoma. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab in macroscopic stage III melanoma.

Adjuvant ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) and nivolumab (anti-PD-1) both improve relapse-free survival of stage III melanoma patients1,2. In stage IV disease, the combination of ipilimumab + nivolumab is superior to ipilimumab alone and also appears to be more effective than nivolumab monotherapy3. Preclinical work suggests that neoadjuvant application of checkpoint inhibitors may be superior to adjuvant therapy4. To address this question and to test feasibility, 20 patients with palpable stage III melanoma were 1:1 randomized to receive ipilimumab 3 mg kg-1 and nivolumab 1 mg kg-1, as either four courses after surgery (adjuvant arm) or two courses before surgery and two courses postsurgery (neoadjuvant arm). Neoadjuvant therapy was feasible, with all patients undergoing surgery at the preplanned time point. However in both arms, 9/10 patients experienced one or more grade 3/4 adverse events. Pathological responses were achieved in 7/9 (78%) patients treated in the neoadjuvant arm. None of these patients have relapsed so far (median follow-up, 25.6 months). We found that neoadjuvant ipilimumab + nivolumab expand more tumor-resident T cell clones than adjuvant application. While neoadjuvant therapy appears promising, with the current regimen it induced high toxicity rates; therefore, it needs further investigation to preserve efficacy but reduce toxicity.

Activated complement components and complement activator molecules on the surface of cell-derived microparticles in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and healthy individuals.

OBJECTIVES: In vitro, microparticles can activate complement via the classical pathway. If demonstrable ex vivo, this mechanism may contribute to the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We therefore investigated the presence of activated complement components and complement activator molecules on the surface of cell-derived microparticles of RA patients and healthy individuals. METHODS: Microparticles from synovial fluid (n = 8) and plasma (n = 9) of 10 RA patients and plasma of sex- and age-matched healthy individuals (n = 10) were analysed by flow cytometry for bound complement components (C1q, C4, C3) and complement activator molecules (C-reactive protein (CRP), serum amyloid P component (SAP), immunoglobulin (Ig) M, IgG). RESULTS: Microparticles with bound C1q, C4, and/or C3 were abundant in RA synovial fluid, while in RA and control plasma much lower levels were present. Microparticles with bound C1q correlated with those with bound C3 in synovial fluid (r = 0.961, p = 0.0001), and with those with bound C4 in plasma (RA: r = 0.908, p = 0.0007; control: r = 0.632, p = 0.0498), indicating classical pathway activation. In synovial fluid, microparticles with IgM and IgG correlated with those with C1q (r = 0.728, p = 0.0408; r = 0.952, p = 0.0003, respectively), and in plasma, microparticles with CRP correlated with those with C1q (RA: r = 0.903, p = 0.0021; control: r = 0.683, p = 0.0296), implicating IgG and IgM in the classical pathway activation in RA synovial fluid, and CRP in the low level classical pathway activation in plasma. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the presence of bound complement components and activator molecules on microparticles ex vivo, and supports their role in low grade complement activation in plasma and increased complement activation in RA synovial fluid.