A crisis in clinical research.

The clinical research pipeline is critical to ensuring continued development of novel treatments that can offer patients with cancer safe and effective options. Unfortunately, progress has slowed since the COVID-19 pandemic due to uncovered, systemic inefficiencies across critical processes. Towards initiating discussion on how to reinvigorate clinical research, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) hosted a virtual summit that characterized issues and formed potential solutions. This commentary serves to highlight the crisis facing clinical research as well as stimulate field-wide discussion on how to better serve patients into the future.

High response rate with extended dosing of cemiplimab in advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Cemiplimab (Libtayo®), a human monoclonal immunoglobulin G4 antibody to the programmed cell death-1 receptor, is approved for the treatment of patients with advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC), who are not candidates for curative surgery or curative radiation, using an every-3-weeks (Q3W) dosing interval. Pharmacokinetic modeling indicated that Ctrough of extended intravenous dosing of 600 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) would be comparable to the approved intravenous dosage of 350 mg Q3W. We examined the efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and safety of cemiplimab dosed Q4W. METHODS: In this open-label, phase II trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02760498), the cohort of patients ≥18 years old with advanced CSCC received cemiplimab 600 mg intravenously Q4W for up to 48 weeks. Tumor measurements were recorded every 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was objective response rate by independent central review. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients with advanced CSCC were treated with cemiplimab. The median duration of follow-up was 22.4 months (range: 1.0-39.8). An objective response was observed in 39 patients (62%; 95% CI: 48.8% to 73.9%), with 22% of patients (n=14) achieving complete response and 40% (n=25) achieving partial response. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhea, pruritus, and fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: Extended dosing of cemiplimab 600 mg intravenously Q4W exhibited substantial antitumor activity, rapid and durable responses, and an acceptable safety profile in patients with advanced CSCC. These results confirm that cemiplimab is a highly active therapy for advanced CSCC. Additional data would help ascertain the benefit-risk profile for the 600 mg intravenous dosing regimen compared with the approved regimen.

Phase II study of durvalumab and tremelimumab with front-line neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer: primary analysis in the original cohort of KGOG3046/TRU-D.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the antitumor activity and safety of durvalumab plus tremelimumab combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients newly diagnosed with advanced ovarian cancer. Here, we report the primary endpoint of the original cohort of the KGOG 3046/TRU-D study. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated single-arm, phase II trial, patients with stage IIIC-IVB ovarian cancer were administered three cycles of durvalumab (1500 mg) and tremelimumab (75 mg) with NAC, followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS). After surgery, three cycles of durvalumab (1120 mg) and adjuvant chemotherapy followed by durvalumab maintenance (1120 mg [total 12 cycles]) were administered. The primary endpoint of the study was 12-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were enrolled. The median patient age was 60 years (range 44-77 years), and most patients presented with high-grade serous carcinoma (87.0%) and stage IV disease (87.0%). At the time of data cut-off on January 17, 2023, the median follow-up duration was 29.2 months (range 12.0-42.2). The 12-month, 24-month, and 30 month PFS rates were 63.6%, 45.0%, and 40.0%, respectively. All patients underwent IDS, with an R0 resection rate of 73.9%, and 17.4% achieved pathological complete response. Skin rashes were the most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs, 69.6%). However, all TRAEs completely resolved after steroid use. CONCLUSION: This study showed promising activity with a durable clinical response, supporting the potential of NAC with dual immune checkpoint blockade in advanced-stage ovarian cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03899610.

Phase II trial of nivolumab and metformin in patients with treatment-refractory microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies showed metformin reduces exhaustion of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and potentiates programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) blockade. We hypothesized that metformin with nivolumab would elicit potent antitumor and immune modulatory activity in metastatic microsatellite stable (MSS) colorectal cancer (CRC). We evaluated this hypothesis in a phase II study. METHODS: Nivolumab (480 mg) was administered intravenously every 4 weeks while metformin (1000 mg) was given orally, two times per day following a 14-day metformin only lead-in phase. Patients ≥18 years of age, with previously treated, stage IV MSS CRC, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0-1, having received no prior anti-PD-1 agent were eligible. The primary endpoint was overall response rate with secondary endpoints of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Correlative studies using paired pretreatment/on-treatment biopsies and peripheral blood evaluated a series of immune biomarkers in the tumor microenvironment and systemic circulation using ChipCytometry and flow cytometry. RESULTS: A total of 24 patients were enrolled, 6 patients were replaced per protocol, 18 patients had evaluable disease. Of the 18 evaluable patients, 11/18 (61%) were women and the median age was 58 (IQR 50-67). Two patients had stable disease, but no patients had objective response, hence the study was stopped for futility. Median OS and PFS was 5.2 months (95% CI (3.2 to 11.7)) and 2.3 months (95% CI (1.7 to 2.3)). Most common grade 3/4 toxicities: Anemia (n=2), diarrhea (n=2), and fever (n=2). Metformin alone failed to increase the infiltration of T-cell subsets in the tumor, but combined metformin and nivolumab increased percentages of tumor-infiltrating leukocytes (p=0.031). Dual treatment also increased Tim3+ levels in patient tissues and decreased naïve CD8+T cells (p=0.0475). CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab and metformin were well tolerated in patients with MSS CRC but had no evidence of efficacy. Correlative studies did not reveal an appreciable degree of immune modulation from metformin alone, but showed trends in tumorous T-cell infiltration as a result of dual metformin and PD-1 blockade despite progression in a majority of patients.

Prospective, randomized, double-blind phase 2B trial of the TLPO and TLPLDC vaccines to prevent recurrence of resected stage III/IV melanoma: a prespecified 36-month analysis.

BACKGROUND: The tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cell (TLPLDC) vaccine is made by ex vivo priming matured autologous dendritic cells (DCs) with yeast cell wall particles (YCWPs) loaded with autologous tumor lysate (TL). The tumor lysate, particle only (TLPO) vaccine uses autologous TL-loaded YCWPs coated with silicate for in vivo DC loading. Here we report the 36-month prespecified analyses of this prospective, randomized, double-blind trial investigating the ability of the TLPO and TLPLDC (±granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF)) vaccines to prevent melanoma recurrence in high-risk patients. METHODS: Patients with clinically disease-free stage III/IV melanoma were randomized 2:1 initially to TLPLDC versus placebo (n=124) and subsequently TLPO versus TLPLDC (n=63). All patients were randomized and blinded; however, the placebo control arm was replaced in the second randomization scheme with another novel vaccine; some analyses in this paper therefore reflect a combination of the two randomization schemes. Patients receiving the TLPLDC vaccine were further divided by their method of DC harvest (with or without G-CSF pretreatment); this was not randomized. The use of standard of care checkpoint inhibitors was not stratified between groups. Safety was assessed and Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analyses compared disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: After combining the two randomization processes, a total of 187 patients were allocated between treatment arms: placebo (n=41), TLPLDC (n=103), or TLPO (n=43). The allocation among arms created by the addition of patients from the two separate randomization schemes does not reflect concurrent randomization among all treatment arms. TLPLDC was further divided by use of G-CSF in DC harvest: no G-CSF (TLPLDC) (n=47) and with G-CSF (TLPLDC+G) (n=56). Median follow-up was 35.8 months. Only two patients experienced a related adverse event ≥grade 3, one each in the TLPLDC+G and placebo arms. DFS was 27.2% (placebo), 55.4% (TLPLDC), 22.9% (TLPLDC+G), and 60.9% (TLPO) (p<0.001). OS was 62.5% (placebo), 93.6% (TLPLDC), 57.7% (TLPLDC+G), and 94.6% (TLPO) (p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The TLPO and TLPLDC (without G-CSF) vaccines were associated with improved DFS and OS in this clinical trial. Given production and manufacturing advantages, the efficacy of the TLPO vaccine will be confirmed in a phase 3 trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02301611.

Adjuvant dendritic cell-based immunotherapy after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma: a phase II clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive malignancy with a poor prognosis. Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) improves survival outcomes, but recurrence rates remain high. Dendritic cell-based immunotherapy (DCBI) showed promising results in patients with pleural mesothelioma. The primary aim of this trial was to determine feasibility of adjuvant DCBI after CRS-HIPEC. METHODS: This open-label, single-center, phase II clinical trial, performed in the Erasmus MC Cancer Institute Rotterdam, the Netherlands, included patients with epithelioid MPM. 4-6 weeks before CRS-HIPEC leukapheresis was performed. 8-10 weeks after surgery, DCBI was administered three times biweekly. Feasibility was defined as administration of at least three adjuvant vaccinations in 75% of patients. Comprehensive immune cell profiling was performed on peripheral blood samples prior to and during treatment. RESULTS: All patients who received CRS-HIPEC (n=16) were successfully treated with adjuvant DCBI. No severe toxicity related to DCBI was observed. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12 months (IQR 5-23) and median overall survival was not reached. DCBI was associated with increased proliferation of circulating natural killer cells and CD4+ T-helper (Th) cells. Co-stimulatory molecules, including ICOS, HLA-DR, and CD28 were upregulated predominantly on memory or proliferating Th-cells and minimally on CD8+ cytotoxic T-lymphocytes (CTLs) after treatment. However, an increase in CD8+ terminally differentiated effector memory (Temra) cells positively correlated with PFS, whereas co-expression of ICOS and Ki67 on CTLs trended towards a positive correlation. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant DCBI after CRS-HIPEC in patients with MPM was feasible and safe, and showed promising survival outcomes. DCBI had an immune modulatory effect on lymphoid cells and induced memory T-cell activation. Moreover, an increase of CD8+ Temra cells was more pronounced in patients with longer PFS. These data provide rationale for future combination treatment strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR7060; Dutch Trial Register (NTR).

IMPemBra: a phase 2 study comparing pembrolizumab with intermittent/short-term dual MAPK pathway inhibition plus pembrolizumab in patients with melanoma harboring the BRAFV600 mutation.

BACKGROUND: Continuous combination of MAPK pathway inhibition (MAPKi) and anti-programmed death-(ligand) 1 (PD-(L)1) showed high response rates, but only limited improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) at the cost of a high frequency of treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) in patients with BRAFV600-mutated melanoma. Short-term MAPKi induces T-cell infiltration in patients and is synergistic with anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1) in a preclinical melanoma mouse model. The aim of this phase 2b trial was to identify an optimal regimen of short-term MAPKi with dabrafenib plus trametinib in combination with pembrolizumab. METHODS: Patients with treatment-naïve BRAFV600E/K-mutant advanced melanoma started pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. In week 6, patients were randomized to continue pembrolizumab only (cohort 1), or to receive, in addition, intermittent dabrafenib 150 mg two times per day plus trametinib 2 mg one time per day for two cycles of 1 week (cohort 2), two cycles of 2 weeks (cohort 3), or continuously for 6 weeks (cohort 4). All cohorts continued pembrolizumab for up to 2 years. Primary endpoints were safety and treatment-adherence. Secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) at week 6, 12, 18 and PFS. RESULTS: Between June 2016 and August 2018, 33 patients with advanced melanoma have been included and 32 were randomized. Grade 3-4 TRAE were observed in 12%, 12%, 50%, and 63% of patients in cohort 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. All planned targeted therapy was given in 88%, 63%, and 38% of patients in cohort 2, 3, and 4. ORR at week 6, 12, and 18 were 38%, 63%, and 63% in cohort 1; 25%, 63%, and 75% in cohort 2; 25%, 50%, and 75% in cohort 3; and 0%, 63%, and 50% in cohort 4. After a median follow-up of 43.5 months, median PFS was 10.6 months for pembrolizumab monotherapy and not reached for patients treated with pembrolizumab and intermittent dabrafenib and trametinib (p=0.17). The 2-year and 3-year landmark PFS were both 25% for cohort 1, both 63% for cohort 2, 50% and 38% for cohort 3 and 75% and 60% for cohort 4. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of pembrolizumab plus intermittent dabrafenib and trametinib seems more feasible and tolerable than continuous triple therapy. The efficacy is promising and appears to be favorable over pembrolizumab monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02625337.

First-line treatment of unresectable or metastatic HER2 positive esophagogastric adenocarcinoma: liquid biomarker analysis of the phase 2 INTEGA trial.

BACKGROUND: The addition of nivolumab to trastuzumab and chemotherapy in first-line unresectable or metastatic HER2 positive esophagogastric adenocarcinoma (HER2+ EGA) results in long progression-free and overall survival as shown by the INTEGA (ipilimumab or FOLFOX in combination with nivolumab and trastuzumab in HER2 positive esophagogastric adenocarcinoma) trial. This trial suggested that the chemotherapy backbone is needed in an unselected HER2+ patient population. Yet, it remains an open question if there are specific patient subsets that may benefit from an enhanced immunotherapeutic but chemotherapy-free approach. METHODS: We analyzed blood T cell repertoire metrics determined by next-generation sequencing, circulating tumor cell (CTC) counts detected by CellSearch and their expression of HER2 and PD-L1 as potential liquid biomarkers predicting outcomes on ipilimumab versus FOLFOX (folinic acid, FOL, fluorouracil, F, oxaliplatin, OX) chemotherapy added to a backbone of trastuzumab and nivolumab in patients with HER2+ EGA in the INTEGA trial population. RESULTS: Patients with two out of three baseline-determined liquid biomarkers-high T cell repertoire richness, absence of CTCs or HER2-expression on CTCs-made up approximately 44% of HER2+ EGA cases and did not show compromise in efficacy if treated with a chemotherapy-free regimen. Long-term responders showing a progression-free survival of >12 months were enriched in this biomarker triad, especially if treated on the chemotherapy-free arm. CONCLUSION: Prospective validation of this liquid biomarker triad is needed to molecularly define HER2+ EGA patient subsets with different needs in the first-line systemic treatment setting.

Phase II study of nivolumab and salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab in treatment-naïve patients with advanced non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (HCRN GU16-260-Cohort B).

BACKGROUND: To determine the efficacy and toxicity of nivolumab monotherapy in treatment-naïve patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) and the efficacy of nivolumab/ipilimumab salvage therapy in patients with tumors unresponsive to initial nivolumab monotherapy. METHODS: Eligible patients with treatment-naïve nccRCC received nivolumab until progressive disease (PD), toxicity, or completion of 96 weeks of treatment (Part A). Patients with PD prior to, or stable disease (SD) at 48 weeks (prolonged SD) were potentially eligible to receive salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab (Part B). Patients were required to submit tissue from a metastatic lesion obtained within 12 months prior to study entry and prior to Part B for correlative studies. RESULTS: 35 patients with nccRCC were enrolled: 19 (54%) had papillary, 6 (17%) had chromophobe and 10 (29%) had unclassified histology. At median follow-up of 22.9 months, RECIST-defined objective response rate (ORR) was 5 of 35 (14.3% 95% CI 4.8% to 30.3%) (complete response (CR) 2 (5.7%) and partial response (PR) 3 (8.6%)). ORR by histology was: papillary-1/19 (5%); chromophobe-1/6 (17%); and unclassified-3/10 (30%). Nine patients (26%) had tumors with sarcomatoid features with 3 (33%) (2 unclassified and 1 papillary) responding. ORR was 0/18, 3/11 (27%) and 2/6 (33%) for patients with tumor progammed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of <5%, ≥5% or not measured, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 4.0 (2.7-4.3) months. Two of five responders have progressed. Thirty-two patients had PD or prolonged SD and therefore, were potentially eligible for salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab (Part B), but 15 patients did not enroll due to grade 2-3 toxicity (6) on nivolumab, symptomatic disease progression (5), or other reasons including no biopsy tissue (4). In the 17 Part B patients, there was one PR (6%) (unclassified/non-sarcomatoid). Grade >3 treatment-related adverse events were seen in 7/35 (20%) on nivolumab and 7/17 (41%) on salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab with one patient experiencing sudden death. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab monotherapy has limited activity in treatment-naïve nccRCC with most responses (4 of 5) seen in patients with sarcomatoid and/or unclassified tumors. Toxicity is consistent with prior nivolumab studies. Salvage treatment with nivolumab/ipilimumab was provided in half of these patients with minimal activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03117309.

Neoadjuvant sintilimab and chemotherapy in patients with potentially resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (KEEP-G 03): an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The standard neoadjuvant treatments in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) still have either poor safety or efficacy. Better therapies are needed in China. METHODS: This was an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial. Patients with potentially resectable ESCC (cT1b-3, Nany, M0 or T4a, N0-1, or M0) received preoperative intravenous sintilimab plus triplet chemotherapy (liposomal paclitaxel, cisplatin, and S-1) every 3 weeks for two cycles. The primary endpoints were safety and surgical feasibility; the secondary endpoint was major pathological response (MPR) rate. Genomic biomarkers (genetic mutations, tumor mutational burden (TMB), circulating tumor DNA status and immune microenvironment) in baseline tumor samples were investigated. RESULTS: All 30 patients completed two cycles of neoadjuvant treatment and underwent surgical resection. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 36.7% (11/30) of patients. The most frequent TRAEs were decreased white cell count (76.7%), anemia (76.7%), and decreased neutrophil count (73.3%). All TRAEs were hematological toxicities; none caused ≥30 days surgical delay. The MPR and pathological complete response (pCR) rates were 50.0% (15/30; 95% CI 33.2 to 66.9) and 20.0% (6/30; 95% CI 9.5 to 37.3), respectively. Patients with higher TMB and more clonal mutations were more likely to respond. ERBB2 alterations and ctDNA high-releaser status have a negative correlation with neoadjuvant ICI response. No significant difference was observed between therapeutic response and tumor immune microenvironment. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant sintilimab plus platinum-based triplet chemotherapy appeared safe and feasible, did not delay surgery and induced a pCR rate of 20.0% in patients with potentially resectable ESCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03946969.

Phase I/II study of PexaVec in combination with immune checkpoint inhibition in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Oncolytic immunotherapy represents a unique therapeutic platform for the treatment of cancer. Here, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of the combination of pexastimogene devacirepvec (PexaVec) plus durvalumab (anti-programmed death ligand 1) with and without tremelimumab (anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4) in patients with standard chemotherapy refractory mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in a phase I/II trial. METHODS: Adult patients with histologically confirmed advanced pMMR mCRC, who had progressed on at least two prior lines of systemic chemotherapy were studied in four cohorts. Patients received four doses of PexaVec IV at a dose of 3×108 plaque forming units (pfu) (dose level 1) or 1×109 pfu (dose level 2) every 2 weeks. Twelve days after the first PexaVec administration, patients received either 1500 mg of durvalumab every 28 days alone or an additional single dose of 300 mg tremelimumab on day 1. Responses were assessed every 8 weeks by CT or MRI. AEs were recorded. The primary endpoints were safety and feasibility. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival. Paired tumor samples and peripheral blood were collected to perform immune monitoring. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients with mCRC enrolled on to the study: 16 patients in the PexaVec/durvalumab cohorts and 18 patients in the PexaVec/durvalumab/tremelimumab cohorts. Overall, the combination of PexaVec plus immune checkpoint inhibitors did not result in any unexpected toxicities. Most common toxicities observed were fever and chills after PexaVec infusion. Two cases of grade 3 colitis, one case of a grade 2 myositis and one case of grade 3 hypotension resulted in discontinuation of immune checkpoint inhibitor and PexaVec treatment, respectively. The median PFS in the PexaVec/durvalumab/tremelimumab cohorts was 2.3 months (95% CI: 2.2 to 3.2 months) vs 2.1 months (95% CI: 1.7 to 2.8 months; p=0.57) in the PexaVec/durvalumab cohorts. Flow cytometry analysis of peripheral blood mononuclear cells revealed an increase in Ki67+CD8+ T cells on treatment. CONCLUSION: PexaVec in combination with durvalumab and tremelimumab is safe and tolerable. No unexpected toxicities were observed. The combination of PexaVec/durvalumab/tremelimumab demonstrated potential clinical activity in patients with pMMR mCRC, but further studies are needed to identify the predictive biomarkers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03206073.

Phase II clinical and immune correlate study of adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab for high-risk resected melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant therapy for high-risk resected melanoma with programmed cell-death 1 blockade results in a median relapse-free survival (RFS) of 5 years. The addition of low dose ipilimumab (IPI) to a regimen of adjuvant nivolumab (NIVO) in CheckMate-915 did not result in increased RFS. A pilot phase II adjuvant study of either standard dose or low dose IPI with NIVO was conducted at two centers to evaluate RFS with correlative biomarker studies. METHODS: Patients with resected stages IIIB/IIIC/IV melanoma received either IPI 3 mg/kg and NIVO 1 mg/kg (cohort 4) or IPI 1 mg/kg and NIVO 3 mg/kg (cohorts 5 and 6) induction therapy every 3 weeks for 12 weeks, followed by maintenance NIVO. In an amalgamated subset of patients across cohorts, peripheral T cells at baseline and on-treatment were assessed by flow cytometry and RNA sequencing for exploratory biomarkers. RESULTS: High rates of grade 3-4 adverse events precluded completion of induction therapy in 50%, 35% and 7% of the patients in cohorts 4, 5 and 6, respectively. At a median of 63.9 months of follow-up, 16/56 patients (29%) relapsed. For all patients, at 5 years, RFS was 71% (95% CI: 60 to 84), and overall survival was 94% (95% CI: 88 to 100). Expansion of CD3+CD4+CD38+CD127-GARP- T cells, an on-treatment increase in CD39 expression in CD8+ T cells, and T-cell expression of phosphorylated signal-transducer-and-activator-of-transcription (STAT)2 and STAT5 were associated with relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant IPI/NIVO at the induction doses used resulted in promising relapse-free and overall survival, although with a high rate of grade 3-4 adverse events. Biomarker analyses highlight an association of ectoenzyme-expressing T cells and STAT signaling pathways with relapse, warranting future validation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01176474 and NCT02970981.

Nivolumab plus rucaparib for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: results from the phase 2 CheckMate 9KD trial.

BACKGROUND: CheckMate 9KD (NCT03338790) is a non-randomized, multicohort, phase 2 trial of nivolumab plus other anticancer treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We report results from cohorts A1 and A2 of CheckMate 9KD, specifically evaluating nivolumab plus rucaparib. METHODS: CheckMate 9KD enrolled adult patients with histologically confirmed mCRPC, ongoing androgen deprivation therapy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1. Cohort A1 included patients with postchemotherapy mCRPC (1-2 prior taxane-based regimens) and ≤2 prior novel hormonal therapies (eg, abiraterone, enzalutamide, apalutamide); cohort A2 included patients with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC and prior novel hormonal therapy. Patients received nivolumab 480 mg every 4 weeks plus rucaparib 600 mg two times per day (nivolumab dosing ≤2 years). Coprimary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) per Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 and prostate-specific antigen response rate (PSA50-RR; ≥50% PSA reduction) in all-treated patients and patients with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-positive tumors, determined before enrollment. Secondary endpoints included radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Outcomes (95% CI) among all-treated, HRD-positive, and BRCA1/2-positive populations for cohort A1 were confirmed ORR: 10.3% (3.9-21.2) (n=58), 17.2% (5.8-35.8) (n=29), and 33.3% (7.5-70.1) (n=9); confirmed PSA50-RR: 11.9% (5.9-20.8) (n=84), 18.2% (8.2-32.7) (n=44), and 41.7% (15.2-72.3) (n=12); median rPFS: 4.9 (3.7-5.7) (n=88), 5.8 (3.7-8.4) (n=45), and 5.6 (2.8-15.7) (n=12) months; and median OS: 13.9 (10.4-15.8) (n=88), 15.4 (11.4-18.2) (n=45), and 15.2 (3.0-not estimable) (n=12) months. For cohort A2 they were confirmed ORR: 15.4% (5.9-30.5) (n=39), 25.0% (8.7-49.1) (n=20), and 33.3% (7.5-70.1) (n=9); confirmed PSA50-RR: 27.3% (17.0-39.6) (n=66), 41.9 (24.5-60.9) (n=31), and 84.6% (54.6-98.1) (n=13); median rPFS: 8.1 (5.6-10.9) (n=71), 10.9 (6.7-12.0) (n=34), and 10.9 (5.6-12.0) (n=15) months; and median OS: 20.2 (14.1-22.8) (n=71), 22.7 (14.1-not estimable) (n=34), and 20.2 (11.1-not estimable) (n=15) months. In cohorts A1 and A2, respectively, the most common any-grade and grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were nausea (40.9% and 40.8%) and anemia (20.5% and 14.1%). Discontinuation rates due to TRAEs were 27.3% and 23.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab plus rucaparib is active in patients with HRD-positive postchemotherapy or chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC, particularly those harboring BRCA1/2 mutations. Safety was as expected, with no new signals identified. Whether the addition of nivolumab incrementally improves outcomes versus rucaparib alone cannot be determined from this trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03338790.

Phase II study of durvalumab (anti-PD-L1) and trametinib (MEKi) in microsatellite stable (MSS) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

BACKGROUND: Monotherapy with immune checkpoint blockade is ineffective for patients (pts) with microsatellite stable (MSS) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This study investigates whether the combination of trametinib (T) with durvalumab (D) can alter the immune tumor microenvironment (TME) by successfully priming and activating T-cells. METHODS: Open-label, single-center, phase II trial with primary endpoint of immune-related response rate for combination of T+D in refractory MSS mCRC pts (NCT03428126). T is 2 mg/day orally starting 1 week prior to D, which is given 1500 mg intravenously every 4 weeks. Simon 2-stage design used to enroll 29 pts into first stage, requiring a response in two or more pts to proceed to stage 2. Tumor biopsies were collected at baseline (BL) and early on-treatment (OT) at week 4. RESULTS: Twenty nine treated pts include 48% females, median age 48 years (range 28-75), and median prior therapies 2 (range 1-5). No grade (G) 4 or 5 treatment-related adverse events (TRAE). The most common TRAE of any grade was acneiform rash, 17% being G3. One of 29 pts had confirmed partial response (PR) lasting 9.3 months (mo) for an overall response rate of 3.4%. Seven pts had stable disease (SD) and five pts (1 PR, 4 SD) demonstrated decrease in total carcinoembryonic antigen ng/mL (best percentage reduction: 94%, 95%, 42%, 34%, and 22%, respectively). Median progression-free survival was 3.2 mo (range 1.1-9.3 months). Three pts with both liver and lung metastases demonstrated discrepant responses in which clinical benefit was present in the lung metastases but not liver metastases. Comparison of BL and 4-week OT tumor tissue flow cytometry demonstrated no changes in T-cell infiltration but upregulation expression of PD-1 and Tim3 on CD8 T cells. However, expression of PD-1 and Tim3 as single markers and as coexpressed markers was observed to increase OT relative to BL (p=0.03, p=0.06 and p=0.06, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: T+D demonstrated acceptable tolerability in pts with refractory MSS mCRC. The response rate in the first stage of the study did not meet efficacy criteria to proceed to the second stage. Specific site of metastatic disease may impact outcomes in novel immunotherapy combination trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03428126.

Phase II study of ceralasertib (AZD6738) in combination with durvalumab in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Targeting the DNA damage repair (DDR) pathways is an attractive strategy for boosting cancer immunotherapy. Ceralasertib (AZD6738) is an oral kinase inhibitor of ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3 related protein, which is a master regulator of DDR. We conducted a phase II trial of ceralasertib plus durvalumab in patients with previously treated advanced gastric cancer (AGC) to demonstrate the safety, tolerability, and clinical activity of the combination. METHODS: This phase II, open-label, single-center, non-randomized study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ceralasertib in combination with durvalumab in patients with AGC. The study drug regimen was ceralasertib (240 mg two times a day) days 15-28 in a 28-day cycle in combination with durvalumab (1500 mg) at day 1 every 4 weeks. The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR) by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (V.1.1). Exploratory biomarker analysis was performed using fresh tumor biopsies in all enrolled patients. RESULTS: Among 31 patients, the ORR, disease control rate, median progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival were 22.6% (95% CI 9.6% to 41.1%), 58.1% (95% CI 39.1% to 75.5%), 3.0 (95% CI 2.1 to 3.9) months, and 6.7 (95% CI 3.8 to 9.6) months, respectively. Common adverse events were manageable with dose modification. A subgroup of patients with a loss of ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) expression and/or high proportion of mutational signature attributable to homologous repair deficiency (sig. HRD) demonstrated a significantly longer PFS than those with intact ATM and low sig. HRD (5.60 vs 1.65 months; HR 0.13, 95% CI 0.045 to 0.39; long-rank p<0.001). During the study treatment, upregulation of the innate immune response by cytosolic DNA, activation of intratumoral lymphocytes, and expansion of circulating tumor-reactive CD8 +T cell clones were identified in responders. Enrichment of the tumor vasculature signature was associated with treatment resistance. CONCLUSIONS: Ceralasertib plus durvalumab has promising antitumor activity, with durable responses in patients with refractory AGC. Thus, a biomarker-driven trial is required. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03780608.

Nivolumab in patients with relapsed or refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma: modest activity and cases of hyperprogression.

Peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCL), a heterogeneous group of mature aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphomas, carry a worse prognosis for most subtypes when compared with their B-cell counterparts. Despite recent approval of newer therapies, the outlook for patients with relapsed/refractory (RR) PTCL remains poor and new treatment strategies are clearly needed. Targeting the profoundly immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment in PTCL is one such approach. To determine whether immune checkpoint blockade targeting program death receptor 1 would be effective in PTCL, we conducted an investigator-initiated phase 2 prospective study of single-agent nivolumab for RR PTCL. We report here results of the pre-specified interim analysis. METHODS: The primary objective was to assess the overall response rate (ORR). Secondary objectives were to assess safety and tolerability of nivolumab in PTCL and to assess progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR) and overall survival (OS). Hyperprogressive disease (HPD) was defined as time-to-treatment failure of less than or equal to one month from initiation of therapy. RESULTS: Twelve patients who received at least one cycle of nivolumab were included in this interim analysis. Half (6/12) of the patients had angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL), 3/12 had PTCL, not otherwise specified. Most (11/12) were advanced stage, had extranodal disease (97.1%) and had received a prior autologous stem cell transplant (50%). The ORR was 33% (95% CI: 12.3 to 63.7%) with two complete response and two partial response. The median PFS was however short at 2.7 months (95% CI: 1.5 to NE); and the median OS was 6.7 months (95% CI: 3.4 to NE). The median DOR was also short at 3.6 months (95% CI: 1.9 to NE). HPD occurred in four patients, three of whom had AITL. Observed grade 3 and higher adverse events (AEs) were non-hematologic in 5/12 (42%), while hematologic AEs were seen in 3/12 (25%). CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab had modest clinical activity in R/R PTCL. Due to a high number of hyperprogression and short DOR, a decision was made to halt the study. These findings likely reflect the distinct biology of PTCL and should be considered when designing future studies using checkpoint inhibitors in these diseases. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03075553.

Phase II trial of efficacy, safety and biomarker analysis of sintilimab plus anlotinib for patients with recurrent or advanced endometrial cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although co-inhibition of the angiogenesis and programmed death 1 (PD-1) pathways is proposed as an effective anticancer strategy, studies in Chinese patients with endometrial cancer are sufficient. Anlotinib is an oral multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor affecting tumor angiogenesis and proliferation; sintilimab is an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody. METHODS: This was a phase II trial using Simon's two-stage design. This study enrolled patients with endometrial cancer who had progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy. Sintilimab 200 mg was administered intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks, and anlotinib 12 mg was administered on days 1-14 in a 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) using the immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria. Immunohistochemistry and whole-exome sequencing were used as correlative investigations. RESULTS: Between November 2019 and September 2020, 23 eligible patients were enrolled. The ORR and disease control rates were 73.9% (95% CI, 51.6 to 89.8) and 91.3% (95% CI, 72.0 to 98.9), respectively, with 4 complete and 12 partial responses. With a median follow-up of 15.4 months (95% CI, 12.6 to 18.3), the median progression-free survival was not reached, and the probability of PFS >12 months was 57.1% (95% CI, 33.6 to 75.0). Exploratory analysis revealed that mutations in the homologous repair pathway showed a trend for higher ORR (100% vs 0%, p=0.07). Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events were observed in 50.0% of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Sintilimab plus anlotinib demonstrated robust therapeutic benefits with tolerable toxicity in endometrial cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04157491.

Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant sintilimab, oxaliplatin and capecitabine in patients with locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: early results of a phase 2 study.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have greatly improved the prognoses of diverse advanced malignancies, including gastric and gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) cancer. However, the role of anti-programmed cell death protein-1 treatment in the neoadjuvant setting remains unclear. This phase 2 study aimed to evaluate sintilimab plus CapeOx as a neoadjuvant regimen in patients with advanced resectable G/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Eligible patients with resectable G/GEJ adenocarcinoma stage cT3-4NanyM0 were enrolled. Patients received neoadjuvant treatment with sintilimab (3 mg/kg for cases <60 kg or 200 mg for those ≥60 kg on day 1) plus CapeOx (oxaliplatin at 130 mg/m2 on D1 and capecitabine at 1000 mg/m2 two times per day on D1-D14) every 21 days, for three cycles before surgical resection, followed by adjuvant treatment with three cycles of CapeOx with the same dosages after surgical resection. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response (pCR) rate. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate, tumor regression grade per Becker criteria, survival and safety. As of July 30, 2020, 36 patients were enrolled. Totally 7 (19.4%) patients had GEJ cancer, and 34 (94.4%) patients were clinical stage III cases. A total of 35 (97.2%) patients completed three cycles of neoadjuvant treatment, and 1 patients received two cycles due to adverse events. All patients underwent surgery and the R0 resection rate was 97.2%. In this study, pCR and major pathological response were achieved in 7 (19.4%, 95% CI: 8.8% to 35.7%; 90% CI: 10.7% to 33.1%) and 17 (47.2%, 95% CI: 31.6% to 64.3%) patients, respectively. Thirty-one patients received adjuvant treatment. By December 20, 2021, three patients died after disease relapse, and two patients were alive with relapse. Median disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were not reached. The 1-year DFS and OS rates were 90.3% (95% CI: 80.4% to 100.0%) and 94.1% (95% CI: 86.5% to 100.0%), respectively. The most common (>1 patient) grade 3 treatment-related adverse events during neoadjuvant treatment were anemia and neutropenia (n=5 each, 13.9%). No serious adverse events (AEs) or grade 4-5 AEs were observed. Sintilimab plus oxaliplatin/capecitabine showed promising efficacy with encouraging pCR rate and good safety profile in the neoadjuvant setting. This combination regimen might present a new option for patients with locally advanced, resectable G/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Trial registration; NCT04065282.

Phase 2 trial of T-cell activation using MVI-816 and pembrolizumab in patients with metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

BACKGROUND: We previously reported a trial using a DNA vaccine encoding prostatic acid phosphatase (MVI-816, pTVG-HP), given over 12 weeks concurrently or sequentially with pembrolizumab, in patients with mCRPC. We report the final analysis of this trial following two additional treatment arms in which patients with mCRPC continued concurrent treatment until progression. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with mCRPC were treated with MVI-816 and pembrolizumab every 3 weeks (arm 3, n=20) or MVI-816 every 2 weeks and pembrolizumab every 4 weeks (arm 4, n=20). The primary objectives were safety, 6-month progression-free survival (PFS), median time to radiographic progression, and objective response rates. Secondary objectives included immunological evaluations. RESULTS: In 25 patients with measurable disease, there were no complete response and one confirmed partial response in a patient who subsequently found to have an MSIhi tumor. 4/40 patients (10%) had a prostate-specific antigen decline >50%. The estimated overall radiographic PFS rate at 6 months was 47.2% (44.4% arm 3, 61.5% arm 4). Accounting for all off-study events, overall median time on treatment was 5.6 months (95% CI: 5.4 to 10.8 months), 5.6 months for arm 3 and 8.1 months for arm 4 (p=0.64). Thirty-two per cent of patients remained on trial beyond 6 months without progression. Median overall survival was 22.9 (95% CI: 16.2 to 25.6) months. One grade 4 event (hyperglycemia) was observed. Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) >grade 1 were observed in 42% of patients overall. Interferon-γ and/or granzyme B immune response to prostatic acid phosphatase was detected in 2/20 patients in arm 3 and 6/20 patients in arm 4. Plasma cytokines associated with immune activation and CD8+ T-cell recruitment were augmented at weeks 6 and 12. The development of irAE was significantly associated with a prolonged time on treatment (HR=0.42, p=0.003). Baseline DNA homologous recombination repair mutations were not associated with longer time to progression. CONCLUSIONS: Findings here demonstrate that combining programmed cell death 1 blockade with MVI-816 is safe, can augment tumor-specific T cells, and can result in a favorable 6-month disease control rate. Correlative studies suggest T-cell activation by vaccination is critical to the mechanism of action of this combination. Future randomized clinical trials are needed to validate these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02499835.