Anti-NKG2A mAb Is a Checkpoint Inhibitor that Promotes Anti-tumor Immunity by Unleashing Both T and NK Cells.

Checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized cancer treatment. However, only a minority of patients respond to these immunotherapies. Here, we report that blocking the inhibitory NKG2A receptor enhances tumor immunity by promoting both natural killer (NK) and CD8+ T cell effector functions in mice and humans. Monalizumab, a humanized anti-NKG2A antibody, enhanced NK cell activity against various tumor cells and rescued CD8+ T cell function in combination with PD-x axis blockade. Monalizumab also stimulated NK cell activity against antibody-coated target cells. Interim results of a phase II trial of monalizumab plus cetuximab in previously treated squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck showed a 31% objective response rate. Most common adverse events were fatigue (17%), pyrexia (13%), and headache (10%). NKG2A targeting with monalizumab is thus a novel checkpoint inhibitory mechanism promoting anti-tumor immunity by enhancing the activity of both T and NK cells, which may complement first-generation immunotherapies against cancer.

Outcomes in biomarker-selected subgroups from the KESTREL study of durvalumab and tremelimumab in recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Selective biomarkers may improve outcomes in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. We investigated three independent biomarkers for association with efficacy in the randomized, phase III KESTREL study (NCT02551159) of first-line durvalumab monotherapy or durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus the EXTREME regimen: programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry, blood tumor mutational burden (bTMB) via circulating tumor DNA, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR). METHODS: Tumor or blood samples from patients enrolled in the KESTREL study were analyzed for PD-L1, bTMB, and NLR. Associations with overall survival (OS) or objective response rates (ORRs) were evaluated based on prespecified cut-offs for PD-L1 (tumor cell [TC] ≥ 50%/immune cell ≥ 25% or TC ≥ 25%), bTMB (≥ 16 mutations [mut] per megabase [Mb]), and NLR (≤ 7). Ad hoc analyses of exploratory cut-offs were performed. RESULTS: Prespecified or exploratory cut-offs for PD-L1 did not enrich for ORR or OS for durvalumab monotherapy or durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus EXTREME. In the bTMB ≥ 16 mut/Mb subgroup, OS hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) for durvalumab monotherapy and durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus EXTREME were 0.90 (0.48-1.72) and 0.69 (0.39-1.25), respectively. Complete response rates were 8.6% with durvalumab plus tremelimumab and 4.3% with EXTREME (≥ 16 mut/Mb subgroup). No improvement in OS was observed for durvalumab monotherapy or durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus EXTREME at prespecified or exploratory NLR cut-offs. CONCLUSIONS: bTMB demonstrated potential utility for selecting patients with R/M HNSCC who benefited from durvalumab with or without tremelimumab versus EXTREME. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02551159.

Efficacy of second-line chemotherapy or immune checkpoint inhibitors for patients with a prolonged objective response (≥ 6 months) after first-line therapy for recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M-HNSCC) have a poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are effective in patients with tumor progression < 6 months following first-line, platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC), but data are missing for patients with progression ≥ 6 months after the last platinum dose. METHODS: Retrospective analysis (six French centers, 2008-2019) of all consecutive R/M-HNSCC patients. treated first-line with PBC and tumor progression ≥ 6 months after the last platinum dose. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: progression-free survival after second-line therapy (PFS2). Additional endpoints: overall survival from Day 1 of first-line (OS1) and second-line (OS2) therapy. RESULTS: R/M-HNSCC patients (n = 144) received cisplatinum (n = 67, 47%) or carboplatinum (n = 77, 53%) first-line. Response after first-line: complete response (CR; n = 16, 11%); partial response (PR; n = 77, 53%); stable disease (n = 22, 15%). Second-line therapy: PBC (n = 95, 66%); platinum-free regimen (PFR) (n = 25, 17%); ICI (n = 24, 17%). Median [95% confidence interval] PFS (months): PBC 5.0 [3.8-6.2]; PFR 4.0 [1-7.0]; ICI 2.0 [0.4-3.6] (p = 0.16). For PBC, PFR, and ICI, respectively: OS1 30, 23, and 29 months (p = 1.02); OS2 14, 10, and 16 months (p = 0.25); PR, 26%, 16%, and 21% patients; CR, 0%, 8%, and 4% patients. For subsequent lines, ICIs were administered for PBC (n = 11, 12%) and PFR (n = 2, 8%). No predictive factor for efficacy (PFS, OS) was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Our retrospective study suggests similar efficacy regarding OS2 for second-line chemotherapy or ICI in R/M-HNSCC patients with progression ≥ 6 months after the last first-line platinum dose.

Long-term Outcomes with Nivolumab as First-line Treatment in Recurrent or Metastatic Head and Neck Cancer: Subgroup Analysis of CheckMate 141.

In the randomized, phase 3 CheckMate 141 trial, nivolumab significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus investigator's choice (IC) of chemotherapy at primary analysis among 361 patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN) post-platinum therapy. Nivolumab versus IC as first-line treatment also improved OS among patients with R/M SCCHN who progressed on platinum therapy for locally advanced disease in the adjuvant or primary setting at 1-year follow-up. In the present long-term follow-up analysis of patients receiving first-line treatment, OS benefit with nivolumab (n = 50) versus IC (n = 26) was maintained (median: 7.7 months versus 3.3 months; hazard ratio: 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.94) at 2 years. No new safety signals were identified. In summary, this long-term 2-year analysis of CheckMate 141 supports the use of nivolumab as a first-line treatment for patients with platinum-refractory R/M SCCHN.

Cetuximab, docetaxel, and cisplatin versus platinum, fluorouracil, and cetuximab as first-line treatment in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma (GORTEC 2014-01 TPExtreme): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Results from a phase 2 trial of the TPEx chemotherapy regimen (docetaxel-platinum-cetuximab) showed promising results, with a median overall survival of 14·0 months in first-line recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma (HNSCC). We therefore aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the TPEx regimen with the standard of care EXTREME regimen (platinum-fluorouracil-cetuximab) in this setting. METHODS: This was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial, done in 68 centres (cancer centres, university and general hospitals, and private clinics) in France, Spain, and Germany. Eligible patients were aged 18-70 years with histologically confirmed recurrent or metastatic HNSCC unsuitable for curative treatment; had at least one measurable lesion according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1; and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 1 or less. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using the TenAlea website by investigators or delegated clinical research associates to the TPEx regimen or the EXTREME regimen, with minimisation by ECOG performance status, type of disease evolution, previous cetuximab treatment, and country. The TPEx regimen consisted of docetaxel 75 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2, both intravenously on day 1, and cetuximab on days 1, 8, and 15 (intravenously 400 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1 and 250 mg/m2 weekly subsequently). Four cycles were repeated every 21 days with systematic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support at each cycle. In case of disease control after four cycles, intravenous cetuximab 500 mg/m2 was continued every 2 weeks as maintenance therapy until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The EXTREME regimen consisted of fluorouracil 4000 mg/m2 on day 1-4, cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1, and cetuximab on days 1, 8, and 15 (400 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1 and 250 mg/m2 weekly subsequently) all delivered intravenously. Six cycles were delivered every 21 days followed by weekly 250 mg/m2 cetuximab as maintenance therapy in case of disease control. G-CSF support was not mandatory per the protocol in the EXTREME regimen. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population; safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of chemotherapy or cetuximab. Enrolment is closed and this is the final analysis. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02268695. FINDINGS: Between Oct 10, 2014, and Nov 29, 2017, 541 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment regimens (271 to TPEx, 270 to EXTREME). Two patients in the TPEx group had major deviations in consent forms and were not included in the final analysis. Median follow-up was 34·4 months (IQR 26·6-44·8) in the TPEx group and 30·2 months (25·5-45·3) in the EXTREME group. At data cutoff, 209 patients had died in the TPEx group and 218 had died in the EXTREME group. Overall survival did not differ significantly between the groups (median 14·5 months [95% CI 12·5-15·7] in the TPEx group and 13·4 months [12·2-15·4] in the EXTREME group; hazard ratio 0·89 [95% CI 0·74-1·08]; p=0·23). 214 (81%) of 263 patients in the TPEx group versus 246 (93%) of 265 patients in the EXTREME group had grade 3 or worse adverse events during chemotherapy (p<0·0001). In the TPEx group, 118 (45%) of 263 patients had at least one serious adverse event versus 143 (54%) of 265 patients in the EXTREME group. 16 patients in the TPEx group and 21 in the EXTREME group died in association with adverse events, including seven patients in each group who had fatal infections (including febrile neutropenia). Eight deaths in the TPEx group and 11 deaths in the EXTREME group were assessed as treatment related, most frequently sepsis or septic shock (four in each treatment group). INTERPRETATION: Although the trial did not meet its primary endpoint, with no significant improvement in overall survival with TPEx versus EXTREME, the TPEx regimen had a favourable safety profile. The TPEx regimen could provide an alternative to standard of care with the EXTREME regimen in the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC, especially for those who might not be good candidates for up-front pembrolizumab treatment. FUNDING: Merck Santé and Chugai Pharma.

A phase 1b study of the MET inhibitor capmatinib combined with cetuximab in patients with MET-positive colorectal cancer who had progressed following anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody treatment.

Background Overcoming resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in patients with KRAS wildtype (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) could help meet the needs of patients with limited treatment options. Methods In this phase 1b study, patients with N/KRAS WT, MET-positive mCRC who had progressed following anti-EGFR mAb treatment received escalating oral doses of capmatinib (150, 300, and 400 mg) twice daily plus weekly intravenous cetuximab (at the approved dose). The primary objective was to establish a recommended dose for expansion (RDE) of capmatinib in combination with cetuximab. Safety, preliminary activity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics were also explored. Results Thirteen patients were enrolled. No patients experienced a dose-limiting toxicity at investigated doses; the RDE was established as capmatinib 400 mg twice daily plus cetuximab. All patients experienced adverse events (AEs) suspected to be related to the study treatment. Five patients (38.5%) reported study-drug-related AEs of grade 3/4 in severity. No patients achieved a complete or partial response according to RECIST v1.1; however, tumor shrinkage of 29-44% was observed in 4 patients. Conclusions Capmatinib plus cetuximab was well tolerated. Preliminary signs of activity were observed. Further investigation is warranted to obtain efficacy data and refine predictive biomarkers of response. Clinical trial registration NCT02205398.

Nivolumab treatment beyond RECIST-defined progression in recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in CheckMate 141: A subgroup analysis of a randomized phase 3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Response patterns with immune checkpoint inhibitors may be different from those with chemotherapy. Therefore, assessment of response to immunotherapy with the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, could result in premature treatment termination. The randomized, open-label, phase 3 CheckMate 141 trial (NCT02105636), which evaluated nivolumab in recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck after platinum therapy, allowed treatment beyond first RECIST-defined progression (TBP) according to protocol-specified criteria. METHODS: In CheckMate 141, patients with RECIST-defined progression who had a stable performance status and demonstrated clinical benefit without rapid disease progression were permitted to receive TBP with nivolumab at 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks until further progression, which was defined as an additional ≥10% increase in tumor volume. This post hoc analysis evaluated outcomes for patients who received TBP with nivolumab. RESULTS: Of 240 patients randomized to nivolumab, 146 experienced RECIST-defined progression. Sixty-two of these patients received TBP, and 84 discontinued treatment (no TBP). Among the 60 TBP patients evaluable for response, 15 (25%) had no change in their tumor burden, and 15 (25%) had reductions in target lesion size; 3 patients (5%) had reductions >30%. The median overall survival among TBP patients was 12.7 months (95% confidence interval, 9.7-14.6 months). No new safety signals were observed with TBP. Exploratory analyses of immune cell biomarkers suggested a potential relationship with initial and TBP responses. CONCLUSIONS: Tumor burden reduction was noted in a proportion of patients who received TBP with nivolumab in CheckMate 141. Additional research is warranted to identify factors predictive of a TBP benefit in this population.

Nivolumab for Recurrent Squamous-Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck.

BACKGROUND: Patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck after platinum chemotherapy have a very poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. Nivolumab, an anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibody, was assessed as treatment for this condition. METHODS: In this randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial, we assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, 361 patients with recurrent squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck whose disease had progressed within 6 months after platinum-based chemotherapy to receive nivolumab (at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight) every 2 weeks or standard, single-agent systemic therapy (methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab). The primary end point was overall survival. Additional end points included progression-free survival, rate of objective response, safety, and patient-reported quality of life. RESULTS: The median overall survival was 7.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.5 to 9.1) in the nivolumab group versus 5.1 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 6.0) in the group that received standard therapy. Overall survival was significantly longer with nivolumab than with standard therapy (hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 97.73% CI, 0.51 to 0.96; P=0.01), and the estimates of the 1-year survival rate were approximately 19 percentage points higher with nivolumab than with standard therapy (36.0% vs. 16.6%). The median progression-free survival was 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 2.1) with nivolumab versus 2.3 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 3.1) with standard therapy (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.13; P=0.32). The rate of progression-free survival at 6 months was 19.7% with nivolumab versus 9.9% with standard therapy. The response rate was 13.3% in the nivolumab group versus 5.8% in the standard-therapy group. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 13.1% of the patients in the nivolumab group versus 35.1% of those in the standard-therapy group. Physical, role, and social functioning was stable in the nivolumab group, whereas it was meaningfully worse in the standard-therapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with platinum-refractory, recurrent squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck, treatment with nivolumab resulted in longer overall survival than treatment with standard, single-agent therapy. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 141 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02105636 .).

Systematic screening for occupations and occupational exposures in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients.

PURPOSE: The importance of occupational exposures in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC) has received little attention. METHODS: In a single-center study, we prospectively characterized occupational exposures in 154 HNSCC cancer patients in a systematic occupational consultation and examined the association between most frequent exposures, HNSCC stage and localization. RESULTS: Patients occupied a mean of 3.3 different positions during their working life. The prevalence of asbestos, the most frequent exposure (46 patients; 29.9%) was higher than in the French population > 50 years. Other frequent exposures were solvents (n = 26; 16.9%) and silica (n = 19; 12.3%). For 37 patients (24%) a possible link was identified between occupational exposures and HNSCC. Duration of asbestos exposure was significantly higher (p = 0.04) in patients with hypopharyngeal and laryngeal cancer compared to other localizations. CONCLUSIONS: Occupational exposures are frequent in patients with HNSCC and should receive increased attention by physicians.

CheckMate 141: 1-Year Update and Subgroup Analysis of Nivolumab as First-Line Therapy in Patients with Recurrent/Metastatic Head and Neck Cancer.

Nivolumab significantly improved overall survival (OS) vs investigator's choice (IC) of chemotherapy at the primary analysis of randomized, open-label, phase 3 CheckMate 141 in patients with recurrent or metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). Here, we report that OS benefit with nivolumab was maintained at a minimum follow-up of 11.4 months. Further, OS benefit with nivolumab vs IC was also noted among patients who received first-line treatment for R/M SCCHN after progressing on platinum therapy for locally advanced disease in the adjuvant or primary (i.e., with radiation) setting.

Nivolumab versus Docetaxel in Advanced Nonsquamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 programmed death 1 (PD-1) immune-checkpoint-inhibitor antibody, disrupts PD-1-mediated signaling and may restore antitumor immunity. METHODS: In this randomized, open-label, international phase 3 study, we assigned patients with nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that had progressed during or after platinum-based doublet chemotherapy to receive nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 weeks or docetaxel at a dose of 75 mg per square meter of body-surface area every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: Overall survival was longer with nivolumab than with docetaxel. The median overall survival was 12.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.7 to 15.0) among 292 patients in the nivolumab group and 9.4 months (95% CI, 8.1 to 10.7) among 290 patients in the docetaxel group (hazard ratio for death, 0.73; 96% CI, 0.59 to 0.89; P=0.002). At 1 year, the overall survival rate was 51% (95% CI, 45 to 56) with nivolumab versus 39% (95% CI, 33 to 45) with docetaxel. With additional follow-up, the overall survival rate at 18 months was 39% (95% CI, 34 to 45) with nivolumab versus 23% (95% CI, 19 to 28) with docetaxel. The response rate was 19% with nivolumab versus 12% with docetaxel (P=0.02). Although progression-free survival did not favor nivolumab over docetaxel (median, 2.3 months and 4.2 months, respectively), the rate of progression-free survival at 1 year was higher with nivolumab than with docetaxel (19% and 8%, respectively). Nivolumab was associated with even greater efficacy than docetaxel across all end points in subgroups defined according to prespecified levels of tumor-membrane expression (≥1%, ≥5%, and ≥10%) of the PD-1 ligand. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported in 10% of the patients in the nivolumab group, as compared with 54% of those in the docetaxel group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC that had progressed during or after platinum-based chemotherapy, overall survival was longer with nivolumab than with docetaxel. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 057 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01673867.).

Nivolumab in recurrent/metastatic head and neck cancers.

Head and neck cancer is an immunosuppressive disease, with a high proportion expressing PD-L1. Until recently, options were lacking in second line. Prognosis is poor especially for patients who progress during chemotherapy with survival often inferior to 6 months. Nivolumab is the only anti-PD-1 agent to prolong survival in the second-line setting and is now the standard option since the CheckMate-141 trial. Treatment is generally well tolerated, patients seem to have a better quality of life when compared with chemotherapy. Markers of efficacy are lacking even if some data are emerging. Different combinations of immunotherapy are ongoing. Hyperprogression is a phenomenon associated with poor outcome and might be the consequence of anti-PD-1 treatment but this is yet to be proven.

Nivolumab versus standard, single-agent therapy of investigator's choice in recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (CheckMate 141): health-related quality-of-life results from a randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with platinum-refractory recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck have few treatment options and poor prognosis. Nivolumab significantly improved survival of this patient population when compared with standard single-agent therapy of investigator's choice in Checkmate 141; here we report the effect of nivolumab on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). METHODS: CheckMate 141 was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck who progressed within 6 months after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (n=240) or investigator's choice (n=121) of methotrexate (40-60 mg/m2 of body surface area), docetaxel (30-40 mg/m2), or cetuximab (250 mg/m2 after a loading dose of 400 mg/m2) until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. On Jan 26, 2016, the independent data monitoring committee reviewed the data at the planned interim analysis and declared overall survival superiority for nivolumab over investigator's choice therapy (primary endpoint; described previously). The protocol was amended to allow patients in the investigator's choice group to cross over to nivolumab. All patients not on active therapy are being followed for survival. As an exploratory endpoint, PROs were assessed at baseline, week 9, and every 6 weeks thereafter using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30), the EORTC head and neck cancer-specific module (EORTC QLQ-H&N35), and the three-level European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire. Differences within and between treatment groups in PROs were analysed by ANCOVA among patients with baseline and at least one other assessment. All randomised patients were included in the time to clinically meaningful deterioration analyses. Median time to clinically meaningful deterioration was analysed by Kaplan-Meier methods. CheckMate 141 was registered with ClinicalTrials.org, number NCT02105636. FINDINGS: Patients were enrolled between May 29, 2014, and July 31, 2015, and subsequently 361 patients were randomly assigned to receive nivolumab (n=240) or investigator's choice (n=121). Among them, 129 patients (93 in the nivolumab group and 36 in the investigator's choice group) completed any of the PRO questionnaires at baseline and at least one other assessment. Treatment with nivolumab resulted in adjusted mean changes from baseline to week 15 ranging from -2·1 to 5·4 across functional and symptom domains measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30, with no domains indicating clinically meaningful deterioration. By contrast, eight (53%) of the 15 domains in the investigator's choice group showed clinically meaningful deterioration (10 points or more) at week 15 (change from baseline range, -24·5 to 2·4). Similarly, on the EORTC QLQ-H&N35, clinically meaningful worsening at week 15 was seen in no domains in the nivolumab group and eight (44%) of 18 domains in the investigator's choice group. Patients in the nivolumab group had a clinically meaningful improvement (according to a difference of 7 points or greater) in adjusted mean change from baseline to week 15 on the EQ-5D visual analogue scale, in contrast to a clinically meaningful deterioration in the investigator's choice group (7·3 vs -7·8). Differences between groups were significant and clinically meaningful at weeks 9 and 15 in favour of nivolumab for role functioning, social functioning, fatigue, dyspnoea, and appetite loss on the EORTC QLQ-C30 and pain and sensory problems on the EORTC QLQ-H&N35. Median time to deterioration was significantly longer with nivolumab versus investigator's choice for 13 (37%) of 35 domains assessed across the three questionnaires. INTERPRETATION: In this exploratory analysis of CheckMate 141, nivolumab stabilised symptoms and functioning from baseline to weeks 9 and 15, whereas investigator's choice led to clinically meaningful deterioration. Nivolumab delayed time to deterioration of patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes compared with single-agent therapy of investigator's choice in patients with platinum-refractory recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. In view of the major unmet need in this population and the importance of maintaining or improving quality of life for patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, these data support nivolumab as a new standard-of-care option in this setting. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Chemotherapy for recurrent/metastatic head and neck cancers.

Chemotherapy is the only option of treatment for most patients presenting with a recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. The triple association of cisplatin, 5-fluorouracile, and cetuximab is still the current standard for fit patients. Other schemes are currently being compared with this protocol in ongoing trials and the association of cisplatin, docetaxel, and cetuximab appears to be the most efficient. The human papilloma virus is very likely a favorable prognostic factor. Immunotherapy with nivolumab or pembrolizumab is now a new standard of treatment in second line after yielding an improvement in overall survival, but predictive markers of efficacy are needed to refine the selection of patients. The combination of paclitaxel and buparlisib appears to be promising.

Chemotherapy for localized head and neck squamous cell cancers.

Concomitant chemotherapy with cisplatin (100 mg/m every 3 weeks) improves outcome for high-risk patients in the postoperative setting and for inoperable disease. Toxicity is increased. Other schemes of potentiation are sometimes used to reduce toxicity, but efficiency is diminished. Cetuximab also improves outcome, but there has been no direct comparison with cisplatin. Immunotherapy is currently being evaluated in association with radiation therapy. Trials are ongoing to evaluate the impact of de-escalation for human papillomavirus-positive patients. The association of docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil is the standard of induction; it is also the standard treatment for laryngeal preservation. Many trials have attempted to compare the concomitant approach with the sequential treatment; none have managed to show a difference between the two. After induction chemotherapy, there is still no standard of potentiation of radiotherapy.

Afatinib versus methotrexate as second-line treatment in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck progressing on or after platinum-based therapy (LUX-Head & Neck 1): an open-label, randomised phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC) progressing after first-line platinum regimens have a poor prognosis and few treatment options. Afatinib, an irreversible ERBB family blocker, has shown efficacy in a phase 2 study in this setting. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of afatinib compared with methotrexate as second-line treatment in patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC progressing on or after platinum-based therapy. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial conducted in 101 centres in 19 countries, we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed HNSCC that was recurrent, metastatic, or both who had progressed on or after first-line platinum-based therapy, were not amenable for salvage surgery or radiotherapy, and who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1. Previous treatment with more than one systemic regimen in this setting was not allowed; previous treatment with EGFR-targeted antibody therapy (but not EGFR-targeted tyrosine-kinase inhibitors) was allowed. We randomly assigned eligible patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive oral afatinib (40 mg/day) or intravenous methotrexate (40 mg/m(2) per week), stratified by ECOG performance status and previous EGFR-targeted antibody therapy for recurrent or metastatic disease. Randomisation was done centrally with an interactive voice or web-based response system. Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation; independent review of tumour response was done in a blinded manner. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival as assessed by an independent, central imaging review committee. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses were done in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01345682. FINDINGS: Between Jan 10, 2012, and Dec 12, 2013, we enrolled 483 patients and randomly assigned 322 to afatinib and 161 to methotrexate. After a median follow-up of 6·7 months (IQR 3·1-9·0), progression-free survival was longer in the afatinib group than in the methotrexate group (median 2·6 months [95% CI 2·0-2·7] for the afatinib group vs 1·7 months [1·5-2·4] for the methotrexate group; hazard ratio [HR] 0·80 [95% CI 0·65-0·98], p=0·030). The most frequent grade 3 or 4 drug-related adverse events were rash or acne (31 [10%] of 320 patients in the afatinib group vs none of 160 patients in the methotrexate group), diarrhoea (30 [9%] vs three [2%]), stomatitis (20 [6%] vs 13 [8%]), fatigue (18 [6%] vs five [3%]), and neutropenia (1 [<1%] vs 11 [7%]); serious adverse events occurred in 44 (14%) of afatinib-treated patients and 18 (11%) of methotrexate-treated patients. INTERPRETATION: Afatinib was associated with significant improvements in progression-free survival and had a manageable safety profile. These findings provide important new insights into the treatment of this patient population and support further investigations with irreversible ERBB family blockers in HNSCC. FUNDING: Boehringer Ingelheim.

An effective and well-tolerated strategy in recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck cancer: successive lines of active chemotherapeutic agents.

BACKGROUND: The combination platinum, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and cetuximab is the standard first-line regimen of recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Due to the toxicity of this treatment, alternative therapies are often offered to patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the overall survival obtained with a first line chemotherapy adapted to patients functional status and the administration of all active drugs within successive lines of chemotherapy. METHODS: This series included a total of 194 patients with recurrent and/or metastatic HNSCC treated from 2006 to 2011 in a single institution where the administration of successive lines of chemotherapies has been the standard clinical approach. Treatment was administered according to clinical practice guidelines. RESULTS: Most patients received at least two treatment lines. Only 11 patients (6%) were treated with a combination of cisplatin, 5-FU and cetuximab in front line, but most patients received at least one platinum-based regimen (n = 154 patients, 78%); 162 (82%) received taxanes, 36 (18%) received 5-FU, 27 (14%) received capecitabine, 67 (34%) received methotrexate and 134 (68%) received cetuximab. The median overall survival was 9.8 months (95% CI: 8.1-11.4 months) and reached 13.1 months among the subgroup of 131 patients eligible for inclusion in a clinical trial. CONCLUSION: The survival outcomes of patients treated in the first-line setting with chemotherapy regimens adapted to their functional status, followed by several subsequent regimens were comparable with published outcomes of patients treated by platinum, 5-FU and cetuximab.

A pyriform sinus cancer organ preservation strategy comprising induction chemotherapy with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil, followed by potentiated radiotherapy: a multicenter, retrospective study.

No specific study has evaluated the role of neoadjuvant DCF (docetaxel, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil) followed by radiotherapy in pyriform sinus cancer, which are often included in studies focusing on laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancer. We assessed the proportion of patients treated sequentially for a pyriform sinus cancer with a preserved larynx. Overall survival, event-free survival (EFS), survival with 'local control', and treatment tolerance were assessed as well. We retrospectively reviewed 88 patients with advanced pyriform sinus squamous cell carcinoma treated with DCF between 2005 and 2010. After induction, radiation could be potentiated with cetuximab or cisplatin. Most patients (82%) had been treated with organ preservation intent. The response rate to DCF was 85%, including 42% with complete response. Primary tumor was operated in 13 patients (eight with total laryngectomy). Radiotherapy had been delivered to 78 (89%) patients (30 with cisplatin, 39 with cetuximab). Potentiation had been achieved as planned in 52 and 79% of patients treated with cisplatin and cetuximab, respectively. Twenty-three local and three neck recurrences were found. Median overall survival was 16.8 months and 38.3% at 3 years. EFS at 3 years was 29.1% with a hazard ratio for partial responders versus nonresponders of 0.18 (P<0.001), and 0.13 (P<0.001) for complete responders versus nonresponders. Thirty-five percent of patients were alive with their larynx preserved at 3 years. This study confirms the efficacy of induction followed by chemoradiation for pyriform sinus cancer and that response to DCF is predictive of EFS.

[Oncology in French Guiana: A challenge to win]. / La cancérologie en Guyane : un défi à gagner.

French Guiana is an equatorial, multicultural, overseas territory in South America. The region is unique: a wealthy country with a universal healthcare system, but significant poverty, which bears little resemblance to its neighbors Brazil and Suriname. Cancer is the second leading cause of death. The incidence of cancer is lower than in France, stages are generally more advanced and the prognosis worse. To date, oncology has been organized through a joint venture between local institutions and healthcare professionals and a cancer center in mainland France, in line with the recommendations of the Institut National du Cancer. The implementation of a medical project and a complete medical studies curriculum in French Guiana is a tremendous opportunity for the development of oncology. The main challenges are consolidating medical care for patients, quality control, genetic oncology, molecular biology, implementation of radiotherapy and nuclear medicine, clinical and translational research, and teaching programs. Working in oncology in French Guiana is exciting because of the scientific interest (particular characteristics of cancers, notably the role of viral or micro-organism-induced carcinogenesis, genetic factors in these populations with African and Asian roots, and the importance of a public health policy) and human interest (patients from different cultures; all of them bring original approaches to health and illness that need to be deciphered in order to offer quality care). This requires the support of healthcare professionals who are enthusiastic about this unique adventure.

Uncovering immune checkpoint heterogeneity in oral squamous cell carcinoma using single cell RNA-sequencing data highlights three subgroups of patients with distinct immune phenotypes.

OBJECTIVES: In head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors remain inefficient in most patients, which points to the need for better characterization of immune checkpoint (ICP) molecule expression. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We evaluated the expression of 22 ICP ligands (ICPL) in 2,176 malignant cells from 10 patients in a public single-cell RNA-sequencing dataset and in two cohorts of HNSCC patients for which gene expression data are available. RESULTS: Based on ICPL expression, malignant cells formed three distinct clusters characterized either by a strong expression of ICPL together with an immune phenotype linked to IFN-γ response (cluster 1) or by a weak ICPL expression and little response to IFN-γ (clusters 2 and 3). Malignant cells from cluster 3 showed a high PD-L1 expression associated with NRF2 signature. The relevance of 3 groups of patients, i.e "high ICPL/high IFN-γ", "low ICPL/low IFN-γ" or "low ICPL/low IFN-γ/high PD-L1" was confirmed in a cohort of 259 OSCC whole tumor samples from TCGA and in the CLB-IHN cohort including patients treated with PD1/PD-L1 inhibitors. The heterogeneous expression of ICPL among patients' malignant cells was associated with immunologically distinct microenvironments, evaluated with the "hot/cold" and the Tumor microenvironment (TME) classification. Finally, the "low ICPL/low IFN-γ/high PD-L1" group 3 displayed a poor prognosis in the TCGA cohort. CONCLUSION: Hence, the global picture of ICPL gene expression in malignant cells from HNSCC patients may contribute to the broader issue of improving immunotherapy strategies though a better stratification of patients and the design of new treatment combinations.