Immune checkpoint therapy-current perspectives and future directions.

Immune checkpoint therapy (ICT) has dramatically altered clinical outcomes for cancer patients and conferred durable clinical benefits, including cure in a subset of patients. Varying response rates across tumor types and the need for predictive biomarkers to optimize patient selection to maximize efficacy and minimize toxicities prompted efforts to unravel immune and non-immune factors regulating the responses to ICT. This review highlights the biology of anti-tumor immunity underlying response and resistance to ICT, discusses efforts to address the current challenges with ICT, and outlines strategies to guide the development of subsequent clinical trials and combinatorial efforts with ICT.

Sotorasib in KRAS p.G12C-Mutated Advanced Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: KRAS p.G12C mutation occurs in approximately 1 to 2% of pancreatic cancers. The safety and efficacy of sotorasib, a KRAS G12C inhibitor, in previously treated patients with KRAS p.G12C-mutated pancreatic cancer are unknown. METHODS: We conducted a single-group, phase 1-2 trial to assess the safety and efficacy of sotorasib treatment in patients with KRAS p.G12C-mutated pancreatic cancer who had received at least one previous systemic therapy. The primary objective of phase 1 was to assess safety and to identify the recommended dose for phase 2. In phase 2, patients received sotorasib at a dose of 960 mg orally once daily. The primary end point for phase 2 was a centrally confirmed objective response (defined as a complete or partial response). Efficacy end points were assessed in the pooled population from both phases and included objective response, duration of response, time to objective response, disease control (defined as an objective response or stable disease), progression-free survival, and overall survival. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: The pooled population from phases 1 and 2 consisted of 38 patients, all of whom had metastatic disease at enrollment and had previously received chemotherapy. At baseline, patients had received a median of 2 lines (range, 1 to 8) of therapy previously. All 38 patients received sotorasib in the trial. A total of 8 patients had a centrally confirmed objective response (21%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10 to 37). The median progression-free survival was 4.0 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 5.6), and the median overall survival was 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.0 to 9.1). Treatment-related adverse events of any grade were reported in 16 patients (42%); 6 patients (16%) had grade 3 adverse events. No treatment-related adverse events were fatal or led to treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Sotorasib showed anticancer activity and had an acceptable safety profile in patients with KRAS p.G12C-mutated advanced pancreatic cancer who had received previous treatment. (Funded by Amgen and others; CodeBreaK 100 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03600883.).

Dostarlimab for Primary Advanced or Recurrent Endometrial Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Dostarlimab is an immune-checkpoint inhibitor that targets the programmed cell death 1 receptor. The combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy may have synergistic effects in the treatment of endometrial cancer. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, global, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Eligible patients with primary advanced stage III or IV or first recurrent endometrial cancer were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either dostarlimab (500 mg) or placebo, plus carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve, 5 mg per milliliter per minute) and paclitaxel (175 mg per square meter of body-surface area), every 3 weeks (six cycles), followed by dostarlimab (1000 mg) or placebo every 6 weeks for up to 3 years. The primary end points were progression-free survival as assessed by the investigator according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, and overall survival. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 494 patients who underwent randomization, 118 (23.9%) had mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR), microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumors. In the dMMR-MSI-H population, estimated progression-free survival at 24 months was 61.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 46.3 to 73.4) in the dostarlimab group and 15.7% (95% CI, 7.2 to 27.0) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.50; P<0.001). In the overall population, progression-free survival at 24 months was 36.1% (95% CI, 29.3 to 42.9) in the dostarlimab group and 18.1% (95% CI, 13.0 to 23.9) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.80; P<0.001). Overall survival at 24 months was 71.3% (95% CI, 64.5 to 77.1) with dostarlimab and 56.0% (95% CI, 48.9 to 62.5) with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.87). The most common adverse events that occurred or worsened during treatment were nausea (53.9% of the patients in the dostarlimab group and 45.9% of those in the placebo group), alopecia (53.5% and 50.0%), and fatigue (51.9% and 54.5%). Severe and serious adverse events were more frequent in the dostarlimab group than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Dostarlimab plus carboplatin-paclitaxel significantly increased progression-free survival among patients with primary advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer, with a substantial benefit in the dMMR-MSI-H population. (Funded by GSK; RUBY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03981796.).

Severe Immune-Related Enteritis after In Utero Exposure to Pembrolizumab.

Immune checkpoint blockade has become standard treatment for many types of cancer. Such therapy is indicated most often in patients with advanced or metastatic disease but has been increasingly used as adjuvant therapy in those with early-stage disease. Adverse events include immune-related organ inflammation resembling autoimmune diseases. We describe a case of severe immune-related gastroenterocolitis in a 4-month-old infant who presented with intractable diarrhea and failure to thrive after in utero exposure to pembrolizumab. Known causes of the symptoms were ruled out, and the diagnosis of pembrolizumab-induced immune-related gastroenterocolitis was supported by the results of histopathological assays, immunophenotyping, and analysis of the level of antibodies against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1). The infant's condition was successfully treated with prednisolone and infliximab.

Sotorasib plus Panitumumab in Refractory Colorectal Cancer with Mutated KRAS G12C.

BACKGROUND: KRAS G12C is a mutation that occurs in approximately 3 to 4% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Monotherapy with KRAS G12C inhibitors has yielded only modest efficacy. Combining the KRAS G12C inhibitor sotorasib with panitumumab, an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor, may be an effective strategy. METHODS: In this phase 3, multicenter, open-label, randomized trial, we assigned patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer with mutated KRAS G12C who had not received previous treatment with a KRAS G12C inhibitor to receive sotorasib at a dose of 960 mg once daily plus panitumumab (53 patients), sotorasib at a dose of 240 mg once daily plus panitumumab (53 patients), or the investigator's choice of trifluridine-tipiracil or regorafenib (standard care; 54 patients). The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Key secondary end points were overall survival and objective response. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 7.8 months (range, 0.1 to 13.9), the median progression-free survival was 5.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2 to 6.3) and 3.9 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 5.8) in the 960-mg sotorasib-panitumumab and 240-mg sotorasib-panitumumab groups, respectively, as compared with 2.2 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 3.9) in the standard-care group. The hazard ratio for disease progression or death in the 960-mg sotorasib-panitumumab group as compared with the standard-care group was 0.49 (95% CI, 0.30 to 0.80; P = 0.006), and the hazard ratio in the 240-mg sotorasib-panitumumab group was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.36 to 0.93; P = 0.03). Overall survival data are maturing. The objective response was 26.4% (95% CI, 15.3 to 40.3), 5.7% (95% CI, 1.2 to 15.7), and 0% (95% CI, 0.0 to 6.6) in the 960-mg sotorasib-panitumumab, 240-mg sotorasib-panitumumab, and standard-care groups, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 35.8%, 30.2%, and 43.1% of patients, respectively. Skin-related toxic effects and hypomagnesemia were the most common adverse events observed with sotorasib-panitumumab. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 3 trial of a KRAS G12C inhibitor plus an EGFR inhibitor in patients with chemorefractory metastatic colorectal cancer, both doses of sotorasib in combination with panitumumab resulted in longer progression-free survival than standard treatment. Toxic effects were as expected for either agent alone and resulted in few discontinuations of treatment. (Funded by Amgen; CodeBreaK 300 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05198934.).

Tivozanib plus nivolumab versus tivozanib monotherapy in patients with renal cell carcinoma following an immune checkpoint inhibitor: results of the phase 3 TiNivo-2 Study.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors are cornerstones of first-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma; however, optimal treatment sequencing after progression is unknown. This study aimed to assess clinical outcomes of tivozanib-nivolumab versus tivozanib monotherapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who have progressed following one or two lines of therapy in the post-ICI setting. METHODS: TiNivo-2 is a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial at 190 sites across 16 countries, in Australia, Europe, North America, and South America. Patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma and progression during or after one to two previous lines of therapy (including one ICI) were randomised 1:1 to tivozanib (0·89 mg per day, orally) plus nivolumab (480 mg every 4 weeks, intravenously) or tivozanib (1·34 mg per day, orally). Randomisation was stratified by immediate previous therapy (ICI or non-ICI) and International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk category. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), defined as the time from randomisation to first documentation of objective progressive disease according to RECIST 1·1 or death from any cause, whichever came first, by independent radiology review. Efficacy was evaluated in the intention-to-treat population, and safety was assessed in patients who received one or more doses of the study drug. This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04987203) and is active and not recruiting. FINDINGS: From Nov 4, 2021, to June 16, 2023, 343 patients were randomly assigned to tivozanib-nivolumab (n=171) or tivozanib monotherapy (n=172). Median follow-up was 12·0 months. Median PFS was 5·7 months (95% CI 4·0-7·4) with tivozanib-nivolumab and 7·4 months (5·6-9·2) with tivozanib monotherapy (hazard ratio 1·10, 95% CI 0·84-1·43; p=0·49). Among those with an ICI as their immediate previous therapy (n=244), median PFS was 7·4 months (95% CI 5·6-9·6) with tivozanib-nivolumab and 9·2 months (7·4-10·0) with tivozanib monotherapy. With non-ICIs as the most recent therapy, lower median PFS was observed, with no difference between groups (tivozanib-nivolumab 3·7 months [95% CI 2·7-5·4] and with tivozanib monotherapy 3·7 months [1·9-7·2]). Serious adverse events occurred in 54 (32%) of 168 patients receiving tivozanib-nivolumab and 64 (37%) of 171 patients receiving tivozanib monotherapy. One (<1%) treatment-related death occurred (tivozanib group). INTERPRETATION: These data further support that ICI rechallenge should be discouraged in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Furthermore, these data suggest that tivozanib monotherapy has efficacy in the post-ICI setting. FUNDING: Aveo Pharmaceuticals.

Nivolumab Combination Therapy in Advanced Esophageal Squamous-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: First-line chemotherapy for advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma results in poor outcomes. The monoclonal antibody nivolumab has shown an overall survival benefit over chemotherapy in previously treated patients with advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned adults with previously untreated, unresectable advanced, recurrent, or metastatic esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive nivolumab plus chemotherapy, nivolumab plus the monoclonal antibody ipilimumab, or chemotherapy. The primary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival, as determined by blinded independent central review. Hierarchical testing was performed first in patients with tumor-cell programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of 1% or greater and then in the overall population (all randomly assigned patients). RESULTS: A total of 970 patients underwent randomization. At a 13-month minimum follow-up, overall survival was significantly longer with nivolumab plus chemotherapy than with chemotherapy alone, both among patients with tumor-cell PD-L1 expression of 1% or greater (median, 15.4 vs. 9.1 months; hazard ratio, 0.54; 99.5% confidence interval [CI], 0.37 to 0.80; P<0.001) and in the overall population (median, 13.2 vs. 10.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.74; 99.1% CI, 0.58 to 0.96; P = 0.002). Overall survival was also significantly longer with nivolumab plus ipilimumab than with chemotherapy among patients with tumor-cell PD-L1 expression of 1% or greater (median, 13.7 vs. 9.1 months; hazard ratio, 0.64; 98.6% CI, 0.46 to 0.90; P = 0.001) and in the overall population (median, 12.7 vs. 10.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.78; 98.2% CI, 0.62 to 0.98; P = 0.01). Among patients with tumor-cell PD-L1 expression of 1% or greater, a significant progression-free survival benefit was also seen with nivolumab plus chemotherapy over chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.65; 98.5% CI, 0.46 to 0.92; P = 0.002) but not with nivolumab plus ipilimumab as compared with chemotherapy. The incidence of treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 was 47% with nivolumab plus chemotherapy, 32% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, and 36% with chemotherapy alone. CONCLUSIONS: Both first-line treatment with nivolumab plus chemotherapy and first-line treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab resulted in significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma, with no new safety signals identified. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 648 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03143153.).

Neoadjuvant camrelizumab plus apatinib for locally advanced microsatellite instability-high or mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer (NEOCAP): a single-arm, open-label, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: PD-1 blockade is highly efficacious for mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer in both metastatic and neoadjuvant settings. We aimed to explore the activity and safety of neoadjuvant therapy with PD-1 blockade plus an angiogenesis inhibitor and the feasibility of organ preservation in patients with locally advanced mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer. METHODS: We initiated a single-arm, open-label, phase 2 trial (NEOCAP) at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center and the Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China. Patients aged 18-75 years with untreated mismatch repair-deficient or microsatellite instability-high or POLE/POLD1-mutated locally advanced colorectal cancer (cT3 or N+ for rectal cancer, and T3 with invasion ≥5mm or T4, with or without N+ for colon cancer) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 0-1 were enrolled and given 200 mg camrelizumab intravenously on day 1 and 250 mg apatinib orally from day 1-14, every 3 weeks for 3 months followed by surgery or 6 months if patients did not have surgery. Patients who had a clinical complete response did not undergo surgery and proceeded with a watch-and-wait approach. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a pathological or clinical complete response. Eligible enrolled patients who received at least one cycle of neoadjuvant treatment and had at least one tumour response assessment following the baseline assessment were included in the activity analysis, and patients who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analysis. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04715633) and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Sept 29, 2020, and Dec 15, 2022, 53 patients were enrolled; one patient was excluded from the activity analysis because they were found to be mismatch repair-proficient and microsatellite-stable. 23 (44%) patients were female and 29 (56%) were male. The median follow-up was 16·4 (IQR 10·5-23·5) months. 28 (54%; 95% CI 35-68) patients had a clinical complete response and 24 of these patients were managed with a watch-and-wait approach, including 20 patients with colon cancer and multiple primary colorectal cancer. 23 (44%) of 52 patients underwent surgery for the primary tumour, and 14 (61%; 95% CI 39-80) had a pathological complete response. 38 (73%; 95% CI 59-84) of 52 patients had a complete response. Grade 3-5 adverse events occurred in 20 (38%) of 53 patients; the most common were increased aminotransferase (six [11%]), bowel obstruction (four [8%]), and hypertension (four [8%]). Drug-related serious adverse events occurred in six (11%) of 53 patients. One patient died from treatment-related immune-related hepatitis. INTERPRETATION: Neoadjuvant camrelizumab plus apatinib show promising antitumour activity in patients with locally advanced mismatch repair-deficient or microsatellite instability-high colorectal cancer. Immune-related adverse events should be monitored with the utmost vigilance. Organ preservation seems promising not only in patients with rectal cancer, but also in those with colon cancer who have a clinical complete response. Longer follow-up is needed to assess the oncological outcomes of the watch-and-wait approach. FUNDING: The National Natural Science Foundation of China, Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation, and the Cancer Innovative Research Program of Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center. TRANSLATION: For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors for individuals with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer who progressed on EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The clinical benefits of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based treatments in treating individuals with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have progressed on EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) remain controversial. We aimed to review the literature to comprehensively investigate the individual and comparative clinical outcomes of various ICI-based treatment strategies in this population. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we used single-arm, pairwise, and network meta-analytical approaches. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and relevant international conference proceedings from database inception to Jan 31, 2024, without language restrictions, to identify eligible clinical trials that assessed ICI-based treatments for individuals with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC who progressed on EGFR-TKIs. Studies considered eligible were published and unpublished phase 1, 2, or 3 clinical trials enrolling participants with histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC who had progressed after at least one EGFR-TKI treatment, and that evaluated ICI-based treatment strategies on at least one of the clinical outcomes of interest. The primary outcome analysed was progression-free survival. The protocol is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021292626. FINDINGS: 17 single-arm trials and 15 randomised controlled trials, involving 2886 participants and seven ICI-based treatment strategies (ICI monotherapy, ICI plus chemotherapy [ICI-chemo], ICI plus antiangiogenesis [ICI-antiangio], ICI plus antiangiogenesis plus chemotherapy [ICI-antiangio-chemo], dual ICIs [ICI-ICI], dual ICIs plus chemotherapy [ICI-ICI-chemo], and ICI plus EGFR-TKI [ICI-TKI]), were included. Three of these strategies-ICI monotherapy, ICI-antiangio-chemo, and ICI-chemo-had sufficient data across the included studies to perform a pairwise meta-analysis. The pairwise meta-analysis showed that, compared with chemotherapy, ICI monotherapy led to shorter progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1·73 [95% CI 1·30-2·29], I2=0%), whereas ICI-antiangio-chemo (HR 0·54 [0·44-0·67], I2=0%) and ICI-chemo (HR 0·77 [0·67-0·88], I2=0%) prolonged progression-free survival. The network meta-analysis showed that ICI-antiangio-chemo yielded the best progression-free survival results, with substantial benefits over ICI-chemo (HR 0·71 [95% credible interval 0·59-0·85]), ICI monotherapy (HR 0·30 [0·22-0·41]), and non-ICI treatment strategies including antiangio-chemo (HR 0·76 [0·58-1·00]) and chemotherapy alone (HR 0·54 [0·45-0·64]). ICI-antiangio-chemo was associated with higher risks of both any-grade and grade 3 or worse adverse events over ICI-chemo and chemotherapy in the network meta-analysis. INTERPRETATION: For individuals with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC who progressed on EGFR-TKIs, ICI-antiangio-chemo was identified as the optimal treatment option. The toxicity of this treatment was acceptable but needs careful attention. ICI-chemo showed appreciably greater efficacy than the standard-of-care chemotherapy. These findings clarified the roles of ICI-based treatment strategies in this difficult-to-treat refractory population, potentially complementing recent guidelines. FUNDING: None.

Chemotherapy versus chemotherapy plus immune checkpoint inhibitors for the first-line treatment of unresectable thymic carcinoma: A multicenter retrospective study.

Thymic carcinoma (TC) is a rare malignant tumor with a poor prognosis, and there is currently limited data on the use of immunotherapy in patients with unresectable TC. In this study, data of patients with unresectable TC diagnosed from January 2017 were retrospectively collected from multiple centers. Treatment response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), survival-independent prognostic factor, and adverse events (AEs) were further analyzed. As a result, a total of 93 patients with unresectable TC were enrolled, of which 54 received first-line chemotherapy, and 39 received chemotherapy plus immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). The objective response rate was 50% (27/54) in the chemotherapy group and 76.9% (30/39) in the chemotherapy plus ICIs group. The chemotherapy plus ICIs group achieved significant median PFS benefit (8.8 vs. 34.9 months, p < .001) and median OS benefit (41.8 months vs. not reached, p = .025). Multivariate analysis showed that ICIs and local therapy were independent prognostic factors for PFS. In addition, 17 patients developed immune-related AEs (IRAEs), of which 15 (38.5%) had Grade 1 or 2 IRAEs and 2 (5.1%) had Grade 3 IRAEs in the chemotherapy plus ICIs group. In conclusion, the efficacy of chemotherapy plus ICIs is superior to chemotherapy, and the adverse effects are manageable in patients with unresectable TC.

Tumor eradication by triplet therapy with BRAF inhibitor, TLR 7 agonist, and PD-1 antibody for BRAF-mutated melanoma.

Programmed death 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors are commonly used to treat various cancers, including melanoma. However, their efficacy as monotherapy is limited, and combination immunotherapies are being explored to improve outcomes. In this study, we investigated a combination immunotherapy involving an anti-PD-1 antibody that blocks the major adaptive immune-resistant mechanisms, a BRAF inhibitor that inhibits melanoma cell proliferation, and multiple primary immune-resistant mechanisms, such as cancer cell-derived immunosuppressive cytokines, and a Toll-like receptor 7 agonist that enhances innate immune responses that promote antitumor T-cell induction and functions. Using a xenogeneic nude mouse model implanted with human BRAF-mutated melanoma, a BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib was found to restore T-cell-stimulatory activity in conventional dendritic cells by reducing immunosuppressive cytokines, including interleukin 6, produced by human melanoma. Additionally, intravenous administration of the Toll-like receptor 7 agonist DSR6434 enhanced tumor growth inhibition by vemurafenib through stimulating the plasmacytoid dendritic cells/interferon-α/natural killer cell pathways and augmenting the T-cell-stimulatory activity of conventional dendritic cells. In a syngeneic mouse model implanted with murine BRAF-mutated melanoma, the vemurafenib and DSR6434 combination synergistically augmented the induction of melanoma antigen gp100-specific T cells and inhibited tumor growth. Notably, only triplet therapy with vemurafenib, DSR6434, and the anti-PD-1 antibody resulted in complete regression of SIY antigen-transduced BRAF-mutated melanoma in a CD8 T-cell-dependent manner. These findings indicate that a triple-combination strategy targeting adaptive and primary resistant mechanisms while enhancing innate immune responses that promote tumor-specific T cells may be crucial for effective tumor eradication.

Dual CTLA-4 and PD-1 checkpoint blockade using CS1002 and CS1003 (nofazinlimab) in patients with advanced solid tumors: A first-in-human, dose-escalation, and dose-expansion study.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the safety and efficacy of an anti-CTLA-4 monoclonal antibody (CS1002) as monotherapy and in combination with an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody (CS1003) in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors. METHODS: The phase 1 study involved phase 1a monotherapy dose-escalation (part 1) and phase 1b combination therapy dose escalation (part 2) and expansion (part 3). Various dosing schedules of CS1002 (0.3, 1, or 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks, or 3 mg/kg every 9 weeks) were evaluated with 200 mg CS1003 every 3 weeks in part 3. RESULTS: Parts 1, 2, and 3 included a total of 13, 18, and 61 patients, respectively. No dose-limiting toxicities or maximum tolerated doses were observed. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 30.8%, 83.3%, and 75.0% of patients in parts 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Grade ≥3 TRAEs were experienced by 15.4%, 50.0%, and 18.3% of patients in each part. Of 61 patients evaluable for efficacy, 23 (37.7%) achieved objective responses in multiple tumor types. Higher objective response rates were observed with conventional and high-dose CS1002 regimens (1 mg/kg every 3 weeks or 3 mg/kg every 9 weeks) compared to low-dose CS1002 (0.3 mg/kg every 3 weeks) in microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient tumors, melanoma, and hepatocellular carcinoma (50.0% vs. 58.8%, 14.3% vs. 42.9%, and 0% vs. 16.7%). CONCLUSION: CS1002, as monotherapy, and in combination with CS1003, had a manageable safety profile across a broad dosing range. Promising antitumor activities were observed in patients with immune oncology (IO)-naive and IO-refractory tumors across CS1002 dose levels when combined with CS1003, supporting further evaluation of this treatment combination for solid tumors. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: CS1002 is a human immunoglobulin (Ig) G1 monoclonal antibody that blocks the interaction of CTLA-4 with its ligands and increases T-cell activation/proliferation. CS1003, now named nofazinlimab, is a humanized, recombinant IgG4 monoclonal antibody that blocks the interaction between human PD-1 and its ligands. In this original article, we determined the safety profile of CS1002 as monotherapy and in combination with CS1003. Furthermore, we explored the antitumor activity of the combination in anti-programmed cell death protein (ligand)-1 (PD-[L]1)-naive microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) pan tumors, and anti-PD-(L)1-refractory melanoma and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). CS1002 in combination with CS1003 had manageable safety profile across a broad dosing range and showed promising antitumor activities across CS1002 dose levels when combined with CS1003. This supports further assessment of CS1002 in combination with CS1003 for the treatment of solid tumors.

SWOG 1609 cohort 48: anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 for advanced gallbladder cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Most patients with advanced gallbladder cancer are treated with multiagent chemotherapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors offer the possibility of a durable response with less toxicity. This prospective, multicenter, open-label study was designed to evaluate the anticancer activity of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced gallbladder cancer. METHODS: Nineteen patients with advanced gallbladder cancer refractory to ≥1 previous therapy received nivolumab 240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg intravenously every 6 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was confirmed radiographic overall response rate (ORR) (complete response [CR] + partial response [PR] confirmed on subsequent scan); secondary end points included unconfirmed overall response, clinical benefit rate (confirmed and unconfirmed responses + stable disease >6 months), progression-free survival, overall survival, and toxicity. RESULTS: The confirmed ORR was 16% (CR, n = 1 [5%]; PR, n = 2 [11%]); all were microsatellite stable, and the confirmed CR had undetectable programmed death-ligand 1 by immunohistochemistry. The unconfirmed ORR and clinical benefit rates were both 32%. The median duration of response was 14.8 months (range, 4-35.1+ months). The 6-month progression-free survival was 26% (95% CI, 12-55). The median overall survival was 7.0 months (95% CI, 3.9-19.1). The most common toxicities were fatigue (32%), anemia (26%), and anorexia (26%). Aspartate aminotransferase elevation was the most common grade 3/4 toxicity (11%). There was 1 possibly related death (sepsis with attendant hepatic failure). CONCLUSIONS: Ipilimumab plus nivolumab was well tolerated and showed modest efficacy with durable responses in previously treated patients with advanced gallbladder cancer. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02834013 (ClincialTrials.gov). PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: This prospective study assessed the efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in 19 patients with advanced gallbladder cancer refractory to previous therapy. The combination demonstrated modest efficacy with a 16% confirmed overall response rate, durable responses, and manageable toxicities, suggesting potential benefits for this challenging patient population.

Primary results and characterization of patients with exceptional outcomes in a phase 1b study combining PARP and MEK inhibition, with or without anti-PD-L1, for BRCA wild-type, platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: This phase 1b study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03695380) evaluated regimens combining PARP and MEK inhibition, with or without PD-L1 inhibition, for BRCA wild-type, platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer (PSROC). METHODS: Patients with PSROC who had received one or two prior treatment lines were treated with 28-day cycles of cobimetinib 60 mg daily (days 1-21) plus niraparib 200 mg daily (days 1-28) with or without atezolizumab 840 mg (days 1 and 15). Stage 1 assessed safety before expansion to stage 2, which randomized patients who had BRCA wild-type PSROC to receive either doublet or triplet therapy, stratified by genome-wide loss of heterozygosity status (<16% vs. ≥16%; FoundationOne CDx assay) and platinum-free interval (≥6 to <12 vs. ≥12 months). Coprimary end points were safety and the investigator-determined objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Potential associations between genetic parameters and efficacy were explored, and biomarker profiles of super-responders (complete response or those with progression-free survival [PFS] >15 months) and progressors (disease progression as the best response) were characterized. RESULTS: The ORR in patients who had BRCA wild-type PSROC was 35% (95% confidence interval, 20%-53%) with the doublet regimen (n = 37) and 27% (95% confidence interval, 14%-44%) with the triplet regimen (n = 37), and the median PFS was 6.0 and 7.4 months, respectively. Post-hoc analyses indicated more favorable ORR and PFS in the homologous recombination-deficiency-signature (HRDsig)-positive subgroup than in the HRDsig-negative subgroup. Tolerability was consistent with the known profiles of individual agents. NF1 and MKNK1 mutations were associated with sustained benefit from the doublet and triplet regimens, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy-free doublet and triplet therapy demonstrated encouraging activity, including among patients who had BRCA wild-type, HRDsig-positive or HRDsig-negative PSROC harboring NF1 or MKNK1 mutations.

Why does circadian timing of administration matter for immune checkpoint inhibitors' efficacy?

BACKGROUND: Tolerability and antitumour efficacy of chemotherapy and radiation therapy can vary largely according to their time of administration along the 24-h time scale, due to the moderation of their molecular and cellular mechanisms by circadian rhythms. Recent clinical data have highlighted a striking role of dosing time for cancer immunotherapy, thus calling for a critical evaluation. METHODS: Here, we review the clinical data and we analyse the mechanisms through which circadian rhythms can influence outcomes on ICI therapies. We examine how circadian rhythm disorders can affect tumour immune microenvironment, as a main mechanism linking the circadian clock to the 24-h cycles in ICIs antitumour efficacy. RESULTS: Real-life data from 18 retrospective studies have revealed that early time-of-day (ToD) infusion of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) could enhance progression-free and/or overall survival up to fourfold compared to late ToD dosing. The studies involved a total of 3250 patients with metastatic melanoma, lung, kidney, bladder, oesophageal, stomach or liver cancer from 9 countries. Such large and consistent differences in ToD effects on outcomes could only result from a previously ignored robust chronobiological mechanism. The circadian timing system coordinates cellular, tissue and whole-body physiology along the 24-h timescale. Circadian rhythms are generated at the cellular level by a molecular clock system that involves 15 specific clock genes. The disruption of circadian rhythms can trigger or accelerate carcinogenesis, and contribute to cancer treatment failure, possibly through tumour immune evasion resulting from immunosuppressive tumour microenvironment. CONCLUSIONS AND PERSPECTIVE: Such emerging understanding of circadian rhythms regulation of antitumour immunity now calls for randomised clinical trials of ICIs timing to establish recommendations for personalised chrono-immunotherapies with current and forthcoming drugs.

Extending the dosing intervals of nivolumab: model-based simulations in unselected cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Reducing nivolumab dose intensity could increase patients' life quality and decrease the financial burden while maintaining efficacy. The aims of this study were to develop a population PK model of nivolumab based on data from unselected metastatic cancer patients and to simulate extended-interval regimens allowing to maintain minimal effective plasma concentrations (MEPC). METHODS: Concentration-time data (992 plasma nivolumab concentrations, 364 patients) were modeled using a two-compartment model with linear elimination clearance in Monolix software. Extended-interval regimens allowing to maintain steady-state trough concentrations (Cmin,ss) above the MEPC of 2.5 mg/L or 1.5 mg/L in >90% of patients were simulated. RESULTS: Increasing 3-times the dosing interval from 240 mg every two weeks (Q2W) to Q6W and 2-times from 480 mg Q4W to Q8W resulted in Cmin,ss above 2.5 mg/L in 95.8% and 95.4% of patients, respectively. 240 mg Q8W and 480 mg Q10W resulted in Cmin,ss above 1.5 mg/L in 91.0% and 91.8% of patients, respectively. Selection of a 240 mg Q6W regimen would decrease by 3-fold the annual treatment costs compared to standard regimen of 240 mg Q2W (from 78,744€ to 26,248€ in France). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical trials are warranted to confirm the non-inferiority of extended-interval compared to standard regimen.

Managing common toxicities associated with checkpoint inhibitor and chemotherapy combinations for untreated classic Hodgkin lymphoma.

Combination checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) and chemotherapy is an effective and safe treatment strategy for patients with untreated classic Hodgkin lymphoma. Recent studies of programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitors combined with doxorubicin, vinblastine and dacarbazine have demonstrated high overall and complete response rates. This combination has a unique toxicity profile that should be managed appropriately so as not to compromise treatment efficacy. Common toxicities include rash, hepatoxicity, neutropenia and thyroid dysfunction. Here, we present four cases and the management strategies around such toxicities. In addition, we highlight key clinical decision-making around the administration of subsequent doses of CPI and chemotherapy.

IMpassion132 double-blind randomised phase III trial of chemotherapy with or without atezolizumab for early relapsing unresectable locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors improve the efficacy of first-line chemotherapy for patients with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive unresectable locally advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (aTNBC), but randomised data in rapidly relapsing aTNBC are scarce. PATIENTS AND METHODS: IMpassion132 (NCT03371017) enrolled patients with aTNBC relapsing <12 months after last chemotherapy dose (anthracycline and taxane required) or surgery for early TNBC. PD-L1 status was centrally assessed using SP142 before randomisation. Initially patients were enrolled irrespective of PD-L1 status. From August 2019, enrolment was restricted to PD-L1-positive (tumour immune cell ≥1%) aTNBC. Patients were randomised 1:1 to placebo or atezolizumab 1200 mg every 21 days with investigator-selected chemotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were chemotherapy regimen (carboplatin plus gemcitabine or capecitabine monotherapy), visceral (lung and/or liver) metastases and (initially) PD-L1 status. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), tested hierarchically in patients with PD-L1-positive tumours and then, if positive, in the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population (all-comer patients randomised pre-August 2019). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and safety. RESULTS: Among 354 patients with rapidly relapsing PD-L1-positive aTNBC, 68% had a disease-free interval of <6 months and 73% received carboplatin/gemcitabine. The OS hazard ratio was 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.73-1.20, P = 0.59; median 11.2 months with placebo versus 12.1 months with atezolizumab). mITT and subgroup results were consistent. Median PFS was 4 months across treatment arms and populations. ORRs were 28% with placebo versus 40% with atezolizumab. Adverse events (predominantly haematological) were similar between arms and as expected with atezolizumab plus carboplatin/gemcitabine or capecitabine following recent chemotherapy exposure. CONCLUSIONS: OS, which is dismal in patients with TNBC relapsing within <12 months, was not improved by adding atezolizumab to chemotherapy. A biology-based definition of intrinsic resistance to immunotherapy in aTNBC is urgently needed to develop novel therapies for these patients in next-generation clinical trials.

Impact of cemiplimab treatment duration on clinical outcomes in advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.

Treatment duration with checkpoint inhibitors must be optimized to prevent unjustified toxicity, but evidence for the management of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma is lacking. A retrospective study was performed to evaluate the survival of patients with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) who discontinued cemiplimab due to different causes and without progression. Among 95 patients with CSCC who received cemiplimab, 22 (23%) patients discontinued immunotherapy due to causes other than progression, such as comorbidities, toxicity, complete response or lack of compliance (group that discontinued before censoring [DBC]), then 73 patients had standard treatment scheduled (STS). The overall survival was 25.2 months (95% CI: 8.9-29.4) in STS group and 28.3 months (95% CI: 12.7-28.3) in the DBC group; deaths for all causes were 11/22 (50%) in the DBC group and 34/73 (46.6%) in the STS group (p = 0.32). 10/22 (45.4%) subjects died due to CSCC in the DBC after discontinuation and 34/73 (46.6%) in the STS group, and the difference between groups was not significant (p = 0.230). Duration of treatment was significantly lower in subjects with stable disease versus those with complete or partial response (16.9, 30.6 and 34.9 months, respectively; p = 0.004). Among the 22 STS patients, 12 received cemiplimab for less than 12 months (10 [83%] died) and 10 for at least 12 months (1 [10%] died). Our observation, finding no outcome difference between DBC and STS groups, suggests that ICI treatment after one year might expose patients to further treatment related events without efficacy advantages.

The short-term efficacy of neoadjuvant SOX versus SOX plus immune checkpoint inhibitor following laparoscopic gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: a multicenter retrospective cohort study in China.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to evaluate the short-term efficacy for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) who accepted laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) after neoadjuvant SOX versus SOX plus immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). METHODS: LAGC patients who accepted LG after neoadjuvant SOX (SOX-LG, n = 169) and SOX plus ICIs (SOX + ICIs-LG, n = 140) in three medical centers between Jan 2020 and Mar 2024 were analyzed. We compared the tumor regression, treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), perioperative safety between two groups, and explored the risk factors of postoperative complications (POCs) for LG after neoadjuvant therapy. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics were comparable between two groups (P > 0.05). SOX + ICIs-LG group acquired a higher proportion of objective response (63.6% vs. 46.7%, P = 0.003), major pathological response (43.6% vs. 31.4%, P = 0.001), and pathological complete response (17.9% vs. 9.5%, P = 0.030). There were no significant differences in the TRAEs rates, operation time, R0 resection, retrieved lymph nodes, postoperative first flatus, and hospitalized days, overall and severe POCs between two groups (P > 0.05). Patients in the SOX-ICIs-LG group had lower estimated blood loss (EBL) compared with SOX-LG (P = 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that more EBL (P = 0.003) and prognostic nutritional index (PNI) < 40 (P = 0.005) were independent risk factors of POCs for LG after neoadjuvant therapy. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant SOX plus ICIs brings better tumor regression and similar TRAEs compared with SOX alone for LAGC. SOX + ICIs-LG is safe and feasible to conduct with less EBL. Surgeons should focus on the perioperative management to control POCs for patients with PNI < 40 and more EBL.