Botensilimab plus balstilimab in relapsed/refractory microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal cancer: a phase 1 trial.

Microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal cancer (MSS mCRC; mismatch repair proficient) has previously responded poorly to immune checkpoint blockade. Botensilimab (BOT) is an Fc-enhanced multifunctional anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) antibody designed to expand therapy to cold/poorly immunogenic solid tumors, such as MSS mCRC. BOT with or without balstilimab (BAL; anti-PD-1 antibody) is being evaluated in an ongoing expanded phase 1 study. The primary endpoint is safety and tolerability, which was evaluated separately in the dose-escalation portion of the study and in patients with MSS mCRC (using combined dose-escalation/dose-expansion data). Secondary endpoints include investigator-assessed RECIST version 1.1-confirmed objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DOR) and progression-free survival (PFS). Here we present outcomes in 148 heavily pre-treated patients with MSS mCRC (six from the dose-escalation cohort; 142 from the dose-expansion cohort) treated with BOT and BAL, 101 of whom were considered response evaluable with at least 6 months of follow-up. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 89% of patients with MSS mCRC (131/148), most commonly fatigue (35%, 52/148), diarrhea (32%, 47/148) and pyrexia (24%, 36/148), with no grade 5 TRAEs reported and a 12% discontinuation rate due to a TRAE (18/148; data fully mature). In the response-evaluable population (n = 101), ORR was 17% (17/101; 95% confidence interval (CI), 10-26%), and DCR was 61% (62/101; 95% CI, 51-71%). Median DOR was not reached (NR; 95% CI, 5.7 months-NR), and median PFS was 3.5 months (95% CI, 2.7-4.1 months), at a median follow-up of 10.3 months (range, 0.5-42.6 months; data continuing to mature). The combination of BOT plus BAL demonstrated a manageable safety profile with no new immune-mediated safety signals and encouraging clinical activity with durable responses. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03860272 .

Phase 1, open-label, dose-escalation study on the safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of intravenous Coxsackievirus A21 (V937), with or without pembrolizumab, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Oncolytic virus V937 showed activity and safety with intratumoral administration. This phase 1 study evaluated intravenous V937±pembrolizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Patients had advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), urothelial cancer, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, or melanoma in part A (V937 monotherapy), and metastatic NSCLC or urothelial cancer in part B (V937+pembrolizumab). Prior immunotherapy was permitted >28 days before study treatment. Patients received intravenous V937 on days 1, 3, and 5 (also on day 8 in part B) of the first 21-day cycle and on day 1 of subsequent cycles for eight cycles. Three ascending dose-escalation cohorts were studied. Dose-escalation proceeded if no dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurred in cycle 1 of the previous cohort. In part B, patients also received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks from day 8 for 2 years; dose-expansion occurred at the highest-dose cohort. Serial biopsies were performed. RESULTS: No DLTs occurred in parts A (n=18) or B (n=85). Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were not observed in part A and were experienced by 10 (12%) patients in part B. The most frequent treatment-related AEs (any grade) in part B were fatigue (36%), pruritus (18%), myalgia (14%), diarrhea (13%), pyrexia (13%), influenza-like illness (12%), and nausea (12%). At the highest tested dose, median intratumoral V937 concentrations were 117,631 copies/mL on day 8, cycle 1 in part A (n=6) and below the detection limit for most patients (86% (19/22)) on day 15, cycle 1 in part B. Objective response rates were 6% (part A), 9% in the NSCLC dose-expansion cohort (n=43), and 20% in the urothelial cancer dose-expansion cohort (n=35). CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous V937+pembrolizumab had a manageable safety profile. Although V937 was detected in tumor tissue, in NSCLC and urothelial cancer, efficacy was not greater than that observed in previous studies with pembrolizumab monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02043665.

A phase 1b single-arm trial of intratumoral oncolytic virus V937 in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced melanoma: results from the CAPRA study.

BACKGROUND: CAPRA (NCT02565992) evaluated Coxsackievirus A21 (V937) + pembrolizumab for metastatic/unresectable stage IIIB-IV melanoma. METHODS: Patients received intratumoral V937 on days 1, 3, 5, and 8 (then every 3 weeks [Q3W]) and intravenous pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg Q3W from day 8. Primary endpoint was safety. RESULTS: Median time from first dose to data cutoff was 32.0 months. No dose-limiting toxicities occurred; 14% (5/36) of patients experienced grade 3‒5 treatment-related adverse events. Objective response rate was 47% (complete response, 22%). Among 17 responders, 14 (82%) had responses ≥ 6 months. Among 8 patients previously treated with immunotherapy, 3 responded (1 complete, 2 partial). Responses were associated with increased serum CXCL10 and CCL22, suggesting viral replication contributes to antitumor immunity. For responders versus nonresponders, there was no difference in baseline tumor PD-L1 expression, ICAM1 expression, or CD3+ infiltrates. Surprisingly, the baseline cell density of CD3+CD8- T cells in the tumor microenvironment was significantly lower in responders compared with nonresponders (P = 0.0179). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest responses to this combination may be seen even in patients without a typical "immune-active" microenvironment. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02565992.

Lung epithelial and endothelial damage, loss of tissue repair, inhibition of fibrinolysis, and cellular senescence in fatal COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is characterized by respiratory distress, multiorgan dysfunction, and, in some cases, death. The pathological mechanisms underlying COVID-19 respiratory distress and the interplay with aggravating risk factors have not been fully defined. Lung autopsy samples from 18 patients with fatal COVID-19, with symptom onset-to-death times ranging from 3 to 47 days, and antemortem plasma samples from 6 of these cases were evaluated using deep sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, multiplex plasma protein measurements, and pulmonary gene expression and imaging analyses. Prominent histopathological features in this case series included progressive diffuse alveolar damage with excessive thrombosis and late-onset pulmonary tissue and vascular remodeling. Acute damage at the alveolar-capillary barrier was characterized by the loss of surfactant protein expression with injury to alveolar epithelial cells, endothelial cells, respiratory epithelial basal cells, and defective tissue repair processes. Other key findings included impaired clot fibrinolysis with increased concentrations of plasma and lung plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 and modulation of cellular senescence markers, including p21 and sirtuin-1, in both lung epithelial and endothelial cells. Together, these findings further define the molecular pathological features underlying the pulmonary response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and provide important insights into signaling pathways that may be amenable to therapeutic intervention.

Association of BRAF V600E/K Mutation Status and Prior BRAF/MEK Inhibition With Pembrolizumab Outcomes in Advanced Melanoma: Pooled Analysis of 3 Clinical Trials.

Importance: The optimal sequencing of immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapy for BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma is not well established. Objective: To assess the association of BRAF wild-type (WT) or BRAF V600E/K-mutant status and BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) with or without MEK inhibitor (MEKi) therapy with response to pembrolizumab. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study is a post hoc subgroup analysis of pooled data from 3 multinational, multisite studies: KEYNOTE-001 (data cutoff September 1, 2017), KEYNOTE-002 (data cutoff May 30, 2018), and KEYNOTE-006 (data cutoff December 4, 2017). Patients included in this analysis were adults with advanced melanoma and known BRAF V600E/K tumor status who had received pembrolizumab. Interventions: Patients received pembrolizumab in dosages of 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks, 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: End points were objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, and overall survival (OS). Objective response rates, 4-year PFS, and OS rates were compared in the following patient subgroups: BRAF WT vs BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma and BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma with vs without previous treatment with BRAFi with or without MEKi therapy. Results: The overall study population (N = 1558) included 944 men (60.6%) and 614 women (39.4%). The mean (SD) age was 60.0 years (14.0). The ORR was 38.3% (596/1558), 4-year PFS rate was 22.0%, and 4-year OS rate was 36.9%. For patients with BRAF WT (n = 1124) and BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma (n = 434), ORR was 39.8% (n = 447) and 34.3% (n = 149), 4-year PFS rate was 22.9% and 19.8%, and 4-year OS rate was 37.5% and 35.1%, respectively. Patients with BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma who had (n = 271) vs had not (n = 163) previously received BRAFi with or without MEKi therapy had baseline characteristics with worse prognosis; ORR was 28.4% (n = 77) and 44.2% (n = 72), 4-year PFS rate was 15.2% and 27.8%, and 4-year OS rate was 26.9% and 49.3%, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this subgroup analysis support the use of pembrolizumab for treatment of advanced melanoma regardless of BRAF V600E/K mutation status or receipt of prior BRAFi with or without MEKi therapy.

The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer perspective on regulation of interleukin-6 signaling in COVID-19-related systemic inflammatory response.

The pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has placed an unprecedented burden on healthcare systems around the world. In patients who experience severe disease, acute respiratory distress is often accompanied by a pathological immune reaction, sometimes referred to as 'cytokine storm'. One hallmark feature of the profound inflammatory state seen in patients with COVID-19 who succumb to pneumonia and hypoxia is marked elevation of serum cytokines, especially interferon gamma, tumor necrosis factor alpha, interleukin 17 (IL-17), interleukin 8 (IL-8) and interleukin 6 (IL-6). Initial experience from the outbreaks in Italy, China and the USA has anecdotally demonstrated improved outcomes for critically ill patients with COVID-19 with the administration of cytokine-modulatory therapies, especially anti-IL-6 agents. Although ongoing trials are investigating anti-IL-6 therapies, access to these therapies is a concern, especially as the numbers of cases worldwide continue to climb. An immunology-informed approach may help identify alternative agents to modulate the pathological inflammation seen in patients with COVID-19. Drawing on extensive experience administering these and other immune-modulating therapies, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer offers this perspective on potential alternatives to anti-IL-6 that may also warrant consideration for management of the systemic inflammatory response and pulmonary compromise that can be seen in patients with severe COVID-19.

Prospective Molecular Profiling of Circulating Tumor Cells from Patients with Melanoma Receiving Combinatorial Immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Blood molecular profiling of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) can enable monitoring of patients with metastatic melanoma during checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy (CII) and in combination with targeted therapies. We developed a microfluidics-based CTC platform to explore CTC profiling utility in CII-treated patients with melanoma using a melanoma messenger RNA (mRNA)/DNA biomarker panel. METHODS: Blood samples (n = 213) were collected prospectively from 75 American Joint Committee on Cancer-staged III/IV melanoma patients during CII treatment and those enriched for CTCs. CTC profiling was performed using 5 known melanoma mRNA biomarkers and BRAF V600E DNA mutation. CTC biomarker status associations with clinical outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: CTCs were detected in 88% of blood samples from patients with melanoma. CTC-derived biomarkers and clinical variables analyzed using classification and regression tree analysis revealed that a combination of lactate dehydrogenase, CTC-mRNA biomarkers, and tumor BRAF-mutation status was indicative of clinical outcomes for patients with stage IV melanoma (n = 52). The panel stratified low-risk and high-risk patients, whereby the latter had poor disease-free (P = 0.03) and overall survival (P = 0.02). Incorporation of a DNA biomarker with mRNA profiling increased overall CTC-detection capability by 57% compared to mRNA profiling only. RNA sequencing of isolated CTCs identified significant catenin beta 1 (CTNNB1) overexpression (P <0.01) compared to nondisease donor blood. CTC-CTNNB1 was associated with progressive disease/stable disease compared to complete-responder patient status (P = 0.02). Serial CTC profiling identified subclinical disease in patients who developed progressive disease during treatment/follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: CTC-derived mRNA/DNA biomarkers have utility for monitoring CII, targeted, and combinatorial therapies in metastatic melanoma patients.

Efficacy and Safety of Pembrolizumab in Patients Enrolled in KEYNOTE-030 in the United States: An Expanded Access Program.

KEYNOTE-030 (ClinicalTrials.gov ID, NCT02083484) was a global expanded access program that allowed access to pembrolizumab, an antiprogrammed death 1 antibody, for patients with advanced melanoma before its regulatory approval. Patients with unresectable stage III/IV melanoma that progressed after standard-of-care therapy, including ipilimumab and, if BRAF mutant, a BRAF inhibitor, were eligible to receive pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Response was assessed by immune-related response criteria by investigator review. Adverse events (AEs) were graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. In the United States, 979 patients enrolled between April and September 2014. Of the 947 evaluable patients, 621 (65.6%) remained on treatment and transitioned to receive commercial pembrolizumab following approval by the Food and Drug Administration, whereas 326 (34.4%) discontinued, most commonly for disease progression (39.6%) or death (26.4%). Objective response rate was 14.5% (95% confidence interval, 12.2%-16.8%) in the treated population (n=947) and 22.1% (95% confidence interval, 18.8%-25.5%) in patients who had ≥1 response assessment reported (n=619). Twelve patients achieved complete response. One hundred eighty-one (19.1%) patients experienced ≥1 treatment-related AE, most commonly general disorders (8.0%), skin/subcutaneous tissue disorders (7.3%), and gastrointestinal disorders (6.4%); 29 (3.1%) patients experienced ≥1 grade 3/4 treatment-related AE. Immune-mediated AEs were also reported. There were no treatment-related deaths. The safety and efficacy observed in this expanded access program were consistent with those previously reported for similar populations and support the use of pembrolizumab for patients with advanced melanoma.

Phase II study of vemurafenib followed by ipilimumab in patients with previously untreated BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Ipilimumab (IPI), an anti-CTLA-4 antibody, and vemurafenib (VEM), a BRAF inhibitor, have distinct mechanisms of action and shared toxicities (e.g., skin, gastrointestinal [GI] and hepatobiliary disorders) that may preclude concomitant administration. Concurrent administration of IPI and VEM previously showed significant dose-limiting hepatotoxicity in advanced melanoma. This single-arm, open-label, phase II study evaluated a sequencing strategy with these two agents in previously untreated patients with BRAF-mutated advanced melanoma. METHODS: This study was divided into two parts. During Part 1 (VEM1-IPI), patients received VEM 960 mg twice daily for 6 weeks followed by IPI 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for 4 doses (induction), then every 12 weeks (maintenance) beginning at week 24 until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. During Part 2 (VEM2), patients who progressed after IPI received VEM at their previously tolerated dose. The primary objective was to estimate the incidence of grade 3/4 drug-related skin adverse events (AEs) during VEM1-IPI. RESULTS: All patients who were initially treated with VEM (n = 46) received IPI induction therapy; 8 received IPI maintenance and 19 were treated during VEM2. During VEM1-IPI, the incidence of grade 3/4 drug-related AEs associated with the skin, GI tract, and hepatobiliary system was 32.6 %, 21.7 %, and 4.3 %, respectively. There were no drug-related deaths. At a median follow-up of 15.3 months, median overall survival was 18.5 months. Median progression-free survival was 4.5 months. CONCLUSIONS: VEM (960 mg twice daily for 6 weeks) followed by IPI 10 mg/kg has a manageable safety profile. The benefits/risks of BRAF inhibitors followed by immunotherapy should be evaluated further in light of continuing developments in treatment options for metastatic melanoma. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01673854 (CA184-240) Registered 24 August 2012.

Pembrolizumab versus investigator-choice chemotherapy for ipilimumab-refractory melanoma (KEYNOTE-002): a randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with melanoma that progresses on ipilimumab and, if BRAF(V600) mutant-positive, a BRAF or MEK inhibitor or both, have few treatment options. We assessed the efficacy and safety of two pembrolizumab doses versus investigator-choice chemotherapy in patients with ipilimumab-refractory melanoma. METHODS: We carried out a randomised phase 2 trial of patients aged 18 years or older from 73 hospitals, clinics, and academic medical centres in 12 countries who had confirmed progressive disease within 24 weeks after two or more ipilimumab doses and, if BRAF(V600) mutant-positive, previous treatment with a BRAF or MEK inhibitor or both. Patients had to have resolution of all ipilimumab-related adverse events to grade 0-1 and prednisone 10 mg/day or less for at least 2 weeks, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and at least one measurable lesion to be eligible. Using a centralised interactive voice response system, we randomly assigned (1:1:1) patients in a block size of six to receive intravenous pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks or investigator-choice chemotherapy (paclitaxel plus carboplatin, paclitaxel, carboplatin, dacarbazine, or oral temozolomide). Randomisation was stratified by ECOG performance status, lactate dehydrogenase concentration, and BRAF(V600) mutation status. Individual treatment assignment between pembrolizumab and chemotherapy was open label, but investigators and patients were masked to assignment of the dose of pembrolizumab. We present the primary endpoint at the prespecified second interim analysis of progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01704287. The study is closed to enrolment but continues to follow up and treat patients. FINDINGS: Between Nov 30, 2012, and Nov 13, 2013, we enrolled 540 patients: 180 patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg, 181 to receive pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg, and 179 to receive chemotherapy. Based on 410 progression-free survival events, progression-free survival was improved in patients assigned to pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg (HR 0·57, 95% CI 0·45-0·73; p<0·0001) and those assigned to pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg (0·50, 0·39-0·64; p<0·0001) compared with those assigned to chemotherapy. 6-month progression-free survival was 34% (95% CI 27-41) in the pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg group, 38% (31-45) in the 10 mg/kg group, and 16% (10-22) in the chemotherapy group. Treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 20 (11%) patients in the pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg group, 25 (14%) in the pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg group, and 45 (26%) in the chemotherapy group. The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse event in the pembrolizumab groups was fatigue (two [1%] of 178 patients in the 2 mg/kg group and one [<1%] of 179 patients in the 10 mg/kg group, compared with eight [5%] of 171 in the chemotherapy group). Other treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events include generalised oedema and myalgia (each in two [1%] patients) in those given pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg; hypopituitarism, colitis, diarrhoea, decreased appetite, hyponatremia, and pneumonitis (each in two [1%]) in those given pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg; and anaemia (nine [5%]), fatigue (eight [5%]), neutropenia (six [4%]), and leucopenia (six [4%]) in those assigned to chemotherapy. INTERPRETATION: These findings establish pembrolizumab as a new standard of care for the treatment of ipilimumab-refractory melanoma. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Phase II Study of Nilotinib in Melanoma Harboring KIT Alterations Following Progression to Prior KIT Inhibition.

PURPOSE: Although durable responses can be achieved with tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as imatinib in melanomas harboring KIT mutations, the efficacy of alternative inhibitors after progression to imatinib and the activity of these agents on brain metastases are unknown. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We conducted a phase II study of nilotinib 400 mg twice a day in two cohorts of patients with melanomas harboring KIT mutations or amplification: (A) those refractory or intolerant to a prior KIT inhibitor; and (B) those with brain metastases. The primary endpoint was 4-month disease control rate. Secondary endpoints included response rate, time-to-progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). A Simon two-stage and a single-stage design was planned to assess for the primary endpoint in cohorts A and B, respectively. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled and 19 treated (11 in cohort A; 8 in cohort B). Three patients on cohort A [27%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 8%-56%] and 1 on cohort B (12.5%; 90% CI, 0.6%-47%) achieved the primary endpoint. Two partial responses were observed in cohort A (18.2%; 90% CI, 3%-47%); none were observed in cohort B. The median TTP and OS was 3.3 (90% CI, 2.1-3.9 months) and 9.1 months (90% CI, 4.3-14.2 months), respectively, in all treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Nilotinib may achieve disease control in patients with melanoma harboring KIT alterations and whose disease progressed after imatinib therapy. The efficacy of this agent in KIT-altered melanoma with brain metastasis is limited.

Dose selection, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib (GSK2118436).

PURPOSE: Dabrafenib is a selective, potent ATP-competitive inhibitor of the BRAFV600-mutant kinase that has demonstrated efficacy in clinical trials. We report the rationale for dose selection in the first-in-human study of dabrafenib, including pharmacokinetics, tissue pharmacodynamics, 2[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) pharmacodynamics, and dose-response relationship. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Dabrafenib was administered orally once, twice (BID), or three times daily (TID). Selected dose cohorts were expanded to collect adequate data on safety, pharmacokinetics, or pharmacodynamics. A recommended phase II dose (RP2D) was chosen based on safety, pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and response data. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-four patients were enrolled and treated with doses ranging from 12 mg once daily to 300 mg BID in 10 cohorts. Pharmacokinetic assessment of dabrafenib demonstrated a less-than-dose-proportional increase in exposure after repeat dosing above 150 mg BID. Similar to parent drug concentrations, exposure for all metabolites demonstrated less-than-dose-proportional increases. Predicted target inhibition of pERK (>80%) was achieved at 150 mg BID, with a similar magnitude of inhibition at higher doses in BRAFV600 mutation melanoma biopsy samples. Although there was large variability between patients, FDG uptake decreased with higher daily doses in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma. A favorable activity and tolerability profile was demonstrated at 150 mg BID. There was no improvement with TID dosing compared with BID dosing, based on FDG-PET and tumor response analyses in patients with melanoma. CONCLUSION: The RP2D of dabrafenib was determined to be 150 mg BID after considering multiple factors, including pharmacokinetics, tissue pharmacodynamics, FDG-PET pharmacodynamics, and the dose-response relationship. A maximum tolerated dose for dabrafenib was not determined.

Clinical Benefit from Ipilimumab Therapy in Melanoma Patients may be Associated with Serum CTLA4 Levels.

Stage IV metastatic melanoma patients historically have a poor prognosis with 5-10% 5-year survival. Ipilimumab, a monoclonal antibody against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA4), is one of the first treatments to provide beneficial durable responses in advanced melanoma. However, less than 25% of those treated benefit, treatment is expensive, and side effects can be fatal. Since soluble (s) CTLA4 may mediate inhibitory effects previously ascribed to the membrane-bound isoform (mCTLA4), we hypothesized patients benefiting from ipilimumab have higher serum levels of sCTLA4. We found that higher sCTLA4 levels correlated both with response and improved survival in patients treated with ipilimumab in a small patient cohort [patients with (n = 9) and without (n = 5) clinical benefit]. sCTLA4 levels were statistically higher in ipilimumab-treated patients with response to ipilimumab. In contrast, sCTLA4 levels did not correlate with survival in patients who did not receive ipilimumab (n = 11). These preliminary observations provide a previously unrecognized link between serum sCTLA4 levels and response to ipilimumab as well as to improved survival in ipilimumab-treated melanoma patients and a potential mechanism by which ipilimumab functions.

Clinical Cancer Advances 2013: Annual Report on Progress Against Cancer from the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

A MESSAGE FROM ASCO'S PRESIDENT: Since its founding in 1964, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has been committed to improving cancer outcomes through research and the delivery of quality care. Research is the bedrock of discovering better treatments--providing hope to the millions of individuals who face a cancer diagnosis each year. The studies featured in "Clinical Cancer Advances 2013: Annual Report on Progress Against Cancer From the American Society of Clinical Oncology" represent the invaluable contributions of thousands of patients who participate in clinical trials and the scientists who conduct basic and clinical research. The insights described in this report, such as how cancers hide from the immune system and why cancers may become resistant to targeted drugs, enable us to envision a future in which cancer will be even more controllable and preventable. The scientific process is thoughtful, deliberate, and sometimes slow, but each advance, while helping patients, now also points toward new research questions and unexplored opportunities. Both dramatic and subtle breakthroughs occur so that progress against cancer typically builds over many years. Success requires vision, persistence, and a long-term commitment to supporting cancer research and training. Our nation's longstanding investment in federally funded cancer research has contributed significantly to a growing array of effective new treatments and a much deeper understanding of the drivers of cancer. But despite this progress, our position as a world leader in advancing medical knowledge and our ability to attract the most promising and talented investigators are now threatened by an acute problem: Federal funding for cancer research has steadily eroded over the past decade, and only 15% of the ever-shrinking budget is actually spent on clinical trials. This dismal reality threatens the pace of progress against cancer and undermines our ability to address the continuing needs of our patients. Despite this extremely challenging economic environment, we continue to make progress. Maintaining and accelerating that progress require that we keep our eyes on the future and pursue a path that builds on the stunning successes of the past. We must continue to show our policymakers the successes in cancer survival and quality of life (QOL) they have enabled, emphasizing the need to sustain our national investment in the remarkably productive US cancer research enterprise. We must also look to innovative methods for transforming how we care for-and learn from-patients with cancer. Consider, for example, that fewer than 5% of adult patients with cancer currently participate in clinical trials. What if we were able to draw lessons from the other 95%? This possibility led ASCO this year to launch CancerLinQ, a groundbreaking health information technology initiative that will provide physicians with access to vast quantities of clinical data about real-world patients and help achieve higher quality, higher value cancer care. As you read the following pages, I hope our collective progress against cancer over the past year inspires you. More importantly, I hope the pride you feel motivates you to help us accelerate the pace of scientific advancement. Clifford A. Hudis, MD, FACP President American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Development of ipilimumab: a novel immunotherapeutic approach for the treatment of advanced melanoma.

The immunotherapeutic agent ipilimumab has helped address a significant unmet need in the treatment of advanced melanoma. Ipilimumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that targets cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4), thereby augmenting antitumor immune responses. After decades in which a number of clinical trials were conducted, ipilimumab was the first therapy to improve overall survival in a randomized, controlled phase III trial of patients with advanced melanoma. These results led to the regulatory approval of ipilimumab at 3 mg/kg for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic melanoma. More than 17,000 patients worldwide have received ipilimumab, either as a commercial drug at 3 mg/kg or in clinical trials and expanded access programs at different doses. Consistent with its proposed mechanism of action, the most common toxicities associated with ipilimumab therapy are inflammatory in nature. These immune-related adverse events were mostly reversible when effective treatment guidelines were followed. Importantly, long-term follow-up of patients who received ipilimumab in a phase III trial showed that 24% survived at least two years, and in phase II studies, a proportion of patients survived at least five years. Evaluation of ipilimumab is ongoing in the adjuvant setting for melanoma, and for advanced disease in nonsmall cell lung, small cell lung, prostate, ovarian, and gastric cancers.

Imatinib for melanomas harboring mutationally activated or amplified KIT arising on mucosal, acral, and chronically sun-damaged skin.

PURPOSE: Amplifications and mutations in the KIT proto-oncogene in subsets of melanomas provide therapeutic opportunities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter phase II trial of imatinib in metastatic mucosal, acral, or chronically sun-damaged (CSD) melanoma with KIT amplifications and/or mutations. Patients received imatinib 400 mg once per day or 400 mg twice per day if there was no initial response. Dose reductions were permitted for treatment-related toxicities. Additional oncogene mutation screening was performed by mass spectroscopy. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled (24 evaluable). Eight patients (33%) had tumors with KIT mutations, 11 (46%) with KIT amplifications, and five (21%) with both. Median follow-up was 10.6 months (range, 3.7 to 27.1 months). Best overall response rate (BORR) was 29% (21% excluding nonconfirmed responses) with a two-stage 95% CI of 13% to 51%. BORR was significantly greater than the hypothesized null of 5% and statistically significantly different by mutation status (7 of 13 or 54% KIT mutated v 0% KIT amplified only). There were no statistical differences in rates of progression or survival by mutation status or by melanoma site. The overall disease control rate was 50% but varied significantly by KIT mutation status (77% mutated v 18% amplified). Four patients harbored pretreatment NRAS mutations, and one patient acquired increased KIT amplification after treatment. CONCLUSION: Melanomas that arise on mucosal, acral, or CSD skin should be assessed for KIT mutations. Imatinib can be effective when tumors harbor KIT mutations, but not if KIT is amplified only. NRAS mutations and KIT copy number gain may be mechanisms of therapeutic resistance to imatinib.

Final results of phase III SYMMETRY study: randomized, double-blind trial of elesclomol plus paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone as treatment for chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced melanoma.

PURPOSE: Elesclomol, an investigational first-in-class compound, induces oxidative stress, triggers mitochondrial-induced apoptosis in cancer cells, and shows synergy with taxanes in tumor models. Following completion of a phase II trial of elesclomol in combination with paclitaxel that met its primary end point of progression-free survival (PFS), this randomized, double-blind, controlled phase III study was conducted to confirm the efficacy and tolerability of elesclomol in combination with paclitaxel versus paclitaxel alone in patients with advanced melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IV chemotherapy-naive melanoma (n = 651) were randomly assigned 1:1 to paclitaxel 80 mg/m(2) either alone or in combination with elesclomol 213 mg/m(2) administered weekly for 3 weeks of a 4-week cycle. Patients were stratified by prior systemic treatment, M1 subclass, and baseline lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels. The primary end point was PFS. RESULTS: The study did not achieve its PFS end point (hazard ratio, 0.89; P = .23). The study was stopped when an early overall survival data analysis indicated an imbalance in total deaths favoring paclitaxel, predominantly in patients with high LDH levels. A prospectively defined subgroup analysis revealed a statistically significant improvement in median PFS for the combination in patients with normal baseline LDH. CONCLUSION: The addition of elesclomol to paclitaxel did not significantly improve PFS in unselected patients with advanced melanoma. The association between baseline LDH and clinical outcomes suggests that LDH may be a predictive factor for treatment with this combination, consistent with recent findings on the association between elesclomol anticancer activity and cellular metabolic state.

Dabrafenib in patients with melanoma, untreated brain metastases, and other solid tumours: a phase 1 dose-escalation trial.

BACKGROUND: Dabrafenib is an inhibitor of BRAF kinase that is selective for mutant BRAF. We aimed to assess its safety and tolerability and to establish a recommended phase 2 dose in patients with incurable solid tumours, especially those with melanoma and untreated, asymptomatic brain metastases. METHODS: We undertook a phase 1 trial between May 27, 2009, and March 20, 2012, at eight study centres in Australia and the USA. Eligible patients had incurable solid tumours, were 18 years or older, and had adequate organ function. BRAF mutations were mandatory for inclusion later in the study because of an absence of activity in patients with wild-type BRAF. We used an accelerated dose titration method, with the first dose cohort receiving 12 mg dabrafenib daily in a 21-day cycle. Once doses had been established, we expanded the cohorts to include up to 20 patients. On the basis of initial data, we chose a recommended phase 2 dose. Efficacy at the recommended phase 2 dose was studied in patients with BRAF-mutant tumours, including those with non-Val600Glu mutations, in three cohorts: metastatic melanoma, melanoma with untreated brain metastases, and non-melanoma solid tumours. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00880321. FINDINGS: We enrolled 184 patients, of whom 156 had metastatic melanoma. The most common treatment-related adverse events of grade 2 or worse were cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma (20 patients, 11%), fatigue (14, 8%), and pyrexia (11, 6%). Dose reductions were necessary in 13 (7%) patients. No deaths or discontinuations resulted from adverse events, and 140 (76%) patients had no treatment-related adverse events worse than grade 2. Doses were increased to 300 mg twice daily, with no maximum tolerated dose recorded. On the basis of safety, pharmacokinetic, and response data, we selected a recommended phase 2 dose of 150 mg twice daily. At the recommended phase 2 dose in 36 patients with Val600 BRAF-mutant melanoma, responses were reported in 25 (69%, 95% CI 51·9-83·7) and confirmed responses in 18 (50%, 32·9-67·1). 21 (78%, 57·7-91·4) of 27 patients with Val600Glu BRAF-mutant melanoma responded and 15 (56%, 35·3-74·5) had a confirmed response. In Val600 BRAF-mutant melanoma, responses were durable, with 17 patients (47%) on treatment for more than 6 months. Responses were recorded in patients with non-Val600Glu BRAF mutations. In patients with melanoma and untreated brain metastases, nine of ten patients had reductions in size of brain lesions. In 28 patients with BRAF-mutant non-melanoma solid tumours, apparent antitumour activity was noted in a gastrointestinal stromal tumour, papillary thyroid cancers, non-small-cell lung cancer, ovarian cancer, and colorectal cancer. INTERPRETATION: Dabrafenib is safe in patients with solid tumours, and an active inhibitor of Val600-mutant BRAF with responses noted in patients with melanoma, brain metastases, and other solid tumours. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline.

Sunitinib therapy for melanoma patients with KIT mutations.

PURPOSE: Recent studies have shown activating KIT mutations in melanoma originating from mucosa, acral, or cumulative sun-damaged skin sites. We aimed to assess the predictive role of KIT mutation, amplification, or overexpression for response to treatment with the kinase inhibitor sunitinib. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Tumor tissues from 90 patients with stage III or IV acral, mucosal, or cumulative sun-damaged skin melanoma underwent sequencing of KIT, BRAF, NRAS, and GNAQ genes, FISH analysis for KIT amplification, and immunohistochemistry of KIT protein (CD117). Patients with mutations, amplifications, or overexpression of KIT were treated with sunitinib and responses measured by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). RESULTS: Eleven percent of the melanomas tested had mutations in KIT, 23% in BRAF, 14% in NRAS, and none in GNAQ. Of 12 patients treated with sunitinib, 10 were evaluable. Of the 4 evaluable patients with KIT mutations, 1 had a complete remission for 15 months and 2 had partial responses (1- and 7-month duration). In contrast, only 1 of the 6 patients with only KIT amplification or overexpression alone had a partial response. In 1 responder with rectal melanoma who later progressed, the recurring tumor had a previously undetected mutation in NRAS, which was found in addition to the persisting mutation in KIT. Interestingly, among patients with manifest stage IV disease, KIT mutations were associated with a significantly shortened survival time (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Sunitinib may have activity in patients with melanoma and KIT mutations; more study is needed. KIT mutations may represent an adverse prognostic factor in metastatic melanoma.