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.

Tumor growth inhibition-overall survival modeling in non-small cell lung cancer: A case study from GEMSTONE-302.

Overall survival is vital for approving new anticancer drugs but is often impractical for early-phase studies. The tumor growth inhibition-overall survival (TGI-OS) model could bridge the gap between early- and late-stage development. This study aimed to identify an appropriate TGI-OS model for patients with non-small cell lung cancer from the GEMSTONE-302 study of sugemalimab. We used three TGI models to delineate tumor trajectories and investigated three OS model for linking TGI metric to OS. All three TGI models accurately captured tumor profiles at the individual level. The published atezolizumab-based TGI-OS model predicted survival time satisfactorily through simulation-based evaluation, whereas the other published model built from multi-treatment underestimated OS. Our study-specific TGI-OS model identified time-to-growth as the most significant metric with the number of metastatic sites and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio at baseline as covariates and exhibited robust OS predictability. Our findings demonstrated the effectiveness of the TGI-OS models in predicting phase III outcomes, which underpins their value as a powerful tool for antitumor drug development.

A first-in-human phase 1 study of nofazinlimab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, in advanced solid tumors and in combination with regorafenib in metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: We assessed nofazinlimab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, in solid tumors and combined with regorafenib in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: This phase 1 study comprised nofazinlimab dose escalation (phase 1a) and expansion (phase 1b), and regorafenib dose escalation (80 or 120 mg QD, days 1-21 of 28-day cycles) combined with 300-mg nofazinlimab Q4W (part 2a) to determine safety, efficacy, and RP2D. RESULTS: In phase 1a (N = 21), no dose-limiting toxicity occurred from 1 to 10 mg/kg Q3W, with 200 mg Q3W determined as the monotherapy RP2D. In phase 1b (N = 87), 400-mg Q6W and 200-mg Q3W regimens were found comparable. In part 2a (N = 14), both regimens were deemed plausible RP2Ds. Fatigue was the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event (AE) in this study. Any-grade and grade 3/4 nofazinlimab-related AEs were 71.4% and 14.3%, 56.3% and 5.7%, and 57.1% and 21.4% in phases 1a, 1b, and part 2a, respectively. ORRs were 14.3% and 25.3% in phases 1a and 1b, respectively. In part 2a, no patients had radiological responses. CONCLUSIONS: Nofazinlimab monotherapy was well tolerated and demonstrated preliminary anti-tumor activity in multiple tumor types. Regorafenib plus nofazinlimab had a manageable safety profile but was not associated with any response in mCRC. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTR ATION: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03475251).

Phase I Imaging and Pharmacodynamic Trial of CS-1008 in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: CS-1008 (tigatuzumab) is a humanized, monoclonal immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1) agonistic antibody to human death receptor 5. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of CS-1008 dose on the biodistribution, quantitative tumor uptake, and antitumor response in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with mCRC who had received at least one course of chemotherapy were assigned to one of five dosage cohorts and infused with a weekly dose of CS-1008. Day 1 and day 36 doses were trace-labeled with indium-111 ((111)In), followed by whole-body planar and regional single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging at several time points over the course of 10 days. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were enrolled. (111)In-CS-1008 uptake in tumor was observed in only 12 patients (63%). (111)In-CS-1008 uptake and pharmacokinetics were not affected by dose or repeated drug administration. (111)In-CS-1008 biodistribution showed gradual blood-pool clearance and no abnormal uptake in normal tissue. No anti-CS-1008 antibody development was detected. One patient achieved partial response (3.7 months duration), eight patients had stable disease, and 10 patients had progressive disease. Clinical benefit rate (stable disease + partial response) in patients with (111)In-CS-1008 uptake in tumor was 58% versus 28% in patients with no uptake. An analysis of individual lesions showed that lesions with antibody uptake were one third as likely to progress as those without antibody uptake (P = .07). Death-receptor-5 expression in archived tumor samples did not correlate with (111)In-CS-1008 uptake (P = .5) or tumor response (P = .6). CONCLUSION: Death-receptor-5 imaging with (111)In-CS-1008 reveals interpatient and intrapatient heterogeneity of uptake in tumor, is not dose dependent, and is predictive of clinical benefit in the treatment of patients who have mCRC.

A phase I study of gemcitabine given via intrahepatic pump for primary or metastatic hepatic malignancies.

PURPOSE: To determine the maximum tolerated dose and duration of hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) gemcitabine in patients with unresectable hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer or primary hepatic malignancies. METHODS: Patients received weekly gemcitabine via the side-port of an implantable HAI pump for 3 weeks in a 28-day cycle. During the dose escalation phase, increasing doses of HAI gemcitabine (800, 1,000, 1,200, and 1,500 mg/m(2)) were given at a fixed dose-rate of 10 mg/(m(2) min). This was followed by the infusion duration escalation (IDE) phase, in which HAI gemcitabine at 1,000 mg/m(2) was given over increasing lengths of time (200, 300, and 400 min). To estimate hepatic drug extraction, the pharmacokinetics of HAI gemcitabine was compared with those of intravenous gemcitabine given at the same dose-rate to the same patient in the IDE phase. RESULTS: Twenty-eight of 30 patients were evaluable. HAI gemcitabine was well tolerated up to 1,500 mg/m(2) given at 10 mg/(m(2) min) and up to 1,000 mg/m(2) infused over 400 min. There were no protocol-defined dose-limiting toxicities. One patient with cholangiocarcinoma had a partial response. Hepatic extraction of gemcitabine seems highly variable among patients and does not correlate with the length of HAI infusion. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatic arterial infusion of gemcitabine given at doses higher or longer than the recommended systemic dose of 1,000 mg/m(2) over 30 min is well tolerated. For future studies, we recommend an infusion of 1,500 mg/m(2) at a fixed dose-rate of 10 mg/(m(2) min).

Aurora B kinase regulates the postmitotic endoreduplication checkpoint via phosphorylation of the retinoblastoma protein at serine 780.

The phenotypic change characteristic of Aurora B inhibition is the induction of polyploidy. Utilizing specific siRNA duplexes and a selective small molecule inhibitor (AZD1152) to inhibit Aurora B activity in tumor cells, we sought to elucidate the mechanism by which Aurora B inhibition results in polyploidy. Cells treated with AZD1152 progressed through mitosis with misaligned chromosomes and exited without cytokinesis and subsequently underwent endoreduplication of DNA despite activation of a p53-dependent pseudo G1 checkpoint. Concomitant with polyploid cell formation, we observed the appearance of Rb hypophosphorylation, an event that occurred independently of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibition. We went on to discover that Aurora B directly phosphorylates Rb at serine 780 both in vitro and in vivo. This novel interaction plays a critical role in regulating the postmitotic checkpoint to prevent endoreduplication after an aberrant mitosis. Thus, we propose for the first time that Aurora B determines cellular fate after an aberrant mitosis by directly regulating the Rb tumor suppressor protein.

90-kDa heat shock protein inhibition abrogates the topoisomerase I poison-induced G2/M checkpoint in p53-null tumor cells by depleting Chk1 and Wee1.

The G(2)/M cell cycle checkpoint is regulated by a multitude of signaling pathways after genotoxic stress. Herein, we report that treatment with the 90-kDa heat shock protein (Hsp90) molecular chaperone inhibitor 17-allylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin (17AAG) selectively abrogates the G(2)/M checkpoint induced by 7-ethyl-10-hydroxycamptothecin (SN-38), an active metabolite of irinotecan, in p53-null compared with p53-intact HCT116 colon cancer cells. The basis for this selectivity can be explained in part by the lack of p21 induction in p53-null cells. In accord with published results, we could show that treatment with 17AAG resulted in depletion of Chk1, a known Hsp90 client protein. In addition, we observed a time- and dose-dependent decrease in Wee1 kinase level, a negative regulator of mitosis, after 17AAG treatment in gastrointestinal cancer cells. Depletion of Wee1 protein preceded mitotic entry induced by 17AAG, and this decrease could be partially rescued by cotreatment with a proteasome inhibitor. Coimmunoprecipitation experiments showed that Hsp90 and Wee1 interacted in whole cells, and 17AAG treatment decreased the degradative half-life of Wee1, indicating that Wee1 is another Hsp90 client in mammalian cells. Knockdown of Chk1 and Wee1 by short interfering RNA each resulted in abrogation of the G(2)/M checkpoint induced by SN-38. The combination of SN-38 and 17AAG was shown to be synergistic in p53-null but not in parental HCT116 cells by median effect/combination index analysis. Taken together, 17AAG specifically inhibits the G(2)/M checkpoint in p53-defective cells by down-regulation of two critical checkpoint kinases, Chk1 and Wee1.

A phase 1 dose-escalation study of irinotecan in combination with 17-allylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin in patients with solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Both heat shock protein 90 (Hsp90) and checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) have emerged as novel therapeutic targets. We conducted a phase I study of irinotecan and the Hsp90 inhibitor 17AAG, which can also down-regulate Chk1, in patients with solid tumors. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: During the dose escalation phase, patients received i.v. irinotecan followed by 17AAG once weekly for 2 weeks in a 21-day cycle. At the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), additional patients were enrolled to undergo pre- and post-17AAG tumor biopsies for pharmacodynamic evaluation. The pharmacokinetics of irinotecan, 17AAG, and their metabolites were characterized. Tumor p53 status as determined by immunohistochemistry was correlated with antitumor activity. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients with a variety of solid tumors were enrolled. Four patients developed dose-limiting toxicity at dose level 4 (100 mg/m(2) irinotecan and 375 mg/m(2) 17AAG) including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and pulmonary embolism. The pharmacokinetics of 17AAG and its metabolite were not significantly affected by the coadministration of irinotecan, and vice versa. There was no partial response, although tumor shrinkage was observed in six patients. Five of 10 patients with p53-mutant tumor had stable disease as the best response compared with 2 of 6 patients with p53-wildtype tumor (P = 0.63). Evidence for Hsp90 inhibition by 17AAG, resulting in phospho-Chk1 loss, abrogation of the G(2)-M cell cycle checkpoint, and cell death could be shown in tumor biopsy samples obtained at the MTD. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of irinotecan and 17AAG can be given to patients with acceptable toxicity. The recommended phase II dose of the combination is 100 mg/m(2) irinotecan and 300 mg/m(2) 17AAG.

AZD7762, a novel checkpoint kinase inhibitor, drives checkpoint abrogation and potentiates DNA-targeted therapies.

Insights from cell cycle research have led to the hypothesis that tumors may be selectively sensitized to DNA-damaging agents resulting in improved antitumor activity and a wider therapeutic margin. The theory relies on the observation that the majority of tumors are deficient in the G1-DNA damage checkpoint pathway resulting in reliance on S and G2 checkpoints for DNA repair and cell survival. The S and G2 checkpoints are regulated by checkpoint kinase 1, a serine/threonine kinase that is activated in response to DNA damage; thus, inhibition of checkpoint kinase 1 signaling impairs DNA repair and increases tumor cell death. Normal tissues, however, have a functioning G1 checkpoint signaling pathway allowing for DNA repair and cell survival. Here, we describe the preclinical profile of AZD7762, a potent ATP-competitive checkpoint kinase inhibitor in clinical trials. AZD7762 has been profiled extensively in vitro and in vivo in combination with DNA-damaging agents and has been shown to potentiate response in several different settings where inhibition of checkpoint kinase results in the abrogation of DNA damage-induced cell cycle arrest. Dose-dependent potentiation of antitumor activity, when AZD7762 is administered in combination with DNA-damaging agents, has been observed in multiple xenograft models with several DNA-damaging agents, further supporting the potential of checkpoint kinase inhibitors to enhance the efficacy of both conventional chemotherapy and radiotherapy and increase patient response rates in a variety of settings.

Targeting checkpoint kinase 1 in cancer therapeutics.

Progression through the cell cycle is monitored by surveillance mechanisms known as cell cycle checkpoints. Our knowledge of the biochemical nature of checkpoint regulation during an unperturbed cell cycle and following DNA damage has expanded tremendously over the past decade. We now know that dysfunction in cell cycle checkpoints leads to genomic instability and contributes to tumor progression, and most agents used for cancer therapy, such as cytotoxic chemotherapy and ionizing radiation, also activate cell cycle checkpoints. Understanding how checkpoints are regulated is therefore important from the points of view of both tumorigenesis and cancer treatment. In this review, we present an overview of the molecular hierarchy of the checkpoint signaling network and the emerging role of checkpoint targets, especially checkpoint kinase 1, in cancer therapy. Further, we discuss the results of recent clinical trials involving the nonspecific checkpoint kinase 1 inhibitor, UCN-01, and the challenges we face with this new therapeutic approach.

CHIR-124, a novel potent inhibitor of Chk1, potentiates the cytotoxicity of topoisomerase I poisons in vitro and in vivo.

PURPOSE: Chk1 kinase is a critical regulator of both S and G(2)-M phase cell cycle checkpoints in response to DNA damage. This study aimed to evaluate the biochemical, cellular, and antitumor effects of a novel Chk1 inhibitor, CHIR124. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: CHIR-124 was evaluated for its ability to abrogate cell cycle checkpoints, to potentiate cytotoxicity, and to inhibit Chk1-mediated signaling induced by topoisomerase I poisons in human tumor cell line and xenograft models. RESULTS: CHIR-124 is a quinolone-based small molecule that is structurally unrelated to other known inhibitors of Chk1. It potently and selectively inhibits Chk1 in vitro (IC(50) = 0.0003 micromol/L). CHIR-124 interacts synergistically with topoisomerase poisons (e.g., camptothecin or SN-38) in causing growth inhibition in several p53-mutant solid tumor cell lines as determined by isobologram or response surface analysis. CHIR-124 abrogates the SN-38-induced S and G(2)-M checkpoints and potentiates apoptosis in MDA-MD-435 breast cancer cells. The abrogation of the G(2)-M checkpoint and induction of apoptosis by CHIR-124 are enhanced by the loss of p53. We have also shown that CHIR-124 treatment can restore the level of cdc25A protein, which is normally targeted by Chk1 for degradation following DNA damage, indicating that Chk1 signaling is suppressed in the presence of CHIR-124. Finally, in an orthotopic breast cancer xenograft model, CHIR-124 potentiates the growth inhibitory effects of irinotecan by abrogating the G(2)-M checkpoint and increasing tumor apoptosis. CONCLUSIONS: CHIR-124 is a novel and potent Chk1 inhibitor with promising antitumor activities when used in combination with topoisomerase I poisons.

Potentiation of cytotoxicity of topoisomerase i poison by concurrent and sequential treatment with the checkpoint inhibitor UCN-01 involves disparate mechanisms resulting in either p53-independent clonogenic suppression or p53-dependent mitotic catastrophe.

UCN-01 is a potent inhibitor of the S- and G2-M-phase cell cycle checkpoints by targeting chk1 and possibly chk2 kinases. It has been shown in some, but not all, instances that UCN-01 potentiates the cytotoxicity of DNA-damaging agents selectively in p53-defective cells. We have investigated this concept in HCT116 colon cancer cells treated with the topoisomerase I poison SN-38. SN-38 alone induced a senescence-like sustained G2 arrest without apoptosis. Sequential treatment with SN-38 followed by UCN-01 resulted in enhancement of cytotoxicity by apoptosis assay, whereas the reverse sequence or concurrent treatment did not potentiate apoptosis. Real-time visualization of HCT116 cells labeled with green fluorescent protein-histone 2B or green fluorescent protein-alpha-tubulin revealed that sequential treatment resulted in G2 checkpoint abrogation, and cells entered an aberrant mitosis despite normal assembly of bipolar spindles, resulting in either apoptosis or formation of micronucleated cells. Although p53-null cells were clearly more sensitive than parental HCT116 to undergoing checkpoint abrogation and mitotic death after sequential treatment, this was not accompanied by an increased inhibition of clonogenicity over that induced by SN-38 alone. Conversely, concurrent treatment with SN-38 and UCN-01 resulted in S-phase checkpoint override, an amplified DNA damage response including increased phosphorylation of the DNA double-strand breakage marker H2AX and augmentation of clonogenic inhibition, which was independent of p53. Thus, reported discrepancies in the pharmacology of UCN-01 and the influence of p53 status on treatment outcome appears to stem, in part, from the different schedules used, the specific checkpoints examined, and the assays used to assess cytotoxicity. Moreover, checkpoint abrogation and subsequent apoptosis induced by UCN-01 do not necessarily correlate with reproductive cell death.