Common mechanistic pathways in cancer and heart failure. A scientific roadmap on behalf of the Translational Research Committee of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).

The co-occurrence of cancer and heart failure (HF) represents a significant clinical drawback as each disease interferes with the treatment of the other. In addition to shared risk factors, a growing body of experimental and clinical evidence reveals numerous commonalities in the biology underlying both pathologies. Inflammation emerges as a common hallmark for both diseases as it contributes to the initiation and progression of both HF and cancer. Under stress, malignant and cardiac cells change their metabolic preferences to survive, which makes these metabolic derangements a great basis to develop intersection strategies and therapies to combat both diseases. Furthermore, genetic predisposition and clonal haematopoiesis are common drivers for both conditions and they hold great clinical relevance in the context of personalized medicine. Additionally, altered angiogenesis is a common hallmark for failing hearts and tumours and represents a promising substrate to target in both diseases. Cardiac cells and malignant cells interact with their surrounding environment called stroma. This interaction mediates the progression of the two pathologies and understanding the structure and function of each stromal component may pave the way for innovative therapeutic strategies and improved outcomes in patients. The interdisciplinary collaboration between cardiologists and oncologists is essential to establish unified guidelines. To this aim, pre-clinical models that mimic the human situation, where both pathologies coexist, are needed to understand all the aspects of the bidirectional relationship between cancer and HF. Finally, adequately powered clinical studies, including patients from all ages, and men and women, with proper adjudication of both cancer and cardiovascular endpoints, are essential to accurately study these two pathologies at the same time.

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

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

Randomized Phase II Trial of Ridaforolimus in Advanced Endometrial Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: The prognosis for women with recurrent and metastatic endometrial cancer is poor, and improved therapies are needed. The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway is an important target, and mTOR inhibitors show clinical activity in endometrial cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An open-label, multicenter, randomized, phase II trial of oral ridaforolimus compared with progestin or investigator choice chemotherapy (comparator) was undertaken in women with metastatic or recurrent endometrial cancer who had progressive disease following one or two lines of chemotherapy and no hormonal therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by independent radiologic review. RESULTS: One hundred thirty patients were enrolled (64 received ridaforolimus and 66 received the comparator), and median age was 66 years. Treatment discontinuation as a result of adverse events was 33% with ridaforolimus versus 6% with the comparator, with common (> 10%) grade 3 toxicities being hyperglycemia, anemia, and diarrhea. Thirty-eight percent (ridaforolimus) versus 71% (comparator) of patients discontinued treatment as a result of disease progression. Median PFS at the protocol prespecified interim analysis with 58 PFS events (primary end point) was 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.7 to 7.3 months) for ridaforolimus and 1.9 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 2.3 months) for the comparator (hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.90; P = .008). PFS rate for ridaforolimus versus comparator was 48% versus 18% at 16 weeks and 38% versus 15% at 24 weeks. Objective response rate for ridaforolimus versus comparator was 0% versus 4% (P = .925), and stable disease was achieved in 35% versus 17% of patients (P = .021). CONCLUSION: Oral ridaforolimus shows encouraging activity in advanced endometrial cancer but is associated with significant toxicity. Inhibition of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway may be a viable therapeutic target.

Oral ridaforolimus plus trastuzumab for patients with HER2+ trastuzumab-refractory metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although trastuzumab-containing therapies prolong survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), most tumors develop trastuzumab resistance, potentially mediated by aberrant phosphatidylinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT signaling. Ridaforolimus (a mammalian target of rapamycin [mTOR] inhibitor) may overcome trastuzumab resistance by inhibiting PI3K signaling. METHODS: A single-arm, phase IIb trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ridaforolimus-trastuzumab in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2(+)) trastuzumab-refractory MBC (NCT00736970). Ridaforolimus was administered orally (40 mg daily) for 5 d/wk plus weekly trastuzumab. The primary end point was objective response (OR). RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were enrolled (91% had received 1 or 2 previous trastuzumab-based therapies, whereas 9% had received 3 previous therapies). The most common reasons for discontinuation were disease progression (62%) and adverse events (AEs; 24%). Three patients died; 1 because of bowel perforation, which was possibly ridaforolimus related. Partial response was observed in 5 patients (15%). Median duration of response was 19.1 weeks (range, 15.9-80.1 weeks). Fourteen patients (41%) achieved stable disease (SD); 7 patients (21%) maintained SD for ≥ 24 weeks. The clinical benefit response (CBR) rate was 34.3%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 5.4 months (range, 0-20.3 months; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-7.4) and 17.7 months (range, 0-25.9 months; 95% CI, 8.8-20.8), respectively. PFS rate at 6 months was 37%. The most common treatment-related AEs were stomatitis (59%), diarrhea (27%), and rash (27%). CONCLUSION: Ridaforolimus-trastuzumab was well tolerated and demonstrated antitumor activity in trastuzumab-resistant HER2(+) MBC.

Results of an international randomized phase III trial of the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor ridaforolimus versus placebo to control metastatic sarcomas in patients after benefit from prior chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Aberrant mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signaling is common in sarcomas and other malignancies. Drug resistance and toxicities often limit benefits of systemic chemotherapy used to treat metastatic sarcomas. This large randomized placebo-controlled phase III trial evaluated the mTOR inhibitor ridaforolimus to assess maintenance of disease control in advanced sarcomas. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic soft tissue or bone sarcomas who achieved objective response or stable disease with prior chemotherapy were randomly assigned to receive ridaforolimus 40 mg or placebo once per day for 5 days every week. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points included overall survival (OS), best target lesion response, safety, and tolerability. RESULTS: A total of 711 patients were enrolled, and 702 received blinded study drug. Ridaforolimus treatment led to a modest, although significant, improvement in PFS per independent review compared with placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.85; P = .001; median PFS, 17.7 v 14.6 weeks). Ridaforolimus induced a mean 1.3% decrease in target lesion size versus a 10.3% increase with placebo (P < .001). Median OS with ridaforolimus was 90.6 weeks versus 85.3 weeks with placebo (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.12; P = .46). Adverse events (AEs) more common with ridaforolimus included stomatitis, infections, fatigue, thrombocytopenia, noninfectious pneumonitis, hyperglycemia, and rash. Grade ≥ 3 AEs were more common with ridaforolimus than placebo (64.1% v 25.6%). CONCLUSION: Ridaforolimus delayed tumor progression to a small statistically significant degree in patients with metastatic sarcoma who experienced benefit with prior chemotherapy. Toxicities were observed with ridaforolimus, as expected with mTOR inhibition. These data provide a foundation on which to further improve control of sarcomas.