Phase I Study of Fianlimab, a Human Lymphocyte Activation Gene-3 (LAG-3) Monoclonal Antibody, in Combination With Cemiplimab in Advanced Melanoma.

PURPOSE: Coblockade of lymphocyte activation gene-3 (LAG-3) and PD-1 receptors could provide significant clinical benefit for patients with advanced melanoma. Fianlimab and cemiplimab are high-affinity, human, hinge-stabilized IgG4 monoclonal antibodies, targeting LAG-3 and PD-1, respectively. We report results from a first-in-human phase-I study of fianlimab and cemiplimab safety and efficacy in various malignancies including advanced melanoma. METHODS: Patients with advanced melanoma were eligible for enrollment into four cohorts: three for patients without and one for patients with previous anti-PD-1 therapy in the advanced disease setting. Patients were treated with fianlimab 1,600 mg and cemiplimab 350 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks for up to 51 weeks, with an optional additional 51 weeks if clinically indicated. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST 1.1 criteria. RESULTS: ORRs were 63% for patients with anti-PD-1-naïve melanoma (cohort-6; n = 40; median follow-up 20.8 months), 63% for patients with systemic treatment-naïve melanoma (cohort-15; n = 40; 11.5 months), and 56% for patients with previous neo/adjuvant treatment melanoma (cohort-16; n = 18, 9.7 months). At a median follow-up of 12.6 months for the combined cohorts (6 + 15 + 16), the ORR was 61.2% and the median progression-free survival (mPFS) 13.3 months (95% CI, 7.5 to not estimated [NE]). In patients (n = 13) with previous anti-PD-1 adjuvant therapy, ORR was 61.5% and mPFS 12 months (95% CI, 1.4 to NE). ORR in patients with previous anti-PD-1 therapy for advanced disease (n = 15) was 13.3% and mPFS 1.5 months (95% CI, 1.3 to 7.7). Treatment-emergent and treatment-related adverse events ≥grade 3 (G3) were observed in 44% and 22% of patients, respectively. Except for increased incidence of adrenal insufficiency (12%-G1-4, 4%-G3-4), no new safety signals were recorded. CONCLUSION: The current results show a promising benefit-risk profile of fianlimab/cemiplimab combination for patients with advanced melanoma, including those with previous anti-PD-1 therapy in the adjuvant, but not advanced, setting.

Lifileucel, a Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocyte Therapy, in Metastatic Melanoma.

PURPOSE: Effective treatment options are limited for patients with advanced (metastatic or unresectable) melanoma who progress after immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies. Adoptive cell therapy using tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes has demonstrated efficacy in advanced melanoma. Lifileucel is an autologous, centrally manufactured tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte product. METHODS: We conducted a phase II open-label, single-arm, multicenter study in patients with advanced melanoma who had been previously treated with checkpoint inhibitor(s) and BRAF ± MEK targeted agents. Lifileucel was produced from harvested tumor specimens in central Good Manufacturing Practice facilities using a streamlined 22-day process. Patients received a nonmyeloablative lymphodepletion regimen, a single infusion of lifileucel, and up to six doses of high-dose interleukin-2. The primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST, version 1.1. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients received a mean of 3.3 prior therapies (anti-programmed death 1 [PD-1] or programmed death ligand 1 [PD-L1]: 100%; anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein-4: 80%; BRAF ± MEK inhibitor: 23%). The ORR was 36% (95% CI, 25 to 49), with two complete responses and 22 partial responses. Disease control rate was 80% (95% CI, 69 to 89). Median duration of response was not reached after 18.7-month median study follow-up (range, 0.2-34.1 months). In the primary refractory to anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 therapy subset, the ORR and disease control rate were 41% (95% CI, 26 to 57) and 81% (95% CI, 66 to 91), respectively. Safety profile was consistent with known adverse events associated with nonmyeloablative lymphodepletion and interleukin-2. CONCLUSION: Lifileucel demonstrated durable responses and addresses a major unmet need in patients with metastatic melanoma with limited treatment options after approved therapy, including the primary refractory to anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 therapy subset.

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.

First-in-Human Trial of a Novel Anti-Trop-2 Antibody-SN-38 Conjugate, Sacituzumab Govitecan, for the Treatment of Diverse Metastatic Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: Sacituzumab govitecan (IMMU-132) is an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) targeting Trop-2, a surface glycoprotein expressed on many epithelial tumors, for delivery of SN-38, the active metabolite of irinotecan. This phase I trial evaluated this ADC as a potential therapeutic for pretreated patients with a variety of metastatic solid cancers. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Sacituzumab govitecan was administered on days 1 and 8 of 21-day cycles, with cycles repeated until dose-limiting toxicity or progression. Dose escalation followed a standard 3 + 3 scheme with 4 planned dose levels and dose delay or reduction allowed. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients (52-60 years old, 3 median prior chemotherapy regimens) were treated at dose levels of 8 (n = 7), 10 (n = 6), 12 (n = 9), and 18 (n = 3) mg/kg. Neutropenia was dose limiting, with 12 mg/kg the maximum tolerated dose for cycle 1, but too toxic with repeated cycles. Lower doses were acceptable for extended treatment with no treatment-related grade 4 toxicities and grade 3 toxicities limited to fatigue (n = 3), neutropenia (n = 2), diarrhea (n = 1), and leukopenia (n = 1). Using CT-based RECIST 1.1, two patients achieved partial responses (triple-negative breast cancer, colon cancer) and 16 others had stable disease as best response. Twelve patients maintained disease control with continued treatment for 16 to 36 weeks; 6 survived 15 to 20+ months. No preselection of patients based on tumor Trop-2 expression was done. CONCLUSIONS: Sacituzumab govitecan had acceptable toxicity and encouraging therapeutic activity in patients with difficult-to-treat cancers. The 8 and 10 mg/kg doses were selected for phase II studies.

Modern multidisciplinary management of brain metastases.

Ideal management of brain metastases (BMs) requires simultaneous control of the existing brain metastasis (local brain control), prevention of future BMs (distant brain control), and control of the systemic cancer (systemic control). Available tools include whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT), surgery, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), and systemic therapies, such as chemotherapies, biologic agents, and radiosensitizing agents. Selecting the combination of these tools is highly individualized and is impacted by numerous factors involving the tumor, patient, provider, and evolving evidence. Historically, patients received WBRT, either alone or with local treatments (surgery or SRS). However, concern about the effects of WBRT, coupled with improvements in local control and survival in select patients, with the combination treatment, has led to a reconsideration of the role of WBRT. Additionally, there have been advancements in the efficacy and tolerance of systemic therapies and clarification regarding the relative risks and symptoms of tumor recurrence versus treatment complications. Thankfully, individualizing modern multidisciplinary management for patients with BMs is being aided by numerous recently completed, ongoing, and planned prospective series.