ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is safe and effective for treatment of extracranial metastatic disease, but its safety when combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) has not yet been comprehensively reported. Here we report adverse events (AEs) associated with combined SBRT and ICI using prospectively-collected data on patients in three trials investigating multi-site SBRT combined with ICI. METHODS: Patients were included from three prospective trials of ICI (pembrolizumab; nivolumab/urelumab or nivolumab/cabiralizumab; nivolumab/ipilimumab) with SBRT to 1-4 sites. AEs were recorded prospectively using the CTCAE v4.0. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method with a 90-day landmark. Association of patient characteristics with cumulative incidence of AEs was assessed using Fine-Gray regression. RESULTS: 213 patients were included, with a median follow-up of 10 months. Over the follow-up period, 50 % and 27 % of patients experienced at least one grade ≥ 2 or grade ≥ 3 AE, respectively. Cumulative incidences of grade ≥ 2 and grade ≥ 3 AEs at 6 months were 47 % and 23 %, respectively. Three grade 5 AEs rated "possibly" related to treatment occurred outside the 90-day dose-limiting toxicity window. Landmarked survival analysis of patients with or without grade ≥ 3 AEs showed no significant difference in progression-free or overall survival. Dual-agent ICI was significantly associated with grade ≥ 3 AE. CONCLUSION: This analysis features the largest prospectively evaluated cohort of patients treated with combination ablative SBRT and ICI to date and provides context for future trial design. We conclude that multi-site SBRT and ICI can be safely co-administered when SBRT is delivered with prioritization of normal tissue constraints.
ABSTRACT
NETosis via lytic neutrophil death or neutrophil activation is associated with standard cancer therapies, notably including radiotherapy, is immunosuppressive, and may enhance metastasis and treatment resistance. This emerging area of research should be prioritized in drug development and standard of care treatment paradigms including radiation, chemo- and immunotherapy.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The safety profile of adjuvant pembrolizumab was evaluated in a pooled analysis of 4 phase 3 clinical trials. METHODS: Patients had completely resected stage IIIA, IIIB, or IIIC melanoma per American Joint Committee on Cancer, 7th edition, criteria (AJCC-7; KEYNOTE-054); stage IIB or IIC melanoma per AJCC-8 (KEYNOTE-716); stage IB, II, or IIIA non-small cell lung cancer per AJCC-7 (PEARLS/KEYNOTE-091); or postnephrectomy/metastasectomy clear cell renal cell carcinoma at increased risk of recurrence (KEYNOTE-564). Patients received adjuvant pembrolizumab 200 mg (2 mg/kg up to 200 mg for pediatric patients) or placebo every 3 weeks for approximately 1 year. Adverse events (AEs) were summarized for patients who received ≥ 1 dose of treatment. RESULTS: Data were pooled from 4125 patients treated with pembrolizumab (n = 2060) or placebo (n = 2065). Median (range) duration of treatment was 11.1 months (0.0-18.9) with pembrolizumab and 11.2 months (0.0-18.1) with placebo. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 78.6 % (1620/2060) of patients in the pembrolizumab group (grade 3-5, 16.3 % [336/2060]) and 58.7 % (1212/2065) in the placebo group (grade 3-5, 3.5 % [72/2065]). Immune-mediated AEs (e.g. adrenal insufficiency, hypophysitis, and thyroiditis) occurred in 36.2 % (746/2060) of patients in the pembrolizumab group (grade 3-5, 8.6 % [177/2060]) and 8.4 % (174/2065) in the placebo group (grade 3-5, 1.1 % [23/2065]). Of patients with ≥ 1 immune-mediated AE or infusion reaction, systemic corticosteroids were required for 35.2 % (268/761) and 20.2 % (39/193) of patients in the pembrolizumab and placebo groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant pembrolizumab demonstrated a manageable safety profile that was comparable to prior reports in advanced disease.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Carcinoma, Renal Cell , Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic , Kidney Neoplasms , Lung Neoplasms , Melanoma , Humans , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Renal Cell/pathology , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/pathology , Melanoma/drug therapy , Melanoma/pathology , Kidney Neoplasms/drug therapy , Kidney Neoplasms/pathology , Male , Female , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Aged , Middle Aged , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/therapeutic use , Adult , Young Adult , Aged, 80 and over , AdolescentABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Tebentafusp, a bispecific (gp100×CD3) ImmTAC, significantly improved overall survival (OS) outcomes for HLA-A*02:01+ adult patients with untreated metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM) and showed promising survival in previously treated mUM with 1-year OS of 62% in the primary analysis of study IMCgp100-102. Here we report long-term outcomes from this phase 1/2 study in pretreated mUM. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously treated mUM received tebentafusp weekly intravenous at 20 µg dose 1, 30 µg dose 2 and either 54, 64, 68, or 73 µg (phase 1) or 68 µg (phase 2) dose 3+. The primary objective was overall response rate. Secondary objectives included OS and safety. OS was estimated by Kaplan-Meier methods. Association between OS and baseline covariates, on-treatment Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) response, baseline tumor biopsy and circulating-tumor DNA (ctDNA) changes were assessed. RESULTS: 146 patients were treated with tebentafusp: 19 in phase 1 and 127 in phase 2. With a median follow-up duration of 48.5 months, the median OS was 17.4 months (95% CI, 13.1 to 22.8), and the 1-year, 2-year, 3-year and 4-year OS rates were 62%, 40%, 23% and 14%, respectively. Improved survival was associated with lower ctDNA baseline levels and greater ctDNA reductions by week 9 on-treatment, with 100% 1-year, 73% 2-year and 45% 3-year OS rates for patients with ctDNA clearance. Baseline gp100 expression was not associated with survival, despite more RECIST responses among patients with higher expression. No new safety signals were reported with long-term dosing. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the longest follow-up of a Tcell receptor bispecific to date and confirms the durable survival benefits achieved with tebentafusp in previously treated mUM with good tolerability long-term. A role for ctDNA reduction as an early indicator of clinical benefit was again suggested for patients treated with tebentafusp.
Subject(s)
Melanoma , Uveal Neoplasms , Humans , Melanoma/drug therapy , Melanoma/mortality , Melanoma/pathology , Uveal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Uveal Neoplasms/mortality , Uveal Neoplasms/pathology , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Adult , Follow-Up Studies , Antibodies, Bispecific/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Bispecific/pharmacology , Aged, 80 and over , Neoplasm MetastasisABSTRACT
Background: Variability in treatment response may be attributable to organ-level heterogeneity in tumor lesions. Radiomic analysis of medical images can elucidate non-invasive biomarkers of clinical outcome. Organ-specific radiomic comparison across immunotherapies and targeted therapies has not been previously reported. Methods: We queried UPMC Hillman Cancer Center registry for patients with metastatic melanoma (MEL) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) (anti-PD1/CTLA4 [ipilimumab+nivolumab; I+N] or anti-PD1 monotherapy) or BRAF targeted therapy. Best overall response was measured using RECIST v1.1. Lesions were segmented into discrete volume-of-interest with 400 radiomics features extracted. Overall and organ-specific machine-learning models were constructed to predict disease control (DC) versus progressive disease (PD) using XGBoost. Results: 291 MEL patients were identified, including 242 ICI (91 I+N, 151 PD1) and 49 BRAF. 667 metastases were analyzed, including 541 ICI (236 I+N, 305 PD1) and 126 BRAF. Across cohorts, baseline demographics included 39-47% female, 24-29% M1C, 24-46% M1D, and 61-80% with elevated LDH. Among patients experiencing DC, the organs with the greatest reduction were liver (-88%±12%, I+N; mean±S.E.M.) and lung (-72%±8%, I+N). For patients with multiple same-organ target lesions, the highest inter-lesion heterogeneity was observed in brain among patients who received ICI while no intra-organ heterogeneity was observed in BRAF. 267 patients were kept for radiomic modeling, including 221 ICI (86 I+N, 135 PD1) and 46 BRAF. Models consisting of optimized radiomic signatures classified DC/PD across I+N (AUC=0.85) and PD1 (0.71) and within individual organ sites (AUC=0.72â¼0.94). Integration of clinical variables improved the models' performance. Comparison of models between treatments and across organ sites suggested mostly non-overlapping DC or PD features. Skewness, kurtosis, and informational measure of correlation (IMC) were among the radiomic features shared between overall response models. Kurtosis and IMC were also utilized by multiple organ-site models. Conclusions: Differential organ-specific response was observed across BRAF and ICI with within organ heterogeneity observed for ICI but not for BRAF. Radiomic features of organ-specific response demonstrated little overlap. Integrating clinical factors with radiomics improves the prediction of disease course outcome and prediction of tumor heterogeneity.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review provides a comprehensive update on recent advancements in melanoma treatment by highlighting promising therapeutics with an aim to increase awareness of novel interventions currently in development. RECENT FINDINGS: Over the last decade there has been considerable expansion of the previously available treatment options for patients with melanoma. In particular, novel immunotherapeutics have been developed to expand on the clinical advancements brought by BRAF targeting and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Despite the success of checkpoint inhibitors there remains an unmet need for patients that do not respond to treatment. This review delves into the latest advancements in novel checkpoint inhibitors, cytokines, oncolytic viruses, vaccines, bispecific antibodies, and adoptive cell therapy. Preclinical experiments and early-stage clinical trials studies have demonstrated promising results for these therapies, many of which have moved into pivotal, phase 3 studies.
Subject(s)
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors , Melanoma , Humans , Melanoma/drug therapy , Melanoma/immunology , Melanoma/therapy , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/pharmacology , Immunotherapy/methods , Cancer Vaccines/therapeutic use , Oncolytic Viruses/immunology , Antibodies, Bispecific/therapeutic use , Cytokines/antagonists & inhibitors , Cytokines/metabolism , Oncolytic Virotherapy/methods , Molecular Targeted Therapy/methodsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Capivasertib, a potent, selective inhibitor of all three AKT serine/threonine kinase (AKT) isoforms, is being evaluated in phase 3 trials in advanced breast and prostate cancer. This study evaluated the drug-drug interaction risk of capivasertib with the cytochrome P450 3A substrate midazolam in previously treated adults with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Patients received oral capivasertib 400 mg twice daily (BID) on an intermittent schedule (4 days on/3 days off) starting on day 2 of cycle 1 (29 days) and on day 1 of each 28-day cycle thereafter. In cycle 1 only, patients received oral midazolam (1 mg) on day 1 (alone), and days 8 and 12 (3rd day off and 4th day on capivasertib, respectively). Midazolam pharmacokinetics on days 8 and 12 were analyzed versus day 1. Capivasertib, with or without standard-of-care treatment, was continued in patients deemed likely to benefit. Safety and exploratory efficacy analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Capivasertib-midazolam coadministration increased midazolam exposure (n = 21): geometric mean ratio (90% confidence interval) AUCinf and Cmax was 1.13 (0.97-1.32) and 1.15 (0.99-1.33) for day 8 versus day 1, and 1.75 (1.50-2.05) and 1.25 (1.08-1.46) for day 12 versus day 1. The capivasertib safety profile was manageable when administered with or without midazolam. Two patients had partial responses to treatment. CONCLUSION: The up to 1.75-fold increase in midazolam exposure indicates capivasertib is a weak CYP3A inhibitor at 400 mg BID on an intermittent schedule. Capivasertib was well tolerated; exploratory efficacy analysis demonstrated evidence of clinical activity in this heavily pre-treated population. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT04958226.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Intratumorally delivered immunotherapies have the potential to favorably alter the local tumor microenvironment and may stimulate systemic host immunity, offering an alternative or adjunct to other local and systemic treatments. Despite their potential, these therapies have had limited success in late-phase trials for advanced cancer resulting in few formal approvals. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a panel of experts to determine how to design clinical trials with the greatest chance of demonstrating the benefits of intratumoral immunotherapy for patients with cancers across all stages of pathogenesis. METHODS: An Intratumoral Immunotherapy Clinical Trials Expert Panel composed of international key stakeholders from academia and industry was assembled. A multiple choice/free response survey was distributed to the panel, and the results of this survey were discussed during a half-day consensus meeting. Key discussion points are summarized in the following manuscript. RESULTS: The panel determined unique clinical trial designs tailored to different stages of cancer development-from premalignant to unresectable/metastatic-that can maximize the chance of capturing the effect of intratumoral immunotherapies. Design elements discussed included study type, patient stratification and exclusion criteria, indications of randomization, study arm determination, endpoints, biological sample collection, and response assessment with biomarkers and imaging. Populations to prioritize for the study of intratumoral immunotherapy, including stage, type of cancer and line of treatment, were also discussed along with common barriers to the development of these local treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The SITC Intratumoral Immunotherapy Clinical Trials Expert Panel has identified key considerations for the design and implementation of studies that have the greatest potential to capture the effect of intratumorally delivered immunotherapies. With more effective and standardized trial designs, the potential of intratumoral immunotherapy can be realized and lead to regulatory approvals that will extend the benefit of these local treatments to the patients who need them the most.
Subject(s)
Neoplasms, Second Primary , Neoplasms , Humans , Neoplasms/therapy , Immunotherapy/methods , Societies, Medical , Tumor MicroenvironmentSubject(s)
Melanoma , Melanoma/therapy , Melanoma/pathology , Humans , Skin Neoplasms/pathology , Skin Neoplasms/therapyABSTRACT
The curative treatment of multiple solid tumors, including head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), utilizes radiation. The outcomes for HPV/p16-negative HNSCC are significantly worse than HPV/p16-positive tumors, with increased radiation resistance leading to worse locoregional recurrence (LRR) and ultimately death. This study analyzed the relationship between immune function and outcomes following radiation in HPV/p16-negative tumors to identify mechanisms of radiation resistance and prognostic immune biomarkers. A discovery cohort of 94 patients with HNSCC treated uniformly with surgery and adjuvant radiation and a validation cohort of 97 similarly treated patients were utilized. Tumor immune infiltrates were derived from RNAseq gene expression. The immune cell types significantly associated with outcomes in the discovery cohort were examined in the independent validation cohort. A positive association between high Th2 infiltration and LRR was identified in the discovery cohort and validated in the validation cohort. Tumor mutations in CREBBP/EP300 and CASP8 were significantly associated with Th2 infiltration. A pathway analysis of genes correlated with Th2 cells revealed the potential repression of the antitumor immune response and the activation of BRCA1-associated DNA damage repair in multiple cohorts. The Th2 infiltrates were enriched in the HPV/p16-negative HNSCC tumors and associated with LRR and mutations in CASP8, CREBBP/EP300, and pathways previously shown to impact the response to radiation.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted treatments for cancer is common; thus, novel immunotherapy agents are needed. Urelumab is a monoclonal antibody agonist that binds to CD137 receptors expressed on T cells. Here, we report two studies that evaluated urelumab in combination with cetuximab or nivolumab in patients with select, advanced solid tumors. METHODS: CA186-018: Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) were treated in a dose-evaluation phase with urelumab 0.1 mg/kg (urelumab-0.1) every 3 weeks (Q3W)+cetuximab 250 mg/m2 (cetuximab-250) weekly; and in a dose-expansion phase with urelumab 8 mg flat dose (urelumab-8) Q3W+cetuximab-250 weekly. CA186-107: The dose-escalation phase included patients with previously treated advanced solid tumors (or treated or treatment-naive melanoma); patients received urelumab 3 mg flat dose (urelumab-3) or urelumab-8 every 4 weeks+nivolumab 3 mg/kg (nivolumab-3) or 240 mg (nivolumab-240) every 2 weeks. In the expansion phase, patients with melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, or SCCHN were treated with urelumab-8+nivolumab-240. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability, and the secondary endpoint included efficacy assessments. RESULTS: CA186-018: 66 patients received study treatment. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were fatigue (75%; n=3) with urelumab-0.1+cetuximab-250 and dermatitis (45%; n=28) with urelumab-8+cetuximab-250. Three patients (5%) discontinued due to TRAE(s) (with urelumab-8+cetuximab-250). One patient with SCCHN had a partial response (objective response rate (ORR) 5%, with urelumab-8+cetuximab-250).CA186-107: 134 patients received study treatment. Fatigue was the most common TRAE (32%; n=2 with urelumab-3+nivolumab-3; n=1 with urelumab-8+nivolumab-3; n=40 with urelumab-8+nivolumab-240). Nine patients (7%) discontinued due to TRAE(s) (n=1 with urelumab-3+nivolumab-3; n=8 with urelumab-8+nivolumab-240). Patients with melanoma naive to anti-PD-1 therapy exhibited the highest ORR (49%; n=21 with urelumab-8+nivolumab-240). Intratumoral gene expression in immune-related pathways (CD3, CD8, CXCL9, GZMB) increased on treatment with urelumab+nivolumab. CONCLUSIONS: Although the addition of urelumab at these doses was tolerable, preliminary response rates did not indicate an evident additive benefit. Nevertheless, the positive pharmacodynamics effects observed with urelumab and the high response rate in treatment-naive patients with melanoma warrant further investigation of other anti-CD137 agonist agents for treatment of cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT02110082; NCT02253992.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Head and Neck Neoplasms , Lung Neoplasms , Melanoma , Humans , Nivolumab/pharmacology , Nivolumab/therapeutic use , Cetuximab/pharmacology , Cetuximab/therapeutic use , Lung Neoplasms/chemically induced , Antibodies, Monoclonal/pharmacology , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and Neck/drug therapy , Head and Neck Neoplasms/drug therapyABSTRACT
Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Pembrolizumab adjuvant therapy was shown to significantly improve recurrence-free survival (RFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) in patients with resected stage IIB or IIC melanoma in earlier analyses of the randomized, double-blind, phase III KEYNOTE-716 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03553836). We report results of the protocol-specified final analysis of DMFS for KEYNOTE-716. Overall, 976 patients were randomly allocated to pembrolizumab (n = 487) or placebo (n = 489). As of January 4, 2023, median follow-up was 39.4 months (range, 26.0-51.4 months). The median DMFS was not reached in either treatment group, and the estimated 36-month DMFS was 84.4% for pembrolizumab and 74.7% for placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.59 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.79]). The median RFS was not reached in either treatment group, and the estimated 36-month RFS was 76.2% for pembrolizumab and 63.4% for placebo (HR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.49 to 0.79]). DMFS and RFS results were consistent across most prespecified subgroups, including stage IIB and stage IIC melanoma. The safety profile of pembrolizumab was manageable and consistent with previous reports. These results continue to support the use of pembrolizumab adjuvant therapy in patients with resected stage IIB or IIC melanoma.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological , Melanoma , Neoplasm Staging , Skin Neoplasms , Humans , Melanoma/drug therapy , Melanoma/mortality , Melanoma/pathology , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Female , Male , Middle Aged , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Aged , Double-Blind Method , Skin Neoplasms/drug therapy , Skin Neoplasms/pathology , Skin Neoplasms/mortality , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/therapeutic use , Adult , Disease-Free Survival , Aged, 80 and overABSTRACT
New treatments have increased survival of patients with melanoma, and methods to monitor patients throughout the disease process are needed. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is a predictive and prognostic biomarker that may allow routine, real-time monitoring of disease status. We surveyed 44 US physicians to understand their preferences and practice patterns for biomarker and ctDNA testing in their patients with melanoma. Tumor biomarker testing was often ordered in stage IIIA-IV patients. Barriers to biomarker testing include insufficient tissue (60%) and lack of insurance coverage (54%). ctDNA testing was ordered by 16-18% of physicians for stages II-IV. Reasons for not using ctDNA testing included lack of prospective data (41%), ctDNA testing used for research only (18%), and others. Physicians (≥74%) believed that ctDNA assays could help with monitoring and treatment selection throughout the disease process. Physicians consider ctDNA testing potentially valuable for clinical decision-making but cited concerns that should be addressed.
Subject(s)
Circulating Tumor DNA , Melanoma , Humans , Melanoma/diagnosis , Melanoma/genetics , Melanoma/pathology , Circulating Tumor DNA/genetics , Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics , Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf/genetics , MutationABSTRACT
With the development of effective BRAF-targeted and immune-checkpoint immunotherapies for metastatic melanoma, clinical trials are moving these treatments into earlier adjuvant and perioperative settings. BRAF-targeted therapy is a standard of care in resected stage III-IV melanoma, while anti-programmed death-1 (PD1) immunotherapy is now a standard of care option in resected stage IIB through IV disease. With both modalities, recurrence-free survival and distant-metastasis-free survival are improved by a relative 35-50%, yet no improvement in overall survival has been demonstrated. Neoadjuvant anti-PD1 therapy improves event-free survival by approximately an absolute 23%, although improvements in overall survival have yet to be demonstrated. Understanding which patients are most likely to recur and which are most likely to benefit from treatment is now the highest priority question in the field. Biomarker analyses, such as gene expression profiling of the primary lesion and circulating DNA, are preliminarily exciting as potential biomarkers, though each has drawbacks. As in the setting of metastatic disease, markers that inform positive outcomes include interferon-γ gene expression, PD-L1, and high tumor mutational burden, while negative predictors of outcome include circulating factors such as lactate dehydrogenase, interleukin-8, and C-reactive protein. Integrating and validating these markers into clinically relevant models is thus a high priority. Melanoma therapeutics continues to advance with combination adjuvant approaches now investigating anti-PD1 with lymphocyte activation gene 3 (LAG3), T-cell immunoreceptor with Ig and ITIM domains (TIGIT), and individualized neoantigen therapies. How this progress will be integrated into the management of a unique patient to reduce recurrence, limit toxicity, and avoid over-treatment will dominate clinical research and patient care over the next decade.
Subject(s)
Melanoma , Skin Neoplasms , Humans , Melanoma/drug therapy , Melanoma/therapy , Melanoma/pathology , Skin Neoplasms/pathology , Skin Neoplasms/therapy , Skin Neoplasms/drug therapy , Skin Neoplasms/immunology , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Biomarkers, Tumor , Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods , Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf/antagonists & inhibitors , Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf/genetics , Neoplasm Staging , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/prevention & controlABSTRACT
Combination immune-checkpoint inhibition with chemotherapy is a clinical standard, yet concurrent administration may limit the full benefit of immunotherapy by blunting the proliferation and differentiation of CD8 T cells. Identifying patients in whom sequential chemo-immunotherapy or immunotherapy alone is feasible should be a priority to optimize long-term outcomes. See related article by Mariniello et al., p. 1833.
Subject(s)
Immunotherapy , Neoplasms , Humans , Immunotherapy/methods , Neoplasms/therapy , Neoplasms/immunology , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes/immunology , Combined Modality Therapy , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Cancer-related mortality rates among kidney transplant recipients (KTR) are high, but these patients have largely been excluded from trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors because of immunosuppression and risk of treatment-related allograft loss (TRAL). We conducted a prospective clinical trial testing nivolumab (NIVO) + tacrolimus (TACRO) + prednisone (PRED) ± ipilimumab (IPI) in KTR with advanced cutaneous cancers. METHODS: Adult KTR with advanced melanoma or basal, cutaneous squamous, or Merkel cell carcinomas were eligible. Immunosuppression was standardized to TACRO (serum trough 2-5 ng/mL) + PRED 5 mg once daily. Patients then received NIVO 480 mg IV once every 4 weeks. The primary composite end point was partial or complete (tumor) response (CR) or stable disease per RECIST v1.1 without allograft loss at 16W. Patients with progressive disease (PD) could receive IPI 1 mg/kg IV + NIVO 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks × 4 followed by NIVO. Donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) levels were measured approximately once every 2 weeks as a potential predictor of allograft rejection. RESULTS: Among eight evaluable patients, none met the trial's primary end point. All eight patients experienced PD on NIVO + TACRO + PRED; TRAL occurred in one patient. Six patients then received IPI + NIVO + TACRO + PRED. Best overall responses: two CR (one with TRAL) and four PD (one with TRAL). In total, 7 of 8 pre-NIVO tumor biopsies contained a paucity of infiltrating immune cells. In total, 2 of 5 on-NIVO biopsies demonstrated moderate immune infiltrates; both patients later experienced a CR to IPI + NIVO. In 2 of 3 patients with TRAL, dd-cfDNA elevations occurred 10 and 15 days before increases in serum creatinine. CONCLUSION: In most KTR with advanced skin cancer, TACRO + PRED provides insufficient allograft protection and compromises immune-mediated tumor regression after administration of NIVO ± IPI. Elevated dd-cfDNA levels can signal treatment-related allograft rejection earlier than rises in serum creatinine.
Subject(s)
Cell-Free Nucleic Acids , Kidney Neoplasms , Kidney Transplantation , Melanoma , Adult , Humans , Nivolumab/therapeutic use , Ipilimumab/therapeutic use , Tacrolimus/adverse effects , Prednisone/therapeutic use , Kidney Transplantation/adverse effects , Prospective Studies , Creatinine/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Melanoma/pathology , Kidney Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Checkpoint inhibitors are standard adjuvant treatment for stage IIB-IV resected melanoma, but many patients recur. Our study aimed to evaluate whether mRNA-4157 (V940), a novel mRNA-based individualised neoantigen therapy, combined with pembrolizumab, improved recurrence-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival versus pembrolizumab monotherapy in resected high-risk melanoma. METHODS: We did an open-label, randomised, phase 2b, adjuvant study of mRNA-4157 plus pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients, enrolled from sites in the USA and Australia, with completely resected high-risk cutaneous melanoma. Patients with completely resected melanoma (stage IIIB-IV) were assigned 2:1 to receive open-label mRNA-4157 plus pembrolizumab or pembrolizumab monotherapy. mRNA-4157 was administered intramuscularly (maximum nine doses) and pembrolizumab intravenously (maximum 18 doses) in 3-week cycles. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This ongoing trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03897881. FINDINGS: From July 18, 2019, to Sept 30, 2021, 157 patients were assigned to mRNA-4157 plus pembrolizumab combination therapy (n=107) or pembrolizumab monotherapy (n=50); median follow-up was 23 months and 24 months, respectively. Recurrence-free survival was longer with combination versus monotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] for recurrence or death, 0·561 [95% CI 0·309-1·017]; two-sided p=0·053), with lower recurrence or death event rate (24 [22%] of 107 vs 20 [40%] of 50); 18-month recurrence-free survival was 79% (95% CI 69·0-85·6) versus 62% (46·9-74·3). Most treatment-related adverse events were grade 1-2. Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 25% of patients in the combination group and 18% of patients in the monotherapy group, with no mRNA-4157-related grade 4-5 events. Immune-mediated adverse event frequency was similar for the combination (37 [36%]) and monotherapy (18 [36%]) groups. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant mRNA-4157 plus pembrolizumab prolonged recurrence-free survival versus pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with resected high-risk melanoma and showed a manageable safety profile. These results provide evidence that an mRNA-based individualised neoantigen therapy might be beneficial in the adjuvant setting. FUNDING: Moderna in collaboration with Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Rahway, NJ, USA.
Subject(s)
Melanoma , Skin Neoplasms , Humans , Adjuvants, Immunologic/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Melanoma/drug therapy , Melanoma/genetics , Melanoma/surgery , Skin Neoplasms/drug therapy , Skin Neoplasms/genetics , Skin Neoplasms/surgeryABSTRACT
The field of oncology has been transformed by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and other immune-based agents; however, many patients do not receive a durable benefit. While biomarker assessments from pivotal ICI trials have uncovered certain mechanisms of resistance, results thus far have only scraped the surface. Mechanisms of resistance are as complex as the tumor microenvironment (TME) itself, and the development of effective therapeutic strategies will only be possible by building accurate models of the tumor-immune interface. With advancement of multi-omic technologies, high-resolution characterization of the TME is now possible. In addition to sequencing of bulk tumor, single-cell transcriptomic, proteomic, and epigenomic data as well as T-cell receptor profiling can now be simultaneously measured and compared between responders and nonresponders to ICI. Spatial sequencing and imaging platforms have further expanded the dimensionality of existing technologies. Rapid advancements in computation and data sharing strategies enable development of biologically interpretable machine learning models to integrate data from high-resolution, multi-omic platforms. These models catalyze the identification of resistance mechanisms and predictors of benefit in ICI-treated patients, providing scientific foundation for novel clinical trials. Moving forward, we propose a framework by which in silico screening, functional validation, and clinical trial biomarker assessment can be used for the advancement of combined immunotherapy strategies.
Subject(s)
Immunotherapy , Neoplasms , Tumor Microenvironment , Humans , Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics , Genomics/methods , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/pharmacology , Immunotherapy/methods , Neoplasms/genetics , Neoplasms/therapy , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasms/immunology , Proteomics/methods , Tumor Microenvironment/immunologyABSTRACT
In this CCR Translations, we discuss the therapeutic potential of CD40 agonism, which stimulates antigen-presenting cells (APC) to activate effector T and NK cells. CD40 agonism may lead to development of an interferon-activated, T cell-inflamed tumor microenvironment and has the potential to facilitate long-term response with immune checkpoint blockade. See related article by Weiss et al., p. 74.