Nivolumab plus chemotherapy in first-line metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: results of the phase III CheckMate 227 Part 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: In CheckMate 227 Part 1, first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolonged overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ≥1% versus chemotherapy. We report results from CheckMate 227 Part 2, which evaluated nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven hundred and fifty-five patients with systemic therapy-naive, stage IV/recurrent NSCLC without EGFR mutations or ALK alterations were randomized 1 : 1 to nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy. Primary endpoint was OS with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC. OS in all randomized patients was a hierarchically tested secondary endpoint. RESULTS: At 19.5 months' minimum follow-up, no significant improvement in OS was seen with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC [median OS 18.8 versus 15.6 months, hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95.62% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-1.08, P = 0.1859]. Descriptive analyses showed OS improvement with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in all randomized patients (median OS 18.3 versus 14.7 months, HR 0.81, 95.62% CI 0.67-0.97) and in an exploratory analysis in squamous NSCLC (median OS 18.3 versus 12.0 months, HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.50-0.97). A trend toward improved OS was seen with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy, regardless of the tumor mutation status of STK11 or TP53, regardless of tumor mutational burden, and in patients with intermediate/poor Lung Immune Prognostic Index scores. Safety with nivolumab plus chemotherapy was consistent with previous reports of first-line settings. CONCLUSIONS: CheckMate 227 Part 2 did not meet the primary endpoint of OS with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC. Descriptive analyses showed prolonged OS with nivolumab plus chemotherapy in all-randomized and squamous NSCLC populations, suggesting that this combination may benefit patients with untreated metastatic NSCLC.

First-in-human phase 1 study of the anti-TIGIT antibody vibostolimab as monotherapy or with pembrolizumab for advanced solid tumors, including non-small-cell lung cancer☆.

BACKGROUND: In this first-in-human phase 1 study (NCT02964013; MK-7684-001), we investigated the safety and efficacy of the anti-TIGIT (T cell immunoglobulin and ITIM domain) antibody vibostolimab as monotherapy or in combination with pembrolizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Part A enrolled patients with advanced solid tumors, and part B enrolled patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients received vibostolimab 2.1-700 mg alone or with pembrolizumab 200 mg in part A and vibostolimab 200 mg alone or with pembrolizumab 200 mg in part B. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability. Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetics and objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: Part A enrolled 76 patients (monotherapy, 34; combination therapy, 42). No dose-limiting toxicities were reported. Across doses, 56% of patients receiving monotherapy and 62% receiving combination therapy had treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs); grade 3-4 TRAEs occurred in 9% and 17% of patients, respectively. The most common TRAEs were fatigue (15%) and pruritus (15%) with monotherapy and pruritus (17%) and rash (14%) with combination therapy. Confirmed ORR was 0% with monotherapy and 7% with combination therapy. In part B, 39 patients had anti-PD-1 (programmed cell death protein 1)/PD-L1 (programmed death-ligand 1)-naive NSCLC (all received combination therapy), and 67 had anti-PD-1/PD-L1-refractory NSCLC (monotherapy, 34; combination therapy, 33). In patients with anti-PD-1/PD-L1-naive NSCLC: 85% had TRAEs-the most common were pruritus (38%) and hypoalbuminemia (31%); confirmed ORR was 26%, with responses occurring in both PD-L1-positive and PD-L1-negative tumors. In patients with anti-PD-1/PD-L1-refractory NSCLC: 56% receiving monotherapy and 70% receiving combination therapy had TRAEs-the most common were rash and fatigue (21% each) with monotherapy and pruritus (36%) and fatigue (24%) with combination therapy; confirmed ORR was 3% with monotherapy and 3% with combination therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Vibostolimab plus pembrolizumab was well tolerated and demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with advanced solid tumors, including patients with advanced NSCLC.

Results of a single-arm pilot study of 32P microparticles in unresectable locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel or FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) is generally managed with chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, but prognosis is poor with a median survival of ∼13 months (or up to 19 months in some studies). We assessed a novel brachytherapy device, using phosphorous-32 (32P) microparticles, combined with standard-of-care chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this international, multicentre, single-arm, open-label pilot study, adult patients with histologically or cytologically proven unresectable LAPC received 32P microparticles, via endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle implantation, planned for week 4 of 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy, per investigator's choice. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability measured using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. The lead efficacy endpoint was local disease control rate at 16 weeks. RESULTS: Fifty patients were enrolled and received chemotherapy [intention-to-treat (ITT) population]. Forty-two patients received 32P microparticle implantation [per protocol (PP) population]. A total of 1102 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in the ITT/safety population (956 PP), of which 167 (139 PP) were grade ≥3. In the PP population, 41 TEAEs in 16 (38.1%) patients were possibly or probably related to 32P microparticles or implantation procedure, including 8 grade ≥3 in 3 (7.1%) patients, compared with 609 TEAEs in 42 (100%) patients attributed to chemotherapy, including 67 grade ≥3 in 28 patients (66.7%). The local disease control rate at 16 weeks was 82.0% (95% confidence interval: 68.6% to 90.9%) (ITT) and 90.5% (95% confidence interval: 77.4% to 97.3%) (PP). Tumour volume, carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels, and metabolic tumour response at week 12 improved significantly. Ten patients (20.0% ITT; 23.8% PP) had surgical resection and median overall survival was 15.2 and 15.5 months for ITT and PP populations, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided 32P microparticle implantation has an acceptable safety profile. This study also suggests clinically relevant benefits of combining 32P microparticles with standard-of-care systemic chemotherapy for patients with unresectable LAPC.

Safety and efficacy of quavonlimab, a novel anti-CTLA-4 antibody (MK-1308), in combination with pembrolizumab in first-line advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Quavonlimab (MK-1308), a novel anti-CTLA-4 antibody, in combination with pembrolizumab was investigated in a phase I study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Dose-escalation (DE) phase: patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors received an initial flat dose of quavonlimab as monotherapy [25 mg (cohort 1), 75 mg (cohort 2), or 200 mg (cohort 3)] followed by four treatments of the same quavonlimab dose plus pembrolizumab every 3 weeks (Q3W). Dose-confirmation phase (DC): patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) received first-line quavonlimab [25 mg Q3W (arm A), 25 mg Q6W (arm B), 75 mg Q6W (arm C), or 75 mg Q3W (arm E)] plus pembrolizumab. Primary objectives were safety and tolerability and establishment of the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of quavonlimab when used with pembrolizumab. Objective response rate (ORR) was a secondary endpoint. Efficacy based on PD-L1 expression, tumor mutational burden (TMB), and changes in circulating CD4+/CD8+ cells were exploratory endpoints. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were enrolled in DE [n = 14 (cohort 1); n = 17 (cohort 2); n = 8 (cohort 3)] and 134 in DC [n = 40 (arm A); n = 40 (arm B); n = 40 (arm C); n = 14 (arm E)]. Maximum-tolerated dose was not reached. Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events (AEs; graded according to NCI CTCAE v4.03) occurred in 0%, 23.5%, and 75.0% of patients in DE cohorts 1, 2, and 3, respectively, and 35.0%, 30.0%, 35.0%, and 57.1% of patients in DC arms A, B, C, and E, respectively. Efficacy was observed at all dose levels/schedules in patients with NSCLC. ORRs were 40.0% [95% confidence interval (CI), 24.9-56.7; arm A], 37.5% (95% CI, 22.7-54.2; arm B), 27.5% (95% CI, 14.6-43.9; arm C), and 35.7% (95% CI, 12.8-64.9; arm E). PD-L1 expression and total number of circulating CD4+ cells correlated with ORR. CONCLUSIONS: Quavonlimab 25 mg Q6W plus pembrolizumab demonstrated similar efficacy and a better safety profile among all quavonlimab doses/schedules evaluated; this regimen was the chosen RP2D.

Circulating tumor DNA as a potential marker of adjuvant chemotherapy benefit following surgery for localized pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: In early-stage pancreatic cancer, there are currently no biomarkers to guide selection of therapeutic options. This prospective biomarker trial evaluated the feasibility and potential clinical utility of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis to inform adjuvant therapy decision making. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients considered by the multidisciplinary team to have resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma were enrolled. Pre- and post-operative samples for ctDNA analysis were collected. PCR-based-SafeSeqS assays were used to identify mutations at codon 12, 13 and 61 of KRAS in the primary pancreatic tumor and to detect ctDNA. Results of ctDNA analysis were correlated with CA19-9, recurrence-free and overall survival (OS). Patient management was per standard of care, blinded to ctDNA data. RESULTS: Of 112 patients consented pre-operatively, 81 (72%) underwent resection. KRAS mutations were identified in 91% (38/42) of available tumor samples. Of available plasma samples (N = 42), KRAS mutated ctDNA was detected in 62% (23/37) pre-operative and 37% (13/35) post-operative cases. At a median follow-up of 38.4 months, ctDNA detection in the pre-operative setting was associated with inferior recurrence-free survival (RFS) [hazard ratio (HR) 4.1; P = 0.002)] and OS (HR 4.1; P = 0.015). Detectable ctDNA following curative intent resection was associated with inferior RFS (HR 5.4; P < 0.0001) and OS (HR 4.0; P = 0.003). Recurrence occurred in 13/13 (100%) patients with detectable ctDNA post-operatively, including in seven that received gemcitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: ctDNA studies in localized pancreatic cancer are challenging, with a substantial number of patients not able to undergo resection, not having sufficient tumor tissue for analysis or not completing per protocol sample collection. ctDNA analysis, pre- and/or post-surgery, is a promising prognostic marker. Studies of ctDNA guided therapy are justified, including of treatment intensification strategies for patients with detectable ctDNA post-operatively who appear at very high risk of recurrence despite gemcitabine-based adjuvant therapy.

Adjuvant chemotherapy in elderly patients with pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival for patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Elderly patients are under-represented in Phase III clinical trials, and as a consequence the efficacy of adjuvant therapy in older patients with pancreatic cancer is not clear. We aimed to assess the use and efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in older patients with pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We assessed a community cohort of 439 patients with a diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent operative resection in centres associated with the Australian Pancreatic Cancer Genome Initiative. RESULTS: The median age of the cohort was 67 years. Overall only 47% of all patients received adjuvant therapy. Patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy were predominantly younger, had later stage disease, more lymph node involvement and more evidence of perineural invasion than the group that did not receive adjuvant treatment. Overall, adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with prolonged survival (median 22.1 vs 15.8 months; P<0.0001). Older patients (aged ≥70) were less likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy (51.5% vs 29.8%; P<0.0001). Older patients had a particularly poor outcome when adjuvant therapy was not delivered (median survival=13.1 months; HR 1.89, 95% CI: 1.27-2.78, P=0.002). CONCLUSION: Patients aged ≥70 are less likely to receive adjuvant therapy although it is associated with improved outcome. Increased use of adjuvant therapy in older individuals is encouraged as they constitute a large proportion of patients with pancreatic cancer.

The prognostic and predictive value of serum CA19.9 in pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Current staging methods for pancreatic cancer (PC) are inadequate, and biomarkers to aid clinical decision making are lacking. Despite the availability of the serum marker carbohydrate antigen 19.9 (CA19.9) for over two decades, its precise role in the management of PC is yet to be defined, and as a consequence, it is not widely used. METHODS: We assessed the relationship between perioperative serum CA19.9 levels, survival and adjuvant chemotherapeutic responsiveness in a cohort of 260 patients who underwent operative resection for PC. RESULTS: By specifically assessing the subgroup of patients with detectable CA19.9, we identified potential utility at key clinical decision points. Low postoperative CA19.9 at 3 months (median survival 25.6 vs 14.8 months, P=0.0052) and before adjuvant chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors. Patients with postoperative CA 19.9 levels>90 U/ml did not benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy (P=0.7194) compared with those with a CA19.9 of ≤90 U/ml (median 26.0 vs 16.7 months, P=0.0108). Normalization of CA19.9 within 6 months of resection was also an independent favorable prognostic factor (median 29.9 vs 14.8 months, P=0.0004) and normal perioperative CA19.9 levels identified a good prognostic group, which was associated with a 5-year survival of 42%. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative serum CA19.9 measurements are informative in patients with detectable CA19.9 (defined by serum levels of >5 U/ml) and have potential clinical utility in predicting outcome and response to adjuvant chemotherapy. Future clinical trials should prioritize incorporation of CA19.9 measurement at key decision points to prospectively validate these findings and facilitate implementation.