Individualised neoantigen therapy mRNA-4157 (V940) plus pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab monotherapy in resected melanoma (KEYNOTE-942): a randomised, phase 2b study.

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.

A Phase II Trial of the CD40 Agonistic Antibody Sotigalimab (APX005M) in Combination with Nivolumab in Subjects with Metastatic Melanoma with Confirmed Disease Progression on Anti-PD-1 Therapy.

PURPOSE: Disease progression during or after anti-PD-1-based treatment is common in advanced melanoma. Sotigalimab is a CD40 agonist antibody with a unique epitope specificity and Fc receptor binding profile optimized for activation of CD40-expressing antigen-presenting cells. Preclinical data indicated that CD40 agonists combined with anti-PD1 could overcome resistance to anti-PD-1. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, open-label, phase II trial to evaluate the combination of sotigalimab 0.3 mg/kg and nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks in patients with advanced melanoma following confirmed disease progression on a PD-1 inhibitor. The primary objective was to determine the objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Thirty-eight subjects were enrolled and evaluable for safety. Thirty-three were evaluable for activity. Five confirmed partial responses (PR) were observed for an ORR of 15%. Two PRs are ongoing at 45.9+ and 26+ months, whereas the other three responders relapsed at 41.1, 18.7, and 18.4 months. The median duration of response was at least 26 months. Two additional patients had stable disease for >6 months. Thirty-four patients (89%) experienced at least one adverse event (AE), and 13% experienced a grade 3 AE related to sotigalimab. The most common AEs were pyrexia, chills, nausea, fatigue, pruritus, elevated liver function, rash, vomiting, headache, arthralgia, asthenia, myalgia, and diarrhea. There were no treatment-related SAEs, deaths, or discontinuation of sotigalimab due to AEs. CONCLUSIONS: Sotigalimab plus nivolumab had a favorable safety profile consistent with the toxicity profiles of each agent. The combination resulted in durable and prolonged responses in a subset of patients with anti-PD-1-resistant melanoma, warranting further evaluation in this setting. See related commentary by Wu and Luke, p. 9.

TATDN2 resolution of R-loops is required for survival of BRCA1-mutant cancer cells.

BRCA1-deficient cells have increased IRE1 RNase, which degrades multiple microRNAs. Reconstituting expression of one of these, miR-4638-5p, resulted in synthetic lethality in BRCA1-deficient cancer cells. We found that miR-4638-5p represses expression of TATDN2, a poorly characterized member of the TATD nuclease family. We discovered that human TATDN2 has RNA 3' exonuclease and endonuclease activity on double-stranded hairpin RNA structures. Given the cleavage of hairpin RNA by TATDN2, and that BRCA1-deficient cells have difficulty resolving R-loops, we tested whether TATDN2 could resolve R-loops. Using in vitro biochemical reconstitution assays, we found TATDN2 bound to R-loops and degraded the RNA strand but not DNA of multiple forms of R-loops in vitro in a Mg2+-dependent manner. Mutations in amino acids E593 and E705 predicted by Alphafold-2 to chelate an essential Mg2+ cation completely abrogated this R-loop resolution activity. Depleting TATDN2 increased cellular R-loops, DNA damage and chromosomal instability. Loss of TATDN2 resulted in poor replication fork progression in the presence of increased R-loops. Significantly, we found that TATDN2 is essential for survival of BRCA1-deficient cancer cells, but much less so for cognate BRCA1-repleted cancer cells. Thus, we propose that TATDN2 is a novel target for therapy of BRCA1-deficient cancers.

Prospective, randomized, double-blind phase 2B trial of the TLPO and TLPLDC vaccines to prevent recurrence of resected stage III/IV melanoma: a prespecified 36-month analysis.

BACKGROUND: The tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cell (TLPLDC) vaccine is made by ex vivo priming matured autologous dendritic cells (DCs) with yeast cell wall particles (YCWPs) loaded with autologous tumor lysate (TL). The tumor lysate, particle only (TLPO) vaccine uses autologous TL-loaded YCWPs coated with silicate for in vivo DC loading. Here we report the 36-month prespecified analyses of this prospective, randomized, double-blind trial investigating the ability of the TLPO and TLPLDC (±granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF)) vaccines to prevent melanoma recurrence in high-risk patients. METHODS: Patients with clinically disease-free stage III/IV melanoma were randomized 2:1 initially to TLPLDC versus placebo (n=124) and subsequently TLPO versus TLPLDC (n=63). All patients were randomized and blinded; however, the placebo control arm was replaced in the second randomization scheme with another novel vaccine; some analyses in this paper therefore reflect a combination of the two randomization schemes. Patients receiving the TLPLDC vaccine were further divided by their method of DC harvest (with or without G-CSF pretreatment); this was not randomized. The use of standard of care checkpoint inhibitors was not stratified between groups. Safety was assessed and Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analyses compared disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: After combining the two randomization processes, a total of 187 patients were allocated between treatment arms: placebo (n=41), TLPLDC (n=103), or TLPO (n=43). The allocation among arms created by the addition of patients from the two separate randomization schemes does not reflect concurrent randomization among all treatment arms. TLPLDC was further divided by use of G-CSF in DC harvest: no G-CSF (TLPLDC) (n=47) and with G-CSF (TLPLDC+G) (n=56). Median follow-up was 35.8 months. Only two patients experienced a related adverse event ≥grade 3, one each in the TLPLDC+G and placebo arms. DFS was 27.2% (placebo), 55.4% (TLPLDC), 22.9% (TLPLDC+G), and 60.9% (TLPO) (p<0.001). OS was 62.5% (placebo), 93.6% (TLPLDC), 57.7% (TLPLDC+G), and 94.6% (TLPO) (p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The TLPO and TLPLDC (without G-CSF) vaccines were associated with improved DFS and OS in this clinical trial. Given production and manufacturing advantages, the efficacy of the TLPO vaccine will be confirmed in a phase 3 trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02301611.

Neoadjuvant-Adjuvant or Adjuvant-Only Pembrolizumab in Advanced Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Whether pembrolizumab given both before surgery (neoadjuvant therapy) and after surgery (adjuvant therapy), as compared with pembrolizumab given as adjuvant therapy alone, would increase event-free survival among patients with resectable stage III or IV melanoma is unknown. METHODS: In a phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned patients with clinically detectable, measurable stage IIIB to IVC melanoma that was amenable to surgical resection to three doses of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab, surgery, and 15 doses of adjuvant pembrolizumab (neoadjuvant-adjuvant group) or to surgery followed by pembrolizumab (200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for a total of 18 doses) for approximately 1 year or until disease recurred or unacceptable toxic effects developed (adjuvant-only group). The primary end point was event-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Events were defined as disease progression or toxic effects that precluded surgery; the inability to resect all gross disease; disease progression, surgical complications, or toxic effects of treatment that precluded the initiation of adjuvant therapy within 84 days after surgery; recurrence of melanoma after surgery; or death from any cause. Safety was also evaluated. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 14.7 months, the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group (154 patients) had significantly longer event-free survival than the adjuvant-only group (159 patients) (P = 0.004 by the log-rank test). In a landmark analysis, event-free survival at 2 years was 72% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64 to 80) in the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group and 49% (95% CI, 41 to 59) in the adjuvant-only group. The percentage of patients with treatment-related adverse events of grades 3 or higher during therapy was 12% in the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group and 14% in the adjuvant-only group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with resectable stage III or IV melanoma, event-free survival was significantly longer among those who received pembrolizumab both before and after surgery than among those who received adjuvant pembrolizumab alone. No new toxic effects were identified. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and Merck Sharp and Dohme; S1801 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03698019.).

Divergent clinical outcomes in a phase 2B trial of the TLPLDC vaccine in preventing melanoma recurrence and the impact of dendritic cell collection methodology: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2b trial of the tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cell (TLPLDC) vaccine was conducted in patients with resected stage III/IV melanoma. Dendritic cells (DCs) were harvested with and without granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF). This analysis investigates differences in clinical outcomes and RNA gene expression between DC harvest methods. METHODS: The TLPLDC vaccine is created by loading autologous tumor lysate into yeast cell wall particles (YCWPs) and exposing them to phagocytosis by DCs. For DC harvest, patients had a direct blood draw or were pretreated with G-CSF before blood draw. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive TLPLDC or placebo. Differences in disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. RNA-seq analysis was performed on the total RNA of TLPLDC + G and TLPLDC vaccines to compare gene expression between groups. RESULTS: 144 patients were randomized: 103 TLPLDC (47 TLPLDC/56 TLPLDC + G) and 41 placebo (19 placebo/22 placebo + G). Median follow-up was 27.0 months. Both 36-month DFS (55.8% vs. 24.4% vs. 30.0%, p = 0.010) and OS (94.2% vs. 69.8% vs. 70.9%, p = 0.024) were improved in TLPLDC compared to TLPLDC + G or placebo, respectively. When compared to TLPLDC + G vaccine, RNA-seq from TLPLDC vaccine showed upregulation of genes associated with DC maturation and downregulation of genes associated with DC suppression or immaturity. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving TLPLDC vaccine without G-CSF had improved OS and DFS. Outcomes remained similar between patients receiving TLPLDC + G and placebo. Direct DC harvest without G-CSF had higher expression of genes linked to DC maturation, likely improving clinical efficacy.

Genomic landscape of lymphatic malformations: a case series and response to the PI3Kα inhibitor alpelisib in an N-of-1 clinical trial.

Background: Lymphatic malformations (LMs) often pose treatment challenges due to a large size or a critical location that could lead to disfigurement, and there are no standardized treatment approaches for either refractory or unresectable cases. Methods: We examined the genomic landscape of a patient cohort of LMs (n = 30 cases) that underwent comprehensive genomic profiling using a large-panel next-generation sequencing assay. Immunohistochemical analyses were completed in parallel. Results: These LMs had low mutational burden with hotspot PIK3CA mutations (n = 20) and NRAS (n = 5) mutations being most frequent, and mutually exclusive. All LM cases with Kaposi sarcoma-like (kaposiform) histology had NRAS mutations. One index patient presented with subacute abdominal pain and was diagnosed with a large retroperitoneal LM harboring a somatic PIK3CA gain-of-function mutation (H1047R). The patient achieved a rapid and durable radiologic complete response, as defined in RECIST1.1, to the PI3Kα inhibitor alpelisib within the context of a personalized N-of-1 clinical trial (NCT03941782). In translational correlative studies, canonical PI3Kα pathway activation was confirmed by immunohistochemistry and human LM-derived lymphatic endothelial cells carrying an allele with an activating mutation at the same locus were sensitive to alpelisib treatment in vitro, which was demonstrated by a concentration-dependent drop in measurable impedance, an assessment of cell status. Conclusions: Our findings establish that LM patients with conventional or kaposiform histology have distinct, yet targetable, driver mutations. Funding: R.P. and W.A. are supported by awards from the Levy-Longenbaugh Fund. S.G. is supported by awards from the Hugs for Brady Foundation. This work has been funded in part by the NCI Cancer Center Support Grants (CCSG; P30) to the University of Arizona Cancer Center (CA023074), the University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center (CA118100), and the Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey (CA072720). B.K.M. was supported by National Science Foundation via Graduate Research Fellowship DGE-1143953. Clinical trial number: NCT03941782.

Telaglenastat plus Everolimus in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled, Phase II ENTRATA Trial.

PURPOSE: Glutaminase is a key enzyme, which supports elevated dependency of tumors on glutamine-dependent biosynthesis of metabolic intermediates. Dual targeting of glucose and glutamine metabolism by the mTOR inhibitor everolimus plus the oral glutaminase inhibitor telaglenastat showed preclinical synergistic anticancer effects, which translated to encouraging safety and efficacy findings in a phase I trial of 2L+ renal cell carcinoma (RCC). This study evaluated telaglenastat plus everolimus (TelaE) versus placebo plus everolimus (PboE) in patients with advanced/metastatic RCC (mRCC) in the 3L+ setting (NCT03163667). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients with mRCC, previously treated with at least two prior lines of therapy [including ≥1 VEGFR-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)] were randomized 2:1 to receive E, plus Tela or Pbo, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; one-sided α <0.2). RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients were randomized (46 TelaE, 23 PboE). Patients had a median three prior lines of therapy, including TKIs (100%) and checkpoint inhibitors (88%). At median follow-up of 7.5 months, median PFS was 3.8 months for TelaE versus 1.9 months for PboE [HR, 0.64; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34-1.20; one-sided P = 0.079]. One TelaE patient had a partial response and 26 had stable disease (SD). Eleven patients on PboE had SD. Treatment-emergent adverse events included fatigue, anemia, cough, dyspnea, elevated serum creatinine, and diarrhea; grade 3 to 4 events occurred in 74% TelaE patients versus 61% PboE. CONCLUSIONS: TelaE was well tolerated and improved PFS versus PboE in patients with mRCC previously treated with TKIs and checkpoint inhibitors.

Multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of seviprotimut-L polyvalent melanoma vaccine in patients with post-resection melanoma at high risk of recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with advanced melanomas relapse after checkpoint blockade therapy. Thus, immunotherapies are needed that can be applied safely early, in the adjuvant setting. Seviprotimut-L is a vaccine containing human melanoma antigens, plus alum. To assess the efficacy of seviprotimut-L, the Melanoma Antigen Vaccine Immunotherapy Study (MAVIS) was initiated as a three-part multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial. Results from part B1 are reported here. METHODS: Patients with AJCC V.7 stage IIB-III cutaneous melanoma after resection were randomized 2:1, with stage stratification (IIB/C, IIIA, IIIB/C), to seviprotimut-L 40 mcg or placebo. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was the primary endpoint. For an hypothesized HR of 0.625, one-sided alpha of 0.10, and power 80%, target enrollment was 325 patients. RESULTS: For randomized patients (n=347), arms were well-balanced, and treatment-emergent adverse events were similar for seviprotimut-L and placebo. For the primary intent-to-treat endpoint of RFS, the estimated HR was 0.881 (95% CI: 0.629 to 1.233), with stratified logrank p=0.46. However, estimated HRs were not uniform over the stage randomized strata, with HRs (95% CIs) for stages IIB/IIC, IIIA, IIIB/IIIC of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.37 to 1.19), 0.72 (95% CI: 0.35 to 1.50), and 1.19 (95% CI: 0.72 to 1.97), respectively. In the stage IIB/IIC stratum, the effect on RFS was greatest for patients <60 years old (HR=0.324 (95% CI: 0.121 to 0.864)) and those with ulcerated primary melanomas (HR=0.493 (95% CI: 0.255 to 0.952)). CONCLUSIONS: Seviprotimut-L is very well tolerated. Exploratory efficacy model estimation supports further study in stage IIB/IIC patients, especially younger patients and those with ulcerated melanomas. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01546571.

Safety and efficacy of autologous tumor lysate particle-loaded dendritic cell vaccination in combination with systemic therapies in patients with recurrent and metastatic melanoma.

Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of melanoma, yet survival remains poor for patients with metastatic disease. The autologous tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cell (TLPLDC) vaccine has been shown to be safe adjuvant therapy for patients with resected stage III/IV melanoma who complete the primary vaccine series. Here, we describe an open-label trial of patients with metastatic melanoma treated with TLPLDC vaccine in addition to standard of care (SoC) therapies. The TLPLDC vaccine is created by loading autologous tumor lysate into yeast cell wall particles, which are phagocytosed by autologous dendritic cells ex vivo. Patients who recurred while enrolled in a phase IIb trial of adjuvant TLPLDC vaccine (crossover cohort) and patients with measurable metastatic melanoma cohort were offered TLPLDC vaccine along with SoC therapies. Tumor response was measured by RECIST 1.1 criteria. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated by intention-to-treat analysis. Fifty-four patients were enrolled (28 in crossover cohort; 26 in metastatic melanoma cohort). The vaccine was well-tolerated with no grade ≥3 adverse events when given with SoC therapies to include checkpoint inhibitors, BRAF/MEK inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, intralesional therapy and/or radiation. In the crossover arm, OS was 76.5% and PFS was 57.1% (median follow-up of 13.9 months). In the metastatic melanoma arm, OS was 85.7% and PFS was 52.2% (median follow-up 8.5 months). The TLPLDC vaccine is well-tolerated and safe in combination with SoC therapies. Future trials will determine the efficacy of TLPLDC in combination with SoC therapies in metastatic melanoma.

Phase II trial of the IDO pathway inhibitor indoximod plus pembrolizumab for the treatment of patients with advanced melanoma.

BACKGROUND: The indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) pathway is a key counter-regulatory mechanism that, in cancer, is exploited by tumors to evade antitumor immunity. Indoximod is a small-molecule IDO pathway inhibitor that reverses the immunosuppressive effects of low tryptophan (Trp) and high kynurenine (Kyn) that result from IDO activity. In this study, indoximod was used in combination with a checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) pembrolizumab for the treatment for advanced melanoma. METHODS: Patients with advanced melanoma were enrolled in a single-arm phase II clinical trial evaluating the addition of indoximod to standard of care CPI approved for melanoma. Investigators administered their choice of CPI including pembrolizumab (P), nivolumab (N), or ipilimumab (I). Indoximod was administered continuously (1200 mg orally two times per day), with concurrent CPI dosed per US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved label. RESULTS: Between July 2014 and July 2017, 131 patients were enrolled. (P) was used more frequently (n=114, 87%) per investigator's choice. The efficacy evaluable population consisted of 89 patients from the phase II cohort with non-ocular melanoma who received indoximod combined with (P).The objective response rate (ORR) for the evaluable population was 51% with confirmed complete response of 20% and disease control rate of 70%. Median progression-free survival was 12.4 months (95% CI 6.4 to 24.9). The ORR for Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive patients was 70% compared with 46% for PD-L1-negative patients. The combination was well tolerated, and side effects were similar to what was expected from single agent (P). CONCLUSION: In this study, the combination of indoximod and (P) was well tolerated and showed antitumor efficacy that is worth further evaluation in selected patients with advanced melanoma.

Multi-institutional, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IIb trial of the tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cell (TLPLDC) vaccine to prevent recurrence in high-risk melanoma patients: A subgroup analysis.

BACKGROUND: Checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) in combination with cell-based vaccines may produce synergistic antitumor immunity. The primary analysis of the randomized and blinded phase IIb trial in resected stage III/IV melanoma demonstrated TLPLDC is safe and improved 24-month disease-free survival (DFS) in the per treatment (PT) analysis. Here, we examine efficacy within pre-specified and exploratory subgroups. METHODS: Stage III/IV patients rendered disease-free by surgery were randomized 2:1 to TLPLDC vaccine versus placebo. The pre-specified PT analysis included only patients completing the primary vaccine/placebo series at 6 months. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare 24-month DFS among subgroups. RESULTS: There were no clinicopathologic differences between subgroups except stage IV patients were more likely to receive CPI. In stage IV patients, 24-month DFS was 43% for vaccine versus 0% for placebo (p = 0.098) in the ITT analysis and 73% versus 0% (p = 0.002) in the PT analysis. There was no significant difference in 24-month DFS when stratified by use of immunotherapy or CPI. For patients with resected recurrent disease, 24-month DFS was 88.9% versus 33.3% (p = 0.013) in the PT analysis. All benefit from vaccination was in the PT analysis; no benefit was found in patients receiving up to three doses. CONCLUSION: The TLPLDC vaccine improved DFS in patients completing the primary vaccine series, particularly in the resected stage IV patients. The efficacy of the TLPLDC vaccine will be confirmed in a phase III study evaluating adjuvant TLPLDC + CPI versus Placebo + CPI in resected stage IV melanoma patients.

Tilsotolimod with Ipilimumab Drives Tumor Responses in Anti-PD-1 Refractory Melanoma.

Many patients with advanced melanoma are resistant to immune checkpoint inhibition. In the ILLUMINATE-204 phase I/II trial, we assessed intratumoral tilsotolimod, an investigational Toll-like receptor 9 agonist, with systemic ipilimumab in patients with anti-PD-1- resistant advanced melanoma. In all patients, 48.4% experienced grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events. The overall response rate at the recommended phase II dose of 8 mg was 22.4%, and an additional 49% of patients had stable disease. Responses in noninjected lesions and in patients expected to be resistant to ipilimumab monotherapy were observed. Rapid induction of a local IFNα gene signature, dendritic cell maturation and enhanced markers of antigen presentation, and T-cell clonal expansion correlated with clinical response. A phase III clinical trial with this combination (NCT03445533) is ongoing. SIGNIFICANCE: Despite recent developments in advanced melanoma therapies, most patients do not experience durable responses. Intratumoral tilsotolimod injection elicits a rapid, local type 1 IFN response and, in combination with ipilimumab, activates T cells to promote clinical activity, including in distant lesions and patients not expected to respond to ipilimumab alone.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1861.

A phase 1, first-in-human study of AMG 900, an orally administered pan-Aurora kinase inhibitor, in adult patients with advanced solid tumors.

Background Aurora kinase overexpression or amplifications are associated with high proliferation, poor prognosis, and therapeutic resistance in human tumors. AMG 900 is an investigational, oral, selective pan-Aurora kinase inhibitor. Methods This first-in-human trial included dose-escalation and dose-expansion phases ( ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT00858377). Dose escalation evaluated the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of AMG 900 in advanced solid tumors and determined the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) with/without granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) prophylaxis. Dose expansion evaluated clinical activity in three tumor types: taxane- and platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, taxane-resistant triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), and castration-resistant and taxane- or cisplatin/etoposide-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). AMG 900 was administered 4 days on/10 days off at 1-50 mg/day during escalation and at the MTD with G-CSF during expansion. Results AMG 900 showed rapid absorption with fast clearance, supporting once-daily dosing. The MTD was 25 mg/day, increasing to 40 mg/day with G-CSF. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events included neutropenia (37%), anemia (23%), leukopenia (14%), and thrombocytopenia (12%). During dose expansion, 3/29 (10.3%, 95% CI: 2.0%-28.0%) evaluable patients with ovarian cancer experienced partial response by central imaging per RECIST 1.1; median duration of response was 24.1 weeks (95% CI: 16.1-34.1). Seven patients (24.1%, 95% CI: 10.3%-43.5%) experienced partial response per Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup criteria; 5/9 patients positive for p53 expression responded to treatment. No objective responses were observed in patients with TNBC or CRPC per RECIST 1.1. Conclusions AMG 900 40 mg/day with G-CSF had manageable toxicity and demonstrated single-agent activity in patients with heavily pretreated, chemotherapy-resistant ovarian cancer.

LANREOTIDE THERAPY IN CARCINOID SYNDROME: PROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS OF PATIENT-REPORTED SYMPTOMS IN PATIENTS RESPONSIVE TO PRIOR OCTREOTIDE THERAPY AND PATIENTS NAÏVE TO SOMATOSTATIN ANALOGUE THERAPY IN THE ELECT PHASE 3 STUDY.

OBJECTIVE: This ELECT prospective analysis examined lanreotide depot/autogel for carcinoid syndrome (CS) symptom control in patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) who were responsive to prior octreotide (prior octreotide group) compared with patients who were naïve to prior somatostatin analogue treatment (de novo group). METHODS: Adults with histopathologically confirmed NET and stable CS (diarrhea and/or flushing) were randomized to subcutaneous (SC) lanreotide 120 mg or placebo every 4 weeks for 16 weeks. Patients reported diarrhea and/or flushing symptom severity and frequency and short-acting SC octreotide rescue therapy daily using an Interactive Voice/Web Response System. To evaluate the efficacy of lanreotide compared with placebo, the novel primary endpoint of patient-determined use of SC octreotide rescue therapy for breakthrough symptoms was used as a surrogate for symptom control. Clinically meaningful patient-reported treatment benefit was examined using daily patient-reported symptoms of diarrhea and flushing. RESULTS: Of the 115 randomized patients, 51 (n = 26 lanreotide, n = 25 placebo) were octreotide-naïve (de novo) and 64 (n = 33 lanreotide; n = 31 placebo) received prior octreotide. Lanreotide versus placebo patients had a lower mean percentage of days of SC octreotide rescue therapy in de novo and prior octreotide groups (least squares [LS] mean difference -19.1, P = .0477 and -6.9, P = .4332, respectively). The mean percentage of days with moderate/severe diarrhea and/or flushing was lower in lanreotide versus placebo patients in de novo and prior octreotide groups (LS mean difference -14.6, P = .0140 and -10.9, P = .0746, respectively). The transition from octreotide to lanreotide was generally well-tolerated. CONCLUSION: Improvement in CS symptoms occurred with lanreotide treatment, regardless of prior octreotide use. ABBREVIATIONS: CI = confidence interval CS = carcinoid syndrome DB = double blind ELECT = Evaluation of Lanreotide depot/autogel Efficacy and safety as a Carcinoid-syndrome Treatment IOL = initial open-label IVRS/IWRS = interactive voice/web response system LS = least square NET = neuroendocrine tumor OR = odds ratio SC = subcutaneous SSA = somatostatin analogue SSTR = somatostatin receptor TEAE = treatment-emergent adverse event.

Patient-Reported Symptom Control of Diarrhea and Flushing in Patients with Neuroendocrine Tumors Treated with Lanreotide Depot/Autogel: Results from a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind and 32-Week Open-Label Study.

BACKGROUND: In the double-blind (DB) ELECT study, lanreotide depot/autogel significantly reduced versus placebo the need for short-acting octreotide for symptomatic carcinoid syndrome (CS) control in neuroendocrine tumor (NET) patients. Here we present patient-reported symptom data during DB and initial open-label (IOL) treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adults with NETs and CS history, with/without prior somatostatin analog use, were randomized to 16 weeks' DB lanreotide 120 mg subcutaneous or placebo every 4 weeks, followed by 32 weeks' IOL lanreotide. Patients recorded diarrhea and/or flushing frequency and severity daily by Interactive Voice (Web) Response System for 1 month prior to randomization and throughout the study. RESULTS: Of 115 patients randomized (n = 59 lanreotide, n = 56 placebo), 56 lanreotide and 45 placebo patients enrolled in the IOL phase. During DB treatment, least square (LS) mean percentages of days with moderate/severe diarrhea and/or flushing were significantly lower for lanreotide (23.4%) versus placebo (35.8%; LS mean difference [95% confidence interval]: -12.4 [-20.73 to -4.07]; p = .004). For DB lanreotide patients, average daily composite (frequency × severity) diarrhea scores improved significantly between DB and IOL treatment (mean difference: -0.71 [-1.20 to -0.22]; p = .005), and remained stable for diarrhea and/or flushing. For DB placebo patients, composite scores for diarrhea, flushing, and diarrhea and/or flushing improved significantly between DB and IOL treatment (mean differences: -1.07 [-1.65 to -0.49]; -1.06 [-1.93 to -0.19]; and -2.13 [-3.35 to -0.91]; all p ≤ .018). CONCLUSION: Improved diarrhea and flushing control in CS patients during 16-week lanreotide treatment was sustained during maintenance of lanreotide treatment for the 32-week IOL phase (48 weeks total). IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study prospectively collected daily patient-reported data on diarrhea and flushing from the ELECT trial to evaluate the direct impact of lanreotide depot on patients' relief of carcinoid syndrome symptoms. Treatment with lanreotide depot was associated with significant reductions in the percentages of days patients reported symptoms of diarrhea and flushing, as well as reductions in the frequency and severity of daily symptoms compared with placebo during 16 weeks of double-blind treatment. These improvements were sustained for 32 additional weeks of open-label lanreotide treatment (i.e., through week 48 of treatment), resulting in clinically meaningful, long-term symptom reduction.

Tumor microenvironment changes leading to resistance of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic melanoma and strategies to overcome resistance.

Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors targeting CTLA-4 and/or PD-1 receptors independent of the BRAF mutational status and targeted therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors in BRAF V600 mutated patients have taken the forefront of advanced melanoma treatment. The main advantage of immunotherapy is its ability to provide durable responses in a subset of patients. However, significant proportions of patients either do not respond or have progression after initial response to immunotherapies. Multiple changes in the tumor microenvironment, such as down regulation of immune checkpoint ligands by tumor, alteration in interferon signaling, and activation of alternate immune suppressive pathways, have been identified as possible reasons for failure of immune checkpoint therapy. Here, we review the resistance mechanisms adopted by cancer cells to checkpoint inhibitor therapy and targeted therapy. In addition, we focus on the available and emerging evidence on tumor microenvironment modulation by BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy and its role in improving responses to checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

Endocrine-related adverse events associated with immune checkpoint blockade and expert insights on their management.

Agents that modulate immune checkpoint proteins, such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) and programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1), have become a mainstay in cancer treatment. The clinical benefit afforded by immune checkpoint inhibitors can be accompanied by immune-related adverse events (irAE) that affect the skin, gastrointestinal tract, liver, and endocrine system. The types of irAEs associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors are generally consistent across tumor types. Immune-related endocrine events can affect the pituitary, thyroid, and adrenal glands, as well as other downstream target organs. These events are unique when compared with other irAEs because the manifestations are often irreversible. Immune-related endocrine events are typically grade 1/2 in severity and often present with non-specific symptoms, making them difficult to diagnose. The mechanisms underlying immune-related target organ damage in select individuals remain mostly undefined. Management includes close patient monitoring, appropriate laboratory testing for endocrine function, replacement of hormones, and consultation with an endocrinologist when appropriate. An awareness of the symptoms and management of immune-related endocrine events may aid in the safe and appropriate use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in clinical practice.

Two Phase 1 dose-escalation studies exploring multiple regimens of litronesib (LY2523355), an Eg5 inhibitor, in patients with advanced cancer.

PURPOSE: This first-in-human report examined the recommended Phase 2 dose and schedule of litronesib, a selective allosteric kinesin Eg5 inhibitor. METHODS: Two concurrent dose-escalation studies investigated litronesib across the dose range of 0.125-16 mg/m2/day, evaluating the following schedules of administration on a 21-day cycle: Days 1, 2, 3; Days 1, 5, 9; Days 1, 8; Days 1, 5; or Days 1, 4, with or without pegfilgrastim. Best overall response was defined per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST Version 1.0). Pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluations were performed. Exploratory PK/pharmacodynamic analyses investigated the relationship between litronesib plasma exposure and changes in phosphohistone H3 (pHH3) levels. RESULTS: One hundred and seventeen patients with advanced malignancies were enrolled. Neutropenia was the primary dose-limiting toxicity. Prophylactic pegfilgrastim reduced neutropenia frequency and severity, allowing administration of higher litronesib doses, but increases in the incidences of mucositis and stomatitis were observed. Among 86 response-evaluable patients, 2 patients (2%) achieved partial response, both on the Days 1, 2, 3 regimen (5 and 6 mg/m2/day with pegfilgrastim), and 17 patients (20%) maintained stable disease for ≥6 cycles. Dose-dependent increases in litronesib plasma exposure were observed, with minor intra- and inter-cycle accumulation, along with exposure-dependent increases in pHH3 expression in tumor and skin biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the results of these studies, two regimens were selected for Phase 2 exploration: 6 mg/m2/day on Days 1, 2, 3 plus pegfilgrastim and 8 mg/m2/day on Days 1, 5, 9 plus pegfilgrastim, both on a 21-day cycle.

Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma: 2-year overall survival outcomes in a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Results from phase 2 and 3 trials in patients with advanced melanoma have shown significant improvements in the proportion of patients achieving an objective response and prolonged progression-free survival with the combination of nivolumab (an anti-PD-1 antibody) plus ipilimumab (an anti-CTLA-4 antibody) compared with ipilimumab alone. We report 2-year overall survival data from a randomised controlled trial assessing this treatment in previously untreated advanced melanoma. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial (CheckMate 069) we recruited patients from 19 specialist cancer centres in two countries (France and the USA). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with previously untreated, unresectable stage III or IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive an intravenous infusion of nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus placebo, every 3 weeks for four doses. Subsequently, patients assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, whereas patients allocated to ipilimumab alone received placebo every 2 weeks during this phase. Randomisation was done via an interactive voice response system with a permuted block schedule (block size of six) and stratification by BRAF mutation status. The study funder, patients, investigators, and study site staff were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint, which has been reported previously, was the proportion of patients with BRAFV600 wild-type melanoma achieving an investigator-assessed objective response. Overall survival was an exploratory endpoint and is reported in this Article. Efficacy analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population, whereas safety was assessed in all treated patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01927419, and is ongoing but no longer enrolling patients. FINDINGS: Between Sept 16, 2013, and Feb 6, 2014, we screened 179 patients and enrolled 142, randomly assigning 95 patients to nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 47 to ipilimumab alone. In each treatment group, one patient no longer met the study criteria following randomisation and thus did not receive study drug. At a median follow-up of 24·5 months (IQR 9·1-25·7), 2-year overall survival was 63·8% (95% CI 53·3-72·6) for those assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 53·6% (95% CI 38·1-66·8) for those assigned to ipilimumab alone; median overall survival had not been reached in either group (hazard ratio 0·74, 95% CI 0·43-1·26; p=0·26). Treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were reported in 51 (54%) of 94 patients who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab compared with nine (20%) of 46 patients who received ipilimumab alone. The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were colitis (12 [13%] of 94 patients) and increased alanine aminotransferase (ten [11%]) in the combination group and diarrhoea (five [11%] of 46 patients) and hypophysitis (two [4%]) in the ipilimumab alone group. Serious grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 34 (36%) of 94 patients who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab (including colitis in ten [11%] of 94 patients, and diarrhoea in five [5%]) compared with four (9%) of 46 patients who received ipilimumab alone (including diarrhoea in two [4%] of 46 patients, colitis in one [2%], and hypophysitis in one [2%]). No new types of treatment-related adverse events or treatment-related deaths occurred in this updated analysis. INTERPRETATION: Although follow-up of the patients in this study is ongoing, the results of this analysis suggest that the combination of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab might lead to improved outcomes compared with first-line ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma. The results suggest encouraging survival outcomes with immunotherapy in this population of patients. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.