Case Report on a Rare Malignancy: Anorectal Melanoma

Introduction: Melanoma of the rectum is an extremely rare disease. The median survival rate is 2-5 years. Current treatment for this aggressive cancer is resection if possible and consider adjuvant or neoadjuvant radiotherapy;immunotherapy in nonresectable cases. Given the rapid spread of disease due to its submucosal growth and metastasis pattern, there is low success rates with treatments. Case Description/Methods: An 84-year-old male presented to the emergency department with an acute COVID-19 infection. The patient was also found to have gram-negative septicemia on blood cultures, so a CT abdomen/pelvis was performed (Figure 1a). The CT showed rectal wall thickening. A flexible sigmoidoscopy was planned for a future outpatient visit after recovering from his acute infection. The patient, however, developed an acute onset of dyspnea and had a high probability V/Q scan while in the hospital. He was started on anticoagulation, and shortly after starting therapy the patient developed bright red rectal bleeding. Due to the new onset of rectal bleeding it was decided to expedite the sigmoidoscopy. The sigmoidoscopy was performed in the hospital showing an ulcerated partially black pigmented non- obstructing medium-sized mass that was partially circumferential involving one-third of the lumen (Figure 1b). A biopsy of the lesion was taken using cold-forceps. The pathology stained positive for S100 consistent with melanoma. The diagnosis of anorectal melanoma was made, and colorectal surgery was consulted. The patient was deemed not to be a surgical candidate secondary to age and active COVID-19 infection. Oncology was consulted, and it was decided to start the patient on radiation and immunotherapy with a PD-1 inhibitor. Discussion(s): The symptoms of anorectal melanoma can be subtle and in this case report completely asymptomatic. Symptoms to be aware of are rectal bleeding and tenesmus. Diagnosing melanoma on sigmoidoscopy can be challenging as most tumors are not pigmented. Biopsies should be taken and sent for immunohistochemical staining for S100, if positive the patient should have a PET scan. Treatment choices for the tumor are based on staging. In a resectable tumor sphincter-saving local excision with radiotherapy to the site of the tumor and the pericolic and inguinal lymphatics is recommended. For unresectable tumors or tumors with distant metastasis, immunotherapy with PD-1 inhibitors (nivolumab and ipilimumab) is an emerging treatment choice.

CD27-IgD- B cells might portray an exhausted B cell phenotype resulting in lack of response to checkpoint inhibitor treatment in NSCLC

Background Checkpoint inhibitor (CI) therapy has revolutionized the therapy landscape of NSCLC. However, why some patients do not respond to CI therapy remains unknown. The correlation between intra-tumoral B cell follicles and response to CI therapy has been established. B cell follicles within the lymph node become more dispersed with age and CD27-IgD- B cells (DNBc) are described to be age-associated. Moreover, DNBc are abundant in chronic infection, elderly, long COVID and auto-immunity and are described to be anergic and exhausted and often lack expression of CD21. DNBc are expanded in NSCLC tumors compared to healthy lung tissue and inversely correlate to switched memory B cells in the tumor. In this study we explored if there is a correlation between this B cell subtype in peripheral blood of NSCLC patients and response to CI therapy. Methods Patients treated with CIs within the Erasmus Medical Center were included in a prospective observational immunomonitoring study. Nineteen NSCLC patients treated with either Pembrolizumab (Pem) or Nivolumab and 5 healthy controls (HC) were selected. Pem was given in 6/11 responding patients (R) and 5/8 non-responding patients (NR). Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) were collected before start of treatment and characterized by multicolor flow cytometry. Results HC and R showed a similar pattern in most B cell subsets. NR had significantly lower proportion of B cells within the PBMC fraction than Rand HC (R: 7.14%, NR: 2.91%, HC: 10.60%). In addition, NR had a significantly higher frequency of DNBc than R and HC (R: 9.43%, NR: 23.78%, HC: 7.19%) and there was no correlation between age and DNBc. The frequency of DNBc correlated positively with lack of CD21 expression (r2: 0.83) and expression of Ki67 (r2: 0.54) both in NR, Rand HC. The frequency of Ki67+CD21-DNBc within the B cell fraction was higher in NR than in R and HC (NR: 18.34%, R: 3.51%, HC: 0.67%). Conclusions We are the first to describe that frequencies of DNBc are higher in NR compared to R and HC. Specifically, Ki67+CD21-DNBc are increased in NR and might reflect an anergic, exhausted B cell phenotype. The absence of a correlation between age and DNBc could suggest that the increase in DNBc is induced by the tumor. Legal entity responsible for the study The authors. Funding Has not received any funding. Disclosure D. Dumoulin: Financial Interests, Personal, Other: Roche, BMS, MSD, AstraZeneca, Novartis. J.G. Aerts: Financial Interests, Personal, Research Grant: Amphera, Roche, Eli Lilly;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Amphera, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, MSD, Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Ownership Interest: Amphera;Financial Interests, Personal, Other: Takeda. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.Copyright © 2023 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Neoadjuvant nivolumab (N) + platinum-doublet chemotherapy (C) for resectable NSCLC: 3-y update from CheckMate 816

Background The phase III CheckMate 816 study demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in event-free survival (EFS) and pathologic complete response (pCR) with neoadjuvant N + C vs C in patients (pts) with resectable NSCLC. Here, we report 3-y efficacy, safety, and exploratory biomarker analyses from CheckMate 816. Methods Adults with stage IB (tumors >=4 cm)-IIIA (per AJCC 7th ed) resectable NSCLC, ECOG PS <= 1, and no known EGFR/ALK alterations were randomized to N 360 mg + C Q3W or C alone Q3W for 3 cycles followed by surgery. Primary endpoints were EFS and pCR, both per blinded independent review. Exploratory analyses included EFS by surgical approach and extent/completeness of resection, and EFS and pCR by a 4-gene (CD8A, CD274, STAT-1, LAG-3) inflammatory signature score derived from RNA sequencing of baseline (BL) tumor samples. Results At a median follow-up of 41.4 mo (database lock, Oct 14, 2022), continued EFS benefit was observed with N + C vs C (HR, 0.68;95% CI, 0.49-0.93);3-y EFS rates were 57% and 43%, respectively. N + C improved EFS vs C in pts who had surgery, regardless of surgical approach or extent of resection, and in pts with R0 resection (table). Recurrence occurred in 28% and 42% of pts who had surgery in the N + C (n = 149) and C arms (n = 135), respectively. In the N + C arm, BL 4-gene inflammatory signature scores were numerically higher in pts with pCR vs pts without, and EFS was improved in pts with high vs low scores (data to be presented). Grade 3-4 treatment-related and surgery-related adverse events occurred in 36% and 11% of pts in the N + C arm, respectively, vs 38% and 15% in the C arm. Conclusions Neoadjuvant N + C continues to provide long-term clinical benefit vs C in pts with resectable NSCLC, regardless of surgical approach or extent of resection. Exploratory analyses in pts treated with N + C suggested that high BL tumor inflammation may be associated with improved EFS and pCR. Clinical trial identification NCT02998528. Editorial acknowledgement Medical writing and editorial support for the development of this , under the direction of the authors, was provided by Adel Chowdhury, PharmD, Samantha Dwyer, PhD, and Michele Salernitano of Ashfield MedComms, an Inizio company, and funded by Bristol Myers Squibb. Legal entity responsible for the study Bristol Myers Squibb. Funding Bristol Myers Squibb. Disclosure P.M. Forde: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, F-Star, G1 Therapeutics, Genentech, Iteos, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Sanofi, Surface;Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: AstraZeneca, BioNTech, Bristol Myers Squibb, Corvus, Kyowa, Novartis, Regeneron;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Trial steering committee member: AstraZeneca, BioNTech, Bristol Myers Squibb, Corvus;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Member of the Board of Directors: Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role, Scientific advisory board member: LUNGevity Foundation. J. Spicer: Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, CLS Therapeutics, Merck, Protalix Biotherapeutics, Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Consulting fees: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Novartis, Protalix Biotherapeutics, Regeneron, Roche, Xenetic Biosciences;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker's Bureau: AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, PeerView;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Data safety monitoring board member: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Leadership Role, Industry chair: Canadian Association of Thoracic Surgeons. [Formula presented] N. Girard: Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, Roche, Pfizer, Mirati, Amgen, Novartis, Sanofi;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, Roche, Pfizer, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Sanofi, AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Grunenthal, Tak da, Owkin;Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant, Local: Roche, Sivan, Janssen;Financial Interests, Institutional, Funding: BMS;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Officer, International Thymic malignancy interest group, president: ITMIG;Other, Personal, Other, Family member is an employee: AstraZeneca. M. Provencio: Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker's Bureau: AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda. S. Lu: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GenomiCare, Hutchison MediPharma, Roche, Simcere, ZaiLab;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker's Bureau: AstraZeneca, Hanosh, Roche. M. Awad: Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Consulting fees: ArcherDX, Ariad, AstraZeneca, Blueprint Medicine, Bristol Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Genentech, Maverick, Merck, Mirati, Nektar, NextCure, Novartis, Syndax;Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech, Eli Lilly. T. Mitsudomi: Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: Boehringer Ingelheim, BridgeBio Pharma;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Consulting fees: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai, MSD, Novartis, Ono, Pfizer;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker's Bureau: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Guardant, Invitae, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Ono, Pfizer, Taiho;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Leadership Role, Former president: IASLC. E. Felip: Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: Fundacion Merck Salud, Merck KGAa;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Consulting fees: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BerGenBio, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Peptomyc, Pfizer, Sanofi, Takeda;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker's Bureau: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Medical Trends, Medscape, Merck, MSD, PeerVoice, Pfizer, Sanofi, Takeda, touchONCOLOGY;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Member of the Board of Directors: Grifols. S.J. Swanson: Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker's Bureau: Ethicon. F. Tanaka: Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Ono, Taiho;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Consulting fees: AstraZeneca, Chugai, Ono;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker's Bureau: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai, Covidien, Eli Lilly, Intuitive, Johnson & Johnson, Kyowa Kirin, MSD, Olympus, Ono, Pfizer, Stryker, Taiho, Takeda. P. Tran: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: Bristol Myers Squibb;Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: Bristol Myers Squibb. N. Hu: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: Bristol Myers Squibb. J. Cai: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: Bristol Myers Squibb;Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: Bristol Myers Squibb;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Travel support for attending meetings and travel: Bristol Myers Squibb. J. Bushong: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: Bristol Myers Squibb;Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: Bristol Myers Squibb. J. Neely: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: Bristol Myers Squibb;Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: Bristol Myers Squibb. D. Balli: Financial Interests, Personal, Other, patents planned, issued, or pending: Bristol Myers Squibb;Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: Bristol Myers Squibb. S.R. Broderick: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.Copyright © 2023 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by E sevier Inc.

Multi-centre review of systemic anti-cancer prescribing patterns and treatment drop off rates in the United Kingdom 2018-2021

Background: The treatment landscape of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has evolved over recent years with several systemic anti-cancer therapies (SACT) licensed across different lines of treatment. There is ongoing discussion amongst oncology professionals about how best to optimise treatments in terms of sequencing to maximise the potential number of lines or to give the best treatments first. A previous south-west UK audit was completed in 2021 reviewing the drop off rates across 5 UK sites identifying that 69% of patients were able to receive second line therapy and 34% were able to receive third line therapy. Method(s): In this study we conducted retrospective analysis of all patients who commenced treatment with SACT for mRCC between 1st January 2018 and 30th June 2021 in 18 centres across the 4 nations of the United Kingdom. All NHS reimbursed treatment options including the COVID interim treatment guideline options were included. Patients who received SACT as part of a clinical trial were also included. Patients who continued on their respective lines of treatment were censored. We also identified patients who had been on a period of active surveillance before staring SACT in this cohort. Result(s): 1549 patients (71% male: 29% female) were included. IMDC subgroup patients included 21.6%favourable, 52.3% intermediate, 25.1%poor and 1% unavailable. 9.1% of patients had been on active surveillance before starting SACT - defined as a period of longer than 3 months from mRCC diagnosis to starting SACT. Of those patients that started SACT 60.5% of eligible patients had 2nd line therapy, 25.3% had 3rd line, 7.2% received 4th line therapy and only 1% had 5th line therapy. In the 1st line setting 58.9% received single agent VEGF TKI, 24.5% received combination ipilimumab and nivolumab (IO-IO) immunotherapy, 14 % received IO/ VEGF TKI combination and 2.6% received other/trial treatment. The single agent VEGF TKI ratio for 1st line SACT declined year by year with rising IO-IO and IO/VEGF TKI combination ratios seen. In the secondand third-line settings cabozantinib (33.2% 2nd line and 44.4% 3rd line) and nivolumab (32.8% 2nd line and 22.6% 3rd line) were the most common options. Disease progression or death was the most common cause of SACT discontinuation amounting to 57.4%, 62.5% and 79% of SACT cessation in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd lines respectively. Treatment toxicity SACT discontinuation rates were 22.8%, 21.4% and 10.9% for 1st, 2nd and 3rd lines respectively. Conclusion(s): These results suggest that with more treatment options available, including combination/immunotherapy therapies, more patients are able to receive second- and third-line therapies. That said there remains significant drop off rates mostly driven by disease progression that would support the use of our most effective therapies in the upfront setting.

Immune-related adverse events induced by programmed death protein-1 inhibitors from the perspective of lymphoma immunotherapy.

Lymphoma, which is highly malignant, stems from lymph nodes and lymphoid tissue. Lymphoma cells express programmed death-ligand 1/2 (PD-L1/PD-L2), which binds with programmed cell death 1 protein (PD-1) to establish inhibitory signaling that impedes the normal function of T cells and allows tumor cells to escape immune system surveillance. Recently, immune checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapies such as PD-1 inhibitors (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) have been introduced into the lymphoma treatment algorithm and have shown remarkable clinical efficacy and greatly improve prognosis in lymphoma patients. Accordingly, the number of lymphoma patients who are seeking treatment with PD-1 inhibitors is growing annually, which results in an increasing number of patients developing immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The occurrence of irAEs inevitably affects the benefits provided by immunotherapy, particularly when PD-1 inhibitors are applied. However, the mechanisms and characteristics of irAEs induced by PD-1 inhibitors in lymphoma need further investigation. This review article summarizes the latest research advances in irAEs during treatment of lymphoma with PD-1 inhibitors. A comprehensive understanding of irAEs incurred in immunotherapy can help to achieve better efficacy with PD-1 inhibitors in lymphoma.

Time and productivity loss associated with immunotherapy infusions for the treatment of melanoma in the United States: a survey of health care professionals and patients.

INTRODUCTION: A new dosing schedule for the oncology immunotherapy pembrolizumab, every 6 weeks (Q6W), has been approved by the U.S. FDA, reducing the frequency of visits to infusion centers. We quantified the time spent by oncologists, nurses, patients, and caregivers per melanoma-related immunotherapy infusion visit to evaluate its potential impact. METHODS: Surveys were self-completed by 100 oncologists, 101 oncology nurses, and 100 patients with melanoma across the U.S. to quantify the time spent per infusion visit with pembrolizumab (Q3W or Q6W), nivolumab (Q2W or Q4W), or nivolumab+ipilimumab (nivolumab in combination: Q3W; nivolumab maintenance: Q2W or Q4W). Time measures included traveling, waiting, consultation, infusion, post-treatment observation, and caregiving. Respondents were also surveyed regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on infusion treatments. RESULTS: Responses deemed valid were provided by 89 oncologists, 93 nurses, and 100 patients. For each new [returning] patient treated with pembrolizumab, nivolumab or nivolumab+ipilimumab, oncologists reported to spend an average of 90 [64], 87 [60] and 101 [69] minutes per infusion visit (p-value for between-group difference = 0.300 [0.627]). For first [subsequent] treatment cycles, nurses reported spending 160 [145] average minutes per visit for nivolumab+ipilimumab, versus roughly 120 [110] for the single agents (p-value for between-group difference = 0.018 [0.022]). Patients reported to spend an average of 263, 382, and 224 minutes per visit at the center for pembrolizumab (N = 47), nivolumab (n = 34), and nivolumab+ipilimumab (n = 15) respectively (p-value for between-group difference = 0.0002). Patients also reported that their unpaid (N = 20) and paid caregivers (N = 41) spent with them an average of 966 and 333 minutes, respectively, from the day before to the day after the infusion visit. CONCLUSION: Less frequent immunotherapy infusion visits may result in substantial time savings for oncologists, nurses, patients, and caregivers.

Side effects, toxicity and ADRs of monoclonal antibodies in multiple organ systems

The review of publications on the safety profiles of three different immunosuppressants and immunomodulators (Alemtuzumab (ALZ), ipilimumab and nivolumab) published between January 2021 and April 2022 are being reported in this chapter. Alemtuzumab (ALZ), a humanized CD52 monoclonal antibody has been widely used in the treatment of Multiple sclerosis (MS). Nivolumab and ipilimumab are known as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), and both are commonly used in treatment of metastatic cancers. All three medications are still widely used by prescribers for these high-impact disease states, but post-study side effects are still being reported regularly. For example, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab is known to cause hypophysitis, which can manifest in different clinical presentations, levels of severity, and other comorbidities in patients. As another example, alemtuzumab has been linked to thyroid dysfunction, causing issues like Graves' hyperthyroidism. With the incidence of COVID-19, these medications have also resulted at putting patients at risk of contracting this new, viral disease, mainly due to immunosuppressive effects. Hence, knowing any recurrent and new adverse reactions are critical to provide the best combination of patient treatment while maintaining the integrity of drug monitoring. Additionally, recurrence of side effects can be prevented or appropriately prepared for during the course of treatment.

HER2 copy number variation in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Background: The value of increased HER2 gene copy number (GCN) in NSCLC is unclear. In this study we defined its frequency and characterized a cohort of patients harboring it. Methods: Patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC enrolled in the Gustave Roussy MSN study (NCT02105168) between Oct. 2009 and Feb. 2016 were screened by FISH (positivity defined as HER2 GCN to centromeres ratio ≥ 2) and tested for other molecular alterations. Descriptive analyses of clinical-pathological data were performed, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. Results: HER2 FISH tested positive in 22 of 250 screened patients (9%). Median age was 60 years (range 47-80), 68% (n=15) were male, 91% (n=20) were current or former tobacco smokers (median exposure 47 pack-year), 64% (n=14) had adenocarcinoma, 18% (n=4) squamous cell and 18% (n=4) large cell carcinoma. 91% (n=20) had an ECOG PS of 0 or 1. Stage IV with extra-thoracic involvement was the most common clinical presentation (64%, n=14). Overall, 95% of patients (n=21) had 1 or 2 metastatic sites at diagnosis (bone 32%, lung 27%, nodes 18%, liver 18%, brain 18%). In 9 patients (41%) 12 concurrent molecular alterations were detected: 5 KRAS mutation (3 G12C, 1 G12D, 1 G61H), 2 HER2 exon 20 insertion, 1 EGFR exon 19 deletion, 1 BRAF V600E mutation, 1 ALK rearrangement, 1 FGFR1 and 1 MET amplification. 18 patients received first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, with 33% (95% CI 16-56) objective response rate and 83% (95% CI 61-94) disease control rate. After a median follow-up of 28 months (95% CI 23-45), median PFS and OS were 5.9 (95% CI 3.4-11.0) and 15.3 (95% CI 10.3-NR) months, respectively. Median PFS was longer in patients with higher GCN. As further line of treatment, 5 patients received trastuzumab: 4 in combination with chemotherapy and 1 as monotherapy, with 1 stabilization of disease as best response. 3 patients received nivolumab (1 partial response and 1 stable disease) and 3 a targeted therapy (anti ALK, EGFR, BRAF). Conclusions: Increased HER2 GCN was found in 9% of patients with unresectable NSCLC, was not correlated to particular clinical characteristics, but frequently occurred with other molecular alterations. Its clinical actionability and the correlation with protein expression deserve further characterization. Clinical trial identification: NCT02105168. Legal entity responsible for the study: Gustave Roussy. Funding: Has not received any funding. Disclosure: M. Tagliamento: Other, Personal, Other, Travel grants: Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Eli Lilly;Other, Personal, Writing Engagements, Honoraria as medical writer: Novartis, Amgen. E. Auclin: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Amgen, Sanofi. E. Rouleau: Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca, Roche, Amgen, GSK;Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: Clovis, BMS;Financial Interests, Institutional, Funding, Data base: AstraZeneca. A. Bayle: Non-Financial Interests, Institutional, Other, Principal/Sub-Investigator of Clinical Trials: AbbVie, Adaptimmune, Adlai Nortye USA Inc, Aduro Biotech, Agios Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Argen-X Bvba, Astex Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca Ab, Aveo, Basilea Pharmaceutica International Ltd, Bayer Healthcare Ag, Bbb Technologies Bv, BeiGene, BicycleTx Ltd, Non-Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, INCA, Janssen Cilag, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi;Financial Interests, Institutional, Other, drug supplied: AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, MedImmune, Merck, NH TherAGuiX, Pfizer, Roche. F. Barlesi: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly Oncology, F. Hoffmann–La Roche Ltd, Novartis, Merck, Mirati, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, Seattle Genetics, Takeda;Non-Financial Interests, Principal Investigator: AstraZeneca, BMS, Merck, Pierre Fabre, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. D. Planchard: Financial I terests, Personal, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca, BMS, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Celgene, AbbVie, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: AstraZeneca, Novartis, Pfizer, priME Oncology, Peer CME, Samsung, AbbVie, Janssen;Non-Financial Interests, Principal Investigator, Institutional financial interests: AstraZeneca, BMS, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi-Aventis, Pierre Fabre;Non-Financial Interests, Principal Investigator: AbbVie, Sanofi, Janssen. B. Besse: Financial Interests, Institutional, Funding: 4D Pharma, AbbVie, Amgen, Aptitude Health, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Cergentis, Cristal Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Onxeo, Ose Immunotherapeutics, Pfizer, Roche-Genentech, Sanofi, Takeda, Tolero Pharmaceuticals;Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: Chugai Pharmaceutical, EISAI, Genzyme Corporation, Inivata, Ipsen, Turning Point Therapeutics. L. Mezquita: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Takeda, AstraZeneca, Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Roche, BMS, AstraZeneca, Takeda;Financial Interests, Personal, Research Grant, SEOM Beca Retorno 2019: BI;Financial Interests, Personal, Research Grant, ESMO TR Research Fellowship 2019: BMS;Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant, COVID research Grant: Amgen;Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: Inivata, Stilla. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

MA06.05 Consolidation Nivolumab and Ipilimumab or Nivolumab Alone Following Concurrent Chemoradiation for Patients with Unresectable Stage III NSCLC

Introduction: The PACIFIC trial demonstrated that a year of consolidation PD-(L)1 inhibition following concurrent chemoradiation (CRT) for unresectable stage III NSCLC improves overall survival (OS). The optimal duration of consolidation IO therapy in this setting is undefined. Studies in metastatic NSCLC demonstrate that combination PD-(L)1/CTLA-4 inhibition improves OS over chemotherapy alone. This trial evaluated the use of combination Nivolumab (N) plus Ipilimumab (IPI) or N alone for up to 6 months in unresectable stage III NSCLC after concurrent CRT. Methods: This is a randomized phase II, multicenter trial of 105 pts with unresectable stage IIIA/IIIB NSCLC. All pts received concurrent CRT and were then enrolled and randomized 1:1 to receive N 480mg IV q4wks (Arm A) for up to 24 weeks or N 3mg/kg IV q2 wks + IPI 1mg/kg IV q6 wks (Arm B) for up to 24 weeks. The primary endpoint is 18-month PFS compared to historical controls of CRT alone for arm A (30%) and CRT followed by Durva for arm B (44%). Secondary endpoints include OS and toxicity. Results: From 9/2017 to 4/2021, 105 pts were enrolled and randomized, 54 to N alone (A) and 51 to N + IPI (B). The baseline characteristics for arm A/B: median age (65/63), male (44.4%/56.9%), stage IIIA (55.6%/56.9%), stage IIIB (44.4%/43.1%), non-squamous (57.4%/54.9%), and squamous (42.6%/45.1%). The percentage of pts completing the full treatment was 70.4% in A and 56.9% in B (p=0.15). Median f/u was 24.5 and 24.1 months on A and B, respectively. The 18-month PFS was 62.3% on A (p <0.1) and 67% on B (p <0.1), and median PFS was 25.8 months and 25.4 months, respectively. Median OS was not reached on either arm, but the 18- and 24-month OS estimates were 82.1% and 76.6% for A and 85.5% and 82.8% for B, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (trAE) on arm A/B were 72.2%/80.4%, and grade ≥3 trAEs on arm A/B were 38.9%/52.9%. There was 1 grade 5 event in each arm (COVID19-A, Cardiac Arrest-B). The number of pts with grade ≥2 pneumonitis were 12 (22.2%) in A and 15 (29.4%) in B, with 5 (9.3%) and 8 (15.7%) grade ≥3 events, respectively. The most common (>10%) non-pneumonitis trAEs in A were fatigue (31.5%), rash (16.7%), dyspnea (14.8%), and hypothyroidism (13%), and in B were fatigue (31.4%), diarrhea (19.6%), dyspnea (19.6%), pruritus (17.7%), hypothyroidism (15.7%), rash (15.7%), arthralgia (11.8%), and nausea (11.8%). Conclusions: Following concurrent CRT for unresectable stage III NSCLC, both N and N + IPI demonstrated improved 18-month PFS compared with historical controls despite a shortened interval (6 months) of treatment. OS data are still maturing but 18- and 24-month OS estimates compare favorably to prior consolidation trials. Toxicity for N alone was similar to prior single-agent trials, and the combination of N + IPI resulted in a higher incidence of trAE’s, although consistent with prior reports. Keywords: Consolidation Immunotherapy, Stage III NSCLC

PD1 inhibition effect on immunization with MRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2

Background: We provide care for the rural, low-income, and underserved population of Oroville. The community has a vaccination rate of 50% and booster rate of over 20% in the 3rd year of the ongoing global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in 2022. During this period, a subset of our cancer patients benefited from the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors. Methods: This is a cross-sectional observational study of the effectiveness of a mRNA-based vaccine in medical care workers compared to patients with systemic malignancies treated with immunomodulation of PD-1 and CTLA-4 inhibitors. The study was approved by the hospital IRB. We evaluated the total anti-Spike protein antibody titer using a commercial semi-quantitative assay, Labcorp Test #164090. All subjects received 3 doses of the mRNA vaccine. We excluded anyone who was administered therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAb) or had a recent infection within 120 days. Results: Subjects with systemic malignancies were significantly older, p = 0.0001 by t-test: median age: 76, range: 64-82, compared to health care workers: median age: 52, range: 21-75. Accrual had to be prematurely stopped upon the arrival of Omicron wave in the community. Out of the seven subjects treated with immunomodulation, six received nivolumab, including two in combination with ipilimumab. One subject received pembrolizumab. Six of the subjects had metastatic disease: one was treated adjuvantly for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma. The rest had NSCLC and one case of urothelioma. We divided the groups to those who had the highest titer of antibody versus everybody else and found a similar distribution in both groups using the Chi2 test. The vast majority of the healthcare workers, 24/27 or 89%, had above the upper limit antibody titer. Patients with systemic malignancy, 5/7 or 71%, had above the upper limit antibody titer p = N.S. Conclusions: Three doses of the mRNA vaccine provided high titers irrespective of frailty or age. We hypothesize that immunomodulation could favorably affect vaccination response.

Long-term survival in advanced melanoma for patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in CheckMate 067

Background: Durable clinical benefit has been achieved with nivolumab (NIVO) + ipilimumab (IPI), including an overall survival (OS) of 49% and a melanoma-specific survival (MSS) of 56%, with median MSS not reached (NR) at 6.5-y minimum follow-up. Here we report sustained efficacy outcomes at 7.5 y. Methods: Patients (pts) with previously untreated, unresectable stage III/IV melanoma were randomly assigned 1:1:1 and stratified by PD-L1 status, BRAF mutation status, and metastasis stage to receive NIVO 1 mg/kg + IPI 3 mg/kg for 4 doses Q3W, followed by NIVO 3 mg/kg Q2W (n = 314);NIVO 3 mg/kg Q2W + placebo (n = 316);or IPI 3 mg/kg Q3W for 4 doses + placebo (n = 315) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and OS with NIVO + IPI or NIVO alone versus IPI. Results: With a minimum follow-up of 7.5 y, median OS remained stable at 72.1 mo (NIVO + IPI), 36.9 mo (NIVO), and 19.9 mo (IPI);median MSS was NR, 49.4 mo, and 21.9 mo, respectively (Table). While the objective response rate remained stable at 58% (NIVO + IPI), 45% (NIVO), and 19% (IPI), median duration of response had now been reached for NIVO at 90.8 mo and remains NR and 19.2 mo for NIVO + IPI and IPI, respectively. Subsequent systemic therapy was received by 36%, 49%, and 66% of NIVO + IPI-, NIVO-, and IPI-treated patients, respectively, and median time to that therapy was NR (95% CI, 45.9-NR), 24.7 mo (16.0-38.7), and 8.0 mo (6.5-8.7). Of patients alive at 7.5 y, 106/138 (77%, NIVO + IPI), 80/115 (70%, NIVO), and 27/60 (45%, IPI) were off treatment and had never received subsequent systemic therapy. No change to the safety summary was observed with additional follow-up;updated health-related quality of life data will be reported. Of the 10 new deaths since the 6.5-y follow-up (ie, 5 NIVO + IPI;3 NIVO;2 IPI), none were treatment-related;4 were due to melanoma progression;1 was due to an unknown cause;and 5 were due to other causes, but not associated with a COVID diagnosis. Conclusions: The 7.5-y follow-up continues to demonstrate the durability of responses with NIVO + IPI and an ongoing survival plateau. A substantial difference in median OS and MSS between patients treated with NIVO + IPI or NIVO was observed in descriptive analyses.

Subcutaneous nivolumab versus intravenous nivolumab in patients with previously treated, advanced, or metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma

Background: Nivolumab (NIVO), a programmed death-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor, has demonstrated clinical efficacy across patients with different tumor types, including clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), when administered via IV infusion. As an alternative to IV infusion, subcutaneous (SC) administration alleviates the need for IV ports, thereby lowering the risk of associated complications such as infections and phlebitis. SC formulation also reduces the time for dose preparation and administration, which may decrease overall treatment burden and reduce patient time in the clinic, benefiting patients and healthcare providers and improving overall healthcare resource utilization. SC-administered NIVO consists of NIVO co-formulated with the recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 enzyme (NIVO + rHuPH20), which aims to increase the dispersion and absorption of NIVO within the SC space. SC NIVO + rHuPH20 was shown to be safe and well tolerated in a phase 1/2 study, warranting further investigation (Lonardi S et al. J Clin Oncol 2021;39(suppl 15):2575). Methods: CheckMate 67T is a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study that will evaluate the noninferiority of SC NIVO + rHuPH20 versus IV NIVO in patients with advanced or metastatic ccRCC who have progressed after receiving ≤ 2 prior systemic treatment regimens. Key inclusion criteria are age ≥ 18 years, histologically confirmed advanced or metastatic ccRCC, measurable disease by RECIST v1.1 within 28 days prior to randomization, and a Karnofsky performance status ≥ 70. Key exclusion criteria are untreated symptomatic metastases to the central nervous system, other malignancy, autoimmune diseases, HIV-positive status with AIDS-defining infection within past year or current CD4 count < 350 cells/μL, other serious or uncontrolled disorders including severe, acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, and prior treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors, other T-cell-targeting antibody drugs, or live attenuated vaccines within 30 days of first study treatment. At least 454 eligible patients will be randomized to receive SC NIVO + rHuPH20 or IV NIVO. The primary objectives are to demonstrate pharmacokinetic (PK) noninferiority of SC NIVO versus IV NIVO, as measured by time-averaged serum concentration over the first 28 days (Cavgd28) and trough serum concentration at steady state (Cminss) (co-primary endpoints). Secondary endpoints include objective response rate by blinded independent central review, additional PK parameters, safety, efficacy, and immunogenicity of SC NIVO and IV NIVO. This study is currently enrolling patients globally.

Anti-PD-1 antibody plus regorafenib in refractory microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal cancer: A retrospective study

Background: To investigate the efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1 antibody plus regorafenib in refractory microsatellite stable (MSS) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the efficacy and safety of 103 MSS mCRC patients treated with anti -PD-1 antibodies(including nivolumab, pembrolizumab, camrelizumab, sintilimab, and toripalimab) combined with regorafenib(80 mg once daily for 21 days on/7 days off)between July 2019 and June 2021 in Hunan Cancer Hospital. Results: 103 patients had received at least one dose of regorafenib plus anti -PD-1 antibody. Due to COVID-19 pandemics, economic or other reasons, 48 patients (46.6%) did not return to hospital for second cycle of combination treatment .With a median follow-up of 5.30 months (range 0.50-22.50), the median overall survival (mOS) and progression-free survival (mPFS) were 8.40 months (95%CI:6.40-12.70) and 2.50 months (95%CI:2.27-3.47) in the entire cohort, respectively. The mOS and mPFS were significantly longer in patients who received more than 1 cycle (n = 55, 53.4%) compared to those who received just 1 cycle(n = 48, 46.6%). (16.07 vs. 4.37 months, HR 0.21;95%CI:[0.12-0.38];P<0.001;3.10 vs. 1.11 months, HR 0.12;95%CI: [0.05-0.31];P<0.001). Further analyses revealed that sintilimab (n = 66, 64.1%) significantly improved mPFS from 1.61 months to 3.30 months, compared to other anti-PD-1 antibodies (n = 37, 35.9%) (HR 0.55;95%CI:[0.31-0.99];P = 0.044). Cox multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that cycles of regorafenib plus PD-1 was a significant independent risk factor for the OS and PFS(P0.001).Patients who had previously undergone surgery were better than those who had not (P= 0.029).Sintilimab plus regorafenib had a better PFS benefit(P= 0.044.)Seven patients were diagnosed as partial response and another 16 cases were diagnosed as stable disease in the 55 patients who were evaluated, but no complete response. Thus the objective response rate was 12.7% and the disease control rate was 41.8%.Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 13 (12.6%) patients. Conclusions: The combination of regorafenib plus anti-PD-1 antibody had a manageable safety profile and promising efficacy in MSS mCRC patients, especially in patients who received more than one cycle. Compared with the other anti-PD-1 antibodies, sintilimab may have more encouraging efficacy, which needs further prospective studies.

Increased incidence of immune-mediated myocarditis in advanced skin malignancies treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in the COVID-19 era

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of advanced stage skin malignancies. Immunotherapy related adverse events (irAE) are toxicities associated with ICI therapy. Myocarditis is a rare life-threatening irAE. We attempt to characterize cases of myocarditis related to ICI therapy that have occurred since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We performed a single-center, retrospective cohort analysis of patients with advanced stage skin cancers who were treated with ICIs and identified cases of ICI-mediated myocarditis. ICI-mediated myocarditis was defined as evidence of myocardial injury in the setting of irAEs and exclusion of cardiovascular causes. Clinicopathologic variables and clinical outcomes were assessed in these patients. Results: A review of 361 patients that received ICI from 9/2014 - 10/2019 found 0 cases of ICI-mediated myocarditis. From 11/2019 - 12/2021, an additional 425 patients were identified of whom 11 (2.6%) developed ICI-mediated myocarditis. 10 patients had melanoma and 1 patient had Merkel cell carcinoma. 10/11 patients were male. 9/11 were treated with anti-PD-1 monotherapy and 2/11 were treated with ipilimumab with nivolumab. All patients had elevated high sensitivity troponin (median 361 pg/mL on presentation, reference range 0-19 pg/mL). 11/11 patients presented with elevated CPK (median 1734 IU/L, reference range 38-240 IU/L) and 8/11 presented with elevated AST:ALT ratio (median 1.58:1) on routine screening which prompted further investigation. 1 patient tested positive for COVID-19 13 days after initial biochemical concern for myocarditis, and 5 patients had received COVID-19 vaccines between 2.5-11 months prior to myocarditis onset. All patients were treated with high dose steroids, and 4 were treated with abatacept. 2 patients died within 30 days after diagnosis of myocarditis and 2 patients later died from malignancy progression. 2 patients developed progressive disease and 1 was successfully rechallenged with ICI with no myocarditis recurrence. 2 patients remain on active surveillance, 2 continue on a steroid taper, and 1 was lost to follow up. All patients with at least 5 months of follow up from myocarditis onset (n = 5) had persistently elevated HS-troponin despite normalization of CPK levels. Conclusions: In this single center study, we noted an increase in the frequency of ICI-mediated myocarditis in patients with advanced skin cancers during the pandemic era (2.6% vs 0% prepandemic) which is higher than reported in the literature (0.04-1.14%). The impact of COVID-19 during this time is suspicious and warrants further investigation. Therefore, we suggest heightened awareness in the COVID-19 era that elevated CPK levels and AST:ALT ratios merits further diagnostic investigation of ICI-mediated myocarditis.

Real-world outcomes with nivolumab for pre-treated malignant mesothelioma in the UK

Introduction: There are limited options for the treatment of malignant mesothelioma (MM) following progression with pemetrexed-platinum chemotherapy. Recently, nivolumab showed a survival benefit over placebo in this setting. In the UK, since April 2020, nivolumab has been funded through the interim national COVID-19 cancer plan. We assessed the real-world efficacy and toxicity outcomes in MM patients treated with nivolumab at Guy’s Cancer Centre.Methods: We identified all chemotherapy-pre-treated patients administered single-agent nivolumab for MM. Baseline characteristics, treatment, response, survival and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were assessed. Best responses – disease control or progression – were derived from radiologic and clinical documentation. Results: Twenty patients were identified. Median age was 72 years (range 45 – 85), 80% male and 95% had epithelioid (5% sarcomatoid) disease. Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) measurements were unavailable. Nineteen (95%) had pleural and one peritoneal MM. ECOG PS was 0, 1 or 2 in 1 (5%), 16 (80%) and 3 (15%) patients respectively. All were previously exposed to pemetrexed-platinum chemotherapy, and 4 (20%) had received rechallenge. Median time from prior treatment to commencement of nivolumab was 6 months. Median follow-up was 10.8 months. Median number of two-weekly 240mg equivalent cycles administered was twelve. Best response was disease control in 17 (85%) patients and progressive disease in 3 (15%). Median progression-free survival was 5.0 months (95% CI 3.7 – 6.2). Six patients (30%) had died by time of analysis, with median overall survival not reached. Twenty TRAEs were seen among 14 patients (70%), all except one graded 1/2 (Table 1). Conclusions: Nivolumab proved a safe and effective way to deliver non-myelosuppressive anticancer therapy at a favourable dosing schedule to a vulnerable population during the COVID-19 pandemic. These real-world outcomes corroborate findings from the CONFIRM trial, although limited by small sample size and retrospective nature.

Clinical course of COVID-19 infection in a melanoma patient treated with nivolumab and bempegaldesleukin: a case report.

The exact impact of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the course and outcome of COVID-19 in cancer patients is currently unclear. Herein, we present the first description of an elderly melanoma patient who developed COVID-19 pneumonia while under treatment with nivolumab and bempegaldesleukin in combination with an investigational PEGylated interleukin (IL-2). We present the clinical characteristics and the laboratory and imaging findings of our patient during the course of COVID-19 pneumonia. Moreover, we discuss the currently available data regarding the mechanism of action of immune checkpoint inhibitors and IL-2 analogs in the treatment of COVID-19. The administration of these agents did not have a negative effect on the outcome of COVID-19 pneumonia in an elderly melanoma patient.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors represent a major advance in the treatment of several solid malignancies, including melanoma. Bempegaldesleukin is an investigational PEGylated IL-2 that is being evaluated, in combination with nivolumab, in the management of a variety of cancers. The immunomodulation caused by these agents may also modify the immune response in COVID-19. Currently available data regarding the impact of immune checkpoint inhibitors in reducing the severity of COVID-19 in patients with cancer are mixed, whereas no clinical data are available for bempegaldesleukin. Herein, we report the case of an elderly female melanoma patient who developed COVID-19 pneumonia while under treatment with nivolumab and bempegaldesleukin. The administration of these agents did not have a negative effect on the outcome of COVID-19 pneumonia in our patient.

A Case of MyastheniaGravis and Myositis after Immunotherapy and COVID Vaccine

Objective: To explore triple overlap syndrome and immune effects of COVID-19 vaccination. Background: Neurologic immune related adverse events (nIRAE) are potential complications of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICI). nIRAE of the Peripheral Nervous System (PNS) can present fulminantly, especially myositis, myasthenia gravis (MG), and overlap syndrome of myositis, MG, and myocarditis. Design/Methods: NA Results: 77-year old male with metastatic melanoma presented to hospital with leg weakness, hoarseness, dyspnea, and ptosis 1 week after first cycle of ipilimumab and nivolumab and 3 days after COVID-19 vaccine. He had bradycardia with heart block, and hepatorenal failure. Exam was remarkable for dysarthria, right eye ptosis, hip flexion weakness 4+/5, without fatigability. Labs showed CK 21,325, Troponin-T 4,888, Aldolase 307, AChR antibody positive, and AntiStriated Muscle Antibody 1:3840. Vital Capacity (VC) was 1.9L and Negative Inspiratory Force (NIF) -20cmH2O. Patient received BiPAP, plasmapheresis, and methylprednisolone 1000mg. After this, he developed fatigability of ocular muscles, voice, and proximal arms;VC dropped to 1.3L. He was diagnosed with triple overlap syndrome, but MG manifested after receiving first dose of high-dose steroids. Heart biopsy showed lymphohystiocytic inflammation. Muscle biopsy showed focal and dispersed lymphomononuclear cell endomysial infiltration. Electromyography demonstrated patchy myositis in lower extremities. Patient completed 3 days of high-dose steroids, 5 days of plasmapheresis, abatacept, and rituximab, followed by slow steroid taper. He did not require intubation despite tenuous respiratory status. Conclusions: nIRAE of the PNS are rare potential complications of immunotherapy, usually presenting by 6 weeks, although overlap syndrome can present hyper-acutely after 1 dose. Our patient presented 1 week after first treatment, perhaps influenced by COVID vaccine. Management of nIRAE is consensus-based, as no standard evidence-based treatment exists. Our patient was successfully treated with plasmapheresis prior to high-dose steroids (obviating steroid-induced myasthenic crisis), abatacept and rituximab. The myasthenic crisis was successfully managed with BiPAP, avoiding intubation, and he ultimately improved.