COVID-19 vaccines in patients with solid tumor cancers receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors

Background: The interaction between checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) and Sars-COV-2 vaccines has been understudied. One potential complication in pts receiving CPI is immune-mediated adverse events (irAEs) resulting from overactivation of the immune system. It is unknown whether concurrent CPI and Sars-COV-2 vaccine administration increases the risk of irAEs. This retrospective study examined the incidence of severe irAEs in cancer patients receiving CPI therapy at the time of vaccination against Sars CoV-2. Method(s): Following IRB approval, pts with solid tumors who received any approved CPI since FDA authorization of the COVID-19 vaccine in December 2020 were identified via institutional electronic health record. Pts who received one or more doses of an authorized vaccine within 60 days of CPI treatment were included. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the incidence of severe irAE (one or more of the following: grade 3 AE or above, multi-system involvement, need for hospitalization). Secondary endpoints included time between CPI and vaccination, need for immunosuppressive therapy, and rate of discontinuation of CPI due to irAE. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Result(s): 290 pts with bladder, head/neck, liver, skin (melanoma, SCC), renal, and gynecologic cancer were included in analysis. The median age was 67 years (IQR: 59.0-74.0) and 66% pts were male. At the time of vaccination, 201 pts (69.3%) received CPI monotherapy, 53 pts (18.3%) received combination (combo) CPI therapy, and 36 pts (12.4%) received other therapies (chemo, TKIs, etc.) with CPI. The vaccine manufacturer was Pfizer Bio-N-Tech in 162 pts (55.9%), Moderna in 122 pts (42.1%), and Johnson and Johnson in 6 pts (2.1%). The number of vaccinations received was >/= 3 in 214 pts, 2 in 64 pts, and 1 in 11 pts. 30 pts (11.5%) experienced severe irAEs following vaccination. The rate of severe irAEs was 10.3% (30/290) in the total population [6% (12/201) with CPI monotherapy, 19% (10/53) with combo CPI, and 22% (8/36) in the combo CPI-other group]. Severe irAEs occurred after the first vaccine dose in 5 pts (16.7%), second dose in 16 pts (53.3%), and third dose in 9 pts (30%) pts. The median time between CPI treatment and vaccination in pts who experienced irAE was15.5 days (IQR: 10.2-23.0). Hospitalization was required for 19 patients (63.3%). 24 pts (80.0%) required immunosuppressive therapy with a median therapy duration of 98.5 days (IQR 40.2-173.0). 16 pts (53.5%) discontinued CPI therapy following severe irAEs Conclusion(s): In this retrospective study, we observed a 10.3% rate of severe irAE in cancer pts receiving CPI concurrently with COVID-19 vaccines. Further investigation in pts with additional cancer types is warranted to help determine best practice guidelines for COVID-19 vaccination in cancer patients receiving CPI.

Critical role of defensins in respiratory viral infection induced breast cancer progression

Respiratory viral infections (RVI) such as influenza and COVID19 impact the host systemic immune system along with causing deleterious chronic inflammatory responses and respiratory distress. While the role of chronic inflammation in cancer is well-established, the role of RVI on tumorigenesis is poorly defined. To study the role of RVI on breast cancer, we first infected murine respiratory epithelial cells (mRES) with murine sendai virus (mSV), an analog for human parainfluenza virus. These infected mRES were co-cultured with 4T1 murine breast cancer cells in 1:1 dilution on a single 2D plate and also in trans-well format. Both in co-culture and transwell culture we saw a 40- 80% (p<0.05) increased proliferation of breast cancer cells. Similarly, when 4T1 cells were treated with the supernatant collected from infected mRES cells in 1:5 dilution, also demonstrated a 2.3 fold increased breast cancer cell proliferation. The cytokine analysis from the supernatant collected from infected mRES cells demonstrated a 17-23 fold enhanced secretion of alpha/beta-defensins. Direct treatment of alpha-defensin (cyptidin-4, 10 pg/mL) and beta-defensin-3 (mBD3, 20 pg/mL) on 4T1 cells demonstrated enhanced expression of chemokine metastatic receptor, CXCR4 (4.3 fold), angiogenic factor, VEGF (12.8 fold) and cell division favoring factor, CDK2 (8.1 fold). Further, analysis of infected mRES cells demonstrated upregulation of toll-like receptor 2 (TLR2) and NODlike receptor protein 3 (NLRP3) expression. Interesting, co-cultured of infected mRES with syngeneic murine CD4 T cells induced exhaustion phenotype (PD1+ and CTLA4+ ) differentiation of CD4 T cells. Taken together, these data suggest that respiratory viral infections through induction of cancer cell proliferation and inhibiting anti-tumor adaptive immune responses promote breast cancer proliferation.

COVID-19 vaccines in patients with urothelial cancers receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors

Background: COVID-19 vaccination recommendations for cancer patients (pts) are similar to the general population. The interaction between checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) and Sars-COV-2 vaccines has been understudied. One potential complication in pts receiving CPI is the occurrence of immune-mediated adverse events (irAEs) resulting from overactivation of the immune system. This retrospective study examined the incidence of severe irAEs in pts with bladder urothelial cancer (UC) treated with CPI therapy who received concurrent vaccinations against Sars-CoV-2. Method(s): Following IRB approval, UC pts who received any approved CPI treatment since FDA authorization of the first COVID-19 vaccine in December 2020 were identified via institutional electronic health record. Pts who received 1 or more doses of an authorized vaccine within 60 days of CPI treatment were included. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the incidence of severe irAE (defined as one or more of the following: grade 3 AE or above, multi-system involvement, need for hospitalization). Secondary endpoints included time between CPI and vaccination, need for immunosuppressive therapy, and rate of discontinuation. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Result(s): Forty pts were included in our analysis with a median age of 72.5 years (IQR: 66.0-79.2);82% pts were male. At the time of vaccination, 37 pts (92.5%) received CPI monotherapy, 2 pts (5.0%) received combination (combo) CPI therapy, and 1 pt (2.5%) received combo platinum-based chemotherapy and CPI. The vaccine manufacturer was Pfizer Bio-NTech in 22 pts (55.0%), Moderna in 17 pts (42.5%), and Johnson and Johnson in 1 pt (2.5%). Number of vaccinations received was>/= 3 in 27 pts, 2 in 11 pts, and 1 in 2 pts. Six pts (15.0%) experienced severe irAEs following vaccination, including nephritis, colitis, pneumonitis, DKA, and infusion-related reaction. Rates of severe irAEs were 16.2% (6/37) with CPI monotherapy, no severe irAEs occurred in the combo CPI and combo CPI-chemo groups. Severe irAEs occurred after the first vaccine dose in 1 pt (16.7%), second dose in 3 pts (50.0%), and third dose in 2 pts (33.3%) pts. The median time between CPI treatment and vaccination in this group was 22.0 days (IQR: 15.8-36.5. Hospitalization was required for all 6 patients (100%). Three pts (50.0%) required immunosuppressive therapy with a median therapy duration of 64.0 days (IQR 47.0-83.5). Five pts (83.3%) discontinued CPI therapy following severe irAEs. Conclusion(s): In this retrospective study, we observed a 15% rate severe irAE in UC pts receiving CPI concurrently with COVID-19 vaccines. Further investigation in pts with additional cancer types is warranted to help determine best practice guidelines for COVID-19 vaccination in cancer patients receiving CPI.

Milrinone-induced platelet inhibition in patients supported on veno-aterial extracorporal membrane oxygenation: a case series

Case Report: Purpose: Milrinone is an inodilator that is used in the treatment of cardiogenic dysfunction and shock. It causes increased cardiac output by stimulating myocardial contractility, enhancing cardiac relaxation, and reducing afterload via phosphodiesterase III inhibition, preventing cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) degradation. Increased cAMP concentrations are known to inhibit platelet aggregation. Veno-arterial-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is an extracorporeal treatment option for inotrope-refractory cardiogenic shock and is often used in conjunction with inodilators. Often, patients supported on ECMO require systemic anticoagulation to prevent clotting complications. Therefore, thromboelastography (TEG) with platelet mapping is used to help gauge a patient's clotting status and gives clinicians information about the degree of platelet inhibition present. We present the case of two patients, both supported on VA-ECMO, who developed platelet inhibition with clinically significant bleeding while on milrinone, requiring the cessation of the milrinone infusion. Cases: First, we present an adult female in her fourth decade of life who required VA-ECMO for Covid-19 ARDS and cardiogenic shock. TEG platelet mapping was obtained for clinically significant bleeding from her trachea and gastrointestinal tract. Ten days after starting milrinone, adenosine-5'-diphosphate (ADP) inhibition was elevated at 67.4% and arachidonic acid (AA) inhibition normal at 1.8%. Twenty days after starting milrinone, ADP inhibition was 93.3% and AA inhibition was 76.4%. Milrinone discontinued and repeat TEG platelet mapping (10 days after discontinuation) showed ADP inhibition of 76.8% and AA inhibition of 0%. Her lowest ADP inhibition was 41.9%, approximately 1 month after milrinone discontinuation. Milrinone again attempted and ADP inhibition was 87.9% and AA inhibition 89.2% within 24 hours of initiation. No data available for platelet inhibition prior to starting milrinone. Next, we present a 9 year old female with acute myeloid leukemia who required VA-ECMO for septic shock. Initial TEG platelet mapping, obtained 2 days after milrinone initiation, showed ADP inhibition of 43.6% and AA inhibition of 98.7%. Two days after discontinuation of milrinone, her ADP inhibition was 19.6% but AA inhibition remained elevated at 91.9%. However, after 4 days off milrinone, her ADP inhibition was normal at 15.5% and AA inhibition mildly elevated at 33.6%. No data available for platelet inhibition prior to starting milrinone. Conclusion(s): Milrinone is a known platelet inhibitor due to increased intracellular cAMP concentrations. For patients on ECMO and milrinone, care should be given to the degree of platelet inhibition and potential risk of clinically significant bleeding. Further studies are needed to further investigate the correlation between milrinone, platelet inhibition, and clinically significant bleeding in ECMO patients. Copyright © 2023 Southern Society for Clinical Investigation.

Nivolumab (NIVO) + chemotherapy (chemo) vs chemo in patients (pts) with EGFR-mutated metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) with disease progression after EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in CheckMate 722

Background: Treatment (tx) options are limited for pts with EGFR-mutated (mut) mNSCLC who experience disease progression following EGFR TKIs. CheckMate 722 (NCT02864251) is a randomized, open-label, phase 3 study of NIVO + chemo vs chemo in pts with EGFR-mut mNSCLC after progression on EGFR TKIs. Method(s): Pts with EGFR-mut mNSCLC (including uncommon mutations) with disease progression on 1 or 2 prior lines of EGFR TKI tx (including 1st or 2nd generation TKI for those with no T790M mutation and/or osimertinib regardless of T790M mutation) were stratified by tumor PD-L1, presence of brain metastases, smoking history, and prior osimertinib. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive NIVO 360 mg Q3W + chemo (platinum + pemetrexed) Q3W or chemo for <= 4 cycles;pts without progression received NIVO + pemetrexed or pemetrexed, respectively, until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or <= 2 y for NIVO. Primary endpoint: PFS. Secondary endpoints: OS, ORR, DOR, and 9- and 12-mo PFS rates. Result(s): In all, 294 pts were randomized;baseline characteristics were well balanced between treatment arms. At final analysis (minimum follow-up: 18.2 mo), there was no statistically significant improvement in PFS with NIVO + chemo vs chemo (HR [95% CI]: 0.75 [0.56-1.00];P = 0.053). No difference in PFS was seen between treatment arms across most subgroups except in pts with sensitizing EGFR mutations (n = 269) and 1 prior line of EGFR TKI tx (n = 248);HR (95% CI) was 0.72 (0.54-0.97) for both. Other efficacy results are presented (Table). Grade 3-4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 45% (NIVO + chemo) vs 29% (chemo) of pts. [Formula presented] Conclusion(s): NIVO + chemo did not show statistically significant improvement in PFS in pts with EGFR-mut mNSCLC after progression on EGFR TKIs;however, a trend of benefit was seen in pts with sensitizing EGFR mutations and in those with 1 prior line of EGFR TKI tx. No new safety signals were identified. Clinical trial identification: NCT02864251. Editorial acknowledgement: All authors contributed to and approved the ;writing and editorial assistance were provided by Thai Cao, MS, of Envision Pharma Group, funded by Bristol Myers Squibb. Legal entity responsible for the study: Bristol Myers Squibb (Princeton, NJ). Funding(s): Bristol Myers Squibb (Princeton, NJ) and Ono Pharmaceutical Company Ltd. (Osaka, Japan). Disclosure: T.S.K. Mok: Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: AbbVie, ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Daiichi Sankyo, Fishawack Facilitate, InMed Medical Communication, Lunit USA, Inc., Merck Serono, MSD, Roche, MD Health, Medscape/WebMD, PeerVoice, Permanyer SL, Prime Oncology, Research to Practice, Touch Medical Media, Sanofi-Aventis, Takeda, PER, Daz Group, Janssen Pharmaceutical NV, Jiahui Holdings Co., LiangYiHui Healthcare, Lucence Health Inc., Merck Pharmaceuticals HK Ltd, MiRXES, Novartis, OrigiMed Co. Ltd., Pfizer, Shanghai BeBirds Translation & Consulting Co., Ltd., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd, AstraZeneca;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: AbbVie, ACEA Pharma, Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, Amoy Diagnostics, BeiGene, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Blueprint Medicines, Berry Oncology, CStone Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo, Fishawack Facilitate, Eisai, Gritstone Oncology, Guardant Health, G1 Therapeutics, Hengrui, Ignyta, IQVIA, Incyte Corporation, Inivata, Janssen, Loxo Oncology, Qiming Dev., Lunit USA, Inc., Merck Serono, MSD, Roche, Mirati Therapeutics, MoreHealth, Novartis, OrigiMed, Puma Tech., Sanofi-Aventis, Takeda, Virtus Medical, Yuhan, Curio Science, Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Covidien LP, C4 Therapeutics, Cirina Ltd., Da Volterrra, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd / Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Lucence Health Inc., Medscape LLC / WebMD, MiRXES, OSE Immunotherapeutics, Pfizer, SFJ Pharmaceutical Ltd., Synergy Research, Tigermed, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Berry Oncology, D3 Bio Ltd., Lakeshore Biotech;Financial In erests, Personal, Invited Speaker, Former known as Hutchison Chi-Med: HutchMed;Financial Interests, Personal, Officer, Chairman: ACT Genomics-Sanomics Group;Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: Sanomics Ltd., Biolidics Ltd., Aurora Tele-Oncology, AstraZeneca;Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares, Former known as Hutchison Chi-Med: HutchMed;Financial Interests, Institutional, Funding, For clinical trials performed at CUHK: AstraZeneca, BMS, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, SFJ Pharmaceuticals, XCovery, Takeda, G1 Therapeutics, Clovis Oncology;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: geneDecode;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Invited Speaker: AstraZeneca, Aurora Tele-Oncology, Lunit USA, Inc., Sanomics Ltd.;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Leadership Role, Term ended on 30 June 2022: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO);Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Leadership Role: Asian Thoracic Oncology Research Group (ATORG), Chinese Lung Cancer Research Foundation Limited (CLCRF), Hong Kong Cancer Fund (HKCF), Hong Kong Cancer Therapy Society (HKCTS), St. Stephen's College & Prep. School (Hong Kong);Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Leadership Role, Term ended: Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO);Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Leadership Role, Term ended on 30 April 2019: International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC). K. Nakagawa: Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Eli Lilly Japan K.K., Amgen Inc., Nippon Kayaku Co., Ltd., AstraZeneca K.K., Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., MSD K.K., Pfizer Japan Inc., Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim Co., Ltd., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co.,Ltd., Bayer Yakuhin, Ltd., CMIC ShiftZero K.K., Life Technologies Japan Ltd., Neo Communication, Merck Biopharma Co., Ltd., Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd., Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., 3H Clinical Trial Inc., Care Net, Inc., Medical Review Co., Ltd., Medical Mobile Communications co., Ltd, YODOSHA CO., LTD., Nikkei Business Publications, Inc., Japan Clinical Research Operations, CMIC Co., Ltd., Novartis Pharma K.K., TAIYO Pharma Co., Ltd.;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Ono Pharmaceutical Co.,Ltd., Eli Lilly Japan K.K.;Financial Interests, Institutional, Other, patents sales fee: Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd.;Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: PAREXEL International Corp., PRA HEALTHSCIENCES, EPS Corporation., Kissei Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., EPS International Co.,Ltd,., Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd., Taiho Pharmaceutical Co.,Ltd., MSD K.K., Ono Pharmaceutical Co.,Ltd., PPD-SNBL K.K, SymBio Pharmaceuticals Limited., IQVIA Services JAPAN K.K., SYNEOS HEALTH CLINICAL K.K., Nippon Kayaku Co.,Ltd., EP-CRSU Co., Ltd., Mebix, Inc., Bristol Myers Squibb K.K., Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K., Eisai Co., Ltd., AstraZeneca K.K., Mochida Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Covance Japan Inc., Japan Clinical Research Operations, Takeda Pharmaceutical Co.,Ltd., GlaxoSmithKline K.K., Sanofi K.K., Chugai Pharmaceutical Co.,Ltd., Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim Co.,Ltd., Sysmex Corporation, Medical Reserch Support, Eli Lilly Japan K.K., Amgen Inc., Novartis Pharma K.K., Novartis Pharma K.K., SRL, Inc. K. Park: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: JNJ, Astra Zeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, BMS, Takeda;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Boehringer Ingelheim;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, DMC member: BeiGene, Incyte;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Advisor/Consultant: Genius, IMBdx;Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: AstraZeneca, MSD. Y. Ohe: Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: AstraZeneca, Chugai, ONO, BMS, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Takeda, MSD, Novartis;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca, BMS, Celltrion, Amgen, Nippon Kayaku, Takeda, Pfizer, ONO, Janssen, AnHeart Therapeutics Inc;Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Amgen;Financial Interests, Personal and Institutional, Invited Speaker: Takeda, ONO;Non-Financ al Interests, Personal, Leadership Role: JSMO, JLCS, JCOG;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Member: ASCO. 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, Novartis, Sanofi, AbbVie, Amgen, Lilly, Grunenthal, Takeda, 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. Y. Wu: Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Hengrui, Merk, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Hengrui, Merk, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Yunhan, Eli Lilly;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca, MSD, Takeda;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Leadership Role: Chinese Thoracic Oncology Group (CTONG);Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Other, WCLC 2020 Conference Chair: IASLC;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Leadership Role, Past President: Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO). J.F. Gainor: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Genentech/Roche, Takeda, Lilly, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, iTeos, Karyopharm, Silverback Therapeutics, GlydeBio, BeiGene;Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares, Immediate family member is an employee. Note: Ironwood Pharmaceuticals is not involved in any oncology drug development. It is focused on gastroenterology.: Ironwood Pharmaceuticals;Financial Interests, Personal and Institutional, InvitedSpeaker: Novartis;Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: Genentech, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, AstraZeneca, Moderna, Jounce, Alexo. X. Zhang: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: Bristol Myers Squibb;Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: Bristol Myers Squibb. J. Sylvester: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: Bristol Myers Squibb;Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: Bristol Myers Squibb. S. Li: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: Bristol Myers Squibb;Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: Bristol Myers Squibb. J.C. Yang: Financial Interests, Institutional, Advisory Board: Astrazeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Amgen, Novartis, Bayer, GSK, Takeda Oncology, Puma Pharmaceuticals, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Merck Serono, MSD, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Roche/Genentech, Janssen;Financial Interests, Institutional, Invited Speaker: Astrazeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Astrazeneca, MSD, Ipsen, Takeda Oncology;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Yuhan Pharmaceuticals;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Dizal Pharmaceutical, Novartis, Numab, Merck, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Bayer, Janssen;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Leadership Role, Board of Director: IASLC;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Member: ASCO. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest. Copyright © 2022

AKI Post SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in Patients Treated With an Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (ICPi): Immune Double Whammy!

Introduction: Immune check point inhibitors (ICPi) have become the first line treatment for most of the cancers and have shown promising results. Vaccine has mitigated the spread of COVID-19 infection, however there are no reported cases in literature of precipitation of AKI in patients treated with ICPi. We describe 3 cases of vaccine induiced AIN in patients treated with ICPi. The plausible explanation is amplification of autoimmunity from SARS-CoV-2 vaacine under the influence of ICPi. Case Description: Pt 1: 55 year old man on pembrolizumab for lung adenocarcinoma (b/l SCr 1.1 mg/dL) came with AKI (SCr 7.65 mg/dL) after he received first dose of Pfizer SARS-CoV-2 vaccine a week prior to admission. COVID19 PCR was negative. Kidney biopsy showed AIN. ICPi was stopped and oral prednisone (1 mg/kg) was started. SCr declined sharply. Steroid was tapered over 7 months, SCr improved to 1.7 mg/dL. Rechallenge with ICPi was defered. Pt 2: 68 year old female was on ipilimumab for metatstaitc melanoma.10 days after her first dose of Pfizer SARS-CoV-2 vaccine she developed AKI, SCr 3.4 mg/dL (b/l 1.3 mg/dL). COVID19 PCR was negative. Kidney biopsy showed AIN. ICPi was stopped and oral prednisone (1mg/kg) was started. At 5 months her SCr was 1.6 mg/dL on prednisone 5 mg qd, however she died from sepsis and multiorgan failure. Pt 3: 65 year old female with h/o bladder cancer on pemborlizumab developed AKI, SCr 2.18 mg/dL (b/l 0.8 mg/dL). 3 weeks prior she got a booster dose of Pfizer SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. COVID19 PCR was negative. ICPi was discontinued. CRP was 40 mg/dL (was < 3mg/dL prior) and urine retinol binding protein to creatinine (uRBP/ Cr) ratio was 3797 mcg/g Cr (normal < 190). Pateint declined kidney biopsy. Kidney function returned to baseline in 6 weeks without steroids. The cause of AKI was presumed to be AIN based on the elvated uRBP/Cr ratio. Discussion(s): A strong immune response from SARS-CoV-2 vaccine combined with an uninhibited immune system from ICPi may have led to an amplification of autoimmunity leading to AIN. We suggest, extra surveillance in patients receiving ICPi after SARSCoV-2 vaccination is justified, and investigation into the amplification of T-lymphocyte response from highly immunogenic vaccines in patients receiving ICPi will throw more light on the immunopathogenesis.

Proton Pump Inhibitors Use Is Not Associated with the Risk of Covid-19-Related Mortality or Hospitalization: Croatian Nationwide Cohort Study

Introduction: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) play an indispensable role in the treatment of acid-secretion disorders and are one of the most widely used drugs. This study aimed to investigate the association between proton pump inhibitors (PPI) use and COVID-19-related mortality and hospitalizations. Aims & Methods: This population-based matched cohort study included all individuals diagnosed with the first episode of COVID-19 up to August 15, 2021, in Croatia. We classified patients based on exposure to PPIs and burden of PPI-requiring conditions as: 1. Non-users (patients without issued PPI prescriptions and treatmentrequiring conditions), 2. Possible users (patients without issued PPI prescriptions but with recorded treatment-requiring conditions), and;3. Users (patients with issued PPI prescriptions). Users were further divided into three groups based on the intensity of PPI prescriptions to investigate the dose effect of PPIs. In addition to the comparison of users to non-users, we compared: 1. Users to possible users to isolate the effect of PPIs and 2. Possible users to non-users to isolate the effect of comorbidities treated with PPIs on COVID-19-related mortality and hospitalization. Log-binomial regression with robust sandwich variance estimation was used to calculate relative risk and 95% confidence intervals after exact matching in respect to a range of pre-COVID-19 characteristics (in primary analysis: age (binned to 5 years), sex, vaccination status, time period in the course of the pandemic, Charlson comorbidity index, presence of ACE inhibitor therapy and comorbidities: atrial fibrillation, autoimmune diseases, cancer, chronic heart failure, chronic obstructive lung disease, ischemic or cerebrovascular diseases, chronic renal disease and immunocompromised state;in sensitivity analysis with an alternative set of covariates). Result(s): Among 433609 COVID-19 patients, 332389 were identified as nonusers, 18170 as possible users, and 55098 as users of PPIs. Users to non-users, users to possible users, and possible users to non-users were matched 48453 to 325005, 41195 to 17334, and 17466 to 316168 subjects per group, respectively. A small difference in COVID-19 related mortality and hospitalizations was observed after matching users to non-users [RRmortality = 1.23 (95%CI 1.16 - 1.30) and RRhospitalization = 1.46 (95%CI 1.38 - 1.54)] and possible users to non-users [RRmortality = 1.24 (95%CI 1.13 to 1.37) and RRhospitalization = 1.26 (95%CI 1.16 - 1.37)]. However, there was no relevant difference between users and possible users in COVID-19-related mortality [RR= 0.93 (95%CI 0.85 - 1.02)] or hospitalizations [RR = 1.04 (0.97 - 1.13)]. Dose effect was not observed in any comparison involving users. Sensitivity analysis yielded comparable results. Conclusion(s): The comparison of possible to non-users, and users to possible users indicates that the risk observed in the comparison of users and non-users of PPI is likely attributable to the burden of comorbidities treated with PPIs and not the effect of the PPIs.

Translesion Synthesis: From Cancer Resistance to Host-Pathogen Interactions

Genome instability mechanisms that characterize cancer initiation and subsequent therapy resistance are still less well understood. Recent evidence suggests that the REV1-dependent translesion synthesis (TLS) is the cornerstone for new mutation formation that primes genome instability, including intrinsic and acquired resistance to therapy. Remarkably, REV1 inhibition also switches the biology of cisplatin-dependent cell death response from apoptosis to senescence, suggesting that REV1 functions beyond a DNA damage polymerase. Furthermore, we discovered two unexpected phenotypes of REV1 TLS polymerase: a) REV1 inhibition triggers autophagy that associated with radioresistance. b) By means of striking preliminary data we show that REV1 inhibition limits SARS-CoV-2 RNA virus propagation, which we recently reported to cause hostcell DNA damage response and telomere instability. These new observations add to the repertoire of REV1- dependent genome instability pathways significant to understanding a wide repertoire of human diseases, including cancer pathogenesis.

Mechanisms of primary and secondary resistance to RET inhibitors in patients with RET-positive advanced NSCLC

Background: RET fusions are found in 1-2% of patients (pts) with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). Targeted therapy with RET inhibitors (RETi) significantly improved prognosis. Molecular mechanisms of resistance are still incompletely characterized. Methods: This multicentric retrospective study included 24 centres. Eligible pts had a RET+ aNSCLC, were treated with a RETi and had at least one molecular profile by next-generation sequencing (NGS), performed before and/or after RETi, on tissue and/or plasma samples. Primary resistance under RETi was defined as disease progression (PD) within 6 months of therapy. Results: 95 patients were included with 112 biopsies: 93 at baseline, 19 at PD. 17 patients had paired NGS (baseline and PD). Median age was 65 years (range 56-72);62% were female, 54% were never smokers, 17% had brain metastasis (BM) at diagnosis. 55 patients received pralsetinib, 36 selpercatinib, 4 other RETi. Overall, median PFS under RETi was 17.1 months (95%CI 12.6-28). Primary resistance to RETi occurred in 22 (23%) patients. Primary resistant versus durable responders to RETi had non-adenocarcinoma histology in 9% vs 46% (p=0.61), smoking history in 57% vs 40% (p=0.21), BM in 5% vs 21% (p=0.1), TP53 mutations in 37% vs 22% (p=0.23). KRAS G12V mutation and SMARCA4 alterations were found only in poor responders (4.5% vs 0%, p=0.2;and 25% vs 0%, p=0.04, respectively). Among biopsies at PD (N=19, 13 liquid and 6 tissue biopsies), 7/13 (54%) liquid biopsies failed due to insufficient ctDNA. In 12 evaluable pts, 3 (25%) acquired secondary RET mutations (2 G810S and 1 S904F), 3 (25%) had novel RET rearrangements (2 in intron 11, 1 RET-DOCK1, 1 RET-CSGALNACT2) and 3 (25%) pts had off-target alterations (2 MET and 1 MYC amplification). Three pts (25%) developed novel TP53 mutations, while 3 (25%) had no novel identifiable alterations at PD. Conclusions: SMARCA4 and KRAS co-mutations may have a role in primary resistance to RETi. Secondary RET mutations, novel RET rearrangements and MET/MYC amplifications were identified after treatment with RETi. More than half of pts had insufficient ctDNA at PD, making tissue biopsy essential to identify resistance mechanisms. Legal entity responsible for the study: Institut Gustave Roussy. Funding: Has not received any funding. Disclosure: V. Fallet: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca, BMS, Takeda, Roche, Pfizer, Sanofi, Sandoz, Jansen;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: AstraZeneca, BMS, Takeda, Pfizer, MSD;Financial Interests, Personal, Expert Testimony: GSK, Boehringer. C. Audigier-Valette: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ipsen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. A. Russo: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Pfizer, AstraZeneca, MSD, Novartis;Financial Interests, Personal, Writing Engagements: AstraZeneca, Novartis. A. Calles Blanco: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, Roche, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Sanofi;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Speaker honoraria: Bayer;Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant, Drug-only for Investigator-initiated trial: Merck Sharp & Dohme. P. Iranzo Gomez: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Bristol-Myers Squibb Recipient, F. Hoffmann, La Roche AG, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD Oncology, Rovi, Yowa Kirin, Grunenthal Pharma S.A., Pfizer. M. Tagliamento: Financial Interests, Personal, Other, medical writer: Novartis, Amgen;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker, travel/accommodation: Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Takeda. 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. C. Lindsay: Financial Interests, Institutional, Principal Investigator: Roche, Amgen, BI;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: CBPartners, Amgen. S. Ponce: Financial Interests, Institutional, Principal Investigator: Merck Sharp and Dohme, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Foundation Medicine, PharmaMar. Personal fees: Merck Sharp and Dohme, Bristol-Myers Squibb, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Foundation Medicine, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Amgen, Celgene.;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Merck Sharp and Dohme, Bristol-Myers Squibb, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Foundation Medicine, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Amgen, Celgene.;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Other: Merck Sharp and Dohme, Bristol-Myers Squibb, F. Hoffmann-La Roche. M. Aldea: Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker, travel/accommodation: Sandoz. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Niraparib plus aromatase inhibitors (AI) for germinal mutated BRCA1/2 (gBRCAm) or homologous recombination-deficient (HRd), hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC): LUZERN interim analysis

Background: The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor niraparib showed clinical activity in advanced gBRCAm ovarian and breast cancers. LUZERN aims to assess the effectiveness of niraparib plus AI in HR+/HER2–, AI-resistant ABC with a pathogenic variant in homologous recombination-related genes. Here we report findings from the stage 1 interim analysis. Methods: This open-label, single-arm, Simon’s 2-stage, phase II trial is enrolling HR+/HER2– ABC patients (pts) with gBRCAm (cohort A;n=6 in stage 1, n=7 in stage 2) and gBRCA wild-type/HRd (cohort B;n=9 in stage 2). Pts had to have received ≤1 prior line of chemotherapy for ABC, 1–2 prior lines of endocrine therapy for early or ABC with secondary endocrine resistance to the last AI regimen. Pts receive niraparib (200/300mg daily orally) plus AI (same agent given with the prior regimen) on each 28-day cycle. Primary endpoint: clinical benefit rate (CBR) as per RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints: overall response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and safety per CTCAE 5.0. If ≥1/6 pts experienced clinical benefit, the trial should proceed to stage 2. Results: Six pts were enrolled in stage 1. Median age was 46 years (range 32–76), 66.7% of pts had visceral disease, and 83.3% had received prior CDK4/6 inhibitor-containing regimen for ABC. At data cut-off, 50.0% of pts were ongoing and median duration of treatment was 4.6 months (range 2.4–5.7). One patient achieved complete response, meeting the criterion to proceed to stage 2. Median investigator-assessed PFS was 5.3 months (95%CI 3.9–NA). The most frequent adverse events (AEs) of any grade (G) were nausea (3 [50.0%]), neutropenia (2 [33.3%];16.7% G3), constipation (2 [33.3%]), and vomiting (1 [16.7%]). Serious AEs occurred in 3 pts (50.0%;G3 COVID-19 pneumonia;G3 pseudomonal bacteriemia;G2 sacral pain). No treatment-related discontinuations/deaths were reported. Conclusions: Niraparib plus AI showed preliminary activity with a tolerable safety profile in gBRCAm HR+/HER2– AI-resistant ABC pts. Based on the steering committee recommendation, enrolment in cohorts A and B is ongoing. Clinical trial identification: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04240106. Legal entity responsible for the study: MEDSIR. Funding: GlaxoSmithKline. Disclosure: J.Á. García Saenz: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Seagen, Gilead;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Novartis, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Eisai, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, MSD, Exact Sciences;Financial Interests, Institutional, Funding: AstraZeneca. J. De la Haba Rodriguez: Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Consultant and Advisory Role, Research Funding and Speaking: Pfizer, Novartis, Roche, Lilly;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, grant support: Pfizer. J.E. Ales Martínez: Financial Interests, Personal, Other, travel grant: Pfizer;Financial Interests, Personal, Research Grant: MEDSIR. E. Alba Conejo: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, Lilly, BMS, Astrazeneca, Pierre Fabre, Daiichi, Exact Sciences;Financial Interests, Personal, Research Grant: Pfizer. J. Balmaña: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Pfizer;Financial Interests, Institutional, Other, Steering committee member: AstraZeneca;Financial Interests, Institutional, Principal Investigator: Medsir, Pfizer. J.M. Perez Garcia: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Lilly,Roche, Eisai, Daichii Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Seattle Genetics, Medsir;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, travel expenses: Roche. M. Sampayo-Cordero: Financial Interests, Personal, Other, honoraria: Medsir, Syntax for Science, Optimapharm, and Ability pharma;Financial Interests, Personal, Research Grant: Medsir;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, travel expenses: Medsir, Syntax for Science, Optimapharm, and Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, consultant: Medsir, Syntax for Science, and Optimapharm;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Medsir;Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: Me sir. A. Malfettone: Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: MEDSIR. J. Cortés: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Roche, Celgene, Cellestia, Astrazeneca, Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo, Erytech, Athenex, Polyphor, Lilly, Merck Sharp&Dohme, GSK, Leuko, Bioasis, Clovis Oncology, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ellipses, Hibercell, BioInvent, Gemoab, Gilead, Menarini, Zymeworks;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, honoraria: Roche, Novartis, Celgene, Eisai, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Lilly, Merck Sharp&Dohme, Daiichi Sankyo;Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: Roche, Ariad pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Baxalta GMBH/Servier Affaires, Bayer healthcare, Eisai, F.Hoffman-La Roche, Guardanth health, Merck Sharp&Dohme, Pfizer, Piqur Therapeutics, Puma C, Queen Mary University of London.;Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: MEDSIR, Nektar Pharmaceuticals, Leuko (relative);Financial Interests, Personal, Other, travel, accomodation: Roche, Novartis, Eisai, pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, Astrazeneca. A. Llombart Cussac: Financial Interests, Personal, Leadership Role: Eisai, Celgene, Lilly, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, and MSD;Financial Interests, Personal, Stocks/Shares: MEDSIR and Initia-Research;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Lilly, Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Pierre-Fabre, GenomicHealth, GSK;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Lilly, AstraZeneca, and MSD;Financial Interests, Personal, Research Grant: Roche, Foundation Medicine, Pierre-Fabre, and Agendia;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, travel compensation: Roche, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

INHIBITION OF PROTEIN KINASE CK2 AND BCL-2: A NOVEL THERAPEUTIC STRATEGY TO ANTAGONIZE MANTLE CELL LYMPHOMA CELL GROWTH

Background: Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a B-cell tumor which often relapses. BCR inhibitors (Ibrutinib, Acalabrutinib) and antiapoptotic BCL2-family members blockers BH3-mimetics (Venetoclax, ABT-199) are effective drugs to fight MCL. However, the disease remains incurable, due to therapy resistance, even to the promising Venetoclax and Ibrutinib combination. Therefore, there is a profound need to explore novel useful therapeutic targets. CK2 is a S/T kinase overexpressed in several solid and blood tumors. We demonstrated that CK2, operating through a 'non-oncogene addiction' mechanism promotes tumor cell survival, and counteracts apoptosis, by activating pro-survival signaling cascades, such as NF-κ B, STAT3 and AKT. CK2 could regulate also BCL2 family members. The CK2 chemical inhibitor CX-4945 (Silmitasertib, Sil) is already under scrutiny in clinical trials in relapsed multiple myeloma, solid tumors and COVID-19. Aims: In this work, we tested the effect of CK2 chemical inhibition or knock down on Venetoclax (Ven)-induced cytotoxicity in MCL pre-clinical models to effectively reduce MCL cell growth and clonal expansion. Methods: CK2 expression and BCR/BCL2 related signaling components were analyzed in MCL cells and control cells by Western blotting. CK2 and BCL2 inhibition was obtained with Sil and Ven, respectively and with CK2 gene silencing through the generation of anti-CK2 shRNA IPTG-inducible MCL cell clones. Survival, apoptosis, mitochondrial membrane depolarization and proliferation were investigated by FACS analysis of AnnexinV/PI and JC-10 staining. The synergic action of Ven and Sil was analyzed by the Chou-Talalay combination index (CI) method. CK2 knock down in vivo was obtained in xenograft NOD-SCID mouse models Results: CK2 inactivation (with Sil or CK2 silencing) determined a reduction in the activating phosphorylation of S529 p65/RelA and S473 and S129 AKT, important survival cascades for MCL. Sil or CK2 silencing caused BCL2 and related MCL1 protein reduction, causing cell death. Importantly, we confirmed these results also in an in vivo xenograft mouse model of CK2 knockdown in MCL. Sil +Ven combination increased MCL cell apoptosis, as judged by the augmented frequency of Annexin V positive cells and expression of cleaved PARP protein, and JC-10 mitochondrial membrane depolarization, with respect to the single treatments. Captivatingly, Sil or CK2 gene silencing led to a substantial reduction of the Ven-induced increase of MCL-1, potentially counteracting a deleterious Ven-induced drawback. Analysis of cell cycle distribution confirmed an increased frequency of apoptotic cells in the sub G1 phase in CK2-silenced cells and a modulation of the other phases of the cell cycle. Remarkably, the calculated CI less than 1 suggested a strong synergic cell-killing effect between Sil and Ven, on all the cell lines tested, including those less sensitive or resistant to Ven Summary/Conclusion: We demonstrated that the simultaneous inhibition/knock down of CK2 and BCL2 synergistically cooperates in inducing apoptosis and cell cycle arrest of MCL malignant B-lymphocytes and has the potential of reducing MCL clonal growth, also counterbalancing mechanism of resistance that may arise with Ven. Therefore, CK2 is a rational therapeutic target for the treatment of MCL to be tested in combination with Ibrutinib or Ven.

Phase Ib study of AVB-S6-500 (axl inhibition) in combination with durvalumab (MEDI4736) in patients with platinum-resistant, recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer (NCT04019288) (320)

Objectives: Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has demonstrated efficacy in a small fraction of patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC), some with durable responses. The receptor tyrosine kinase AXL and its sole ligand, GAS6, are possible mediators of T cell exclusion and an attractive target due to the expected synergy between AXL inhibition and immune targeting agents. The recommended phase II dose (RP2D), safety, and efficacy of the combination of AXL inhibition via AVB-S6-500 with durvalumab (MEDI4736) were evaluated in patients with PROC. Methods: In this open-label Phase Ib open-label study, patients with PROC received AVB-S6-500 and durvalumab therapy in escalating dosing regimens guided by a Bayesian optimal interval (BOIN) design: durvalumab (1500 mg Q4W) and AVB-S6-500 (10mg/kg Q2W, 15mg/kg Q2W, 20mg/kg Q2W) with durvalumab infused prior to AVB-S6-500. The response was evaluated using modified RECIST v1.1. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) studies were collected, and PD-L1 status and tumor/tumor microenvironment AXL and GAS6 staining pre and on-treatment were assessed. Results: Eleven patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (six clear cells [55%], four high-grade serous [36%], one endometrioid histology [1%]) received treatment per protocol. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (range: 1-5);73% (8/11) of patients had received prior bevacizumab. There were no DLTs noted over the 6-week period and no grade ≥3 adverse events attributed to study drugs. Five patients experienced an immune-related AE, most commonly liver enzyme elevations (36%). Infusion reaction with AVB-S6- 500 was noted in the first two subjects, prompting the institution of a premedication regimen, after which only one of the nine additional patients experienced an infusion reaction. Dose delays greater than one week occurred in six (55%) patients;three patients experienced delays for cancer-related complications (small bowel obstruction, pneumonia, severe fatigue), while three patients experienced delays for non-medical causes (COVID/travel, weather). Patients received therapy for a median of two cycles (range: 1-6), and there were no responses noted across all dosing levels. One patient had stable disease, with a duration of response of three months. Only two patients had strong (2+) AXLstaining on pretreatment biopsy, both with high-grade serous histology. The majority of serum AXL levels were within previously demonstrated ranges (range: 5.6-112ng/mL), though two patients had comparatively high levels (102, 112ng/mL). PK/PD analysis revealed expected AVB-S6-500 levels at initial postdose (C1D1), but low levels at trough (C2D1 predose) when compared to prior AVB-S6-500 data [1]. Conclusions: The combination of AVB-S6-500 and durvalumab was tolerable in this PROC patient population at all dosing levels tested. Exploratory studies to correlate lack of response to AXL-GAS6 pathway alterations, tumor microenvironment, and clinical characteristics, such as prior treatment, dosing delays, burden of disease, and ascites, are ongoing.

GALLANT-1: Galectin-3 (Gal-3) inhibitor GB1211 plus atezolizumab (atezo) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)?A randomized, double-blind trial

Background: Gal-3 is a protein that binds specifically to N-acetylglucosamine-expressing carbohydrates, which are upregulated on key tumorigenic cell surface proteins. Gal-3 is widely over-expressed in the tumor microenvironment and is generally linked to poor outcomes. Gal-3 regulates immune cell function of T cells and macrophages, and promotes neovascularization and fibrosis [Peng Cancer Res 2008;Markowska J Biol Chem 2011;Kouo Cancer Immunol Res 2015]. Gal-3 sequesters interferon gamma, reduces T-cell influx, and contributes to tumor cell evasion of the immune system via LAG-3 activation [Chen PNAS 2009;Gordon-Alonso Nat Commun 2017]. Gal-3 has been identified as a marker of resistance to checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs);patients with stage IV NSCLC with high Gal-3 levels (> 70% Gal-3 immunohistochemical staining) have been shown to be resistant to the CPI pembrolizumab [Capalbo Int J Mol Sci 2019]. Animal data indicate synergy between CPI therapy and Gal-3 inhibition [Vuong Cancer Res 2019;Zhang FEBS Open Bio 2021]. Thus, inhibiting Gal-3 together with CPI-based immunotherapy may enhance tumor-specific immune responses, and overcome CPI resistance. Methods: GALLANT-1 (NCT05240131) is a 3-part, placebo-controlled phase Ib/IIa trial that will investigate safety and efficacy of GB1211 (a Gal-3 inhibitor) + atezo vs placebo + atezo in patients with advanced NSCLC. Part A will include 8-12 patients and study safety and tolerability of 200 mg and 400 mg GB1211 twice-daily + atezo (open-label). Primary endpoint is number of adverse events (AEs) after 12 weeks' treatment and will determine the dosage for Part B. Part B will include 75-94 patients, and is a randomized, double-blind study of GB1211 + atezo or placebo + atezo. Primary endpoints are safety (number of AEs) and efficacy (percentage change from baseline in the sum of longest diameter of target lesions after 12 weeks' treatment). Part C is an expansion study including patients from Parts A and B, with safety and efficacy assessments. Eligibility criteria: advanced or metastatic stage IIIB or IV NSCLC adenocarcinoma;measurable disease per RECIST v1.1;expression of programmed death ligand-1 on ≥50% of tumor cells;eligible for 1200 mg atezo every 3 weeks. Exclusion criteria: symptomatic, untreated, or actively progressing central nervous system metastases;prior systemic chemotherapy for treatment of recurrent advanced or metastatic disease, except if part of neoadjuvant/ adjuvant therapy;prior treatment with immune CPIs and/or GB1211;presence of EGFR mutation and ALK, ROS1, and RET alterations;treatment with antineoplastic or systemic immunotherapeutic agents prior to first GB1211 dose;severe infectious disease < 4 weeks prior to first GB1211 dose;active hepatitis B or C, HIV, or COVID-19. The study is being initiated;updated enrollment status will be presented at the meeting.

COVID-19 vaccination status and clinical outcomes in solid cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) constitute the mainstay of treatment in several unresectable locally advanced and metastatic solid cancers. mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are immunogenic and can modulate intrinsic host immunostimulatory properties however the effect of COVID-19 mRNA vaccination on outcomes in patients receiving ICI is not well understood. This study examines the outcomes in cancer patients receiving ICI according to their vaccination status. Methods: From January 2021 to December 2021, we identified adult patients with locally advanced and metastatic solid tumors at the University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System who had received at least one dose of ICI, either as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy or targeted therapy, in any line of cancer treatment. Patients were stratified by COVID-19 vaccination status and treatment type (monotherapy versus combined chemoimmunotherapy). Endpoints included immune-related adverse events (IRAEs), progression-free survival (PFS) from ICI initiation and overall survival (OS). Results: Among 89 patients meeting these inclusion criteria, the mean age at diagnosis was 66 years, patient sex was about equally split (female 50.5% to male 49.5%), most patients were minorities (including 58.4% African American), vaccinated (78.7%), had lung cancer (57.3%), were stage IV (71.1%), and had received ICI monotherapy (67.4%). There were no significant differences in the rate of IRAEs between vaccinated and non-vaccinated patients (p= 0.53). Patients who received ICI monotherapy had higher rates of IRAEs (p< 0.001). There was no difference in PFS between vaccinated and non-vaccinated patients (p= 0.7) and no difference in OS between vaccinated and non-vaccinated patients (p= 0.59). Conclusions: In this real-world sample of patients with advanced solid cancers who received ICI there were no significant differences in IRAEs, PFS or OS between vaccinated and non-vaccinated patients, which may be due to the relatively small sample size. Larger real-world datasets with long-term follow-up are needed to study the effect of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination on outcomes in advanced cancer patients receiving ICI.

Clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients with cancer who are treated with chemo-or immunotherapy

Background: Cancer patients infected with COVID-19 are very vulnerable to increased complications and mortality while actively being treated with chemotherapy or immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). The full impact of COVID-19 infections on this subset of patients has not been fully defined. Our goal was to track clinical outcomes in patients with an underlying malignancy and COVID-19 infection who received chemotherapy or ICIs. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of 121 patients (age > 18 years) at the University of Alabama-Birmingham from January 2020 till November 2021 with an advanced solid malignancy that were treated with chemotherapy or ICIs within 12 months of their COVID-19 diagnosis. The aim of this study was to track clinical outcomes including: hospitalization rates, ICU admissions, treatments, and deaths of any cause. Results: A total of 121 patients were examined in this study and 61 received immunotherapy treatment within 12 months. The median age at diagnosis for the ICI group was 62.3 years and 54% were male while for the patients that receive chemotherapy the median age at diagnosis was 65.1 years and 53% were male (Table1). The 3 most common cancers represented in the ICI cohort were lung (30%, NSCLC), liver (13%, HCC) and renal (11%, RCC). While in the chemotherapy group, the 3 most cancers were NSCLC (40%), HCC (12%,), and head & neck (10%, H&N). 25% of patients on ICIs died while only 13% of patients died post chemotherapy. Of the ICI patients that died, 33% were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and 53% received oxygen, steroids and antiviral therapy. For the chemotherapy patients that died, 25% were admitted to the ICU and 50% received oxygen, steroids and antiviral therapy. Patients with lower ECOG (0.98) had lower mortality compared to patients with worse functional status (0.98 vs 1.52;t = 3.20;p < 0.01). Factors associated with increased admission were higher ECOG (1.07 vs 1.67;f = 3.05;p = 0.05), higher AST (21.2 vs 40.9, f = 10.2;p < 0.001), lower absolute lymphocyte count (1122.8 vs 408.9, f = 5.99;p < 0.01) and higher oxygen needs (0.02 vs 1.11, f = 29.5;p < 0.001). Conclusions: ICI mortality was higher compared to patients receiving chemotherapy, especially for those with reduced functional status. Factors for hospitalization included: higher ECOG, higher AST, lower lymphocyte count and increased oxygen needs. However, further investigation still needs to be undertaken to understand if the PD-1-PD-L1 pathway with the subsequent inflammatory cascade post COVID-19 can impact overall survival.

HEALTH PROFESSIONALS' PERSPECTIVES on the USE of JANUS KINASE INHIBITORS to TREAT PATIENTS with INFLAMMATORY ARTHRITIS

Background: Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) are relatively new to the feld of rheumatology and provide health professionals in rheumatology (HPRs) with more therapeutic options for treating infammatory arthritis (IA), specifcally rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) [1]. Aside from a different target, JAKi differ from often currently prescribed biologics by being administered orally. To date, there is a lack of evidence on what HPRs think about their real-world use and how the COVID-19 pandemic affects JAKi prescription. Objectives: To explore UK-based HPRs' perspectives towards JAKi use in IA patients, and in the context also of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A 15-item anonymous online survey, with both closed and open-ended questions, was designed and piloted on 5 HPRs with amendments made based on their feedback. The survey was advertised on Twitter and shared by email in September 2021. Data were exported from the online survey platform and analysed descriptively with the assistance of statistical software. Results: Fifty-one HPRs responded to the survey: 37 Consultants, 7 Registrars, 5 Clinical Nurse Specialists, 1 Clinical Fellow and 1 'other rheumatology role' (not stated). Responses were received from 11/12 UK regions. Most represented was Greater London (18%) and North-West England (16%). 69% of respondents worked in secondary care, with the remaining 31% in tertiary care. The majority (40%) spent 1-25% of their job role doing research, followed by 27% who were not research active. 60% of HPRs indicated that 1-5% of their RA and/or PsA patients take a JAKi (no HPRs had more than 15% of their RA/PsA patients on a JAKi). 96% of HPRs indicated that they prescribe JAKi in their clinical practice, with 91% of those who prescribe following their local guidelines. 72% of respondents who prescribe JAKi, prescribed them 'frequently' as a monotherapy. Figure 1 shows responses chosen for when JAKi therapy is usually started and for feeling less confdent with JAKi prescription. Of those HPRs who prescribe, 17% have continued JAKi in their patients. When discontinuation occurred, the most common reasons chosen (multiple responses allowed) were 'due to inefficacy' (60%), 'due to other adverse events' i.e., non-major adverse cardiovascular events (32%) and 'due to herpes zoster infection' (28%). 55% of HPRs would consider switching patients to another JAKi after initial failure. Across prescrib-ers, 49% indicated no impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their prescribing of JAKi. Common reasons chosen for a change in prescribing patterns for JAKi as a result of the pandemic (multiple responses allowed) included: prescribing them more as 'an alternative to infusions, in order to reduce hospital visits' (23%) and as 'an alternative to injections, in order to reduce at-home training visits' (21%). This was followed by 'other reason' (15%) with the free text from all 7 respondents highlighting the benefts of the shorter half-life of JAKi e.g., 'Prescribed more as quick on and quick off so can be discontinued quickly in event of severe infection' (Registrar, Greater London). Safety concerns around the use of JAKi were raised in 13/14 free text comments left at the end of the survey e.g., 'I am concerned about recent reports of increased VTE [venous thromboembolism] and malignancies' (Consultant, Yorkshire and the Humber) and 'Concerns about cardiovascular safety' (Clinical Fellow, Scotland). Conclusion: A large proportion of HPRs indicate confdence in prescribing JAKi to their patients with IA, adhering to local guidelines. JAKi are largely prescribed as monotherapy, with the most frequent reason for discontinuation being ineffi-cacy. The COVID-19 pandemic seems to have positively impacted JAKi prescription, however, safety concerns over JAKi use remain for some HPRs.

COVID-19 vaccine and incidence of severe immune-mediated adverse events in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) on checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy (CPI)

Background: Immune-mediated adverse events (irAEs) can be seen in patients (pts) receiving checkpoint inhibitors (CPI). It is unknown whether the immune response to vaccines against Sars-CoV-2 interacts with the immune activation from CPI therapy. In this retrospective study, we examined the incidence of severe irAEs in pts with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) who received vaccines against Sars-CoV-2 during the course of their CPI therapy. Methods: Following IRB approval, RCC pts who received any CPI treatment since FDA authorization of the first COVID-19 vaccine in March 2021 were identified via institutional electronic health record. Pts who received one or more doses of an authorized vaccine within 60 days of CPI treatment were included. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the incidence of severe irAE (defined as one or more of the following: grade 3 AE or above, multi-system involvement, need for hospitalization). Secondary endpoints included time between CPI and vaccination, need for immunosuppressive therapy, and rate of discontinuation. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: Sixty-five pts were included in our analysis with a median age of 66 years (IQR: 58.0, 73.0);80% pts were male. At the time of vaccination, 26 pts (40.0%) received CPI monotherapy, 12 pts (18.4%) received combination (combo) CPI therapy, and 27 pts (41.6%) received combo therapy with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) and CPI. The type of vaccine received was Pfizer Bio-NTech in 30 pts (46.2%), Moderna in 33 pts (50.7%), and Johnson and Johnson in 2 pts (3.1%). Six pts received only one vaccination (9.2%), 18 pts received two vaccinations (27.7%), and 40 pts received 3 or more vaccinations (61.5%). Eleven pts (16.9%) experienced severe irAEs following vaccination. Rates of severe irAEs was 3.8% (1/26) with CPI monotherapy, 25% (3/12) with combo CPI, and 25.9% (7/27) with combo CPI and TKI. Severe irAEs occurred after the first vaccine dose in 4 pts (36.4%), second dose in 3 pts (27.3%), and third dose in 4 pts (36.4%) pts. The median time between CPI treatment and vaccination in this group was 11.0 days (IQR: 7.5-15.5). Hospitalization was required for 6 patients (54.5%). Ten pts (90.9%) required immunosuppressive therapy with a median steroid duration of 85.5 days (IQR 36.8, 176.0). Six pts (54.5%) discontinued CPI therapy following severe irAEs. Conclusions: In this retrospective study, the observed rate of severe irAEs in RCC patients who received CPI and COVID-19 vaccine concomitantly was similar to historical controls, suggesting that there is no definite increase in the incidence of severe irAEs in pts undergoing CPI therapy and receiving COVID-19 vaccination. Future confirmatory studies are warranted.

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.

The impact of COVID-19 infection on immune-related adverse events in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can cause a variety of inflammatory autoimmune tissue damage, referred to as immune-related adverse events (irAEs). COVID-19 is associated with increased amounts of proinflammatory cytokines, which may synergistically affect the outcome of irAEs. Data are limited regarding the impact of COVID-19 on irAEs in ICI-treated cancer patients. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed adult patients with malignant solid tumors treated with ICIs at AdventHealth Orlando between August 2020 and August 2021. All COVID-19 infections were confirmed by PCR. Patients who had the most recent ICI treatment over one month before or after the positive COVID- 19 test were excluded from the study. For COVID-19 positive group, only the irAEs that developed after COVID-19 infection were considered as events. Results: A total of 579 patients were included in our study, with 46 (7.9%) in COVID-19 positive group, and 533 (92.1%) in COVID-19 negative group. The baseline characteristics of patients in the two groups were similar in terms of age, ethnicity, ECOG, cancer histology, and type of ICI. With a median follow-up of 10 months (1-73 months), no differences in the time from ICI initiation to irAE onset, corticosteroid use, or additional immunosuppressant use were seen. A trend in higher incidence of all-grade diarrhea/colitis (8.7% vs. 3.0%, p=0.07) and grade 3 and 4 hepatitis (4.3% vs. 0.8%, p=0.08) was noted in the COVID-19 positive group, however the difference was not statistically significant. No significant difference in the incidence of pneumonitis (2.2% vs. 1.1%, p=0.44), nephritis (2.2% vs. 0.8%, p=0.34) or dermatitis (6.5% vs. 6.4%, p=1.00) were noted between COVID-19 positive and negative groups. We noticed a higher incidence of all-grade irAEs in the COVID-19 positive group (30.4% vs. 19.9%, p=0.18), but the difference was not statistically significant. The incidence of grade 3 and 4 irAEs was significantly higher in the COVID- 19 positive group (10.9% vs. 3.2%, p=0.02). Nine COVID-19 related death occurred while no irAE-related death was noted in the entire cohort. Conclusions: Our study suggested that COVID-19 may pose a risk of severe irAEs in cancer patients receiving ICIs. Close monitoring and possible delaying ICI administration could be considered when cancer patients were infected with COVID-19. (Table Presented).

PI3Kgamma inhibition reduces inflammation and promotes survival in cancer and SARS-CoV-2

Solid tumors are characterized by extensive immune suppressive inflammation, vascular leak, fibrosis and organ damage. Similarly, SARS-CoV-2 infections induce aberrant pulmonary and systemic inflammation, vascular leak, coagulation, fibrosis and fatal organ damage. We previously demonstrated that macrophages in solid tumors strongly expressed phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase gamma (PI3Kγ), a signaling protein that coordinately controls granulocyte and monocyte trafficking to tumors as well as wound-healing-type macrophage transcription in cancer and fibrosis. We also observed that macrophages in COVID-19 lungs strongly expressed PI3Kγ. To identify therapeutic strategies to suppress COVID-19-associated inflammation, we characterized lung tissue of COVID19 patients using multiplex immunohistochemistry and tissue transcriptomics. Lungs of deceased patients exhibited substantial infiltration by neutrophils and wound-healing macrophages, fibrosis and alveolar type II cell depletion. In animal models of lung inflammation, bacterial infections, viral infection and SARS-CoV-2 infection, PI3Kγ deletion or inhibition with the cancer therapeutic IPI-549 (eganelisib) suppressed pulmonary and systemic inflammation, reduced lung damage, and promoted survival. These studies demonstrate the essential role of PI3Kγ in inflammatory diseases as well as cancer and support the use of PI3Kγ inhibitors such as eganelisib to suppress inflammation and promote survival in pulmonary infections like SARS-CoV-2 and cancer.