Safety and Efficacy of Vicriviroc (MK-7690) in Combination With Pembrolizumab in Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Microsatellite Stable Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab, a monoclonal antibody against PD-1, has shown limited efficacy in patients with microsatellite stable or mismatch repair proficient (MSS/pMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). We evaluated vicriviroc (small-molecule C-C motif chemokine ligand 5 antagonist) plus pembrolizumab in patients with advanced or metastatic MSS/pMMR CRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This open-label, phase 2 trial (NCT03631407) enrolled adults with histologically confirmed, locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic CRC that was MSS per local assessment. All patients had received previous treatment with standard therapies. Patients were randomized 1:1 to vicriviroc 150 mg orally once daily plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks or vicriviroc 250 mg orally once daily plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles (2 years). Primary endpoints were the objective response rate (ORR) as assessed by the investigator per RECIST v1.1, dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), adverse events (AEs), and discontinuations due to AEs. RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled and treated. ORR was 5% (95% CI, 0.1%-24.9%) in both treatment groups. There were no complete responses; 1 patient in each treatment group experienced a partial response. No patient in the vicriviroc 150 mg plus pembrolizumab group experienced a DLT. Two patients in the vicriviroc 250 mg plus pembrolizumab group experienced DLTs (1 grade 4 encephalopathy and 1 grade 4 pneumonitis). CONCLUSION: The combination of vicriviroc at doses of 150 or 250 mg plus pembrolizumab 200 mg showed limited antitumor activity in patients with advanced or metastatic MSS/pMMR CRC. Toxicity with the combination was manageable.

Evaluation of potential biomarkers for lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab among patients with advanced endometrial cancer: results from Study 111/KEYNOTE-146.

BACKGROUND: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab demonstrated clinically meaningful benefit in patients with previously treated advanced endometrial carcinoma in Study 111/KEYNOTE-146 (NCT02501096). In these exploratory analyses from this study, we evaluated the associations between clinical outcomes and gene expression signature scores and descriptively summarized response in biomarker subpopulations defined by tumor mutational burden (TMB) and DNA variants for individual genes of interest. METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed metastatic endometrial carcinoma received oral lenvatinib 20 mg once daily plus intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for 35 cycles. Archived formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue was obtained from all patients. T-cell-inflamed gene expression profile (TcellinfGEP) and 11 other gene signatures were evaluated by RNA sequencing. TMB, hotspot mutations in PIK3CA (oncogene), and deleterious mutations in PTEN and TP53 (tumor suppressor genes) were evaluated by whole-exome sequencing (WES). RESULTS: 93 and 79 patients were included in the RNA-sequencing-evaluable and WES-evaluable populations, respectively. No statistically significant associations were observed between any of the RNA-sequencing signature scores and objective response rate or progression-free survival. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values for response ranged from 0.39 to 0.54; all 95% CIs included 0.50. Responses were seen regardless of TMB (≥175 or <175 mutations/exome) and mutation status. There were no correlations between TcellinfGEP and TMB, TcellinfGEP and microvessel density (MVD), or MVD and TMB. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrated efficacy for lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab regardless of biomarker status. Results from this study do not support clinical utility of the evaluated biomarkers. Further investigation of biomarkers for this regimen is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02501096.

Results of an open-label phase 1b study of the ERK inhibitor MK-8353 plus the MEK inhibitor selumetinib in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors.

AIM: We evaluated MK-8353 (small molecule inhibitor of extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2) plus selumetinib (mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 inhibitor) in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: This phase 1b, open-label, dose-escalation study (NCT03745989) enrolled adults with histologically/cytologically documented, locally advanced/metastatic solid tumors. MK-8353/selumetinib dose combinations were intended to be investigated in sequence: 50/25, 100/50, 150/75, 200/75, 200/100, and 250/100. Each agent was administered orally BID 4 days on/3 days off in repeating cycles every 21 days. Primary objectives were safety and tolerability and to establish preliminary recommended phase 2 doses for combination therapy. RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled. Median (range) age was 61.5 (26-78) years and 93% had received previous cancer therapy. Among 28 patients in the dose-limiting toxicities [DLT]-evaluable population, 8 experienced DLTs: 1/11 (9%) in the MK-8353/selumetinib 100/50-mg dose level experienced a grade 3 DLT (urticaria), and 7/14 (50%) in the 150/75-mg dose level experienced grade 2/3 DLTs (n = 2 each of blurred vision, retinal detachment, vomiting; n = 1 each of diarrhea, macular edema, nausea, retinopathy). The DLT rate in the latter dose level exceeded the prespecified target DLT rate (~30%). Twenty-six patients (87%) experienced treatment-related adverse events (grade 3, 30%; no grade 4/5), most commonly diarrhea (67%), nausea (37%), and acneiform dermatitis (33%). Three patients (10%) experienced treatment-related adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation. Best response was stable disease in 14 patients (n = 10 with MK-8353/selumetinib 150/75 mg). CONCLUSION: MK-8353/selumetinib 50/25 mg and 100/50 mg had acceptable safety and tolerability, whereas 150/75 mg was not tolerable. No responses were observed.

First-in-Class Anti-immunoglobulin-like Transcript 4 Myeloid-Specific Antibody MK-4830 Abrogates a PD-1 Resistance Mechanism in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: In this first-in-human study (NCT03564691) in advanced solid tumors, we investigated a novel first-in-class human IgG4 monoclonal antibody targeting the immunoglobulin-like transcript 4 (ILT4) receptor, MK-4830, as monotherapy and in combination with pembrolizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically/cytologically confirmed advanced solid tumors, measurable disease by RECIST v1.1, and evaluable baseline tumor sample received escalating doses of intravenous MK-4830 every 3 weeks as monotherapy (parts A and B) and in combination with pembrolizumab (part C). Safety and tolerability were the primary objectives. Pharmacokinetics, objective response rate per RECIST v1.1, and molecular biomarkers were also evaluated. RESULTS: Of 84 patients, 50 received monotherapy and 34 received combination therapy. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed; maximum tolerated dose was not reached. MK-4830 showed dose-related target engagement. Eleven of 34 patients in the dose-escalation phase who received combination therapy achieved objective responses; 5 previously had progressive disease on anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies. Exploratory evaluation of the association between response and pretreatment gene expression related to interferon-gamma signaling in tumors suggested higher sensitivity to T-cell inflammation with combination therapy than historically expected with pembrolizumab monotherapy, with greater response at more moderate levels of inflammation. CONCLUSIONS: This first-in-class MK-4830 antibody dosed as monotherapy and in combination with pembrolizumab was well tolerated with no unexpected toxicities, and demonstrated dose-related evidence of target engagement and antitumor activity. Inflammation intrinsic to the ILT4 mechanism may be facilitated by alleviating the myeloid-suppressive components of the tumor microenvironment, supporting the target of ILT4 as a potential novel immunotherapy in combination with an anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agent.

Propensity score-integrated Bayesian prior approaches for augmented control designs: a simulation study.

Drug development can be costly, and the availability of clinical trial participants may be limited either due to the disease setting (rare or pediatric diseases) or due to many sponsors evaluating multiple drugs or combinations in the same patient population. To maximize resource utilization, sponsors may leverage patient-level control data from historical trials. However, in a study with no control arm, it is impossible to evaluate if the historical controls are an appropriate comparator for the current study. Here, instead of conducting a single-arm trial and relying solely on historical controls, we evaluate the situation where a minimal number of patients are enrolled into a control arm, which is augmented by borrowing historical control data. Propensity score (PS) methods are commonly used to minimize bias for non-randomized data. In addition, Bayesian information borrowing with PS adjustments has been proposed when it may not be reasonable to include all available historical data. This paper proposes using PS adjustment integrated with Bayesian commensurate priors to adaptively borrow information. We then evaluate the performance of different PS adjustment methods and different Bayesian priors for augmented control using simulation studies to help inform the design of future trials. In general, we find that propensity weighting or matching combined with the commensurate prior yield reasonable statistical properties across a range of scenarios. Finally, our proposed methods are applied to a real trial with a binary outcome.Abbreviations: PS: propensity score; IPTW: inverse probability of treatment weighting; ATT: average treatment effect on those who received treatment; RCT: randomized controlled trial; CDD: covariate distribution difference; ESS: effective sample size.

Independent drug action and its statistical implications for development of combination therapies.

Researchers have long sought to find combinations of cancer drugs that might achieve synergy. However, while observed in some preclinical tumor models, synergistic effects are rarely seen in clinical trials. In fact, growing evidence in clinical trial data shows that the treatment effect of most approved combination therapies can be largely explained by the independent drug action model at the patient level. Previous statistical research on drug combinations mainly centered on experimental designs for dose-finding followed by measure of combination efficacy. In this paper, we introduce the independent drug action model to those working in late stage clinical development, propose a new approach to predict the progression-free survival of combination therapies, and discuss its statistical implications for trial design and monitoring. The discussion is enriched with real data examples.

Testing patient-informed approaches for visually depicting the hemoglobin A1c value to patients with poorly controlled diabetes: a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients' understanding of the hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) has been linked to better diabetes care outcomes (glycemic control, self-care). This is concerning given low documented rates of HbA1c understanding. In this non-blinded, randomized trial, we compared two formats for communicating the HbA1c, selected based on input from people with diabetes, to standard presentation to assess their impact on participants' glycemic control and diabetes-related perceptions. METHODS: To design the tested formats, we interviewed 25 patients with diabetes and reviewed a range of possible formats, including color-based scales and graphs. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and subjected to thematic analysis. Synthesizing interviewees' feedback, we selected two formats, one using a combination of words and colors (Words) and one using a color-coded graph (Graph), for further evaluation. We then randomized adults with poorly controlled diabetes to receive mailed information on their current diabetes control in one of three ways: 1) standard lab report (control), 2) Words format, or 3) Graph format. The primary outcome was HbA1c change at 6 months. Also examined were changes in participants' diabetes-related perceptions and choice of participation incentive. RESULTS: Of the 234 enrolled participants, 76.9% were Black, and their median baseline HbA1c was 9.1% (interquartile range 8.4-10.4). There were no between-arm differences in HbA1c change (- 1.04% [SD 2.2] Control vs. -0.59% [SD 2.0] Words vs. -0.54% [SD 2.1] Graph, p > 0.05 for all comparisons). Participants in the Words arm had an increase in the accuracy of their perceptions of diabetes seriousness (p = 0.04) and in the number of participants reporting a diabetes management goal (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The two patient-informed communication formats did not differentially impact glycemic control among adults with inadequately controlled diabetes. However, a significant proportion of participants in the Words arm had an increase in the accuracy of their perception of diabetes seriousness, a potential mediating factor in positive diabetes-related behavioral changes. With increasing use of patient-facing online portals, thoughtfully designed approaches for visually communicating essential, but poorly understood, information like the HbA1c to patients have the potential to facilitate interpretation and support self-management. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospectively registered as NCT01886170.

Measuring and Analyzing Length of Stay in Critical Care Trials.

BACKGROUND: In randomized clinical trials among critically ill patients, it is uncertain how choices regarding the measurement and analysis of nonmortal outcomes measured in terms of duration, such as intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), affect studies' conclusions. OBJECTIVES: Assess the definitions and analytic methods used for ICU LOS analyses in published randomized clinical trials. RESEARCH DESIGN: This is a systematic review and statistical simulation study. RESULTS: Among the 80 of 150 trials providing sufficient information regarding the chosen definition of ICU LOS, 3 different start times (ICU admission, trial enrollment/randomization, receipt of intervention) and 2 end times (discharge readiness, actual discharge) were used. In roughly three quarters of these studies, ICU LOS was compared using approaches that did not explicitly account for death, either by ignoring it entirely or stratifying the analyses by survival status. The remaining studies used time-to-event (discharge) models censoring at death or applied a fixed LOS value to patients who died. In statistical simulations, we showed that each analytic approach tested a different question regarding ICU LOS, and that approaches that do not explicitly account for death often produce misleading or ambiguous conclusions when treatments produce small effects on mortality, even if those are not detected as significant in the trial. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variability in how ICU LOS is measured and analyzed which impairs the ability to compare results across trials and can produce spurious conclusions. Analyses of duration-based outcomes such as LOS should jointly assess the impact of the intervention on mortality to yield correct interpretations.

Statistical estimation of white matter microstructure from conventional MRI.

Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) has become the predominant modality for studying white matter integrity in multiple sclerosis (MS) and other neurological disorders. Unfortunately, the use of DTI-based biomarkers in large multi-center studies is hindered by systematic biases that confound the study of disease-related changes. Furthermore, the site-to-site variability in multi-center studies is significantly higher for DTI than that for conventional MRI-based markers. In our study, we apply the Quantitative MR Estimation Employing Normalization (QuEEN) model to estimate the four DTI measures: MD, FA, RD, and AD. QuEEN uses a voxel-wise generalized additive regression model to relate the normalized intensities of one or more conventional MRI modalities to a quantitative modality, such as DTI. We assess the accuracy of the models by comparing the prediction error of estimated DTI images to the scan-rescan error in subjects with two sets of scans. Across the four DTI measures, the performance of the models is not consistent: Both MD and RD estimations appear to be quite accurate, while AD estimation is less accurate than MD and RD; the accuracy of FA estimation is poor. Thus, in some cases when assessing white matter integrity, it may be sufficient to acquire conventional MRI sequences alone.

No improvement in the reporting of clinical trial subgroup effects in high-impact general medical journals.

BACKGROUND: When subgroup analyses are not correctly analyzed and reported, incorrect conclusions may be drawn, and inappropriate treatments provided. Despite the increased recognition of the importance of subgroup analysis, little information exists regarding the prevalence, appropriateness, and study characteristics that influence subgroup analysis. The objective of this study is to determine (1) if the use of subgroup analyses and multivariable risk indices has increased, (2) whether statistical methodology has improved over time, and (3) which study characteristics predict subgroup analysis. METHODS: We randomly selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from five high-impact general medical journals during three time periods. Data from these articles were abstracted in duplicate using standard forms and a standard protocol. Subgroup analysis was defined as reporting any subgroup effect. Appropriate methods for subgroup analysis included a formal test for heterogeneity or interaction across treatment-by-covariate groups. We used logistic regression to determine the variables significantly associated with any subgroup analysis or, among RCTs reporting subgroup analyses, using appropriate methodology. RESULTS: The final sample of 416 articles reported 437 RCTs, of which 270 (62 %) reported subgroup analysis. Among these, 185 (69 %) used appropriate methods to conduct such analyses. Subgroup analysis was reported in 62, 55, and 67 % of the articles from 2007, 2010, and 2013, respectively. The percentage using appropriate methods decreased over the three time points from 77 % in 2007 to 63 % in 2013 (p < 0.05). Significant predictors of reporting subgroup analysis included industry funding (OR 1.94 (95 % CI 1.17, 3.21)), sample size (OR 1.98 per quintile (1.64, 2.40), and a significant primary outcome (OR 0.55 (0.33, 0.92)). The use of appropriate methods to conduct subgroup analysis decreased by year (OR 0.88 (0.76, 1.00)) and was less common with industry funding (OR 0.35 (0.18, 0.70)). Only 33 (18 %) of the RCTs examined subgroup effects using a multivariable risk index. CONCLUSIONS: While we found no significant increase in the reporting of subgroup analysis over time, our results show a significant decrease in the reporting of subgroup analyses using appropriate methods during recent years. Industry-sponsored trials may more commonly report subgroup analyses, but without utilizing appropriate methods. Suboptimal reporting of subgroup effects may impact optimal physician-patient decision-making.