Botensilimab plus balstilimab in relapsed/refractory microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal cancer: a phase 1 trial.

Microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal cancer (MSS mCRC; mismatch repair proficient) has previously responded poorly to immune checkpoint blockade. Botensilimab (BOT) is an Fc-enhanced multifunctional anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) antibody designed to expand therapy to cold/poorly immunogenic solid tumors, such as MSS mCRC. BOT with or without balstilimab (BAL; anti-PD-1 antibody) is being evaluated in an ongoing expanded phase 1 study. The primary endpoint is safety and tolerability, which was evaluated separately in the dose-escalation portion of the study and in patients with MSS mCRC (using combined dose-escalation/dose-expansion data). Secondary endpoints include investigator-assessed RECIST version 1.1-confirmed objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DOR) and progression-free survival (PFS). Here we present outcomes in 148 heavily pre-treated patients with MSS mCRC (six from the dose-escalation cohort; 142 from the dose-expansion cohort) treated with BOT and BAL, 101 of whom were considered response evaluable with at least 6 months of follow-up. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 89% of patients with MSS mCRC (131/148), most commonly fatigue (35%, 52/148), diarrhea (32%, 47/148) and pyrexia (24%, 36/148), with no grade 5 TRAEs reported and a 12% discontinuation rate due to a TRAE (18/148; data fully mature). In the response-evaluable population (n = 101), ORR was 17% (17/101; 95% confidence interval (CI), 10-26%), and DCR was 61% (62/101; 95% CI, 51-71%). Median DOR was not reached (NR; 95% CI, 5.7 months-NR), and median PFS was 3.5 months (95% CI, 2.7-4.1 months), at a median follow-up of 10.3 months (range, 0.5-42.6 months; data continuing to mature). The combination of BOT plus BAL demonstrated a manageable safety profile with no new immune-mediated safety signals and encouraging clinical activity with durable responses. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03860272 .

Metastatic extraneural glioblastoma diagnosed with molecular testing.

Glioblastoma, the most common malignant brain tumor in adults, is associated with a median overall survival duration of less than 2 years. Extraneural metastases occur in less than 1% of all patients with glioblastoma. The mechanism of extraneural metastasis is unclear. We present a case of extensive extraneural, extraosseous, epidural, and soft-tissue metastasis of glioblastoma. The diagnosis of metastatic glioblastoma was made only after next-generation sequencing (NGS) of the metastatic paraspinal lesions was completed. The CDK4, pTERT, PTEN, and TP53 molecular alterations seen in the initial intracranial glioblastoma were found in the paraspinal tumor, along with the addition of MYC, which is implicated in angiogenesis and epidermal-to-mesenchymal transition. Immunohistochemical stains showed that neoplastic cells were negative for GFAP. In conclusion, this case raises awareness about the role of NGS in the diagnosis of extraneural glioblastoma. This diagnosis was not possible with histology alone and only became evident after molecular profiling of the metastatic lesions and its comparison to the original tumor.

Synergistic cytotoxicity of histone deacetylase and poly-ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors and decitabine in pancreatic cancer cells: Implications for novel therapy.

Histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi) can modulate the acetylation status of proteins, influencing the genomic instability exhibited by cancer cells. Poly (ADP ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) have a direct effect on protein poly (ADP-ribosyl)ation, which is important for DNA repair. Decitabine is a nucleoside cytidine analogue, which when phosphorylated gets incorporated into the growing DNA strand, inhibiting methylation and inducing DNA damage by inactivating and trapping DNA methyltransferase on the DNA, thereby activating transcriptionally silenced DNA loci. We explored various combinations of HDACi and PARPi +/- decitabine (hypomethylating agent) in pancreatic cancer cell lines BxPC-3 and PL45 (wild-type BRCA1 and BRCA2) and Capan-1 (mutated BRCA2). The combination of HDACi (panobinostat or vorinostat) with PARPi (talazoparib or olaparib) resulted in synergistic cytotoxicity in all cell lines tested. The addition of decitabine further increased the synergistic cytotoxicity noted with HDACi and PARPi, triggering apoptosis (evidenced by increased cleavage of caspase 3 and PARP1). The 3-drug combination treatments (vorinostat, talazoparib, and decitabine; vorinostat, olaparib, and decitabine; panobinostat, talazoparib, and decitabine; panobinostat, olaparib, and decitabine) induced more DNA damage (increased phosphorylation of histone 2AX) than the individual drugs and impaired the DNA repair pathways (decreased levels of ATM, BRCA1, and ATRX proteins). The 3-drug combinations also altered the epigenetic regulation of gene expression (NuRD complex subunits, reduced levels). This is the first study to demonstrate synergistic interactions between the aforementioned agents in pancreatic cancer cell lines and provides preclinical data to design individualized therapeutic approaches with the potential to improve pancreatic cancer treatment outcomes.

Case report: Fatal overwhelming post-splenectomy infection in a patient with metastatic angiosarcoma treated with immunotherapy.

A patient in his 40s with splenic angiosarcoma metastatic to the liver underwent splenectomy, chemotherapy, and partial hepatectomy before being treated on a clinical trial with CTLA4 and PD1 inhibitors. He had received pneumococcal and meningococcal vaccines post-splenectomy. On week 10, he developed grade 3 immune-related colitis, successfully treated with the anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitor infliximab and steroids. After 4 cycles of treatment, scans showed partial response. He resumed anti-PD1 therapy, and 6 hours after the second dose of anti-PD1 he presented to the emergency room with hematemesis, hematochezia, hypotension, fever, and oxygen desaturation. Laboratory tests demonstrated acute renal failure and septicemia (Streptococcus pneumoniae). He died 12 hours after the anti-PD1 infusion from overwhelming post-splenectomy infection (OPSI). Autopsy demonstrated non-viable liver tumors among other findings. In conclusion, patients undergoing immunotherapy and with prior history of asplenia should be monitored closely for OPSI as they may be at increased risk.

Tumor-agnostic baskets to N-of-1 platform trials and real-world data: Transforming precision oncology clinical trial design.

Choosing the right drug(s) for the right patient via advanced genomic sequencing and multi-omic interrogation is the sine qua non of precision cancer medicine. Traditional cancer clinical trial designs follow well-defined protocols to evaluate the efficacy of new therapies in patient groups, usually identified by their histology/tissue of origin of their malignancy. In contrast, precision medicine seeks to optimize benefit in individual patients, i.e., to define who benefits rather than determine whether the overall group benefits. Since cancer is a disease driven by molecular alterations, innovative trial designs, including biomarker-defined tumor-agnostic basket trials, are driving ground-breaking regulatory approvals and deployment of gene- and immune-targeted drugs. Molecular interrogation further reveals the disruptive reality that advanced cancers are extraordinarily complex and individually distinct. Therefore, optimized treatment often requires drug combinations and N-of-1 customization, addressed by a new generation of N-of-1 trials. Real-world data and structured master registry trials are also providing massive datasets that are further fueling a transformation in oncology. Finally, machine learning is facilitating rapid discovery, and it is plausible that high-throughput computing, in silico modeling, and 3-dimensional printing may be exploitable in the near future to discover and design customized drugs in real time.

First-In-Human Phase I Study of Tinengotinib (TT-00420), a Multiple Kinase Inhibitor, as a Single Agent in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: This first-in-human phase I dose-escalation study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of tinengotinib (TT-00420), a multi-kinase inhibitor targeting fibroblast growth factor receptors 1-3 (FGFRs 1-3), Janus kinase 1/2, vascular endothelial growth factor receptors, and Aurora A/B, in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received tinengotinib orally daily in 28-day cycles. Dose escalation was guided by Bayesian modeling using escalation with overdose control. The primary objective was to assess dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and dose recommended for dose expansion (DRDE). Secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics and efficacy. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were enrolled (dose escalation, n = 40; dose expansion, n = 8). MTD was not reached; DRDE was 12 mg daily. DLTs were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (8 mg, n = 1) and hypertension (15 mg, n = 2). The most common treatment-related adverse event was hypertension (50.0%). In 43 response-evaluable patients, 13 (30.2%) achieved partial response (PR; n = 7) or stable disease (SD) ≥ 24 weeks (n = 6), including 4/11 (36.4%) with FGFR2 mutations/fusions and cholangiocarcinoma (PR n = 3; SD ≥ 24 weeks n = 1), 3/3 (100.0%) with hormone receptor (HR)-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer (PR n = 2; SD ≥ 24 weeks n = 1), 2/5 (40.0%) with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC; PR n = 1; SD ≥ 24 weeks n = 1), and 1/1 (100.0%) with castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC; PR). Four of 12 patients (33.3%; HR-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer, TNBC, prostate cancer, and cholangiocarcinoma) treated at DRDE had PRs. Tinengotinib's half-life was 28-34 hours. CONCLUSIONS: Tinengotinib was well tolerated with favorable pharmacokinetic characteristics. Preliminary findings indicated potential clinical benefit in FGFR inhibitor-refractory cholangiocarcinoma, HER2-negative breast cancer (including TNBC), and CRPC. Continued evaluation of tinengotinib is warranted in phase II trials.

Phase 1/2 trial of avelumab combined with utomilumab (4-1BB agonist), PF-04518600 (OX40 agonist), or radiotherapy in patients with advanced gynecologic malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint blockade has shown mixed results in advanced/recurrent gynecologic malignancies. Efficacy may be improved through costimulation with OX40 and 4-1BB agonists. The authors sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of avelumab combined with utomilumab (a 4-1BB agonist), PF-04518600 (an OX40 agonist), and radiotherapy in patients with recurrent gynecologic malignancies. METHODS: The primary end point in this six-arm, phase 1/2 trial was safety of the combination regimens. Secondary end points included the objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors and immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, the disease control rate (DCR), the duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: Forty patients were included (35% with cervical cancer, 30% with endometrial cancer, and 35% with ovarian cancer). Most patients (n = 33; 83%) were enrolled in arms A-C (no radiation). Among 35 patients who were evaluable for efficacy, the ORR was 2.9%, and the DCR was 37.1%, with a median duration of stable disease of 5.4 months (interquartile range, 4.1-7.3 months). Patients with cervical cancer in arm A (avelumab and utomilumab; n = 9 evaluable patients) achieved an ORR of 11% and a DCR of 78%. The median progression-free survival was 2.1 months (95% CI, 1.8-3.5 months), and overall survival was 9.4 months (95% CI, 5.6-11.9 months). No dose-limiting toxicities or grade 3-5 immune-related adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this trial highlight that, in heavily pretreated patients with gynecologic cancer, even multidrug regimens targeting multiple immunologic pathways, although safe, did not produce significant responses. A DCR of 78% in patients with cervical cancer who received avelumab and utomilumab indicates that further research on this combination in select patients may be warranted.

Phase I Study of mTORC1/2 Inhibitor Sapanisertib (CB-228/TAK-228) in Combination with Metformin in Patients with mTOR/AKT/PI3K Pathway Alterations and Advanced Solid Malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Sapanisertib (CB-228/TAK-228) is a potent, selective ATP-competitive, dual inhibitor of mTORC1/2. Metformin is thought to inhibit the mTOR pathway through upstream activation of 5'-AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) suggesting combination therapy may enhance antitumor activity of sapanisertib. We report preliminary safety, tolerability, and efficacy from the dose-escalation study of sapanisertib in combination with metformin in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Patients with advanced metastatic solid tumors resistant or refractory to standard treatment, with and without mTOR/AKT/PI3K pathway alterations, received sapanisertib 3 or 4 mg daily together with metformin once to three times daily (500-1,500 mg). All patients underwent 14-day titration period for metformin in cycle 1. Tumor measurements were performed following cycle 2 and subsequently every 8 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients were enrolled across four cohorts (3 mg/500 mg; 3 mg/1,000 mg, 4 mg/1,000 mg; 4 mg/1,500 mg). 19 were female (63%), median age was 57 (range: 30-77), all were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 1. Tumor types included sarcoma (6), breast (4), ovarian (4), head and neck (3), colorectal (2), lung (2), renal cell (2), endometrial (2), gastroesophageal junction (1), prostate (1), stomach (1), urachus (1), and cervical cancer (1). Median number of prior lines of therapy was 4. Most common genomic alterations included PIK3CA (27%), PTEN (17%), AKT1/2 (10%), mTOR (10%). Of 30 patients evaluable for response, 4 patients achieved partial response (PR); 15 patients achieved stable disease (SD) as best response. Disease control rate (PR+SD) was 63%. Of the responders in PR, 3 of 4 patients had documented PTEN mutations (3/5 patients enrolled with PTEN mutations had PR); 2 of 4 of patients in PR had comutations (patient with leiomyosarcoma had both PTEN and TSC; patient with breast cancer had both PTEN and STK11); 1 of 4 patients in PR had AKT and mTOR mutation; tumor types included leiomyosarcoma (n = 2), breast (n = 1), and endometrial cancer (n = 1). Most common treatment-emergent adverse events included nausea, anorexia, diarrhea, and rash. Grade (G) 3-5 treatment-related adverse events included hyperglycemia (4/30; 13%), fatigue (2/30; 7%), hypertriglyceridemia (1/30; 3%), rash (2/20; 7%), diarrhea (2/30; 7%), creatinine increase (1/30; 3%), acidosis (1/30; 3%). No dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) were reported in the 3 mg/500 mg cohort. One of 6 patient had DLT in the 3 mg/1,000 mg cohort (G3 diarrhea) and 2 of 11 patients had DLTs in the 4 mg/1,500 mg cohort (G3 fatigue, G3 rash). 4 mg/1,000 mg was defined as the MTD. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile of mTORC1/2 inhibitor sapanisertib in combination with metformin was generally tolerable, with antitumor activity observed in patients with advanced malignancies harboring PTEN mutations and AKT/mTOR pathway alterations. SIGNIFICANCE: Sapanisertib (CB-228/TAK-228) is a potent, selective ATP-competitive, next-generation dual inhibitor of mTORC1/2. Metformin is thought to inhibit the mTOR pathway through upstream activation of AMPK suggesting combination therapy may enhance antitumor activity of sapanisertib. This dose-escalation study of sapanisertib and metformin in advanced solid tumors and mTOR/AKT/PI3K pathway alterations, demonstrates safety, tolerability, and early clinical activity in advanced malignancies harboring PTEN mutations and AKT/mTOR pathway alterations.Clinical trial information: NCT03017833.

Autologous engineered T cell receptor therapy in advanced cancer.

To overcome challenges associated with adoptive cell therapy (ACT), we developed a personalized autologous T-cell therapy program. Patients with advanced cancer with HLA-A *02:01 allele and tumor expression of PRAME, MAGEA1, MAGEA4, MAGEA8, NY-ESO-1, COL6A3 exon 6, MXRA5, and/or MMP1 underwent leukapheresis and T-cell product manufacturing. Patients received lymphodepletion, IMA101 infusion and interleukin 2 for 14 days. Of 214 screened patients, 14 were treated (6, IMA101; 8, IMA101 and atezolizumab). The most common adverse events were cytokine release syndrome (G1, n = 6; G2, n = 4) and cytopenia. At 6 weeks, 12 (85.7%) patients had stable disease. Three patients had prolonged disease stabilization for 12.9, 7.3, and 13.7 months, respectively. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 3.4 months and 9.4 months, respectively. Target-specific T cells expanded to constitute up to 78.7% of CD8+ cells. In conclusion, IMA101 was feasible and well tolerated, leveraging the potential of multi-targeted ACT that warrants further investigation.

Dataset of phase I and II immunotherapy clinical trials used for a meta-analysis to assess the role of biomarkers in treatment outcomes in diverse cancers.

We performed a literature search in PubMed to identify phase I/II clinical trials with immunotherapy drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (labeled, off-label, and/or combined with investigational immune checkpoint inhibitors or other treatment modalities) from 2018 to 2020. We used the following key words: clinical trials, phase 1, Phase 2; and the following filters: cancer, humans; and selected the checkpoint inhibitors that had been approved by the FDA by March 2021, i.e., "pembrolizumab", "nivolumab", "atezolizumab", "durvalumab", "cemiplimab", "avelumab", and "ipilimumab. Clinical trials with their checkpoint inhibitors as in their labeled indications, off-label use or their combinations with investigational immune checkpoint inhibitors or other treatment modalities were included. Studies describing supportive care or locoregional treatments; cellular, viral, or vaccine therapy; studies in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting; and pediatric studies were excluded. Overall, 173 articles reporting on relevant studies were identified. Using these articles, we compiled a data file of study-specific covariates for each study. We recorded the immunotherapeutic agent, tumor type and biomarker, and clinical outcomes (objective response rate and median values [point estimate] and confidence intervals for progression-free survival and overall survival. Using these data, we carried out meta-analyses for the three outcomes and meta-regression on study-specific covariates. The same data could be used for any alternative implementation of meta-analysis and meta-regression, using more structured inference models reflecting different levels of dependence based on the available study-specific covariates.

Reprogramming T cell differentiation and exhaustion in CAR-T cell therapy.

T cell differentiation is a highly regulated, multi-step process necessary for the progressive establishment of effector functions, immunological memory, and long-term control of pathogens. In response to strong stimulation, as seen in severe or chronic infections or cancer, T cells acquire a state of hypo-responsiveness known as exhaustion, limiting their effector function. Recent advances in autologous chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapies have revolutionized the treatment of hematologic malignancies by taking advantage of the basic principles of T cell biology to engineer products that promote long-lasting T cell response. However, many patients' malignancies remain unresponsive to treatment or are prone to recur. Discoveries in T cell biology, including the identification of key regulators of differentiation and exhaustion, offer novel opportunities to have a durable impact on the fate of CAR-T cells after infusion. Such next-generation CAR-T cell therapies and their clinical implementation may result in the next leap forward in cancer treatment for selected patients. In this context, this review summarizes the foundational principles of T cell differentiation and exhaustion and describes how they can be utilized and targeted to further improve the design and efficacy of CAR-T cell therapies.

Recommendations for Cell-Free DNA Assay Validations: A Joint Consensus Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology and College of American Pathologists.

Diagnosing, selecting therapy for, and monitoring cancer in patients using a minimally invasive blood test represents a significant advance in precision medicine. Wide variability exists in how circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) assays are developed, validated, and reported in the literature, which hinders clinical adoption and may negatively impact patient care. Standardization is needed for factors affecting ctDNA assay performance and reporting, including pre-analytical variables, analytical considerations, and elements of laboratory assay reporting. The Association for Molecular Pathology Clinical Practice Committee's Liquid Biopsy Working Group (LBxWG), including organizational representation from the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists, has undertaken a full-text data extraction of 1228 ctDNA publications that describe assays performed in patients with lymphoma and solid tumor malignancies. With an emphasis on clinical assay validation, the LBxWG has developed a set of 13 best practice consensus recommendations for validating, reporting, and publishing clinical ctDNA assays. Recommendations include reporting key pre-analytical considerations and assay performance metrics; this analysis demonstrates these elements are inconsistently included in publications. The LBxWG recommendations are intended to assist clinical laboratories with validating and reporting ctDNA assays and to ensure high-quality data are included in publications. It is expected that these recommendations will need to be updated as the body of literature continues to mature.

Molecular tumour boards - current and future considerations for precision oncology.

Over the past 15 years, rapid progress has been made in developmental therapeutics, especially regarding the use of matched targeted therapies against specific oncogenic molecular alterations across cancer types. Molecular tumour boards (MTBs) are panels of expert physicians, scientists, health-care providers and patient advocates who review and interpret molecular-profiling results for individual patients with cancer and match each patient to available therapies, which can include investigational drugs. Interpretation of the molecular alterations found in each patient is a complicated task that requires an understanding of their contextual functional effects and their correlations with sensitivity or resistance to specific treatments. The criteria for determining the actionability of molecular alterations and selecting matched treatments are constantly evolving. Therefore, MTBs have an increasingly necessary role in optimizing the allocation of biomarker-directed therapies and the implementation of precision oncology. Ultimately, increased MTB availability, accessibility and performance are likely to improve patient care. The challenges faced by MTBs are increasing, owing to the plethora of identifiable molecular alterations and immune markers in tumours of individual patients and their evolving clinical significance as more and more data on patient outcomes and results from clinical trials become available. Beyond next-generation sequencing, broader biomarker analyses can provide useful information. However, greater funding, resources and expertise are needed to ensure the sustainability of MTBs and expand their outreach to underserved populations. Harmonization between practice and policy will be required to optimally implement precision oncology. Herein, we discuss the evolving role of MTBs and current and future considerations for their use in precision oncology.

Multidisciplinary Care of a Large Brain Metastasis in a Patient with Hormone-Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer with Ataxia-Telangiectasia Mutation.

Poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARP)i are emerging as standard oncology treatments in various tumor types. The indications will expand as PARPi are being investigated in various breast cancer subtypes. Currently, except for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer, there is inadequate identification of predictive biomarkers of response. We present a 57-year-old woman with metastatic breast cancer, hormone-receptor-positive, HER2 negative with a germline ataxia-telangiectasia mutation with a large brain metastasis with clinical benefit to talazoparib. This case report exemplifies the importance of the multidisciplinary management of patients with brain metastases and personalized biomarker selected treatment.

A Phase I Trial of Bevacizumab and Temsirolimus in Combination With Valproic Acid in Advanced Solid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical models suggest synergy between anti-angiogenesis therapy, mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), and histone deacetylase inhibitors to promote anticancer activity. METHODS: This phase I study enrolled 47 patients between April 2012 and 2018 and determined safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) when combining bevacizumab, temsirolimus, and valproic acid in patients with advanced cancer. RESULTS: Median age of enrolled patients was 56 years. Patients were heavily pretreated with a median of 4 lines of prior therapy. Forty-five patients (95.7%) experienced one or more treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Grade 3 TRAEs were lymphopenia (14.9%), thrombocytopenia (8.5%), and mucositis (6.4%). Grade 4 TRAEs included lymphopenia (2.1%) and CNS cerebrovascular ischemia (2.1%). Six patients developed DLTs across 10 dose levels with grade 3 infection, rash, mucositis, bowel perforation, elevated lipase, and grade 4 cerebrovascular ischemia. The MTD was dose level 9 (bevacizumab 5 mg/kg days 1 and 15 intravenously (IV) plus temsirolimus 25 mg days 1, 8, 15, and 22 IV and valproic acid 5 mg/kg on days 1-7 and 15-21 per orally (PO)). Objective response rate (ORR) was 7.9% with confirmed partial response (PRs) in 3 patients (one each in parotid gland, ovarian, and vaginal cancers). Stable disease (SD) ≥+6 months was seen in 5 patients (13.1%). Clinical benefit state (CBR: PR + SD ≥+6 months) was 21%. CONCLUSION: Combination therapy with bevacizumab, temsirolimus, and valproic acid was feasible, but there were numerous toxicities, which will require careful management for future clinical development (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01552434).

A phase I trial of the pan-ERBB inhibitor neratinib combined with the MEK inhibitor trametinib in patients with advanced cancer with EGFR mutation/amplification, HER2 mutation/amplification, HER3/4 mutation or KRAS mutation.

PURPOSE: Aberrant alterations of ERBB receptor tyrosine kinases lead to tumorigenesis. Single agent therapy targeting EGFR or HER2 has shown clinical successes, but drug resistance often develops due to aberrant or compensatory mechanisms. Herein, we sought to determine the feasibility and safety of neratinib and trametinib in patients with EGFR mutation/amplification, HER2 mutation/amplification, HER3/4 mutation and KRAS mutation. METHODS: Patients with actionable somatic mutations or amplifications in ERBB genes or actionable KRAS mutations were enrolled to receive neratinib and trametinib in this phase I dose escalation trial. The primary endpoint was determination of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetic analysis and preliminary anti-tumor efficacy. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled with a median age of 50.5 years and a median of 3 lines of prior therapy. Grade 3 treatment-related toxicities included: diarrhea (25%), vomiting (10%), nausea (5%), fatigue (5%) and malaise (5%). The MTD was dose level (DL) minus 1 (neratinib 160 mg daily with trametinib 1 mg, 5 days on and 2 days off) given 2 DLTs of grade 3 diarrhea in DL1 (neratinib 160 mg daily with trametinib 1 mg daily). The treatment-related toxicities of DL1 included: diarrhea (100%), nausea (55.6%) and rash (55.6%). Pharmacokinetic data showed trametinib clearance was significantly reduced leading to high drug exposures of trametinib. Two patients achieved stable disease (SD) ≥ 4 months. CONCLUSION: Neratinib and trametinib combination was toxic and had limited clinical efficacy. This may be due to suboptimal drug dosing given drug-drug interactions. TRIAL REGISTRATION ID: NCT03065387.

Correlation between biomarkers and treatment outcomes in diverse cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of phase I and II immunotherapy clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Many immuno-oncology (IO) trials are conducted without biomarker selection. We performed a meta-analysis of phase I/II clinical trials evaluating immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) to determine the association between biomarkers and clinical outcomes, if any. METHODS: A PubMed search for phase I/II clinical trials with drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (labelled, off-label, combined with investigational ICIs or other treatment modalities) from 2018 to 2020 was performed. The objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between biomarker-positive and biomarker-negative groups, using studies that explored the correlation of biomarkers with outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 174 clinical studies that included 19,178 patients were identified, and 132 studies investigated>30 correlative biomarkers that included PD-L1 expression (≥1%, 111 studies), tumour mutational burden (20 studies) and microsatellite instability/mismatch repair deficiency (10 studies). Overall, 123, 46 and 30 cohorts (drugs, tumour types or biomarkers) with 11,692, 3065, and 2256 patient outcomes for ORR, PFS and OS, respectively, were analysed in correlation with biomarkers. Meta-analyses demonstrated that ICIs in patients with biomarker-positive tumours were associated with higher ORR (odds ratio 2.15 [95% CI, 1.79-2.58], p < 0.0001); and longer PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.55 [95% CI, 0.45-0.67], p < 0.0001), and OS (HR 0.65 [95% CI, 0.53-0.80], p < 0.0001) compared with those with biomarker-negative tumours. Significance for ORR and PFS was retained in multivariate analysis (p < 0.001) (OS, not included owing to the small number of trials reporting OS). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that IO biomarkers should be used in patient selection for ICIs. Prospective studies are warranted.

Feasibility and Safety of Personalized, Multi-Target, Adoptive Cell Therapy (IMA101): First-in-Human Clinical Trial in Patients with Advanced Metastatic Cancer.

IMA101 is an actively personalized, multi-targeted adoptive cell therapy (ACT), whereby autologous T cells are directed against multiple novel defined peptide-HLA (pHLA) cancer targets. HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with relapsed/refractory solid tumors expressing ≥1 of 8 predefined targets underwent leukapheresis. Endogenous T cells specific for up to 4 targets were primed and expanded in vitro. Patients received lymphodepletion (fludarabine, cyclophosphamide), followed by T-cell infusion and low-dose IL2 (Cohort 1). Patients in Cohort 2 received atezolizumab for up to 1 year (NCT02876510). Overall, 214 patients were screened, 15 received lymphodepletion (13 women, 2 men; median age, 44 years), and 14 were treated with T-cell products. IMA101 treatment was feasible and well tolerated. The most common adverse events were cytokine release syndrome (Grade 1, n = 6; Grade 2, n = 4) and expected cytopenias. No patient died during the first 100 days after T-cell therapy. No neurotoxicity was observed. No objective responses were noted. Prolonged disease stabilization was noted in three patients lasting for 13.7, 12.9, and 7.3 months. High frequencies of target-specific T cells (up to 78.7% of CD8+ cells) were detected in the blood of treated patients, persisted for >1 year, and were detectable in posttreatment tumor tissue. Individual T-cell receptors (TCR) contained in T-cell products exhibited broad variation in TCR avidity, with the majority being low avidity. High-avidity TCRs were identified in some patients' products. This study demonstrates the feasibility and tolerability of an actively personalized ACT directed to multiple defined pHLA cancer targets. Results warrant further evaluation of multi-target ACT approaches using potent high-avidity TCRs. See related Spotlight by Uslu and June, p. 865.

Phase 1 dose-escalation study evaluating the safety, pharmacokinetics, and clinical activity of OBI-3424 in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Report of a Phase 1 dose-escalation study of OBI-3424 monotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumors (NCT03592264). METHODS: A classic 3 + 3 design was used to determine the maximum tolerated dose and recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of OBI-3424 administered intravenously, as a single agent, at doses of 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, or 12 mg/m2 (days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle, Schedule A) or 8, 10, 12, or 14 mg/m2 (day 1 of a 21-day cycle, Schedule B). RESULTS: Dose-limiting hematologic toxicities at 12 mg/m2 in Schedule A led to dose and schedule modifications (Schedule B). In Schedule B, maximum tolerated dose was not reached at the maximum dose tested (14 mg/m2). Grade ≥3 anemia was noted in 3/6 patients treated at 14 mg/m2; the RP2D was 12 mg/m2 (Schedule B). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events were experienced by 19/39 (49%) and included anemia (41%) and thrombocytopenia (26%); three patients experienced serious treatment-emergent adverse events (grade ≥3 anemia and thrombocytopenia). One patient had a partial response and 21/33 (64%) had stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: The RP2D is 12 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks. OBI-3424 was well tolerated; dose-dependent, noncumulative thrombocytopenia and anemia were dose-limiting.