Multidimensional biomarker predicts disease control in response to immunotherapy in recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Anti-PD-1 therapy provides clinical benefit in 40-50% of patients with relapsed and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (RM-HNSCC). Selection of anti- PD-1 therapy is typically based on patient PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) which has low specificity for predicting disease control. Therefore, there is a critical need for a clinical biomarker that will predict clinical benefit to anti-PD-1 treatment with high specificity. METHODS: Clinical treatment and outcomes data for 103 RM-HNSCC patients were paired with RNA-sequencing data from formalin-fixed patient samples. Using logistic regression methods, we developed a novel biomarker classifier based on expression patterns in the tumor immune microenvironment to predict disease control with monotherapy PD-1 inhibitors (pembrolizumab and nivolumab). The performance of the biomarker was internally validated using out-of-bag methods. RESULTS: The biomarker significantly predicted disease control (65% in predicted non-progressors vs. 17% in predicted progressors, p < 0.001) and was significantly correlated with overall survival (OS; p = 0.004). In addition, the biomarker outperformed PD-L1 IHC across numerous metrics including sensitivity (0.79 vs 0.64, respectively; p = 0.005) and specificity (0.70 vs 0.61, respectively; p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: This novel assay uses tumor immune microenvironment expression data to predict disease control and OS with high sensitivity and specificity in patients with RM-HNSCC treated with anti-PD-1 monotherapy.

Patient-reported tolerability of adjuvant ipilimumab (3 or 10 mg/kg) versus high-dose interferon alfa-2b for resected high-risk stage III-IV melanoma in phase III trial E1609.

PURPOSE: Trial E1609 demonstrated superior overall survival with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg (ipi3) compared to high-dose interferon (HDI) for patients with resected high-risk melanoma. To inform treatment tolerability, we compared health-related quality of life (HRQoL), gastrointestinal (GI), and treatment-specific physical and cognitive/emotional symptoms. We also compared treatment-specific concerns between all arms. METHODS: We assessed HRQoL using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General, physical and cognitive/emotional concerns using the FACT-Biologic Response Modifier subscale, and GI symptoms with the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Diarrhea subscale pre-treatment and every 3 months. The primary outcome was the difference in HRQoL at 3 months between ipi3/ipi10 vs. HDI. RESULTS: 549 patients (n = 158 ipi3; n = 191 ipi10; n = 200 HDI) were analyzed. 3-month completion was 58.7%. Compared to HDI, ipilimumab patients reported better HRQoL (ipi3 = 87.5 ± 14.6 vs. HDI = 74.7 ± 15.4, p < .001; ipi10 = 84.9 ± 16.5 vs. HDI, p < .001) and fewer physical (ipi3 = 22.3 ± 4.6 vs. HDI = 17.1 ± 5.4, p < .001; ipi10 = 21.8 ± 5.0 vs. HDI p < .001) and cognitive/emotional (ipi3 = 18.6 ± 4.4 vs. HDI = 15.0 ± 5.3, p < .001; ipi10 = 17.7 ± 4.8 vs. HDI p < .001) concerns, but worse GI symptoms (ipi3 = 40.8 ± 5.0 vs. HDI = 42.2 ± 2.9, p = .011; ipi10 = 39.5 ± 7.0 vs. HDI, p < .001). Fewer ipilimumab patients reported worsening treatment-specific concerns (e.g., 52% of ipi3 and 58% of ipi10 reported worsening fatigue vs. 82% HDI, p's < .001). CONCLUSION: PROs demonstrated less toxicity of ipi3 compared to HDI and ipi10. Priorities for symptom management among patients receiving ipilimumab include GI toxicities, fatigue, weakness, appetite loss, arthralgia, and depression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01274338, January 11, 2011 (first posted date) https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01274338?term=NCT01274338&draw=2&rank=1 .

Combination Dabrafenib and Trametinib Versus Combination Nivolumab and Ipilimumab for Patients With Advanced BRAF-Mutant Melanoma: The DREAMseq Trial-ECOG-ACRIN EA6134.

PURPOSE: Combination programmed cell death protein 1/cytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-4-blockade and dual BRAF/MEK inhibition have each shown significant clinical benefit in patients with BRAFV600-mutant metastatic melanoma, leading to broad regulatory approval. Little prospective data exist to guide the choice of either initial therapy or treatment sequence in this population. This study was conducted to determine which initial treatment or treatment sequence produced the best efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a phase III trial, patients with treatment-naive BRAFV600-mutant metastatic melanoma were randomly assigned to receive either combination nivolumab/ipilimumab (arm A) or dabrafenib/trametinib (arm B) in step 1, and at disease progression were enrolled in step 2 to receive the alternate therapy, dabrafenib/trametinib (arm C) or nivolumab/ipilimumab (arm D). The primary end point was 2-year overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were 3-year OS, objective response rate, response duration, progression-free survival, crossover feasibility, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 265 patients were enrolled, with 73 going onto step 2 (27 in arm C and 46 in arm D). The study was stopped early by the independent Data Safety Monitoring Committee because of a clinically significant end point being achieved. The 2-year OS for those starting on arm A was 71.8% (95% CI, 62.5 to 79.1) and arm B 51.5% (95% CI, 41.7 to 60.4; log-rank P = .010). Step 1 progression-free survival favored arm A (P = .054). Objective response rates were arm A: 46.0%; arm B: 43.0%; arm C: 47.8%; and arm D: 29.6%. Median duration of response was not reached for arm A and 12.7 months for arm B (P < .001). Crossover occurred in 52% of patients with documented disease progression. Grade ≥ 3 toxicities occurred with similar frequency between arms, and regimen toxicity profiles were as anticipated. CONCLUSION: Combination nivolumab/ipilimumab followed by BRAF and MEK inhibitor therapy, if necessary, should be the preferred treatment sequence for a large majority of patients.

A phase I/II trial of vorinostat (SAHA) in combination with rituximab-CHOP in patients with newly diagnosed advanced stage diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL): SWOG S0806.

Loss of major histocompatibility Class II expression (MHCII) in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) correlates with decreased survival. MHCII transcription is in part regulated by histone acetylation. We tested the hypothesis that combination of histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDACI) with standard chemotherapy would improve outcomes in DLBCL in part through increased MHCII expression. S0806 was a single arm phase I/II trial of vorinostat given at 400 mg po daily on days 1-9 (subsequently amended to days 1-5 due to toxicity), combined with R-CHOP given on day 3 of a 21-day cycle for 8 cycles, with primary phase II endpoint of 2-year progression free survival (PFS). With 72 evaluable patients, at median follow up of 3 years, 2-year PFS estimate was 73%, and OS estimate was 86%. Considering that the regimen fell short of predefined efficacy improvement and was associated with high rates of febrile neutropenia (38%) and sepsis (19%), it cannot be recommended for general use. Consistent with our hypothesis, patients with low MCHII expression on S0806 had numerically superior outcomes compared to those from trial S0433 which did not use an HDACI, but the difference was not statistically significant. Current studies are focused on finding biomarkers of response to HDACI.