Immune checkpoint inhibitors and Carbon iON radiotherapy In solid Cancers with stable disease (ICONIC).

ICONIC is a multicenter, open-label, nonrandomized phase II clinical trial aiming to assess the feasibility and clinical activity of the addition of carbon ion radiotherapy to immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients who have obtained disease stability with pembrolizumab administered as per standard-of-care. The primary end point is objective response rate, and the secondary end points are safety, survival and disease control rate. Translational research is an exploratory aim. The planned sample size is 27 patients. The study combination will be considered worth investigating if at least four objective responses are observed. If the null hypothesis is rejected, ICONIC will be the first proof of concept of the feasibility and clinical activity of the addition of carbon ion radiotherapy to immune checkpoint inhibitors in oncology.

ICONIC is a multicenter, open-label, nonrandomized, phase II clinical trial aiming to evaluate the feasibility and clinical activity of the addition of carbon ion radiotherapy to immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients who have obtained disease stability with pembrolizumab administered as per standard-of-care. Considering that no clinical trials have been conducted thus far to assess the safety of the association between immune checkpoint inhibitors and carbon ion radiotherapy, the current clinical study will provide controlled data about the safety of this unprecedented therapeutic combination. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05229614 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Beyond First-Line Immunotherapy: Potential Therapeutic Strategies Based on Different Pattern Progressions: Oligo and Systemic Progression.

First-line immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapy has deeply changed the treatment landscape and prognosis in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) patients with no targetable alterations. Nonetheless, a percentage of patients progressed on ICI as monotherapy or combinations. Open questions remain on patients' selection, the identification of biomarkers of primary resistance to immunotherapy and the treatment strategies to overcome secondary resistance to first-line immunotherapy. Local ablative approaches are the main therapeutic strategies in oligoprogressive disease, and their role is emerging in patients treated with immunotherapy. Many therapeutic strategies can be adapted in aNSCLC patients with systemic progression to personalize the treatment approach according to re-characterization of the tumors, previous ICI response, and type of progression. This review's aim is to highlight and discuss the current and potential therapeutic approaches beyond first-line ICI-based therapy in aNSCLC patients based on the pattern of disease progression (oligoprogression versus systemic progression).

Pimasertib Versus Dacarbazine in Patients With Unresectable NRAS-Mutated Cutaneous Melanoma: Phase II, Randomized, Controlled Trial with Crossover.

This study investigated the efficacy and safety of pimasertib (MEK1/MEK2 inhibitor) versus dacarbazine (DTIC) in patients with untreated NRAS-mutated melanoma. Phase II, multicenter, open-label trial. Patients with unresectable, stage IIIc/IVM1 NRAS-mutated cutaneous melanoma were randomized 2:1 to pimasertib (60 mg; oral twice-daily) or DTIC (1000 mg/m2; intravenously) on Day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Patients progressing on DTIC could crossover to pimasertib. Primary endpoint: investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints: overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), quality of life (QoL), and safety. Overall, 194 patients were randomized (pimasertib n = 130, DTIC n = 64), and 191 received treatment (pimasertib n = 130, DTIC n = 61). PFS was significantly improved with pimasertib versus DTIC (median 13 versus 7 weeks, respectively; hazard ratio (HR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42-0.83; p = 0.0022). ORR was improved with pimasertib (odds ratio 2.24, 95% CI 1.00-4.98; p = 0.0453). OS was similar between treatments (median 9 versus 11 months, respectively; HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.61-1.30); 64% of patients receiving DTIC crossed over to pimasertib. Serious adverse events (AEs) were more frequent for pimasertib (57%) than DTIC (20%). The most common treatment-emergent AEs were diarrhea (82%) and blood creatine phosphokinase (CPK) increase (68%) for pimasertib, and nausea (41%) and fatigue (38%) for DTIC. Most frequent grade ≥3 AEs were CPK increase (34%) for pimasertib and neutropenia (15%) for DTIC. Mean QoL scores (baseline and last assessment) were similar between treatments. Pimasertib has activity in NRAS-mutated cutaneous melanoma and a safety profile consistent with known toxicities of MEK inhibitors. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01693068.

Surrogate Endpoints in Second-Line Trials of Targeted Agents in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Literature-Based Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) as surrogate endpoints of overall survival (OS) in modern clinical trials investigating the efficacy of targeted agents in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search of literature pertaining to randomized phase II and III trials evaluating targeted agents as second-line treatments for mCRC was performed. The strength of the correlation between both PFS and ORR and OS was assessed based on the Pearson's correlation coefficient (R) and the coefficient of determination (R2). RESULTS: Twenty trials, including a total of 7,571 patients, met the search criteria. The median duration of post-progression survival (PPS) was 7.6 months. The median differences between experimental and control arms were 0.65 months (range, -2.4 to 3.4) for the median PFS and 0.7 months (range, -5.8 to 3.9) for the median OS. PFS and ORR showed moderate (R=0.734, R2=0.539, p < 0.001) and poor correlation (R=0.169, R2=0.029, p=0.476) with OS, respectively. No differences between anti-angiogenic agents and other drugs were evident. CONCLUSION: Targeted agents investigated in the second-line treatment of mCRC provided minimal PFS gains translating into modest OS improvements. Considering both the moderate correlation between PFS and OS and the short duration of PPS, the OS should remain the preferred primary endpoint for randomized clinical trials in the second-line treatment of mCRC.

The tumor-targeting immunocytokine F16-IL2 in combination with doxorubicin: dose escalation in patients with advanced solid tumors and expansion into patients with metastatic breast cancer.

A phase Ib/II trial was performed to evaluate safety, tolerability, recommended dose (RD) and efficacy of F16-IL2, a recombinant antibody-cytokine fusion protein, in combination with doxorubicin in patients with solid tumors (phase Ib) and metastatic breast cancer (phase II). Six patient cohorts with progressive solid tumors (n = 19) received escalating doses of F16-IL2 [5-25 Million International Units (MIU) of IL2 equivalent dose] in combination with escalating doses of doxorubicin (0-25 mg/m(2)) on day 1, 8 and 15 every 4 weeks. Subsequently, patients with metastatic breast cancer (n = 10) received the drug combination at the RD. Clinical data and laboratory findings were analyzed for safety, tolerability, and activity. F16-IL2 could be administered up to 25 MIU, in combination with the RD of doxorubicin (25 mg/m(2)). No human anti-fusion protein antibodies (HAFA) response was detected. Pharmacokinetics of F16-IL2 was dose-dependent over the tested range, with half-lives of ca. 13 and ca. 8 hours for cohorts dosed at lower and higher levels, respectively. Toxicities were controllable and reversible, with no combination treatment-related death. After 8 weeks, 57% and 67% disease control rates were observed for Phase I and II, respectively (decreasing to 43% and 33% after 12 weeks), considering 14 and 9 patients evaluable for efficacy. One patient experienced a long lasting partial response (45 weeks), still on-going at exit of study. F16-IL2 can be safely and repeatedly administered at the RD of 25 MIU in combination with 25 mg/m(2) doxorubicin; its safety and activity are currently being investigated in combination with other chemotherapeutics, in order to establish optimal therapy settings.

Targeted therapies in advanced renal cell carcinoma: the role of metastatic sites as a prognostic factor.

AIM: This retrospective study evaluates whether metastatic sites were associated with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with renal cell carcinoma treated with targeted therapies. PATIENTS & METHODS: In total, 358 patients were analyzed. RESULTS & CONCLUSION: After a median follow-up of 56.1 months, median PFS was 11 months and median OS was 24.2 months. Metastatic sites were associated with PFS: lymph nodes (HR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.12-1.83; p = 0.004), liver (HR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.05-1.90; p = 0.021), bone (HR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.96-1.65; p = 0.091), brain (HR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.46-1.43; p = 0.474) and other sites (HR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.83-1.38; p = 0.589). Metastatic sites were associated with OS: lymph nodes (HR: 1.73; 95% CI: 1.31-2.29; p < 0.001), liver (HR: 1.71; 95% CI: 1.23-2.37; p = 0.002), bone (HR: 1.48; 95% CI: 1.10-1.98; p = 0.009), brain (HR: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.64-2.28; p = 0.568) and other sites (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.81-1.47; p = 0.568). Patients with >2 metastatic sites had shorter PFS and OS. Every association was lost when introducing the Motzer score in regression models.

Palonosetron plus dexamethasone in highly emetogenic chemotherapy: pooled data from two Phase III trials.

AIM: Data from two randomized trials were pooled to further characterize the effectiveness of palonosetron combined with dexamethasone in the setting of highly emetogenic chemotherapy. PATIENTS & METHODS: The analysis included 1411 patients who were randomized to receive palonosetron or ondansetron/granisetron intravenously on day 1 plus either 1-day or 3-day dexamethasone dosing. The primary end point was complete response (no vomiting and no rescue antiemetics over days 1-5) in cycle one. Data across the studies were analyzed by the Mantel-Haenszel method. RESULTS: The vast majority of patients received either cisplatin (62%) or anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide (34%). The palonosetron regimen provided a 12 percentage-point improvement in the rate of overall complete response compared with the control regimen (49.2 vs 37.3%; odds ratio: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.33-2.04; p < 0.0001). The frequency of no delayed nausea at all daily periods was consistently higher in the palonosetron group. CONCLUSION: The current analysis confirmed that palonosetron plus dexamethasone improved control of highly emetogenic chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting throughout 5 days postchemotherapy to a significantly greater extent than the combination including older 5-HT3 antagonists.