Overall survival with first-line atezolizumab in combination with vemurafenib and cobimetinib in BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma (IMspire150): second interim analysis of a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Primary analysis of the phase 3 IMspire150 study showed improved investigator-assessed progression-free survival with first-line atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (atezolizumab group) versus placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (control group) in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma. With a median follow-up of 18·9 months (IQR 10·4-23·8) at the primary analysis, overall survival data were immature. Here, we report the results from the second, prespecified, interim overall survival analysis. METHODS: The multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 IMspire150 study was done at 108 academic and community hospitals in 20 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated unresectable stage IIIc or stage IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously on day 1 and 15) or placebo plus vemurafenib (960 mg or 720 mg twice daily orally) and cobimetinib (60 mg once daily orally; 21 days on and 7 days off) in 28-day cycles. Atezolizumab and placebo were added to treatment regimens from cycle two onwards. Randomisation was done centrally (Durham, NC, USA) based on a permuted block randomisation scheme (block size of 4) using an interactive web-based response system and was stratified by geographical region and baseline lactate dehydrogenase concentration. Overall survival was analysed in the intention-to-treat population and safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug according to actual treatment received. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, which was previously reported. Here, we report the second, prespecified, interim overall survival analysis, which was planned after about 270 overall survival events had occurred. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer enrolling patients, and it is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908672. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2017, and April 26, 2018, 514 patients (median age 54 years [IQR 43-63]; 299 [58%] men and 215 [42%] women) were enrolled in the trial and randomly assigned to the atezolizumab group (256 [50%] patients) or the control group (258 [50%] patients). At the data cutoff (Sept 8, 2021), 273 patients had died (126 in the atezolizumab group and 147 in the control group). Median follow-up was 29·1 months (IQR 10·1-45·4) for the atezolizumab group versus 22·8 months (10·6-44·1) for the control group. Median overall survival was 39·0 months (95% CI 29·9-not estimable) in the atezolizumab group versus 25·8 months (22·0-34·6) in the control group (HR 0·84 [95% CI 0·66-1·06]; p=0·14). The most common adverse events of any grade in the atezolizumab group were blood creatine phosphokinase increased (123 [53%] of 231 patients), diarrhoea (116 [50%]), and pyrexia (115 [50%]). The most common adverse events of any grade in the control group were diarrhoea (157 [56%] of 280 patients), blood creatine phosphokinase increased (135 [48%]), and rash (119 [43%]). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were increased lipase (54 [23%] of 231 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 62 [22%] of 280 patients in the control group), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (51 [22%] vs 50 [18%]), and increased alanine aminotransferase (32 [14%] vs 26 [9%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 112 (48%) patients in the atezolizumab group and 117 (42%) patients in the control group. Grade 5 adverse events were reported in eight (3%) patients in the atezolizumab group versus six (2%) patients in the control group. Two grade 5 adverse events (hepatitis fulminant and hepatic failure) in the atezolizumab group were considered to be associated with the triplet combination, and one event in the control group (pulmonary haemorrhage) was considered to be associated with cobimetinib. INTERPRETATION: Additional follow-up of the IMspire150 trial showed that overall survival was not significantly improved with atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib compared with placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma. Results of the final analysis are awaited to establish whether a significant improvement in overall survival can be achieved with long-term treatment with this triplet combination versus vemurafenib plus cobimetinib. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Real-World Experience with Targeted Therapy in BRAF Mutant Advanced Melanoma Patients: Results from a Multicenter Retrospective Observational Study Advanced Melanoma in Russia (Experience) (ADMIRE).

Clinical trials of targeted therapy (TT) and immunotherapy (IT) for highly aggressive advanced melanoma have shown marked improvements in response and survival rates. However, real-world data on treatment patterns and clinical outcomes for patients with advanced BRAF V600 mutant melanoma are ultimately scarce. The study was designed as an observational retrospective chart review study, which included 382 patients with advanced BRAF V600 mutant melanoma, who received TT in a real-world setting and were not involved in clinical trials. The data were collected from twelve medical centers in Russia. The objective response rates (ORRs) to combined BRAFi plus MEKi and to BRAFi mono-therapy were 57.4% and 39.8%, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 9.2 months and 22.6 months, respectively, for the combined first-line therapy; 9.4 months and 16.1 months, respectively, for the combined second-line therapy; and 7.4 months and 17.1 months, respectively, for the combined third- or higher-line therapy. Analysis of treatment patterns demonstrated the effectiveness of the combined TT with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors in patients with brain metastases, rare types of BRAF mutations, and across lines of therapy, as well as a well-tolerated and manageable safety profile.

Novel PD-1 inhibitor prolgolimab: expanding non-resectable/metastatic melanoma therapy choice.

BACKGROUND: Prolgolimab is an IgG1 anti-PD-1 (programmed cell death protein 1) monoclonal antibody containing the Fc-silencing 'LALA' mutation. We assessed the efficacy and safety of two dosing regimens of prolgolimab in patients with advanced melanoma in a multicenter open-label parallel-arm phase II trial (MIRACULUM). We present the final analysis after 1 year of follow-up and additional efficacy results from 2 years of follow-up. METHODS: Patients with advanced cutaneous or non-cutaneous melanoma, including stable brain metastasis, without autoimmune disease and who underwent no prior targeted therapy, anti-PD-(L)1 or anti-CTLA-4 (cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4) therapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive prolgolimab in 2 dosing regimens, 1 mg/kg every 2 weeks (arm 1) or 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks (arm 2), until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Randomisation was stratified based on performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0 or 1), lactate dehydrogenase levels (elevated or normal) and prior systemic therapy (naive or previously treated). The primary outcome was the objective response rate, assessed as per immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours by independent central review. The hypothesis that each dosing regimen of prolgolimab has an overall response rate >28% was tested independently for each study arm comprising all patients who received at least one dose of prolgolimab. Exploratory assessment of efficacy, including subgroup analysis, at 2 years of follow-up was not specified in the protocol. This study is registered withClinicalTrials.gov(NCT03269565). RESULTS: Between August 2017 and March 2018, 126 patients with advanced melanoma were enrolled. At main 1-year data cut-off, the median follow-up was 13.8 and 14.5 months in arm 1 and 2, respectively. An objective response was observed in 38.1% of patients (arm 1) and in 28.6% (arm 2). Grade III-IV treatment-related adverse events occurred in 12.7% and 3.2% of patients in arm 1 and 2, respectively. For exploratory efficacy analysis, the median follow-up was 25.4 and 25.7 months in arm 1 and 2, respectively. The 2-year progression-free survival was 33.3% in arm 1 and 30.2% in arm 2, and the 2-year overall survival was 57.1% and 46.0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The MIRACULUM study met its primary end-point in both the study arms. Prolgolimab showed significant antitumour activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with advanced melanoma.

Melatonin and Metformin Failed to Modify the Effect of Dacarbazine in Melanoma.

LESSONS LEARNED: Melatonin did not increase the efficacy of systemic chemotherapy in melanoma. Metformin did not increase the efficacy of systemic chemotherapy in melanoma. BACKGROUND: Current data support the possibility of antitumor activity of melatonin and metformin. METHODS: From March 2014 to December 2016, 57 patients with disseminated melanoma received dacarbazine (DTIC) 1,000 mg/m2 on day 1 of a 28-day cycle, either as monotherapy (first group) or in combination with melatonin 3 mg p.o. daily (second group) or metformin 850 mg two times a day p.o. daily (third group) as the first-line of chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints were time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), immunologic biomarkers, and quality of life. RESULTS: ORR was 7% and did not differ among the treatment groups. Median TTP was 57, 57, and 47 days, respectively, in the first, second, and third groups (р = .362). Median OS was 236, 422, and 419 days, respectively (p = .712). Two patients from the combinations groups showed delayed response to therapy. The increase of CD3+ CD4+ HLA-DR+ lymphocytes (p = .003), CD3+ CD8+ HLA-DR+ (p = .045), CD3+ CD8+ lymphocytes (p = .012), CD4+ CD25high CD127low lymphocytes (p = .029), and overall quantity of lymphocytes (p = .021) was observed in patients with clinical benefit. CONCLUSION: No benefit was found in either combination over DTIC monotherapy. Delayed responses in melatonin and metformin combination groups were registered. The increase of lymphocyte subpopulations responsible for antitumor immune response demonstrates the immune system's potential involvement in clinical activity.

Atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib as first-line treatment for unresectable advanced BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma (IMspire150): primary analysis of the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: IMspire150 aimed to evaluate first-line combination treatment with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors and immune checkpoint therapy in BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced or metastatic melanoma. METHODS: IMspire150 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study done at 112 institutes in 20 countries. Patients with unresectable stage IIIc-IV, BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma were randomly assigned 1:1 to 28-day cycles of atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (atezolizumab group) or atezolizumab placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (control group). In cycle 1, all patients received vemurafenib and cobimetinib only; atezolizumab placebo was added from cycle 2 onward. Randomisation was stratified by lactate dehydrogenase concentration and geographical region. Blinding for atezolizumab was achieved by means of an identical intravenous placebo, and blinding for vemurafenib was achieved by means of a placebo tablet. The primary outcome was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. This trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908672) is ongoing but no longer recruiting patients. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2017, and April 26, 2018, 777 patients were screened and 514 were enrolled and randomly assigned to the atezolizumab group (n=256) or control group (n=258). At a median follow-up of 18·9 months (IQR 10·4-23·8), progression-free survival as assessed by the study investigator was significantly prolonged with atezolizumab versus control (15·1 vs 10·6 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0·78; 95% CI 0·63-0·97; p=0·025). Common treatment-related adverse events (>30%) in the atezolizumab and control groups were blood creatinine phosphokinase increased (51·3% vs 44·8%), diarrhoea (42·2% vs 46·6%), rash (40·9%, both groups), arthralgia (39·1% vs 28·1%), pyrexia (38·7% vs 26·0%), alanine aminotransferase increased (33·9% vs 22·8%), and lipase increased (32·2% vs 27·4%); 13% of patients in the atezolizumab group and 16% in the control group stopped all treatment because of adverse events. INTERPRETATION: The addition of atezolizumab to targeted therapy with vemurafenib and cobimetinib was safe and tolerable and significantly increased progression-free survival in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

An Open-Label Study of the Safety and Efficacy of Tag-7 Gene-Modified Tumor Cells-Based Vaccine in Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Malignant Melanoma or Renal Cell Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: This study showed that carefully selected patients with locally advanced and metastatic forms of malignant melanoma and renal cell carcinoma could potentially have long-term disease control with a tag-7 gene-modified tumor cells-based vaccine. Randomized clinical trials in patients whose tumors produce low amounts of immunosuppressive factors are needed to confirm this hypothesis in both the adjuvant and metastatic settings. BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy may produce long-lasting effects on survival and toxicity. The magnitude of efficacy may be dependent on immune factors. We analyzed the results of a phase I/II study of a tag-7 gene-modified tumor cells-based vaccine (GMV) in patients with malignant melanoma (MM) or renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with biomarker analysis of immunosuppressive factors (ISFs) production by their tumor cells. METHODS: From 2001 to 2014, 80 patients received GMV: 68 with MM and 12 with RCC. Treatment in the metastatic setting included 61 patients (MM, 51; RCC, 10), and treatment in the adjuvant setting (after complete cytoreduction) included 19 patients (MM, 17; RCC, 2). Twenty-six patients were stage III (33%), and 54 (67%) were stage IV. The patients' tumor samples were transferred to culture, transfected with tag-7 gene, and inactivated by radiation. The produced product was injected subcutaneously every 3 weeks until progression or 2 years of therapy. ISFs were measured in the supernatants of the tumor cell cultures and used as predictive factors. RESULTS: No major safety issues or grade 5 adverse events (AEs) were seen. One grade 4 and two grade 3 AEs were registered. No AEs were registered in 89.4% of treatment cycles. No delayed AE was found. The 5-year overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population was 25.1%. There were no differences between MM OS and RCC OS (log rank, p = .44). Median OS in the metastatic setting was 0.7 years and in the adjuvant setting was 3.1 years. Classification trees were built on the basis of ISF production (Fig. 1). The median OS was 6.6 years in the favorable prognosis (FP) group (major histocompatibility complex class I polypeptide-related sequence A [MICA] level ≤582 pg/mL, n = 15) and 4.6 months in the unfavorable (UF) group (MICA level >582 pg/mL, n = 12; p < .0001). No significant differences were found between classification trees based on ISFs (transforming growth factor ß1 [TGF-ß1], interleukin-10 [IL-10], and vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF]). In patients with stage III-IV MM with FP, median OS was 2.3 years, with 31% patients alive at 10 years (Fig. 2) in the UF group (0.4 years; log rank, p = 1.94E-5). No FP patients received modern immunotherapy. CONCLUSION: GMV showed high results in carefully selected patients with low ISF (TGF-ß1, IL-10, and VEGF) production. The method should be further investigated in patients with FP.

Nivolumab in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma and chronic hepatitis C virus infection.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) interferes with activation of innate and adaptive immune responses. Theoretically, the efficacy and toxicity of immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients infected with HCV may differ. Nevertheless, HCV was an exclusion criterion in most checkpoint inhibitor trials. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients with or without chronic HCV infection. METHODS: In a matched cohort study, data were collected from 174 patients, retrospectively. All patients had clear-cell mRCC, chronic HCV infection (case study group), no evidence of other malignancy or cirrhosis, and had received nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Quantitation of HCV RNA in plasma samples was performed before and during treatment with nivolumab with the automated HCV test (Hoffmann-La Roche, Switzerland). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and rate of grade 3-4 adverse events in study and control cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 44 matched patients were included. Groups were well balanced. HCV-infected patients had significantly longer OS and PFS. Median OS was 27.5 (95% CI 25.3-29.7) and 21.7 (20.3-23.1) in study and control groups, respectively (P = 0.005). Median PFS was 7.5 (5.7-9.3) and 4.9 (4-5.8) (P = 0.013). Despite no differences in ORR between groups (27% vs. 23%, P = 0.7), patients with HCV had significantly more durable responses (P = 0.01). Nivolumab was well tolerated in all HCV-positive patients. No unexpected toxicity was observed. Assessment of viral load during nivolumab therapy was available in 14 of 22 (64%) patients with HCV. Nivolumab did not significantly impact HCV concentration (mean change 210 IU/ml, P = 0.82) in the absence of antiviral therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety profiles observed in this study support the administration of nivolumab in mRCC patients infected with HCV and warrant further investigation.

Vemurafenib-induced progression of breast cancer: a case report and review of the literature.

Vemurafenib, a specific inhibitor of mutated BRAF kinase, may activate wild-type BRAF and therefore induce squamous cell skin carcinomas in patients treated for melanoma. All vemurafenib clinical trials excluded patients with multiple primary malignant tumors; therefore, the action of this drug on concurrent BRAF wild-type malignancies remains insufficiently studied. We observed a patient, who was administered vemurafenib for BRAF mutation-containing melanoma, but experienced immediate relapse of previously controlled breast cancer disease. Interestingly, breast cancer lesions underwent regression soon after vemurafenib discontinuation. Therefore, caution must be taken while considering vemurafenib treatment for patients with multiple tumors.

Lapatinib in Combination With Capecitabine Plus Oxaliplatin in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Advanced or Metastatic Gastric, Esophageal, or Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma: TRIO-013/LOGiC--A Randomized Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of adding lapatinib to capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CapeOx) in patients with previously untreated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -amplified advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with HER2-positive advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned at a one-to-one ratio to CapeOx plus lapatinib 1,250 mg or placebo daily. Primary end point was overall survival (OS) in patients with centrally confirmed HER2 amplification in the primary efficacy population. RESULTS: A total of 545 patients were randomly assigned, and 487 patients comprised the primary efficacy population. Median OS in the lapatinib and placebo arms was 12.2 (95% CI, 10.6 to 14.2) and 10.5 months (95% CI, 9.0 to 11.3), respectively, which was not significantly different (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.12). Median progression-free survival in the lapatinib and placebo arms was 6.0 (95% CI, 5.6 to 7.0) and 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.4 to 5.7), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.00; P = .0381). Response rate was significantly higher in the lapatinib arm: 53% (95% CI, 46.4 to 58.8) compared with 39% (95% CI, 32.9 to 45.3) in the placebo arm (P = .0031). Preplanned exploratory subgroup analyses showed OS in the lapatinib arm was prolonged in Asian and younger patients. No correlation was observed between HER2 immunohistochemistry status and survival. There were increased toxicities in the lapatinib arm, particularly diarrhea. CONCLUSION: Addition of lapatinib to CapeOx did not increase OS in patients with HER2-amplified gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. There were clear differences in the effect of lapatinib depending on region and age. Future studies could examine this correlation.

BRAF-mutated clear cell sarcoma is sensitive to vemurafenib treatment.

We report a patient with a metastatic relapse of clear cell sarcoma, whose tumor harbored BRAF V600E mutation. Standard chemotherapy with doxorubicin and ifosfamide failed to slow the disease progression. Subsequent administration of vemurafenib (960 mg twice a day) resulted in complete tumor response after 8 weeks of treatment. Literature data on the use of vemurafenib and dabrafenib in non-melanoma BRAF-mutated tumors are reviewed.