Search

Baseline (screening) vs treatment cycle 2 (P=.06; paired t test). For patient 5, baseline data were not available.

Purpose:Assess safety and efficacy of nivolumab plus nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer in a two-part, open-label, phase I trial.Patients and Methods:Fifty chemotherapy-naive patients received nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, and 15) and nivolumab 3 mg/kg (days 1 and 15) in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs; part 1) and grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) or treatment discontinuation due to TEAEs (parts 1/2). Secondary efficacy endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and response. Assessment of programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression was an exploratory endpoint; additional biomarkers were assessed post hoc.Results:One DLT (hepatitis) was reported in part 1 among six DLT-evaluable patients; 48 of 50 patients experienced grade 3/4 TEAEs and 18 discontinued treatment due to TEAEs. One grade 5 TEAE (respiratory failure) was reported. Median [95% confidence interval (CI)] PFS/OS was 5.5 (3.25–7.20 months)/9.9 (6.74–12.16 months) months, respectively [median follow-up for OS, 13.6 months (95% CI, 12.06–23.49 months)]. Overall response rate (95% CI) was 18% (8.6%–31.4%). Median PFS/OS was 5.5/9.7 months (PD-L1 + CD8+/CD4+ cells increased significantly from baseline to cycle 3; median peak on-treatment Ki67+ CD8+ T-cell values were higher in responders than in nonresponders.Conclusions:The safety profile of nivolumab plus nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine at standard doses in advanced pancreatic cancer was manageable, with no unexpected safety signals. Overall, the clinical results of this study do not support further investigation.

Percentage lymphocyte subset Ki67+. All patient visits are binned by treatment cycle. Data at baseline and treatment cycle 3 were compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. All available data are illustrated; however, statistical comparisons were performed only for data available at both baseline and treatment cycle 3 (n=29).

T-Cell Tumor Infiltration in Tissue-Matched Baseline (screening) and On-Treatment Metastatic Tumors (arm B parts 1 and 2)

Investigator-assessed PFS and OS in patients with PD-L1 expression cutoff of 1% (A, B) or 5% (C, D). HR, hazard ratio; mo, months; OS, overall survival; PD-L1, programmed cell death ligand-1; PFS, progression-free survival.

Patients were enrolled in Arm B Part 1 after the safety oversight committee deemed Arm A Part 1 safe. DRC, data review committee; LAPC, locally advanced pancreatic cancer; MPC, metastatic pancreatic cancer; RP2D, recommended Part 2 dose.

Concentrations of CXCL10 (A) and sIL2Rα (B) at baseline and peak on-treatment values. Investigator-assessed PFS in patients with high or low serum cytokines CXCL10 (C) and sIL2Rα (D). CXCL10, interferon gamma-induced protein 10; mo, months; NE, not estimable; NR, nonresponder; PFS, progression-free survival; R, responder; sIL2Rα, soluble form of interleukin 2 receptor alpha; Tx, treatment.

Data Tables

Background: SHP2 is an oncogenic tyrosine phosphatase that transduces receptor tyrosine kinase signaling to the RAS/MAPK pathway via its phosphatase-mediated regulation of guanine nucleotide exchange factors. ERAS-601 is a potent, selective, and orally bioavailable allosteric inhibitor of SHP2. In combination with cetuximab, an antibody that targets epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), ERAS-601 has demonstrated robust nonclinical activity in human papillomavirus (HPV)-negative head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and RAS/RAF wild-type colorectal cancer (CRC) tumors. Method: FLAGSHP-1 is the first-in-human trial of ERAS-601 administered as monotherapy and in combination with other cancer therapies in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors. The primary objectives are to characterize the safety profile, determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD)/recommended dose (RD), and characterize the pharmacokinetics (PK) profile of ERAS-601 as a monotherapy and in combination with other cancer therapies. Secondary objectives include tolerability and antitumor activity in solid tumors. Presented here are results from the combination dose escalation cohorts in which patients received ERAS-601 twice a day for three weeks followed by a one-week break (BID 3/1) in combination with cetuximab (500mg/m2) administered every 2 weeks (Q2W) on a 28-day cycle. Results: As of October 31, 2022, a total of 15 patients with previously treated advanced or metastatic solid tumors received ERAS-601 BID 3/1 at the following dose levels: 20 mg BID 3/1 (n=4), 40 mg BID 3/1 (n=8), or 60 mg BID 3/1 (n=3) in combination with cetuximab. Combination therapy MTD was determined​ to be 40 mg BID 3/1. ERAS-601 Treatment Related Adverse Events (TRAEs) at or below the MTD were all Grade 1 and 2. TRAEs occurring in ≥20% of patients included diarrhea (27%), AST increase (27%), ALT increase (20%), dermatitis acneiform (20%). Grade ≥3 TRAEs included Grade 4 hypokalaemia, Grade 3 diarrhea, platelet count decreased anemia (each 7%); high grade TRAEs were only observed at 60 mg BID 3/1 (above the MTD). Dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were only observed at the 60mg BID 3/1 dose levels and included Grade 3 platelet count decreased (n=1) and Grade 4 hypokalemia (n=1). Pharmacokinetics of ERAS-601 and cetuximab in combination were generally comparable to historical monotherapy PK values, suggesting lack of drug-drug interaction. The evaluation of clinical activity is still ongoing. Conclusions: ERAS-601 in combination with cetuximab in patients with previously treated advanced or metastatic solid tumors shows promising preliminary safety and tolerability with reversible and manageable TRAEs. Further evaluation in relevant tumor types are ongoing. Citation Format: Meredith McKean, Ezra Rosen, Minal Barve, Tarek Meniawy, Judy Wang, David S. Hong, Jennifer Yang, Zhengrong Li, Roxana Picard, Les Brail, Daniela Vecchio, Thomas John, Ezra Cohen, Gregory Obara, Aparna Parikh. Preliminary dose escalation results of ERAS-601 in combination with cetuximab in FLAGSHP-1: a phase I study of ERAS-601, a potent and selective SHP2 inhibitor, in patients with previously treated advanced or metastatic solid tumors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 2 (Clinical Trials and Late-Breaking Research); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(8_Suppl):Abstract nr CT184.

Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has revolutionized the treatment of many cancers but has been ineffective for the treatment of microsatellite stable (MSS) PDAC. The lack of efficacy of immunotherapies in PDAC is due to: 1) a desmoplastic tumor microenvironment (TME); 2) the presence of suppressive cells, including myeloid derived suppressor cells and regulatory T cells; and 3) the lack of antigen-presenting dendritic cells (DCs) that are important in priming an effective immune response to generate functionally effective tumor antigen-specific T cells. We recently completed a pilot study of dual ICB (Ipilumamab and Nivolumab) with radiation therapy (SBRT 8Gy for 3 fractions) in a cohort of 25 metastatic PDAC patients that had progressed on conventional chemotherapy; this combination conferred an impressive 18% ORR and 29% disease control rate measured on non-irradiated lesions (historical 0% ORR with ICB in PDAC). This led to a phase 2 study in 30 metastatic PDAC patients using this dual modality treatment paradigm. To understand the role of radiation and ICB in altering the PDAC tumor microenvironment we performed single-cell RNA-sequencing and TCR-sequencing (>180k cells), and single-nucleus RNA-sequencing (>300k cells) on 36 tumor biopsies (23 pre-treatment, 13 paired on-treatment between day 10 and 21) from patients undergoing treatment in our phase 2 study. Tumor tissue was taken from distinct tissue sites, including primary tumors in the pancreas, and liver and abdominal wall metastases. We identified distinct tumor cell state distributions within different tissues, and a redistribution of cells from basal/mesenchymal states to classical states after radiation. We identified several state-specific interferon stimulated gene programs thus cataloging distinct responses of epithelial cells with different transcriptional states. Importantly, we found a redistribution of T cells states towards proliferating and exhausted T cells with unique clonality after radiation. Additionally, the myeloid compartment after radiation was enriched for C1QC+ and MHCII+ macrophage subsets, as well as infiltrating CD16/CD16 monocytes and CD14 monocytes, each showing induction of unique sets of interferon stimulated genes (ISGs). We next sought to better understand immunotherapy resistance mechanisms within these PDAC patients despite finding strong ISG induction in several subsets. We analyzed covarying gene programs and identified multicellular communities of cells before and after radiation that underlie interaction networks associated with radiation. Together our data provides the most comprehensive single-cell atlas of paired biopsies to study tumor and immune cell states in the context of radiation and ICB response. Citation Format: Arnav Mehta, Aparna Parikh, Milan Parikh, Ryan Park, Moshe Sade-Feldman, Lynn Bi, Nicole Carzo, Tarin M. Grillo, Islam Baiev, Olanike Asupoto, Irena Gushterova, Tom LaSalle, Anna Gonye, Emily Blaum, Sebastien Vigneau, Ronan Chaligne, Ana Lako, Thomas Lila, David Nelson, Caroline Porter, Orr Ashenberg, Karthik Jagadesh, William L. Hwang, Christopher Smillie, David P. Ryan, David T. Ting, Theodore Hong, Dana Pe'er, Nir Hacohen. Dissecting the reorganization of pancreatic tumor microenvironments after radiation and immunotherapy reveals insights into immunotherapy resistance [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Pancreatic Cancer; 2022 Sep 13-16; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(22 Suppl):Abstract nr C012.