Search

Supplementary Figures S1-S5

Purpose:This clinical trial combined pembrolizumab and vorinostat in recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck (HN), and salivary gland cancer (SGC).Patients and Methods:Patients with progressing incurable HN and SGC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) ≤1, no prior immunotherapy, RECIST1.1 measurable disease, and normal organ function were eligible. Pembrolizumab 200 mg was given intravenous every 21 days, and vorinostat 400 mg given orally 5 days on and 2 days off during each 21-day cycle. Primary endpoints were safety and objective response rates.Results:From November 2015 to August 2017, 25 patients with HN and 25 SGC were enrolled. Median age was 61 (range, 33–86) years, 39 (78%) were male, 21 (62%) were never smokers, and 27 (54%) had ECOG 0. In HN, 13 (52%) were p16+ oropharynx. Most common SGC histologies were adenoid cystic 12 (48%), acinic cell 3 (12%), and mucoepidermoid 3 (12%). Adverse events (AEs) in all patients were: 27 (54%) with grade ≥ 1 and 18 (36%) with grade ≥ 3. The most common AEs in all patients were renal insufficiency in seven, (14%), fatigue in six, (12%), and nausea in three (6%). There were three (12%) deaths on study. Responses in HN were complete response (CR) 0, partial response (PR) eight (32%), and stable disease (SD) five (20%). Efficacy in SGCs was CR 0, PR four (16%) in one lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma, two acinic cell, one adenoid cystic, and SD 14 (56%). In the HN group, median follow-up (mFUP) was 12.6 months, median overall survival (mOS) was 12.6 months, and median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 4.5 months. In SGC, mFUP was 13.1 months, mOS was 14.0 months, and mPFS was 6.9 months.Conclusions:This combination demonstrated activity in HN, with fewer responses in SGC. Toxicities were higher than reported with pembrolizumab alone.

Supplement Figure 1: Synergistic cytotoxic effect of pembrolizumab combined with vorinostat in HNSCC tissue slice culture. HNSCC slices (250 �m) were cultured and treated with 20 �g/ml of isotype control antibody IgG4 or pembrolizumab, with or without vorinostat (20 �M, 100 �M) for 6 days. Graph shows the percentage of cleaved-caspase-3+ cells. Unpaired student's tests, P-values are as follows: *p < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P< 0.001.

Supplementary Data from ASCEND-7: Efficacy and Safety of Ceritinib Treatment in Patients with ALK-Positive Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Metastatic to the Brain and/or Leptomeninges

supplemental tables and legends (no revisions, re-uploaded)

Supplementary Figure from ASCEND-7: Efficacy and Safety of Ceritinib Treatment in Patients with ALK-Positive Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Metastatic to the Brain and/or Leptomeninges

Purpose: This phase Ib study (NCT02179918) evaluated the safety, antitumor activity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of utomilumab, a fully human IgG2 mAb agonist of the T-cell costimulatory receptor 4-1BB/CD137 in combination with the humanized, PD-1–blocking IgG4 mAb pembrolizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors.Experimental Design: Utomilumab (0.45–5.0 mg/kg) and pembrolizumab (2 mg/kg) were administered intravenously every 3 weeks. Utomilumab dose escalation was conducted using the time-to-event continual reassessment method.Results: Twenty-three patients received combination treatment with no dose-limiting toxicities. Treatment-emergent adverse events were mostly grades 1 to 2, without any treatment-related discontinuations. Six patients (26.1%) had confirmed complete or partial responses. Pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity of utomilumab and pembrolizumab were similar when administered alone or in combination. A trend toward higher levels of activated memory/effector peripheral blood CD8+ T cells was observed in responders versus nonresponders.Conclusions: The safety, tolerability, and clinical activity demonstrated by utomilumab in combination with pembrolizumab support further investigation in patients with advanced solid tumors. Clin Cancer Res; 23(18); 5349–57. ©2017 AACR.See related commentary by Pérez-Ruiz et al., p. 5326

Table S1. Patient flow by dose group Table S2. PK parameters of utomilumab following multiple dosing Figure S1. Partial response in a patient with anaplastic thyroid carcinoma (utomilumab 3.6 mg/kg + pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg) at cycle 4 versus baseline. Figure S2. Mean concentration-time profile for pembrolizumab

Correlative translational pharmacodynamics data revised

Supplement

Purpose: The WEE1 tyrosine kinase regulates G2–M transition and maintains genomic stability, particularly in p53-deficient tumors which require DNA repair after genotoxic therapy. Thus, a need arises to exploit the role of WEE1 inhibition in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) mostly driven by tumor-suppressor loss. This completed phase I clinical trial represents the first published clinical experience using the WEE1 inhibitor, AZD1775, with cisplatin and docetaxel.Patients and Methods: We implemented an open-label phase I clinical trial using a 3+3 dose-escalation design for patients with stage III/IVB HNSCC with borderline-resectable or -unresectable disease, but who were candidates for definitive chemoradiation. Escalating AZD1775 was administered orally twice a day over 2.5 days on the first week, then in combination with fixed cisplatin (25 mg/m2) and docetaxel (35 mg/m2) for 3 additional weeks. The primary outcome measure was adverse events to establish MTD. Secondary measures included response rates, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics, and genomic data.Results: The MTD for AZD1775 was established at 150 mg orally twice per day for 2.5 days. RECISTv1.1 responses were seen in 5 of 10 patients; histologic adjustment revealed three additional responders. The only drug-limiting toxicity was grade 3 diarrhea. The PK C8hr target of 240 nmol/L was achieved on day 4 at all three doses tested. Pharmacodynamic analysis revealed a reduction in pY15-Cdk, and increases in γH2AX, CC3, and RPA32/RPA2 were noted in responders versus nonresponders.Conclusions: The triplet combination of AZD1775, cisplatin, and docetaxel is safe and tolerable. Preliminary results show promising antitumor efficacy in advanced HNSCC, meriting further investigation at the recommended phase II dose. Clin Cancer Res; 24(12); 2740–8. ©2018 AACR.

Study Schema Supplemental figure 1 (no revisions, reuploaded)

Purpose:Although PD-(L)1 inhibitors have shown efficacy in advanced/metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), many patients do not respond to this treatment and more effective combinations with acceptable toxicities are needed. To assess the potential benefit of combining localized innate immune stimulation with checkpoint blockade, the TLR9 agonist DV281 was combined with nivolumab in a phase Ib study.Patients and Methods:Patients after one or two prior lines of systemic therapy were enrolled in a dose-escalation study with a 3+3 design. DV281 was administered via inhalation in five dose cohorts at 1 to 25 mg; nivolumab 240 mg was administered intravenously every 2 weeks. Safety, tolerability, pharmacodynamics, and response to treatment were assessed.Results:Twenty-six patients with advanced NSCLC enrolled. Baseline programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression was present in 16 patients (61.5%); 21 (80.7%) had received previous anti–PD-1/PD-L1. Thirteen patients (50%) had stable disease, nine (34.6%) had progressive disease, and four (15.4%) were not evaluable. Median duration of disease control was 124 days. Adverse events were seen in 16 patients (61.5%), mostly grade 1/2 chills, fatigue, flu-like symptoms, diarrhea, and rash; there was only one grade 3 adverse event (dyspnea). Pharmacodynamic assessment, measured by IFN- inducible gene expression, showed target engagement in all dose cohorts. Systemic pharmacodynamic responses plateaued in the 2 highest dose cohorts.Conclusions:DV281 with nivolumab was well tolerated with target engagement observed at every dose. Pharmacodynamic advantages at doses above 10 mg were unclear. The long duration of disease control in 50% of patients suggests clinically relevant activity in this population of heavily pretreated patients.

Purpose: Tumor-associated PD-L1 expression is predictive of clinical response to PD-1–directed immunotherapy. However, PD-L1–negative patients may also respond to PD-1 checkpoint blockade, suggesting that other PD-1 ligands may be relevant to the clinical activity of these therapies. The prevalence of PD-L2, the other known ligand of PD-1, and its relationship to response to anti-PD-1 therapy were evaluated.Experimental Design: PD-L2 expression was assessed in archival tumor tissue from seven indications using a novel immunohistochemical assay. In addition, relationships between clinical response and PD-L2 status were evaluated in tumor tissues from patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) with recurrent or metastatic disease, treated with pembrolizumab.Results: PD-L2 expression was observed in all tumor types and present in stromal, tumor, and endothelial cells. The prevalence and distribution of PD-L2 correlated significantly with PD-L1 (P = 0.0012–Conclusions: Clinical response to pembrolizumab in patients with HNSCC may be related partly to blockade of PD-1/PD-L2 interactions. Therapy targeting both PD-1 ligands may provide clinical benefit in these patients. Clin Cancer Res; 23(12); 3158–67. ©2017 AACR.

Purpose:Central nervous system metastases are a prominent cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with ALK-positive (ALK+) non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The phase II ASCEND-7 (NCT02336451) study was specifically designed to assess the efficacy and safety of the ALK inhibitor (ALKi) ceritinib in patients with ALK+ NSCLC metastatic to the brain and/or leptomeninges.Patients and Methods:Patients with active brain metastases were allocated to study arms 1 to 4 based on prior exposure to an ALKi and/or prior brain radiation (arm 1: prior radiotherapy/ALKi-pretreated; arm 2: no radiotherapy/ALKi-pretreated; arm 3: prior radiotherapy/ALKi-naïve; arm 4: no radiotherapy/ALKi-naïve). Arm 5 included patients with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis. Patients received ceritinib 750 mg once daily (fasted condition). Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed whole-body overall response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR) and intracranial/extracranial responses.Results:Per investigator assessment, in arms 1 (n = 42), 2 (n = 40), 3 (n = 12), and 4 (n = 44), respectively: whole-body ORRs [95% confidence interval (CI)] were 35.7% (21.6–52.0), 30.0% (16.6–46.5), 50.0% (21.1–78.9), and 59.1% (43.2–73.7); whole-body DCR (95% CI): 66.7% (50.5–80.4), 82.5% (67.2–92.7), 66.7% (34.9–90.1), and 70.5% (54.8–83.2); intracranial ORRs (95% CI): 39.3% (21.5–59.4), 27.6% (12.7–47.2), 28.6% (3.7–71.0), and 51.5% (33.5–69.2). In arm 5 (n = 18), whole-body ORR was 16.7% (95% CI, 3.6–41.4) and DCR was 66.7% (95% CI, 41.0–86.7). Paired cerebrospinal fluid and plasma sampling revealed that ceritinib penetrated the human blood–brain barrier.Conclusions:Ceritinib showed antitumor activity in patients with ALK+ NSCLC with active brain metastases and/or leptomeningeal disease, and could be considered in the management of intracranial disease.See related commentary by Murciano-Goroff et al., p. 2477

Summary Background Both innate and adaptive immune responses are important components of anticancer immunity. The CD47–SIRPα interaction could represent an important pathway used by tumour cells to evade immune surveillance. We aimed to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and anticancer activity of evorpacept (also known as ALX148), a high-affinity CD47-blocking protein with an inactive IgG Fc region in patients with solid tumours. Methods We did a first-in-human, open-label, multicentre, phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study at nine hospitals and one clinic in the USA and Korea. Eligible patients for the dose-escalation and safety lead-in phases were aged 18 years or older with histological or cytological diagnosis of advanced or metastatic solid tumours with no available standard therapy, measurable or unmeasurable disease according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1. In the dose-escalation phase, which used a 3 + 3 design, patients received intravenous evorpacept at either 0·3, 1, 3, or 10 mg/kg once per week in 21-day cycles, or 30 mg/kg once every other week in 28-day cycles. In the safety lead-in phase, patients were given the maximum tolerable dose of evorpacept from the dose-escalation phase plus either intravenous pembrolizumab (200 mg administered once every 3 weeks) or intravenous trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose followed by 6 mg/kg once every 3 weeks). In the dose-expansion phase, additional patients aged 18 years or older with second-line or later-line advanced malignancies were enrolled into three parallel cohorts: those with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and those with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were given the maximum tolerated dose of evorpacept plus intravenous pembrolizumab (200 mg administered once every 3 weeks), and patients with HER2-positive gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer were given the maximum tolerated dose of evorpacept plus intravenous trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose followed by 6 mg/kg once every 3 weeks) until disease progression, voluntary withdrawal from the study, or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was the maximum tolerated dose of evorpacept administered as a single agent and in combination with pembrolizumab or trastuzumab, measured by the occurrence of dose-limiting toxicities during the first cycle, and was assessed in all patients who had received at least one dose of evorpacept. Secondary outcomes included the safety, tolerability, and antitumour activity of evorpacept, alone or in combination with pembrolizumab or trastuzumab. The primary outcome, safety, and tolerability were assessed in all patients who had received at least one dose of evorpacept, and antitumour activity was assessed in those who recieved at least one dose of study treatment and underwent at least one post-baseline tumor assessment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03013218 . Findings Between March 6, 2017, and Feb 21, 2019, 110 patients received single-agent evorpacept (n=28), evorpacept plus pembrolizumab (n=52), or evorpacept plus trastuzumab (n=30), and were included in the safety analysis. Median follow-up was 29·1 months (95% CI not calculable [NC]–NC) in the single-agent cohort, 27·0 months (25·1–28·8) in the evorpacept plus pembrolizumab cohort, and 32·7 months (27·0–32·7) in the evorpacept plus trastuzumab cohort. Two (7%) dose-limiting toxicities in the first cycle were reported in patients who received single-agent evorpacept; neutropenia with an associated infection in one patient with gastroesophageal junction cancer who received 3 mg/kg once per week, and thrombocytopenia with associated bleeding in one patient with pancreatic cancer who received 30 mg/kg once every other week. No maximum tolerated dose was reached; the maximum administered doses were 10 mg/kg once per week or 30 mg/kg once every other week. The 10 mg/kg once per week dose was used in the expansion cohorts in combination with pembrolizumab or trastuzumab. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were thrombocytopenia with single-agent evorpacept (two [7%] patients) and evorpacept plus pembrolizumab (two [4%]), and thrombocytopenia (two [7%]) and neutropenia (two [7%]) with evorpacept plus trastuzumab. In patients who received single-agent evorpacept, four treatment-related serious adverse events were reported. Five serious treatment-related adverse events related to evorpacept plus pembrolizumab were reported, and one serious adverse event related to evorpacept plus trastuzumab was reported. In response-evaluable patients in the dose-escalation phase (n=15) receiving single-agent evorpacept once per week, four (27%) had a best overall response of stable disease (two received 0·3 mg/kg, one received 3 mg/kg, and one received 10 mg/kg); in the 11 patients who received single-agent evorpacept at the highest dose of 30 mg/kg once every other week, two (18%) had stable disease. In the dose-expansion cohort, overall responses were recorded in four (20·0%; 95% CI 5·7–43·7) of 20 patients with HNSCC who received evorpacept plus pembrolizumab, in one (5·0%; 0·1–24·9) of 20 patients with NSCLC who received evorpacept plus pembrolizumab, and in four (21·1%; 6·1–45·6) of 19 patients with gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer who received evorpacept plus trastuzumab. Interpretation The safety findings support the use of evorpacept in combination with pembrolizumab or trastuzumab for patients with advanced solid tumours. Preliminary antitumour activity results support future investigation of evorpacept combined with pembrolizumab or trastuzumab in patients with HNSCC, gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer, and NSCLC. Funding ALX Oncology.

Purpose: Although PD-(L)1 inhibitors have shown efficacy in advanced/metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), many patients do not respond to this treatment and more effective combinations with acceptable toxicities are needed. To assess the potential benefit of combining localized innate immune stimulation with checkpoint blockade, the TLR9 agonist DV281 was combined with nivolumab in a phase Ib study. Patients and Methods: Patients after one or two prior lines of systemic therapy were enrolled in a dose-escalation study with a 3+3 design. DV281 was administered via inhalation in five dose cohorts at 1 to 25 mg; nivolumab 240 mg was administered intravenously every 2 weeks. Safety, tolerability, pharmacodynamics, and response to treatment were assessed. Results: Twenty-six patients with advanced NSCLC enrolled. Baseline programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression was present in 16 patients (61.5%); 21 (80.7%) had received previous anti–PD-1/PD-L1. Thirteen patients (50%) had stable disease, nine (34.6%) had progressive disease, and four (15.4%) were not evaluable. Median duration of disease control was 124 days. Adverse events were seen in 16 patients (61.5%), mostly grade 1/2 chills, fatigue, flu-like symptoms, diarrhea, and rash; there was only one grade 3 adverse event (dyspnea). Pharmacodynamic assessment, measured by IFN- inducible gene expression, showed target engagement in all dose cohorts. Systemic pharmacodynamic responses plateaued in the 2 highest dose cohorts. Conclusions: DV281 with nivolumab was well tolerated with target engagement observed at every dose. Pharmacodynamic advantages at doses above 10 mg were unclear. The long duration of disease control in 50% of patients suggests clinically relevant activity in this population of heavily pretreated patients.

BackgroundEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) induce cytolysis and release of tumour proteins, which can stimulate antigen-specific T cells. The safety and efficacy of durvalumab and gefitinib in combination for TKI-naive patients with advancedEGFRm NSCLC was evaluated.MethodsThis Phase 1 open-label, multicentre trial (NCT02088112) was conducted in 56 patients with NSCLC. Dose expansion permitted TKI-naive patients, primarily with activating L858R or Ex19delEGFRm. Arms 1 + 1a received concurrent therapy; Arm 2 received 4 weeks of gefitinib induction followed by concurrent therapy.ResultsFrom dose escalation, the recommended dose of durvalumab was 10 mg/kg Q2W with 250 mg QD gefitinib. Pharmacokinetics were as expected, consistent with inhibition of soluble PD-L1 and no treatment-emergent immunogenicity. In dose expansion, 35% of patients had elevated liver enzymes leading to drug discontinuation. In Arms 1 + 1a, objective response rate was 63.3% (95% CI: 43.9–80.1), median progression-free survival (PFS) was 10.1 months (95% CI: 5.5–15.2) and median response duration was 9.2 months (95% CI: 3.7–14.0).ConclusionsDurvalumab and gefitinib in combination had higher toxicity than either agent alone. No significant increase in PFS was detected compared with historical controls. Therefore, concurrent PD-L1 inhibitors with gefitinib should be generally avoided in TKI-naive patients withEGFRm NSCLC.

Purpose: This clinical trial combined pembrolizumab and vorinostat in recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck (HN), and salivary gland cancer (SGC). Patients and Methods: Patients with progressing incurable HN and SGC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) ≤1, no prior immunotherapy, RECIST1.1 measurable disease, and normal organ function were eligible. Pembrolizumab 200 mg was given intravenous every 21 days, and vorinostat 400 mg given orally 5 days on and 2 days off during each 21-day cycle. Primary endpoints were safety and objective response rates. Results: From November 2015 to August 2017, 25 patients with HN and 25 SGC were enrolled. Median age was 61 (range, 33–86) years, 39 (78%) were male, 21 (62%) were never smokers, and 27 (54%) had ECOG 0. In HN, 13 (52%) were p16+ oropharynx. Most common SGC histologies were adenoid cystic 12 (48%), acinic cell 3 (12%), and mucoepidermoid 3 (12%). Adverse events (AEs) in all patients were: 27 (54%) with grade ≥ 1 and 18 (36%) with grade ≥ 3. The most common AEs in all patients were renal insufficiency in seven, (14%), fatigue in six, (12%), and nausea in three (6%). There were three (12%) deaths on study. Responses in HN were complete response (CR) 0, partial response (PR) eight (32%), and stable disease (SD) five (20%). Efficacy in SGCs was CR 0, PR four (16%) in one lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma, two acinic cell, one adenoid cystic, and SD 14 (56%). In the HN group, median follow-up (mFUP) was 12.6 months, median overall survival (mOS) was 12.6 months, and median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 4.5 months. In SGC, mFUP was 13.1 months, mOS was 14.0 months, and mPFS was 6.9 months. Conclusions: This combination demonstrated activity in HN, with fewer responses in SGC. Toxicities were higher than reported with pembrolizumab alone.

Summary Background Phase 3 clinical data has shown higher proportions of patients with objective response, longer response duration, and longer overall survival with nivolumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to evaluate the long-term benefit of nivolumab and the effect of response and disease control on subsequent survival. Methods We pooled data from four clinical studies of nivolumab in patients with previously treated NSCLC (CheckMate 017, 057, 063, and 003) to evaluate survival outcomes. Trials of nivolumab in the second-line or later setting with at least 4 years follow-up were included. Comparisons of nivolumab versus docetaxel included all randomised patients from the phase 3 CheckMate 017 and 057 studies. We did landmark analyses by response status at 6 months to determine post-landmark survival outcomes. We excluded patients who did not have a radiographic tumour assessment at 6 months. Safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of nivolumab. Findings Across all four studies, 4-year overall survival with nivolumab was 14% (95% CI 11–17) for all patients (n=664), 19% (15–24) for those with at least 1% PD-L1 expression, and 11% (7–16) for those with less than 1% PD-L1 expression. In CheckMate 017 and 057, 4-year overall survival was 14% (95% CI 11–18) in patients treated with nivolumab, compared with 5% (3–7) in patients treated with docetaxel. Survival subsequent to response at 6 months on nivolumab or docetaxel was longer than after progressive disease at 6 months, with hazard ratios for overall survival of 0·18 (95% 0·12–0·27) for nivolumab and 0·43 (0·29–0·65) for docetaxel; for stable disease versus progressive disease, hazard ratios were 0·52 (0·37–0·71) for nivolumab and 0·80 (0·61–1·04) for docetaxel. Long-term data did not show any new safety signals. Interpretation Patients with advanced NSCLC treated with nivolumab achieved a greater duration of response compared with patients treated with docetaxel, which was associated with a long-term survival advantage. Funding Bristol-Myers Squibb.

BackgroundEvorpacept is a high affinity, CD47-blocking, myeloid checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) with an inactive Fc region designed to safely enhance anticancer therapeutics.1-3 In combination with standard chemotherapy and antibody regimens, evorpacept was evaluated in patients with advanced HNSCC or HER2-positive GC.MethodsPatients with untreated advanced HNSCC or previously treated HER2-positive GC received evorpacept (E) 10 mg/kg QW or 15 mg/kg QW in combination with pembrolizumab (P) + 5FU (F) + cisplatin or carboplatin (C) as 1st line therapy, or in combination with trastuzumab (T) + ramucirumab (R) + paclitaxel (P) as ≥2nd line treatment. The primary endpoint was first-cycle dose limiting toxicity (DLT). Tumor response, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic markers were assessed in all patients. Data from fully-enrolled HNSCC and GC cohorts, and follow-up data from patients with HNSCC administered EP are reported as of 15Jun2021.ResultsForty-one patients fully enrolled the following study cohorts: Thirteen patients with 1L HNSCC received EPFC. No DLTs were reported and the evorpacept maximum administered dose (MAD) was 15 mg/kg QW. Thirteen patients experienced an AE, 2 patients experienced treatment-related AEs (TRAE) of pneumonitis, anemia, fatigue, neutropenia, and hypersensitivity reaction (each n=1, 7.7%). Of 13 evaluable patients, 1CR/4PR/6SD (ORR 38.5%), mPFS 5.6 mo [3.6,NR], mOS not reached, and estimated 12-month OS of 83.3% were reported. Survival follow-up of 10 patients with CPI naïve HNSCC administered EP (2nd or later-line; ORR 40%) demonstrated a mPFS 4.6 mo [0.5,7.5], mOS 24.5 mo [3.1,NR] and estimated 12-month OS of 80%.Eighteen patients with ≥2L GC received ETRP. No DLTs were reported and the evorpacept MAD was 15 mg/kg QW. All patients experienced an AE, 8 patients experienced TRAEs, where the most common were urticaria, rash, and diarrhea (each n=3, 17%), fatigue and pruritus (each n=2, 11%). Of 18 evaluable patients, there were 1CR/12PR/3SD (ORR 72.2%; mDOR unreached) with a mPFS 9.8 mo [5.4,NR], mOS not reached, and estimated 12-month OS of 77.7%.ConclusionsInitial data suggest evorpacept is well tolerated with no DLTs in combination with the antibody/cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens evaluated above and a MAD of 15 mg/kg QW. Consistent with standard CPI therapeutic agents, the initial response benefit seen with evorpacept in combination is notably magnified in longer term PFS and OS endpoints in both the HNSCC and GC populations. Evorpacept’s preliminary positive impact on critical survival endpoints compares favorably with historical standards and warrants further evaluation in patients with HNSCC and GC.AcknowledgementsWe would like to thank all of the participating patients, their families and site research teams.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03013218.ReferencesKauder S, et al. ALX148 blocks CD47 and enhances innate and adaptive antitumor immunity with a favorable safety profile. PLoS ONE 2018;13(8).Chow L, et al. A phase I study of ALX148, a CD47 blocker, in combination with standard anticancer antibodies and chemotherapy regimens in patients with advanced malignancy. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2020;38:15_suppl, 3056–3056.Chung H et al, ASPEN-01: A Phase 1 study of ALX148, a CD47 blocker, in combination with trastuzumab, ramucirumab and paclitaxel in patients with 2nd line HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) cancer. ESMO-GI 2021; #SO-31.Ethics ApprovalThe study was approved by all participating institutions’ Ethics and/or Review Boards

Thin-film freeze-drying (TFFD) is a rapid freezing and then drying technique used to prepare inhalable dry powders from the liquid form for drug delivery to the lungs. We report the preparation of aerosolizable dry powders of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) by TFFD. We first formulated IgG with lactose/leucine (60:40 w/w) or trehalose/leucine (75:25). IgG 1% (w/w) formulated with lactose/leucine (60:40 w/w) in phosphate buffered saline (PBS) (IgG-1-LL-PBS) and processed by TFFD was found to produce the powder with the most desirable aerosol properties. We then replaced IgG with a specific antibody, anti-programmed cell death protein (anti-PD-1 mAb), to prepare a dry powder (anti-PD1-1-LL-PBS), which performed similarly to the IgG-1-LL-PBS powder. The aerosol properties of anti-PD1-1-LL-PBS were significantly better when TFFD was used to prepare the powder as compared to conventional shelf freeze-drying (shelf FD). The dry powder had a porous structure with nanoaggregates. The dry powder had a Tg value between 39-50 °C. When stored at room temperature, the anti-PD-1 mAb in the TFFD powder was more stable than that of the same formulation stored as a liquid. The addition of polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) K40 in the formulation was able to raise the Tg to 152 °C, which is expected to further increase the storage stability of the mAbs. The PD-1 binding activities of the anti-PD-1 mAbs before and after TFFD were not different. While protein loss, likely due to protein binding to glass or plastic vials and the TFF apparatus, was identified, we were able to minimize the loss by increasing mAb content in the powders. Lastly, we show that another mAb, anti-TNF-α, can also be converted to a dry powder with a similar composition by TFFD. We conclude that TFFD can be applied to produce stable aerosolizable dry powders of mAbs for pulmonary delivery.

Objectives To better understand genetic determinants of response to ceritinib, an exploratory analysis was conducted using tumor biopsies from anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearranged (ALK+) non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with ceritinib at doses of ≥300 mg in the ASCEND-1 study. Methods ASCEND-1 was an open-label, multicentre, phase 1, dose–escalation and expansion study of ceritinib (fasted) in ALK inhibitor (ALKi)-naive or ALKi-pretreated patients with locally advanced or metastatic ALK+ NSCLC. Biopsies were assayed by next-generation sequencing (NGS) using a Foundation Medicine panel targeting 295 genes. Somatic alterations were correlated with clinical outcome (cut-off 14-Apr-2014). A total of 285 ALK+ NSCLC patients were treated with ceritinib at doses ≥300 mg. Results NGS data were generated for 85 pts (ALKi-pretreated [n=54]; ALKi-naive [n=31]), 57 were collected from patients before exposure to any ALKi. NGS did not detect ALK rearrangement in 14 of 85 patients; several of these ALK NGS negative cases harbored alternative drivers, e.g. EGFR mutation. Of the 71 biopsies with NGS confirmed ALK rearrangement, the most frequently detected rearrangements were EML4-ALK variant 1 (V1) and EML4-ALK V3 (36.6% [26/71] and 32.4% [23/71] respectively). Eight (six crizotinib-pretreated and two pretreated with crizotinib followed by alectinib) of the 21 ALKi-pretreated patients carried a point mutation of the ALK TKD, and had the biopsy collected between 1 and 14 days before ceritinib; with the exception of one patient with a G1202R point mutation, all patients derived clinical benefit from ceritinib treatment. Of the 14 ALKi-naive patients, ceritinib was effective in almost all patients, including a patient carrying a concomitant ERBB4 and HGF amplification. Conclusions This exploratory analysis highlights the potential role of NGS in improving our understanding of response and resistance to ceritinib. It also illustrates that ceritinib is active against almost all ALK resistance mutations found in ALKi-pretreated patients. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01283516. Registered January 26, 2011, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01283516

Background Patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring a sensitizing EGFR mutation have effective targeted therapy options initially but most patients eventually progress and receive cytotoxic chemotherapy. In this single-institution phase II study, we evaluated the role of nab-paclitaxel monotherapy in this patient population. Patients and Methods Patients with metastatic NSCLC with an activating EGFR mutation whose disease progressed after frontline tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy and who were chemotherapy naive received nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15 in a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was response rate per RECIST 1.1 and secondary endpoints were duration of response, progression free survival, toxicity and overall survival. Results A total of 27 patients were enrolled and 21 patients were evaluable for response. Median age was 65 (range 52–81), 69% of patients were women, 42% of patients did not having a smoking history. 31% of patients had central nervous system (CNS) metastatic disease at baseline. Confirmed partial response was documented in 9 of 26 patients (35%, 95% CI 17–56) and disease control rate was 58% (95% CI 35–73). CNS was a common first site of progression. Median progression free survival was 4.0 months (95% CI 1.8–5.2). No new safety signals were observed. Conclusion Single agent nab-paclitaxel showed modest antitumor activity in patients with EGFR mutation positive NSCLC and may be an option in patients who are platinum ineligible. Patients often progressed in the CNS and the results underscores the importance of CNS activity of systemic therapies in this patient population.

Большой прогресс в лечении распространенного медуллярного рака щитовидной железы за последние 5 лет достигнут благодаря одобрению 2 препаратов – вандетаниба и кабозантиниба. Действие этих ингибиторов протеинкиназ во многом совпадает и направлено на различные мишени, участвующие в патогенезе медуллярного рака щитовидной железы. Оба препарата имеют достаточно широкий ряд токсических побочных эффектов, таких как артериальная гипертензия, кровотечения, перфорация кишечника, диарея и другие нежелательные явления со стороны желудочно-кишечного тракта, поражения кожи и гипотиреоз. Кроме того, вандетаниб может вызывать удлинение интервала QT из-за взаимодействия с калиевыми ионными каналами клеток миокарда, а кабозантиниб – ладонно-подошвенный синдром. Связанные с лечением токсические эффекты возникают достаточно часто, могут быть очень тяжелыми и даже опасными для жизни. Следовательно, пациенты, получающие эти препараты в течение длительного времени, имеют весьма высокий риск развития побочных эффектов. В данной статье даны практические рекомендации по лечению побочных эффектов применения вандетаниба и кабозантиниба. Рекомендуемый нами подход основан на раннем выявлении побочных эффектов и их своевременном лечении на фоне прерывания терапии ингибиторами протеинкиназ или снижения их дозы, чтобы обеспечить как можно более длительное применение максимально допустимой для конкретного пациента дозы препарата и предотвратить ухудшение качества его жизни. На сегодняшний день отсутствуют рекомендации по выбору очередности применения вандетаниба и кабозантиниба, однако большинство пациентов получают оба эти препарата. Выбор терапии 1-й линии следует проводить в индивидуальном порядке после тщательной оценки потенциальных рисков и пользы. Часто этот выбор зависит от предпочтений врача и особенностей пациента, например наличия сопутствующих заболеваний. Поскольку многие специалисты могут быть незнакомы с тонкостями применения таких препаратов, как вандетаниб и кабозантиниб, мы рекомендуем проводить лечение пациентов с медуллярным раком щитовидной железы под контролем опытного, хорошо осведомленного специалиста, а также мультидисциплинарной бригады врачей.

Introduction The FIR phase II study (NCT01846416) evaluated the efficacy and safety of anti–programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) atezolizumab in advanced NSCLC selected by tumor cell (TC) or tumor-infiltrating immune cell (IC) PD-L1 expression. Methods Patients with PD-L1 TC2/3 (PD-L1 staining on ≥5% of TC) or IC2/3 tumors (PD-L1 staining on ≥5% of IC; determined by SP142 PD-L1 immunohistochemistry assay) with paired fresh and archival histology samples were recruited into cohort 1 (chemotherapy-naive/>6 months between adjuvant chemotherapy and recurrence), cohort 2 (≥ second-line without brain metastases), or cohort 3 (≥ second-line with treated brain metastases). Patients received 1200 mg atezolizumab on day 1 (21-day cycles). Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, objective response rate (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1). Secondary endpoints were overall survival, progression-free survival, duration of response, and safety. Results Patients (N = 138) were enrolled (137 evaluable for response: cohort 1, n = 31; cohort 2, n = 93; and cohort 3, n = 13). Investigator-assessed objective response rate was 32%, 21%, and 23% for cohorts 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events were reported in 81%, 67%, and 69% of patients, respectively, including grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events in 16%, 19%, and 15%, respectively. Moreover, 88.6% (86 of 97) paired baseline tumor samples had Conclusions Atezolizumab monotherapy showed clinical activity in patients with NSCLC, including those with brain metastases; safety was consistent with previous trials. Atezolizumab has completed phase III monotherapy studies in second-line. Front-line trials are ongoing, confirming these favorable results.

PURPOSE Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In two phase III trials (CheckMate 017 and CheckMate 057), nivolumab showed an improvement in overall survival (OS) and favorable safety versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated, advanced squamous and nonsquamous NSCLC, respectively. We report 5-year pooled efficacy and safety from these trials. METHODS Patients (N = 854; CheckMate 017/057 pooled) with advanced NSCLC, ECOG PS ≤ 1, and progression during or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab (3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point for both trials was OS; secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Exploratory landmark analyses were investigated. RESULTS After the minimum follow-up of 64.2 and 64.5 months for CheckMate 017 and 057, respectively, 50 nivolumab-treated patients and nine docetaxel-treated patients were alive. Five-year pooled OS rates were 13.4% versus 2.6%, respectively; 5-year PFS rates were 8.0% versus 0%, respectively. Nivolumab-treated patients without disease progression at 2 and 3 years had an 82.0% and 93.0% chance of survival, respectively, and a 59.6% and 78.3% chance of remaining progression-free at 5 years, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 8 of 31 (25.8%) nivolumab-treated patients between 3–5 years of follow-up, seven of whom experienced new events; one (3.2%) TRAE was grade 3, and there were no grade 4 TRAEs. CONCLUSION At 5 years, nivolumab continued to demonstrate a survival benefit versus docetaxel, exhibiting a five-fold increase in OS rate, with no new safety signals. These data represent the first report of 5-year outcomes from randomized phase III trials of a programmed death-1 inhibitor in previously treated, advanced NSCLC.

Background CD47 is a myeloid checkpoint up-regulated by tumors to evade the anticancer immune response. ALX148 is a high affinity CD47-blocking fusion protein with an inactive Fc region designed to safely enhance anticancer therapeutics.1 2 ALX148 in combination with standard chemotherapy and antibody regimens was evaluated in patients (pts) with advanced HER2-positive GC or HNSCC. Methods Pts with previously treated advanced HER2-positive GC or untreated advanced HNSCC received ALX148 (A) 10 mg/kg QW or 15 mg/kg QW in combination with trastuzumab (T) + ramucirumab (ram) + paclitaxel (pac) as 2nd or later-line treatment or pembrolizumab (P) + 5FU + platinum (cisplatin or carboplatin) as 1st line therapy, respectively. The primary endpoint was dose limiting toxicity (DLT). Tumor response, pharmacokinetic (PK), and pharmacodynamic (PD) markers were assessed in all pts. Preliminary data from enrolling cohorts, and follow-up data from pts with GC administered A+T, and with HNSCC administered A+P are also reported as of 30June2020. Results Fifty-five pts enrolled into this portion of the study. Twelve patients with ≥2L GC received A+T+ram+pac and were evaluated for safety. No DLTs, were reported, and the ALX148 maximum administered dose was 15 mg/kg QW. Out of the 9 pts who experienced any adverse event, 7 pts reported treatment-related adverse events (TRAE). The most common TRAEs were low grade diarrhea, fatigue, pruritus and rash (each n=2,17%). Nine of the 12 patients were response-evaluable and reported a 66% ORR with 6PR and 3SD (including one ongoing near PR, ↓29.6%). Three patients with 1L HNSCC were administered A+P+5FU+platinum. No DLTs were reported and accrual to 15 mg/kg QW continues. Three pts experienced any AE, none were treatment-related. Of 3 evaluable patients with HNSCC, 2PR and 1SD were reported. Initial ALX148 combination PK and CD47 target occupancy are similar to that of single agent administration. Response duration and survival follow-up of 19 pts with HER2-positive GC administered A+T (2nd or later-line; 21% ORR) and of 10 pts with checkpoint inhibitor naive HNSCC administered A+P (2nd or later-line; 40% ORR) will be reported. Results of all cohorts will be updated at time of presentation. Conclusions Initial data suggests the myeloid checkpoint inhibitor, ALX148, is well tolerated in combination with the above anticancer antibodies, T-cell checkpoint inhibitor, and cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens with early anticancer signals in GC and HNSCC that compare favorably with historic controls. No MTD has been reached in any combination to date and accrual to chemotherapy combination regimens is ongoing. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials. gov identifier NCT03013218 Ethics Approval The study was approved by all participating institutions’ Ethics and/or Review Boards References Kauder S, Kuo T, Harrabi O, Chen A, Sangalang E, et al. ALX148 blocks CD47 and enhances innate and adaptive antitumor immunity with a favorable safety profile. PLoS ONE 2018;13(8). Chow L, Gainor J, Lakhani N, et al. A phase I study of ALX148, a CD47 blocker, in combination with standard anticancer antibodies and chemotherapy regimens in patients with advanced malignancy. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2020;38:15_suppl, 3056–3056.

ObjectiveLung cancer is increasingly recognised as a heterogeneous disease. Recent advances with targeted therapies for lung cancer with oncogenic mutations have greatly improved the prognosis for this subset of patients, yet little is known about their experiences. This study aimed to identify the needs and explore the healthcare experiences of these advanced patients with oncogenic mutation driven lung cancer.DesignQualitative interviews with patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer with oncogenic alterations in anaplastic lymphoma kinase, epidermal growth factor receptor or c-ros oncogene 1.SettingsPatients were recruited from online lung cancer support groups within the USA. Interviews were conducted remotely or in person, transcribed verbatim and analysed using an iterative inductive and deductive process.ParticipantsWe included 39 patients (11 males and 28 females) with a median age of 48.ResultsTwo primary theme categories emerged: patients' unmet needs and improving healthcare experiences. Unmet needs are related to patients’ desire to view their disease as a chronic illness, aspire to live a meaningful existence without financial devastation, desire for understanding along with emotional support and needing help with practical matters. Improving healthcare experiences involved patients’ desire to trust the expertise of clinical providers, receive reliable care and be treated holistically and as informed partners.ConclusionsPatients with lung cancer with oncogenic mutations live uncharted experiences. Targeted therapy brings hope, but uncertainty is daunting. Patients grapple with the meaning and purpose of their lives while day-to-day obligations remain challenging. Healthcare teams are instrumental in their care experiences, and patients desire providers who are up-to-date on advances in the field and treat them as whole persons.

Epacadostat is a potent and highly selective inhibitor of indoleamine 2,3‐dioxygenase 1 (IDO1). Here we report results from the open‐label, dose‐escalation, Phase 1b ECHO‐110 study evaluating epacadostat plus atezolizumab in patients with previously treated Stage IIIB/IV nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Eligible patients had received ≥1 prior line of platinum‐based chemotherapy (≥2 cycles) and no prior checkpoint/IDO inhibitors treatment. Oral epacadostat (25, 50, 75, 100, 200 or 300 mg) was administered twice daily (BID) with intravenous atezolizumab 1,200 mg every 3 weeks (Q3W). Primary endpoints were safety, tolerability and dose‐limiting toxicities (DLTs). Twenty‐nine patients received ≥1 dose of treatment. The maximum tolerated dose of epacadostat was not reached. Two patients had DLTs: one patient with Grade 3 dehydration and hypotension (epacadostat 200 mg BID); one patient with Grade 3 hyponatremia and Grade 4 autoimmune encephalitis (epacadostat 300 mg BID). Twenty‐three patients (79%) had treatment‐related adverse events (AEs); seven patients (24%) experienced Grade 3/4 events; five patients (17%) discontinued treatment due to treatment‐related AEs. No fatal treatment‐related AEs occurred. One patient achieved a partial response (objective response rate, 3%), which was maintained for 8.3 months; eight patients had stable disease. Baseline tumoral programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD‐L1) and IDO expression were low among patients with evaluable samples (1 of 23 expressed PD‐L1; 5 of 17 expressed IDO). Epacadostat pharmacokinetics was comparable to historical controls. Epacadostat, at doses up to 300 mg BID, combined with atezolizumab 1,200 mg Q3W was well tolerated in patients with previously treated NSCLC, although clinical activity was limited., What's new? There has been considerable interest in investigating combination treatment strategies that target separate but complementary immune‐evasion pathways, in patients with advanced non‐small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The goal is to enhance the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors. In this study, the authors found that combining the IDO1 enzyme inhibitor epacadostat with the PD‐L1 checkpoint inhibitor atezolizumab was generally well tolerated. However, clinical activity was limited. These results provide important insights into the challenges associated with developing combination immunotherapies in NSCLC.

Background Long-term data with immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are limited. Two phase III trials demonstrated improved overall survival (OS) and a favorable safety profile with the anti-programmed death-1 antibody nivolumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced squamous (CheckMate 017) and nonsquamous (CheckMate 057) NSCLC. We report results from ≥3 years’ follow-up, including subgroup analyses of patients with liver metastases, who historically have poorer prognosis among patients with NSCLC. Patients and methods Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) until progression or discontinuation. The primary end point of each study was OS. Patients with baseline liver metastases were pooled across studies by treatment for subgroup analyses. Results After 40.3 months’ minimum follow-up in CheckMate 017 and 057, nivolumab continued to show an OS benefit versus docetaxel: estimated 3-year OS rates were 17% [95% confidence interval (CI), 14% to 21%] versus 8% (95% CI, 6% to 11%) in the pooled population with squamous or nonsquamous NSCLC. Nivolumab was generally well tolerated, with no new safety concerns identified. Of 854 randomized patients across both studies, 193 had baseline liver metastases. Nivolumab resulted in improved OS compared with docetaxel in patients with liver metastases (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50–0.91), consistent with findings from the overall pooled study population (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61–0.81). Rates of treatment-related hepatic adverse events (primarily grade 1–2 liver enzyme elevations) were slightly higher in nivolumab-treated patients with liver metastases (10%) than in the overall pooled population (6%). Conclusions After 3 years’ minimum follow-up, nivolumab continued to demonstrate an OS benefit versus docetaxel in patients with advanced NSCLC. Similarly, nivolumab demonstrated an OS benefit versus docetaxel in patients with liver metastases, and remained well tolerated. Clinical trial registration CheckMate 017: NCT01642004; CheckMate 057: NCT01673867.

BackgroundNemvaleukin alfa (nemvaleukin, ALKS 4230) is a novel engineered cytokine that selectively binds to the intermediate-affinity IL-2R to preferentially activate and expand anti-tumor CD8+ T and NK cells with minimal expansion of regulatory T cells (Treg), thereby leveraging antitumor effects of the IL-2 pathway while mitigating potential toxicity that limits use.1 Nemvaleukin single-agent activity has been demonstrated in checkpoint inhibitor-experienced patients, and deep and durable responses have been achieved in combination with pembrolizumab in multiple tumor types (eg, breast, head and neck, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, gynecological).2MethodsION-01 (NCT04144517) is a nonrandomized trial in adult patients with histologically/cytopathologically confirmed diagnosis of metastatic/recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Eligible patients have progressive disease after ≥8 weeks on anti-PD-(L)1 therapy. The primary endpoint is the rate of new or improved antitumor response after the addition of nemvaleukin. Secondary objectives include characterization of the antitumor response and evaluation of safety and tolerability of the combination regimen. Patients receive intravenous nemvaleukin (3 μg/kg) once daily for the first 5 days and pembrolizumab (200 mg) on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Tumor imaging and biopsies were performed at baseline and at pre-specified times. We present preliminary safety and antitumor activity (RECIST v1.1) data as of June 2021.ResultsFourteen patients with progressive disease received combination therapy with nemvaleukin and pembrolizumab; 8 had no prior response to pembrolizumab, 6 had previous best response of stable disease or partial response. Mean (± SD) age was 62 ± 12 years, 86% were male, and all were Caucasian. Prior anti-cancer therapy included radiotherapy (93%) and surgery (50%). ECOG performance status was 0 (14%) and 1 (86%) at baseline. Treatment-related adverse events of any grade in ≥30% of patients were chills (64.3%), pyrexia (57.1%), fatigue (42.9%), and nausea (35.7%). Five patients had stable disease as best response. One patient achieved a partial response (complete response in the target lesion) and remains on treatment (8+ cycles). Expansion of CD8+ T and NK cells with minimal Treg expansion was observed.ConclusionsNemvaleukin and pembrolizumab combination therapy was generally well tolerated; adverse events were consistent with those observed with intravenous nemvaleukin in ARTISTRY studies [2]. Peripheral immune cell expansion profiles are comparable to that observed with the same regimen in the ARTISTRY 1 phase 1 study. Emerging data from pretreatment and on-treatment paired biopsies will further characterize specific antitumor effects of nemvaleukin and pembrolizumab in this patient population.AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to thank all the patients who are participating in this study and their families. The study is sponsored by Alkermes, Inc. Medical writing and editorial support was provided by Parexel, and funded by Alkermes, Inc.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04144517ReferencesLopes JE, Fisher JL, Flick HL, et al. ALKS 4230: a novel engineered IL-2 fusion protein with an improved cellular selectivity profile for cancer immunotherapy. J Immunother Cancer 2020;8:e000673. doi: 10.1136/jitc-2020-000673.Boni V, Winer IS, Gilbert L, et al. ARTISTRY-1: Nemvaleukin alfa monotherapy and in combination with pembrolizumab in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors. J Clin Oncol 2021;39(Suppl 15):abstr 2513.Ethics ApprovalThis study was approved by Quorum Review IRB (now Advarra IRB), approval number QR 33752.

Lessons Learned Background We conducted a first-in-human, first-in-class, phase I study of SGN-2FF, a potent small-molecule inhibitor of glycoprotein fucosylation, in patients with advanced solid tumors. Methods The study consisted of four parts: SGN-2FF monotherapy dose-escalation (part A) and expansion (part B), and SGN-2FF + pembrolizumab dose-escalation (part C) and expansion (part D). The objectives were to evaluate safety and tolerability, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and antitumor activity of SGN-2FF monotherapy and SGN-2FF + pembrolizumab. Results Forty-six patients were enrolled (part A, n = 33; part B, n = 6; part C, n = 7; part D did not enroll any patients). During part A (n = 32) exploring 1–15 g once daily (QD) and 2–5 g twice daily (b.i.d.), grade 3 dose-limiting toxicities were diarrhea (2 g and 15 g QD) and increased lipase (2 g QD). The MTD was 10 g daily. In part A, common toxicities were grades 1–2 diarrhea, fatigue, and nausea (each 47%); thromboembolic events (grades 2–5) occurred in 5 of 32 patients (16%). Safety measures included concurrent prophylactic anticoagulation with low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH). In part C, despite the safety measures implemented, a thromboembolic event occurred in one of seven patients (14%) during the SGN-2FF lead-in period. Of 28 evaluable patients in part A, 1 patient with advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma achieved Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 complete response (CR) and 10 (36%) had RECIST v1.1 stable disease, including 1 patient with advanced triple-negative breast cancer with 51% tumor burden reduction. SGN-2FF administration led to dose-proportional increases in exposure and PD reduction in protein fucosylation. Conclusion SGN-2FF demonstrated proof-of-mechanism and preliminary antitumor activity but was associated with thromboembolic events leading to study termination.

Purpose: This phase Ib study (NCT02179918) evaluated the safety, antitumor activity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of utomilumab, a fully human IgG2 mAb agonist of the T-cell costimulatory receptor 4-1BB/CD137 in combination with the humanized, PD-1–blocking IgG4 mAb pembrolizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. Experimental Design: Utomilumab (0.45–5.0 mg/kg) and pembrolizumab (2 mg/kg) were administered intravenously every 3 weeks. Utomilumab dose escalation was conducted using the time-to-event continual reassessment method. Results: Twenty-three patients received combination treatment with no dose-limiting toxicities. Treatment-emergent adverse events were mostly grades 1 to 2, without any treatment-related discontinuations. Six patients (26.1%) had confirmed complete or partial responses. Pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity of utomilumab and pembrolizumab were similar when administered alone or in combination. A trend toward higher levels of activated memory/effector peripheral blood CD8+ T cells was observed in responders versus nonresponders. Conclusions: The safety, tolerability, and clinical activity demonstrated by utomilumab in combination with pembrolizumab support further investigation in patients with advanced solid tumors. Clin Cancer Res; 23(18); 5349–57. ©2017 AACR. See related commentary by Pérez-Ruiz et al., p. 5326

Immuno-oncology (I-O) has required a shift in the established paradigm of toxicity and response assessment in clinical research. The design and interpretation of cancer clinical trials has been primarily driven by conventional toxicity and efficacy patterns observed with chemotherapy and targeted agents, which are insufficient to fully inform clinical trial design and guide therapeutic decisions in I-O. Responses to immune-targeted agents follow nonlinear dose–response and dose–toxicity kinetics mandating the development of novel response evaluation criteria. Biomarker-driven surrogate endpoints may better capture the mechanism of action and biological response to I-O agents and could be incorporated prospectively in early-phase I-O clinical trials. While overall survival remains the gold standard for evaluation of clinical efficacy of I-O agents in late-phase clinical trials, exploration of potential novel surrogate endpoints such as objective response rate and milestone survival is to be encouraged. Patient-reported outcomes should also be assessed to help redefine endpoints for I-O clinical trials and drive more efficient drug development. This paper discusses endpoints used in I-O trials to date and potential optimal endpoints for future early- and late-phase clinical development of I-O therapies. Clin Cancer Res; 23(17); 4959–69. ©2017 AACR. See all articles in this CCR Focus section, “Clinical Trial Design Considerations in the Immuno-oncology Era.”

Purpose: Tumor-associated PD-L1 expression is predictive of clinical response to PD-1–directed immunotherapy. However, PD-L1–negative patients may also respond to PD-1 checkpoint blockade, suggesting that other PD-1 ligands may be relevant to the clinical activity of these therapies. The prevalence of PD-L2, the other known ligand of PD-1, and its relationship to response to anti-PD-1 therapy were evaluated. Experimental Design: PD-L2 expression was assessed in archival tumor tissue from seven indications using a novel immunohistochemical assay. In addition, relationships between clinical response and PD-L2 status were evaluated in tumor tissues from patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) with recurrent or metastatic disease, treated with pembrolizumab. Results: PD-L2 expression was observed in all tumor types and present in stromal, tumor, and endothelial cells. The prevalence and distribution of PD-L2 correlated significantly with PD-L1 (P = 0.0012– Conclusions: Clinical response to pembrolizumab in patients with HNSCC may be related partly to blockade of PD-1/PD-L2 interactions. Therapy targeting both PD-1 ligands may provide clinical benefit in these patients. Clin Cancer Res; 23(12); 3158–67. ©2017 AACR.

The discovery of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in 2007 led to the development and subsequent approval of the ALK inhibitor crizotinib in 2011. However, despite its clinical efficacy, resistance to crizotinib invariably develops. There is now a next generation of ALK inhibitors, including two that have been approved-ceritinib and alectinib-and others that are in development-brigatinib, lorlatinib and X-396. Ceritinib and the other next-generation ALK inhibitors are more potent than crizotinib and can overcome tumor cell resistance mechanisms. Ceritinib gained US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2014 following accelerated review for the treatment of patients with ALK-positive (ALK+) metastatic NSCLC who have progressed on or are intolerant to crizotinib. In pre-clinical studies, it demonstrated more potent inhibition of ALK than crizotinib in enzymatic assays, more durable responses in xenograft models and the ability to potently overcome crizotinib resistance mutations in vitro (including the gatekeeper mutation). There is also evidence for ceritinib penetration across the blood-brain barrier. In clinical trials, ceritinib has demonstrated durable responses and progression-free survival in ALK-inhibitor-pre-treated and -naïve NSCLC patients, including high overall and intracranial response rates in those with central nervous system metastases. Selective gastrointestinal toxicity of ceritinib, such as diarrhea, nausea and vomiting is generally manageable with prophylactic medication and prompt dose reduction or interruption. Future progress in treating ALK+ NSCLC will focus on determining the optimal sequencing of therapies and strategies to overcome acquired resistance, an ongoing challenge in treating ALK-mutation-driven tumors.

Introduction Historiquement, la survie des patients atteints de CBNPC avance etait mediocre, avec des taux a 5 ans Methodes Les patients (n = 854 ; CM 017/057 regroupes) atteints d’un CBNPC avance, avec un ECOG PS ≤ 1 et dont la maladie avait progresse pendant ou apres une premiere ligne de chimiotherapie ont ete randomises 1 :1 pour recevoir nivolumab 3 mg/kg toutes les 2 semaines ou docetaxel 75 mg/m2 toutes les 3 semaines jusqu’a progression ou toxicite inacceptable. La SG etait le critere principal d’evaluation pour les deux etudes. Resultats A 5 ans de suivi, 50 patients dans le bras nivolumab et 9 patients dans le bras docetaxel etaient en vie. Les caracteristiques initiales des survivants a 5 ans dans les deux bras etaient similaires a celles de la population globale et a celles des patients ayant survecu Conclusion Les CM 017 et CM 057 sont les premiers essais de phase III a rapporter les resultats a 5 ans d’un anti-PD1 dans le CBNPC avance prealablement traite et font etat d’une augmentation de plus de 4 fois des taux de SG a 5 ans avec nivolumab (13 %) par rapport au docetaxel (3 %). Le traitement par nivolumab reste bien tolere, sans nouveau signal de toxicite.

Objectives Identify predictors of outcome in patients with recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (RMHNSCC) treated with weekly cetuximab and paclitaxel (CP). Study Design Retrospective analysis. Methods Patients with RMHNSCC treated with CP were identified and patient data was recorded. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate outcomes, and Cox regression analysis was used to examine outcome predictors. Results Fifty-nine patients initiated CP between January 2007 and June 2014. Median age was 56 (range: 39–80) years. The most common primary sites were the oropharynx in 22 (37%) patients, oral cavity in 19 (32%), and larynx in 11 (19%). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) was 0 in seven (12%), 1 in 32 (54%), and 2 in 16 (28%) patients. In 44 (75%) patients, CP was used as a first-line R/M regimen. Median number of cycles was five (range: 1–29). Dose modifications were necessary in 27 (46%) patients. The objective response rate was 47.5%, with 27 (45.8%) partial responses and one (2%) complete response. With a median follow-up of 13.4 months, median progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 7.7 and 13.2 months, respectively. On multivariable analysis, an ECOG of 2 of 3 was associated with inferior OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.94; P = 0.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1–14.04) and PFS (HR: 7.29; P < 0.01; 95% CI: 2.1–26.0) compared to an ECOG 0 of 1. First-line CP administration was associated with superior PFS compared to second line (HR: 2.6; P = 0.02; 95% CI:1.2–5.5). Conclusions CP is well tolerated in this population of patients, with favorable tumor efficacy. First-line use and an ECOG 0 of 1 points appears to confer superior outcomes. Level of Evidence 4. Laryngoscope, 127:1583–1588, 2017

Background LM are seen in approximately 5% of ALK+ NSCLC patients (pts), and are associated with poor prognosis with standard treatment. Ceritinib is highly active in ALK+ NSCLC pts with previously reported intracranial/central nervous system activity. We report the efficacy and safety of ceritinib in ALK+ NSCLC pts with LM enrolled in the ASCEND-7 study (NCT02336451). Methods Pts with documented ALK + (FISH) NSCLC, CSF invasiveness with radiologically or cytologically confirmed LM, and ≥1 extracranial measurable lesion using RECIST v1.1 were eligible. The study objectives included evaluation of antitumor activity based on overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and progression-free survival (PFS). Data cut-off was Feb 6, 2019. Results Of the 18 LM pts enrolled, 14 pts (77.8%) also had brain metastases and 8 pts (44.4%) had measurable brain metastases at baseline. Majority of the pts (n = 16, 88.9%) had received prior crizotinib and 7 pts (38.9%) had received prior brain radiotherapy. Median duration of exposure to ceritinib was 18.1 weeks (range: 1.7–125.9). Whole body ORR by investigator assessment was 16.7% (95% CI: 3.6, 41.4) with median duration of response of 5.5 months (95% CI: 3.7, 9.9) and a clinically significant median PFS of 5.2 months (95% CI: 1.6, 7.2). Median duration of follow-up for PFS was 3.84 months (range: 0.5–13). Additional efficacy endpoints are included in the below Table. Adverse events (AEs, all grades, regardless of study drug relationship) were reported in all 18 pts. Grade 3/4 AEs occurring in ≥ 10% of pts were increased alanine aminotransferase (22.2%), hyperglycemia (16.7%), increased gammaglutamyltransferase (11.1%), pneumonia (11.1%), and increased lipase (11.1%). Table: Efficacy results Table: 390O . Endpoint per investigator assessment Arm 5 (ALK+ NSCLC pts with LM) N = 18 Whole body Response (RECIST v1.1) ORR, % (95% CI) 16.7 (3.6, 41.4) DCR, % (95% CI) 66.7 (41.0, 86.7) Median DOR, (months) [95% CI] 5.5 (3.7, 9.9) Median PFS, (months) [95% CI] 5.2 (1.6, 7.2) Intracranial response * (modified RECIST v1.1) M = 8 ORR, % (95% CI) 12.5 (0.3, 52.7) DCR, % (95% CI) 62.5 (24.5, 91.5) Extracranial response (RECIST v1.1) ORR, % (95% CI) 22.2 (6.4, 47.6) DCR, % (95% CI) 72.2 (46.5, 90.3) Median OS, months (95% CI) 7.2 (1.6, 16.9) * In patients with measurable brain metastases M, number of patients with measurable brain metastases at baseline DCR, disease control rate; DOR, duration of response; NE, not estimable; ORR, overall response rate; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression free survival; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Conclusions Ceritinib demonstrated a clinically meaningful efficacy and a safety profile similar to earlier reported results in this largest reported set of ALK+ NSCLC pts with LM. Clinical trial identification NCT02336451. Editorial acknowledgement Aarti Kamaraj, Novartis Healthcare Pvt Ltd (Hyderabad, India). Legal entity responsible for the study Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Funding Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Disclosure F. Barlesi: Honoraria (self): AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer–Ingelheim, Eli Lilly Oncology; Honoraria (self): F. Hoffmann–La Roche Ltd, Novartis, Merck, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer and Takeda; Research grant / Funding (institution): Abbvie, ACEA, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer–Ingelheim, Eisai, Eli Lilly Oncology, F. Hoffmann–La Roche Ltd, Genentech, Ipsen, Ignyta, Innate Pharma, Loxo, Novartis, Medimmune, Merck, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis; Non-remunerated activity/ies, Principal investigator: AstraZeneca, BMS, Merck, Pierre Fabre and F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd, sponsored trials (or ISR); Research grant / Funding (institution): Takeda. D. Kim: Research grant / Funding (institution): Alpha Biopharma, AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Hanmi, Janssen, Merus, Mirati Therapeutics, MSD, Novartis, ONO Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Takeda, TP Therapeutics, Xcovery, and Yuhan. E.M. Bertino: Advisory / Consultancy: Takeda; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Pfizer. M.J. van den Bent: Honoraria (self): Celgene, Agios, Boehringer, BMS, Abbvie; Research grant / Funding (institution): Abbvie. H. Wakelee: Honoraria (self): Novartis, AZ; Advisory / Consultancy, Compensated: AstraZeneca, Xcovery, Janssen; Advisory / Consultancy, Not compensated: Merck, Takeda, Genentech/Roche; Research grant / Funding (institution): ACEA Biosciences, Arrys Therapeutics, AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Bayer (under Suki and not me), BMS, Celgene, Clovis Oncology, Exelixis, Genentech/Roche, Gilead, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Pharmacyclics, Xcovery; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: AstraZeneca; Officer / Board of Directors: International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC). P.Y. Wen: Advisory / Consultancy: Agios, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Eli Lily, Genentech/Roche, Karyopharm, Kazia, MediciNova, Merck, Novartis, Oncoceutics, Sanofi-Aventis, VBI Vaccines, Tocagen; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Merck, Prime Oncology; Research grant / Funding (institution): Agios, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Eli Lily, Genentech/Roche, Karyopharm, Kazia, MediciNova, Merck, Novartis, Oncoceutics, Sanofi-Aventis, VBI Vaccines. P. Garrido Lopez: Advisory / Consultancy: Roche, MSD, BMS, Boerhinger Ingelheim, Pfizer, Abbvie, Guardant Health, Novartis, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Jansen, Sysmex, Blueprint Medicines, Takeda; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Roche, MSD, BMS, Pfizer, Novartis, Boerhinger Ingelheim, Rovi; Research grant / Funding (institution), Financial support for clinical trials: Roche, MSD, BMS, Takeda, Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Pharmamar, Celgene, Sanofi, GSK, Theradex Oncology, BluePrint Medicines; Research grant / Funding (institution), Financial support for contracted research: Guardant Health, Sysmex. M. Majem: Advisory / Consultancy: Roche, MSD, AstraZeneca, Boehringer, Tesaro, Takeda, Pierre Fabre; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Roche, BMS, MSD, AstraZeneca, Boehringer, Hellsin, Pierre Fabre, Amgen; Research grant / Funding (self): BMS; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: BMS, MSD, AstraZeneca, Lilly. M. McKeage: Advisory / Consultancy: Novartis, Pfizer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Novartis, Pfizer, Roche. C. Yu: Honoraria (self): Roche, AstraZeneca, Ono pharma, Boehringer-Ingelheim; Advisory / Consultancy: Roche, AstraZeneca, Ono pharma, Boehringer-Ingelheim. F.K. Hurtado: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.; Full / Part-time employment: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. P. Cazorla Arratia: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation; Full / Part-time employment: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Y. Song: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options, Restricted Stock Unit: Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation; Full / Part-time employment: Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation. F. Branle: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options: Novartis AG; Full / Part-time employment: Novartis AG. M. Shi: Shareholder / Stockholder / Stock options: Novartis; Full / Part-time employment: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. L.Q. Chow: Advisory / Consultancy: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Genentech, AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Novartis, Dynavax Inc., Alkermes, Amgen, Sanofi-Genzyme, Takeda; Research grant / Funding (institution): Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Genentech, AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Novartis, Dynavax Inc. and Alkermes,Incyte, VentiRx and Lily/Imclone. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical evidence suggests that MEK inhibition promotes accumulation and survival of intratumoral tumor-specific T cells and can synergize with immune checkpoint inhibition. We investigated the safety and clinical activity of combining a MEK inhibitor, cobimetinib, and a programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor, atezolizumab, in patients with solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase I/Ib study treated PD-L1/PD-1-naive patients with solid tumors in a dose-escalation stage and then in multiple, indication-specific dose-expansion cohorts. In most patients, cobimetinib was dosed once daily orally for 21 days on, 7 days off. Atezolizumab was dosed at 800 mg intravenously every 2 weeks. The primary objectives were safety and tolerability. Secondary end points included objective response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: Between 27 December 2013 and 9 May 2016, 152 patients were enrolled. As of 4 September 2017, 150 patients received ≥1 dose of atezolizumab, including 14 in the dose-escalation cohorts and 136 in the dose-expansion cohorts. Patients had metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC; n = 84), melanoma (n = 22), non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC; n = 28), and other solid tumors (n = 16). The most common all-grade treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (67%), rash (48%), and fatigue (40%), similar to those with single-agent cobimetinib and atezolizumab. One (

Purpose Nivolumab, a fully human immunoglobulin G4 programmed death-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor antibody, has demonstrated improved survival in previously treated patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). CheckMate 012, a phase I, multicohort study, was conducted to explore the safety and efficacy of nivolumab as monotherapy or combined with current standard therapies in first-line advanced NSCLC. Here, we report results for nivolumab plus platinum-based doublet chemotherapy (PT-DC). Patients and Methods Patients (N = 56) received nivolumab (intravenously) plus PT-DC concurrently every 3 weeks for four cycles followed by nivolumab alone until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Regimens were nivolumab 10 mg/kg plus gemcitabine-cisplatin (squamous) or pemetrexed-cisplatin (nonsquamous) or nivolumab 5 or 10 mg/kg plus paclitaxel-carboplatin (all histologies). The primary objective was to assess safety and tolerability. Secondary objectives included objective response rate and 24-week progression-free survival rate (per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1); exploratory objectives included overall survival (OS) and response by tumor programmed death ligand-1 expression. Results No dose-limiting toxicities occurred during the first 6 weeks of treatment. Forty-five percent of patients (25 of 56 patients) reported grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs); 7% of patients (n = 4) had pneumonitis. Twenty-one percent of patients (n = 12) discontinued all study therapy as a result of treatment-related AEs. Objective response rates for nivolumab 10 mg/kg plus gemcitabine-cisplatin, nivolumab 10 mg/kg plus pemetrexed-cisplatin, nivolumab 10 mg/kg plus paclitaxel-carboplatin, and nivolumab 5 mg/kg plus paclitaxel-carboplatin were 33%, 47%, 47%, and 43%, respectively; 24-week progression-free survival rates were 51%, 71%, 38%, and 51%, respectively; 2-year OS rates were 25%, 33%, 27%, and 62%, respectively. Responses were achieved regardless of tumor programmed death ligand-1 expression. Conclusion The safety profile of nivolumab plus PT-DC was consistent with that expected for individual agents; however, treatment discontinuation related to AEs was greater with the combination. Encouraging activity was observed, especially for the nivolumab 5 mg/kg plus paclitaxel-carboplatin group, with a 2-year OS rate of 62%.

Purpose The objective of this phase II study was to evaluate pharmacokinetic interaction potential between ramucirumab and paclitaxel in patients with advanced cancer. Methods This study was designed to assess 2-way pharmacokinetic drug–drug interactions between ramucirumab and paclitaxel. Twenty-four patients participated in Part A, which consisted of a 2-week monotherapy period in which paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 was administered on day 1, followed by a 4-week cycle of combination treatment with ramucirumab (8 mg/kg on days 1 and 15; paclitaxel on days 1, 8, and 15). Patients could continue to receive combination therapy with ramucirumab and paclitaxel. In 16 patients in Part B, ramucirumab monotherapy was administered on day 1 of a 3-week cycle. Patients could continue to receive ramucirumab monotherapy or combination therapy with paclitaxel. Results Concomitant administration of ramucirumab had no effect on pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel, with ratios of geometric least squares (LS) means (with ramucirumab vs. alone) of 1.09 (90 % confidence interval [CI] 0.93, 1.29) for AUC(0–∞) and 0.97 (90 % CI 0.83, 1.13) for Cmax. In addition, similar ramucirumab pharmacokinetic characteristics were observed with or without paclitaxel administration. The ratios of geometric LS means of AUC(0–∞) and Cmax of ramucirumab (with paclitaxel vs. alone) were 1.00 (90 % CI 0.84, 1.19) for AUC(0–∞) and 1.07 (90 % CI 0.93, 1.24) for Cmax, respectively. Conclusions Concomitant paclitaxel administration is unlikely to affect the pharmacokinetics of ramucirumab, and vice versa. The incidence and severity of adverse events were consistent with the known safety profiles of paclitaxel and ramucirumab.

The role of adjuvant radiation for Masaoka stages II and III thymoma remains controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical benefit of radiation therapy for resected stages II and III thymoma patients.We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 175 thymoma patients treated from July 1996 to January 2013 at University of Washington Medical Center; 88 patients with adequate follow-up and who met histologic criteria were included. We evaluated progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and compared these outcomes in patients treated by surgery (S) alone versus surgery plus radiotherapy (S+RT). Cox regression models and log-rank tests were used to compare PFS and OS for S versus S+RT, and they were further assessed by margin-positive versus margin-negative subgroups using Kaplan-Meier curves.Among the 88 thymoma patients, 22 were stage II and 18 were stage III. For all stages II and III patients, adjuvant radiation was not identified as a significant predictor for PFS (P=0.95) or OS (P=0.63). A positive surgical margin predicted for a worse OS (hazard ratio=7.1; P=0.004). Further investigation revealed for resection margin-positive patients; S+RT had higher OS than S alone (P=0.006).For stages II and III thymoma, postoperative adjuvant radiation was not associated with statistically significant differences in PFS or OS in this study. Our results indicated a potential OS benefit of adjuvant RT in patients with positive resection margins, and therefore may be considered in this patient population.

Background Postoperative cisplatin and radiation is the standard of care for high-risk squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). We have used cetuximab and radiation in the postoperative setting for patients deemed poor candidates for cisplatin. Methods We retrospectively identified 40 patients who received cetuximab and radiation for resected locoregionally advanced SCCHN between 2006 and 2013 at our institution. Results The 2-year Kaplan–Meier estimates were: overall survival (OS) 41%, recurrence-free survival (RFS) 34%, locoregional control 63%, and distant metastatic control 59%. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≥1 predicted for inferior OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 5.43; p = .003), RFS (HR = 4.07; p = .007), and locoregional control (HR = 4.92; p = .04) in multivariate analysis. Conclusion Patients with resected high-risk SCCHN treated with postoperative cetuximab and radiation have suboptimal therapeutic outcomes. Further study of the efficacy and cost-effectiveness compared to radiation alone is warranted. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck, 2016