Search

Purpose:Androgen deprivation regenerates the thymus in adults, expanding of T-cell receptor V β repertoire in blood and lymphoid organs and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in human prostate tumors. In melanoma murine models, androgen receptor promotes metastases and androgen blockade potentiates antitumor vaccine efficacy. This phase I study evaluated the safety, efficacy, and pharmocodynamics of androgen deprivation with the gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist triptorelin combined with nivolumab in male patients with melanoma resistant to anti–PD-1.Patients and Methods:Adult male patients with advanced melanoma who progressed under anti–PD-1 containing regimens received triptorelin 3.75 mg every 4 weeks, nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks, and bicalutamide 50 mg once daily during the first 28 days. Tumor response was first assessed after 3 months; adverse events (AE) were monitored throughout the study. T-cell receptor excision circles (TREC), a biomarker of thymus activity, were explored throughout the study.Results:Of 14 patients, 4 were locally advanced and 10 had distant metastases. There were no grade 4 or 5 AEs. Five grade three AEs were reported in 4 patients. According to RECIST v1.1, best overall response was partial response (PR) in one patient with a pancreas metastasis, stable disease (SD) in 5 patients, and progressive disease in 8 patients. According to iRECIST, a second PR occurred after an initial pseudoprogression, TRECs increased in 2 patients, one with PR who also had an increase in TILs, and the second with SD.Conclusions:This combination was well tolerated. Disease control was obtained in 42.8% (RECIST) and 50% (iRECIST). The evidence for thymus rejuvenation was limited.

Background Several observational studies have reported a decreased response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) following antibiotic use. ICI activity has been hypothesized to be impaired by antibiotic-induced gut dysbiosis. Methods Patients with advanced melanoma receiving an anti-PD-1 antibody as a first-line therapy between 2015 and 2017 in France were selected using the French Health Insurance database. We compared overall survival and time-to-treatment discontinuation according to antibiotic exposure in the 3 months prior to the initiation of anti-PD-1 antibody. To disentangle a causal effect of antibiotics from a confounding bias, we balanced characteristics of patients exposed and nonexposed to antibiotics using an overlap weighting method based on a propensity score. We also evaluated a control cohort of patients with advanced melanoma receiving first-line targeted therapy, as there is no rationale for decreased efficacy of targeted therapy following antibiotic treatment. Results The anti-PD-1 antibody cohort comprised 2605 individuals. Antibiotic exposure in the 3 months prior to anti-PD-1 antibody initiation was not associated with shorter overall survival (weighted hazard ratio = 1.01, 95% confidence interval = 0.88 to 1.17) or time-to-treatment discontinuation (weighted hazard ratio = 1.00, 95% confidence interval = 0.89 to 1.11). Consistent results were observed when the time frame of antibiotics was narrowed to 1 month prior to anti-PD-1 initiation or when exposure was restricted to antibiotics leading to more profound gut dysbiosis. Similar results were observed in the targeted therapy cohort. Conclusions In a large cohort of advanced melanoma patients, we showed that antibiotic use preceding anti-PD-1 antibody was not associated with worse outcome. Physicians should not delay immunotherapy for patients who have recently received antibiotics.

Previous therapies and outcome

Age, localisation primary, stage, TNM

Washout, response to protocol therapy, AEs

Representativeness of Study Participants

Purpose:Androgen deprivation regenerates the thymus in adults, expanding of T-cell receptor V β repertoire in blood and lymphoid organs and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in human prostate tumors. In melanoma murine models, androgen receptor promotes metastases and androgen blockade potentiates antitumor vaccine efficacy. This phase I study evaluated the safety, efficacy, and pharmocodynamics of androgen deprivation with the gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist triptorelin combined with nivolumab in male patients with melanoma resistant to anti–PD-1.Patients and Methods:Adult male patients with advanced melanoma who progressed under anti–PD-1 containing regimens received triptorelin 3.75 mg every 4 weeks, nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks, and bicalutamide 50 mg once daily during the first 28 days. Tumor response was first assessed after 3 months; adverse events (AE) were monitored throughout the study. T-cell receptor excision circles (TREC), a biomarker of thymus activity, were explored throughout the study.Results:Of 14 patients, 4 were locally advanced and 10 had distant metastases. There were no grade 4 or 5 AEs. Five grade three AEs were reported in 4 patients. According to RECIST v1.1, best overall response was partial response (PR) in one patient with a pancreas metastasis, stable disease (SD) in 5 patients, and progressive disease in 8 patients. According to iRECIST, a second PR occurred after an initial pseudoprogression, TRECs increased in 2 patients, one with PR who also had an increase in TILs, and the second with SD.Conclusions:This combination was well tolerated. Disease control was obtained in 42.8% (RECIST) and 50% (iRECIST). The evidence for thymus rejuvenation was limited.

Immunohistology: Response at time of biopsy, tissue, date biopsies, previous CPI and protocol CPI, elapse times, TILs and macrophages phenotypes.

Tables S1, S2, S3, S4

Figure S2. (A) Change in the tumor burden from baseline over time according to RECIST for all the included patients. The tumor burden was measured as the sum of the longest diameters of target lesions. Each line represents a patient. (B) Kaplan-Meier plot of the overall survival for all the included patients (N =18). (C) Kaplan-Meier plot of the progression-free survival for all the included patients (N =18).

Purpose:In BRAFV600MUT metastatic melanoma, cyclin D–CDK4/6–INK4–Rb pathway alterations are involved in resistance to MAPK inhibitors, suggesting a clinical benefit of cyclin-dependent kinase 4 (CDK4) inhibitors. In this phase I–II study, we aimed to establish the MTD of palbociclib when added to vemurafenib.Patients and Methods:Patients with BRAFV600E/KMUT metastatic melanoma harboring CDKN2A loss and RB1 expression were included and stratified into two groups according to previous BRAF inhibitor treatment (no:strata 1; yes:strata 2). Treatment comprised palbociclib once daily for 14 days followed by a 7-day break + continuous dosing of vemurafenib. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), and the secondary endpoints included the best response, survival, pharmacokinetics, and tumor molecular profiling.Results:Eighteen patients were enrolled, with 15 in strata 2. Characteristics at inclusion were American Joint Committee on Cancer stage IVM1c (N = 16; 88.9%), high lactate dehydrogenase (N = 9; 50.0%), and median number of previous treatments of 2. One and 5 patients experienced DLT in strata 1 and 2, respectively, defining the MTD at palbociclib 25 mg and vemurafenib 960 mg in strata 2. No significant evidence for drug–drug interactions was highlighted. The median progression-free survival was 2.8 months, and 5 (27.8%) patients showed a clinical response. The baseline differential mRNA expression analysis and in vitro data revealed the role of CHEK2 in the response to palbociclib.Conclusions:Although the combination of palbociclib + fixed-dose vemurafenib did not allow an increased palbociclib dosage above 25 mg, a significant clinical benefit was achieved in pretreated patients with melanoma. An association between the transcriptomic data and clinical response was highlighted.

Supplementary Materials and Methods

Supplementary Figures S1-S9; Supplementary Tables S1-S5.

PURPOSE Mitogen-activating protein kinase inhibitors (MAPKis) are largely used in V600E/K BRAF–mutated metastatic melanomas, but data regarding effectiveness of targeted therapy in patients with rare BRAF mutations and molecular description of these infrequent mutations are scarce. PATIENTS AND METHODS A multicenter study was conducted on patients with metastatic melanoma harboring a well-identified mutation of BRAF and enrolled from March 2013 to June 2021 in the French nationwide prospective cohort MelBase. The molecular BRAF mutation pattern, response to MAPKis when applicable, and survival data were analyzed. RESULTS Of 856 selected patients, 51 (6%) harbored a non-V600E/K BRAF mutation involving codons V600 (24 of 51, 47%; V600G 27.4%, V600R 15.6%), K601 (6 of 51, 11.7%), and L597 (4 of 51, 7.8%). An objective response to MAPKis either BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) alone or combined with MEK inhibitor was achieved in 56% (353 of 631) of V600E/K, 58% (11 of 19) of non-E/K V600, and 22% (2 of 9) of non-V600 BRAF-mutated patients, with a median progression-free survival of 7.7, 7.8, and 2.8 months, respectively. Overall, objective response rate was higher with BRAFi + MEK inhibitor combination than with BRAFi in monotherapy for each subset. CONCLUSION Rare BRAF mutations are not anecdotal in the metastatic melanoma population. Although data interpretation must remain careful owing to the limited size of some subsets of patients, non-E/K V600 BRAF mutations seem to confer a high sensitivity to targeted therapy, whereas MAPKis seem less effective in patients with non-V600 BRAF mutations. However, this strategy may be used as an alternative option in the case of immunotherapy failure in the latter population.

International audience; Background Data regarding characteristics, safety and survival outcomes of patients aged 80 or older treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in routine oncology practice are limited. Materials and methods We retrospectively collected data of patients aged 80 and older with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or melanoma treated with anti-PD1, anti-PD-L1 or anti-CTLA-4 regardless of the treatment line, in 14 institutions, between January 2014 and June 2017. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated with the Kaplan Meier method. Toxicity was assessed according to CTCAE 5.0. Multivariate analyses were performed with the Cox model. Results Eighty-two patients were included (36 with NSCLC, 45 with melanoma). Their median age was 82 years (range 80-93). Nivolumab and pembrolizumab were mainly used. In the NSCLC group, median PFS and OS were 2.3 months (95%CI 1.8-6.1) and 8.8 months (95%CI 5.5-18.1), respectively. In the melanoma group, median PFS and OS were 10.2 months (95%CI 4.5-20.0) and 24.5 months (95%CI 14.1-NR), respectively. The albumin level was found to be independently associated with a better OS in both groups. Grade 3-4 toxicities occurred in 15 patients (18.5%). One patient died from ICI-induced pulmonary toxicity. Conclusion Our study findings suggest that treatment with ICI in elderly patients with NSCLC and melanoma has a risk-benefit ratio that supports its use. However, we report in this cohort that one in five patients has a grade 3-4 IRAEs leading to treatment discontinuation. Geriatric assessment prior to initiation of therapy and during therapy should be routine in patients aged 80 years and older.

This study aimed to assess the prognostic value of thyroid dysfunctions in metastatic melanoma patients on anti-programmed death-1 (anti-PD-1). A total of 110 stage IV or inoperable stage III melanoma patients treated with anti-PD-1 alone or in association with anti-CTLA-4 (T-lymphocyte antigen-4) antibody from January 2015 to December 2017 at our institution were enrolled in this retrospective study. Median follow-up was 32.8 months. Transitory thyroid dysfunctions and permanent thyroid dysfunctions were distinguished. The main criterion was progression-free survival. Secondary criteria were best response and overall survival. Survival curves were compared with log-rank tests and a cox proportional hazard ratio model was used to adjust patients and melanoma characteristics. Thirty-eight (35%) thyroid dysfunctions were observed during the follow-up, including 25 transitory thyroid dysfunctions (23%) and 13 permanent thyroid dysfunctions (12%). Progression-free survival was longer in patients with thyroid dysfunction (18.1 months) than in patients without thyroid dysfunction (3.9 months, P = 0.0085). In multivariate analysis, thyroid dysfunctions were not an independent predictive factor for progression-free survival. Patients with thyroid dysfunction had a longer overall survival (P = 0.0021), and thyroid dysfunctions were associated with a lower mortality risk (hazard ratio = 0.40; P = 0.005). Best response was positively associated with thyroid dysfunctions (P = 0.048). Thyroid dysfunctions induced by anti-PD-1 were not an independent predictive factor for progression-free survival in metastatic melanoma patients but seemed associated with a better response and increased overall survival.

Purpose: In BRAFV600MUT metastatic melanoma, cyclin D–CDK4/6–INK4–Rb pathway alterations are involved in resistance to MAPK inhibitors, suggesting a clinical benefit of cyclin-dependent kinase 4 (CDK4) inhibitors. In this phase I–II study, we aimed to establish the MTD of palbociclib when added to vemurafenib. Patients and Methods: Patients with BRAFV600E/KMUT metastatic melanoma harboring CDKN2A loss and RB1 expression were included and stratified into two groups according to previous BRAF inhibitor treatment (no:strata 1; yes:strata 2). Treatment comprised palbociclib once daily for 14 days followed by a 7-day break + continuous dosing of vemurafenib. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), and the secondary endpoints included the best response, survival, pharmacokinetics, and tumor molecular profiling. Results: Eighteen patients were enrolled, with 15 in strata 2. Characteristics at inclusion were American Joint Committee on Cancer stage IVM1c (N = 16; 88.9%), high lactate dehydrogenase (N = 9; 50.0%), and median number of previous treatments of 2. One and 5 patients experienced DLT in strata 1 and 2, respectively, defining the MTD at palbociclib 25 mg and vemurafenib 960 mg in strata 2. No significant evidence for drug–drug interactions was highlighted. The median progression-free survival was 2.8 months, and 5 (27.8%) patients showed a clinical response. The baseline differential mRNA expression analysis and in vitro data revealed the role of CHEK2 in the response to palbociclib. Conclusions: Although the combination of palbociclib + fixed-dose vemurafenib did not allow an increased palbociclib dosage above 25 mg, a significant clinical benefit was achieved in pretreated patients with melanoma. An association between the transcriptomic data and clinical response was highlighted.

Background: First-degree relatives (FDRs, defined as parents, children, and siblings) of melanoma patients are at a two-to-fivefold increased risk of developing melanoma themselves. FDRs are advised to perform self-skin examination (SSE) and annual medical total cutaneous examination (TCE) performed either by a dermatologist or a general practitioner, and to change their sun-related behavior. This advice is given orally to melanoma patients who are asked to relay the information to their FDRs. Objective: Our aim was to determine the impact of providing a tip sheet to melanoma patients intended to their first-degree relatives (FDRs) on early detection and sun-related behaviors in this group at increased risk of melanoma. Methods: A superiority, cluster-randomized trial was conducted at nine hospital centers. In the intervention group, dermatologists were asked to deliver to melanoma patients (index cases) the tip sheet and oral advice intended to their FDRs. The control group were asked to deliver the usual oral advice alone. The primary outcome was early detection of melanoma in FDRs with a medical TCE performed within one year after the first visit of the index case. Secondary outcomes were SSE and sun-related behaviors in FDRs. Results: A total of 48 index cases and 114 FDRS in the control group, 60 index cases and 166 FDRS in the intervention group were recruited. In the intervention group, 36.1% of FDRs performed a medical TCE as compared to 39.5% of FDRs in the control group (OR 0.9 [95% CI 0.5 to 1.5], p = 0.63). We did not find a between-group difference in SSE and sun-related behaviors. Conclusion: A tip sheet added to the usual oral advice did not increase medical TCE among FDRs of melanoma patients. Overall, the rate of TCE among FDRs was low. Research on other strategies is needed to increase melanoma detection in this population.

International audience; Background: Significant progress was recently observed in the treatment of metastatic melanoma (MM). With >50% of patients now reaching a second line of treatment and a significant improvement in the survival rate, an assessment of quality of life (QoL) during the whole course of the disease becomes necessary. The objective of this study was to describe the QoL of patients with MM in France, from their diagnosis of advanced disease to their death, in real life. Methods: QoL data were collected through MelBase, a prospective, French, multicentric cohort dedicated to the follow-up of adults with MM. QoL was assessed using the EuroQoL-5D questionnaire and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment (FACT)-Melanoma questionnaire at the time of study inclusion, every 3 months, and at the time of each treatment change until death. To assess longitudinal changes from baseline to death, mixed-effect models for repeated-measures analyses were used to control for baseline covariates. Results: QoL was assessed in 1435 patients who were included in the study between 2013 and 2018. The median follow-up was 9.4 months, and 47% of patients died during follow-up. During first-line treatment, the model-based, mean utility score was 0.830 (95% CI, 0.818-0.843), the mean FACT-General score was 77.22 (95% CI, 76.23-78.22), and the mean FACT-Melanoma score was 129.46 (95% CI, 128.02-130.90). At the time of a change in treatment line, there was a decrease of −0.027 (95% CI, −0.03, −0.02) in the utility score, −1.82 (95% CI, −1.88, −1.76) in the FACT-General score, and −2.98 (95% CI, −3.05, −2.91) in the FACT-Melanoma score compared with first-line treatment. Conclusions: In the MelBase cohort, the QoL among patients with MM seems to be fairly stable over the whole disease course, although a small but significant decrease at time therapy is changed is observed.

Pimasertib is a selective, potent mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) 1/2 inhibitor. The aim of this study was to describe the efficacy, safety, and pharmacodynamics of pimasertib at pharmacologically active doses in a cohort of patients with locally advanced/metastatic melanoma from a first-in-human study of pimasertib. This was a phase I, open-label, two-part, dose-escalation study. Part 1 was conducted in patients with solid tumors and identified the maximum tolerated dose, while Part 2 was restricted to patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma. Endpoints included safety, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity. We present data for patients with melanoma only from both parts of the study. In total, 93 patients with melanoma received pimasertib, 89 of whom received pharmacologically active doses (28–255 mg/day) across four dose regimens in the two parts of the study. The objective response rate was 12.4% (11/89): complete response (n = 1) and partial response (PR; n = 10). Six patients responded for > 24 weeks. Nine of the 11 responders had tumors with B-Raf Proto-Oncogene, Serine/Threonine Kinase (BRAF; n = 6) and/or NRAS Proto-Oncogene, GTPase (NRAS; n = 3) mutations. Forty-six patients had stable disease (SD). In patients with ocular melanoma (n = 13), best overall response was PR (n = 1), SD (n = 11), and disease progression (n = 1). Phosphorylated extracellular signal-regulated kinase (pERK) levels were substantially reduced within 2 h of treatment and inhibition was sustained with continuous twice-daily dosing. Treatment-related, recurrent, grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported in eight patients, including diarrhea, and skin and ocular events. Results from this phase I study indicate that pimasertib has clinical activity in patients with locally advanced/metastatic melanoma, particularly BRAF- and NRAS-mutated tumors, at clinically relevant doses associated with pERK inhibition in peripheral blood mononuclear cells. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00982865

The Ras/Raf/mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase/extracellular signal-regulated kinase (Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK) signaling cascade is frequently constitutively activated in human cancers. Pimasertib is a selective and potent adenosine triphosphate non-competitive MEK1/2 inhibitor. Our objectives were to describe the results of a phase I, first-in-human, dose-escalation trial of pimasertib that investigated the maximum tolerated dose, recommended phase II dose, and safety, as well as other endpoints. Four dosing schedules of pimasertib (once daily [qd], 5 days on, 2 days off; qd, 15 days on, 6 days off; continuous qd; continuous twice daily [bid]) were evaluated in patients with advanced solid tumors. Each treatment cycle lasted 21 days. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) evaluated during cycle 1, and the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Secondary objectives included safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity. Overall, 180 patients received pimasertib (dose range 1–255 mg/day). DLTs were mainly observed at doses ≥ 120 mg/day and included skin rash/acneiform dermatitis and ocular events, such as serous retinal detachment. The most common drug-related adverse events were consistent with class effects, including diarrhea, skin disorders, ocular disorders, asthenia/fatigue, and peripheral edema. The median time to maximum pimasertib concentration was 1.5 h across dosing schedules, and the apparent terminal half-life was 5 h across qd dosing schedules. Pimasertib decreased ERK phosphorylation within 2 h of administration, which was maintained for up to 8 h at higher doses and prolonged with bid dosing. Based on the safety profile and efficacy signals, a continuous bid regimen was the preferred dosing schedule and the RP2D was defined as 60 mg bid. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00982865.

International audience; Background With the development of precision oncology, Molecular Tumor Boards (MTB) are developing in many institutions. However, the implementation of MTB in routine clinical practice has still not been thoroughly studied. Material and methods Since the first drugs approved for targeted therapies, patient tumor samples were centralized to genomic testing platforms. In our institution, all tumor samples have been analyzed since 2014 by Next Generation Sequencing (NGS). In 2015, we established a regional MTB to discuss patient cases with 1 or more alterations identified by NGS, in genes different from those related to drug approval. We conducted a retrospective comparative analysis to study whether our MTB increased the prescriptions of Molecular Targeted Therapies (MTT) and the inclusions of patients in clinical trials with MTT, in comparison with patients with available NGS data but no MTB discussion. Results In 2014, 86 patients had UGA, but the results were not available to clinicians and not discussed in MTB. During the years 2015 and 2016, 113 patients with an UGA (unreferenced genomic alteration) were discussed in MTB. No patients with an UGA were included in 2014 in a clinical trial, versus 2 (2%) in 2015-2016. 13 patients with an UGA (12%) were treated in 2015-2016 with a MTT whereas in 2014, no patient (p = 0.001). Conclusions In this retrospective analysis, we showed that the association of large-scale genomic testing and MTB was feasible, and could increase the prescription of MTT. However, in routine clinical practice, the majority of patients with UGA still do not have access to MTT.

Despite the poor prognosis associated with melanoma brain metastases (BM), data concerning these patients and their inclusion in clinical trials remains scarce. We report here the efficacy results of a subgroup analysis in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma and BM treated with BRAF and MEK inhibitors dabrafenib (D) and trametinib (T).This phase IIIb single-arm, open-label, multicenter, French study included patients with unresectable stage IIIc or IV BRAFV600-mutant melanoma with or without BM. The present analysis focuses on patients with BM. Response rates were determined clinically and/or radiologically as per standard clinical practice. Progression-free survival (PFS) was estimated using the Kaplan Meier analysis and modelled with multivariate Cox regression model. Risk subgroups were identified using an exponential regression tree analysis. Significance was set at plt; 0.05.Between March 2015 and November 2016, 856 patients were included and 275 (32%) patients had BM. Median PFS was 5.68 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.29-6.87). Significant independent factors associated with shorter PFS were ECOG ≥1, elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), ≥3 metastatic sites, and non-naïve status. The binary-split classification and regression tree modelling identified baseline LDH and ECOG status as major prognostic factors.This is to date the largest, close to real-world, study in advanced BRAFV600-mutant melanoma patients with BM treated with D+T. ECOGgt;1, ≥3 metastatic sites and elevated LDH were associated with shorter PFS, a finding previously demonstrated only in patients without BM. Further studies are warranted to determine the optimal treatment sequence in this population.

MBD4 mutations have been reported in uveal melanomas, acute myeloid leukemias, colorectal adenocarcinomas, gliomas, and spiradenocarcinomas and cause a hypermutated phenotype. Although metastatic uveal melanomas (mUM) are usually resistant to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), the first reported MBD4-mutated (MBD4m) patient responded to ICI, suggesting that MBD4 mutation may predict response to ICI.Retrospective cohort of mUM patients treated with ICI. MBD4 was sequenced in a subset of these patients.Three hundred mUM patients were included. Median follow-up was 17.3 months. Ten patients with an objective response and 20 cases with stable disease forgt;12 months were observed, corresponding to an objective response rate of 3.3% and a clinical benefit (i.e., responder patients and stable disease) rate of 10%. Of the 131 tumors sequenced for MBD4, five (3.8%) were mutated. MBD4 mutation was associated with a better objective response rate as three out of five MBD4m versus 4% of MBD4 wild-type patients responded (p lt; 0.001). Of these five responders, three presented progressive disease at 2.8, 13.9, and 22.3 months. Median PFS was 4.0 months in MBD4 wild-type and 22.3 months in MBD4m patients (HR = 0.22; p = 0.01). Median OS in MBD4def patients was unreached as compared to 16.6 months in MBD4pro (HR = 0.11; 95% CI: 0.02-0.86; log-rank p-test = 0.04; Fig. 2e).In mUM patients, MBD4 mutation is highly predictive for the response, PFS, and overall survival benefit to ICI. MBD4 could be a tissue-agnostic biomarker and should be sequenced in mUM, and other tumor types where MBD4 mutations are reported.

ObjectiveTo quantify the risk of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in patients with pre-existing autoimmune disease (pAID) treated by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for stage III or IV melanoma.MethodsCase–control study performed on a French multicentric prospective cohort of patients with melanoma, matched for irAE risk factors and oncological staging. Risk of irAE was assessed by logistic regression.Results110 patients with pAID were included and matched with 330 controls, from March 2013 to October 2020. Over a median follow-up period of 7.2 months for cases and 6.9 months for controls, the ORs of developing all-grade and grade ≥3 irAEs among cases compared with controls were 1.91 (95% CI (1.56 to 2.27)) and 1.44 (95% CI (1.08 to 1.82)), respectively. Patients with pAID had an increased risk of multiple irAEs (OR 1.46, 95% CI (1.15 to 2.67)) and a shorter time to irAE onset. In contrast, there were no difference in irAE-related mortality nor in the rate of treatment discontinuation, and a landmark analysis revealed a better survival at 24 months among cases (p=0.02). Thirty per cent of cases experienced a pAID flare during follow-up, and baseline immunosuppression did not prevent irAE occurrence. Last, we report associations between the pAID clinical subsets and organ-specific irAEs.ConclusionIn our study, patients with pAID were at greater risk of all-grade, severe and multiple irAEs, yet had a better 24-month survival than controls. Thus, patients with pAID should be eligible for ICI therapy but benefit from a close monitoring for irAE occurrence, especially during the first months of therapy.

Summary Background In the phase 3 COMBI-AD study, patients with resected, stage III melanoma with BRAF V600E or BRAF V600K mutations received adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib or placebo. The primary analysis showed that dabrafenib plus trametinib significantly improved relapse-free survival at 3 years. These results led to US Food and Drug Administration approval of dabrafenib plus trametinib as adjuvant treatment for patients with resected stage III melanoma with BRAF V600E or BRAF V600K mutations. Here, we report the patient-reported outcomes from COMBI-AD. Methods COMBI-AD was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study done at 169 sites in 25 countries. Study participants were aged 18 years or older and had complete resection of stage IIIA (lymph node metastases >1 mm), IIIB, or IIIC cutaneous melanoma as per American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th edition criteria, with BRAF V600E or BRAF V600K mutations, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice response system, stratified by mutation type and disease stage, to receive oral dabrafenib (150 mg twice daily) plus oral trametinib (2 mg once daily) or matching placebos for 12 months. Patients, physicians, and the investigators who analysed the data were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival, reported elsewhere. Health-related quality of life, reported here, was a prespecified exploratory endpoint, and was assessed with the European Quality of Life 5-Dimensions 3-Levels (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire in the intention-to-treat population. We used a mixed-model repeated-measures analysis to assess differences in health-related quality of life between groups. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01682083. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer recruiting participants. Findings Between Jan 31, 2013, and Dec 11, 2014, 870 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive dabrafenib plus trametinib (n=438) or matching placebos (n=432). Data were collected until the data cutoff for analyses of the primary endpoint (June 30, 2017). The median follow-up was 34 months (IQR 28–39) in the dabrafenib plus trametinib group and 33 months (20·5–39) in the placebo group. During the 12-month treatment phase, there were no significant or clinically meaningful changes from baseline between groups in EQ-5D-3L visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) or utility scores. During treatment, there were no clinically meaningful differences in VAS scores or utility scores in the dabrafenib plus trametinib group between patients who did and did not experience the most common adverse events. During long-term follow-up (range 15–48 months), VAS and utility scores were similar between groups and did not differ from baseline scores. At recurrence, there were significant decreases in VAS scores in both the dabrafenib plus trametinib group (mean change −6·02, SD 20·57; p=0·0032) and the placebo group (−6·84, 20·86; p Interpretation These findings show that dabrafenib plus trametinib did not affect patient-reported outcome scores during or after adjuvant treatment, and suggest that preventing or delaying relapse with adjuvant therapy could be beneficial in this setting. Funding Novartis.

Introduction L’interet de dabrafenib trametinib (dab + tram) en adjuvant chez les patients (pts) ayant un melanome BRAF V600E/K mute de stade III reseque a ete demontre dans l’etude COMBI-AD. Dans COMBI-AD, les effets indesirables (EI) ont conduit a l’arret definitif de dab + tram chez 26 % des pts, principalement en raison de la fievre (9 %). L’objectif de COMBI-APlus ( NCT03551626 ) est d’evaluer un nouvel algorithme de gestion de la fievre pour reduire les grades 3/4 et ses consequences (arret du traitement, hospitalisation). Materiel et methodes COMBI-APlus est un essai ouvert de phase IIIb evaluant un algorithme de gestion de la fievre chez des pts ayant un melanome reseque de stade III BRAF V600E/K-mute traites en adjuvant par dab + tram pendant 12 mois. L’algorithme prevoit l’interruption de dab + tram des apparition d’une temperature ≥ 38 °C et la reprise a la meme dose des disparition des symptomes depuis 24 h. En cas de suspicion de fievre recurrente et en presence d’un syndrome febrile (frissons, raideurs, sueurs nocturnes, symptomes grippaux sans fievre) le traitement peut etre interrompu a la discretion de l’investigateur. Le critere d’evaluation principal est le taux composite de fievre (grades 3/4, hospitalisation ou arret definitif du traitement dus a la fievre) compare aux donnees historiques de COMBI-AD (20 % ; IC95 % : 16,3 %–24,1 %). Les criteres secondaires incluent la survie sans rechute (SSR) et l’innocuite. Resultats Cent soixante-seize pts ont ete inclus en France sur un total de 552 pts avec un suivi median de 18,14 mois. COMBI-APlus a atteint son critere principal d’amelioration significative du taux composite de fievre par rapport au temoin historique COMBI-AD. Il est de 7,4 % (IC95 % : 4,0 %–12,3 %) avec des taux de 4,0 % pour les grades 3/4, de 2,8 % pour les hospitalisations et de 3,4 % pour les arrets definitifs de traitement dus a la fievre. Le taux de SSR estime a 12 mois est de 90,9 % (IC95 % : 85,4 %–94,4 %). Les principaux EI ≥ 20 % sont : fievre (67,0 %), asthenie (48,9 %), cephalees (40,9 %), diarrhee (34,7 %), augmentation de la creatine phosphokinase sanguine (31,8 %), frissons (31,3 %), nausees (26,7 %), arthralgies (25,6 %), fatigue (22,2 %). L’ensemble des EI a conduit a l’arret definitif de dab + tram chez 14,2 % des pts versus 26 % dans COMBI-AD. Discussion Cette analyse suggere que ce nouvel algorithme simplifie de gestion de la fievre est efficace pour reduire le taux composite de fievre (grades 3/4, hospitalisation, arret de traitement) chez les pts recevant dab + tram en adjuvant. Les premiers resultats d’efficacite semblent correspondre a ceux observes dans COMBI-AD. Cet algorithme peut reduire le besoin d’hospitalisation ou de consultation liees a la fievre, ce qui est souhaitable dans le contexte actuel de pandemie du COVID-19. Ainsi plus de pts peuvent rester sous traitement et en tirer un benefice clinique.

Background: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 1325/KEYNOTE-054 trial assessed pembrolizumab versus placebo in patients with resected high-risk stage III melanoma. At 15-month median follow-up, pembrolizumab improved recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57 [98·4% CI 0·43–0·74], p1 mm), IIIB, or IIIC (without in-transit metastasis), and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a central interactive voice response system to receive intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks for up to 18 doses or until disease recurrence or unacceptable toxicity. Randomisation was stratified according to disease stage and region, using a minimisation technique, and clinical investigators, patients, and those collecting or analysing the data were masked to treatment assignment. The two coprimary endpoints were recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and in patients with PD-L1-positive tumours. The secondary endpoint reported here was distant metastasis-free survival in the ITT and PD-L1-positive populations. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02362594, and EudraCT, 2014-004944-37. Findings: Between Aug 26, 2015, and Nov 14, 2016, 1019 patients were assigned to receive either pembrolizumab (n=514) or placebo (n=505). At an overall median follow-up of 42·3 months (IQR 40·5–45·9), 3·5-year distant metastasis-free survival was higher in the pembrolizumab group than in the placebo group in the ITT population (65·3% [95% CI 60·9–69·5] in the pembrolizumab group vs 49·4% [44·8–53·8] in the placebo group; HR 0·60 [95% CI 0·49–0·73]; p

Somatic mutations in the isocitrate dehydrogenase genes IDH1 and IDH2 occur at high frequency in several tumour types. Even though these mutations are confined to distinct hotspots, we show that gliomas are the only tumour type with an exceptionally high percentage of IDH1R132H mutations. Patients harbouring IDH1R132H mutated tumours have lower levels of genome-wide DNA-methylation, and an associated increased gene expression, compared to tumours with other IDH1/2 mutations (“non-R132H IDH1/2 mutations”). This reduced methylation is seen in multiple tumour types and thus appears independent of the site of origin. For 1p/19q non-codeleted glioma (astrocytoma) patients, we show that this difference is clinically relevant: in samples of the randomised phase III CATNON trial, patients harbouring tumours with IDH mutations other than IDH1R132H have a better outcome (hazard ratio 0.41, 95% CI [0.24, 0.71], p = 0.0013). Such non-R132H IDH1/2-mutated tumours also had a significantly lower proportion of tumours assigned to prognostically poor DNA-methylation classes (p R132H mutated counterpart indicates that not all IDH-mutations are identical. This difference is clinically relevant and should be taken into account for patient prognostication.

e21601 Background: MBD4 encodes a glycosylase implicated in repair of lesions induced by DNA deamination and its inactivation in tumors is associated with a hypermutated phenotype. Uveal melanoma (UM) is a rare but aggressive form of melanoma carrying an extremely low mutation burden. Although metastatic UM (mUM) are usually resistant to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), the first reported MBD4-mutated (MBD4m) patient responded to ICI, suggesting that MBD4 mutation may predict response to ICI. Since then, other MBD4-inactivated UMs, acute myeloid leukemias, colorectal adenocarcinomas, gliomas and spiradenocarcinoma cases have been reported. Methods: Retrospective cohort of mUM patients treated with ICI. MBD4 was sequenced in a subset of these patients. Results: Three hundred mUM patients were analyzed. Median follow-up was 17.3 months. Ten objective responses and 20 stable disease for > 12 months were observed, corresponding to an objective response rate of 3.3% and a clinical benefit (CB; i.e. responder patients and stable disease) rate of 10%. Median progression-free survivals (PFS) in patients without and with CB were 3.1 and 16.3 months, respectively (p < 0.0001). Of the 134 tumors sequenced for MBD4, five (3.7%) were mutated. MBD4 inactivation was associated with higher mutation burden (179 to 643 variants versus a median of 16 in MBD4 wild-type), better objective response rate as 60% of MBD4m versus 4% of MBD4-wild type patients responded (Fisher’s exact p-test = 0.0009). Median PFS was 4.0 months in MBD4-wild type and 22.3 months in MBD4m patients (HR = 0.22; p = 0.01). Median overall survival was 16.6 months in MBD4-wild type and unreached in MBD4m patients (HR = 0.11; p = 0.004). Conclusions: In mUM patients, MBD4 mutation is highly predictive for response to ICI, PFS and overall survival benefit. MBD4 could be a tissue-agnostic biomarker and should be sequenced in mUM and other tumor types where MBD4 mutations are reported.

International audience; Background: BRAF and MEK inhibitors combination, including dabrafenib (D) and trametinib (T) have transformed the treatment of BRAF V600-mutant advanced melanoma patients, including patients with brain metastasis (BM). In a large phase IIIb, single-arm, open-label, multicenter French study, we assessed safety, response to treatment, progression-free survival (PFS) and factors associated with progression, and stratified the population into risk groups. Methods: Patients with unresectable, advanced, BRAF V600-mutant melanoma were included, including those with the presence of BM, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) ≤2, elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) or previous melanoma treatments. Responses were determined locally, without central review. PFS was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier analysis and modelled with multivariate Cox model. Risk subgroups were identified using a regression tree analysis. Results: Between March 2015 and November 2016, 856 patients received at least one D + T dose. Overall, 92% had stage IV melanoma, 38% ECOG PS ≥1, 32% BM and 37.5% elevated LDH. Median PFS was 8.02 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.33–8.77). Significant factors associated with lower PFS were ECOG PS ≥1, elevated LDH, ≥3 metastatic sites and presence of BM. Patients with

Background: The CATNON trial investigated the addition of concurrent, adjuvant, and both current and adjuvant temozolomide to radiotherapy in adults with newly diagnosed 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic gliomas. The benefit of concurrent temozolomide chemotherapy and relevance of mutations in the IDH1 and IDH2 genes remain unclear.Methods: This randomised, open-label, phase 3 study done in 137 institutions across Australia, Europe, and North America included patients aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic gliomas and a WHO performance status of 0–2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) centrally using a minimisation technique to radiotherapy alone (59·4 Gy in 33 fractions; three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy or intensity-modulated radiotherapy), radiotherapy with concurrent oral temozolomide (75 mg/m2 per day), radiotherapy with adjuvant oral temozolomide (12 4-week cycles of 150–200 mg/m2 temozolomide given on days 1–5), or radiotherapy with both concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide. Patients were stratified by institution, WHO performance status score, age, 1p loss of heterozygosity, the presence of oligodendroglial elements on microscopy, and MGMT promoter methylation status. The primary endpoint was overall survival adjusted by stratification factors at randomisation in the intention-to-treat population. A second interim analysis requested by the independent data monitoring committee was planned when two-thirds of total required events were observed to test superiority or futility of concurrent temozolomide. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00626990.Findings: Between Dec 4, 2007, and Sept 11, 2015, 751 patients were randomly assigned (189 to radiotherapy alone, 188 to radiotherapy with concurrent temozolomide, 186 to radiotherapy and adjuvant temozolomide, and 188 to radiotherapy with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide). Median follow-up was 55·7 months (IQR 41·0–77·3). The second interim analysis declared futility of concurrent temozolomide (median overall survival was 66·9 months [95% CI 45·7–82·3] with concurrent temozolomide vs 60·4 months [45·7–71·5] without concurrent temozolomide; hazard ratio [HR] 0·97 [99·1% CI 0·73–1·28], p=0·76). By contrast, adjuvant temozolomide improved overall survival compared with no adjuvant temozolomide (median overall survival 82·3 months [95% CI 67·2–116·6] vs 46·9 months [37·9–56·9]; HR 0·64 [95% CI 0·52–0·79], pInterpretation: Adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy, but not concurrent temozolomide chemotherapy, was associated with a survival benefit in patients with 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic glioma. Clinical benefit was dependent on IDH1 and IDH2 mutational status.Funding: Merck Sharpe & Dohme.

International audience; Background: The 'obesity paradox' suggests that higher body mass index (BMI) is associated with better survival values in metastatic melanoma patients, especially those receiving targeted and immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Higher BMI is also associated with higher incidences of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). This study assesses whether BMI is associated with survival outcomes and adverse events in metastatic melanoma patients with systemic therapy.Patients and methods: This multicentric retrospective study, conducted from 1 March 2013 to 29 April 2019, enrolled adults with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma from the French multicentric prospective cohort-MelBase (NCT02828202). Patients with first-line chemotherapy and targeted and immune therapy were included. Underweight people and those with metastatic mucosal or ocular melanoma were excluded. BMI was categorized using the World Health Organization criteria. Co-primary outcomes included the association between BMI and progression-free survival and overall survival, stratified by treatment type, sex, and age. Secondary endpoints were the association of BMI with overall response and TRAEs. Multivariate analyses were carried out.Results: A total of 1214 patients were analyzed. Their median age was 66.0 years (range, 53-75). Male predominance was observed [n = 738 (61%)]. Most patients received immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy (63%), followed by targeted therapy (32%), and had stage M1c disease (60.5%). Obese patients represented 22% of the cohort. The median follow-up duration was 13.5 months (range, 6.0-27.5). In the pooled analysis, no positive or negative association between BMI and progression-free survival (P = 0.88)/overall survival (P = 0.25) was observed, regardless of treatment type, sex, and age. These results were nonsignificant in the univariate and multivariate analyses. The objective response rate, according to BMI category, did not differ significantly regardless of age. TRAEs were not associated with BMI.Conclusion: The observed lack of an association between BMI and survival demonstrates that BMI is not a valuable marker of systemic treatment-related outcomes in metastatic melanoma. Future approaches might focus on the whole-body distribution.

Introduction Mucosal melanomas (MM) of the female genital tract are rare a. We aimed to study the prognostic factors of vulvar and vaginal locations of MM. Material and method A multicenter, retrospective cohort study conducted between 01/01/2000 and 01/06/2019. Result Of the 33 patients included 25 (75.8 %) had vulvar (VuM) and eight (24.2 %) vaginal melanomas (VaM). VaMs were deeper: median Breslow index: 17.5 mm [3.5−22] versus 4.3 mm [0.35−18] (p = 0.013). Average follow-up was 24.0 ± 59.8 months. Twenty-six patients (78.8 %) experienced recurrence. Disease-free survival was 52.9 % at 1 year (64.7 % for VuM and 14.3 % for VaM) and 8.4 % at 3 years (11 % for VuM and 0% for VaM) (p = 0.002). Median time to the first recurrence was 9.01 months [CI95 %: 2.07–56.71]. VaM recurred earlier than VuM (3.12 months [CI95 %: 2.07–12.49] versus 17.72 [CI95 %: 3.58–56.71], p = 0.011). VaM had a higher risk of recurrence (HR = 5.64 [CI95 %: 2.01–15.82], p = 0.001) in multivariate analysis. Overall survival was 88.5 % at 1 year (100 % for VuM and 50 % for VaM), and 59.4 % at 3 years (69.3 % for VuM and 25 % for VaM). Women with VaM died earlier: median specific death occurrence of 8.76 months [CI95 %: 6.54–24.72] versus 39.61 [CI95 %: 21.89–209.21], p = 0.013 (HR = 5.08 [CI95 %: 1.39–18.60], p = 0.014). A lesion size ≥3 cm was associated with an increased risk of mortality (HR = 8.45 [CI95 %: 1.60–44.52], p = 0.012). In multivariate analysis, vaginal location remained an independent and predictive variable of a higher risk of specific death (HR = 8.56 [CI95 %: 1.95–37.64], p = 0.005). Conclusion A vaginal location of MM is associated with a poorer prognosis than a vulvar location.

InPatients withEighteen patients were enrolled, with 15 in strata 2. Characteristics at inclusion were American Joint Committee on Cancer stage IVM1c (Although the combination of palbociclib + fixed-dose vemurafenib did not allow an increased palbociclib dosage above 25 mg, a significant clinical benefit was achieved in pretreated patients with melanoma. An association between the transcriptomic data and clinical response was highlighted.

Importance Since 2011, many patients with metastatic melanoma have been treated with ipilimumab therapy and have developed severe immune-related adverse events (AEs). Because several immune therapies are now available to treat metastatic melanoma, a better knowledge of mechanisms and recurrence risks of immune-related AEs is needed before reintroduction of immunotherapies. Objectives To evaluate the risk of a recurrence of immune toxic effects associated with anti–programmed cell death 1 antibody (anti–PD-1) therapy after discontinuation of ipilimumab monotherapy because of severe AEs. Design, Settings, and Participants This cohort study conducted at 19 French melanoma referral centers included patients with metastatic melanoma who experienced severe immune-related AEs after ipilimumab therapy and then were treated with anti–PD-1 therapy between February 1, 2013, and December 31, 2016. The study cutoff was June 1, 2017. Statistical analysis was performed from June 1, 2016, to August 31, 2017. Exposures Monotherapy with at least 1 cycle of ipilimumab that was associated with a grade 3 or 4 immune-related AE and subsequent treatment with at least 1 cycle of an anti–PD-1 (nivolumab or pembrolizumab) therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the rate of immune-related AEs associated with anti–PD-1 therapy. Secondary outcomes were characteristics of ipilimumab-related and anti–PD-1 immune–related AEs and overall response rate and overall survival associated with anti–PD-1 therapy. Results Of 56 patients with metastatic melanoma included in the study, all of whom experienced severe immune-related AEs after ipilimumab therapy (31 [55%] male; mean [SD] age, 64 [14.9] years), 20 (36%) experienced at least 1 immune-related AE associated with pembrolizumab (6 of 20 [30%]) or nivolumab (14 of 20 [70%]) therapy. A total of 12 patients (21%) experienced grade 3 or 4 immune-related AEs, and among these patients, 4 (33%) presented with the same immune-related AE as with ipilimumab therapy. Severe immune-related AEs were resolved with use of systemic corticosteroids (7 [58%]) and/or anti–tumor necrosis factor (1 [8%]), and no grade 5 toxic effects were reported. Five patients discontinued anti–PD-1 therapy because of immune-related AEs. The overall response rate was 43%, with a median overall survival of 21 months (interquartile range, 18 to ongoing). Conclusions and Relevance The findings suggest that anti–PD-1 therapy may be associated with reduced risk of toxic effects and improved survival among patients who have experienced severe toxic effects after ipilimumab therapy.

90 Background: Darolutamide, a structurally distinct and highly potent androgen receptor inhibitor, had a consistently favorable safety and tolerability profile in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in ARAMIS, and discontinuation rates due to adverse events (AEs) remained consistently low after longer follow-up. In previously reported phase 1/2 studies in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), darolutamide was well tolerated for up to 25 months. We report the safety and tolerability of extended treatment with darolutamide in these mCRPC studies. Methods: Data from three phase 1/2 studies (NCT02363855, NCT01317641/NCT01429064, and NCT01784757) in patients with mCRPC were pooled for analysis of long-term safety. Results are summarized descriptively. Results: Of 173 patients with mCRPC evaluable for safety in the 3 studies, 13 patients received > 2 years of darolutamide treatment; median duration of treatment was 38 months (range 24–90). Six patients received > 4 years of darolutamide treatment. Nine of 13 patients with > 2 years of darolutamide therapy initially received 600 mg BID; others received 200 mg (n = 1), 300 mg (n = 1), or 700 mg (n = 2) BID. Median age was 68 years in the > 2-years group, and most patients were white. Patients were enrolled from France (n = 4), Latvia (n = 3), United Kingdom (n = 3), Finland (n = 2), and Japan (n = 1). Most patients had normal renal function (n = 10) and hepatic function (n = 10), 12 patients had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, and 9 patients had a Gleason score ≥7. Prior systemic anticancer treatments taken by more than 1 patient were bicalutamide (n = 10); cyproterone (n = 3); and triptorelin and leuprorelin (n = 2 each). No patient received prior chemotherapy. All 13 patients reported AEs, most grade 1 or 2; 6 reported grade 3 AEs. Treatment-related AEs were reported in 5 patients, and all were grade 1 in severity. Serious AEs were reported in 6 patients, and all were judged not related to darolutamide. One patient treated with darolutamide for > 2 years had an AE (new neoplasm; not related to darolutamide) that led to treatment discontinuation. Conclusions: Extended darolutamide treatment > 2 years in this small group of patients with mCRPC was generally well tolerated, with safety and tolerability consistent with that previously reported. Clinical trial information: NCT02363855, NCT01317641/NCT01429064, and NCT01784757.

Background: BET proteins are epigenetic readers and activators of oncogenic pathways in cancer. CC-95775 is a novel oral small molecule bromodomain inhibitor. It is a non-specific inhibitor with potent activity against all 4 BET family members (BRD2, BRD3, BRD4, BRDT), and shows additional activity towards several non-BET bromodomain proteins. Methods: CC-95775-ST-001 is a phase 1 dose-escalation study of CC-95775 in patients with advanced STs. Primary objectives were to determine safety and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Secondary and exploratory objectives were pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD) and antitumor activity. Four dose levels (DLs), from 400 to 1200 mg, administered on 4 consecutive days (Day 1 to Day 4) followed by 24 days off, every four weeks (Q4W), were evaluated. Results: As of 16 Apr 2021, 24 evaluable patients were enrolled and treated. The RP2D was 1200 mg (300 mg on days 1-4 and 24 days off, Q4W). One patient treated at 800 mg and two at 1200 mg had dose-limiting toxicities: QT prolongation, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) decreased and abnormal T wave. The most common treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) was thrombocytopenia in 11 patients (45.8%), 2 of them grade 3 (8.3%) and 1 grade 4 (4.2%). Safety profile consisted mainly of gastrointestinal and general disorders. Five patients (20.8%) had transient serious TRAEs: nausea, QT prolongation, abnormal T wave, posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome and acute kidney injury. Eleven patients 11 (45.8) had disease stabilization, 9 of them with a duration of ≥ 16 weeks and 4 of them ≥ 24 weeks: melanoma, chondrosarcoma, adenoid cystic carcinoma and chordoma. Plasma exposures increased in a dose-proportional manner across DLs. Across all dose groups, median Tmax was between ~ 2-4 h post-dose, indicating rapid absorption. The terminal half-life was approximately 30 h and repeated dosing leads to drug accumulation, as expected: ~2 - 3 fold for AUC and Cmax. CC-95775 induced ≥50% decrease of the PD biomarker CCR1 at the 4-hour timepoint in the 1200 mg cohort. Conclusions: CC-95775 was well tolerated and showed preliminary antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with advanced malignancies. The RP2D was 1200 mg Q4W. The favorable PD profile improved tolerability and enabled less frequent dosing. Further evaluation of CC-95775 alone or in combination in STs is warranted. Citation Format: Thierry Lesimple, María José de Miguel, Cristophe Le Tourneau, Mariano Ponz-Sarvise, Marie Paule Sablin, Diego Salas Benito, Bishoy Hanna, Henry Chang, Xin Wei, Marta Ocejo Garcia, Pilar Lardelli, Tania Sánchez, Josep Lluís Parra Palau, Zariana Nikolova, Emiliano Calvo. CC-95775, a reversible, oral bromodomain and extra-terminal (BET) inhibitor in patients with advanced solid tumors (STs): Results of a phase 1 study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR-NCI-EORTC Virtual International Conference on Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics; 2021 Oct 7-10. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Mol Cancer Ther 2021;20(12 Suppl):Abstract nr P033.

Background: Combining anti-VEGF/Ang2 and anti-PD-1 therapy promotes an immunopermissive state, supportive of T-cell-mediated tumour cell destruction. This phase Ib study is assessing BI 836880 plus ezabenlimab in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumours. In Part 1 (dose escalation in pts with advanced NSCLC), the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) was determined as BI 836880 720 mg + ezabenlimab 240 mg IV q3w. Here, we report updated results, including data from Part 2 (expansion cohorts). Methods: Part 2 has 7 cohorts: metastatic (m) NSCLC after checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) monotherapy (Cohort A);mNSCLC after chemotherapy (CT) + CPI (Cohort B);mSCLC after CT ± CPI (Cohort C);recurrent GBM (1st and 2nd recurrence;Cohort D);immunotherapy-resistant m-melanoma (Cohort E);HCC after prior sorafenib or lenvatinib (Cohort F);and previously untreated unresectable HCC (Cohort G). Primary endpoint is objective response rate (complete response [CR] + partial response [PR]). Results: As of March 2021, 215 pts have been treated (Part 1: 14, Part 2: 201 [Cohort A, 35;B, 32;C, 19;D, 31;E, 32;F, 29;G, 23];70% male, median age 62 yrs). Any and ≥G3 AEs (any-cause) were reported in 183 (85%) and 72 (33%) pts. 118 (55%) pts had drug-related AEs, most commonly asthenia (13%) and hypertension (12%). 7 pts had G4 AEs (non-related hyperkalaemia + cardiac arrest, laryngospasm, gastrointestinal perforation;drug-related anaphylactic reaction, cholestatic hepatitis, acute pancreatitis, increased transaminases);9 pts had G5 AEs (non-related COVID-19 pneumonia, epilepsy, intracranial haemorrhage, cardio-respiratory arrest, haemoptysis, hepatic failure, general physical health deterioration, Glasgow coma scale abnormal + shortness of breath;drug-related tracheal haemorrhage). 35 (16%) pts had immune-related AEs and 15 (7%) had AEs leading to discontinuation. 179 pts were evaluable for response: 1 had confirmed CR (Cohort F), 22 had PR (Part 1: 2;Part 2: 20 [Cohort A, 4;C, 5;D, 4;E, 3;F, 3;G, 1]) and 110 had stable disease. 106 pts remain on treatment. Conclusions: BI 836880 plus ezabenlimab had a manageable safety profile, with preliminary activity in a range of tumour types. Clinical trial identification: NCT03468426. Editorial acknowledgement: Medical writing support for the development of this manuscript, under the direction of the authors, was provided by Hannah Simmons MSc, of Ashfield MedComms, an Ashfield Health company, and funded by Boehringer Ingelheim. Legal entity responsible for the study: Boehringer Ingelheim. Funding: Boehringer Ingelheim. Disclosure: N. Girard: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Roche, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Pfizer, BMS, MSD, Takeda, GSK, AbbVie, Pharmamar, Janssen, Sanofi;Financial Interests, Personal, Funding, Travel/accommodation/expenses: Roche, AstraZeneca, BMS MSD Oncology;Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: Roche, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim. M. Wermke: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: MSD, Novartis, Kite, Heidelberg Pharma, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Honoraria: BMS, Merck, Roche, Novartis, Kite, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca;Financial Interests, Personal, Funding, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Glenmark, BMS, AstraZeneca. E. Ledin: Financial Interests, Personal and Institutional, Research Grant: Boehringer Ingelheim. D. Kim: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service, Korea;Financial Interests, Personal, Invited Speaker: Korean Association for Lung Cancer, Korean Cancer Association, Korean Society of Medical Oncology, Taiwan Lung Cancer Society;Financial Interests, Institutional, Principal Investigator, Clinical Trial Funding: Alpha Biopharma, Amgen, AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bridge BioTherapeutics, Chong Keun Dang, Daiich-Sankyo, GSK, Hanmi, Janssen, Merus, MIrati Therapeutics, MSD, Novartis, ONO Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Takeda, TP Therapeuti;Non-Financial Interests, Person l, Advisory Role: Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS / ONO Pharmaceuticals, Daiich-Sankyo, GSK, Janssen, Pfizer, SK Biopharm, Takeda, Yuhan;Non-Financial Interests, Personal, Member of the Board of Directors: Asian Thoracic Oncology Research Group, Korean Association for Lung Cancer, Korean Cancer Association, Korean Society of Medical Oncology;Other, Personal, Funding, Travel support for advisory board meeting attendance: Amgen, Daiichi-Sankyo. J. Bennouna: Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Honoraria: Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, AstraZeneca, Roche, Servier, Bayer, AMGEN;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, AstraZeneca, Roche;Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: AstraZeneca. T. Lesimple: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: MSD, Novartis, BMS, Pierre Fabre;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: MSD, Novartis;Financial Interests, Institutional, Research Grant: Roche. E. Felip: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Amgen;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: AstraZeneca;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: BAYER;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Beigene;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Boehringer-Ingelheim;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Bristol-Myers Squibb;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Eli Lilly;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: F. Hoffman-La Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Glaxo Smith Kline;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Janssen;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Medical Trends;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Merck Sharp & Dohme;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Merck Serono;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Peptomyc;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Pfizer;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Puma;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Regeneron;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Sanofi;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Syneos Health;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: Takeda;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Amgen;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: AstraZeneca;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Bristol-Myers Squibb;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Eli Lilly;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: F. Hoffmann-La Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Janssen;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Medscape;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Merck Sharp & Dohme;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Merck Serono;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Peervoice;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Pfizer;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Springer;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Touch Medical;Financial Interests, Personal, Member, Independent Member of the Board: Grifols. D. Berz: Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Honoraria: Oncocyte;Other, Personal, Other, Honoraria: Sun Pharma;Other, Personal, Other, Honoraria: Caris;Other, Personal, Other, Honoraria: Takeda;Other, Personal, Other, Honoraria: Natera;Other, Personal, Other, Honoraria: Jazz Pharma;Other, Personal, Other, Honoraria: Genentech;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Oncocyte;Other, Personal, Advisory Role: Sun Pharma;Other, Personal, Advisory Role: Biocept;Other, Personal, Advisory Role: Prelude;Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Oncocyte;Other, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Caris;Other, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Sun Pharma;Other, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: AstraZeneca;Other, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Takeda;Other, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Merck;Other, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Natera;Other, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Jazz Pharma. C. Mascaux: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Astr Zeneca;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Kephren;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Bristol-Myers Squibb;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: MSD;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Pfizer;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Honoraria: Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Honoraria: AstraZeneca;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Honoraria: Kephren;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Honoraria: Bristol-Myers Squibb;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Honoraria: MSD;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Honoraria: Pfizer;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, travel, accommodations, expenses: Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, travel, accommodations, expenses: AstraZeneca;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, travel, accommodations, expenses: Boehringer Ingelheim;Financial Interests, Personal, Other, travel, accommodations, expenses: Takeda. M. Voskoboynik: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: AstraZeneca. H.T. Landsteiner: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: Boehringer Ingelheim. V. Chen: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: Boehringer Ingelheim. G. Jayadeva: Financial Interests, Personal, Full or part-time Employment: Boehringer Ingelheim. J. Alt: Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Honoraria: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda;Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Roche;Financial Interests, Personal, Funding, Travel/accommodation/expenses: AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS. B. Hackanson: Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Role: Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD, AstraZeneca, BMS. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Combination therapy with the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib plus the MEK inhibitor trametinib improved survival in patients with advanced melanoma with BRAF V600 mutations. We sought to determine whether adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib would improve outcomes in patients with resected, stage III melanoma with BRAF V600 mutations.In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 870 patients with completely resected, stage III melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations to receive oral dabrafenib at a dose of 150 mg twice daily plus trametinib at a dose of 2 mg once daily (combination therapy, 438 patients) or two matched placebo tablets (432 patients) for 12 months. The primary end point was relapse-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, distant metastasis-free survival, freedom from relapse, and safety.At a median follow-up of 2.8 years, the estimated 3-year rate of relapse-free survival was 58% in the combination-therapy group and 39% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for relapse or death, 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 0.58; P0.001). The 3-year overall survival rate was 86% in the combination-therapy group and 77% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.79; P=0.0006), but this level of improvement did not cross the prespecified interim analysis boundary of P=0.000019. Rates of distant metastasis-free survival and freedom from relapse were also higher in the combination-therapy group than in the placebo group. The safety profile of dabrafenib plus trametinib was consistent with that observed with the combination in patients with metastatic melanoma.Adjuvant use of combination therapy with dabrafenib plus trametinib resulted in a significantly lower risk of recurrence in patients with stage III melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations than the adjuvant use of placebo and was not associated with new toxic effects. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis; COMBI-AD ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01682083 ; EudraCT number, 2012-001266-15 .).

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: The role of temozolomide chemotherapy in newly diagnosed 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic gliomas, which are associated with lower sensitivity to chemotherapy and worse prognosis than 1p/19q co-deleted tumours, is unclear. We assessed the use of radiotherapy with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide in adults with non-co-deleted anaplastic gliomas. METHODS: This was a phase 3, randomised, open-label study with a 2 x 2 factorial design. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had newly diagnosed non-co-deleted anaplastic glioma with WHO performance status scores of 0-2. The randomisation schedule was generated with the electronic EORTC web-based ORTA system. Patients were assigned in equal numbers (1:1:1:1), using the minimisation technique, to receive radiotherapy (59.4 Gy in 33 fractions of 1.8 Gy) alone or with adjuvant temozolomide (12 4-week cycles of 150-200 mg/m(2) temozolomide given on days 1-5); or to receive radiotherapy with concurrent temozolomide 75 mg/m(2) per day, with or without adjuvant temozolomide. The primary endpoint was overall survival adjusted for performance status score, age, 1p loss of heterozygosity, presence of oligodendroglial elements, and MGMT promoter methylation status, analysed by intention to treat. We did a planned interim analysis after 219 (41%) deaths had occurred to test the null hypothesis of no efficacy (threshold for rejection p