A phase Ib study evaluating the recommended phase II dose, safety, tolerability, and efficacy of mivavotinib in combination with nivolumab in advanced solid tumors

\ua9 2024 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.Mivavotinib (TAK-659/CB-659), a dual SYK/FLT3 inhibitor, reduced immunosuppressive immune cell populations and suppressed tumor growth in combination with anti-PD-1 therapy in cancer models. This dose-escalation/expansion study investigated the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary efficacy of mivavotinib plus nivolumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients received oral mivavotinib 60–100 mg once-daily plus intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg on days 1 and 15 in 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The dose-escalation phase evaluated the recommended phase II dose (RP2D; primary endpoint). The expansion phase evaluated overall response rate (primary end point) at the RP2D in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). During dose-escalation (n = 24), two dose-limiting toxicities (grade 4 lipase increased and grade 3 pyrexia) occurred in patients who received mivavotinib 80 mg and 100 mg, respectively. The determined RP2D was once-daily mivavotinib 80 mg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg. The expansion phase was terminated at ~50% enrollment (n = 17) after failing to meet an ad hoc efficacy futility threshold. Among all 41 patients, common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) included dyspnea (48.8%), aspartate aminotransferase increased, and pyrexia (46.3% each). Common grade ≥3 TEAEs were hypophosphatemia and anemia (26.8% each). Mivavotinib plasma exposure was generally dose-proportional (60–100 mg). One patient had a partial response. Mivavotinib 80 mg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg was well tolerated with no new safety signals beyond those of single-agent mivavotinib or nivolumab. Low response rates highlight the challenges of treating unresponsive tumor types, such as TNBC, with this combination and immunotherapies in general. Trial registration ID: NCT02834247

Combined Tumor Cell-Based Vaccination and Interleukin-12 Gene Therapy Polarizes the Tumor Microenvironment in Mice

Tumor progression depends on tumor milieu, which influences neovasculature formation and immunosuppression. Combining immunotherapy with antiangiogenic/antivascular therapy might be an effective therapeutic approach. The aim of our study was to elaborate an anticancer therapeutic strategy based on the induction of immune response which leads to polarization of tumor milieu. To achieve this, we developed a tumor cell-based vaccine. CAMEL peptide was used as a B16-F10 cell death-inducing agent. The lysates were used as a vaccine to immunize mice bearing B16-F10 melanoma tumors. To further improve the therapeutic effect of the vaccine, we combined it with interleukin (IL)-12 gene therapy. IL-12, a cytokine with antiangiogenic properties, activates nonspecific and specific immune responses. We observed that combined therapy is significantly more effective (as compared with monotherapies) in inhibiting tumor growth. Furthermore, the tested combination polarizes the tumor microenvironment, which results in a switch from a proangiogenic/immunosuppressive to an antiangiogenic/immunostimulatory one. The switch manifests itself as a decreased number of tumor blood vessels, increased levels of tumor-infiltrating CD4+, CD8+ and NK cells, as well as lower level of suppressor lymphocytes (Treg). Our results suggest that polarizing tumor milieu by such combined therapy does inhibit tumor growth and seems to be a promising therapeutic strategy

Phase 1 study of the pan-RAF inhibitor tovorafenib in patients with advanced solid tumors followed by dose expansion in patients with metastatic melanoma.

PURPOSE: Genomic alterations of BRAF and NRAS are oncogenic drivers in malignant melanoma and other solid tumors. Tovorafenib is an investigational, oral, selective, CNS-penetrant, small molecule, type II pan‑RAF inhibitor. This first-in-human phase 1 study explored the safety and antitumor activity of tovorafenib. METHODS: This two-part study in adult patients with relapsed or refractory advanced solid tumors included a dose escalation phase and a dose expansion phase including molecularly defined cohorts of patients with melanoma. Primary objectives were to evaluate the safety of tovorafenib administered once every other day (Q2D) or once weekly (QW), and to determine the maximum-tolerated and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) on these schedules. Secondary objectives included evaluation of antitumor activity and tovorafenib pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Tovorafenib was administered to 149 patients (Q2D n = 110, QW n = 39). The RP2D of tovorafenib was defined as 200 mg Q2D or 600 mg QW. In the dose expansion phase, 58 (73%) of 80 patients in Q2D cohorts and 9 (47%) of 19 in the QW cohort had grade ≥ 3 adverse events. The most common of these overall were anemia (14 patients, 14%) and maculo-papular rash (8 patients, 8%). Responses were seen in 10 (15%) of 68 evaluable patients in the Q2D expansion phase, including in 8 of 16 (50%) patients with BRAF mutation-positive melanoma naïve to RAF and MEK inhibitors. In the QW dose expansion phase, there were no responses in 17 evaluable patients with NRAS mutation-positive melanoma naïve to RAF and MEK inhibitors; 9 patients (53%) had a best response of stable disease. QW dose administration was associated with minimal accumulation of tovorafenib in systemic circulation in the dose range of 400-800 mg. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile of both schedules was acceptable, with QW dosing at the RP2D of 600 mg QW preferred for future clinical studies. Antitumor activity of tovorafenib in BRAF-mutated melanoma was promising and justifies continued clinical development across multiple settings. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01425008

Safety and efficacy of AMG 820, an anti-colony-stimulating factor 1 receptor antibody, in combination with pembrolizumab in adults with advanced solid tumors

BACKGROUND: To determine the safety and efficacy of the anti-colony-stimulating factor 1 receptor (anti-CSF1R) monoclonal antibody AMG 820 in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with select solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had advanced, refractory mismatch repair-proficient colorectal cancer, pancreatic cancer, or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with low (<50%) programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and were naïve to anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 or had relapsed/refractory NSCLC after anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment with low or high (≥50%) PD-L1 expression; all were anti-CSF1/CSF1R naïve. Patients received 1100 mg or 1400 mg AMG 820 plus 200 mg pembrolizumab intravenously every 3 weeks. The primary endpoints were incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and adverse events (AEs) and objective response rate per immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours at the recommended combination dose. RESULTS: Overall, 116 patients received ≥1 dose of AMG 820 plus pembrolizumab (18 at 1400 mg AMG 820; 98 at 1100 mg AMG 820). Most patients (64%) were male; the median age was 64 (range 30-86) years. Seven patients had DLTs (1 at 1400 mg AMG 820; 6 at 1100 mg AMG 820). Almost all patients (99.1%) had AEs, 87.9% with grade ≥3 AEs. The most common AEs were increased aspartate aminotransferase (59.5%), fatigue (48.3%), periorbital/face edema (48.3%), and rash/maculopapular rash (37.1%). The best response was immune-related partial response in 3 patients (3%; duration of response 9.2, 10.0, 12.5 months) and immune-related stable disease in 39 patients (34%). None of the completed phase II cohorts met the predefined threshold for efficacy. Post-treatment there was accumulation of serum colony-stimulating factor 1 (CSF1) and interleukin-34, reduction in CSF1-dependent CD16-expressing monocytes, and increased PD-L1 expression and CD4 and CD8 cell numbers in tumor biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: The recommended combination dose of 1100 mg AMG 820 plus 200 mg pembrolizumab had an acceptable safety profile. Although pharmacodynamic effects were observed, antitumor activity was insufficient for further evaluation of this combination in selected patient populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02713529