Diagnosis and management of toxicities of immune checkpoint inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have reshaped cancer therapy. ICIs enhance T cell activation through various mechanisms and may help reverse the exhausted phenotype of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes. However, disrupting the key role that checkpoint molecules play in immune homeostasis may result in autoimmune complications. A broad range of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) involve almost every organ but mostly affect the skin, digestive system, lung, endocrine glands, nervous system, kidney, blood cells, and musculoskeletal system. They are usually manageable but can be life-threatening. The incidence of irAEs is not very different in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) compared to other tumour types, although there is a trend towards a higher incidence of hepatic irAEs. HCC usually develops on a background of cirrhosis with associated systemic manifestations. Extrahepatic organ dysfunction in cirrhosis may cause signs and symptoms that overlap with irAEs or increase their severity. Available guidelines for the management of irAEs have not specifically considered the assessment of toxicities in the context of patients with liver cancer and cirrhosis. This review addresses the toxicity profile of ICIs in patients with HCC, focusing on the challenges that the underlying liver disease poses to their diagnosis and management. Challenges include late recognition, inadequate work-up and delayed treatment, overdiagnosis and inappropriate interruption of ICIs, complications caused by immunosuppressive therapy, and increased cost. A specific algorithm for the management of hepatic irAEs is provided

SWOG 1815: A phase III randomized trial of gemcitabine, cisplatin, and nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine and cisplatin in newly diagnosed, advanced biliary tract cancers

Background: Biliary tract cancers (BTCs) are a heterogeneous group of malignancies with a dismal prognosis. Gemcitabine-based regimens are the standard of care in advanced disease, but median overall survival (OS) is roughly 12 months. The addition of albumin-bound paclitaxel to gemcitabine and cisplatin (GAP) demonstrated promising efficacy in a 60 patient, single-arm phase II study (Shroff et al, JAMA Oncol 2019), with observed median OS of 19.2 months. Methods: SWOG 1815 is a randomized, open-label, phase III trial comparing GAP to gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC). The study included newly diagnosed advanced BTC patients (pts), randomized 2:1 to GAP vs. GC. GAP included gemcitabine at 800 mg/m2, cisplatin at 25 mg/m2 and albumin-bound paclitaxel at 100 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. GC included standard dosing of gemcitabine at 1000 mg/m2 and cisplatin at 25 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. Pts were treated until progression. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) with a target hazard ratio of 0.7 with 90% power and a 1-sided alpha of 0.025; randomization was stratified by disease site (intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma [CCA] vs gallbladder adenocarcinoma [GBC] vs extrahepatic CCA), disease stage (locally advanced vs metastatic), and Zubrod PS 0 vs 1. Results: Of 441 eligible pts randomized, 55% were female. 67% of patients had intrahepatic CCA, 16% had GBC and 17% had extrahepatic CCA. Most pts had metastases (73%). Median OS with GAP vs. GC was 14 vs. 12.7 mo respectively (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.74-1.19, p=0.58), ORR (confirmed and unconfirmed) 34% vs25% (p=0.11) and median PFS 8.2 vs 6.4 mo (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.72-1.16, p=0.47), respectively. Grade 3 and 4 treatment related adverse events (TRAEs) in ≥10% of pts for GAP and GC were anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia. GAP had more ≥ grade 3 hematologic AEs compared to the GC arm (60% vs. 45%, p=0.003). Discontinuation due to toxicity was at 24% vs 19% (p=0.26) with GAP vs GC. In exploratory subset analyses, GAP vs GC improved OS in pts with locally advanced disease (medians 19.2 vs 13.7 mo; HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.42- 1.06, p=0.09) and in GBC pts (medians 17.0 vs 9.3 mo; HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.41-1.35, p=0.33). ORR for GAP vs GC in GBC was 50% vs 24% (p=0.09) and for locally advanced disease 28 vs 21% p=0.74. Conclusions: SWOG 1815 did not result in a statistically significant improvement in median OS with GAP vs. GC. The GAP regimen had higher rates of TRAEs without a statistically significant difference in discontinuation rates. Pts with locally advanced disease and GBC may benefit from the use of GAP. Further analyses are ongoing to understand potential benefit of GAP in subsets of BTC pts. Funding: NIH/National Cancer Institute grants CA180888, CA180819, CA180820, CA180821, and CA180868; and in part by Celgene Corporation, Summit, NJ (subsidiary of Bristol Myer Squibb)

Efficacy and Safety of Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Previously Treated With Sorafenib The CheckMate 040 Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE Most patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are diagnosed with advanced disease not eligible for potentially curative therapies; therefore, new treatment options are needed. Combining nivolumab with ipilimumab may improve clinical outcomes compared with nivolumab monotherapy. OBJECTIVE To assess efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced HCC who were previously treated with sorafenib. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS CheckMate 040 is a multicenter, open-label, multicohort, phase 1/2 study. In the nivolumab plus ipilimumab cohort, patients were randomized between January 4 and September 26, 2016. Treatment group information was blinded after randomization. Median follow-up was 30.7 months. Data cutoff for this analysis was January 2019. Patients were recruited at 31 centers in 10 countries/territories in Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients had advanced HCC (with/without hepatitis B or C) previously treated with sorafenib. A total of 148 patients were randomized (50 to arm A and 49 each to arms B and C). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to either nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, administered every 3 weeks (4 doses), followed by nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks (arm A); nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg, administered every 3 weeks (4 doses), followed by nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks (arm B); or nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks (arm C). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Coprimary end points were safety, tolerability, and objective response rate. Duration of response was also measured (investigator assessed with the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1). RESULTS Of 148 total participants, 120 were male (81%). Median (IQR) age was 60 (52.5-66.5). At data cutoff (January 2019), the median follow-up was 30.7 months (IQR, 29.9-34.7). Investigator-assessed objective response rate was 32% (95% CI, 20%-47%) in arm A, 27% (95% CI, 15%-41%) in arm B, and 29% (95% CI, 17%-43%) in arm C. Median (range) duration of response was not reached (8.3-33.7+) in arm A and was 15.2 months (4.2-29.9+) in arm B and 21.7 months (2.8-32.7+) in arm C. Any-grade treatment-related adverse events were reported in 46 of 49 patients (94%) in arm A, 35 of 49 patients (71%) in arm B, and 38 of 48 patients (79%) in arm C; there was 1 treatment-related death (arm A; grade 5 pneumonitis). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this randomized clinical trial, nivolumab plus ipilimumab had manageable safety, promising objective response rate, and durable responses. The arm A regimen (4 doses nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks then nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks) received accelerated approval in the US based on the results of this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0165887

Effect of First-Line Chemotherapy Combined With Cetuximab or Bevacizumab on Overall Survival in Patients With KRAS Wild-Type Advanced or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Combining biologic monoclonal antibodies with chemotherapeutic cytotoxic drugs provides clinical benefit to patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer, but the optimal choice of the initial biologic therapy in previously untreated patients is unknown

WNT signalling in prostate cancer

Genome sequencing and gene expression analyses of prostate tumours have highlighted the potential importance of genetic and epigenetic changes observed in WNT signalling pathway components in prostate tumours-particularly in the development of castration-resistant prostate cancer. WNT signalling is also important in the prostate tumour microenvironment, in which WNT proteins secreted by the tumour stroma promote resistance to therapy, and in prostate cancer stem or progenitor cells, in which WNT-β-catenin signals promote self-renewal or expansion. Preclinical studies have demonstrated the potential of inhibitors that target WNT receptor complexes at the cell membrane or that block the interaction of β-catenin with lymphoid enhancer-binding factor 1 and the androgen receptor, in preventing prostate cancer progression. Some WNT signalling inhibitors are in phase I trials, but they have yet to be tested in patients with prostate cancer

Targeting EGFR/HER2 pathways enhances the antiproliferative effect of gemcitabine in biliary tract and gallbladder carcinomas

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Advanced biliary tract carcinomas (BTCs) have poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. Therefore, it is crucial to combine standard therapies with molecular targeting. In this study EGFR, HER2, and their molecular transducers were analysed in terms of mutations, amplifications and over-expression in a BTC case series. Furthermore, we tested the efficacy of drugs targeting these molecules, as single agents or in combination with gemcitabine, the standard therapeutic agent against BTC.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Immunohistochemistry, FISH and mutational analysis were performed on 49 BTC samples of intrahepatic (ICCs), extrahepatic (ECCs), and gallbladder (GBCs) origin. The effect on cell proliferation of different EGFR/HER2 pathway inhibitors as single agents or in combination with gemcitabine was investigated on BTC cell lines. Western blot analyses were performed to investigate molecular mechanisms of targeted drugs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>EGFR is expressed in 100% of ICCs, 52.6% of ECCs, and in 38.5% of GBCs. P-MAPK and p-Akt are highly expressed in ICCs (>58% of samples), and to a lower extent in ECCs and GBCs (<46%), indicating EGFR pathway activation. HER2 is overexpressed in 10% of GBCs (with genomic amplification), and 26.3% of ECCs (half of which has genomic amplification). EGFR or its signal transducers are mutated in 26.5% of cases: 4 samples bear mutations of PI3K (8.2%), 3 cases (6.1%) in K-RAS, 4 (8.2%) in B-RAF, and 2 cases (4.1%) in PTEN, but no loss of PTEN expression is detected. EGI-1 cell line is highly sensitive to gemcitabine, TFK1 and TGBC1-TKB cell lines are responsive and HuH28 cell line is resistant. In EGI-1 cells, combination with gefitinib further increases the antiproliferative effect of gemcitabine. In TFK1 and TGBC1-TKB cells, the efficacy of gemcitabine is increased with addiction of sorafenib and everolimus. In TGBC1-TKB cells, lapatinib also has a synergic effect with gemcitabine. HuH28 becomes responsive if treated in combination with erlotinib. Moreover, HuH28 cells are sensitive to lapatinib as a single agent. Molecular mechanisms were confirmed by western blot analysis.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>These data demonstrate that EGFR and HER2 pathways are suitable therapeutic targets for BTCs. The combination of gemcitabine with drugs targeting these pathways gives encouraging results and further clinical studies could be warranted.</p

Association of inflammatory biomarkers with clinical outcomes in nivolumab-treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Background & Aims: Nivolumab, a programmed death (PD)-1 (PD-1) inhibitor, led to durable responses, manageable safety, and increased survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In our retrospective analysis, we studied the immunobiology and potential associations between biomarkers and outcomes with nivolumab in HCC. Methods: Fresh and archival tumour samples from dose-escalation and dose-expansion phases of the CheckMate 040 trial were analysed by immunohistochemistry and RNA sequencing to assess several inflammatory gene expression signatures, including CD274 (PD-ligand 1 [PD-L1]), CD8A, LAG3, and STAT1. Biomarkers were assessed for association with clinical outcomes (best overall response by blinded independent central review per RECIST v1.1 and overall survival [OS]). Results: Complete or partial tumour responses were observed in PD-L1-positive and PD-L1-negative patients treated with nivolumab monotherapy. Median OS was 28.1 (95% CI 18.2-n.a.) vs. 16.6 months (95% CI 14.2-20.2) for patients with tumour PD-L1 >= 1% vs. <1% (p = 0.03). Increased CD3 and CD8 showed a non-significant trend towards improved OS (both p = 0.08), and macrophage markers were not associated with OS. Tumour PD-1 and PD-L1 expression were associated with improved OS (p = 0.05 and p = 0.03, respectively). An inflammatory gene signature consisting of 4 genes was associated with improved objective response rate (p = 0.05) and OS (p = 0.01). Conclusions: PD-1 and PD-L1 expression, biomarkers of inflammation, and inflammatory gene signatures trended with improved survival and response. While further confirmation within a larger phase III trial is needed to evaluate predictive value of these biomarkers, these exploratory analyses suggest that anti-tumour immune response may play a role in the treatment benefit of nivolumab in HCC. Lay summary: Certain tests may be used to provide a picture of how a tumour is escaping the immune system, allowing it to continue to grow and create more tumours. Therapies such as nivolumab are designed to help the immune system fight the tumour. These tests may be used to determine how effective such therapies will be in the treatment of advanced liver cancer. (C) 2020 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V

AKT Inhibition in Solid Tumors With AKT1 Mutations.

Purpose AKT1 E17K mutations are oncogenic and occur in many cancers at a low prevalence. We performed a multihistology basket study of AZD5363, an ATP-competitive pan-AKT kinase inhibitor, to determine the preliminary activity of AKT inhibition in AKT-mutant cancers. Patients and Methods Fifty-eight patients with advanced solid tumors were treated. The primary end point was safety; secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Tumor biopsies and plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) were collected in the majority of patients to identify predictive biomarkers of response. Results In patients with AKT1 E17K-mutant tumors (n = 52) and a median of five lines of prior therapy, the median PFS was 5.5 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 6.9 months), 6.6 months (95% CI, 1.5 to 8.3 months), and 4.2 months (95% CI, 2.1 to 12.8 months) in patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast, gynecologic, and other solid tumors, respectively. In an exploratory biomarker analysis, imbalance of the AKT1 E17K-mutant allele, most frequently caused by copy-neutral loss-of-heterozygosity targeting the wild-type allele, was associated with longer PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.41; P = .04), as was the presence of coincident PI3K pathway hotspot mutations (HR, 0.21; P = .045). Persistent declines in AKT1 E17K in cfDNA were associated with improved PFS (HR, 0.18; P = .004) and response ( P = .025). Responses were not restricted to patients with detectable AKT1 E17K in pretreatment cfDNA. The most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events were hyperglycemia (24%), diarrhea (17%), and rash (15.5%). Conclusion This study provides the first clinical data that AKT1 E17K is a therapeutic target in human cancer. The genomic context of the AKT1 E17K mutation further conditioned response to AZD5363

Expert consensus document: Clinical and molecular diagnosis, screening and management of Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome: an international consensus statement.

Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome (BWS), a human genomic imprinting disorder, is characterized by phenotypic variability that might include overgrowth, macroglossia, abdominal wall defects, neonatal hypoglycaemia, lateralized overgrowth and predisposition to embryonal tumours. Delineation of the molecular defects within the imprinted 11p15.5 region can predict familial recurrence risks and the risk (and type) of embryonal tumour. Despite recent advances in knowledge, there is marked heterogeneity in clinical diagnostic criteria and care. As detailed in this Consensus Statement, an international consensus group agreed upon 72 recommendations for the clinical and molecular diagnosis and management of BWS, including comprehensive protocols for the molecular investigation, care and treatment of patients from the prenatal period to adulthood. The consensus recommendations apply to patients with Beckwith-Wiedemann spectrum (BWSp), covering classical BWS without a molecular diagnosis and BWS-related phenotypes with an 11p15.5 molecular anomaly. Although the consensus group recommends a tumour surveillance programme targeted by molecular subgroups, surveillance might differ according to the local health-care system (for example, in the United States), and the results of targeted and universal surveillance should be evaluated prospectively. International collaboration, including a prospective audit of the results of implementing these consensus recommendations, is required to expand the evidence base for the design of optimum care pathways