The Protein Kinase C Inhibitor Enzastaurin Exhibits Antitumor Activity against Uveal Melanoma

GNAQ mutations at codon 209 have been recently identified in approximately 50% of uveal melanomas (UM) and are reported to be oncogenic through activating the MAPK/Erk1/2 pathway. Protein kinase C (PKC) is a component of signaling from GNAQ to Erk1/2. Inhibition of PKC might regulate GNAQ mutation-induced Erk1/2 activation, resulting in growth inhibition of UM cells carrying GNAQ mutations. UM cells carrying wild type or mutant GNAQ were treated with the PKC inhibitor enzastaurin. Effects on proliferation, apoptosis, and signaling events were evaluated. Enzastaurin downregulated the expression of several PKC isoforms including PKCβII PKCθ, PKCε and/or their phosphorylation in GNAQ mutated cells. Downregulation of these PKC isoforms in GNAQ mutated cells by shRNA resulted in reduced viability. Enzastaurin exhibited greater antiproliferative effect on GNAQ mutant cells than wild type cells through induction of G1 arrest and apoptosis. Enzastaurin-induced G1 arrest was associated with inhibition of Erk1/2 phosphorylation, downregulation of cyclin D1, and accumulation of cyclin dependent kinase inhibitor p27Kip1. Furthermore, enzastaurin reduced the expression of antiapoptotic Bcl-2 and survivin in GNAQ mutant cells. Inhibition of Erk1/2 phosphorylation with a MEK specific inhibitor enhanced the sensitivity of GNAQ wild type cells to enzastaurin, accompanied by p27Kip1 accumulation and/or inhibition of enzastaurin-induced survivin and Bcl-2 upregulation. PKC inhibitors such as enzastaurin have activity against UM cells carrying GNAQ mutations through inhibition of the PKC/Erk1/2 pathway and induction of G1 arrest and apoptosis. Inhibition of the PKC pathway provides a basis for clinical investigation in patients with UM

Antitumour activity of pembrolizumab in advanced mucosal melanoma: a post-hoc analysis of KEYNOTE-001, 002, 006.

BackgroundMucosal melanoma is an aggressive melanoma with poor prognosis. We assessed efficacy of pembrolizumab in patients with advanced mucosal melanoma in KEYNOTE-001 (NCT01295827), -002 (NCT01704287), and -006 (NCT01866319).MethodsPatients received pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks (Q3W) or 10 mg/kg Q2W or Q3W. Response was assessed by independent central review per RECIST v1.1.Results1567 patients were treated and 84 (5%) had mucosal melanoma. Fifty-one of 84 were ipilimumab-naive. In patients with mucosal melanoma, the objective response rate (ORR) was 19% (95% CI 11-29%), with median duration of response (DOR) of 27.6 months (range 1.1 + to 27.6). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.8 months (95% CI 2.7-2.8), with median overall survival (OS) of 11.3 months (7.7-16.6). ORR was 22% (95% CI 11-35%) and 15% (95% CI 5-32%) in ipilimumab-naive and ipilimumab-treated patients.ConclusionPembrolizumab provides durable antitumour activity in patients with advanced mucosal melanoma regardless of prior ipilimumab

Efficacy of PD-1 & PD-L1 inhibitors in older adults: a meta-analysis

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting PD-1/PD-L1 pathway demonstrated promising activities in variety of malignancies, however little is known regarding their efficacy in adults aged ≥65 years. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and a study-level meta-analysis to explore efficacy of ICIs based on age, younger vs older than 65 years. We included in this analysis randomized controlled phase II or III studies in patients with metastatic solid tumors that compared efficacy of PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors to a non-PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor. Aggregated estimates of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) are based on random/mixed effects (RE) models to allow for heterogeneity between the studies. Results: Initial search identified 53 articles, 17 were randomized controlled trials that compared nivolumab, pembrolizumab or atezolizumab to chemotherapy or targeted therapy. Only 9 trials reported hazard ratiios (HR) for OS based on age and were included in this meta-analysis. Out of those studies seven reported HR for PFS but only 4 studies included subgroup-analysis based on age for PFS. The overall estimated random-effects HR for death was 0.64 with 95% CI of 0.54–0.76 in patients ≥65 years vs. 0.68 with 95% CI of 0.61–0.75 in patients < 65 years. The overall estimated random-effects for HR for progression was 0.74 with 95% CI of 0.60–0.92 in patients ≥65 years vs. 0.73 with 95% CI of 0.61–0.88 in patients < 65 years. Conclusions: PD-1 (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) and PD-L1 (atezolizumab) inhibitors had comparable efficacy in adults younger vs ≥ 65 years

Neurologic Serious Adverse Events Associated with Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab or Nivolumab Alone in Advanced Melanoma, Including a Case Series of Encephalitis

BackgroundDespite unprecedented efficacy across multiple tumor types, immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy is associated with a unique and wide spectrum of immune‐related adverse events (irAEs), including neurologic events ranging from mild headache to potentially life‐threatening encephalitis. Here, we summarize neurologic irAEs associated with nivolumab and ipilimumab melanoma treatment, present cases of treatment‐related encephalitis, and provide practical guidance on diagnosis and management.MethodsWe searched a Global Pharmacovigilance and Epidemiology database for neurologic irAEs reported over an 8‐year period in patients with advanced melanoma receiving nivolumab with or without ipilimumab from 12 studies sponsored by Bristol‐Myers Squibb. Serious neurologic irAEs were reviewed, and relationship to nivolumab or ipilimumab was assigned.ResultsIn our search of 3,763 patients, 35 patients (0.93%) presented with 43 serious neurologic irAEs, including neuropathy (n = 22), noninfective meningitis (n = 5), encephalitis (n = 6), neuromuscular disorders (n = 3), and nonspecific adverse events (n = 7). Study drug was discontinued (n = 20), interrupted (n = 8), or unchanged (n = 7). Most neurologic irAEs resolved (26/35 patients; 75%). Overall, median time to onset was 45 days (range 1–170) and to resolution was 32 days (2–809+). Median time to onset of encephalitis was 55.5 days (range 18–297); four cases resolved and one was fatal.ConclusionBoth oncologists and neurologists need to be aware of signs and symptoms of serious but uncommon neurologic irAEs associated with checkpoint inhibitors. Prompt diagnosis and management using an established algorithm are critical to minimize serious complications from these neurologic irAEs.Implications for PracticeWith increasing use of checkpoint inhibitors in cancer, practicing oncologists need to be aware of the potential risk of neurologic immune‐related adverse events and be able to provide prompt treatment of this uncommon, but potentially serious, class of adverse events. We summarize neurologic adverse events related to nivolumab alone or in combination with ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma from 12 studies and examine in depth 6 cases of encephalitis. We also provide input and guidance on the existing neurologic adverse events management algorithm for nivolumab and ipilimumab.Melanoma is a particularly immunogenic cancer, and immune checkpoint inhibitors have been extensively studied in this tumor type. This review focuses on the incidence of serious neurologic immune‐related adverse events, specifically encephalitis, in patients with advanced melanoma treated with nivolumab alone or in sequence or combination with ipilimumab. Practical guidance is provided for the diagnosis and management of treatment‐related encephalitis associated with nivolumab and ipilimumab.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/139998/1/onco12130.pd

Proton Pump Inhibitor Use and Efficacy of Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma

The impact of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on clinical outcomes with first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with metastatic melanoma was previously analyzed in the phase II study, CheckMate 069. This retrospective analysis utilized data from three phase II/III studies of first-line ICI therapy in untreated advanced melanoma: CheckMate 066, 067, and 069. All randomized patients with PPI use ≤ 30 days before initiating study treatment were included in the PPI-use subgroup. Possible associations between baseline PPI use and efficacy were evaluated within each treatment arm of each study using multivariable modeling. Approximately 20% of 1505 randomized patients across the studies reported baseline PPI use. The median follow-up was 52.6–58.5 months. Objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival analyses provided insufficient evidence of a meaningful association between PPI use and efficacy outcomes with nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab, nivolumab, or ipilimumab therapy. In five of the six ICI treatment arms, 95% confidence intervals for odds ratios or hazard ratios traversed 1. Significant associations were observed in the CheckMate 069 combination arm between PPI use and poorer ORR and PFS. This multivariable analysis found insufficient evidence to support meaningful associations between PPI use and ICI efficacy in patients with advanced melanoma

The role of whole brain radiation therapy in the management of melanoma brain metastases

Background: Brain metastases are common in patients with melanoma, and optimal management is not well defined. As melanoma has traditionally been thought of as “radioresistant,” the role of whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) in particular is unclear. We conducted this retrospective study to identify prognostic factors for patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for melanoma brain metastases and to investigate the role of additional up-front treatment with whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT). Methods: We reviewed records of 147 patients who received SRS as part of initial management of their melanoma brain metastases from January 2000 through June 2010. Overall survival (OS) and time to distant intracranial progression were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic factors were evaluated using the Cox proportional hazards model. Results: WBRT was employed with SRS in 27% of patients and as salvage in an additional 22%. Age at SRS > 60 years (hazard ratio [HR] 0.64, p = 0.05), multiple brain metastases (HR 1.90, p = 0.008), and omission of up-front WBRT (HR 2.24, p = 0.005) were associated with distant intracranial progression on multivariate analysis. Extensive extracranial metastases (HR 1.86, p = 0.0006), Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) ≤ 80% (HR 1.58, p = 0.01), and multiple brain metastases (HR 1.40, p = 0.06) were associated with worse OS on univariate analysis. Extensive extracranial metastases (HR 1.78, p = 0.001) and KPS (HR 1.52, p = 0.02) remained significantly associated with OS on multivariate analysis. In patients with absent or stable extracranial disease, multiple brain metastases were associated with worse OS (multivariate HR 5.89, p = 0.004), and there was a trend toward an association with worse OS when up-front WBRT was omitted (multivariate HR 2.56, p = 0.08). Conclusions: Multiple brain metastases and omission of up-front WBRT (particularly in combination) are associated with distant intracranial progression. Improvement in intracranial disease control may be especially important in the subset of patients with absent or stable extracranial disease, where the competing risk of death from extracranial disease is low. These results are hypothesis generating and require confirmation from ongoing randomized trials

Health-related quality of life results from the phase III CheckMate 067 study

Background Nivolumab, a monoclonal antibody of immune checkpoint programmed death 1 on T cells (PD-1), combined with ipilimumab, an immune checkpoint cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitor, as combination therapy on the one hand and nivolumab as monotherapy on the other, have both demonstrated improved efficacy compared with ipilimumab alone in the CheckMate 067 study. However, the combination resulted in a higher frequency of grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs), which could result in diminished health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Here we report analyses of HRQoL for patients with advanced melanoma in clinical trial CheckMate 067.Patients and methods HRQoL was assessed at weeks 1 and 5 per 6-week cycle for the first 6 months, once every 6 weeks thereafter, and at two follow-up visits using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Care Core Quality of Life Questionnaire and the EuroQoL Five Dimensions Questionnaire. In addition to the randomised population, patient subgroups, including BRAF mutation status, partial or complete response, treatment-related AEs of grade 3/4, and those who discontinued due to any reason and due to an AE, were investigated.Results Nivolumab and ipilimumab combination and nivolumab alone both maintained HRQoL, and no clinically meaningful deterioration was observed over time compared with ipilimumab. In addition, similar results were observed across patient subgroups, and no clinically meaningful changes in HRQoL were observed during follow-up visits for patients who discontinued due to any cause.Conclusion These results further support the clinical benefit of nivolumab monotherapy and nivolumab and ipilimumab combination therapy in patients with advanced melanoma. The finding that the difference in grade 3/4 AEs between the arms did not translate into clinically meaningful differences in the reported HRQoL may be relevant in the clinical setting.Study number NCT01844505

Response to single agent PD-1 inhibitor after progression on previous PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors: a case series

Background: Monoclonal antibodies targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis have gained increasing attention across many solid tumors and hematologic malignancies due to their efficacy and favorable toxicity profile. With more than 1 agent now FDA-approved in a wide variety of tumor types, and with others in clinical trials, it is becoming more common that patients present to clinic for potential treatment with a second PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor. Case presentation: In this report, we present two patients with renal cell carcinoma and one with melanoma who received PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Upon progression on their first-line PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, these patients received a different PD-1 inhibitor (nivolumab in all cases) and all had progressive disease as their best response to the subsequent PD-1 inhibitor. The reported clinical information focuses on the course of the disease and the responses to all treatment regimens. Conclusions: Clinicians should refrain from using multiple PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors sequentially outside of clinical trials until there is sufficient data to support this practice routinely. Prospective studies that allow prior treatment with PD-1/PD-L1 are needed to validate the efficacy and safety of these drugs in the second line or later setting. Furthermore, ongoing efforts that aim to identify mechanisms of resistance to immunotherapy will be informative and may ultimately assist physicians in select the optimal treatment following progression on PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor