134 research outputs found
Videos of sipuleucel-T programmed T cells lysing cells that express prostate cancer target antigens
Sipuleucel-T, an autologous cellular immunotherapy, was approved to treat metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in 2010 in the United States. Treatment with sipuleucel-T primes the immune system to target prostate acid phosphatase, which is expressed by prostate cancer cells, potentially leading to lysis of cancer cells. Expanding on previously reported indirect evidence of cell killing with sipuleucel-T treatment, we sought to provide direct evidence of cell lysis through visualization. We used advanced video technology and available samples of peripheral blood mononuclear cells from subjects enrolled in the STAMP trial (NCT01487863). Isolated CD8+ T cells were used as effector cells and cocultured with autologous monocytes pulsed with control or target antigens. Differentially stained effector and target cells were then video recorded during coculture. Here, we present video recordings and analyses of T cells from sipuleucel-T-treated subjects showing-for the first time-direct lysis of cells that express prostate cancer target antigens, prostate acid phosphatase, or prostate-specific antigen
The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer consensus statement on immunotherapy for the treatment of prostate carcinoma.
Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed malignancy and second leading cause of cancer death among men in the United States. In recent years, several new agents, including cancer immunotherapies, have been approved or are currently being investigated in late-stage clinical trials for the management of advanced prostate cancer. Therefore, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a multidisciplinary panel, including physicians, nurses, and patient advocates, to develop consensus recommendations for the clinical application of immunotherapy for prostate cancer patients. To do so, a systematic literature search was performed to identify high-impact papers from 2006 until 2014 and was further supplemented with literature provided by the panel. Results from the consensus panel voting and discussion as well as the literature review were used to rate supporting evidence and generate recommendations for the use of immunotherapy in prostate cancer patients. Sipuleucel-T, an autologous dendritic cell vaccine, is the first and currently only immunotherapeutic agent approved for the clinical management of metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The consensus panel utilized this model to discuss immunotherapy in the treatment of prostate cancer, issues related to patient selection, monitoring of patients during and post treatment, and sequence/combination with other anti-cancer treatments. Potential immunotherapies emerging from late-stage clinical trials are also discussed. As immunotherapy evolves as a therapeutic option for the treatment of prostate cancer, these recommendations will be updated accordingly
Recommended from our members
A Phase I Trial of Pox PSA vaccines (PROSTVAC®-VF) with B7-1, ICAM-1, and LFA-3 co-stimulatory molecules (TRICOM™) in Patients with Prostate Cancer
Purpose: Based on previous studies that demonstrated the safety profile and preliminary clinical activity of prostate specific antigen (PSA) targeted therapeutic vaccines, as well as recent laboratory data supporting the value of the addition of co-stimulatory molecules B7-1, ICAM-1, and LFA-3 (designated TRICOM™) to these vaccines, we conducted a Phase I study to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of a novel vaccinia and fowlpox vaccine incorporating the PSA gene sequence and TRICOM. Methods: In this study, ten patients with androgen independent prostate cancer with or without metastatic disease were enrolled. Patients were treated with 2 × l08 pfu of a recombinant vaccinia virus vaccine (PROSTVAC-V) followed by 1 × 109 pfu of the booster recombinant fowlpox virus (PROSTVAC-F) both with gene sequences for PSA and TRICOM. The mean age of patients enrolled in the study was 70 (range 63 to 79). The mean PSA at baseline was 434 (range 9 - 1424). Results: There were no deaths, and no Grade 3 or 4 adverse events. The most commonly reported adverse events, regardless of causality, were injection site reactions and fatigue. One serious adverse event (SAE) occurred that was unrelated to vaccine; this patient developed progressive disease with a new sphenoid metastasis. PSA was measured at week 4 and week 8. Four patients had stable disease (with less than 25% increase in PSA) through the week 8 study period. Anti-PSA antibodies were not induced with therapy: however, anti-vaccinia titers increased in all patients. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that vaccination with PROSTVAC-V and PROSTVAC-F combined with TRICOM is well-tolerated and generated an immune response to vaccinia. Therefore, PROSTVAC-VF/TRICOM represents a feasible therapeutic approach for further phase II and III study in patients with prostate cancer
Recommended from our members
Sipuleucel-T Immune Parameters Correlate with Survival: an Analysis of the Randomized Phase 3 Clinical Trials in Men with Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer
Purpose: Sipuleucel-T, the first FDA-approved autologous cellular immunotherapy for treatment of advanced prostate cancer, is manufactured by activating peripheral blood mononuclear cells, including antigen presenting cells (APCs), with a fusion protein containing prostatic acid phosphatase. Analysis of data from three phase 3 trials was performed to immunologically characterize this therapy during the course of the three doses, and to relate the immunological responses to overall survival (OS). Methods: Sipuleucel-T product characteristics [APC numbers, APC activation (CD54 upregulation), and total nucleated cell (TNC) numbers] were assessed in three randomized, controlled phase 3 studies (N = 737). Antigen-specific cellular and humoral responses were assessed in a subset of subjects. The relationships between these parameters and OS were assessed. Results: APC activation occurred in the first dose preparation [6.2-fold, (4.65, 7.70); median (25th, 75th percentile)] and increased in the second [10.6-fold (7.83, 13.65)] and third [10.5-fold (7.89, 13.65)] dose preparations. Cytokines and chemokines associated with activated APCs were produced during the manufacture of each dose; T-cell activation-associated cytokines were detected in the second and third dose preparations. Antigen-specific T cells were detectable after administration of the first sipuleucel-T dose. Cumulative APC activation, APC number, and TNC number correlated with OS (P < 0.05). Antigen-specific immune responses were observed in 78.8 % of monitored subjects and their presence correlated with OS (P = 0.003). Conclusion: Sipuleucel-T broadly engages the immune system by activating APCs ex vivo and inducing long-lived immune responses in vivo. These data indicate antigen-specific immune activation as a mechanism by which sipuleucel-T prolongs OS
ARCHES: A Randomized, Phase III Study of Androgen Deprivation Therapy With Enzalutamide or Placebo in Men With Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer
PURPOSE: Enzalutamide, a potent androgen-receptor inhibitor, has demonstrated significant benefits in metastatic and nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of enzalutamide in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). METHODS: ARCHES (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02677896) is a multinational, double-blind, phase III trial, wherein 1,150 men with mHSPC were randomly assigned 1:1 to enzalutamide (160 mg/day) or placebo, plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), stratified by disease volume and prior docetaxel chemotherapy. The primary end point was radiographic progression-free survival. RESULTS: As of October 14, 2018, the risk of radiographic progression or death was significantly reduced with enzalutamide plus ADT versus placebo plus ADT (hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.50; P < .001; median not reached v 19.0 months). Similar significant improvements in radiographic progression-free survival were reported in prespecified subgroups on the basis of disease volume and prior docetaxel therapy. Enzalutamide plus ADT significantly reduced the risk of prostate-specific antigen progression, initiation of new antineoplastic therapy, first symptomatic skeletal event, castration resistance, and reduced risk of pain progression. More men achieved an undetectable prostate-specific antigen level and/or an objective response with enzalutamide plus ADT (P < .001). Patients in both treatment groups reported a high baseline level of quality of life, which was maintained over time. Grade 3 or greater adverse events were reported in 24.3% of patients who received enzalutamide plus ADT versus 25.6% of patients who received placebo plus ADT, with no unexpected adverse events. CONCLUSION: Enzalutamide with ADT significantly reduced the risk of metastatic progression or death over time versus placebo plus ADT in men with mHSPC, including those with low-volume disease and/or prior docetaxel, with a safety analysis that seems consistent with the safety profile of enzalutamide in previous clinical trials in castration-resistant prostate cancer
Double‐blind, randomized, phase 2 trial of maintenance sunitinib versus placebo after response to chemotherapy in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma
Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/106126/1/cncr28477.pd
A Clinician\u27s Guide to Next Generation Imaging in Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer (RADAR III).
PURPOSE: The advanced prostate cancer therapeutic landscape has changed dramatically in the last several years, resulting in improved overall survival of patients with castration naïve and castration resistant disease. The evolution and development of novel next generation imaging techniques will affect diagnostic and therapeutic decision making. Clinicians must navigate when and which next generation imaging techniques to use and how to adjust treatment strategies based on the results, often in the absence of correlative therapeutic data. Therefore, guidance is needed based on best available information and current clinical experience.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The RADAR (Radiographic Assessments for Detection of Advanced Recurrence) III Group convened to offer guidance on the use of next generation imaging to stage prostate cancer based on available data and clinical experience. The group also discussed the potential impact of next generation imaging on treatment options based on earlier detection of disease.
RESULTS: The group unanimously agreed that progression to metastatic disease is a seminal event for patient treatment. Next generation imaging techniques are able to detect previously undetectable metastases, which could redefine the phases of prostate cancer progression. Thus, earlier systemic or locally directed treatment may positively alter patient outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: The RADAR III Group recommends next generation imaging techniques in select patients in whom disease progression is suspected based on laboratory (biomarker) values, comorbidities and symptoms. Currently 18F-fluciclovine and 68Ga prostate specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computerized tomography are the next generation imaging agents with a favorable combination of availability, specificity and sensitivity. There is ongoing research of additional next generation imaging technologies, which may offer improved diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic options. As next generation imaging techniques evolve and presumably result in improved global accessibility, clinician ability to detect micrometastases may be enhanced for decision making and patient outcomes
Durvalumab alone and durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus chemotherapy in previously untreated patients with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (DANUBE):a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial
Background: Survival outcomes are poor for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma who receive standard, first-line, platinum-based chemotherapy. We assessed the overall survival of patients who received durvalumab (a PD-L1 inhibitor), with or without tremelimumab (a CTLA-4 inhibitor), as a first-line treatment for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Methods: DANUBE is an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial in patients with untreated, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, conducted at 224 academic research centres, hospitals, and oncology clinics in 23 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. We randomly assigned patients (1:1:1) to receive durvalumab monotherapy (1500 mg) administered intravenously every 4 weeks; durvalumab (1500 mg) plus tremelimumab (75 mg) administered intravenously every 4 weeks for up to four doses, followed by durvalumab maintenance (1500 mg) every 4 weeks; or standard-of-care chemotherapy (gemcitabine plus cisplatin or gemcitabine plus carboplatin, depending on cisplatin eligibility) administered intravenously for up to six cycles. Randomisation was done through an interactive voice–web response system, with stratification by cisplatin eligibility, PD-L1 status, and presence or absence of liver metastases, lung metastases, or both. The coprimary endpoints were overall survival compared between the durvalumab monotherapy versus chemotherapy groups in the population of patients with high PD-L1 expression (the high PD-L1 population) and between the durvalumab plus tremelimumab versus chemotherapy groups in the intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned patients). The study has completed enrolment and the final analysis of overall survival is reported. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02516241, and the EU Clinical Trials Register, EudraCT number 2015-001633-24. Findings: Between Nov 24, 2015, and March 21, 2017, we randomly assigned 1032 patients to receive durvalumab (n=346), durvalumab plus tremelimumab (n=342), or chemotherapy (n=344). At data cutoff (Jan 27, 2020), median follow-up for survival was 41·2 months (IQR 37·9–43·2) for all patients. In the high PD-L1 population, median overall survival was 14·4 months (95% CI 10·4–17·3) in the durvalumab monotherapy group (n=209) versus 12·1 months (10·4–15·0) in the chemotherapy group (n=207; hazard ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·71–1·11; p=0·30). In the intention-to-treat population, median overall survival was 15·1 months (13·1–18·0) in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group versus 12·1 months (10·9–14·0) in the chemotherapy group (0·85, 95% CI 0·72–1·02; p=0·075). In the safety population, grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 47 (14%) of 345 patients in the durvalumab group, 93 (27%) of 340 patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group, and in 188 (60%) of 313 patients in the chemotherapy group. The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse event was increased lipase in the durvalumab group (seven [2%] of 345 patients) and in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group (16 [5%] of 340 patients), and neutropenia in the chemotherapy group (66 [21%] of 313 patients). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 30 (9%) of 345 patients in the durvalumab group, 78 (23%) of 340 patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group, and 50 (16%) of 313 patients in the chemotherapy group. Deaths due to study drug toxicity were reported in two (1%) patients in the durvalumab group (acute hepatic failure and hepatitis), two (1%) patients in the durvalumab plus tremelimumab group (septic shock and pneumonitis), and one (<1%) patient in the chemotherapy group (acute kidney injury). Interpretation: This study did not meet either of its coprimary endpoints. Further research to identify the patients with previously untreated metastatic urothelial carcinoma who benefit from treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors, either alone or in combination regimens, is warranted. Funding: AstraZeneca
Comparative Survival of Asian and White Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Men Treated With Docetaxel
There are few data regarding disparities in overall survival (OS) between Asian and white men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We compared OS of Asian and white mCRPC men treated in phase III clinical trials with docetaxel and prednisone (DP) or a DP-containing regimen. Individual participant data from 8820 men with mCRPC randomly assigned on nine phase III trials to receive DP or a DP-containing regimen were combined. Men enrolled in these trials had a diagnosis of prostate adenocarcinoma. The median overall survival was 18.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI] = 17.4 to 22.1 months) and 21.2 months (95% CI = 20.8 to 21.7 months) for Asian and white men, respectively. The pooled hazard ratio for death for Asian men compared with white men, adjusted for baseline prognostic factors, was 0.95 (95% CI = 0.84 to 1.09), indicating that Asian men were not at increased risk of death. This large analysis showed that Asian men did not have shorter OS duration than white men treated with docetaxel
FORT-1: Phase II/III Study of Rogaratinib Versus Chemotherapy in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma Selected Based on FGFR1/3 mRNA Expression
Purpose: Rogaratinib, an oral pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR1-4) inhibitor, showed promising phase I efficacy and safety in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) with FGFR1-3 mRNA overexpression. We assessed rogaratinib efficacy and safety versus chemotherapy in patients with FGFR mRNA-positive advanced/metastatic UC previously treated with platinum chemotherapy. Methods: FORT-1 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03410693) was a phase II/III, randomized, open-label trial. Patients with FGFR1/3 mRNA-positive locally advanced or metastatic UC with ≥ 1 prior platinum-containing regimen were randomly assigned (1:1) to rogaratinib (800 mg orally twice daily, 3-week cycles; n = 87) or chemotherapy (docetaxel 75 mg/m2, paclitaxel 175 mg/m2, or vinflunine 320 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks; n = 88). The primary end point was overall survival, with objective response rate (ORR) analysis planned following phase II accrual. Because of comparable efficacy between treatments, enrollment was stopped before progression to phase III; a full interim analysis of phase II was completed. Results: ORRs were 20.7% (rogaratinib, 18/87; 95% CI, 12.7 to 30.7) and 19.3% (chemotherapy, 17/88; 95% CI, 11.7 to 29.1). Median overall survival was 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.5 to not estimable) and 9.8 months (95% CI, 6.8 to not estimable; hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.72; P = .67). Grade 3/4 events occurred in 37 (43.0%)/4 (4.7%) patients and 32 (39.0%)/15 (18.3%), respectively. No rogaratinib-related deaths occurred. Exploratory analysis of patients with FGFR3 DNA alterations showed ORRs of 52.4% (11/21; 95% CI, 29.8 to 74.3) for rogaratinib and 26.7% (4/15; 95% CI, 7.8 to 55.1) for chemotherapy. Conclusion: To our knowledge, these are the first data to compare FGFR-directed therapy with chemotherapy in patients with FGFR-altered UC, showing comparable efficacy and manageable safety. Exploratory testing suggested FGFR3 DNA alterations in association with FGFR1/3 mRNA overexpression may be better predictors of rogaratinib response
- …