Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) consensus definitions for resistance to combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors with chemotherapy

Although immunotherapy can offer profound clinical benefit for patients with a variety of difficult-to-treat cancers, many tumors either do not respond to upfront treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) or progressive/recurrent disease occurs after an interval of initial control. Improved response rates have been demonstrated with the addition of ICIs to cytotoxic therapies, leading to approvals from the US Food and Drug Administration and regulatory agencies in other countries for ICI-chemotherapy combinations in a number of solid tumor indications, including breast, head and neck, gastric, and lung cancer. Designing trials for patients with tumors that do not respond or stop responding to treatment with immunotherapy combinations, however, is challenging without uniform definitions of resistance. Previously, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) published consensus definitions for resistance to single-agent anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1). To provide guidance for clinical trial design and to support analyses of emerging molecular and cellular data surrounding mechanisms of resistance to ICI-based combinations, SITC convened a follow-up workshop in 2021 to develop consensus definitions for resistance to multiagent ICI combinations. This manuscript reports the consensus clinical definitions for combinations of ICIs and chemotherapies. Definitions for resistance to ICIs in combination with targeted therapies and with other ICIs will be published in companion volumes to this paper

Violent aggression predicted by multiple pre-adult environmental hits

Early exposure to negative environmental impact shapes individual behavior and potentially contributes to any mental disease. We reported previously that accumulated environmental risk markedly decreases age at schizophrenia onset. Follow-up of matched extreme group individuals (≤1 vs. ≥3 risks) unexpectedly revealed that high-risk subjects had >5 times greater probability of forensic hospitalization. In line with longstanding sociological theories, we hypothesized that risk accumulation before adulthood induces violent aggression and criminal conduct, independent of mental illness. We determined in 6 independent cohorts (4 schizophrenia and 2 general population samples) pre-adult risk exposure, comprising urbanicity, migration, physical and sexual abuse as primary, and cannabis or alcohol as secondary hits. All single hits by themselves were marginally associated with higher violent aggression. Most strikingly, however, their accumulation strongly predicted violent aggression (odds ratio 10.5). An epigenome-wide association scan to detect differential methylation of blood-derived DNA of selected extreme group individuals yielded overall negative results. Conversely, determination in peripheral blood mononuclear cells of histone-deacetylase1 mRNA as 'umbrella mediator' of epigenetic processes revealed an increase in the high-risk group, suggesting lasting epigenetic alterations. Together, we provide sound evidence of a disease-independent unfortunate relationship between well-defined pre-adult environmental hits and violent aggression, calling for more efficient prevention

Randomized Phase II Trial of Parsatuzumab (Anti‐EGFL7) or Placebo in Combination with FOLFOX and Bevacizumab for First‐Line Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

LESSONS LEARNED. These negative phase II results for parsatuzumab highlight the challenges of developing an agent intended to enhance the efficacy of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibition without the benefit of validated pharmacodynamic biomarkers or strong predictive biomarker hypotheses. Any further clinical development of anti‐EGFL7 is likely to require new mechanistic insights and biomarker development for antiangiogenic agents. BACKGROUND. EGFL7 (epidermal growth factor‐like domain 7) is a tumor‐enriched vascular extracellular matrix protein that supports endothelial cell survival. This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of parsatuzumab (also known as MEGF0444A), a humanized anti‐EGFL7 IgG(1) monoclonal antibody, in combination with modified FOLFOX6 (mFOLFOX6) (folinic acid, 5‐fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) bevacizumab in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS. One‐hundred twenty‐seven patients were randomly assigned to parsatuzumab, 400 mg, or placebo, in combination with mFOLFOX6 plus bevacizumab, 5 mg/kg. Treatment cycles were repeated every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity for a maximum of 24 months, with the exception of oxaliplatin, which was administered for up to 8 cycles. RESULTS. The progression‐free survival (PFS) hazard ratio was 1.17 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71–1.93; p = .548). The median PFS was 12 months for the experimental arm versus 11.9 months for the control arm. The hazard ratio for overall survival was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.46–2.1; p = .943). The overall response rate was 59% in the parsatuzumab arm and 64% in the placebo arm. The adverse event profile was similar in both arms. CONCLUSIONS. There was no evidence of efficacy for the addition of parsatuzumab to the combination of bevacizumab and chemotherapy for first‐line mCRC

First-In-Human Phase I Study of the OX40 Agonist MOXR0916 in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: OX40, a receptor transiently expressed by T cells upon antigen recognition, is associated with costimulation of effector T cells and impairment of regulatory T-cell function. This first-in-human study evaluated MOXR0916, a humanized effector-competent agonist IgG1 monoclonal anti-OX40 antibody. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients with locally advanced or metastatic refractory solid tumors were treated with MOXR0916 intravenously once every 3 weeks (Q3W). A 3+3 dose-escalation stage (0.2-1,200 mg; n = 34) was followed by expansion cohorts at 300 mg (n = 138) for patients with melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, non-small cell lung carcinoma, urothelial carcinoma, and triple-negative breast cancer. RESULTS: MOXR0916 was well tolerated with no dose-limiting toxicities observed. An MTD was not reached. Most patients (95%) experienced at least one adverse event (AE); 56% of AEs, mostly grade 1-2, were related to MOXR0916. Most common treatment-related AEs included fatigue (17%), diarrhea (8%), myalgia (7%), nausea (6%), decreased appetite (6%), and infusion-related reaction (5%). Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were dose proportional between 80 and 1,200 mg and supported Q3W administration. The recommended expansion dose based on PK and OX40 receptor saturation was 300 mg Q3W. Immune activation and upregulation of PD-L1 was observed in a subset of paired tumor biopsies. One renal cell carcinoma patient experienced a confirmed partial response. Overall, 33% of patients achieved stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: Although objective responses were rarely observed with MOXR0916 monotherapy, the favorable safety profile and evidence of tumor immune activation in a subset of patients support further investigation in combination with complementary agents such as PD-1/PD-L1 antagonists

First-In-Human Phase I Study of the OX40 Agonist MOXR0916 in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors

Purpose: OX40, a receptor transiently expressed by T cells upon antigen recognition, is associated with costimulation of effector T cells and impairment of regulatory T-cell function. This first-in-human study evaluated MOXR0916, a humanized effector-competent agonist IgG1 monoclonal anti-OX40 antibody. Patients and Methods: Eligible patients with locally advanced or metastatic refractory solid tumors were treated with MOXR0916 intravenously once every 3 weeks (Q3W). A 3+3 dose-escalation stage (0.2-1,200 mg; n = 34) was followed by expansion cohorts at 300 mg (n = 138) for patients with melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, non-small cell lung carcinoma, urothelial carcinoma, and triple-negative breast cancer. Results: MOXR0916 was well tolerated with no dose-limiting toxicities observed. An MTD was not reached. Most patients (95%) experienced at least one adverse event (AE); 56% of AEs, mostly grade 1-2, were related to MOXR0916. Most common treatment-related AEs included fatigue (17%), diarrhea (8%), myalgia (7%), nausea (6%), decreased appetite (6%), and infusion-related reaction (5%). Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were dose proportional between 80 and 1,200 mg and supported Q3W administration. The recommended expansion dose based on PK and OX40 receptor saturation was 300 mg Q3W. Immune activation and upregulation of PD-L1 was observed in a subset of paired tumor biopsies. One renal cell carcinoma patient experienced a confirmed partial response. Overall, 33% of patients achieved stable disease. Conclusions: Although objective responses were rarely observed with MOXR0916 monotherapy, the favorable safety profile and evidence of tumor immune activation in a subset of patients support further investigation in combination with complementary agents such as PD-1/PD-L1 antagonists.N

Phase I study of the indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1) inhibitor navoximod (GDC-0919) administered with PD-L1 inhibitor (atezolizumab) in advanced solid tumors

Purpose: IDO1 induces immune suppression in T cells through L-tryptophan (Trp) depletion and kynurenine (Kyn) accumulation in the local tumor microenvironment, suppressing effector T cells and hyperactivating regulatory T cells (Treg). Navoximod is an investigational small-molecule inhibitor of IDO1. This phase I study evaluated safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of navoximod in combination with atezolizumab, a PD-L1 inhibitor, in patients with advanced cancer. Patients and Methods: The study consisted of a 3 + 3 dose-escalation stage (n = 66) and a tumor-specific expansion stage (n = 92). Navoximod was given orally every 12 hours continuously for 21 consecutive days of each cycle with the exception of cycle 1, where navoximod administration started on day -1 to characterize pharmacokinetics. Atezolizumab was administered by intravenous infusion 1,200 mg every 3 weeks on day 1 of each cycle. Results: Patients (n = 157) received navoximod at 6 dose levels (50-1,000 mg) in combination with atezolizumab. The maximum administered dose was 1,000 mg twice daily; the MTD was not reached. Navoximod demonstrated a linear pharmacokinetic profile, and plasma Kyn generally decreased with increasing doses of navoximod. The most common treatment-related AEs were fatigue (22%), rash (22%), and chromaturia (20%). Activity was observed at all dose levels in various tumor types (melanoma, pancreatic, prostate, ovarian, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, cervical, neural sheath, non-small cell lung cancer, triple-negative breast cancer, renal cell carcinoma, urothelial bladder cancer): 6 (9%) dose-escalation patients achieved partial response, and 10 (11%) expansion patients achieved partial response or complete response. Conclusions: The combination of navoximod and atezolizumab demonstrated acceptable safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics for patients with advanced cancer. Although activity was observed, there was no clear evidence of benefit from adding navoximod to atezolizumab