61MO Biomarker analysis of men with enzalutamide (enza)-resistant metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with pembrolizumab (pembro) + enza in KEYNOTE-199

Background: In KEYNOTE-199 (NCT02787005), pembro + enza had durable antitumor activity in enza-refractory mCRPC. We evaluated the association between prespecified biomarkers and clinical outcomes. Methods: Cohorts 4 (C4; RECIST-measurable disease) and 5 (C5; nonmeasurable, bone-predominant disease) enrolled men with chemotherapy-naive mCRPC, irrespective of PD-L1 status, that progressed after initial response to enza. We evaluated TMB by whole exome sequencing (n = 64), PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) by IHC (n = 124), and 18-gene T-cell–inflamed gene expression profile (TcellinfGEP) by NanoString (n = 51). Outcomes were DCR, PFS, PSA response, PSA progression, OS, and ORR per blinded independent review (C4 only). Significance of continuous biomarkers (CPS, TMB, GEP) was prespecified at 0.05 for 1-sided P values from logistic (ORR, DCR, PSA response) and Cox proportional hazard (PFS, OS, PSA progression) regression adjusted for ECOG PS. Results: In C4, ORR was 10% (5/48) in pts with evaluable TMB data and 12% (10/81) in pts with CPS data. In C4 and C5, 16% (10/64) and 14% (17/124) of pts with TMB and CPS data, respectively, achieved a PSA response. TMB was significantly associated with DCR (P = 0.03) and trended toward an association with PSA response (P = 0.08). TMB (AUROC [95% CI]: 0.68 [0.51-0.86]), but not CPS (0.54 [0.41-0.67]) or TcellinfGEP (0.55 [0.37-0.74]), enriched for PSA response. TMB (P = 0.04), but not CPS (P = 0.57) or TcellinfGEP (P = 0.32), was significantly associated with PSA progression. There was 1 MSI-H pt (per Promega PCR assay); this pt achieved an objective and PSA response and had PFS \u3e6 months. TMB, CPS, and TcellinfGEP were not associated with PFS or OS. There was a low prevalence of TMB ≥175 mut/exome (11%) and TcellinfGEP-high (≥−0.318; 16%). Conclusions: In this biomarker analysis of KEYNOTE-199 C4-C5, PD-L1 CPS and TcellinfGEP were not significantly associated with clinical outcome. Despite the low prevalence of TMB ≥175 mut/exome, TMB was positively associated with outcomes of pembro + enza in pts with mCRPC. The sample sizes for the exploratory analyses were small, and results should be interpreted with caution

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

Cabozantinib Versus Mitoxantrone-prednisone in Symptomatic Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: A Randomized Phase 3 Trial with a Primary Pain Endpoint

Background: Bone metastases in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are associated with debilitating pain and functional compromise. Objective: To compare pain palliation as the primary endpoint for cabozantinib versus mitoxantrone-prednisone in men with mCRPC and symptomatic bone metastases using patient-reported outcome measures. Design, setting, and participants: A randomized, double-blind phase 3 trial (COMET-2; NCT01522443) in men with mCRPC and narcotic-dependent pain from bone metastases who had progressed after treatment with docetaxel and either abiraterone or enzalutamide. Intervention: Cabozantinib 60 mg once daily orally versus mitoxantrone 12 mg/m2 every 3 wk plus prednisone 5 mg twice daily orally. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary endpoint was pain response at week 6 confirmed at week 12 (≥30% decrease from baseline in patient-reported average daily worst pain score via the Brief Pain Inventory without increased narcotic use). The planned sample size was 246 to achieve ≥90% power. Results and limitations: Enrollment was terminated early because cabozantinib did not demonstrate any survival benefit in the companion COMET-1 trial. At study closure, 119 participants were randomized (cabozantinib: N =61; mitoxantrone-prednisone: N = 58). Complete pain and narcotic use data were available at baseline, week 6, and week 12 for 73/106 (69%) patients. There was no significant difference in the pain response with cabozantinib versus mitoxantrone-prednisone: the proportions of responders were 15%versus 17%,a −2%difference(95%confidenceinterval:−16%to11%, p = 0.8). Barriers to accrual included pretreatment requirements for a washout period of prior anticancer therapy and a narcotic optimization period to maximize analgesic dosing. Conclusions: Cabozantinib treatment did not demonstrate better pain palliation than mitoxantrone-prednisone in heavily pretreated patients with mCRPC and symptomatic bone metastases. Future pain-palliation trials should incorporate briefer timelines from enrollment to treatment initiation. Patient summary: Cabozantinib was not better than mitoxantrone-prednisone for pain relief in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and debilitating pain from bone metastases

Pembrolizumab for Treatment-Refractory Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Multicohort, Open-Label Phase II KEYNOTE-199 Study

PURPOSE: Pembrolizumab has previously shown antitumor activity against programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Here, we assessed the antitumor activity and safety of pembrolizumab in three parallel cohorts of a larger mCRPC population. METHODS: The phase II KEYNOTE-199 study included three cohorts of patients with mCRPC treated with docetaxel and one or more targeted endocrine therapies. Cohorts 1 and 2 enrolled patients with RECIST-measurable PD-L1-positive and PD-L1-negative disease, respectively. Cohort 3 enrolled patients with bone-predominant disease, regardless of PD-L1 expression. All patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles. The primary end point was objective response rate per RECIST v1.1 assessed by central review in cohorts 1 and 2. Secondary end points included disease control rate, duration of response, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-eight patients were enrolled: 133 in cohort 1, 66 in cohort 2, and 59 in cohort 3. Objective response rate was 5% (95% CI, 2% to 11%) in cohort 1 and 3% (95% CI, = 21.8 months) and 10.6 months (range, 4.4 to 16.8 months), respectively. Disease control rate was 10% in cohort 1, 9% in cohort 2, and 22% in cohort 3. Median OS was 9.5 months in cohort 1, 7.9 months in cohort 2, and 14.1 months in cohort 3. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 60% of patients, were of grade 3 to 5 severity in 15%, and led to discontinuation of treatment in 5%. CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab monotherapy shows antitumor activity with an acceptable safety profile in a subset of patients with RECIST-measurable and bone-predominant mCRPC previously treated with docetaxel and targeted endocrine therapy. Observed responses seem to be durable, and OS estimates are encouraging

Impact of Sequencing Targeted Therapies With High-dose Interleukin-2 Immunotherapy: An Analysis of Outcome and Survival of Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma From an On-going Observational IL-2 Clinical Trial: PROCLAIM

BACKGROUND: This analysis describes the outcome for patients who received targeted therapy (TT) prior to or following high-dose interleukin-2 (HD IL-2). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with renal cell carcinoma (n = 352) receiving HD IL-2 were enrolled in Proleukin RESULTS: Overall, there were 4% complete response (CR), 13% partial response (PR), 39% stable disease (SD), and 43% progressive disease (PD) with HD IL-2. The median overall survival (mOS) was not reached in patients with CR, PR, or SD, and was 15.5 months in patients with PD (median follow-up, 21 months). Sixty-one patients had prior TT before HD IL-2 with an overall response rate (ORR) to HD IL-2 of 19% (1 CR, 9 PR) and an mOS of 22.1 months. One hundred forty-nine patients received TT only after HD IL-2 with an mOS of 35.5 months. One hundred forty-two patients had no TT before or after HD IL-2, and mOS was not reached. The mOS was 8.5 months in PD patients who received HD IL-2 without follow-on TT and 29.7 months in PD patients who received follow-on TT after HD IL-2. CONCLUSIONS: HD IL-2 as sole front-line therapy, in the absence of added TT, shows extended clinical benefit (CR, PR, and SD). Patients with PD after HD IL-2 appear to benefit from follow-on TT. Patients who progressed on TT and received follow-on HD IL-2 experienced major clinical benefit. HD IL-2 therapy should be considered in eligible patients

Concurrent capecitabine and upper abdominal radiation therapy is well tolerated

We retrospectively evaluated acute toxicity in 88 patients that were treated with capecitabine and concurrent radiotherapy to the upper abdomen. These patients included 28 (32%) with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, 18 (20%) with cholangiocarcinoma, 11 (13%) with ampullary carcinoma, 11 (13%) with other primary tumors, 14 (16%) with liver metastases, and 6 (7%) with metastases at other sites. The median dose of radiotherapy was 45 Gy (range 30–72 Gy). The median dose of capecitabine was 850 mg/m(2 )twice daily, with 77% receiving 800–900 mg/m(2 )twice daily. The highest grade of acute toxicity was Common Terminology Criteria (CTC) grade 0 in 5 (6%), grade 1 in 60 (68%), grade 2 in 18 (20%), and grade 3 in 5 (6%) patients. No patient had CTC grade 4 toxicity. The most common grade 2 toxicities were nausea, hand-foot syndrome, fatigue, anorexia and diarrhea. The grade 3 toxicities included nausea, vomiting and fatigue. Three patients (3%) required hospitalization due to grade 3 acute toxicity. Capecitabine was interrupted, discontinued or given at an adjusted dose in 13 (15%) patients because of acute toxicity. Therefore, capecitabine and concurrent radiotherapy to the upper abdomen appears to be well tolerated. Capecitabine may serve as an alternative to bolus or infusional 5-FU during chemoradiation for upper gastrointestinal malignancies