Search

The 2022 Immunotherapy Bridge congress (November 30–December 1, Naples, Italy) featured a Great Debate session which addressed three contemporary topics in the field of immunotherapy. The debates included counterpoint views from leading experts and considered whether adoptive cell therapy (ACT) has a role in the treatment of solid tumors, the use of peripheral/blood biomarkers versus tumor microenvironment biomarkers for cancer immunotherapy and the role of chimeric antigen receptor T cell versus natural killer cell therapy. As is the tradition in the Immunotherapy Bridge Great Debates, speakers are invited by the meeting Chairs to express one side of the assigned debate and the opinions given may not fully reflect their own personal views. Audiences voted in favour of either side of the topic both before and after each debate.

The Great Debate session at the 2022 Melanoma Bridge congress (December 1–3) featured counterpoint views from leading experts on five contemporary topics of debate in the management of melanoma. The debates considered the choice of anti-lymphocyte-activation gene (LAG)-3 therapy or ipilimumab in combination with anti-programmed death (PD)-1 therapy, whether anti-PD-1 monotherapy is still acceptable as a comparator arm in clinical trials, whether adjuvant treatment of melanoma is still a useful treatment option, the role of adjuvant therapy in stage II melanoma, what role surgery will continue to have in the treatment of melanoma. As is customary in the Melanoma Bridge Great Debates, the speakers are invited by the meeting Chairs to express one side of the assigned debate and the opinions given may not fully reflect personal views. Audiences voted in favour of either side of the argument both before and after each debate.

Patients with metastatic melanoma whose disease progresses on ipilimumab can clearly derive benefit from subsequent anti–programmed death-1 (PD-1). However, patients experience heterogeneous outcomes with ipilimumab, including rapid or delayed progression, and it is unclear whether patterns of ipilimumab progression influence subsequent clinical responses to anti–PD-1. We retrospectively reviewed data from 116 patients with metastatic melanoma who progressed on ipilimumab and were subsequently treated with pembrolizumab. The study objectives were to determine whether progression-free survival (PFS) with ipilimumab was associated with PFS, objective response rate (ORR), and clinical benefit rate (CBR; ORR + stable disease) with pembrolizumab. Patients with PFS ≥90 days after treatment with ipilimumab generally had superior outcomes with subsequent pembrolizumab treatment compared with patients with PFS P = 0.12; CBR, 66% vs. 46%, P = 0.03). Patients with prolonged ipilimumab benefit (PFS ≥ 180 days) had excellent outcomes with pembrolizumab compared with rapid progressors (PFS < 45 days; ORR, 55% vs. 25%; CBR, 80% vs. 25%; median PFS, 249 vs. 50 days). Using logistic regression models, PFS with ipilimumab was independently correlated with response to pembrolizumab (odds ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.02–1.51). This study shows that prolonged PFS with ipilimumab predicts excellent outcomes with subsequent pembrolizumab treatment, offering valuable prognostic information for clinicians. Cancer Immunol Res; 4(7); 569–73. ©2016 AACR.

Supplementary figures 1 & 2

Mass cytometry panel of antibodies.

Therapeutic antibodies blocking programmed death-1 and its ligand (PD-1/PD-L1) induce durable responses in a substantial fraction of melanoma patients. We sought to determine whether the number and/or type of mutations identified using a next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel available in the clinic was correlated with response to anti–PD-1 in melanoma. Using archival melanoma samples from anti–PD-1/PD-L1-treated patients, we performed hybrid capture–based NGS on 236–315 genes and T-cell receptor (TCR) sequencing on initial and validation cohorts from two centers. Patients who responded to anti–PD-1/PD-L1 had higher mutational loads in an initial cohort (median, 45.6 vs. 3.9 mutations/MB; P = 0.003) and a validation cohort (37.1 vs. 12.8 mutations/MB; P = 0.002) compared with nonresponders. Response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival were superior in the high, compared with intermediate and low, mutation load groups. Melanomas with NF1 mutations harbored high mutational loads (median, 62.7 mutations/MB) and high response rates (74%), whereas BRAF/NRAS/NF1 wild-type melanomas had a lower mutational load. In these archival samples, TCR clonality did not predict response. Mutation numbers in the 315 genes in the NGS platform strongly correlated with those detected by whole-exome sequencing in The Cancer Genome Atlas samples, but was not associated with survival. In conclusion, mutational load, as determined by an NGS platform available in the clinic, effectively stratified patients by likelihood of response. This approach may provide a clinically feasible predictor of response to anti–PD-1/PD-L1. Cancer Immunol Res; 4(11); 959–67. ©2016 AACR.

BRAFV600 mutations occur in a wide range of tumor types, and RAF inhibition has become standard in several of these cancers. Despite this progress, BRAFV600 mutations have historically been considered a clear demonstration of tumor lineage context–dependent oncogene addiction, based predominantly on the insensitivity to RAF inhibition in colorectal cancer. However, the true broader activity of RAF inhibition pan-cancer remains incompletely understood. To address this, we conducted a multicohort “basket” study of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib in non-melanoma BRAFV600 mutation–positive solid tumors. In total, 172 patients with 26 unique cancer types were treated, achieving an overall response rate of 33% and median duration of response of 13 months. Responses were observed in 13 unique cancer types, including historically treatment-refractory tumor types such as cholangiocarcinoma, sarcoma, glioma, neuroendocrine carcinoma, and salivary gland carcinomas. Collectively, these data demonstrate that single-agent BRAF inhibition has broader clinical activity than previously recognized.Significance:These data suggest that BRAFV600 mutations lead to oncogene addiction and are clinically actionable in a broad range of non-melanoma cancers, including tumor types in which RAF inhibition is not currently considered standard of care.See related commentary by Ribas and Lo, p. 640.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 627

Supplementary Table 1: Results for samples obtained (less than or equal to) 12 months prior to therapy (optimal) vs. those obtained >12 months from treatment or shortly after starting therapy (non-optimal). Supplementary Table 2: Cox proportional hazards model of OS adjusting for baseline variables. Supplementary Table 3: Cox proportional hazards model of PFS adjusting for baseline variables. Figure S1: (A) Performance of mutational load across a range of potential thresholds. (B) Receiver Operating Curve (ROC) for mutational loads cutoffs of 3.3 mutations/MB (low mutational load group) and 23.1 mutations/MB (high mutational load group). Figure S2: (A) Mutational load in tumors with cutaneous/unknown primaries in responders vs. non-responders. (B) Mutational load in tumors with non-cutaneous primaries (acral, mucosal, uveal) in responders vs. non-responders. (C) Gene amplifications and deletions in responders vs. non-responders. Figure S3: (A) LRP1B mutations/variants of unknown significance in responders vs. non-responders. (B) Total number of mutations among melanomas with and without LRP1B mutations. (C) Association between number of LRP1B mutations and total mutations in the melanoma TCGA. Figure S4: (A) T cell receptor (TCR) clonality in responders vs. non-responders. (B) T cell fraction in responders vs. non-responders. (C) TCR clonality in responders vs. non-responders in ideal samples, defined as those obtained within 4 months of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment without other prior therapies. (D) T cell fraction in these ideal samples. Figure S5: Mutation load correlated with (A) T cell receptor (TCR) clonality and (B) T cell fraction.

Supplementary Data from Tilsotolimod with Ipilimumab Drives Tumor Responses in Anti–PD-1 Refractory Melanoma

Antibodies aimed at blocking the interaction between programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and its ligands have shown impressive efficacy in a variety of malignancies and are generally well tolerated. Research has focused intensely on T cells and their interaction with cells within melanoma tumors, while relatively little is understood about the systems immunology of the cells in the blood during checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Longitudinal cytomic analysis using mass cytometry can characterize all the cells in a small sample of blood and has the potential to reveal key shifts in the cellular milieu occurring during treatment. We report a case of advanced melanoma in which mass cytometry detected abnormal myeloid cells resulting from myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) in the blood following treatment with an anti–PD-1 agent. Myeloid blasts comprised Cancer Immunol Res; 4(6); 474–80. ©2016 AACR.

Supplementary Table 1

Protocol appendix

Progression free survival and overall survival using alternate cutoffs for prolonged benefit ({greater than or equal to} 120 days) and rapid progression (< 60 days).

Many patients with advanced melanoma are resistant to immune checkpoint inhibition. In the ILLUMINATE-204 phase I/II trial, we assessed intratumoral tilsotolimod, an investigational Toll-like receptor 9 agonist, with systemic ipilimumab in patients with anti–PD-1– resistant advanced melanoma. In all patients, 48.4% experienced grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events. The overall response rate at the recommended phase II dose of 8 mg was 22.4%, and an additional 49% of patients had stable disease. Responses in noninjected lesions and in patients expected to be resistant to ipilimumab monotherapy were observed. Rapid induction of a local IFNα gene signature, dendritic cell maturation and enhanced markers of antigen presentation, and T-cell clonal expansion correlated with clinical response. A phase III clinical trial with this combination (NCT03445533) is ongoing.Significance:Despite recent developments in advanced melanoma therapies, most patients do not experience durable responses. Intratumoral tilsotolimod injection elicits a rapid, local type 1 IFN response and, in combination with ipilimumab, activates T cells to promote clinical activity, including in distant lesions and patients not expected to respond to ipilimumab alone.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1861

Progression free survival and overall survival using alternate cutoffs for prolonged benefit ({greater than or equal to} 67% percentile) and rapid progression (< 33 percentile).

Supplementary Table from Tilsotolimod with Ipilimumab Drives Tumor Responses in Anti–PD-1 Refractory Melanoma

Legends for supplementary figures 1-3

Supplementary Data from Tilsotolimod Exploits the TLR9 Pathway to Promote Antigen Presentation and Type 1 IFN Signaling in Solid Tumors: A Multicenter International Phase I/II Trial (ILLUMINATE-101)

Purpose:Tilsotolimod is an investigational synthetic Toll-like receptor 9 (TLR9) agonist that has demonstrated antitumor activity in preclinical models. The ILLUMINATE-101 phase I study explored the safety, dose, efficacy, and immune effects of intratumoral (it) tilsotolimod monotherapy in multiple solid tumors.Patients and Methods:Patients with a diagnosis of refractory cancer not amenable to curative therapies received tilsotolimod in doses escalating from 8 to 32 mg into a single lesion at weeks 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, and 11. Additional patients with advanced malignant melanoma were enrolled into an expansion cohort at the 8 mg dose. Objectives included characterizing the safety, establishing the dose, efficacy, and immunologic assessment. Blood samples and tumor biopsies of injected and noninjected lesions were obtained at baseline and 24 hours after treatment for immune analyses.Results:Thirty-eight and 16 patients were enrolled into the dose escalation and melanoma expansion cohorts, respectively. Deep visceral injections were conducted in 91% of patients. No dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) or grade 4 treatment-related adverse events were observed. Biopsies 24 hours after treatment demonstrated an increased IFN pathway signature and dendritic cell maturation. Immunologic profiling revealed upregulation of IFN-signaling genes and modulation of genes for checkpoint proteins. In the dose escalation cohort, 12 (34%) of 35 evaluable patients achieved a best overall response rate (ORR) of stable disease (SD), whereas 3 (19%) of 16 evaluable patients in the melanoma cohort achieved stable disease.Conclusions:Overall, tilsotolimod monotherapy was generally well tolerated and induced rapid, robust alterations in the tumor microenvironment.See related commentary by Punekar and Weber, p. 5007

Purpose:Combined axitinib/pembrolizumab is approved for advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). This exploratory analysis examined associations between angiogenic and immune-related biomarkers and outcomes following axitinib/pembrolizumab treatment.Patients and Methods:Prospectively defined retrospective correlative exploratory analyses tested biospecimens from 52 treatment-naïve patients receiving axitinib and pembrolizumab (starting doses 5 mg twice daily and 2 mg/kg respectively, every 3 weeks). Tumor tissue, serum, and whole blood samples were collected at baseline, at cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1), and end of treatment (EOT) for blood-based samples. Clinical outcomes were objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS).Results:Higher baseline tumor levels of CD8 showed a trend toward longer PFS (HR 0.4; P = 0.091). Higher baseline serum levels of CXCL10 (P = 0.0197) and CEACAM1 (P = 0.085) showed a trend toward better ORR and longer PFS, respectively. Patients for whom IL6 was not detected at baseline had longer PFS versus patients for whom it was detected (HR 0.4; P = 0.028). At C2D1 and/or EOT, mainly immune-related biomarkers showed any association with better outcomes. The genes CA9 (P = 0.084), HIF1A (P = 0.064), and IFNG (P = 0.073) showed trending associations with ORR, and AKT3 (P = 0.0145), DDX58 (P = 0.0726), GZMA (P = 0.0666), LCN2 (NGAL; P = 0.0267), and PTPN11 (P = 0.0287) with PFS.Conclusions:With combined axitinib/pembrolizumab treatment in patients with aRCC, mostly immune-related biomarkers are associated with better treatment outcomes. This exploratory analysis has identified some candidate biomarkers to consider in future prospective testing.

Purpose: BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) extend survival in BRAF-mutant melanoma but can promote the growth of Ras-mutant neoplasms. This study determined if gastrointestinal polyps found in BRAFi-treated patients harbored Ras mutations.Experimental Design: Colonic and gastric polyps were identified and resected from BRAFi-treated melanoma patients. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was performed on polyps. The ability of BRAFi to promote polyp formation was functionally characterized in Apc Min+/− mice. MAPK and β-catenin pathway activity was assessed by immunohistochemistry in mouse and human polyps.Results: Fourteen patients treated with BRAFi underwent endoscopy to assess for polyps. Seven out of 7 patients >40 years of age and treated for >2 years were found to have colonic tubular adenomas with 4 out of the 7 patients having 5 or more polyps. One patient presented with bleeding from hyperplastic gastric polyps that recurred 6 months after BRAFi rechallenge. NGS performed on polyps found no mutations in MAPK pathway genes, but found APC mutations in all tubular adenomas. A significant increase in the number of polyps was observed in BRAFi-treated compared with control-treated Apc Min+/− mice (20.8 ± 9.2 vs 12.8 ± 0.1; P = 0.016). No polyps were observed in BRAFi-treated wild-type mice.Conclusions: BRAFi may increase the risk of developing hyperplastic gastric polyps and colonic adenomatous polyps. Due to the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding and the possibility of malignant transformation, further studies are needed to determine whether or not endoscopic surveillance should be recommended for patients treated with BRAFi. Clin Cancer Res; 21(23); 5215–21. ©2015 AACR.

Treatment significantly affects the circulating immune compartment.

Purpose: To evaluate γ-H2AX foci as a pharmacodynamic marker for DNA damage induced by DNA interstrand cross-linking drugs.Experimental Design: γ-H2AX foci formation was validated preclinically in comparison with the Comet assay, and evaluated pharmacodynamically in two phase I studies of different dosing schedules of the novel cross-linking agent SJG-136 (SG2000).Results: The measurement of γ-H2AX foci in human fibroblasts and lymphocytes in vitro was more than 10-fold more sensitive than Comet assay measurement of cross-linking, with peak γ-H2AX response 24 hours after the peak of cross-linking. In lymphocytes from a phase I study (every three week schedule), γ-H2AX foci were detectable 1 hour following the end of administration, and in all patients, maximum response was observed at 24 hours. Significant levels of foci were still evident at days 8 and 15 consistent with the known persistence of the DNA damage produced by this agent. In two tumor biopsy samples, foci were detected 4 hours postinfusion with levels higher than in lymphocytes. Extensive foci formation was also observed before the third dose in cycle 1 in lymphocytes from a second phase I study (daily × 3 schedule). These foci also persisted with a significant level evident before the second cycle (day 21). An increased γ-H2AX response was observed during the second cycle consistent with a cumulative pharmacodynamic effect. No clear relationship between foci formation and administered drug dose was observed.Conclusion: This is the first use of γ-H2AX as a pharmacodynamic response to a DNA cross-linking agent in a clinical trial setting. Clin Cancer Res; 19(3); 721–30. ©2012 AACR.

All supplementary data

Percentage of cells (m-MDSC, PMN-MDSC, T regulatory cells, T helper cells, cytotoxic T-cells, PD-L1+ melanoma cells, activated, partially exhausted and exhausted CD8+ T-cells) in archival tissue biopsies for 8/9 patients in the regions of interest selected for the analysis

Supplementary Figure 2

PDF file - 96K, Supplementary Figure S3. Signaling and inhibition of TRIM24-BRAF.

PDF file - 83K

Purpose: Preclinical studies show that bortezomib, a proteasome inhibitor, blocks NF-κB activation and, combined with temozolomide, enhances activity against human melanoma xenografts and modulates other critical tumor targets. We initiated a phase I trial of temozolomide plus bortezomib in advanced melanoma. Objectives included defining a maximum tolerated dose for the combination, characterizing biomarker changes reflecting inhibition of both proteasome and NF-κB activity in blood (if possible tumor), and characterizing antitumor activity.Experimental Design: Cohorts were enrolled onto escalating dose levels of temozolomide (50-75 mg/m2) daily, orally, for 6 of 9 weeks and bortezomib (0.75-1.5 mg/m2) by i.v. push on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 every 21 days. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were assayed at specified time points for proteasome inhibition and NF-κB biomarker activity.Results: Bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2) and temozolomide (75 mg/m2) proved to be the maximum tolerated dose. Dose-limiting toxicities included neurotoxicity, fatigue, diarrhea, and rash. Nineteen melanoma patients were enrolled onto four dose levels. This melanoma population (17 M1c, 10 elevated lactate dehydrogenase, 12 performance status 1-2) showed only one partial response (8 months) and three with stable disease ≥4 months. A significant reduction in proteasome-specific activity was observed 1 hour after infusion at all bortezomib doses. Changes in NF-κB electrophoretic mobility shift assay and circulating chemokines in blood failed to correlate with the schedule/dose of bortezomib, inhibition of proteasome activity, or clinical outcome.Conclusions: We have defined phase II doses for this schedule of temozolomide with bortezomib. Although proteasome activity was inhibited for a limited time in peripheral blood mononuclear cells, we were unable to show consistent effects on NF-κB activation. Clin Cancer Res; 16(1); 348–57

Purpose:Increased β-adrenergic receptor (β-AR) signaling has been shown to promote the creation of an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME). Preclinical studies have shown that abrogation of this signaling pathway, particularly β2-AR, provides a more favorable TME that enhances the activity of anti–PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors. We hypothesize that blocking stress-related immunosuppressive pathways would improve tumor response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients. Here, we report the results of dose escalation of a nonselective β-blocker (propranolol) with pembrolizumab in patients with metastatic melanoma.Patients and Methods:A 3 + 3 dose escalation study for propranolol twice a day with pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks) was completed. The primary objective was to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Additional objectives included safety, antitumor activity, and biomarker analyses. Responders were defined as patients with complete or partial response per immune-modified RECIST at 6 months.Results:Nine patients with metastatic melanoma received increasing doses of propranolol in cohorts of 10, 20, and 30 mg twice a day. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were rash, fatigue, and vitiligo, observed in 44% patients. One patient developed two grade ≥3 TRAEs. Objective response rate was 78%. While no significant changes in treatment-associated biomarkers were observed, an increase in IFNγ and a decrease in IL6 was noted in responders.Conclusions:Combination of propranolol with pembrolizumab in treatment-naïve metastatic melanoma is safe and shows very promising activity. Propranolol 30 mg twice a day was selected as RP2D in addition to pembrolizumab based on safety, tolerability, and preliminary antitumor activity.

Biomarker changes over time. A, Variations in chemokines IP-10, eotaxin and TNF-β in pg/ml. B, Variation in CD8+T-cells, m-MDSC, PMN-MDSC, regulatory T-cells (Tregs) expressed as percentage of total CD45+ cells, ratio of CD8+/ PMN-MDSC. C, Relative changes in peripheral blood cells (PMN-MDSC, CD8+ T-cell, CD8+ T cells/T-reg) and IL-12p70. Dose level 1 is propranolol 10 mg BID, dose level 2 is propranolol 20 mg BID and dose level 3 is propranolol 30 mg BID. Asterix show significant values at different time points compared to baseline in different dose levels.

Supplemental Table S1. Baseline Patient Characteristics Supplemental Table S2. Univariate Analyses of Association Between Clinical Factors and Early LVEF Change on Sunitinib

Supplemental Figure 1. Endoscopic and histological H&E images of colonic polyps in a Magnification: 10X (bottom left); 200X (bottom right) BRAF mutant melanoma patient treated with long-term vemurafenib.

Purpose: Recurrent “driver” mutations at specific loci in BRAF, NRAS, KIT, GNAQ, and GNA11 define clinically relevant molecular subsets of melanoma, but more than 30% are “pan-negative” for these recurrent mutations. We sought to identify additional potential drivers in “pan-negative” melanoma.Experimental Design: Using a targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay (FoundationOne™) and targeted RNA sequencing, we identified a novel PAPSS1-BRAF fusion in a “pan-negative” melanoma. We then analyzed NGS data from 51 additional melanomas genotyped by FoundationOne™, as well as melanoma RNA, whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing data in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), to determine the potential frequency of BRAF fusions in melanoma. We characterized the signaling properties of confirmed molecular alterations by ectopic expression of engineered cDNAs in 293H cells.Results: Activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway in cells by ectopic expression of PAPSS1-BRAF was abrogated by mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) inhibition but not by BRAF inhibition. NGS data analysis of 51 additional melanomas revealed a second BRAF fusion (TRIM24-BRAF) in a “pan-negative” sample; MAPK signaling induced by TRIM24-BRAF was also MEK inhibitor sensitive. Through mining TCGA skin cutaneous melanoma dataset, we further identified two potential BRAF fusions in another 49 “pan-negative” cases.Conclusions: BRAF fusions define a new molecular subset of melanoma, potentially comprising 4% to 8% of “pan-negative” cases. Their presence may explain an unexpected clinical response to MEK inhibitor therapy or assist in selecting patients for MEK-directed therapy. Clin Cancer Res; 19(24); 6696–702. ©2013 AACR.

Purpose: OSI-906 is a potent inhibitor of insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor (IGF1R) and insulin receptor (IR). The purpose of this study was to determine the MTD, safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary activity of OSI-906 in patients with advanced solid tumors.Patients and Methods: This was a nonrandomized, open-label, phase I, dose-escalation study in patients with advanced solid tumors. The study also included a diabetic expansion cohort and a biomarker expansion cohort of patients with colorectal cancer. Patients were treated with OSI-906 by once- or twice-daily continuous dosing schedules.Results: Of 95 patients enrolled in the study, 86 received at least one dose of OSI-906. Dose-limiting toxicities included QTc prolongation, grade 2 abdominal pain and nausea, hyperglycemia, and elevation of aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase (all grade 3). The MTDs were established to be 400 mg once daily and 150 mg twice daily. The recommended phase II dose was determined as 150 mg twice daily. OSI-906 was rapidly absorbed with a half-life of 5 hours, and steady-state plasma concentrations were achieved by day 8. Pharmacodynamic effects on IGF1R and IR phosphorylation were levels observed and correlated with plasma concentrations of OSI-906. Thirty-one patients had stable disease as their best response. One patient with melanoma had a radiographic partial response and underwent resection, during which only melanocytic debris but no viable tumor tissue was identified.Conclusions: At the established MTD, OSI-906 was well tolerated and antitumor activity was observed. These results support further evaluation of OSI-906 in solid tumors. Clin Cancer Res; 21(4); 701–11. ©2014 AACR.See related commentary by Yee, p. 667

Supplementary Figure 1

Supplementary Data from A Phase I Trial of Bortezomib with Temozolomide in Patients with Advanced Melanoma: Toxicities, Antitumor Effects, and Modulation of Therapeutic Targets

Purpose: This phase 1b dose-escalation study assessed safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of ganitumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against the insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1) receptor, combined with targeted agents or cytotoxic chemotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumors.Experimental Design: Patients with treatment-refractory advanced solid tumors were sequentially enrolled at 2 ganitumab dose levels (6 or 12 mg/kg i.v. every 2 weeks) combined with either sorafenib 400 mg twice daily, panitumumab 6 mg/kg every 2 weeks, erlotinib 150 mg once daily, or gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 4-week cycle. The primary end points were safety and pharmacokinetics of ganitumab.Results: Ganitumab up to 12 mg/kg appeared well tolerated combined with sorafenib, panitumumab, erlotinib, or gemcitabine. Treatment-emergent adverse events were generally mild and included fatigue, nausea, vomiting, and chills. Three patients had dose-limiting toxicities: grade 3 hyperglycemia (ganitumab 6 mg/kg and panitumumab), grade 4 neutropenia (ganitumab 6 mg/kg and gemcitabine), and grade 4 thrombocytopenia (ganitumab 12 mg/kg and erlotinib). Ganitumab-binding and panitumumab-binding antibodies were detected in 5 and 2 patients, respectively; neutralizing antibodies were not detected. The pharmacokinetics of ganitumab and each cotherapy did not appear affected by coadministration. Circulating total IGF1 and IGF binding protein 3 increased from baseline following treatment. Four patients (9%) had partial responses.Conclusions: Ganitumab up to 12 mg/kg was well tolerated, without adverse effects on pharmacokinetics in combination with either sorafenib, panitumumab, erlotinib, or gemcitabine. Ganitumab is currently under investigation in combination with some of these and other agents. Clin Cancer Res; 18(12); 3414–27. ©2012 AACR.

PDF file - 190K, Supplementary Figure S2. Detection of TRIM24-BRAF by FoundationOne(TM).

PDF file - 59K, Validation experiments in human lymphocytes treated ex vivo with SJG-136. A. Inter-assay variation - mean � s.e. data from three independent experiments. B. Intra-assay variation - mean � s.e. data from the same samples assayed on three independent occasions. C. Aliquots of the same internal standard samples stored at -80oC were assayed with each set of clinical samples. Data are the mean � s.e. from 10 internal standard runs over a period of several months.

Adverse events by grade and frequency regardless of attribution

Supplementary Tables

Representative gating strategy illustrating (A) CD4 and CD8 T cell identification (B) expression of ICOS on CD4 positive T cells (C) expression of PD-1 and Ki-67 within PD-1 positive cells and (D) expression of CD38/HLA-DR, PD-1 and KI-67 within CD8+ PD-1+ T cells is shown.

Supplementary Figure 4A. Kaplan-Meier PFS curves by treatment and dichotomized angiokines groups for following angiokines: TGFb-R3, HGF, TSP-2, OPN, IL-6, SDF-1, Ang-2, ICAM-1, TGF-b2, TIMP-1, BMP-9, PDGF-BB, VCAM-1, PDGF-AA, VEGF-D, TGF-b1, VEGF-R1, HER-3, VEGF, PlGF, CD-73, VEGF-R3, and VEGF-R2

Supplementary Figure 2. Kaplan-Meier PFS curves by dichotomized angiokines: CD-73, BMP-9, VEGF-R1, PDGF-BB, VEGF, IL-6, VCAM-1, OPN, HGF, PDGF-AA, TGFb-R3, TGF-b1, VEGF-R3, and TGF-b2

PDF file - 56K, Mean foci per cell versus dose of SJG-136 administered for the CRUK (upper) and NCI (middle) clinical trials, and mean foci per cell versus cross-linking (% decrease in tail moment) for the NCI trial (bottom).

Representative gating strategy illustrating (A) CD4 and CD8 T cell identification (B) expression of ICOS on CD4 positive T cells (C) expression of PD-1 and Ki-67 within PD-1 positive cells and (D) expression of CD38/HLA-DR, PD-1 and KI-67 within CD8+ PD-1+ T cells is shown.

CONSORT diagram

Supplementary tables

Purpose:To assess the response to pexidartinib treatment in six cohorts of adult patients with advanced, incurable solid tumors associated with colony-stimulating factor 1 receptor (CSF1R) and/or KIT proto-oncogene receptor tyrosine kinase activity.Patients and Methods:From this two-part phase I, multicenter study, pexidartinib, a small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets CSF1R, KIT, and FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3), was evaluated in six adult patient cohorts (part 2, extension) with advanced solid tumors associated with dysregulated CSF1R. Adverse events, pharmacokinetics, and tumor responses were assessed for all patients; patients with tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) were also evaluated for tumor volume score (TVS) and patient-reported outcomes (PRO). CSF1 transcripts and gene expression were explored in TGCT biopsies.Results:Ninety-one patients were treated: TGCT patients (n = 39) had a median treatment duration of 511 days, while other solid tumor patients (n = 52) had a median treatment duration of 56 days. TGCT patients had response rates of 62% (RECIST 1.1) and 56% (TVS) for the full analysis set. PRO assessments for pain showed improvement in patient symptoms, and 76% (19/25) of TGCT tissue biopsy specimens showed evidence of abnormal CSF1 transcripts. Pexidartinib treatment of TGCT resulted in tumor regression and symptomatic benefit in most patients. Pexidartinib toxicity was manageable over the entire study.Conclusions:These results offer insight into outcome patterns in cancers whose biology suggests use of a CSF1R inhibitor. Pexidartinib results in tumor regression in TGCT patients, providing prolonged control with an acceptable safety profile.