Search

Ipilimumab improves clinical outcomes when combined with nivolumab in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but its efficacy and impact on the immune microenvironment in operable NSCLC remain unclear. We report the results of the phase 2 randomized NEOSTAR trial (NCT03158129) of neoadjuvant nivolumab or nivolumab + ipilimumab followed by surgery in 44 patients with operable NSCLC, using major pathologic response (MPR) as the primary endpoint. The MPR rate for each treatment arm was tested against historical controls of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The nivolumab + ipilimumab arm met the prespecified primary endpoint threshold of 6 MPRs in 21 patients, achieving a 38% MPR rate (8/21). We observed a 22% MPR rate (5/23) in the nivolumab arm. In 37 patients resected on trial, nivolumab and nivolumab + ipilimumab produced MPR rates of 24% (5/21) and 50% (8/16), respectively. Compared with nivolumab, nivolumab + ipilimumab resulted in higher pathologic complete response rates (10% versus 38%), less viable tumor (median 50% versus 9%), and greater frequencies of effector, tissue-resident memory and effector memory T cells. Increased abundance of gut Ruminococcus and Akkermansia spp. was associated with MPR to dual therapy. Our data indicate that neoadjuvant nivolumab + ipilimumab-based therapy enhances pathologic responses, tumor immune infiltrates and immunologic memory, and merits further investigation in operable NSCLC. Neoadjuvant treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab is well tolerated and demonstrates clinical efficacy in patients with early stage lung cancer.

BackgroundSAR444245 (THOR-707) is a recombinant human IL-2 molecule that includes a PEG moiety irreversibly bound to a novel amino acid via click chemistry to block the alpha-binding domain while retaining near-native affinity for the beta/gamma subunits. In animal models, SAR444245 showed anti-tumor benefits, but with no severe side effects, both as single agent and when combined with anti-PD1 comparing with historical data from aldeslukin. Preclinical study demonstrated SAR444245 enhances ADCC function of cetuximab. The HAMMER trial, which is the FIH study shows preliminary encouraging clinical results: initial efficacy and safety profile with SAR444245 monotherapy and in combination with pembrolizumab or with cetuximab support a non-alpha preferential activity, validating preclinical models. The Pegasus Head and Neck Ph 2 study will evaluate the clinical benefit of SAR444245 in combination with other anticancer therapies for the treatment of patients with R/M HNSCC.MethodsThe Pegasus Head and Neck will enroll approximately 272 patients in 4 separate cohorts concurrently. In cohorts A1 & A2, 1L R/M HNSCC patients will receive SAR444245 + pembrolizumab, or SAR444245+ pembrolizumab+ cetuximab respectively. In cohort B1 & B2 patients with 2/3L R/M HNSCC failed a checkpoint based regimen & a platinum containing regimen will receive SAR444245 + pembrolizumab, or SAR444245 + cetuximab. Patients to be enrolled in cohort B2 need to be cetuximab-naïve in R/M setting. SAR444245 is administered intravenously IV at a dose of 24 ug/kg Q3W until disease progression (PD) or completion of 35 cycles. Pembrolizumab is administered at a dose of 200 mg Q3W until PD or completion of 35 cycles. Cetuximab is administered at a dose of 400/250 mg/m2 QW until PD. The study primary objective is to determine the antitumor activity of SAR444245 in combination with other anticancer therapies. Secondary objectives include confirmation of dose and safety profile, assess other indicators of antitumor activity, and assess the pharmacokinetic profile and immunogenicity of SAR444245. The study will be conducted in the US, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, South Korea, Spain and Taiwan.AcknowledgementsThe Pegasus Head and Neck study is sponsored by Sanofi.

Purpose: Cetuximab, which modulates immune responses, may affect the efficacy of subsequent immunotherapy. Here, we assessed outcomes with nivolumab, by prior cetuximab exposure, in patients with recurrent or metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) who had experienced progression within 6 months of platinum-containing chemotherapy. Patients and Methods: In the randomized, open-label, phase III CheckMate 141 trial, patients were randomized 2:1 to nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or investigator's choice (IC) of single-agent chemotherapy, with stratification by prior cetuximab exposure. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); additional endpoints were progression-free survival, objective response rate, and safety. Results: In patients with prior cetuximab exposure, the median OS was 7.1 months with nivolumab versus 5.1 months with IC (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.62–1.15); OS benefit with nivolumab was maintained across most demographic subgroups. In patients without prior cetuximab exposure, the median OS was 8.2 months with nivolumab versus 4.9 months with IC (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.35–0.77); OS benefit with nivolumab was maintained across patient baseline subgroups including tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ( Conclusions: Nivolumab appeared to improve efficacy versus IC regardless of prior cetuximab use, supporting its use in patients with R/M SCCHN with or without prior cetuximab exposure. The reduction in risk of death with nivolumab compared with IC was greater in patients without prior cetuximab exposure versus with prior cetuximab exposure.

Objectives: Many patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) are ≥65 years old; comorbidities and other age-related factors may affect their ability to tolerate traditional chemotherapy. Nivolumab is the only immunotherapy to significantly improve overall survival (OS) versus investigator’s choice (IC) of single-agent chemotherapy at primary analysis in a phase 3 trial (CheckMate 141) in patients with recurrent/metastatic SCCHN post-platinum therapy. In this post hoc analysis, we report efficacy and safety by age. Patients and methods: Eligible patients were randomized 2:1 to nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (n = 240) or IC (methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab n = 121). The primary endpoint of the trial was OS. For this analysis, outcomes were analyzed by age < 65 and ≥65 years. The data cut-off date was September 2017 (minimum follow-up 24.2 months). Results: At baseline, 68 patients (28.3%) receiving nivolumab and 45 patients (37.2%) receiving IC were ≥65 years. Baseline characteristics were generally similar across age groups. OS and tumor response benefits with nivolumab versus IC were maintained regardless of age. The 30-month OS rates of 11.2% (< 65 years) and 13.0% (≥65 years) with nivolumab were more than tripled versus corresponding IC rates of 1.4% and 3.3%, respectively. The nivolumab arm had a lower rate of treatment-related adverse events versus IC regardless of age, consistent with the overall patient population. Conclusion: In CheckMate 141, nivolumab resulted in a higher survival versus IC in patients < 65 and ≥65 years, with a manageable safety profile in both age groups. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02105636.

Background Tebotelimab, also known as MGD013, is an investigational, Fc bearing bispecific tetravalent DART molecule designed to bind PD-1 and LAG-3 and sustain/restore the function of exhausted T cells.1 Margetuximab, an investigational Fc-engineered anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody, has similar HER2 binding and antiproliferative properties to trastuzumab, but with enhanced Fc-mediated effector function. In vitro studies have demonstrated upregulation of LAG-3/PD-L1 expression on immune cells after margetuximab exposure, along with enhanced lytic activity of immune cells primed by margetuximab in the presence of tebotelimab. Methods This study characterizes safety, PK/PD, and preliminary antitumor activity of tebotelimab plus margetuximab in patients with advanced HER2+ malignancies. A one-step 3+3 dose escalation phase of tebotelimab (300 and 600 mg) combined with margetuximab 15 mg/kg, both every 3 weeks, was followed by cohort expansion of patients with breast, gastric or gastroesophageal, and other HER2+ tumors. Results At data-cutoff, 31 patients (2.0 median lines of prior therapy; 64.5% with prior HER2-directed therapy) were treated. Median duration of treatment is 10.3 weeks with 17 patients remaining on treatment. No maximum tolerated dose was defined. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 23/31 (74.2%) patients, most commonly diarrhea (n=6), nausea, ALT increased (n=5, each), AST increased, and myalgia (n=4, each). The rate of Grade 3 TRAEs was 19.4%, with no Grade 4–5 TRAEs observed. Immune-related AEs were consistent with events observed with anti-PD-1 antibodies and were manageable with supportive treatment. Among 20 response-evaluable patients (i.e., received on-treatment scan), 8 objective responses (6 confirmed) per RECIST v1.1 have been observed, including a confirmed complete response (cholangiocarcinoma) and 7 partial responses (breast [2], microsatellite stable colorectal cancer [2], esophageal adenocarcinoma [1], ovarian cancer [1], and microsatellite stable gastroesophageal junction carcinoma).1 Immunohistochemistry (IHC) of available baseline tumor specimens (n=17) demonstrated low PD-L1 expression with combined positive scores of either 0 (n=16) or 1 (n=1, colorectal cancer). Investigations into other potential correlative biomarkers, including LAG-3 and PD-1 by IHC and gene expression profiling by NanoString, remain ongoing. Conclusions Tebotelimab in combination with margetuximab has demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and encouraging early evidence of anti-tumor activity, with a preliminary overall response rate (ORR) of 40% (8/20) [including unconfirmed responses] among late-line patients with various advanced HER2+ malignancies. Trial Registration NCT03219268 Ethics Approval This study was approved by each Institution’s Ethics Board prior to enrollment of subjects. Reference Luke J, et al. A phase I, first-in-human, open-label, dose-escalation study of MGD013, a bispecific DART molecule binding PD–1 and LAG–3, in patients with unresectable or metastatic neoplasms. J Clin Oncol38: 2020 (suppl; abstr 3004).

Background MRx0518 is a novel, human gut microbiome-derived, single-strain, live biotherapeutic in clinical development for treatment of solid tumours. Preclinically, MRx0518 induced broad immunostimulatory activity and demonstrated anti-tumorigenic effects in a range of murine tumor models. MRx0518 increased CD4+ and CD8+ T cell and NK cell tumor infiltration and decreased Tregs. Activation of tumour TLR5 was observed and linked to the bacterial flagellin moiety, which was shown to strongly induce NFκB, cytokine responses and IFNγ+ CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. Methods Heavily pre-treated patients refractory to ICIs were enrolled from March 2019 to March 2020. Patients had experienced at least SD from previous ICI (monotherapy or combination) but eventually progressed as confirmed by two radiological scans ≥4 weeks apart in the absence of rapid clinical progression and within 12 weeks of last dose of ICI. Patients were treated with 1 capsule of MRx0518 (1 × 1010 to 1 × 1011 CFU) BID and pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks) for up to 35 cycles or disease progression. Tumour response was assessed every 9 weeks per RECIST 1.1. The primary objective was to evaluate safety of the combination by monitoring toxicities in the first cycle of treatment. Secondary objectives were to evaluate efficacy via ORR, DOR, DCR and PFS. Results In Part A, patients with mRCC (n=9) and mNSCLC (n=3) were recruited. At data cut-off (21 Aug 20), 5 patients remain on study treatment. 83% of patients were male and 17% were female. Median number of prior lines of therapy was 3. 10 patients received nivolumab previously (83%), one received avelumab (8%) and one received pembrolizumab and nivolumab (8%). 83% of patients had experienced SD as best response to prior ICI and 17% had PR as best response. Of 6 patients with available PD-L1 results, 5 had a positive CPS/TPS (≥1) and 1 negative ( Conclusions This data represents first-in-class proof of concept for a live biotherapeutic in an oncology setting. The combination was tolerable and there were preliminary signals of efficacy. Part B (phase II) in NSCLC, RCC and bladder cancer is ongoing. Trial Registration www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT03637803 Ethics Approval This study was approved by University of Texas MD Anderson’s Institutional Review Board; approval ref. 2018-0290

Background Tumor and nodal downstaging following neoadjuvant therapy in resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are important markers of therapeutic response associated with favorable prognosis. We studied the impact of four different systemic neoadjuvant therapies on tumor, nodal and overall pathological downstaging of surgically resectable I-IIIA NSCLC (AJCC 7th edition). Methods Our study cohorts consisted of NSCLC patients treated with three cycles of neoadjuvant platinum doublet chemotherapy from 2001–2012 (N=302, 84%), and patients treated on the NEOSTAR study (NCT03158129) who received neoadjuvant nivolumab (N=21,6%), nivolumab plus ipilimumab (N=16, 4%), or platinum doublet chemotherapy plus nivolumab (N=22, 6%). Clinical and pathological (yp) T and N staging were evaluated for downstaging and upstaging; differences were assessed using Fisher’s exact test. Results Following neoadjuvant platinum doublet chemotherapy, nivolumab, nivolumab plus ipilimumab and platinum doublet chemotherapy plus nivolumab, the rates of clinical-to-pathological ypT downstaging were 26% (N=79), 29% (N=6), 38% (N=6) and 59% (N=13), respectively, p =0.012 (table 1). The rates of clinical-to-pathological ypN downstaging in patients with clinical N1 or N2 disease with each therapy were 55% (N=96), 50% (N=3), 50% (N=2), and 42% (N=5) respectively, p =0.862. Overall clinical-to-pathological (ypT and/or ypN) downstaging rates were 38% (N=114), 38% (N=8), 38% (N=6), and 68% (N=15) respectively, p=0.048. The proportions of patients being overall upstaged following each therapy were 28% (N=85), 38% (N=8), 38% (N=6) and 14% (N=3), respectively, p=0.251. These results suggest superior downstaging effect and clinically meaningful lower upstaging probability of combined platinum doublet chemotherapy plus nivolumab as compared to other neoadjuvant regimens. Conclusions The combination of neoadjuvant platinum doublet chemotherapy with nivolumab achieves the most robust tumor and overall pathological downstaging and decreases the probability of upstaging at surgery. Whether the overall downstaging effect results in improved survival will be determined with longer follow-up, in conjunction with results from ongoing phase III neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy trials. Trial Registration NCT03158129 Ethics Approval This study was approved by the University of Texas MD Anderson Institutional Review Board with a waiver of informed consent, protocol 2020-0337.

PURPOSE RTOG 0617 compared standard-dose (SD; 60 Gy) versus high-dose (HD; 74 Gy) radiation with concurrent chemotherapy and determined the efficacy of cetuximab for stage III non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS The study used a 2 × 2 factorial design with radiation dose as 1 factor and cetuximab as the other, with a primary end point of overall survival (OS). RESULTS Median follow-up was 5.1 years. There were 3 grade 5 adverse events (AEs) in the SD arm and 9 in the HD arm. Treatment-related grade ≥3 dysphagia and esophagitis occurred in 3.2% and 5.0% of patients in the SD arm v 12.1% and 17.4% in the HD arm, respectively ( P = .0005 and < .0001). There was no difference in pulmonary toxicity, with grade ≥3 AEs in 20.6% and 19.3%. Median OS was 28.7 v 20.3 months ( P = .0072) in the SD and HD arms, respectively, 5-year OS and progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 32.1% and 23% and 18.3% and 13% ( P = .055), respectively. Factors associated with improved OS on multivariable analysis were standard radiation dose, tumor location, institution accrual volume, esophagitis/dysphagia, planning target volume and heart V5. The use of cetuximab conferred no survival benefit at the expense of increased toxicity. The prior signal of benefit in patients with higher H scores was no longer apparent. The progression rate within 1 month of treatment completion in the SD arm was 4.6%. For comparison purposes, the resultant 2-year OS and PFS rates allowing for that dropout rate were 59.6% and 30.7%, respectively, in the SD arms. CONCLUSION A 60-Gy radiation dose with concurrent chemotherapy should remain the standard of care, with the OS rate being among the highest reported in the literature for stage III NSCLC. Cetuximab had no effect on OS. The 2-year OS rates in the control arm are similar to the PACIFIC trial.

Background Long-term data with immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are limited. Two phase III trials demonstrated improved overall survival (OS) and a favorable safety profile with the anti-programmed death-1 antibody nivolumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced squamous (CheckMate 017) and nonsquamous (CheckMate 057) NSCLC. We report results from ≥3 years’ follow-up, including subgroup analyses of patients with liver metastases, who historically have poorer prognosis among patients with NSCLC. Patients and methods Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) until progression or discontinuation. The primary end point of each study was OS. Patients with baseline liver metastases were pooled across studies by treatment for subgroup analyses. Results After 40.3 months’ minimum follow-up in CheckMate 017 and 057, nivolumab continued to show an OS benefit versus docetaxel: estimated 3-year OS rates were 17% [95% confidence interval (CI), 14% to 21%] versus 8% (95% CI, 6% to 11%) in the pooled population with squamous or nonsquamous NSCLC. Nivolumab was generally well tolerated, with no new safety concerns identified. Of 854 randomized patients across both studies, 193 had baseline liver metastases. Nivolumab resulted in improved OS compared with docetaxel in patients with liver metastases (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50–0.91), consistent with findings from the overall pooled study population (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61–0.81). Rates of treatment-related hepatic adverse events (primarily grade 1–2 liver enzyme elevations) were slightly higher in nivolumab-treated patients with liver metastases (10%) than in the overall pooled population (6%). Conclusions After 3 years’ minimum follow-up, nivolumab continued to demonstrate an OS benefit versus docetaxel in patients with advanced NSCLC. Similarly, nivolumab demonstrated an OS benefit versus docetaxel in patients with liver metastases, and remained well tolerated. Clinical trial registration CheckMate 017: NCT01642004; CheckMate 057: NCT01673867.

Summary Background Patients with platinum-refractory recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck have few treatment options and poor prognosis. Nivolumab significantly improved survival of this patient population when compared with standard single-agent therapy of investigator's choice in Checkmate 141; here we report the effect of nivolumab on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Methods CheckMate 141 was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck who progressed within 6 months after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (n=240) or investigator's choice (n=121) of methotrexate (40–60 mg/m 2 of body surface area), docetaxel (30–40 mg/m 2 ), or cetuximab (250 mg/m 2 after a loading dose of 400 mg/m 2 ) until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. On Jan 26, 2016, the independent data monitoring committee reviewed the data at the planned interim analysis and declared overall survival superiority for nivolumab over investigator's choice therapy (primary endpoint; described previously). The protocol was amended to allow patients in the investigator's choice group to cross over to nivolumab. All patients not on active therapy are being followed for survival. As an exploratory endpoint, PROs were assessed at baseline, week 9, and every 6 weeks thereafter using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire–Core 30 (QLQ-C30), the EORTC head and neck cancer-specific module (EORTC QLQ-H&N35), and the three-level European Quality of Life–5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire. Differences within and between treatment groups in PROs were analysed by ANCOVA among patients with baseline and at least one other assessment. All randomised patients were included in the time to clinically meaningful deterioration analyses. Median time to clinically meaningful deterioration was analysed by Kaplan-Meier methods. CheckMate 141 was registered with ClinicalTrials.org, number NCT02105636. Findings Patients were enrolled between May 29, 2014, and July 31, 2015, and subsequently 361 patients were randomly assigned to receive nivolumab (n=240) or investigator's choice (n=121). Among them, 129 patients (93 in the nivolumab group and 36 in the investigator's choice group) completed any of the PRO questionnaires at baseline and at least one other assessment. Treatment with nivolumab resulted in adjusted mean changes from baseline to week 15 ranging from −2·1 to 5·4 across functional and symptom domains measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30, with no domains indicating clinically meaningful deterioration. By contrast, eight (53%) of the 15 domains in the investigator's choice group showed clinically meaningful deterioration (10 points or more) at week 15 (change from baseline range, −24·5 to 2·4). Similarly, on the EORTC QLQ-H&N35, clinically meaningful worsening at week 15 was seen in no domains in the nivolumab group and eight (44%) of 18 domains in the investigator's choice group. Patients in the nivolumab group had a clinically meaningful improvement (according to a difference of 7 points or greater) in adjusted mean change from baseline to week 15 on the EQ-5D visual analogue scale, in contrast to a clinically meaningful deterioration in the investigator's choice group (7·3 vs −7·8). Differences between groups were significant and clinically meaningful at weeks 9 and 15 in favour of nivolumab for role functioning, social functioning, fatigue, dyspnoea, and appetite loss on the EORTC QLQ-C30 and pain and sensory problems on the EORTC QLQ-H&N35. Median time to deterioration was significantly longer with nivolumab versus investigator's choice for 13 (37%) of 35 domains assessed across the three questionnaires. Interpretation In this exploratory analysis of CheckMate 141, nivolumab stabilised symptoms and functioning from baseline to weeks 9 and 15, whereas investigator's choice led to clinically meaningful deterioration. Nivolumab delayed time to deterioration of patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes compared with single-agent therapy of investigator's choice in patients with platinum-refractory recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. In view of the major unmet need in this population and the importance of maintaining or improving quality of life for patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, these data support nivolumab as a new standard-of-care option in this setting. Funding Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Background The survival advantage of induction chemotherapy (IC) followed by locoregional treatment is controversial in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC). We previously showed feasibility and safety of cetuximab-based IC (paclitaxel/carboplatin/cetuximab—PCC, and docetaxel/cisplatin/5-fluorouracil/cetuximab—C-TPF) followed by local therapy in LAHNSCC. The primary end point of this phase II clinical trial with randomization to PCC and C-TPF followed by combined local therapy in patients with LAHNSCC stratified by human papillomavirus (HPV) status and T-stage was 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) compared with historical control. Patients and methods Eligible patients were ≥18 years with squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx, oral cavity, nasopharynx, hypopharynx, or larynx with measurable stage IV (T0–4N2b–2c/3M0) and known HPV by p16 status. Stratification was by HPV and T-stage into one of the two risk groups: (i) low-risk: HPV-positive and T0–3 or HPV-negative and T0–2; (ii) intermediate/high-risk: HPV-positive and T4 or HPV-negative and T3–4. Patient reported outcomes were carried out. Results A total of 136 patients were randomized in the study, 68 to each arm. With a median follow up of 3.2 years, the 2-year PFS in the PCC arm was 89% in the overall, 96% in the low-risk and 67% in the intermediate/high-risk groups; in the C-TPF arm 2-year PFS was 88% in the overall, 88% in the low-risk and 89% in the intermediate/high-risk groups. Conclusion The observed 2-year PFS of PCC in the low-risk group and of C-TPF in the intermediate/high-risk group showed a 20% improvement compared with the historical control derived from RTOG-0129, therefore reaching the primary end point of the trial.

8542 Background: The NEOSTAR study compared nivolumab (N) vs. nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NI) with major pathological response (MPR; ≤10% viable tumor) as primary outcome. We report updated rates of treatment failure (TF), including in patients whose tumors harbored genomic aberrations, and outcomes of additional treatments. Methods: Patients (pts) with stage I-IIIA resectable NSCLC (AJCC 7th) were randomized to either neoadjuvant N or NI followed by surgery (n = 44). TF was defined as radiographic and/or biopsy-proven recurrence from primary lung cancer and/or death (treatment or cancer-related). Additional systemic therapy at recurrence included immuno-oncology (IO)-based therapy (IO or chemo-IO), targeted therapy (TT), or chemotherapy. Disease control rate (DCR) was defined as the proportion of pts with radiographic objective responses and stable disease at first restaging. Cox proportional hazards model was used to associate baseline characteristics and time to TF. Results: A total of 44 randomized pts were evaluated, the median follow-up was 35 months (mts) as of February 4, 2021. Among the 12 TF pts (12/44, 27%), 42% (5/12) did not undergo surgery on trial, 9 (9/44, 20%) experienced recurrence and 6 (6/44, 14%) died (1 non-cancer-related, 5 cancer-related). TF was less likely in smokers vs. never smokers (hazard ratio = 0.20, 95% confidence interval = 0.06-0.65, p = 0.007). Among pts with pathological specimen resected on trial, MPR was achieved in 40% (12/30) of non-TF pts. Only 1 (1/7, 14%) TF pt achieved MPR, but died of a non-cancer related cause. TF-free survival rate at 2 years was 92% in MPR and 78% in non-MPR pts. Eight (8/9, 89%) pts had tumors with canonical oncodriver aberrations (5 EGFR mutations, 1 with STK11+ KRAS Q61H mutations, 1 ALK translocation and 1 RET fusions). Of the 9 recurrences, 44% (4/9) were treated with IO therapy, and all 7 pts with targetable aberrations were treated with TT (3 after retreatment with IO therapies). Of the 4 pts retreated with IO therapy, duration between end of neoadjuvant and retreatment were 20, 17, 23, and 19 mts. Duration from retreatment until progression (PD) were 1, 1, and 2 mts, respectively. Last pt was treated without PD for 2 mts but switched to TT due to discovery of genomic aberration. IO retreatment achieved 25% DCR (1/4). In comparison, the DCR for TT treated pts was 71% (5/7, p = 0.242). Median time to treatment was 21 mts, and median time to PD was not reached. Among 32 non-TF pts, 12 had genomic analysis and 7 aberrations were found in 6 pts (2 STK11, 2 ERBB2, 1 STK11 + 1 KRAS G12C, and 1 KRAS G12C mutation). Conclusions: A 27% TF rate was observed after neoadjuvant IO. TF was less likely to occur in smokers and MPR pts, and 42% of TF pts did not undergo curative-intent surgery on trial. Genomic aberrations were common in pts with recurrence (89%), and treatment with TT achieved 71% DCR vs. 25% DCR with IO-based retreatment. Clinical trial information: NCT: 03158129.

// Xiaochun Liu 1 , Susan Kambrick 1 , Siqing Fu 1 , Aung Naing 1 , Vivek Subbiah 1 , George R. Blumenschein 2 , Bonnie S. Glisson 2 , Merrill S. Kies 2 , Apostolia M. Tsimberidou 1 , Jennifer J. Wheler 1 , Ralph G. Zinner 1 , David S. Hong 1 , Razelle Kurzrock 3 and Sarina A. Piha-Paul 1 1 Department of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA 2 Department of Thoracic/Head & Neck Medical Oncology, University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA 3 Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of California San Diego, Moores Cancer Center, San Diego, CA, USA Correspondence to: Sarina A. Piha-Paul, email: // Keywords : solid tumors, bevacizumab, cetuximab, temsirolimus Received : August 20, 2015 Accepted : February 05, 2016 Published : February 24, 2016 Abstract BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab and temsirolimus are active agents in advanced solid tumors. Temsirolimus inhibits mTOR in the PI3 kinase/AKT/mTOR pathway as well as CYP2A, which may be a resistance mechanism for cetuximab. In addition, temsirolimus attenuates upregulation of HIF-1α levels, which may be a resistance mechanism for bevacizumab. RESULTS: The median age of patients was 60 years (range, 23-80 years). The median number of prior systemic therapies was 3 (range, 1-6). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was determined to be bevacizumab 10 mg/kg biweekly, temsirolimus 5 mg weekly and cetuximab 100/75 mg/m2 weekly. Grade 3 or 4 toxicities were seen in 52% of patients with the highest prevalence being hyperglycemia (14%) and hypophosphatemia (14%). Eighteen of the 21 patients were evaluable for response. Three patients were taken off the study before restaging for toxicities. Partial response (PR) was observed in 2/18 patients (11%) and stable disease (SD) lasting ≥ 6 months was observed in 4/18 patients (22%) (total = 6/18 (33%)). In 8 evaluable patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC) there were partial responses in 2/8 (25%) patients and SD ≥ 6 months in 1/8 (13%) patients (total = 3/8, (38%)). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed safety and responses in 21 patients with advanced solid tumors treated with bevacizumab, cetuximab, and temsirolimus. CONCLUSION: The combination of bevacizumab, cetuximab, and temsirolimus showed activity in HNSCC; however, there were numerous toxicities reported, which will require careful management for future clinical development.

e15114 Background: Associations between obesity and cancer risk, prognosis, and therapeutic outcomes have been extensively researched. However, the impact of BMI on safety in patients receiving immunotherapy has not been well described. Methods: A descriptive, retrospective analysis examined associations between BMI (kg/m2) (underweight/normal, BMI < 25; overweight, 25 ≤ BMI < 30; obese, BMI ≥ 30) and incidence of any-grade and grade 3/4 immune-mediated adverse events (imAEs) in patients receiving ≥ 1 dose of nivolumab 3 mg/kg as monotherapy (NIVO3; n = 2746). Data were pooled from CheckMate clinical trials across 8 tumor types. Data from nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab cohorts (n = 1026) and safety analyses by specific imAEs and tumor types will be presented. Results: Select NIVO3 monotherapy cohort patient demographics were: 68.5% male, median age of 61 years, median 10 doses received, and median BMI of 25.3 kg/m2. Results showed a trend towards higher incidence of any-grade, but not grade 3/4, imAEs in obese vs overweight and obese vs underweight/normal BMI patients (Table). BMI associations with imAE incidence were consistent with the overall trend across pre-defined subsets, including smoking status, age, and ECOG performance status. Both male and female patients had an increased incidence of any-grade imAEs with obesity; however, obese female patients had a higher incidence of grade 3/4 imAEs vs underweight/normal BMI (Table). Conclusions: This was a novel analysis of BMI and safety in 2746 patients across 8 tumor types in CheckMate clinical trials who were treated with nivolumab monotherapy. While obese patients showed a trend towards higher incidence of any-grade imAEs than those with overweight and underweight/normal BMI, incidence of grade 3/4 imAEs was consistent across BMI categories. Clinical trial information: CheckMate 017,026,057,025,039,205,040,066,067,141,275,142,016,214 (NCT numbers do not fit in field) . [Table: see text]

Purpose The receptor tyrosine kinase rearranged during transfection (RET) can be oncogenically activated by gene fusions or point mutations. Multikinase inhibitors such as cabozantinib, lenvatinib and vandetanib have demonstrated activity in RET-dependent malignancies, and selective RET inhibitors (Selpercatinib and Pralsetinib) are in clinical trials. However, the responsiveness of RET-dependent malignancies to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is unknown. We compared the time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) for ICI versus non-ICI therapy in patients with malignancies harbouring activating RET mutations or fusions (RET+). Methods A retrospective review of all RET+ patients who were referred to the phase I clinical trials programme at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center was conducted. TTD was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Multivariate analysis using the Cox proportional hazard model was performed to identify independent risk factors of treatment discontinuation. Results Of 70 patients who received systemic therapy for RET+ malignancies, 20 (28.6%) received ICI and 50 (71.4%) received non-ICI therapy. Non-ICI therapy was associated with decreased risk for treatment discontinuation compared with ICI in the overall population (HR=0.31; 95% CI 0.16–0.62; p=0.000834) and in patients with RET point mutations (HR=0.13; 95% CI 0.04–0.45; p=0.00134). In patients with RET fusions, non-ICI therapy was associated with a non-statistically significant decreased risk of treatment discontinuation (HR=0.59; 95% CI 0.25–1.4; p=0.24). ICI therapy and a diagnosis other than medullary thyroid cancer (MTC) were independent risk factors for treatment discontinuation. Conclusion Our study supports the prioritisation of non-ICI over ICI therapy in patients with RET+ tumours.

Purpose: Evaluate safety and determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of ensartinib (X-396), a potent anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), and evaluate preliminary pharmacokinetics and antitumor activity in a first-in-human, phase I/II clinical trial primarily in patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods: In dose escalation, ensartinib was administered at doses of 25 to 250 mg once daily in patients with advanced solid tumors; in dose expansion, patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC were administered 225 mg once daily. Patients who had received prior ALK TKI(s) and patients with brain metastases were eligible. Results: Thirty-seven patients enrolled in dose escalation, and 60 enrolled in dose expansion. The most common treatment-related toxicities were rash (56%), nausea (36%), pruritus (28%), vomiting (26%), and fatigue (22%); 23% of patients experienced a treatment-related grade 3 to 4 toxicity (primarily rash and pruritus). The maximum tolerated dose was not reached, but the RP2D was chosen as 225 mg based on the frequency of rash observed at 250 mg without improvement in activity. Among the ALK-positive efficacy evaluable patients treated at ≥200 mg, the response rate (RR) was 60%, and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.2 months. RR in ALK TKI-naïve patients was 80%, and median PFS was 26.2 months. In patients with prior crizotinib only, the RR was 69% and median PFS was 9.0 months. Responses were also observed in the central nervous system, with an intracranial RR of 64%. Conclusions: Ensartinib was active and generally well tolerated in patients with ALK-positive NSCLC. Clin Cancer Res; 24(12); 2771–9. ©2018 AACR.

Introduction Crizotinib, an anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor, is a first-line treatment for ALK translocation–positive advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, patients eventually progress. Immunotherapies, including the programmed death-1 inhibitor nivolumab, have resulted in durable responses and long-term overall survival in patients with NSCLC. We hypothesized that combining targeted therapy with immunotherapy could result in more patients with responses and/or more durable responses. Herein we report data from a study assessing nivolumab plus crizotinib in patients with previously untreated advanced ALK translocation–positive NSCLC. Methods Group E in CheckMate 370 was a single-arm cohort designed to evaluate the safety of first-line nivolumab (240 mg every 2 weeks) plus crizotinib (250 mg twice daily) in patients with ALK translocation–positive NSCLC. The primary endpoint of safety would be met if ≤20% of patients discontinued treatment due to treatment-related adverse events by week 17. Objective response rate was a secondary endpoint. A planned safety review occurred in November 2016; the data cutoff was May 26, 2017. Results Of the first 13 patients treated with nivolumab plus crizotinib, 5 (38%) developed severe hepatic toxicities leading to the discontinuation of the combination. Of these, two patients died and the presence of severe hepatic toxicities may have contributed to death. Enrollment was closed and combination treatment discontinued due to observed grade ≥3 hepatic toxicities. Five patients (38%) had a partial response. Conclusions These findings do not support further evaluation of nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks plus crizotinib 250 mg twice daily.

Background Enhanced phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/Akt/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway is one of the key adaptive changes accounting for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor-resistant growth in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). We designed a phase II clinical trial of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), erlotinib, in association with the mTOR inhibitor, everolimus, based on the hypothesis that the downstream effects of Akt through inhibition of mTOR may enhance the effectiveness of the EGFR-TKI in patients with recurrent/metastatic HNSCC. Patients and methods Patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed platinum-resistant HNSCC received everolimus 5 mg and erlotinib 150 mg daily orally until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, investigator or patient decision. Cytokines and angiogenic factors profile, limited mutation analysis and p16 immunohistochemistry status were included in the biomarker analysis. Results Of the 35 assessable patients, 3 (8%) achieved partial response at 4 weeks, 1 confirmed at 12 weeks; overall response rate at 12 weeks was 2.8%. Twenty-seven (77%) patients achieved disease stabilization at 4 weeks, 11 (31%) confirmed at 12 weeks. Twelve-week progression-free survival (PFS) was 49%, median PFS 11.9 weeks and median overall survival (OS) 10.25 months. High neutrophil gelatinase lipocalin (P = 0.01) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) (P = 0.04) plasma levels were significantly associated with worse OS. Conclusions The combination of erlotinib and everolimus did not show significant benefit in unselected patients with platinum-resistant metastatic HNSCC despite a manageable toxicity profile. Markers of tumor invasion and hypoxia identify a group of patients with particularly poor prognosis. Clinical trial number NCT00942734.

Background The purpose of this study was to determine the antitumor activity of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor gefitinib in patients with recurrent/metastatic salivary gland cancer. Methods We conducted a phase II study in adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) and non-ACC. Gefitinib was administered 250 mg orally daily. The primary endpoint was tumor response. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and disease control rates. EGFR and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression were evaluated and correlated with outcomes. Results Thirty-seven patients were enrolled in this study, and 36 were evaluable (18 with ACC and 18 with non-ACC). No responses were observed. Median PFS was 4.3 months and 2.1 months, and median OS was 25.9 months and 16 months for patients with ACC and non-ACC, respectively. The disease control rate at 8 weeks was higher in patients with ACC. No unexpected toxicities occurred. EGFR and HER2 overexpression did not correlate with outcomes. Conclusion We did not observe significant clinical activity of gefitinib in advanced salivary gland cancer. NCT00509002. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 37: 644–649, 2015

We aimed to compare overall survival after standard-dose versus high-dose conformal radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy and the addition of cetuximab to concurrent chemoradiation for patients with inoperable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer.In this open-label randomised, two-by-two factorial phase 3 study in 185 institutions in the USA and Canada, we enrolled patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, a Zubrod performance status of 0-1, adequate pulmonary function, and no evidence of supraclavicular or contralateral hilar adenopathy. We randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) patients to receive either 60 Gy (standard dose), 74 Gy (high dose), 60 Gy plus cetuximab, or 74 Gy plus cetuximab. All patients also received concurrent chemotherapy with 45 mg/m(2) paclitaxel and carboplatin once a week (AUC 2); 2 weeks after chemoradiation, two cycles of consolidation chemotherapy separated by 3 weeks were given consisting of paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2)) and carboplatin (AUC 6). Randomisation was done with permuted block randomisation methods, stratified by radiotherapy technique, Zubrod performance status, use of PET during staging, and histology; treatment group assignments were not masked. Radiation dose was prescribed to the planning target volume and was given in 2 Gy daily fractions with either intensity-modulated radiation therapy or three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy. The use of four-dimensional CT and image-guided radiation therapy were encouraged but not necessary. For patients assigned to receive cetuximab, 400 mg/m(2) cetuximab was given on day 1 followed by weekly doses of 250 mg/m(2), and was continued through consolidation therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival. All analyses were done by modified intention-to-treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00533949.Between Nov 27, 2007, and Nov 22, 2011, 166 patients were randomly assigned to receive standard-dose chemoradiotherapy, 121 to high-dose chemoradiotherapy, 147 to standard-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab, and 110 to high-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab. Median follow-up for the radiotherapy comparison was 22.9 months (IQR 27.5-33.3). Median overall survival was 28.7 months (95% CI 24.1-36.9) for patients who received standard-dose radiotherapy and 20.3 months (17.7-25.0) for those who received high-dose radiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 1.38, 95% CI 1.09-1.76; p=0.004). Median follow-up for the cetuximab comparison was 21.3 months (IQR 23.5-29.8). Median overall survival in patients who received cetuximab was 25.0 months (95% CI 20.2-30.5) compared with 24.0 months (19.8-28.6) in those who did not (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.84-1.35; p=0.29). Both the radiation-dose and cetuximab results crossed protocol-specified futility boundaries. We recorded no statistical differences in grade 3 or worse toxic effects between radiotherapy groups. By contrast, the use of cetuximab was associated with a higher rate of grade 3 or worse toxic effects (205 [86%] of 237 vs 160 [70%] of 228 patients; p0.0001). There were more treatment-related deaths in the high-dose chemoradiotherapy and cetuximab groups (radiotherapy comparison: eight vs three patients; cetuximab comparison: ten vs five patients). There were no differences in severe pulmonary events between treatment groups. Severe oesophagitis was more common in patients who received high-dose chemoradiotherapy than in those who received standard-dose treatment (43 [21%] of 207 patients vs 16 [7%] of 217 patients; p0.0001).74 Gy radiation given in 2 Gy fractions with concurrent chemotherapy was not better than 60 Gy plus concurrent chemotherapy for patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer, and might be potentially harmful. Addition of cetuximab to concurrent chemoradiation and consolidation treatment provided no benefit in overall survival for these patients.National Cancer Institute and Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Background: The RET receptor tyrosine kinase can be oncogenically activated by gene fusions or point mutations. Multikinase inhibitors such as cabozantinib, lenvatinib, and vandetanib have demonstrated activity in RET dependent (RET+) malignancies. Recent development of selective RET inhibitors is poised to alter their treatment paradigm. However, the responsiveness of RET+ malignancies to immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) is unknown. We compared the time to progression (TTP) on ICI with non-ICI therapy in patients with malignancies harboring activating RET mutations/fusions. Methods: A retrospective chart review of all RET+ patients who were referred to the phase 1 clinical trials program at MD Anderson Cancer Center between September 2014 and October 2018 was conducted. Patients who had not discontinued treatment or had discontinued treatment for reasons besides disease progression were censored. Time to progression was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: Out of 72 patients who had received systemic therapy for RET+ malignancies, 39 (54.2%) harbored RET mutations (RETm) and 33 (45.8%) harbored RET fusions (RETf). Nineteen patients (26.4%) received ICI and 53 (73.6%) received non-ICI therapy. Thirty four patients (47.2%) had medullary thyroid cancer, 29 (40.3%) had NSCLC and 9 (12.5%) had other types of cancer. PD-L1 expression was only available for 7 patients of which 5 (71.4%) were positive (≥ 1%). Patients had received a median of 1 (1-7) prior lines of therapy. Overall median TTP (mTTP) was 10.5 months (95% CI 6.7-30.1). Hazard ratio for ICI vs. non-ICI therapy was 1.73 (0.70, 4.26) p=0.25 in patients with RETf and 8.0 (2.27, 28.2) p=0.0025 in patients with RETm. Conclusions: In patients with RET+ malignancies, mTTP was shorter with ICI compared to non-ICI therapy. The effect of type of therapy was dependent on the type of RET pathway aberration, with a statistically significant higher risk of progression in RETm malignancies treated with ICI compared to non-ICI therapy. Time to ProgressionRETTherapyNmTTP (months)Freedom from Progression at 6 months (%)Freedom from Progression at 12 months (%)FusionNon-ICI218.36335FusionICI123.03624MutationNon-ICI3231.98273MutationICI75.6430 Citation Format: Aparna Hegde, Le Huang, Shuang Liu, Kenneth Hess, Maria Cabanillas, Mimi Hu, Naifa Busaidy, Steven Sherman, George Simon, George Blumenschein, Vassiliki A. Papadimitrakopoulou, David S. Hong, Funda Meric-Bernstam, John Heymach, Vivek Subbiah. Responsiveness to immune checkpoint inhibitors in RET dependent cancers [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 4997.

8504 Background: Neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) induce major pathologic response (MPR) rates of 20 to 45% in resected NSCLCs. We report the results of NEOSTAR - a phase 2 trial of neoadjuvant N or NI for NSCLCs. Methods: Pts with stage I-IIIA (single N2) resectable NSCLC (AJCC 7th), PS 0-1, were randomized to N (3 mg/kg IV, D1, 15, 29) or N plus I (1 mg/kg IV, D1) followed by surgery (n = 44). Primary endpoint: MPR (≤10% viable tumor), hypothesized to be higher than MPR to induction chemotherapy historical controls. Tumor immune infiltrates and pre- & post-ICI tumor PD-L1 % were assessed by flow cytometry & IHC. Wilcoxon ranked sum test & Fisher’s exact test were used for comparisons. Results: 44 pts were randomized, 23 N, 21 NI: mean age 66, 64% males, 18% never smokers, 59% adenocarcinomas, stages: IA 8 (18%), IB 15 (34%), IIA 7 (16%) IIB 5 (11%); IIIA 9 (20%). Only 3 pts received < 3 doses due to TRAEs (7%). 34 pts had surgery post ICIs (7 not resected [7/41], 17%, [2 N, 5 NI], 3 pending). There were 10 MPRs in 41 pts overall (24%, 4 N, 6 NI), of which 6 were path CRs (15%, 2 N [9%], 4 NI [21%]). Among 34 resected pts, MPR rate was 29% (N 20%, NI 43%). Median % of viable tumor was lower post NI vs N (20% vs 65%, p = .097). ORR (RECIST v1.1) was 22% (8 PRs [5 N, 3 NI], 1 CR [NI]); 15% of pts had PD (3 N, 3 NI). The proportion of CR+PR in MPR+ was higher than in MPR- (6 [60%] vs 2 [7%], p < .001). Surgical complications included 2 bronchopleural fistulas (BPFs) in N & 8 air leaks (5 N, 3 NI). G3-G5 TRAEs included a death due to BPF post steroid-treated pneumonitis (G5, N); G3 pneumonia, hypoxia, hypermagnesemia (1 each, all N), G3 diarrhea (1 NI). CD3+ & CD103+ tissue resident memory CD8+ TILs were higher in NI- vs N-treated tumors (CD3+ 81.2% vs 54.4%, p = .028; CD8+ 56.2% vs 38.3%, p = .069). Median pre-treatment tumor PD-L1 was higher in responders (MPR+, CR+PR) vs non-responders (80% vs 1%, p = .024), and the % of viable tumor was lower in tumors with PD-L1 > 1% vs PD-L1 ≤1% (median 20% vs 80%, p = .046). Conclusions: Overall a 24% MPR rate to neoadjuvant ICIs was observed. NI induced a higher % of non-viable tumor and of tissue resident memory TILs vs N. Antitumor activity was associated with higher pre-treatment PD-L1 levels. Clinical trial information: NCT03158129.

Purpose: To report the clinical efficacy of sorafenib and to evaluate biomarkers associated with sorafenib clinical benefit in the BATTLE (Biomarker-Integrated Approaches of Targeted Therapy for Lung Cancer Elimination) program. Patients and Methods: Patients with previously treated non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) received sorafenib until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Eight-week disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Prespecified biomarkers included K-RAS, EGFR, and B-RAF mutations, and EGFR gene copy number. Gene expression profiles from NSCLC cell lines and patient tumor biopsies with wild-type EGFR were used to develop a sorafenib sensitivity signature (SSS). Results: A total of 105 patients were eligible and randomized to receive sorafenib. Among 98 patients evaluable for eight-week DCR, the observed DCR was 58.2%. The median PFS and OS were 2.83 [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.04–3.58] and 8.48 months (95% CI, 5.78–10.97), respectively. Eight-week DCR was higher in patients with wild-type EGFR than patients with EGFR mutation (P = 0.012), and in patients with EGFR gene copy number gain (FISH-positive) versus patients FISH-negative (P = 0.048). In wild-type EGFR tumors, the SSS was associated with improved PFS (median PFS 3.61 months in high SSS vs. 1.84 months in low SSS; P = 0.026) but not with eight-week DCR. Increased expression of fibroblast growth factor-1, NF-κB, and hypoxia pathways were identified potential drivers of sorafenib resistance. Conclusion: Sorafenib demonstrates clinical activity in NSCLC, especially with wild-type EGFR. SSS was associated with improved PFS. These data identify subgroups that may derive clinical benefit from sorafenib and merit investigation in future trials. Clin Cancer Res; 19(24); 6967–75. ©2013 AACR.

Purpose Increased hepatocyte growth factor/MET signaling is associated with poor prognosis and acquired resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) –targeted drugs in patients with non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated whether dual inhibition of MET/EGFR results in clinical benefit in patients with NSCLC. Patients and Methods Patients with recurrent NSCLC were randomly assigned at a ratio of one to one to receive onartuzumab plus erlotinib or placebo plus erlotinib; crossover was allowed at progression. Tumor tissue was required to assess MET status by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Coprimary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and MET-positive (MET IHC diagnostic positive) populations; additional end points included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, and safety. Results There was no improvement in PFS or OS in the ITT population (n = 137; PFS hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; P = .69; OS HR, 0.80; P = .34). MET-positive patients (n = 66) treated with erlotinib plus onartuzumab showed improvement in both PFS (HR, .53; P = .04) and OS (HR, .37; P = .002). Conversely, clinical outcomes were worse in MET-negative patients treated with onartuzumab plus erlotinib (n = 62; PFS HR, 1.82; P = .05; OS HR, 1.78; P = .16). MET-positive control patients had worse outcomes versus MET-negative control patients (n = 62; PFS HR, 1.71; P = .06; OS HR, 2.61; P = .004). Incidence of peripheral edema was increased in onartuzumab-treated patients. Conclusion Onartuzumab plus erlotinib was associated with improved PFS and OS in the MET-positive population. These results combined with the worse outcomes observed in MET-negative patients treated with onartuzumab highlight the importance of diagnostic testing in drug development.

Combined inhibition of vascular, platelet-derived, and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) pathways may overcome refractoriness to single agents in platinum-pretreated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).This randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase II trial evaluated sunitinib 37.5 mg/day plus erlotinib 150 mg/day versus placebo plus erlotinib continuously in 4-week cycles. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed stage IIIB or IV NSCLC previously treated with one or two chemotherapy regimens, including one platinum-based regimen. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by an independent central review.One hundred and thirty-two patients were randomly assigned, and the median duration of follow-up was 17.7 months. The median PFS was 2.8 versus 2.0 months for the combination versus erlotinib alone (HR 0.898, P = 0.321). The median overall survival (OS) was 8.2 versus 7.6 months (HR 1.066, P = 0.617). Objective response rates (ORRs) were 4.6% and 3.0%, respectively. Sunitinib plus erlotinib was fairly well tolerated although most treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were more frequent than with erlotinib alone: diarrhea (55% versus 33%), rash (41% versus 30%), fatigue (31% versus 25%), decreased appetite (30% versus 13%), nausea (28% versus 14%), and thrombocytopenia (13% versus 0%).The addition of sunitinib to erlotinib did not significantly improve PFS in patients with advanced, platinum-pretreated NSCLC.

BackgroundThe Biomarker-integrated Approaches of Targeted Therapy for Lung Cancer Elimination trial1 prospectively obtained serum and tumor core biopsies and randomized 255 chemorefractory non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients into four phase II trials: erlotinib, erlotinib-bexarotene, vandetanib, or sorafenib. Herein, we report the clinical and biomarker results of the phase II vandetanib trial.ResultsFifty-four patients received vandetanib. The 8-week disease control rate was 33%, median progression-free survival (PFS) 1.81 months, and median overall survival (OS) 6.5 months. No demographic subgroups had PFS or OS benefit. Eight patients with EGFR mutations had a trend for higher 8-week disease control rate (63% versus 31%; p = 0.12) but worse OS (5.9 months versus 9 months; p = 0.8). Patients with EGFR gene amplification (n = 6) had a worse OS (3.9 months versus 9.5 months; p = 0.04). KRAS mutation patients (3.9 months versus 9.5 months; p = 0.23) also had a worse OS. For the serum biomarker analysis, patients with below the median serum expression of interleukin 9c (p = 0.019) and eotaxin (p = 0.007) had a shorter PFS. A trend toward a shorter PFS was also seen in patients with higher than the median neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (p = 0.079) and lower than the median TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (p = 0.087).ConclusionOur trial results are largely consistent with the literature in unselected pretreated NSCLC patients. Although vandetanib improved median PFS in EGFR mutation patients with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor–resistance compared with EGFR wild-type, there was no OS advantage. Although vandetanib is no longer in development in NSCLC, identification of a molecular phenotype that responds to dual epidermal growth factor receptor and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibition would contribute to the field.

Background We evaluated combined targeting with cetuximab, an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody, and bevacizumab, an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) monoclonal antibody, in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). Patients and methods The combination was studied in human endothelial cells and head and neck and lung cancer xenograft model systems. Patients with recurrent or metastatic SCCHN were treated with weekly cetuximab and bevacizumab, 15 mg/kg on day 1 given intravenously every 21 days, until disease progression. Analysis of tumor biomarkers and related serum cytokines was performed. Results Cetuximab plus bevacizumab enhanced growth inhibition both in vitro and in vivo, and resulted in potent reduction in tumor vascularization. In the clinical trial, 46 eligible patients were enrolled. The objective response rate was 16% and the disease control rate 73%. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 2.8 and 7.5 months, respectively. Grade 3–4 adverse events were expected and occurred in less than 10% of patients. transforming growth factor alpha, placenta-derived growth factor, EGFR, VEGFR2 increased and VEGF decreased after treatment but did not correlate with treatment efficacy. Conclusions Cetuximab and bevacizumab are supported by preclinical observations and are well tolerated and active in previously treated patients with SCCHN.

© 2016 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Objectives This two-part study evaluated trametinib, a MEK1/2 inhibitor, in combination with anticancer agents. Inhibition of MEK, a downstream effector of KRAS, demonstrated preclinical synergy with chemotherapy in KRAS-mutant NSCLC cell lines. Part 1 of this study identified recommended phase 2 doses of trametinib combinations. Part 2, reported herein, evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of trametinib combinations in patients with NSCLC with and without KRAS mutations. Methods Phase 1b evaluated trametinib plus docetaxel with growth factor support (trametinib, 2.0 mg once daily, and docetaxel, 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) or pemetrexed (trametinib, 1.5 mg once daily, and pemetrexed, 500 mg/m2 every 3 weeks). Eligibility criteria for the expansion cohorts included metastatic NSCLC with measurable disease, known KRAS mutation status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or lower, and no more than two prior regimens. Results The primary end point of overall response rate (ORR) was met for both combinations. A confirmed partial response (PR) was observed in 10 of the 47 patients with NSCLC who received trametinib plus docetaxel (21%). The ORR was 18% (four PRs in 22 patients) in those with KRAS wild-type NSCLC versus 24% (six PRs in 25 patients) in those with KRAS-mutant NSCLC. Of the 42 patients with NSCLC treated with trametinib plus pemetrexed, six (14%) had a PR; the ORR was 17% (four of 23) in patients with KRAS-mutated NSCLC versus 11% (two of 19) in KRAS wild-type NSCLC. Adverse events—most commonly diarrhea, nausea, and fatigue—were manageable. Conclusions Trametinib-plus-chemotherapy combinations were tolerable. Clinical activity exceeding the ORRs previously reported with docetaxel or pemetrexed alone in KRAS-mutated NSCLC and meeting prespecified criteria was observed.

Patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck after platinum chemotherapy have a very poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. Nivolumab, an anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibody, was assessed as treatment for this condition.In this randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial, we assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, 361 patients with recurrent squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck whose disease had progressed within 6 months after platinum-based chemotherapy to receive nivolumab (at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight) every 2 weeks or standard, single-agent systemic therapy (methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab). The primary end point was overall survival. Additional end points included progression-free survival, rate of objective response, safety, and patient-reported quality of life.The median overall survival was 7.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.5 to 9.1) in the nivolumab group versus 5.1 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 6.0) in the group that received standard therapy. Overall survival was significantly longer with nivolumab than with standard therapy (hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 97.73% CI, 0.51 to 0.96; P=0.01), and the estimates of the 1-year survival rate were approximately 19 percentage points higher with nivolumab than with standard therapy (36.0% vs. 16.6%). The median progression-free survival was 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 2.1) with nivolumab versus 2.3 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 3.1) with standard therapy (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.13; P=0.32). The rate of progression-free survival at 6 months was 19.7% with nivolumab versus 9.9% with standard therapy. The response rate was 13.3% in the nivolumab group versus 5.8% in the standard-therapy group. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 13.1% of the patients in the nivolumab group versus 35.1% of those in the standard-therapy group. Physical, role, and social functioning was stable in the nivolumab group, whereas it was meaningfully worse in the standard-therapy group.Among patients with platinum-refractory, recurrent squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck, treatment with nivolumab resulted in longer overall survival than treatment with standard, single-agent therapy. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 141 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02105636 .).

Background: This randomized, double-blind, multicenter study evaluated sunitinib plus erlotinib versus placebo plus erlotinib. Subjects with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer had received prior treatment with a platinum-based regimen. Here, we report safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of the combination of sunitinib and erlotinib.Methods: Lead-in subjects in this phase II study received sunitinib 37.5 mg/d and erlotinib 150 mg/d. Safety, including dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs, cohort 1 only), pharmacokinetic profiles, and antitumor activity were investigated (cohorts 1 and 2).Results: Thirty patients were evaluated. The combination of sunitinib and erlotinib was tolerable. Diarrhea (76.9%), fatigue (61.5%), and decreased appetite (53.8%) were the most frequent adverse events in cohort 1; and diarrhea (52.9%) and rash (41.2%) were the most frequent adverse events in cohort 2. DLTs were observed (fatigue, n = 2 and paronychial inflammation, n = 1) in three of 13 patients evaluated for DLTs. Geometric mean ratios for the maximum plasma concentration (C-max) and area under plasma concentration-time profile from time 0 to 24 hours of erlotinib with and without sunitinib were 1.05 and 1.03, respectively. Corresponding values for sunitinib with and without erlotinib were 0.62 and 0.62 for sunitinib, 2.13 and 2.07 for SU12662; and 0.81 and 0.79 for total drug. Three patients experienced partial response as per response evaluation criteria in solid tumor.Conclusion: A dosage of sunitinib 37.5 mg/d concurrently with erlotinib 150 mg/d was tolerable and established the recommended combinatorial dose in subjects with platinum-refractory non-small-cell lung cancer. Coadministration of sunitinib with erlotinib does not affect the pharmacokinetics of erlotinib, but may result in decreased exposure to sunitinib.

We investigated the relationship between plasma protein biomarker concentrations and clinical outcomes in 52 patients with relapsed/refractory advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with 400 mg bid sorafenib in a phase II trial. Blood samples were collected at baseline, on day 15 of cycle 1 (C1D15), and on day 1 of cycle 3 (C3D1), and plasma concentrations of total VEGF, VEGF-165, soluble (s) VEGFR-2, PDGF-BB, sPDGFR-β, sEGFR, sHER-2, uPA, PAI-1, uPAR, TIMP-1, and circulating Ras p21 were assayed by ELISA. Elevated baseline VEGF, VEGF-165, PDGF-BB, Ras p21, and TIMP- 1 concentrations were associated with poorer patient outcomes (shorter overall survival (OS) and/or progression-free survival (PFS)). During treatment, the mean concentrations of sVEGFR-2, PDGF-BB, sPDGFR-β, TIMP-1, uPAR, and PAI-1 decreased, while the mean sEGFR concentration increased. Increases in VEGF, VEGF-165, PDGF-BB, and TIMP-1 during treatment were associated with better outcomes (longer OS and/or PFS), whereas increases in plasma Ras p21 during treatment were associated with shorter PFS. The associations between baseline concentrations and/or pharmacodynamic changes in plasma proteins and clinical outcomes in NSCLC patients treated with sorafenib suggest that these biomarkers may have a prognostic role and/or predict the efficacy of sorafenib in patients with NSCLC.

Purpose: Two phase II clinical trials in the aerodigestive tumors were undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of imatinib mesylate-docetaxel. We hypothesized that imatinib mesylate would inhibit platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) on pericytes and increase docetaxel uptake into tumor cells for an additive antitumor effect. Baseline tumor specimens, serum, and perfusion computed tomography (CT) scans were obtained for supportive evaluation. Materials and Methods: Eligible patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with 1 prior therapy and chemonaive patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) were enrolled in separate trials, which administered both docetaxel (60 mg/m 2 every 3 weeks) and oral imatinib mesylate (400 mg daily). Both trials used interim analyses for efficacy and safety. Results: Twenty-two patients with NSCLC and seven patients with HNSCC were enrolled. Both trials were closed early due to lack of efficacy, significant toxicity, and a potential antagonistic effect. In the NSCLC study, the response rate was 4.5%, median progression-free survival (PFS) 7.9 weeks, and overall survival 35.6 weeks. The HNSCC trial yielded a response rate 0%, PFS 8.8 weeks, and overall survival 34.7 weeks. Baseline NSCLC tumor immunohistochemical biomarker analyses indicated that lower expression of stromal PDGFRβ correlated with a better PFS, whereas stromal PDGFRα and tumor cell PDGFRβ were associated with a worse clinical outcome when treated with imatinib mesylate-docetaxel. Conclusion: We do not recommend further investigation of this regimen in the aerodigestive tumors. Future investigations in PDGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors should be used with caution in combination with taxanes and validation of the potential predictive or prognostic biomarkers stromal PDGFRα/β, and tumor cell PDGFRβ are needed.

Background We conducted a phase II clinical trial of induction chemotherapy followed by surgery ± radiotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the oral tongue (SCCOT) in young adults. Methods From September 2001 to October 2004, 23 patients aged 18 to 49 years with clinical T2–3 N0–2 M0 SCCOT and no prior radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or neck dissection underwent induction chemotherapy (paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and carboplatin) followed by glossectomy and neck dissection ± radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Results On final surgical pathology, 9 patients (39%) had a complete/major (2 complete) histologic response at the primary tumor site; 8 patients (35%) had no response or progression. Similarly, 9 patients (39%) had a complete response in the neck or remained node negative; 6 patients (26%) had an increase in nodal category. No treatment-associated deaths occurred, and toxicity was modest. At a median follow-up from the end of treatment of 52 months (minimum, 23 months), 10 patients (43%) developed recurrence, and all 10 died of cancer. Crude recurrence/cancer death rates were associated with ≤ a partial response at the tongue (p = .029), poor histologic differentiation (p = .012), and multiple adverse features on final surgical pathology (p = .040). Conclusion Response rates and overall survival with this induction chemotherapy regimen were limited, but complete/major response at the tongue was associated with excellent prognosis. Additionally, improved patient selection and predictive tumor biomarkers will be needed for induction chemotherapy to be routinely incorporated into the treatment of oral tongue cancer in young adults. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck, 2012

Standard therapy for advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has primarily consisted of traditional cytotoxic chemotherapy, although use of targeted therapies has been approved in specific settings. Antiangiogenic agents represent a promising therapeutic strategy for treatment of advanced NSCLC. Bevacizumab is currently approved when given in combination with first-line platinum-based therapy in selected patients with nonsquamous NSCLC. Bevacizumab may also provide benefit in other clinical settings, as a part of a combination or maintenance strategy. Other antiangiogenic agents under development, including multi-targeted kinase inhibitors (MTKIs) and antibody-based agents, have exhibited mixed results in the NSCLC population. Published efficacy and safety data from clinical trials for antiangiogenic agents are reviewed, with an emphasis on novel agents and novel settings for established agents. Identification of biomarkers associated with improved efficacy may help select patients likely to receive the most benefit from these agents and may improve outcomes through development of personalized therapeutic strategies.

Background Sorafenib, a small-molecule inhibitor of multiple kinases involved in tumor growth and progression, is approved for the treatment of advanced renal-cell carcinoma and advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Encouraging activity and good tolerability of daily oral sorafenib, either as a single agent or in combination with gefitinib, have been demonstrated in phase I-II trials in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Currently, minimal data are available describing the long-term safety and tolerability of sorafenib in patients with NSCLC. Materials and Methods We describe a series of 12 patients with advanced NSCLC (derived from 1 phase I and 2 phase II trials) who achieved long-term (ie, > 12 months) disease control and continued to receive sorafenib alone or in combination with gefitinib beyond the end of the study in which they were enrolled. Results The safety profile of sorafenib administered on a long-term basis did not differ significantly from that seen previously in the shorter term. The majority of adverse events (AEs) were Grade 1-2 in severity. Five of the 12 patients experienced no ≥ Grade 3 AEs. There was no evidence of increased frequency or severity of AEs over time, or of late AEs, and no patient in this series discontinued study treatment because of AEs. Conclusion In patients with advanced NSCLC who achieve a prolonged response or stable disease with sorafenib given as a single agent or as part of a combination regimen, sorafenib treatment could be continued until disease progression without major long-term safety or tolerability problems.

Purpose Non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) commonly expresses the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), which is associated with poor clinical outcome. Cetuximab is a chimerized monoclonal antibody that targets the EGFR and, in preclinical models, it demonstrates radiosensitization properties. We report a phase II trial testing the combination of cetuximab with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in unresectable stage III NSCLC. Patients and Methods Eligibility criteria included unresectable stage III NSCLC, Zubrod performance status ≤ 1, weight loss ≤ 5%, forced expiratory volume in 1 second ≥ 1.2 L, and adequate organ function. Patients received an initial dose of cetuximab (400 mg/m2) on day 1 of week 1 and then weekly doses of cetuximab (250 mg/m2) until completion of therapy (weeks 2 through 17). During week 2, patients started CRT (63 Gy in 35 fractions) with weekly carboplatin at area under the [concentration-time] curve (AUC) 2 and six doses of paclitaxel at 45 mg/m2 followed by carboplatin (AUC 6) and two cycles of paclitaxel (200 mg/m2) during weeks 12 through 17. Primary end points included safety and compliance of concurrent cetuximab and CRT. Results In all, 93 patients were enrolled and 87 were evaluable. Median follow-up was 21.6 months. Response rate was 62% (n = 54), median survival was 22.7 months, and 24-month overall survival was 49.3%. Adverse events related to treatment included 20% grade 4 hematologic toxicities, 8% grade 3 esophagitis, and 7% grade 3 to 4 pneumonitis. There were five grade 5 events. Conclusion The combination of cetuximab with CRT is feasible and shows promising activity. The median and overall survival achieved with this regimen were longer than any previously reported by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group.

To evaluate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and antitumor activity of sunitinib combined with paclitaxel and carboplatin.Successive cohorts of patients with advanced solid tumors received oral sunitinib (25, 37.5, or 50 mg) for 2 consecutive weeks of a 3-week cycle (Schedule 2/1) or as a continuous daily dose for 3-week cycles (CDD schedule) in combination with paclitaxel (175-200 mg/m(2)) plus carboplatin (AUC 6 mg min/ml) on day one of each of 4 cycles. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated to determine the MTD. Efficacy parameters were analyzed in patients with measurable disease.Forty-three patients were enrolled (n = 25 Schedule 2/1; n = 18 CDD schedule). Across all doses, 6 DLTs were observed [grade 4 papilledema, grade 5 GI hemorrhage, grade 3 neutropenic infection, and grade 4 thrombocytopenia (n = 3)]. The MTD for Schedule 2/1 was sunitinib 25 mg plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) and carboplatin AUC 6 mg min/ml. The MTD was not determined for the CDD schedule. Treatment-related AEs included neutropenia (77%), thrombocytopenia (56%), and fatigue (47%). Of 38 evaluable patients, 4 (11%) had partial responses and 12 (32%) had stable disease. PK data indicated an increase in maximum and total plasma exposures to sunitinib and its active metabolite when given with paclitaxel and carboplatin compared with sunitinib monotherapy.Myelosuppression resulting in prolonged dose delays and frequent interruptions was observed, suggesting that this treatment combination is not feasible in the general cancer population.

Aim: Nivo is the only immunotherapy to significantly improve overall survival (OS) in patients (pts) with R/M SCCHN who have progressed on or after platinum-based therapy. Here we report long-term data from the randomized, open-label, phase 3 CheckMate 141 study (NCT02105636). Patients: Pts with R/M SCCHN who progressed on or after platinum-based therapy were randomized 2:1 to nivo 3 mg/kg q2wk (n = 240) or IC (methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab; n = 121). Endpoints: OS (primary), progression-free survival (PFS), safety. Minimum follow-up: 24.2 mo (data cut: Sep 2017). Results: Nivo improved OS significantly vs IC in the overall population (median [95% CI]: 7.7 [5.7, 8.8] mo vs 5.1 [4.0, 6.2] mo; HR [95% CI]: 0.68 [0.54, 0.86]). 2-yr OS rate (95% CI) was 16.9% (12.4, 22.0) with nivo vs 6.0% (2.7, 11.3) with IC. 8.3% of pts in the IC arm received subsequent immunotherapy. Outcomes by PD-L1 and HPV subgroups are shown in the Table. In pts with tumor PD-L1 Conclusion: With 2-yr follow-up, nivo continued to significantly improve OS and maintain a favorable safety profile vs IC. Nivo is the only immunotherapy to demonstrate OS benefit irrespective of PD-L1 expression in pts with SCCHN. Table: Outcomes by PD-L1 expression and HPV statusMedian OS (95% CI), monthsMedian PFS (95% CI), monthsNivoICHR (95% CI)NivoICHR (95% CI)PD-L1 < 1%6.5 (4.4, 11.7)5.5 (3.7, 8.5)0.73 (0.49, 1.09)2.0 (1.9, 2.1)2.7 (2.0, 4.6)1.13 (0.75, 1.71)PD-L1 ≥ 1%8.2 (6.7, 9.5)4.7 (3.8, 6.2)0.55 (0.39, 0.78)2.1 (2.0, 3.5)2.0 (1.9, 3.1)0.59 (0.41, 0.84)HPV+9.1 (6.5, 11.8)4.4 (3.0, 9.8)0.60 (0.37, 0.97)2.0 (1.9, 3.3)2.0 (1.6, 2.8)0.75 (0.46, 1.23)HPV−7.7 (4.8, 13.0)6.5 (3.9, 8.7)0.59 (0.38, 0.92)2.1 (1.9, 3.1)3.3 (1.9, 4.0)1.01 (0.65, 1.56) Citation Format: Robert L. Ferris, George R. Blumenschein, Jerome Fayette, Joel Guigay, A Dimitrios Colevas, Lisa Licitra, Kevin J. Harrington, Stefan Kasper, Everett E. Vokes, Caroline Even, Francis Worden, Nabil F. Saba, Lara Carmen Iglesias Docampo, Robert Haddad, Tamara Rordorf, Naomi Kiyota, Makoto Tahara, Mark Lynch, Vijayvel Jayaprakash, Li Li, Maura L. Gillison. Nivolumab (Nivo) vs investigator's choice (IC) in recurrent or metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN): 2-yr outcomes in the overall population and PD-L1 subgroups of CheckMate 141 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT116.

Purpose: This randomized phase II study was initially designed to test the activity of two dose schedules of lapatinib (GW572016H), an oral, reversible, dual tyrosine kinase inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and human EGFR-2 (HER2/neu; HER2), in chemotherapy-naive patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); it was later amended to target patients with bronchioloalveolar carcinoma or no smoking history. Experimental Design: Patients with good performance status and recurrent or metastatic NSCLC were randomized to lapatinib (orally, 1,500 mg once daily or 500 mg twice daily) until progression or intolerance. Patients could have had a maximum of one prior systemic therapy (chemotherapy or biological therapy) for NSCLC. Safety and activity were assessed every 4 and 8 weeks, respectively. Tumors were analyzed for EGFR and HER2 mutations and/or amplifications. Results: Of 75 patients in the nontargeted population, 1 (1.3%) had partial response and 16 (21%) had stable disease of ≥24 weeks. No complete or partial responses were observed in 56 patients in the targeted population; 14 (25%) had stable disease of ≥24 weeks. No responses were seen in three patients with EGFR mutations and five with EGFR gene amplification. No mutations in HER2 were found. One of two patients with HER2 amplification had a 51% decrease in tumor size; however, this response was unconfirmed. The most common adverse events were grade 1 or 2 diarrhea, rash, fatigue, nausea, and anorexia. Adverse events were similar across dosing regimens. Conclusions: Lapatinib was well tolerated, with no notable difference in toxicity between treatment groups. Lapatinib monotherapy did not induce a significant number of tumor regressions in NSCLC. Further studies may be warranted to determine whether lapatinib is active in combination with other agents in the treatment of NSCLC. Clin Cancer Res; 16(6); 1938–49

Purpose: Motesanib is a small-molecule antagonist of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1, 2, and 3, platelet-derived growth factor receptor, and Kit. This phase 1b study assessed the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and pharmacokinetics, and explored the objective response of motesanib plus carboplatin/paclitaxel and/or the fully human anti–epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody panitumumab in advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Experimental Design: Patients with unresectable NSCLC received sequentially escalating doses of motesanib [50, 125 mg once daily; 75 mg twice daily] orally continuously plus carboplatin/paclitaxel (arm A; first line) or panitumumab (arm B; first and second line) once every 21-day cycle or 125 mg once daily plus carboplatin/paclitaxel and panitumumab (arm C; first line). Results: Forty-five patients received motesanib. Three dose-limiting toxicities occurred: grade 4 pulmonary embolism (n = 1; arm A, 50 mg once daily) and grade 3 deep vein thrombosis (n = 2; arm A, 125 mg once daily; arm C). The MTD was 125 mg once daily. Common motesanib-related adverse events were fatigue (60% of patients), diarrhea (53%), hypertension, (38%), anorexia (27%), and nausea (22%). Three cases of cholecystitis occurred but only in the 75-mg twice-daily schedule, which was subsequently discontinued. At 125 mg once daily, motesanib pharmacokinetics were not markedly changed with carboplatin/paclitaxel coadministration; however, exposure to paclitaxel was moderately increased. The objective response rates were 17%, 0%, and 17% in arms A, B, and C, respectively. Conclusions: Treatment with motesanib was tolerable when combined with carboplatin/paclitaxel and/or panitumumab, with little effect on motesanib pharmacokinetics at the 125-mg once daily dose level. This dose is being investigated in an ongoing phase 3 study in NSCLC. Clin Cancer Res; 16(1); 279–90

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Angiogenesis, primarily mediated through vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), is one of the key steps in tumor growth and metastasis. VEGF is now a validated target for NSCLC based on the results of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group trial E4599 which showed that the addition of bevacizumab, a VEGF monoclonal antibody, to cytotoxic chemotherapy improves survival compared with chemotherapy alone in patients with metastatic NSCLC. As NSCLC has complex and integrated signaling pathways, a rational approach is to target more than one of these pathways concurrently. Sorafenib, which is approved for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma, is a multitargeted signal transduction inhibitor that inhibits raf-kinases, VEGF receptor-2, platelet derived growth factor receptor-B, and c-kit. In a phase II monotherapy trial in patients with previously treated NSCLC, sorafenib demonstrated activity with a disease control rate and survival rate comparable to other small molecules. Additionally, sorafenib has shown preliminary activity in combination with chemotherapy and with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors. Future directions will include the development of rational combinations either with cytotoxic compounds or biologically targeted compounds and the identification of subsets of patients that might benefit from the other targets of sorafenib.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine whether addition of the synthetic rexinoid bexarotene (Targretin; Eisai Inc, Woodcliff Lake, NJ) to standard first-line carboplatin and paclitaxel therapy provides additional survival benefit in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods Patients with stage IIIB disease with pleural effusion, or stage IV NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1, were randomly assigned to bexarotene 400 mg/m2/d combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel, or assigned to carboplatin and paclitaxel alone. Bexarotene patients also received lipid-lowering agents on or before day 1. The primary efficacy end point was overall survival; secondary efficacy and supportive analyses were also conducted. Results A total of 612 patients (306 per arm) were enrolled onto the study. In the intent-to-treat population, no significant difference in survival occurred between the two arms. However, a subpopulation (approximately 40%) of bexarotene-treated patients who experienced National Cancer Institute grade 3/4 hypertriglyceridemia had significantly longer median survival than control patients (12.4 v 9.2 months; log-rank, P = .014). Bexarotene-treated patients with grade 3/4 hypertriglyceridemia who received the most benefit included those who were male, were smokers, experienced 6-month prior weight loss ≥ 5%, and had stage IV disease. The incidence and severity of most adverse events were similar between arms, although hyperlipidemia, neutropenia, fatigue, leukopenia, arthralgia, and diarrhea were more frequent in the bexarotene arm. Conclusion Although the addition of bexarotene to chemotherapy did not improve survival in the overall study population, occurrence of high-grade hypertriglyceridemia in bexarotene-treated patients strongly correlated with increased survival, suggesting that bexarotene may benefit a segment of first-line NSCLC patients.

Purpose: The novel dual-action humanized IgG1 antibody MEHD7945A targeting HER3 and EGFR inhibits ligand-dependent HER dimer signaling. This phase I study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity of MEHD7945A. Experimental Design: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic epithelial tumors received escalating doses of MEHD7945A (1–30 mg/kg) every 2 weeks (q2w) until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. An expansion cohort was enrolled at the recommended phase II dose (14 mg/kg, q2w). Plasma samples, tumor biopsies, FDG-PET were obtained for assessment of pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamic modulation downstream of EGFR and HER3. Results: No dose-limiting toxicities or MEHD7945A-related grade ≥ 4 adverse events (AE) were reported in dose-escalation (n = 30) or expansion (n = 36) cohorts. Related grade 3 AEs were limited to diarrhea and nausea in the same patient (30 mg/kg). Related AEs in ≥20% of patients ≤24 hours after the first infusion included grade 1/2 headache, fever, and chills, which were managed with premedication and/or symptomatic treatment. Pharmacodynamic data indicated target inhibition in 25% of evaluable patients. Best response by RECIST included 2 confirmed partial responses in squamous cell carcinomas of head and neck (SCCHN) patients with high tumor tissue levels of the HER3 ligand heregulin; 14 patients had stable disease ≥8 weeks, including SCCHN (n = 3), colorectal cancer (n = 6), and non–small cell lung cancer (n = 3). Conclusions: MEHD7945A was well-tolerated as single agent with evidence of tumor pharmacodynamic modulation and antitumor activity in SCCHN. Phase II studies were initiated with flat (nonweight-based) dosing at 1,100 mg q2w in SCCHN and colorectal cancer. Clin Cancer Res; 21(11); 2462–70. ©2015 AACR.

KRAS mutations in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are associated with poor prognosis. Trametinib, a selective inhibitor of MEK1/MEK2, demonstrated similar efficacy to docetaxel in patients with advanced KRAS-mutant NSCLC, with median progression-free survival of 12 and 11 weeks, respectively. With moderate activity as a monotherapy, trametinib-based combination regimens may show improve efficacy. Background KRAS mutations are detected in 25% of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and no targeted therapies are approved for this subset population. Trametinib, a selective allosteric inhibitor of MEK1/MEK2, demonstrated preclinical and clinical activity in KRAS-mutant NSCLC. We report a phase II trial comparing trametinib with docetaxel in patients with advanced KRAS-mutant NSCLC. Patients and methods Eligible patients with histologically confirmed KRAS-mutant NSCLC previously treated with one prior platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned in a ratio of 2 : 1 to trametinib (2 mg orally once daily) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 i.v. every 3 weeks). Crossover to the other arm after disease progression was allowed. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). The study was prematurely terminated after the interim analysis of 92 PFS events, which showed the comparison of trametinib versus docetaxel for PFS crossed the futility boundary. Results One hundred and twenty-nine patients with KRAS-mutant NSCLC were randomized; of which, 86 patients received trametinib and 43 received docetaxel. Median PFS was 12 weeks in the trametinib arm and 11 weeks in the docetaxel arm (hazard ratio [HR] 1.14; 95% CI 0.75–1.75; P = 0.5197). Median overall survival, while the data are immature, was 8 months in the trametinib arm and was not reached in the docetaxel arm (HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.52–1.83; P = 0.934). There were 10 (12%) partial responses (PRs) in the trametinib arm and 5 (12%) PRs in the docetaxel arm (P = 1.0000). The most frequent adverse events (AEs) in ≥20% of trametinib patients were rash, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and fatigue. The most frequent grade 3 treatment-related AEs in the trametinib arm were hypertension, rash, diarrhea, and asthenia. Conclusion Trametinib showed similar PFS and a response rate as docetaxel in patients with previously treated KRAS-mutant-positive NSCLC. Clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT01362296.

PurposeThis multicenter, open-label, phase I/IIa study was undertaken to establish the safety/toxicity profile of cetuximab in combination with gemcitabine and carboplatin in patients with chemotherapy-naïve, epidermal growth factor receptor–positive, stage IV non–small-cell lung cancer. Secondary objectives were to gather preliminary evidence of efficacy including tumor response rate, time to progression, and overall survival.Patients and MethodsThirty-five patients received a total of 264 3-week cycles of treatment with cetuximab, carboplatin, and gemcitabine. An initial dose of cetuximab 400 mg/m2intravenously was administered the first week, followed by weekly doses of 250 mg/m2. Carboplatin (area under the curve = 5, day 1) and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2on days 1 and 8 were administered every 3 weeks. Patients were evaluated for tumor response after every two cycles of therapy.ResultsThe most frequently reported adverse events related to cetuximab included an acne-like rash (88.6%), dry skin (34.3%), asthenia and skin disorders (31.4%), mucositis/stomatitis (25.7%), fever/chills (20%), and nausea/vomiting (17.1%). The majority of these toxicities were mild to moderate. One patient withdrew from the study because of a grade 3 allergic reaction. Myelosuppression was the most frequently observed toxicity related to chemotherapy. Responses among 35 assessable patients included 10 partial responses (28.6%). Twenty-one patients had stable disease. The median time to progression was 165 days, and the median overall survival was 310 days.ConclusionThe combination of cetuximab, carboplatin, and gemcitabine was well tolerated with an acceptable toxicity profile. Most grade 3 adverse events were attributable to chemotherapy. The response rate and median survival are encouraging and warrant additional investigation.

Purpose Bevacizumab (Avastin; Genentech, South San Francisco, CA) is a recombinant, humanized anti-vascular endothelial growth factor monoclonal antibody. Erlotinib HCl (Tarceva, OSI-774; OSI Pharmaceuticals, New York, NY) is a potent, reversible, highly selective and orally available HER-1/epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Preclinical data in various xenograft models produced greater growth inhibition than with either agent alone. Additionally, both agents have demonstrated benefit in patients with previously treated non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods A phase I/II study in two centers examined erlotinib and bevacizumab (A+T) in patients with nonsquamous stage IIIB/IV NSCLC with ≥ one prior chemotherapy. In phase I, erlotinib 150 mg/day orally plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg intravenously every 21 days was established as the phase II dose, although no dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Phase II assessed the efficacy and tolerability of A+T at this dose. Pharmacokinetic parameters were evaluated. Results Forty patients were enrolled and treated in this study (34 patients at phase II dose); the median age was 59 years (range, 36 to 72 years), 21 were female, 30 had adenocarcinoma histology, nine were never-smokers, and 22 had ≥ two prior regimens (three patients had ≥ four prior regimens). The most common adverse events were mild to moderate rash, diarrhea, and proteinuria. Preliminary data showed no pharmacokinetic interaction between A+T. Eight patients (20.0%; 95% CI, 7.6% to 32.4%) had partial responses and 26 (65.0%; 95% CI, 50.2% to 79.8%) had stable disease as their best response. The median overall survival for the 34 patients treated at the phase II dose was 12.6 months, with progression-free survival of 6.2 months. Conclusion Encouraging antitumor activity and safety of A+T support further development of this combination for patients with advanced NSCLC and other solid tumors.

Purpose To determine the ability of amifostine to reduce the severity and/or incidence of the acute toxicities of concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy (RT) for non–small-cell lung cancer. Methods and materials Patients with inoperable, nonmetastatic non–small-cell lung cancer receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy were randomized to one of two treatment groups. Arm 1 patients received thoracic RT (total dose, 69.6 Gy in 58 fractions of 1.2 Gy b.i.d. 5 d/wk), plus oral etoposide (50 mg b.i.d. 30 min before thoracic RT for 10 days, repeated on Day 29) and cisplatin (50 mg/m 2 i.v. on Days 1, 8, 29, and 36). Arm 2 patients received the same treatment plus amifostine (500 mg i.v. 20–30 min before any treatment the first 2 days of each week). Acute effects were assessed using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria. Results Sixty-two patients were enrolled between November 1998 and January 2001. The minimal follow-up was 24 months, and the median follow-up of living patients was 31 months. The patient and tumor characteristics were equally distributed between the patients in the two arms. The median survival time was 20 months in Arm 1 patients and 19 months in Arm 2 patients. The maximal esophageal toxicity was mild (Grade 1) in 23%, moderate (Grade 2) in 42%, and severe (Grade 3-4) in 35% of patients in Arm 1; the corresponding rates for the Arm 2 patients were 48%, 35%, and 16% ( p = 0.021). Severe pneumonitis occurred in 16% of the Arm 1 and none of the Arm 2 patients ( p = 0.020, chi-square test). Neutropenic fever occurred in 39% of Arm 1 and 16% of Arm 2 patients ( p = 0.046, chi-square test). Mild hypotension, dysgeusia, and sneezing were significantly more frequent among the patients in Arm 2. Conclusion Amifostine reduced the severity and incidence of acute esophageal, pulmonary, and hematologic toxicity resulting from concurrent cisplatin-based chemotherapy and RT. Amifostine had no apparent effect on survival in these patients with unresectable non–small-cell lung cancer, suggesting that it does not have a tumor-protective effect.

We have previously demonstrated that in non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (nsNSCLC) cells expressing relatively high levels of the glucocorticoid receptor (GR), dexamethasone (Dex) induces reversible G1 arrest that is virtually complete by 72h of Dex treatment. We have also shown that this effect of Dex protects the cells from the cytotoxicity of pemetrexed, a mainstay chemotherapy in advanced nsNSCLC that entails co-administration of Dex. Further, induction of G1 arrest by Dex was confirmed by FLT-PET imaging of tumor lesions in patients treated with Dex for 24h. Here we report the effects of long-term treatment of nsNSCLC cells with Dex. The nsNSCLC cell line models included A549 (GR), H292 (GR), H1650 (GR) and H1299 (GR) cells as well as clonal recombinant H1299 cells overexpressing GR. In only the GRhi cells, Dex caused an increase in p21 peaking on Day 7 and declining by Day 14. The cells retained proliferation potential on Day 3 as measured by colony formation. By Day 7 of Dex treatment, the GRhi cells but not the GRlo cells exhibited a senescence phenotype, marked by cytosolic beta-galactosidase activity and increases in p16 and p15 at the mRNA and protein levels as well as significant increases in cell size. The GR cells displayed a progressively decreasing ability to form colonies until 6 weeks of Dex treatment. The extent of this loss of proliferation potential was related to relative GR expression levels among the Dex-sensitive cells. When mice bearing xenografts of H1299 (GR) or isogenic recombinant H1299-GR (GR) cells were implanted with slow release Dex pellets, tumor growth was inhibited only in the H1299-GR cells. Evaluation of a tissue microarray as well as a cDNA array from clinical nsNSCLC tumors showed that about 20 percent of the tumors showed uniform expression of GR that were comparable to the levels required for Dex to induce senescence in vitro or to inhibit tumor growth in vivo. The results suggest that long-term administration of Dex could serve as an additional treatment option for a small cohort of lung adenocarcinoma patients that harbor uniform high levels of GR in their tumor lesions.