Search

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have substantially advanced the treatment of patients with malignant melanoma. However, improving therapeutic efficacy requires identifying drug combinations that elicit durable responses without inducing intolerable toxicity. Within that context, selinexor emerges as a possible combination option that has been shown in preclinical studies to enhance the efficacy of ICI therapy. Methods: In this phase 1b study, we investigated selinexor in combination with pembrolizumab in 25 patients with advanced non-uveal melanoma. Patients received selinexor at a dosage of 60 mg taken orally twice weekly, and pembrolizumab intravenously at a dosage of 200 mg every 3 weeks. Results: Despite the high incidence of adverse events (96%), most treatment-related toxicities were manageable with supportive care and dose reductions. The most common adverse events of any grade were nausea (n = 20; 80%), decreased white blood cell count (n = 15; 60%), vomiting (n = 14; 56%), anemia (n = 12; 48%), fatigue (n = 12; 48%), and decreased platelet count (n = 12; 48%). The 10 patients with treatment naïve evaluable disease had an objective response rate (ORR) of 70% (n = 7, including three patients with complete response), which was significantly higher than that of the 14 patients with prior anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1) therapy, whose ORR was 7% (n = 1; p = 0.002). Stable disease was observed in two patients (20%) with treatment-naïve disease and seven patients (50%) with prior anti-PD-1 therapy. Conclusion: Selinexor combined with pembrolizumab showed promising antitumor activity in patients with treatment-naïve metastatic melanoma. The toxicity profile of the combination was consistent with that reported for individual agents, with no additional safety concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Immune checkpoint blockade has shown mixed results in advanced/recurrent gynecologic malignancies. Efficacy may be improved through costimulation with OX40 and 4‐1BB agonists. The authors sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of avelumab combined with utomilumab (a 4‐1BB agonist), PF‐04518600 (an OX40 agonist), and radiotherapy in patients with recurrent gynecologic malignancies. Methods: The primary end point in this six‐arm, phase 1/2 trial was safety of the combination regimens. Secondary end points included the objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors and immune‐related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, the disease control rate (DCR), the duration of response, progression‐free survival, and overall survival. Results: Forty patients were included (35% with cervical cancer, 30% with endometrial cancer, and 35% with ovarian cancer). Most patients (n = 33; 83%) were enrolled in arms A–C (no radiation). Among 35 patients who were evaluable for efficacy, the ORR was 2.9%, and the DCR was 37.1%, with a median duration of stable disease of 5.4 months (interquartile range, 4.1–7.3 months). Patients with cervical cancer in arm A (avelumab and utomilumab; n = 9 evaluable patients) achieved an ORR of 11% and a DCR of 78%. The median progression‐free survival was 2.1 months (95% CI, 1.8–3.5 months), and overall survival was 9.4 months (95% CI, 5.6–11.9 months). No dose‐limiting toxicities or grade 3–5 immune‐related adverse events were observed. Conclusions: The findings from this trial highlight that, in heavily pretreated patients with gynecologic cancer, even multidrug regimens targeting multiple immunologic pathways, although safe, did not produce significant responses. A DCR of 78% in patients with cervical cancer who received avelumab and utomilumab indicates that further research on this combination in select patients may be warranted. In a phase 1/2 trial of heavily pretreated patients who had recurrent gynecologic cancers, avelumab in combination with a 4‐1BB agonist, an OX40 agonist, and/or radiation was safe and had a similar rate of immune‐related adverse events compared with single‐agent immune checkpoint blockade. The combination of multiple immune‐modulating agents, however, did not result in increased efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Immunotherapy is emerging as the cornerstone for treatment of patients with advanced cancer, but significant toxicity (immune-related adverse events [irAEs]) associated with unbridled T cell activity remains a concern. Patients and methods A retrospective review of the electronic medical records of 290 patients with advanced cancer treated on an immunotherapy-based clinical trial in the Department of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center between February 2010 and September 2015 was performed. Clinical and laboratory parameters were collected to determine the incidence of irAEs, risk factors, and their association with treatment outcomes. Results Ninety eight of 290 patients (34%) experienced any grade irAEs. Among the 15 (5.2%) patients with grade ≥ 3 irAEs, the most common irAEs were dermatitis and enterocolitis. Although 80% of the patients with grade ≥ 3 irAEs required systemic corticosteroids, all the 15 patients recovered from the irAEs. On re-challenge, 4 of the 5 patients who had received systemic corticosteroids for irAE continued to respond. There were no irAE-related deaths. Importantly, patients with grade ≥ 3 irAEs had improved overall response rate (25 vs. 6%; p = 0.039) and longer median time to progression (30 weeks vs. 10 weeks; p = 0.0040) when compared to those without grade ≥ 3 irAEs. Conclusion Incidence of irAEs with immunotherapeutic agents indicates an active immune status, suggestive of potential clinical benefit to the patient. Further validation of this association in a large prospective study is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We present the first reported work that explores the potential of radiomics to predict patients who are at risk for developing immunotherapy-induced pneumonitis. Despite promising results with immunotherapies, immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are challenging. Although less common, pneumonitis is a potentially fatal irAE. Thus, early detection is critical for improving treatment outcomes; an urgent need to identify biomarkers that predict patients at risk for pneumonitis exists. Radiomics, an emerging field, is the automated extraction of high fidelity, high-dimensional imaging features from standard medical images and allows for comprehensive visualization and characterization of the tissue of interest and corresponding microenvironment. In this pilot study, we sought to determine whether radiomics has the potential to predict development of pneumonitis. We performed radiomic analyses using baseline chest computed tomography images of patients who did (N = 2) and did not (N = 30) develop immunotherapy-induced pneumonitis. We extracted 1860 radiomic features in each patient. Maximum relevance and minimum redundancy feature selection method, anomaly detection algorithm, and leave-one-out cross-validation identified radiomic features that were significantly different and predicted subsequent immunotherapy-induced pneumonitis (accuracy, 100% [p = 0.0033]). This study suggests that radiomic features can classify and predict those patients at baseline who will subsequently develop immunotherapy-induced pneumonitis, further enabling risk-stratification that will ultimately lead to better treatment outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cancer immunotherapy has resulted in durable responses in patients with metastatic disease, unseen with traditional chemotherapy. Several therapies have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of various cancers, including: immune checkpoint inhibitors, cytokines - interleukin 2 (IL-2) and interferon alpha (IFN), and the cancer vaccine sipuleucel-T. These therapies upregulate the immune system to enhance antitumor responses. As a consequence, they can cause inflammatory and immune-related adverse events that can affect one or more organs, can be serious, and on occasion lifethreatening. The management of these adverse events is complex, and requires a multidisciplinary approach involving not only oncologists, but also other internal medicine specialists, to ensure prompt diagnosis and optimal management of these complications.