Search

Chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy has improved the treatment of certain solid tumors, but effective regimens remain elusive for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We conducted a randomized phase 2 trial evaluating the efficacy of nivolumab (nivo; anti-PD-1) and/or sotigalimab (sotiga; CD40 agonistic antibody) with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (chemotherapy) in patients with first-line metastatic PDAC (NCT03214250). In 105 patients analyzed for efficacy, the primary endpoint of 1-year overall survival (OS) was met for nivo/chemo (57.7%, P = 0.006 compared to historical 1-year OS of 35%, n = 34) but was not met for sotiga/chemo (48.1%, P = 0.062, n = 36) or sotiga/nivo/chemo (41.3%, P = 0.223, n = 35). Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival, objective response rate, disease control rate, duration of response and safety. Treatment-related adverse event rates were similar across arms. Multi-omic circulating and tumor biomarker analyses identified distinct immune signatures associated with survival for nivo/chemo and sotiga/chemo. Survival after nivo/chemo correlated with a less suppressive tumor microenvironment and higher numbers of activated, antigen-experienced circulating T cells at baseline. Survival after sotiga/chemo correlated with greater intratumoral CD4 T cell infiltration and circulating differentiated CD4 T cells and antigen-presenting cells. A patient subset benefitting from sotiga/nivo/chemo was not identified. Collectively, these analyses suggest potential treatment-specific correlates of efficacy and may enable biomarker-selected patient populations in subsequent PDAC chemoimmunotherapy trials.

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), although revolutionary in improving long-term survival outcomes, are mostly effective in patients with immune-responsive tumors. Most patients with cancer either do not respond to ICIs at all or experience disease progression after an initial period of response. Treatment resistance to ICIs remains a major challenge and defines the biggest unmet medical need in oncology worldwide. In a collaborative workshop, thought leaders from academic, biopharma, and nonprofit sectors convened to outline a resistance framework to support and guide future immune-resistance research. Here, we explore the initial part of our effort by collating seminal discoveries through the lens of known biological processes. We highlight eight biological processes and refer to them as immune resistance nodes. We examine the seminal discoveries that define each immune resistance node and pose critical questions, which, if answered, would greatly expand our notion of immune resistance. Ultimately, the expansion and application of this work calls for the integration of multiomic high-dimensional analyses from patient-level data to produce a map of resistance phenotypes that can be utilized to guide effective drug development and improved patient outcomes.

Immunotherapy is rapidly becoming a standard of care for many cancers. However, colorectal cancer had been generally resistant to immunotherapy, despite features in common with sensitive tumors. Observations of substantial clinical activity for checkpoint blockade in colorectal cancers with defective mismatch repair (microsatellite instability–high tumors) have reignited interest in the search for immunotherapies that could be extended to the larger microsatellite stable (MSS) population. The Cancer Research Institute and Fight Colorectal Cancer convened a group of scientists, clinicians, advocates, and industry experts in colorectal cancer and immunotherapy to compile ongoing research efforts, identify gaps in translational and clinical research, and provide a blueprint to advance immunotherapy. We identified lack of a T-cell inflamed phenotype (due to inadequate T-cell infiltration, inadequate T-cell activation, or T-cell suppression) as a broad potential explanation for failure of checkpoint blockade in MSS. The specific cellular and molecular underpinnings for these various mechanisms are unclear. Whether biomarkers with prognostic value, such as the immunoscores and IFN signatures, would also predict benefit for immunotherapies in MSS colon cancer is unknown, but if so, these and other biomarkers for measuring the potential for an immune response in patients with colorectal cancer will need to be incorporated into clinical guidelines. We have proposed a framework for research to identify immunologic factors that may be modulated to improve immunotherapy for colorectal cancer patients, with the goal that the biomarkers and treatment strategies identified will become part of the routine management of colorectal cancer. Cancer Immunol Res; 5(11); 942–9. ©2017 AACR.

Supplemental Tables 1 and 2

S1. Therapeutic strategies and corresponding laboratory tests.

S2. Policy and Infrastructure driven solutions noted for support of immunology work.

Summary Background Standard chemotherapy remains inadequate in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Combining an agonistic CD40 monoclonal antibody with chemotherapy induces T-cell-dependent tumour regression in mice and improves survival. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the safety of combining APX005M (sotigalimab) with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel, with and without nivolumab, in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma to establish the recommended phase 2 dose. Methods This non-randomised, open-label, multicentre, four-cohort, phase 1b study was done at seven academic hospitals in the USA. Eligible patients were adults aged 18 years and older with untreated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0–1, and measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. All patients were treated with 1000 mg/m2 intravenous gemcitabine and 125 mg/m2 intravenous nab-paclitaxel. Patients received 0·1 mg/kg intravenous APX005M in cohorts B1 and C1 and 0·3 mg/kg in cohorts B2 and C2. In cohorts C1 and C2, patients also received 240 mg intravenous nivolumab. Primary endpoints comprised incidence of adverse events in all patients who received at least one dose of any study drug, incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) in all patients who had a DLT or received at least two doses of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel and one dose of APX005M during cycle 1, and establishing the recommended phase 2 dose of intravenous APX005M. Objective response rate in the DLT-evaluable population was a key secondary endpoint. This trial (PRINCE, PICI0002) is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03214250 and is ongoing. Findings Between Aug 22, 2017, and July 10, 2018, of 42 patients screened, 30 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of any study drug; 24 were DLT-evaluable with median follow-up 17·8 months (IQR 16·0–19·4; cohort B1 22·0 months [21·4–22·7], cohort B2 18·2 months [17·0–18·9], cohort C1 17·9 months [14·3–19·7], cohort C2 15·9 months [12·7–16·1]). Two DLTs, both febrile neutropenia, were observed, occurring in one patient each for cohorts B2 (grade 3) and C1 (grade 4). The most common grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events were lymphocyte count decreased (20 [67%]; five in B1, seven in B2, four in C1, four in C2), anaemia (11 [37%]; two in B1, four in B2, four in C1, one in C2), and neutrophil count decreased (nine [30%]; three in B1, three in B2, one in C1, two in C2). 14 (47%) of 30 patients (four each in B1, B2, C1; two in C2) had a treatment-related serious adverse event. The most common serious adverse event was pyrexia (six [20%] of 30; one in B2, three in C1, two in C2). There were two chemotherapy-related deaths due to adverse events: one sepsis in B1 and one septic shock in C1. The recommended phase 2 dose of APX005M was 0·3 mg/kg. Responses were observed in 14 (58%) of 24 DLT-evaluable patients (four each in B1, C1, C2; two in B2). Interpretation APX005M and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel, with or without nivolumab, is tolerable in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma and shows clinical activity. If confirmed in later phase trials, this treatment regimen could replace chemotherapy-only standard of care in this population. Funding Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Cancer Research Institute, and Bristol Myers Squibb.

Many approaches to identify therapeutically relevant neoantigens couple tumor sequencing with bioinformatic algorithms and inferred rules of tumor epitope immunogenicity. However, there are no reference data to compare these approaches, and the parameters governing tumor epitope immunogenicity remain unclear. Here, we assembled a global consortium wherein each participant predicted immunogenic epitopes from shared tumor sequencing data. 608 epitopes were subsequently assessed for T cell binding in patient-matched samples. By integrating peptide features associated with presentation and recognition, we developed a model of tumor epitope immunogenicity that filtered out 98% of non-immunogenic peptides with a precision above 0.70. Pipelines prioritizing model features had superior performance, and pipeline alterations leveraging them improved prediction performance. These findings were validated in an independent cohort of 310 epitopes prioritized from tumor sequencing data and assessed for T cell binding. This data resource enables identification of parameters underlying effective anti-tumor immunity and is available to the research community.

As the field of cancer immunotherapy continues to advance at a fast pace, treatment approaches and drug development are evolving rapidly to maximize patient benefit. New agents are commonly evaluated for activity in patients who had previously received a programmed death receptor 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor as standard of care or in an investigational study. However, because of the kinetics and patterns of response to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade, and the lack of consistency in the clinical definitions of resistance to therapy, the design of clinical trials of new agents and interpretation of results remains an important challenge. To address this unmet need, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer convened a multistakeholder taskforce—consisting of experts in cancer immunotherapy from academia, industry, and government—to generate consensus clinical definitions for resistance to PD-(L)1 inhibitors in three distinct scenarios: primary resistance, secondary resistance, and progression after treatment discontinuation. The taskforce generated consensus on several key issues such as the timeframes that delineate each type of resistance, the necessity for confirmatory scans, and identified caveats for each specific resistance classification. The goal of this effort is to provide guidance for clinical trial design and to support analyses of emerging molecular and cellular data surrounding mechanisms of resistance.

Immunotherapy is rapidly becoming a standard of care for many cancers. However, colorectal cancer had been generally resistant to immunotherapy, despite features in common with sensitive tumors. Observations of substantial clinical activity for checkpoint blockade in colorectal cancers with defective mismatch repair (microsatellite instability–high tumors) have reignited interest in the search for immunotherapies that could be extended to the larger microsatellite stable (MSS) population. The Cancer Research Institute and Fight Colorectal Cancer convened a group of scientists, clinicians, advocates, and industry experts in colorectal cancer and immunotherapy to compile ongoing research efforts, identify gaps in translational and clinical research, and provide a blueprint to advance immunotherapy. We identified lack of a T-cell inflamed phenotype (due to inadequate T-cell infiltration, inadequate T-cell activation, or T-cell suppression) as a broad potential explanation for failure of checkpoint blockade in MSS. The specific cellular and molecular underpinnings for these various mechanisms are unclear. Whether biomarkers with prognostic value, such as the immunoscores and IFN signatures, would also predict benefit for immunotherapies in MSS colon cancer is unknown, but if so, these and other biomarkers for measuring the potential for an immune response in patients with colorectal cancer will need to be incorporated into clinical guidelines. We have proposed a framework for research to identify immunologic factors that may be modulated to improve immunotherapy for colorectal cancer patients, with the goal that the biomarkers and treatment strategies identified will become part of the routine management of colorectal cancer. Cancer Immunol Res; 5(11); 942–9. ©2017 AACR.

2573 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated durable clinical responses and improved survival in patients (pts) across numerous indications. Despite this progress, the benefit of ICIs is limited to a minority of overall metastatic cancer patients. There is a critical need for biomarkers agnostic of tumor type to inform which pts will benefit from nivo alone versus ipi/nivo combination treatment. Both pre-treatment tumoral CD8 + cells and recruitment of CD8+ T cells in response to ICIs are associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients treated with anti-PD-1 therapy. 1,2,3,4 Here we report the final results of a prospective clinical study in which pts with varying advanced solid tumors were assigned to nivo, with or without ipi, based on the percentage of tumoral CD8 cells at the time of treatment. Methods: We performed a prospective, non-randomized, open-label, multicenter study in which pts with tumoral CD8+ cells ≥ 15% (CD8+ high) received nivo 360mg IV Q3W, followed by nivo maintenance 480mg Q4W. Pts with tumoral CD8+ cells < 15% (CD8+ low) received nivo 360 mg IV Q3W, and ipi at 1 mg/kg IV Q3W for 2 doses and then Q6W for 2 doses, followed by nivo maintenance 480 mg IV Q4W until PD or intolerable toxicity. Primary endpoints were Disease Control Rate (DCR: CR, PR, or SD ≥ 6 months) and CD8 low to high conversion (< 15% to ≥ 15%). Baseline and on-treatment tumor, blood and stool samples were collected for multiomic biomarker analyses. This study was not powered for formal statistical analysis. Up to 200 pts could be enrolled to allow for adaptive exploration of response and CD8 changes. Results: N = 79 pts were enrolled:7 in CD8+ high arm (nivo) and 72 in CD8+ low arm (ipi/nivo). The study enrolled a wide variety of primary solid tumors; the most common were gynecological (n = 15), prostate (12), and head and neck (7). DCR was 14% (1/7; 95% CI 1 - 44) and 24% (17/72; 95% CI 15 - 34) in the CD8 high and CD8 low arms, respectively. Of 39 pts in CD8 low arm with an on-treatment biopsy, 14 (36%; 95% CI 22 - 51) had CD8 conversion; 7/14 pts (50%) who converted had DCR. Immune-related AEs (irAEs) were consistent with known safety profile of both drugs. Conclusions: Ipi/nivo demonstrated clinical responses and increased CD8% in a range of “cold” tumors with low tumoral CD8 cells. There may be an association between increasing CD8% and response. Baseline high CD8% alone does not appear to be sufficient as a pan-cancer predictive biomarker of response to nivo monotherapy. CD8 conversion, response, and irAEs associated with circulating and stool-based biomarkers are under evaluation as composite biomarkers may improve their predictive value. Clinical trial information: 03651271.

On September 25–28, 2016, in New York City, the Second International Cancer Immunotherapy Conference was cohosted by the Cancer Research Institute, the American Association for Cancer Research, the Association for Cancer Immunotherapy, and the European Academy of Tumor Immunology. This exciting conference brought together more than 1,400 participants, including scientists, clinicians, investors, and regulators, to discuss the latest scientific advances within the field of cancer immunotherapy. This conference report reviews the chief themes that emerged during the 4-day meeting. Cancer Immunol Res; 4(12); 996–1000. ©2016 AACR.

Neoantigen-based therapies hold the promise of being safe, personalized anti-cancer therapies for a broad range of cancers. A crucial step for the development of effective neoantigen therapies is the identification of putative tumor specific neoantigens typically achieved through in silico analyses. In silico-based approaches have the benefit of being fast, modular and reproducible. A wide range of tools are available for variant calling, determining peptide-HLA binding affinity, peptide foreignness, agritopicity and more, and researchers are continuously adding to the lot. However, there does not currently exist a common reference data set with which these different approaches can be compared, and the key parameters for effective neoantigen identification remain elusive. Here we introduce a consortium-based initiative, the Tumor nEoantigen SeLection Alliance (TESLA), to address these needs and describe straight-forward strategies through which the sensitivity and ranking ability of neoantigen prediction methods can be improved. TESLA participants were provided with whole exome and RNA sequencing from six tumors (3 melanoma and 3 NSCLC) and in turn submitted predictions for immunogenic peptides. Twenty-five groups from academia, pharma and biotech participated to this challenge. Peptides identification and ranking across the teams were assessed and showed little overlap. The limited overlap could not be explained simply by differences in variant calling. From these predictions, 608 peptides regrouping the teams' highly ranked epitopes plus epitopes frequently called and ranked across the teams, were assessed for T-cell recognition in patient-matched samples as well as for in-vitro MHC binding affinity. Analyses showed that peptides recognized by T-cells had significantly stronger MHC binding affinity and were derived from genes with significantly higher gene expression. Concomitantly, neoantigen pipelines which prioritized epitopes with strong binding affinity and/or which filtered out those originating from genes with low tumor variant allele fraction or low gene expression were associated with improved ability to identify and rank neoantigens. Direct interventions on participant predictions using these identified traits demonstrated substantial improvement in the performance of the neoantigen predictions. Pipeline analysis indicated that there are a range of approaches to neoantigen prediction and improving upon an existing neoantigen pipeline requires assessing that pipeline for a range of characteristics, including variant detection ability, peptide filtering ability, and peptide ranking ability, and improving those areas where the pipeline performance is sub-optimal. TESLA data will be continually available and serve as a living benchmark to improve neoantigen prediction. Citation Format: Daniel K. Wells, Kristen Dang, Vanessa M. Hubbard-Lucey, Kathleen C. Sheehan, Andrew Lamb, Jeffrey P. Ward, John Sidney, Ana B. Blazquez, Andrew J. Rech, Jesse Zaretsky, Begonya Comin-Anduix, Alphonsus H. Ng, William Chour, Thomas V. Yu, Hira Rizvi, Jia Chen, Patrice Manning, Taha Merghoub, Justin Guinney, Adam Kolom, Cheryl Selinsky, Antoni Ribas, Matthew D. Hellmann, Ton N. Schumacher, Nir Hacohen, Pia Kvistborg, Alessandro Sette, James R. Heath, Nina Bhardwaj, Fred Ramsdell, Robert D. Schreiber, Nadine A. Defranoux, TESLA Consortium. Strategies to improve the sensitivity and ranking ability of neoantigen prediction methods: Report on the results of the Tumor nEoantigen SeLection Alliance (TESLA) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr 3210.

3017 Background: Metastasis to the peritoneal cavity is associated with end-stage disease in many cancers, including OC and CRC, both of which exhibit poor responses to checkpoint inhibitors. Locoregional treatment with oncolytic viruses may be used to improve the efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors at both treated and distant tumor sites. This study evaluates the combination of IP-administered ONCOS-102, an oncolytic adenovirus encoding for granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor (GMCSF), with systemic durvalumab, an anti PD-L1 antibody, in patients with peritoneal disease who have histologically confirmed OC or metastatic CRC and have failed prior standard therapies. Methods: This ongoing Phase 1/2, open-label study (NCT02963831) evaluates safety and antitumor/biologic activity of durvalumab (1500 mg IV, every 4 weeks x 12) + ONCOS-102 (IP, weekly x 6); cyclophosphamide is given pre first ONCOS-102 dose. Phase 1 uses a 3+3 design to evaluate the ONCOS-102 dose (1 or 3 x 1011 VP) to be given with durvalumab. Phase 2 evaluates the activity of the combination using Simon’s 2-stage MINIMAX design. Safety, response rate by RECIST 1.1, and immunological effects in tumors were evaluated for Phase 1; the current abstract reports on the phase 1 results. Results: Enrollment opened 7 Sep 2017; data cutoff, 1 Nov 2019. There were 17 patients treated in Phase 1: 8 CRC, 9 ovarian; 94% female; median age, 56 [37-77] years; ECOG PS0, 47%; ECOG PS1, 53%. There were no DLTs. Grade 3 treatment-related AEs included hypokalemia (n = 2); anemia, myocarditis, increased GGT, and influenza like illness (n = 1 each). There were 4 deaths due to PD. One patient had durable confirmed partial response and remains on treatment > 1 year; 4 patients had stable disease as best overall response. Two patients remained on treatment at data cutoff. Analysis of pre- and on-treatment tumor biopsies revealed changes in the tumor-infiltrating immune cells and PD-L1 expression, including an increase in tumor-infiltrating CD8 T cells in 5 of 11 evaluable patients. Conclusions: Combination of durvalumab and IP ONCOS-102 was safe, and no DLTs were observed. Preliminary analyses demonstrate evidence of biologic and clinical activity. Phase 2 enrollment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT02963831 .

Immunotherapy is emerging as a new treatment modality in breast cancer. After long-standing use of endocrine therapy and targeted biological therapy, improved understanding of immune evasion by cancer cells and the discovery of selective immune checkpoint inhibitors have created novel opportunities for treatment. Single-drug therapies with monoclonal antibodies against programmed death-1 (PD-1) and programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) have shown little efficacy in patients with metastatic breast cancer, in part because of the low number of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes in most breast cancers. There is growing interest in the development of combinations of immunotherapy and molecularly targeted therapies for metastatic breast cancer. In this Personal View, we review the available data and ongoing efforts to establish the safety and efficacy of immunotherapeutic approaches in combination with HER2-targeted therapy, inhibitors of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6, angiogenesis inhibitors, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, as well as chemotherapy and radiotherapy.

The inaugural International Cancer Immunotherapy Conference, cohosted by the Cancer Research Institute (CRI), the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR), the Association for Cancer Immunotherapy (CIMT), and the European Academy of Tumor Immunology (EATI), was held in New York City on September 16–19, 2015. The conference brought together nearly 1,400 scientists, clinicians, regulators, patient advocates, and other stakeholders to discuss the latest scientific developments in cancer immunology and immunotherapy, as well as the regulatory hurdles facing new drug development. This conference report summarizes the main themes that emerged during the 4-day meeting. Cancer Immunol Res; 4(1); 3–11. ©2016 AACR.

Advances from immuno-oncology (IO) are changing the standard of care of many types of cancer, and the paradigm of cancer treatments and drug development is being rewritten on a regular basis. Moreover, an unprecedented number of new investigational agents and companies are entering the field of IO. As such, it has become challenging for oncology physicians conducting clinical trials, industry veterans developing IO drugs, and even regulators reviewing novel IO agents to keep track of the rapidly evolving landscape. To help the key stake holders in the field understand the latest IO landscape, we sought to present an unbiased, neutral, scientifically curated, and timely updated analysis of all the current IO agents in clinical development and the clinical trials testing these agents. We based our analyses on information collected from numerous trusted and publicly available sources. We have developed two databases. One database tracks 2004 IO agents (940 in clinical stage and 1064 in preclinical stage) against 303 targets, from 864 companies; the other tracks 3042 active clinical trials of these agents with a target enrollment of 577 076 patients. This report provides key analyses of these data. Furthermore, we will discuss a number of important and actionable trends in the current IO landscape: a large number of companies developing agents against the same IO targets; a rapid increase in the number of anti-PD-1/L1 combination studies, many of which are testing the same combinations and following inefficient patterns; and a significant increase in the number of small, investigator-initiated studies. For each of the findings, we speculate the causes and discuss a few initiatives that aim to address some of these challenges. Finally, by making these landscape analyses available, we aspire to inform the cancer community as they seek to strive for efficiencies and innovation while avoiding duplication.

Matsuzawa-Ishimoto et al. show that autophagy gene ATG16L1, which is associated with inflammatory diseases of the gastrointestinal tract, is essential for preventing necroptotic cell death and loss of Paneth cells in the intestinal epithelium., A variant of the autophagy gene ATG16L1 is associated with Crohn’s disease, an inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and poor survival in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. We demonstrate that ATG16L1 in the intestinal epithelium is essential for preventing loss of Paneth cells and exaggerated cell death in animal models of virally triggered IBD and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Intestinal organoids lacking ATG16L1 reproduced this loss in Paneth cells and displayed TNFα-mediated necroptosis, a form of programmed necrosis. This cytoprotective function of ATG16L1 was associated with the role of autophagy in promoting mitochondrial homeostasis. Finally, therapeutic blockade of necroptosis through TNFα or RIPK1 inhibition ameliorated disease in the virally triggered IBD model. These findings indicate that, in contrast to tumor cells in which autophagy promotes caspase-independent cell death, ATG16L1 maintains the intestinal barrier by inhibiting necroptosis in the epithelium.

SummaryAtg16L1 mediates the cellular degradative process of autophagy and is considered a critical regulator of inflammation based on its genetic association with inflammatory bowel disease. Here we find that Atg16L1 deficiency leads to an exacerbated graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) in a mouse model of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). Atg16L1-deficient allo-HSCT recipients with GVHD displayed increased T cell proliferation due to increased dendritic cell (DC) numbers and costimulatory molecule expression. Reduced autophagy within DCs was associated with lysosomal abnormalities and decreased amounts of A20, a negative regulator of DC activation. These results broaden the function of Atg16L1 and the autophagy pathway to include a role in limiting a DC-mediated response during inflammatory disease, such as GVHD.

This report analyses the dramatic progress in the global immuno-oncology landscape from September 2017 to September 2018.

How many cancer cell therapies are being developed? To harmonize efforts in this arena, the Cancer Research Institute has curated a database that includes all cell therapies in development.

Background: Checkpoint inhibitors such as anti-PD-1 are ineffective as single agents for patients (pts) with PDAC. Preclinical data suggest that chemotherapy with agonistic CD40 antibodies can be combined with anti-PD-1 to trigger effective T cell immunity. We conducted a multi-center, open label clinical trial to evaluate the combination of APX005M with nivo and standard chemotherapy (gem and NP). Herein, we report safety and efficacy from the ongoing study. Methods: Pts with previously untreated PDAC were enrolled in 4 cohorts: Gem/NP/APX005M 0.1 mg/kg (B1), Gem/NP/APX005M 0.3 mg/kg (B2), Gem/NP/Nivo/APX005M 0.1 mg/kg (C1) and Gem/NP/Nivo/APX005M 0.3 mg/kg (C2). Primary objectives were to evaluate safety and determine the recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) of APX005M. Secondary objectives included tumor response and immune pharmacodynamics. Analyses were performed on dose-limiting toxicity (DLT)-evaluable subjects, defined as receiving 1 dose of APX005M and ≥ 2 doses of gem/NP during Cycle 1 and remaining on study through Cycle 2 Day 1. Results: N=30 pts dosed; 24 DLT-evaluable (6 per cohort). Median follow up is 32.2 weeks. N=13 (54%) pts experienced an AE leading to discontinuation, and 10 (42%) pts experienced a treatment-related serious AE. Two DLTs were observed, 1 each in cohorts B2 and C1 (grade 3 and 4 febrile neutropenia, respectively). AE rates were similar across cohorts. Four (17%) subjects died (2 each in Cohorts B1 and C1) due to disease progression (n=2) and AE (n=2, sepsis and septic shock in the setting of neutropenia). Within the DLT-evaluable population, best overall responses included 14 (58%) PR (11 confirmed, 3 unconfirmed), 8 (33%) SD, 1 (4%) PD and 1 (4%) NE. Post-baseline tumor assessments were available for 2 of the 6 DLT-inevaluable pts (best overall responses of SD and confirmed PR). Multiplexed IHC analysis of baseline tumors revealed a low CD8 T cell and high macrophage infiltrate. Analysis of circulating mutant KRAS DNA showed marked and rapid decrease with therapy in some pts. Immune profiling of PBMCs at baseline and on-treatment by CyTOF revealed remodeling of the myeloid compartment in response to treatment, with rapid activation of dendritic cells in most pts. Conclusions: Gem/NP/APX005M ± nivo demonstrated manageable safety profiles and promising antitumor activity in untreated metastatic PDAC pts. APX005M 0.3 mg/kg was selected as the dose for a randomized Phase II study in which the primary endpoint is 1-year overall survival. Clinical trial information: NCT02482168. Citation Format: Mark H. O'Hara, Eileen M. O'Reilly, Mick Rosemarie, Gauri Varadhachary, Zev A. Wainberg, Andrew Ko, George A. Fisher, Osama Rahma, Jaclyn P. Lyman, Christopher R. Cabanski, Erica L. Carpenter, Travis Hollmann, Pier Federico Gherardini, Lacey Kitch, Cheryl Selinsky, Theresa LaVallee, Ovid C. Trifan, Ute Dugan, Vanessa M. Hubbard-Lucey, Robert H. Vonderheide. A Phase Ib study of CD40 agonistic monoclonal antibody APX005M together with gemcitabine (Gem) and nab-paclitaxel (NP) with or without nivolumab (Nivo) in untreated metastatic ductal pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients [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 CT004.

With the recent FDA approvals of pembrolizumab and nivolumab, and a host of additional immunomodulatory agents entering clinical development each year, the field of cancer immunotherapy is changing rapidly. Strategies that can assist researchers in choosing the most promising drugs and drug combinations to move forward through clinical development are badly needed in order to reduce the likelihood of late-stage clinical trial failures. On October 5, 2014, the Cancer Immunotherapy Consortium of the Cancer Research Institute, a collaborative think tank composed of stakeholders from academia, industry, regulatory agencies, and patient interest groups, met to discuss strategies for de-risking immunotherapy development, with a focus on integrating preclinical and clinical studies, and conducting smarter early-phase trials, particularly for combination therapies. Several recommendations were made, including making better use of clinical data to inform preclinical research, obtaining adequate tissues for biomarker studies, and choosing appropriate clinical trial endpoints to identify promising drug candidates and combinations in nonrandomized early-phase trials. Cancer Immunol Res; 4(4); 279–88. ©2016 AACR.

Metastasis to the peritoneal cavity is associated with end-stage disease in many cancers, including epithelial ovarian cancer (OC) and colorectal cancer (CRC), both of which exhibit poor responses to checkpoint inhibitors. Oncolytic viruses may promote tumor recognition by the immune system. Evidence suggests that locoregional treatment with oncolytic viruses can be used to improve the efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors at both treated and distant tumor sites. ONCOS-102 is an oncolytic adenovirus encoding for granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor (GMCSF). Durvalumab (durva), a checkpoint inhibitor, is a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody against programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD L1). This study evaluates the combination of intraperitoneally administered ONCOS-102 with systemic durva in patients with peritoneal disease who have histologically confirmed OC or metastatic CRC and have failed prior standard therapies.This ongoing phase 1/2, open-label study (NCT02963831) evaluates the safety and antitumor/biologic activity of durva (1500 mg intravenous, every 4 weeks x 12) + ONCOS-102 (intraperitoneal, weekly x 6); cyclophosphamide is given before the first ONCOS-102 dose. Phase 1 will follow a 3+3 design to evaluate the ONCOS 102 dose to be given with durva. Phase 2 will evaluate the activity of the combination using Simon’s 2-stage MINIMAX design. In Stage 1, the OC and CRC cohorts will enroll 18 and 13 patients, respectively. If ≥ 5 patients in the OC cohort or ≥ 1 patient in the CRC cohort are progression free at the end of Week 24 (PFS24W), then Stage 2 will enroll 15 and 14 additional patients in the OC and CRC cohorts for a total n of 33 and 27, respectively. The null/alternative hypotheses for PFS24W are 20/40% for OC and 5/20% for CRC. The null hypothesis will be rejected if ≥ 11 patients in the OC cohort or ≥ 4 patients in the CRC cohort experience PFS24W. The primary endpoints are safety/tolerability per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) for phase 1 and PFS24W rate by RECIST 1.1 for phase 2. Secondary endpoints are safety and tolerability, response rate at 8 and 24 weeks, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Exploratory endpoints are immunologic effects in tumors and peripheral blood. Enrollment opened 07 September 2017. As of 27 June 2018, 4 patients are enrolled; enrollment is ongoing. Citation Format: Dmitriy Zamarin, Kunle Odunsi, Brian Slomovitz, Vanessa M. Hubbard-Lucey, Danielle McCabe, Lisa Shohara, Paul Schwarzenberger, Toni Ricciardi, Mary Macri, Aileen Ryan, Anne-Kirsti Aksnes, Lukasz Kuryk, Ralph Venhaus. Phase 1/2 study to evaluate systemic durvalumab (durva) + intraperitoneal ONCOS-102 in patients with peritoneal disease who have epithelial ovarian (OC) or metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Fourth CRI-CIMT-EATI-AACR International Cancer Immunotherapy Conference: Translating Science into Survival; Sept 30-Oct 3, 2018; New York, NY. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Immunol Res 2019;7(2 Suppl):Abstract nr A022.

Background: Monoclonal antibodies targeting PD-1 or PD-L1 (PDx) have revolutionized the standards of care for many types of cancer. As of June 2018, 5 anti-PDx agents have been approved by the FDA as monotherapy or part of combination therapy to treat 13 different cancer types. Since the first anti-PDx trial started in 2006, the anti-PDx clinical trial landscape has dramatically evolved. A current understanding of this expanding landscape by stakeholders in the immunotherapy clinical development enterprise will help to inform their prioritization of clinical trials and to support more efficient and effective evaluation of promising treatments. Methods: The Cancer Research Institute, a leading nonprofit organization dedicated to cancer immunotherapy research, has been tracking the progress in the immuno-oncology space over the past 5 years. Having analyzed the database at Clinicaltrials.gov, we were able to compare the available information regarding new interventional cancer trials evaluating PDx with that of all interventional cancer trials. We also compared the current PDx trial landscape with our previous PDx trial analysis conducted in Sept. 2017. Results: In the past decade, the new interventional cancer trials started per year have gradually increased from 2,294 in 2008 to 3,727 in 2017. However, during the same period of time, the number of new PDx trials per year increased from one in 2008 to 776 in 2017. Significantly, PDx trials accounted for 21% of all new interventional cancer trials in 2017. While the number of new trials increased, the average planned patient enrollment per PDx trial decreased from 476 patients in 2011 to 132 patients in 2017. When compared with our previous landscape analysis conducted in Sept. 2017, we found the number of active PDx trials (including both monotherapy and combination) increased from 1,502 as of Sept. 2017 to 2,011 as of Jun 2018, and the number of active PDx combination trials increased from 1,105 to 1,449 during the same time. Finally, in addition to PD-1 or PD-L1, other cancer targets evaluated by those PDx combination trials have expanded from 166 as of Sept. 2017 to 266 as of June 2018, and the planned patient enrollment of these combination trials expanded from 165,215 to 225,747 accordingly. Conclusion: Our landscape analyses show that the PDx trial space has been rapidly expanding, and the numbers of new trials started per year suggest no indication of slowing down in the near future. The 2,011 ongoing PDx trials are a testament to the field’s commitment to developing more effective immunotherapies that will build on the success of PDx checkpoint inhibitors. Care should be given, however, to ensure the trials being conducted are testing new PDx therapies or expanding the effectiveness of PDx therapies to new cancer types while avoiding the concentration of trials testing similar PDx therapies in a few identical cancer conditions. Citation Format: Jun Tang, Laura Pearce, Jill O'Donnell-Tormey, Vanessa M. Hubbard-Lucey. Longitudinal analysis of the landscape of cancer trials testing anti-PD-1/L1 monoclonal antibodies [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Fourth CRI-CIMT-EATI-AACR International Cancer Immunotherapy Conference: Translating Science into Survival; Sept 30-Oct 3, 2018; New York, NY. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Immunol Res 2019;7(2 Suppl):Abstract nr A019.

Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 17, 783–784 (2018) In the original version of Figure 1, the label in the Y axis 'T cell-targeted' was incorrect and should be 'T cell-targeted immunomodulator'. The article has been corrected in the online version.

SummaryPolymorphisms in the essential autophagy gene Atg16L1 have been linked with susceptibility to Crohn’s disease, a major type of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Although the inability to control intestinal bacteria is thought to underlie IBD, the role of Atg16L1 during extracellular intestinal bacterial infections has not been sufficiently examined and compared to the function of other IBD susceptibility genes, such as Nod2, which encodes a cytosolic bacterial sensor. We find that Atg16L1 mutant mice are resistant to intestinal disease induced by the model bacterial pathogen Citrobacter rodentium. An Atg16L1 deficiency alters the intestinal environment to mediate an enhanced immune response that is dependent on monocytic cells, but this hyperimmune phenotype and its protective effects are lost in Atg16L1/Nod2 double-mutant mice. These results reveal an immunosuppressive function of Atg16L1 and suggest that gene variants affecting the autophagy pathway may have been evolutionarily maintained to protect against certain life-threatening infections.

The development of successful cancer vaccines is contingent on the ability to induce effective and persistent anti-tumor immunity against self-antigens that do not typically elicit immune responses. In this study, we examine the effects of a non-myeloablative dose of total body irradiation on the ability of tumor-naïve mice to respond to DNA vaccines against melanoma. We demonstrate that irradiation followed by lymphocyte infusion results in a dramatic increase in responsiveness to tumor vaccination, with augmentation of T cell responses to tumor antigens and tumor eradication. In irradiated mice, infused CD8(+) T cells expand in an environment that is relatively depleted in regulatory T cells, and this correlates with improved CD8(+) T cell functionality. We also observe an increase in the frequency of dendritic cells displaying an activated phenotype within lymphoid organs in the first 24 hours after irradiation. Intriguingly, both the relative decrease in regulatory T cells and increase in activated dendritic cells correspond with a brief window of augmented responsiveness to immunization. After this 24 hour window, the numbers of dendritic cells decline, as does the ability of mice to respond to immunizations. When immunizations are initiated within the period of augmented dendritic cell activation, mice develop anti-tumor responses that show increased durability as well as magnitude, and this approach leads to improved survival in experiments with mice bearing established tumors as well as in a spontaneous melanoma model. We conclude that irradiation can produce potent immune adjuvant effects independent of its ability to induce tumor ablation, and that the timing of immunization and lymphocyte infusion in the irradiated host are crucial for generating optimal anti-tumor immunity. Clinical strategies using these approaches must therefore optimize such parameters, as the correct timing of infusion and vaccination may mean the difference between an ineffective treatment and successful tumor eradication.