-
1.
Efficacy and safety-in analysis of short-course radiation followed by mFOLFOX-6 plus avelumab for locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma.
Shamseddine, A, Zeidan, YH, El Husseini, Z, Kreidieh, M, Al Darazi, M, Turfa, R, Kattan, J, Khalifeh, I, Mukherji, D, Temraz, S, et al
Radiation oncology (London, England). 2020;(1):233
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and short-course radiotherapy followed by resection has been gaining recognition in the treatment of rectal cancer. Avelumab is a fully human immunoglobulin that binds Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PD-L1) and prevents the suppression of the cytotoxic T cell immune response. This phase II trial evaluates the safety and pathologic response rate of short-course radiation followed by 6 cycles of mFOLFOX6 with avelumab in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). METHODS This study is prospective single-arm, multicenter phase II trial adopting Simon's two-stage. Short-course radiation is given over 5 fractions to a total dose of 25 Gy. mFOLFOX6 plus avelumab (10 mg/kg) are given every 2 weeks for 6 cycles. Total mesorectal excision is performed 3-4 weeks after the last cycle of avelumab. Follow up after surgery is done every 3 months to a total of 36 months. Adverse event data collection is recorded at every visit. RESULTS 13 out of 44 patients with LARC were enrolled in the first stage of the study (30% from total sample size). All patients met the inclusion criteria and received the full short-course radiation course followed by 6 cycles of mFOLFOX6 plus avelumab. 12 out of the 13 patients completed TME while one patient had progression of disease and was dropped out of the study. The sample consisted of 9 (69%) males and 4 (31%) females with median age of 62 (33-73) years. The first interim analysis revealed that 3 (25%) patients achieved pathologic complete response (pCR) (tumor regression grade, TRG 0) out of 12. While 3 (25%) patients had near pCR with TRG 1. In total, 6 out of 12 patients (50%) had a major pathologic response. All patients were found to be MMR proficient. The protocol regimen was well tolerated with no serious adverse events of grade 4 reported. CONCLUSION In patients with LARC, neoadjuvant radiation followed by mFOLFOX6 with avelumab is safe with a promising pathologic response rate. Trial Registration Number and Date of Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03503630, April 20, 2018. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03503630?term=NCT03503630&draw=2&rank=1 .
-
2.
Effect of Eribulin With or Without Pembrolizumab on Progression-Free Survival for Patients With Hormone Receptor-Positive, ERBB2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Tolaney, SM, Barroso-Sousa, R, Keenan, T, Li, T, Trippa, L, Vaz-Luis, I, Wulf, G, Spring, L, Sinclair, NF, Andrews, C, et al
JAMA oncology. 2020;(10):1598-1605
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Prior studies have shown that only a small proportion of patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) experience benefit from programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors given as monotherapy. There are data suggesting that activity may be greater with combination strategies. OBJECTIVE To compare the efficacy of eribulin plus pembrolizumab vs eribulin alone in patients with HR-positive, ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-negative MBC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Multicenter phase 2 randomized clinical trial of patients with HR-positive, ERBB2-negative MBC who had received 2 or more lines of hormonal therapy and 0 to 2 lines of chemotherapy. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized 1:1 to eribulin, 1.4 mg/m2 intravenously, on days 1 and 8 plus pembrolizumab, 200 mg/m2 intravenously, on day 1 of a 21-day cycle or eribulin alone. At time of progression, patients in the eribulin monotherapy arm could cross over and receive pembrolizumab monotherapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points were objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). Exploratory analyses assessed the association between PFS and PD-L1 status, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), tumor mutational burden (TMB), and genomic alterations. RESULTS Eighty-eight patients started protocol therapy; the median (range) age was 57 (30-76) years, median (range) number of prior lines of chemotherapy was 1 (0-2), and median (range) number of prior lines of hormonal therapy was 2 (0-5). Median follow-up was 10.5 (95% CI, 0.4-22.8) months. Median PFS and ORR were not different between the 2 groups (PFS, 4.1 vs 4.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.50-1.26; P = .33; ORR, 27% vs 34%, respectively; P = .49). Fourteen patients started crossover treatment with pembrolizumab; 1 patient experienced stable disease. All-cause adverse events occurred in all patients (grade ≥3, 65%) including 2 treatment-related deaths in the combination group, both from immune-related colitis in the setting of sepsis, attributed to both drugs. The PD-L1 22C3 assay was performed on archival tumor samples in 65 patients: 24 (37%) had PD-L1-positive tumors. Analysis indicated that PD-L1 status, TILs, TMB, and genomic alterations were not associated with PFS. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this randomized clinical trial of patients with HR-positive, ERBB2-negative MBC, the addition of pembrolizumab to eribulin did not improve PFS, ORR, or OS compared with eribulin alone in either the intention-to-treat or PD-L1-positive populations. Further efforts to explore the benefits of adding checkpoint inhibition to chemotherapy among less heavily pretreated patients are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03051659.
-
3.
The clinical value and usage of inflammatory and nutritional markers in survival prediction for gastric cancer patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and D2 lymphadenectomy.
Li, Z, Li, S, Ying, X, Zhang, L, Shan, F, Jia, Y, Ji, J
Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. 2020;(3):540-549
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND The clinical values of inflammatory and nutritional markers remained unclear for gastric cancer with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). METHODS The inflammatory, nutritional markers and their changes were analyzed for locally advanced gastric cancer with NACT. The predictive value was evaluated by the Cox proportional hazards regressions under three hypothesized scenarios. The nomograms including independent prognostic factors were plotted for survival prediction. RESULTS A total of 225 patients were included in the study. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR), systemic immune-inflammation index, and hemoglobin (Hgb) were significantly reduced, and the body mass index was significantly increased after NACT (all P < 0.05). The pre-NACT NLR [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.176, P = 0.059] showed a trend to correlate with the overall survival (OS) when only pre-NACT markers available; The post-NACT Hgb (HR = 0.982, P = 0.015) was the independent prognostic factor when only post-NACT markers available; The post-NACT Hgb (HR = 0.984, P = 0.025) and the change value of LMR (HR = 1.183, P = 0.036) were the independent prognostic factors when both pre- and post-NACT markers available. The nomogram had a similar Harrell's C-statistic compared to ypTNM stage (0.719 vs. 0.706). CONCLUSION For locally advanced gastric cancer, the NACT could significantly decrease some inflammatory markers. The pre-NACT NLR, the post-NACT Hgb and the change value of LMR had some values in survival prediction combined with age, sex, tumor location and the clinical stages under different clinical scenarios. The elevated initial NLR, the preoperative anemia and the greater change value of LMR implied a poor prognosis.
-
4.
AtezoTRIBE: a randomised phase II study of FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab alone or in combination with atezolizumab as initial therapy for patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer.
Antoniotti, C, Borelli, B, Rossini, D, Pietrantonio, F, Morano, F, Salvatore, L, Lonardi, S, Marmorino, F, Tamberi, S, Corallo, S, et al
BMC cancer. 2020;(1):683
Abstract
BACKGROUND Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) reported remarkable achievements in several solid tumours. However, in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) promising results are limited to patients with deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high (dMMR/MSI-high) tumours due to their immune-enriched microenvironment. Combining cytotoxic agents and bevacizumab in mCRC with proficient mismatch repair/microsatellite stability (pMMR/MSS) could make ICIs efficacious by increasing the exposure of neoantigens, especially with highly active chemotherapy regimens, inducing immunogenic cell death, increasing the tumoral infiltration of CD8+ T-cells and reducing tumour-associated myeloid-derived suppressor cells. VEGF-blockade also plays an immunomodulatory role by inhibiting the expansion of T regulatory lymphocytes. Consistently with this rationale, a phase Ib study combined the anti-PDL-1 atezolizumab with FOLFOX/bevacizumab as first-line treatment of mCRC, irrespective of microsatellite status, and reported interesting activity and efficacy results, without safety concerns. Phase III trials led to identify FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab as an upfront therapeutic option in selected mCRC patients. Drawing from these considerations, the combination of atezolizumab with an intensified upfront treatment (FOLFOXIRI) and bevacizumab could be worthy of investigation. METHODS AtezoTRIBE is a prospective, open label, phase II, comparative trial in which initially unresectable and previously untreated mCRC patients, irrespective of microsatellite status, are randomized in a 1:2 ratio to receive up to 8 cycles of FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab alone or in combination with atezolizumab, followed by maintenance with bevacizumab plus 5-fluoruracil/leucovorin with or without atezolizumab according to treatment arm until disease progression. The primary endpoint is PFS. Assuming a median PFS of 12 months for standard arm, 201 patients should be randomized in a 1:2 ratio to detect a hazard ratio of 0.66 in favour of the experimental arm. A safety run-in phase including the first 6 patients enrolled in the FOLFOXIRI/bevacizumab/atezolizumab arm was planned, and no unexpected adverse events or severe toxicities were highlighted by the Safety Monitoring Committee. DISCUSSION The AtezoTRIBE study aims at assessing whether the addition of atezolizumab to an intensified chemotherapy plus bevacizumab might be an efficacious upfront strategy for the treatment of mCRC, irrespective of the microsatellite status. TRIAL REGISTRATION AtezoTRIBE is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03721653 ), October 26th, 2018 and at EUDRACT (2017-000977-35), Februray 28th, 2017.
-
5.
Molecular therapies for HCC: Looking outside the box.
Faivre, S, Rimassa, L, Finn, RS
Journal of hepatology. 2020;(2):342-352
Abstract
Over the past decade, sorafenib has been the only systemic agent with proven clinical efficacy for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Recently, lenvatinib was shown to be non-inferior to sorafenib, while regorafenib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab were shown to be superior to placebo in patients failing sorafenib. In addition, trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors reported encouraging efficacy signals. However, apart from alpha-fetoprotein, which is used to select patients for ramucirumab, no biomarkers are available to identify patients that may respond to a specific treatment. Different synergisms have been postulated based on the potential interplay between antiangiogenic drugs and immunotherapy, with several clinical trials currently testing this hypothesis. Indeed, encouraging preliminary results of phase I studies of bevacizumab plus atezolizumab and lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab have led to the design of ongoing phase III trials, including both antiangiogenics and immune checkpoint inhibitors in the front-line setting. Other important phase II studies have tested molecular therapies directed against different novel targets, such as transforming growth factor-beta, MET (hepatocyte growth factor receptor), and fibroblast growth factor receptor 4. These studies integrated translational research with the aim of better defining the biological tumour profile and identifying tumour and blood biomarkers that select patients who may really benefit from a specific molecular therapy. Importantly, good safety profiles make these drugs suitable for future combinations. In this review, we discuss the most recent data on novel combination strategies and targets, as well as looking ahead to the future role of molecular therapies in the treatment of patients with advanced HCC.
-
6.
Systemic treatment of pancreatic cancer revisited.
Ducreux, M, Seufferlein, T, Van Laethem, JL, Laurent-Puig, P, Smolenschi, C, Malka, D, Boige, V, Hollebecque, A, Conroy, T
Seminars in oncology. 2019;(1):28-38
Abstract
Pancreatic cancer is considered to be one of the most aggressive cancers. For unknown reasons, the incidence of pancreatic cancer is slowly rising and so too are mortality rates. Over 75% of patients are diagnosed with locally advanced disease or with metastases; and more than 95% of patients have metastases at diagnosis or will develop metastases during their follow-up. Despite recent improvements in the therapy of pancreatic cancer, initially with demonstration of the activity of the FOLFIRINOX regimen and subsequently the approval of nab-paclitaxel in combination with gemcitabine, prognosis remains poor and the 5-year survival rate is less than 5%. To date, neither personalized medicine nor immunotherapy, the 2 recent revolutions of cancer treatment, have delivered major positive results in the treatment of pancreatic cancer; and it is especially clear that immune checkpoint inhibitors will not become a major tool in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. There are many ongoing studies, including those exploring combinations of chemotherapy with immunotherapy. Vaccines or T cells modified with a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR-T cells) could also play a role in the treatment of cancer in the future. The aim of this review is to discuss recent improvements in standard of care, major obstacles to overcome, recent results of new treatment combinations, and the most interesting innovative approaches.
-
7.
Role of CCL5 and CCR5 gene polymorphisms in epidermal growth factor receptor signalling blockade in metastatic colorectal cancer: analysis of the FIRE-3 trial.
Suenaga, M, Stintzing, S, Cao, S, Zhang, W, Yang, D, Ning, Y, Okazaki, S, Berger, MD, Miyamoto, Y, Schirripa, M, et al
European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990). 2019;:100-114
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Epidermal growth factor receptor signalling blockade increases CCL5 expression that regulates either the anti-tumour immune response or tumour progression. We investigated the potential role of CCL5/CCR5 axis in cetuximab-based treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS Genomic DNA was extracted from 491 samples of two different cohorts with KRAS wild-type mCRC from the FIRE-3 trial: an evaluation cohort of 244 patients receiving cetuximab plus FOLFIRI and a control cohort of 247 patients receiving bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI. Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of CCL5 and CCR5 genes were analysed by polymerase chain reaction-based direct sequencing. RESULTS Patients in the evaluation cohort with any CCL5 rs2280789G allele had shorter overall survival (OS) compared with those with the A/A variant (hazard ratio 1.56, P = 0.024). Patients carrying any CCR5 rs1799988T allele had a trend toward lower response rate than those with the C/C variant (68 vs. 81%, P = 0.078). In the analysis based on primary tumour location (left-sided [L]: right-sided [R]), remarkable differences in outcomes were observed between patients with L-CCR5 SNPs C/C variant (L-C/C), L-any T, R-T/T and R-any C as follows: median OS, 38.5, 30.6, 27.1 and 15.8 months, P < 0.001; response rate, 91, 66, 92 and 48%, P < 0.001. Median OS for CCL5 SNPs including L-A/A, L-any G, R-A/A and R-any G groups were 38.3, 21.7, 21.9 and 18.3 months, P < 0.001. The findings were not significant in the control cohort. CONCLUSION Genetic variants of CCL5 and CCR5 SNPs may predict outcomes in mCRC patients receiving cetuximab-based treatment depending on tumour location.
-
8.
Elemene injection as adjunctive treatment to platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with stage III/IV non-small cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis following the PRISMA guidelines.
Wang, X, Liu, Z, Sui, X, Wu, Q, Wang, J, Xu, C
Phytomedicine : international journal of phytotherapy and phytopharmacology. 2019;:152787
Abstract
BACKGROUND Elemene injection is an anticancer Chinese patent medicine that is widely used for the treatment of advanced lung cancer. Its active ingredients are β-, γ- and δ-elemene, which are extracted from Curcumaaromatica Salisb. (Curcumawenyujin Y.H. Chen & C. Ling). PURPOSE To evaluate the effects of Elemene injection as adjunctive treatment to platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC) in patients with stage III/IV non-small cell lung cancer. STUDY DESIGN A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following the PRISMA (Preferred Reported Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis) guidelines. Analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.3, Comprehensive Meta-Analysis 3.0 and Trial Sequential Analysis software. All RCTs comparing Elemene injection combined with PBC vs. PBC alone were selected and assessed for inclusion. The disease control rate (DCR) was defined as the primary endpoint, and the objective Response rate (ORR), survival rate, quality of life (QOL), cellular immune function and toxicities were the secondary outcomes. RESULTS 15 RCTs recruiting 1,410 patients with stage III/IV NSCLC were included. The methodological quality of most included trials was low to moderate. Compared with PBC alone, Elemene injection plus PBC can improve DCR (RR = 1.23, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.31, p < 0.00001), ORR (RR = 1.62, 95% CI 1.44 to 1.82, p < 0.00001), 1- and 2-year survival rates (RR = 1.33, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.59, p = 0.002; RR = 1.73, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.46, p = 0.002, respectively), QOL (RR = 1.91, 95% CI 1.58 to 2.32, p < 0.00001), CD4+T cell counts (WMD = 10.43, 95% CI 8.25 to 12.62, p < 0.00001), and the CD4+/CD8+ratio (WMD = 0.78, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.14, p < 0.0001) and can reduce severe toxicities by 58% (RR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.52, p < 0.00001). CONCLUSION Elemene injection is a safe and effective adjunctive treatment to platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with stage III/IV NSCLC. Elemene injection can improve clinical efficacy, enhance cellular immune function and alleviate the toxicity of chemotherapy. High-quality RCTs with significant survival outcomes and longer follow-ups are warranted to confirm the results further.
-
9.
Atezolizumab with or without cobimetinib versus regorafenib in previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (IMblaze370): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial.
Eng, C, Kim, TW, Bendell, J, Argilés, G, Tebbutt, NC, Di Bartolomeo, M, Falcone, A, Fakih, M, Kozloff, M, Segal, NH, et al
The Lancet. Oncology. 2019;(6):849-861
Abstract
BACKGROUND Microsatellite-stable metastatic colorectal cancer is typically unresponsive to immunotherapy. This phase 3 study was designed to assess atezolizumab plus cobimetinib in metastatic colorectal cancer. Here, we report the comparison of atezolizumab plus cobimetinib or atezolizumab monotherapy versus regorafenib in the third-line setting. METHODS IMblaze 370 is a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial, done at 73 academic medical centres and community oncology practices in 11 countries. Patients aged at least 18 years with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer, baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and disease progression on or intolerance to at least two previous systemic chemotherapy regimens were enrolled. We used permuted-block randomisation (block size four) to assign patients (2:1:1) via an interactive voice and web response system to atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously every 2 weeks) plus cobimetinib (60 mg orally once daily for days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle), atezolizumab monotherapy (1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks), or regorafenib (160 mg orally once daily for days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle). Stratification factors were extended RAS status (wild-type vs mutant) and time since diagnosis of first metastasis (<18 months vs ≥18 months). Recruitment of patients with high microsatellite instability was capped at 5%. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in the population of patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. IMblaze370 is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02788279. FINDINGS Between July 27, 2016, and Jan 19, 2017, 363 patients were enrolled (183 patients in the atezolizumab plus cobimetinib group, 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 90 in the regorafenib group). At data cutoff (March 9, 2018), median follow-up was 7·3 months (IQR 3·7-13·6). Median overall survival was 8·87 months (95% CI 7·00-10·61) with atezolizumab plus cobimetinib, 7·10 months (6·05-10·05) with atezolizumab, and 8·51 months (6·41-10·71) with regorafenib; the hazard ratio was 1·00 (95% CI 0·73-1·38; p=0·99) for the combination versus regorafenib and 1·19 (0·83-1·71; p=0·34) for atezolizumab versus regorafenib. Grade 3-4 adverse events were reported in 109 (61%) of 179 patients in the atezolizumab plus cobimetinib group, 28 (31%) of 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 46 (58%) of 80 in the regorafenib group. The most common all-cause grade 3-4 adverse events in the combination group were diarrhoea (20 [11%] of 179), anaemia (ten [6%]), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (12 [7%]), and fatigue (eight [4%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 71 (40%) of 179 patients in the combination group, 15 (17%) of 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 18 (23%) of 80 in the regorafenib group. Two treatment-related deaths occurred in the combination group (sepsis) and one in the regorafenib group (intestinal perforation). INTERPRETATION IMblaze370 did not meet its primary endpoint of improved overall survival with atezolizumab plus cobimetinib or atezolizumab versus regorafenib. The safety of atezolizumab plus cobimetinib was consistent with those of the individual drugs. These results underscore the challenge of expanding the benefit of immunotherapy to patients whose tumours have lower baseline levels of immune inflammation, such as those with microsatellite-stable metastatic colorectal cancer. FUNDING F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd/Genentech Inc.
-
10.
Targeting myeloid-derived suppressor cells using all-trans retinoic acid in melanoma patients treated with Ipilimumab.
Tobin, RP, Jordan, KR, Robinson, WA, Davis, D, Borges, VF, Gonzalez, R, Lewis, KD, McCarter, MD
International immunopharmacology. 2018;:282-291
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Immune checkpoint inhibitors have improved overall survival rates for many cancers, yet the majority of patients do not respond to treatment and succumb to disease progression. One tumor-related mechanism limiting the efficacy of immunotherapies in melanoma is the recruitment and expansion of myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs). Therefore, targeting MDSCs in combination with immunotherapies is an attractive strategy to improve response rates and effectiveness. METHODS We tested this strategy by designing a randomized phase II clinical trial treating advanced melanoma patients with either Ipilimumab monotherapy or Ipilimumab plus all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA). Clinicaltrails.gov identifier (NCT02403778). The frequency of circulating MDSCs and the activation of CD8(+) T cells was measured by flow cytometry. Expression of immunosuppressive genes was measured with quantitative real time-PCR. T cell suppressive functions were measured by mixed lymphocyte reaction. RESULTS Here we show that in vitro treatment with ATRA decreases immunosuppressive function of MDSCs in mixed lymphocyte reactions. Additionally, ATRA reduces the expression of immunosuppressive genes including PD-L1, IL-10, and indoleamine 2,3‑dioxygenase by MDSCs. Furthermore, the addition of ATRA to standard of care Ipilimumab therapy appears safe, as ATRA did not increase the frequency of grade 3 or 4 adverse events. Finally, ATRA significantly decreased the frequency of circulating MDSCs compared to Ipilimumab treatment alone in advanced-stage melanoma patients. CONCLUSIONS These results illustrate the importance of MDSCs in immunotherapy resistance and provide evidence that targeting MDSCs in cancer patients may augment immunotherapeutic approaches.