scholarly journals 550 ARTACUS: An open-label, multicenter, phase 1b/2 study of RP1 in solid organ transplant recipients with advanced cutaneous malignancies

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (Suppl 3) ◽  
pp. A580-A580
Author(s):  
Jason Luke ◽  
Michael Migden ◽  
Wanxing Chai-Ho ◽  
Diana Bolotin ◽  
Trisha Wise-Draper ◽  
...  

BackgroundSolid organ transplantation (SOT) has emerged as an important lifesaving procedure for patients with a wide range of end-organ diseases characterized by dysfunction or specific organ function failure. SOT rejection is a major complication requiring patients (pts) to undergo lifelong immunosuppression to prevent allograft rejection.1Skin cancers (SCs) including cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) are common post transplant malignancies.2 SC in SOT pts is generally managed with surgical resection, radiation therapy and chemotherapy or targeted therapy. Use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in SOT recipients has improved outcomes but are associated with the high risk of allograft rejection.3–5 Thus, there is a high unmet need for a safe and effective treatment that also protects pts from allograft rejection. RP1 is an oncolytic virus (HSV-1) that expresses a fusogenic glycoprotein (GALV-GP R-) and granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF). In preclinical studies, RP1 induced immunogenic tumor cell death and provided potent systemic anti-tumor activity6 and clinical data in combination with nivolumab has demonstrated a high rate of deep and durable response in patients with advanced SCs.7 The objective of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of single agent RP1 in kidney and liver transplant recipients with SCs, with focus on CSCC. After determining the safety and tolerability in the initial cohort with kidney and liver transplants the study may also enroll heart and lung transplant recipients.MethodsThis study will enroll up to 65 evaluable allograft transplantation pts with locally advanced or metastatic SCs. Key inclusion criteria are pts with confirmed recurrent, locally advanced or metastatic CSCC and up to 10 pts with non-CSCC SC, stable allograft function and ECOG performance status of ≤1. Pts with prior systemic anti-cancer treatment are allowed. Key exclusion criteria are prior treatment with an oncolytic therapy, active herpetic infections or prior complications of HSV-1 infection and a history of organ graft rejection within 12 months. Pts will receive an initial dose of 1 x 10^6 plaque-forming units (PFU) of RP1. Two weeks later they will receive 1 x 10^7 PFU of RP1 and continue every two weeks until pre-specified study endpoints are met. RP1 will be administered by intra-tumoral injection including through imaging guidance as clinically appropriate. The primary objective of the trial is to assess efficacy determined by ORR and safety of single agent RP1. Additional secondary endpoints include DOR, CR, DCR, PFS and OS.Trial RegistrationNCT04349436ReferencesFrohn C, Fricke L, Puchta JC, Kirchner H. The effect of HLA-C matching on acute renal transplant rejection. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2001;16(2):355–60.Madeleine MM, Patel NS, Plasmeijer EI, Engels EA, Bouwes Bavinck JN, Toland AE, Green AC; the Keratinocyte Carcinoma Consortium (KeraCon) Immunosuppression Working Group. Epidemiology of keratinocyte carcinomas after organ transplantation. Br J Dermatol 2017;177(5):1208–1216.Spain L, Higgins R, Gopalakrishnan K, Turajlic S, Gore M, Larkin J. Acute renal allograft rejection after immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy for metastatic melanoma. Ann Oncol 2016;27(6):1135–1137.Herz S, Höfer T, Papapanagiotou M, Leyh JC, Meyenburg S, Schadendorf D, Ugurel S, Roesch A, Livingstone E, Schilling B, Franklin C. Checkpoint inhibitors in chronic kidney failure and an organ transplant recipient. Eur J Cancer 2016;67:66-72.Kittai AS, Oldham H, Cetnar J, Taylor M. Immune checkpoint inhibitors in organ transplant ptss. J Immunother 2017;40(7):277–281.Thomas S, Kuncheria L, Roulstone V, Kyula JN, Mansfield D, Bommareddy PK, Smith H, Kaufman HL, Harrington KJ, Coffin RS. Development of a new fusion-enhanced oncolytic immunotherapy platform based on herpes simplex virus type 1. J Immunother Cancer 2019 10;7(1):214.Middleton M, Aroldi F, Sacco J, Milhem M, Curti B, Vanderwalde A, Baum S, Samson A, Pavlick A, Chesney J, Niu J, Rhodes T, Bowles T, Conry R, Olsson-Brown A, Earl-Laux D, Kaufman H, Bommareddy P, Deterding A, Samakoglu S, Coffin R, Harrington K. 422 An open-label, multicenter, phase 1/2 clinical trial of RP1, an enhanced potency oncolytic HSV, combined with nivolumab: updated results from the skin cancer cohorts. J Immunother Cancer 2020;8(3): doi: 10.1136/jitc-2020-SITC2020.0422Ethics ApprovalThe study was approved by institutional review board or the local ethics committee at each participating site. Informed consent was obtained from patients before participating in the trial.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS461-TPS461
Author(s):  
Nataliya Volodymyrivna Uboha ◽  
Jens C. Eickhoff ◽  
Chandrikha Chandrasekharan ◽  
Shadia Ibrahim Jalal ◽  
Al Bowen Benson ◽  
...  

TPS461 Background: Metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA) has poor prognosis. Overall survival (OS) remains around 12 months (mo) with current therapies. Pembrolizumab is approved for advanced GEA that has progressed on at least 2 prior lines of systemic therapy. However, the majority of patients progress on this treatment, and less than 15% of patients experience objective response (OR). This study will evaluate efficacy of pembrolizumab in combination with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor, abemaciclib, in patients with advanced GEA. Preclinical studies have demonstrated that CDK4/6 inhibitors can increase anti-tumor immunity and can synergize with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Based on these data, we hypothesize that abemaciclib will augment response to pembrolizumab in GEA. Methods: This is a multi-institutional, single arm, open label, phase II study of abemaciclib in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced GEA who have progressed or were intolerant to at least 2 prior lines of therapy. Patients previously treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors or with microsattelite unstable tumors will be excluded. Treatments will be given on a 21 day cycle until disease progression or intolerable toxicities. Pembrolizumab, 200 mg intravenously, will be given on day 1, and abemaciclib, 150 mg, will be taken orally twice a day on days 1-21. Primary endpoint is progression free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints include PFS rate at 6 mo, disease control rate, OS and OR rate. Correlative endpoints will examine relationship between PDL1 status, genomic signature and treatment response. Saliva samples will be collected for microbiome analysis. Archival tumor tissue and blood samples will be banked for future studies. A total of 31 evaluable subjects will be enrolled to detect an anticipated increase in the median PFS from 2 months (null hypothesis) to 4 months with 80% power at the one-sided 0.05 significance level. The trial is open to enrollment. Clinical trial information: NCT03997448.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 440-440 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petros Grivas ◽  
Yohann Loriot ◽  
Susan Feyerabend ◽  
Rafael Morales-Barrera ◽  
Min Yuen Teo ◽  
...  

440 Background: ATLAS (NCT03397394) evaluated the efficacy/safety of the PARP inhibitor (PARPi) rucaparib in patients (pts) with previously treated locally advanced/unresectable UC or mUC. Methods: Pts with measurable disease who had progressed after 1–2 prior regimens (ie, platinum-based chemotherapy [PBC] and/or immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICI]) were enrolled regardless of tumor homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status. Prior PARPi was not allowed. Pts received rucaparib 600 mg PO BID. Baseline tumor tissue or archival tissue ≤6 mo without intervening therapy was required; serial circulating tumor DNA samples were collected. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (RECIST v1.1) in the intent-to-treat and HRD-positive (defined as genomic loss of heterozygosity ≥10%) populations. Key secondary endpoints: progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Clinical benefit rate (CBR) was defined as complete or partial response or stable disease (SD) lasting ≥16 weeks. Results: As of Oct 7, 2019, 97 pts were enrolled (median age 66 y [range, 39–87]); most were men (n=76, 78.4%) and had ECOG PS 1 (n=65, 67.0%). Sixty-six pts (68.0%) had both prior PBC and ICI. Twenty pts (20.6%) were HRD-positive, 30 (30.9%) were HRD-negative and 47 (48.5%) had unknown HRD status; 4 pts had a deleterious BRCA1/2 alteration. Median time on treatment was 54 d (range, 2–224). There were no confirmed responses. Of 96 evaluable pts, 27 (28.1%) had a best response of SD; CBR was 12.5% and median PFS was 1.8 mo. No relationship was observed between HRD status and clinical activity. Treatment was discontinued by 93 pts (95.9%), mainly due to radiologic or clinical progression (73.1%). Most frequent any grade treatment-emergent (any cause) adverse events were asthenia/fatigue (n=56, 57.7%), nausea (n=40, 41.2%), and anemia (n=34, 35.1%). Conclusions: Single agent rucaparib did not show activity in pts with previously treated advanced UC and enrollment was suspended at the first interim analysis. The safety profile was consistent with that observed in pts with ovarian cancer. Next generation sequencing–based characterization of the genomic landscape of mUC will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT03397394.


2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 543-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Saberianfar ◽  
L.S. Nguyen ◽  
A. Manouchehri ◽  
B. Lebrun-Vignes ◽  
J.J. Moslehi ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 25 (7) ◽  
pp. 2037-2052 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven M. Steinberg ◽  
Rocco C. Venuto ◽  
Chakko K. Kuruvila ◽  
David O. Taylor ◽  
Mysore S. Anil Kumar ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document