Preliminary analysis of a phase II, multicenter, randomized, active-control study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of eganelisib (IPI 549) in combination with nivolumab compared to nivolumab monotherapy in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 436-436
Author(s):  
Piotr Tomczak ◽  
Lazar Popovic ◽  
Philippe Barthelemy ◽  
Aleksander Janicic ◽  
Elena Sevillano Fernandez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Preliminary Data ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Suppressor Cells ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Transaminase Elevation ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
To Receive

436 Background: Inhibition of the PD-1 pathway has demonstrated clinical benefit in metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC); however, response rates of 15% to 29% highlight the need for more effective therapies, especially for PD-L1- patients. Eganelisib is a first-in-class, novel, oral agent which selectively inhibits PI3K-γ, with the goal of improving the immune response to checkpoint inhibitors (CPI). Methods: Eligible patients (pts) with mUC who progressed on > 1 platinum-based chemotherapy regimen and were CPI naïve were enrolled. Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive eganelisib in combination with nivolumab (EN) or placebo with nivolumab (PN). Pts were stratified by baseline circulating monocytic myeloid derived suppressor cells (mMDSC) level. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1 in pts with high baseline mMDSC levels. Other endpoints included ORR, progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in all pts and PD-L1 +/- pts. Results: We report preliminary data (as of 9/1/2020) for the first 49 pts with 33 randomized to receive EN and 16 PN. Preliminary ORR/PFS is presented in the table below. Except for the mMDSC high subgroup, ORR and PFS were improved in the EN arm compared to the PN arm. The duration of exposure was a median of 15 weeks for EN and 11 for PN. Most common all-Gr AEs (EN vs PN %) were pyrexia (33 vs 0), decreased appetite (30 vs 19), pruritis (24 vs 6), rash (24 vs 6), asthenia (21 vs 31), and transaminase elevation (21 vs 6). Most common Gr≥3 AEs (EN vs PN %) include hepatotoxicity (15 vs 0), transaminase elevation (12 vs 6), and rash (9 vs 0). Following an early safety review, eganelisib dose was reduced from 40 to 30 mg, resulting in a reduction of hepatic AEs. Conclusions: Preliminary data demonstrates that the combination of eganelisib, once reduced to 30 mg, and nivolumab was well tolerated with hepatic and skin-related toxicities more common in the EN arm. When compared to PN, the combination demonstrated an improved ORR and PFS, especially in the PD-L1- subset. Updated efficacy, including PFS and OS, safety and translational data will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT03980041 . [Table: see text]

Response to salvage chemotherapy after progression on immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 519-519
Author(s):  
Seung-Hoon Beom ◽  
Sun Young Rha ◽  
Joong Bae Ahn ◽  
Sang Joon Shin
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Salvage Chemotherapy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma

519 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are active in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma which progressed to platinum-based chemotherapy. Recent data suggest that exposure to ICI improves response to salvage chemotherapy (SCT) in several cancer types. Here we evaluated whether PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors affect the antitumor effects of SCT after ICI in patients with urothelial carcinoma. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted at Yonsei Cancer Center. Eligibility criteria were patients who received at least one SCT as 3rd-line or beyond, following progression after platinum-based chemotherapy and ICI and for whom efficacy data were available between January 2017 and September 2019. We evaluated efficacy outcomes to each therapy, including ORR by RECIST version 1.1, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: In total, 35 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analyses. ICIs were given as monotherapy and they were administrated as second-line in 48% and as later line in 52%. Twenty-six patients (74%) received a anti-PD-L1 inhibitor and 9 (26%) did a anti-PD-1 inhibitor. SCT included single paclitaxel (60%), MVAC (26%), gemcitabine/platinum combination (9%), and pemetrexed (6%). The ORR to SCT was 26%. Among 9 patients who received MVAC, 5 (55.5%) achieved a partial response. Median progression-free survival was 2.5 months and median overall survival was 7.8 months. A number of prior chemotherapy regimens was associated with response to SCT on univariate analysis. Conclusions: In urothelial cancer patients, the confirmed ORR (26%) to SCT after ICI exposure was higher as compared to historical data from the pre-ICI era. These data indicate that anti–PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors could make tumors more vulnerable to subsequent chemotherapy.

A randomized comparison of cisplatin alone or in combination with methotrexate, vinblastine, and doxorubicin in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a cooperative group study.

1992 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 1066-1073 ◽  
Author(s):  
P J Loehrer ◽  
L H Einhorn ◽  
P J Elson ◽  
E D Crawford ◽  
P Kuebler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Combined Therapy ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
To Receive

PURPOSE A prospective randomized trial was performed to determine if the addition of methotrexate, vinblastine, and doxorubicin to cisplatin (M-VAC) imparted a response rate or a survival advantage over single-agent cisplatin in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS From October 1984 through May 1989, 269 patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma were entered onto this international intergroup trial and randomized to receive intravenous (IV) cisplatin (70 mg/m2) alone or with methotrexate (30 mg/m2 on days 1, 15, 22), vinblastine (3 mg/m2 on days 2, 15, 22) plus doxorubicin (30 mg/m2 on day 2). Cycles were repeated every 28 days until tumor progression or a maximum of six cycles. There were 246 fully assessable patients of whom 126 were randomized to cisplatin alone and 120 were randomized to the M-VAC regimen. RESULTS As expected, the M-VAC regimen was associated with a greater toxicity, especially leukopenia, mucositis, granulocytopenic fever, and drug-related mortality. Response rates were superior for the M-VAC regimen compared with single-agent cisplatin (39% v 12%; P less than .0001). Similarly, the progression-free survival (10.0 v 4.3 months) and overall survival (12.5 v 8.2 months) were significantly greater for the combined therapy arm. CONCLUSION Although a more toxic regimen, we found M-VAC to be superior to single-agent cisplatin with respect to response rate, duration of remission, and overall survival in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

Interim analysis of ibrutinib plus paclitaxel for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4522-4522
Author(s):  
Daniel E. Castellano ◽  
Rafael Morales-Barrera ◽  
Ignacio Duran ◽  
Bhumsuk Keam ◽  
Ik Joo Chung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Geometric Mean ◽  
Major Hemorrhage ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Phase 1B ◽  
Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma

4522 Background: Patients (pts) with advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) who progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy (PBCT) have a median overall survival (OS) of ~6 mo on CT and 8-10 mo on novel immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Treatment (tx) with ibrutinib (ibr), a first-in-class, once-daily inhibitor of Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) with immunomodulatory properties, plus paclitaxel (pac) may improve outcomes for pts with aUC. Methods: Pts with aUC who had 1-2 prior tx (≥1 PBCT and/or ICIs) formed one cohort of this phase 1b/2 study. Recommended phase 2 dose per phase 1b was ibr 840 mg/d + weekly pac 80 mg/m2 in 21-d cycles; starting ibr dose of 560 mg/d. nanoString gene expression assay (NanoString Technologies) was used for preliminary assessment of ibr-targeted kinases in baseline tumor biopsies. Results: This interim analysis included the first 29 pts treated (ibr 840/560 mg/d, n = 25/4; median age 67 y). 52% had 2 prior regimens (prior PD-L1 inhibitors, 100%). Median time on study/tx was 7.2/2.3 mo (max tx: 11.5 mo). Unconfirmed overall response rate (ORR) was 41% (complete/partial response: 10%/31%). Disease control rate was 62%. ORR was 71% for 7 pts with only lymph node metastases; ORR was 36% for 14 pts with 1 prior tx and 47% for 15 pts with 2 prior tx. Median duration of response was 4.2 mo (90% CI: 1.9-7.1). Median progression-free survival was 3.6 mo (90% CI: 1.6-5.4). Median OS was 14.7 mo (90% CI: 7.7-15.9). Follow-up is ongoing for durability/survival with 6 pts alive without progression, including 4 still on ibr. 76% of pts had grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs); 4 discontinued ibr + pac due to AEs and 1 had major hemorrhage. Pac exposure was not impacted by ibr; pac geometric mean Cmax (2066 ng/mL) and AUC0-∞ (3813 ng·h/mL) were consistent with historical data. Preliminary tumor biopsy data showed a nonsignificant trend of higher BTK/ITK/BMX expression in tx responders; analyses are ongoing. Conclusions: Ibr + pac shows promising results for ORR/OS in pts with aUC previously treated with PBCT and ICIs. No unexpected safety signals were seen; ibr + pac seemed tolerable. Follow-up of these and additional pts will support the activity and safety of ibr + pac in this study. Clinical trial information: NCT02599324.

Real-world (rw) clinical outcomes for advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) patients (pts) treated with second line (2L) ramucirumab plus docetaxel (R+D) post frontline (1L) platinum based chemotherapy plus immune checkpoint inhibitors (Pt + ICI).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20727-e20727
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Melson Clarke ◽  
Raina Mathur ◽  
Cliff Molife ◽  
Marta Batus ◽  
Victoria Jennifer Stefaniak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Control ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Community Practice ◽  
Best Response ◽  
First Response ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Duration Of Response

e20727 Background: R+D is approved for use in pts with aNSCLC after Pt chemotherapy. With recent approvals, ICI can now be added to Pt chemotherapy (Pt + ICI) in 1L. This retrospective observational study provides an exploratory view of baseline characteristics and rw clinical effectiveness outcomes for pts receiving 2L R+D post 1L Pt + ICI. Methods: All adult pts treated with 2L R+D after 1L Pt + ICI therapy between 03/01/2015 and 06/30/2018, with ≥ 3 months follow up, were selected from the Flatiron Health EHR-derived de-identified database (n = 15). Rw clinical endpoints during R+D therapy included rw objective response rate (rwORR), rw disease control rate (rwDCR), rw best response, as well as Kaplan-Meier estimates of rw time to first response & rw duration of response. Results: Median age was 62 years, 10 pts (66.6%) were aged < 65 years, 11 (73.3%) were men, 3 (20.0%) had no history of smoking, 14 (93.3%) had non-squamous histology, 4 (26.7%) were EGFR positive, 3 (20.0%) were KRAS positive and 6 (85.7%) were PD-L1 negative. Of the 8 pts with a documented rw tumor response assessment, 3 (37.5%) had partial response (PR), 3 (37.5%) had stable disease (SD), & 2 (25.0%) had progressive disease as their rw best response. The rwORR (PR or complete response [CR]) & rwDCR (PR, CR, or SD) were 37.5% and 75.0%, respectively. Among responding pts, median time to first response was 2.2 months (95% CI, 1.3 - not reached [NR]) & median duration of response was 2.3 months (95% CI, 1.5 - NR). Patient numbers were too small (n = 15) and duration of follow-up was too short (3.4 months [IQR, 0.7 - 5.4]) to make robust estimation of overall survival or rw progression free survival. Conclusions: Data from this small patient cohort in US community practice are not conclusive and should be considered exploratory, but do show high rates of rw objective response and rw disease control rates during 2L R+D following 1L Pt + ICI. Data with larger sample sizes and additional follow-up are needed to better understand outcomes of R+D following the addition of ICI to 1L Pt chemotherapy regimens.

scholarly journals RaPiDS (GOG-3028): randomized Phase II study of balstilimab alone or in combination with zalifrelimab in cervical cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M O’Malley ◽  
Leslie M Randall ◽  
Camille Gunderson Jackson ◽  
Robert L Coleman ◽  
John L Hays ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Chemotherapy Patients ◽  
Investigational Agents

Balstilimab (anti-programmed death 1) and zalifrelimab (anti-CTLA-4) are two new checkpoint inhibitors that have emerged as promising investigational agents for the treatment of cervical cancer, particularly in the setting of previously-treated, recurrent/metastatic disease. Here we describe the rationale and design of RaPiDS (NCT03894215), a two-arm Phase II study evaluating the safety, tolerability and efficacy of balstilimab administered alone or in combination with zalifrelimab in patients with advanced cervical cancer who progressed after first-line, platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio. The primary end point is objective response rate, and key secondary objectives include safety, duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival and quality of life outcomes.

scholarly journals Nivolumab in Metastatic Adrenocortical Carcinoma: Results of a Phase 2 Trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 104 (12) ◽  
pp. 6193-6200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benedito A Carneiro ◽  
Bhavana Konda ◽  
Rubens B Costa ◽  
Ricardo L B Costa ◽  
Vinay Sagar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adrenocortical Carcinoma ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Preliminary Evidence ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy

Abstract Context Systemic treatment of metastatic adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) remains limited to chemotherapy and mitotane. Preliminary evidence suggesting that antitumor immune responses can be elicited in ACC has fostered interest in checkpoint inhibitors such as anti–PD-1 nivolumab. Objective The primary endpoint was objective response rate according to the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and safety. Design Single-arm, multicenter, phase 2 clinical trial with two-stage design. Setting Comprehensive cancer center. Patients Ten adult patients with metastatic ACC previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy and/or mitotane as well as patients who declined front-line chemotherapy. Intervention Nivolumab (240 mg) IV every 2 weeks. Results Ten patients with metastatic ACC were enrolled between March and December 2016. The median number of doses of nivolumab administered was two. Three patients only received one treatment [one died of disease progression, one discontinued due to adverse events (AEs), one withdrew after beginning treatment]. The median PFS was 1.8 months. The median follow-up was 4.5 months (range, 0.1 to 25.6 months). Two patients had stable disease for a duration of 48 and 11 weeks, respectively. One patient had an unconfirmed partial response but discontinued the study due to an AE. Most AEs were grade 1/2. The most common grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs were aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase elevations, mucositis, and odynophagia. Conclusion Nivolumab demonstrated modest antitumor activity in patients with advanced ACC. The nivolumab safety profile was consistent with previous clinical experience without any unexpected AEs in this population.

Retrospective study to assess the efficacy and safety of checkpoint inhibitors in advanced urothelial carcinoma in real-world setting.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e17043-e17043
Author(s):  
Elena Sevillano Fernandez ◽  
Javier Puente ◽  
Natalia Vidal ◽  
Alvaro Pinto ◽  
Lourdes Garcia Sanchez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Real World ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Molecular Study ◽  
Collaborative Group ◽  
First Line ◽  
Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma

e17043 Background: Checkpoint Inhibitors (CPI) have become a new standard of treatment in advanced urothelial carcinoma. However, little is known regarding the outcome of patients in daily practice.We aimed to assess tumor response and toxicity of CPIs in a cohort of patients treated in “real world” conditions. In parallel, a comprehensive molecular study in tumor samples from these patients, is ongoing. Methods: We designed an observational retrospective study within the “Grupo Centro” collaborative group. Adult patients diagnosed of metastasic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) and treated with CPIs between 2011-2019 in any of the 20 centers of the group, were eligible. Results: Up to date 100 patients have been included (82% males) with a median age of 74 years (48 -96). In 82% patients primary was bladder cancer. Most common metastasic sites were bone (26%) and liver (16%).With a median follow up of 10,6 months(mo) median progression free survival (mPFS) was 6,6mo (1,4-95,4 range) and median Overall Survival (mOS) was 21.3mo (3,8-121,8). 38% of patients received CPIs in first line(L): atezolizumab:27, pembrolizumab: 10, nivolumab:1. The median number of cycles was 8,2. Up to 51% received platinum-based combinations in first line. 69% (69/100) pts received 2L treatment: 68% with CPIs, 27,5% with chemotherapy and 4% with FGFR inhibitors (as part of a clinical trial). 2L mPFS was 3,5 mo (1,9-25.9). 23% (23/100) patients received 3L, of them 26% (6/23) were treated with CPIs. 3L mPFS:8,3mo(0,4-43,8). As a whole, patients treated with CPI accross different lines, achieved complete response in 8% of the cases, partial response in 18% and stable disease in 15%. Up to 44% of cases presented progressive disease as best response and evaluation was not available in 15%. Most common G1-2 AEs related to immunotherapy were: asthenia:31%,pruritus:16% and anorexia: 9%.10% pts experienced G3-4 toxicity: asthenia G3: 4, diarrhea G3: 1, erythrodysesthesia G3:1, arthromyalgia G3: 1, cardiac arrest G4:1,pneumonitis G4:1,anemia G3:1. Conclusions: This study confirms the efficacy and security of CPIs in real world. Response rates and toxicity profile were comparable to those reported in clinical trials.

scholarly journals Current Systemic Treatment Options in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma after Progression on Checkpoint Inhibition Therapy—A Systemic Review Combined with Single-Group Meta-Analysis of Three Studies Testing Enfortumab Vedotin

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (13) ◽  
pp. 3206
Author(s):  
Susanne Deininger ◽  
Peter Törzsök ◽  
David Oswald ◽  
Lukas Lusuardi
Keyword(s):  
Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Current Treatment ◽  
Systemic Review ◽  
Single Group ◽  
Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma

Background: In the first and second-line therapy of metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC), checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) such as Pembrolizumab and Atezolizumab have been widely implemented. Little is currently known about what therapeutic options are effective after therapy with CPI. This article presents a systemic review of current treatment options in this setting. Methods: From August 2020 to 15 April 2021, a literature search was performed through the PubMed/Medline. Subsequently, a single-group meta-analysis of three studies testing Enfortumab vedotin (EV) was conducted. Results: Five therapy regimens tested in the post-CPI setting with adequate data were identified: Chemotherapy (CT), Ramucirumab plus Docetaxel, Erdafitinib (Erd), EV, and Sacituzumab govitecan (SG). In n = 74 + 125 + 288 patients, the single-group meta-analysis showed an objective response rate of 42.1% for EV compared to 17.9% for CT in a similar setting. EV was also ahead in progression free survival (5.9 months with EV vs. 3.7 months with CT) and overall survival (12.8 months with EV vs. 9.0 months with CT). Conclusion: Most data are currently available for EV. Further research is needed on the question of which patients’ subcollectives particularly benefit from which therapeutic approach.

scholarly journals Approved checkpoint inhibitors in bladder cancer: which drug should be used when?

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 175883591878831 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pooja Ghatalia ◽  
Matthew Zibelman ◽  
Daniel M. Geynisman ◽  
Elizabeth Plimack
Keyword(s):  
Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
United States Food ◽  
Phase Iii Trials ◽  
Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
States Food ◽  
Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma ◽  
Line Setting

The treatment of advanced metastatic urothelial carcinoma has recently evolved with the approval of five checkpoint inhibitors. In the second-line setting, in patients who have progressed on cisplatin-based chemotherapy, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, nivolumab and avelumab are United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved. In cisplatin-ineligible patients, atezolizumab and pembrolizumab are the FDA-approved checkpoint inhibitors. Here we describe the updated clinical efficacy of these checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma and then suggest how they can be sequenced in the context of available chemotherapeutic options. For cisplatin-eligible patients, platinum-based chemotherapy remains the standard first-line treatment. For patients progressing on platinum-based therapy, phase III trials have been performed comparing pembrolizumab and atezolizumab separately with standard chemotherapy, and results favor the use of pembrolizumab.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document