Faculty Bibliography

MEK inhibition is of interest in cancer drug development, but clinical activity in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has been limited. Preclinical studies demonstrated Wnt pathway overexpression in KRAS-mutant cell lines resistant to the MEK inhibitor, selumetinib. The combination of selumetinib and cyclosporin A, a noncanonical Wnt pathway modulator, demonstrated antitumor activity in mCRC patient-derived xenografts. To translate these results, we conducted a NCI Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program-approved multicenter phase I/IB trial (NCT02188264) of the combination of selumetinib and cyclosporin A. Patients with advanced solid malignancies were treated with the combination of oral selumetinib and cyclosporin A in the dose escalation phase, followed by an expansion cohort of irinotecan and oxaliplatin-refractory mCRC. The expansion cohort utilized a single-agent selumetinib "run-in" to evaluate FZD2 biomarker upregulation and KRAS-WT and KRAS-MT stratification to identify any potential predictors of efficacy. Twenty and 19 patients were enrolled in dose escalation and expansion phases, respectively. The most common adverse events and grade 3/4 toxicities were rash, hypertension, and edema. Three dose-limiting toxicities (grade 3 hypertension, rash, and increased creatinine) were reported. The MTD was selumetinib 75 mg twice daily and cyclosporin A 2 mg/kg twice daily on a 28-day cycle. KRAS stratification did not identify any differences in response between KRAS-WT and KRAS-MT cancers. Two partial responses, 18 stable disease, and 10 progressive disease responses were observed. Combination selumetinib and cyclosporin A is well tolerated, with evidence of activity in mCRC. Future strategies for concept development include identifying better predictors of efficacy and improved Wnt pathway modulation.Significance: These findings translate preclinical studies combining selumetinib and cyclosporin into a phase I first-in-human clinical trial of such a combination in patients with advanced solid malignancies. Cancer Res; 78(18); 5398-407. ©2018 AACR.

Metastatic melanoma represents a challenging clinical situation and, until relatively recently, there was an absence of effective treatment options. However, in 2011, the advanced melanoma treatment landscape was revolutionised with the approval of the anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein-4 checkpoint inhibitor ipilimumab and the selective BRAF kinase inhibitor vemurafenib, both of which significantly improved overall survival. Since then, availability of new immunotherapies, especially the anti-programmed death-1 checkpoint inhibitors, as well as other targeted therapies, have further improved outcomes for patients with advanced melanoma. Seven years on from the first approval of these novel therapies, evidence for the use of various immune-based and targeted approaches is continuing to increase at a rapid rate. Improved understanding of the tumour microenvironment and tumour immuno-evasion strategies has resulted in different approaches to target and harness the immune response. These new immune-based approaches offer the opportunity for various approaches with distinct modes of action being used in combination with one another, as well as combined with other treatment modalities such as targeted therapy, electrochemotherapy and surgery. The increasing number of treatment options that are now available has resulted in a growing need to identify which patients will derive most benefit from which treatments. Much research is now focused on the identification of biomarkers that can be utilised to help select patients for treatment. These and other recent advances in the management of melanoma were the focus of discussions at the third Melanoma Bridge meeting (30 November-2 December, 2017, Naples, Italy), which is summarised in this report.

Studies demonstrate that GRM, expressed by >60% of human melanomas, may be a therapeutic target. We performed a phase II trial of 100 mg PO bid of riluzole, an inhibitor of GRM1 signaling, in patients with advanced melanoma with the primary endpoint of response rate. Thirteen patients with GRM1-positive tumors were enrolled. No objective responses were observed, and accrual was stopped. Stable disease was noted in six (46%) patients, with one patient on study for 42 weeks. Riluzole was well tolerated, with fatigue (62%) as the most common adverse event. Downregulation of MAPK and PI3K/AKT was noted in 33% of paired tumor biopsies. Hypothesis-generating correlative studies suggested that downregulation of angiogenic markers and increased leukocytes at the active edge of tumor correlate with clinical benefit. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed interpatient variability consistent with prior riluzole studies. Future investigations should interrogate mechanisms of biologic activity and advance the development of agents with improved bioavailability.

BACKGROUND:Cancer immunotherapy has been firmly established as a standard of care for patients with advanced and metastatic melanoma. Therapeutic outcomes in clinical trials have resulted in the approval of 11 new drugs and/or combination regimens for patients with melanoma. However, prospective data to support evidence-based clinical decisions with respect to the optimal schedule and sequencing of immunotherapy and targeted agents, how best to manage emerging toxicities and when to stop treatment are not yet available. METHODS:To address this knowledge gap, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) Melanoma Task Force developed a process for consensus recommendations for physicians treating patients with melanoma integrating evidence-based data, where available, with best expert consensus opinion. The initial consensus statement was published in 2013, and version 2.0 of this report is an update based on a recent meeting of the Task Force and extensive subsequent discussions on new agents, contemporary peer-reviewed literature and emerging clinical data. The Academy of Medicine (formerly Institute of Medicine) clinical practice guidelines were used as a basis for consensus development with an updated literature search for important studies published between 1992 and 2017 and supplemented, as appropriate, by recommendations from Task Force participants. RESULTS:The Task Force considered patients with stage II-IV melanoma and here provide consensus recommendations for how they would incorporate the many immunotherapy options into clinical pathways for patients with cutaneous melanoma. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:These clinical guidleines provide physicians and healthcare providers with consensus recommendations for managing melanoma patients electing treatment with tumor immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND:Antibodies targeting the programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)/programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) checkpoint may cause adverse events (AEs) that are linked to the mechanism of action of this therapeutic class and unique from those observed with conventional chemotherapy. METHODS:Patients with advanced solid tumors who were enrolled in the phase 1 JAVELIN Solid Tumor (1650 patients) and phase 2 JAVELIN Merkel 200 (88 patients) trials received avelumab, a human anti-PD-L1 IgG1 antibody at a dose of 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) were graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.0). In post hoc analyses, immune-related AEs (irAEs) were identified via an expanded AE list and medical review, and infusion-related reactions (IRRs) occurring ≤2 days after infusion and symptoms occurring ≤1 day after infusion and resolving ≤2 days after onset were identified based on prespecified Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) terms. RESULTS:Of the 1738 patients analyzed, grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 177 (10.2%); the most common were fatigue (17 patients; 1.0%) and IRR (10 patients; 0.6%). TRAEs led to discontinuation in 107 patients (6.2%) and death in 4 patients (0.2%). Grade ≥3 irAEs occurred in 39 patients (2.2%) and led to discontinuation in 34 patients (2.0%). IRRs or related symptoms occurred in 439 patients (25.3%; grade 3 in 0.5% [9 patients] and grade 4 in 0.2% [3 patients]). An IRR occurred at the time of first infusion in 79.5% of 439 patients who had an IRR, within the first 4 doses in 98.6% of 439 patients who had an IRR, and led to discontinuation in 35 patients (2.0%). CONCLUSIONS:Avelumab generally was found to be well tolerated and to have a manageable safety profile. A minority of patients experienced grade ≥3 TRAEs or irAEs, and discontinuation was uncommon. IRRs occurred mainly at the time of first infusion, and repeated events were infrequent. Cancer 2018;124:2010-7. © 2018 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

Response to immune checkpoint therapy can be associated with a high mutation burden, but other mechanisms are also likely to be important. We identified a patient with metastatic gastric cancer with meaningful clinical benefit from treatment with the anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody avelumab. This tumor showed no evidence of high mutation burden or mismatch repair defect but was strongly positive for presence of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) encoded RNA. Analysis of The Cancer Genome Atlas gastric cancer data (25 EBV+, 80 microsatellite-instable [MSI], 310 microsatellite-stable [MSS]) showed that EBV-positive tumors were MSS. Two-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum tests showed that: 1) EBV-positive tumors had low mutation burden (median = 2.07 vs 3.13 in log10 scale, P < 10-12) but stronger evidence of immune infiltration (median ImmuneScore 2212 vs 1295, P < 10-4; log2 fold-change of CD8A = 1.85, P < 10-6) compared with MSI tumors, and 2) EBV-positive tumors had higher expression of immune checkpoint pathway (PD-1, CTLA-4 pathway) genes in RNA-seq data (log2 fold-changes: PD-1 = 1.85, PD-L1 = 1.93, PD-L2 = 1.50, CTLA-4 = 1.31, CD80 = 0.89, CD86 = 1.31, P < 10-4 each), and higher lymphocytic infiltration by histology (median tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte score = 3 vs 2, P < .001) compared with MSS tumors. These data suggest that EBV-positive low-mutation burden gastric cancers are a subset of MSS gastric cancers that may respond to immune checkpoint therapy.

Background Voxtalisib, a PI3K/mTOR inhibitor, has shown antitumor activity in capsule formulation in patients with solid tumors. This Phase I study assessed safety and pharmacokinetics of voxtalisib administered as immediate-release tablets in patients with solid tumors (NCT01596270). Methods A "3 + 3" dose escalation design was used. Adverse events (AEs), pharmacokinetics (PK), food effect and tumor response were evaluated. Results Thirty-two patients received voxtalisib doses ranging from 50 mg to 70 mg once daily (QD) and 17 patients received voxtalisib doses ranging from 30 mg to 50 mg twice daily (BID), for two 28-day cycles. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were Grade 3 fatigue (two patients at 70 mg QD, one patient at 40 mg BID) and Grade 3 rash (two patients at 50 mg BID). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was 60 mg for QD and 40 mg for BID regimens. Common treatment-emergent AEs were diarrhea (41%), nausea (37%) and fatigue (33%). Voxtalisib appeared to follow linear PK, with a general increase in plasma exposure with dose and no significant accumulation. Administration with food caused a slight decrease in exposure; however, given the high variability observed in the exposure parameters, this should be interpreted with caution. Best response was stable disease in 29% and 50% of patients (QD and BID regimens, respectively). Conclusions The safety profile of voxtalisib tablets at the MTD in patients with solid tumors was consistent with that observed with voxtalisib capsules. Given the limited activity observed across multiple clinical trials, no further trials of voxtalisib are planned.

Purpose To establish the safety profile and antitumor activity of the anti-programmed death 1 receptor monoclonal antibody, pembrolizumab, in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (RM-NPC) that expressed programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). Patients and Methods KEYNOTE-028 (NCT02054806) is a nonrandomized, multicohort, phase Ib trial of pembrolizumab in patients with PD-L1-positive advanced solid tumors. Key eligibility criteria for the NPC cohort included unresectable or metastatic disease, failure on prior standard therapy, and PD-L1 expression in 1% or more of tumor cells or tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. Patients received pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks up to 2 years or until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) per investigator review. Tumor response was assessed according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST; version 1.1) every 8 weeks for the first 6 months and every 12 weeks thereafter. Results Twenty-seven patients received pembrolizumab. Median age was 52.0 years (range, 18 to 68 years); 92.6% received prior therapies for RM-NPC; 70.4% had received three or more therapies. Partial response and stable disease were observed in seven and 14 patients, respectively, for an ORR of 25.9% (95% CI, 11.1 to 46.3) over a median follow-up of 20 months. ORR by central review was similar (26.3%). Drug-related adverse events that occurred in 15% or more of patients included rash (25.9%), pruritus (25.9%), pain (22.2%), hypothyroidism (18.5%), and fatigue (18.5%). Grade ≥ 3 drug-related adverse events occurred in eight patients (29.6%), and there was one drug-related death (sepsis). As of the data cutoff (June 20, 2016), two patients remained on pembrolizumab treatment. Conclusion Pembrolizumab demonstrated antitumor activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with RM-NPC.

Purpose The safety and efficacy of pembrolizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody against programmed death 1 (PD-1), were assessed in patients with programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-expressing extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) in the multicohort, phase Ib open-label KEYNOTE-028 study ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02054806). Methods Patients with SCLC received pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks for 24 months or until disease progression or intolerable toxicity occurred. PD-L1 expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry. PD-L1-positive patients had membranous PD-L1 expression in ≥ 1% of tumor and associated inflammatory cells or positive staining in stroma. Response was assessed by investigator per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 every 8 weeks for the first 6 months and every 12 weeks thereafter. Adverse events (AEs) were reported per the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. Primary end points were safety, tolerability, and objective response rate (ORR). Secondary end points included progression-free survival, overall survival, and duration of response. Results Twenty-four patients with PD-L1-expressing SCLC were enrolled and received at least one pembrolizumab dose. At the data cutoff date (June 20, 2016), the median follow-up duration was 9.8 months (range, 0.5 to 24 months). All 24 patients experienced AEs; the most common were asthenia (n = 7), fatigue (n = 7), and cough (n = 6). Two patients experienced grade 3 to 5 treatment-related AEs: one patient had elevated bilirubin, and one patient had asthenia, grade 5 colitis, and intestinal ischemia. One patient had a complete response, and seven patients had partial responses, resulting in an ORR of 33% (95% CI, 16% to 55%). Conclusion The safety of pembrolizumab was consistent with the known safety profile in other tumor types. Pembrolizumab demonstrated promising antitumor activity in patients with pretreated, PD-L1-expressing SCLC.

Purpose: Many patients with BRAF^V600E mutant melanoma treated with BRAF inhibitors experience a rapid response, but ultimately develop resistance. Insight into the mechanism of resistance is critical for development of more effective treatment strategies.Experimental Design: Comprehensive genomic profiling of serial biopsies was performed in a patient with a BRAF^V600E mutant metastatic melanoma who developed resistance to vemurafenib. An AGAP3-BRAF fusion gene, identified in the vemurafenib-resistant tumor, was expressed in BRAF^V600E melanoma cell lines, and its effect on drug sensitivity was evaluated.Results: Clinical resistance to vemurafenib in a melanoma harboring a BRAF^V600E mutation was associated with acquisition of an AGAP3-BRAF fusion gene. Expression of the AGAP3-BRAF fusion in BRAF^V600E mutant melanoma cells induced vemurafenib resistance; however, these cells remained relatively sensitive to MEK inhibitors. The patient experienced clinical benefit following treatment with the combination of a BRAF and a MEK inhibitor. Rebiopsy of the tumor at a later time point, after BRAF and MEK inhibitors had been discontinued, showed loss of the AGAP3-BRAF fusion gene. Mixing experiments suggest that cells harboring both BRAF^V600E and AGAP3-BRAF only have a fitness advantage over parental BRAF^V600E cells during active treatment with a BRAF inhibitor.Conclusions: We report acquisition of a BRAF fusion as a novel mechanism of acquired resistance to vemurafenib in a patient with melanoma harboring a BRAF^V600E mutation. The acquisition and regression of clones harboring this fusion during the presence and absence of a BRAF inhibitor are consistent with rapidly evolving clonal dynamics in melanoma. Clin Cancer Res; 23(18); 5631-8. ©2017 AACR.