Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Brain metastases are a common cause of disabling neurologic complications and death in patients with metastatic melanoma. Previous studies of nivolumab combined with ipilimumab in metastatic melanoma have excluded patients with untreated brain metastases. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with melanoma who had untreated brain metastases. METHODS:In this open-label, multicenter, phase 2 study, patients with metastatic melanoma and at least one measurable, nonirradiated brain metastasis (tumor diameter, 0.5 to 3 cm) and no neurologic symptoms received nivolumab (1 mg per kilogram of body weight) plus ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 3 weeks for up to four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The primary end point was the rate of intracranial clinical benefit, defined as the percentage of patients who had stable disease for at least 6 months, complete response, or partial response. RESULTS:Among 94 patients with a median follow-up of 14.0 months, the rate of intracranial clinical benefit was 57% (95% confidence interval [CI], 47 to 68); the rate of complete response was 26%, the rate of partial response was 30%, and the rate of stable disease for at least 6 months was 2%. The rate of extracranial clinical benefit was 56% (95% CI, 46 to 67). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported in 55% of patients, including events involving the central nervous system in 7%. One patient died from immune-related myocarditis. The safety profile of the regimen was similar to that reported in patients with melanoma who do not have brain metastases. CONCLUSIONS:Nivolumab combined with ipilimumab had clinically meaningful intracranial efficacy, concordant with extracranial activity, in patients with melanoma who had untreated brain metastases. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and the National Cancer Institute; CheckMate 204 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02320058 .).

Combination anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) therapy promotes antitumor immunity and provides superior benefit to patients with advanced-stage melanoma compared with either therapy alone. T cell immunity requires recognition of antigens in the context of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I and class II proteins by CD8⁺ and CD4⁺ T cells, respectively. We examined MHC class I and class II protein expression on tumor cells from previously untreated melanoma patients and correlated the results with transcriptional and genomic analyses and with clinical response to anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1, or combination therapy. Most (>50% of cells) or complete loss of melanoma MHC class I membrane expression was observed in 78 of 181 cases (43%), was associated with transcriptional repression of HLA-A, HLA-B, HLA-C, and B2M, and predicted primary resistance to anti-CTLA-4, but not anti-PD-1, therapy. Melanoma MHC class II membrane expression on >1% cells was observed in 55 of 181 cases (30%), was associated with interferon-γ (IFN-γ) and IFN-γ-mediated gene signatures, and predicted response to anti-PD-1, but not anti-CTLA-4, therapy. We conclude that primary response to anti-CTLA-4 requires robust melanoma MHC class I expression. In contrast, primary response to anti-PD-1 is associated with preexisting IFN-γ-mediated immune activation that includes tumor-specific MHC class II expression and components of innate immunity when MHC class I is compromised. The benefits of combined checkpoint blockade may be attributable, in part, to distinct requirements for melanoma-specific antigen presentation to initiate antitumor immunity.

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:Cancer-testis antigen NY-ESO-1 is a highly immunogenic melanoma antigen which has been incorporated into adjuvant vaccine clinical trials. Three such early-phase trials were conducted at our center among patients with high-risk resected melanoma. We herein report on the pooled long-term survival outcomes of these patients in comparison to historical controls. METHODS:All melanoma patients treated at NYU Langone Health under any of three prospective adjuvant NY-ESO-1 vaccine trials were retrospectively pooled into a single cohort. All such patients with stage III melanoma were subsequently compared to historical control patients identified via a prospective institutional database with protocol-driven follow-up. Survival times were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazard models were employed to identify significant prognostic factors and control for confounding variables. RESULTS:A total of 91 patients were treated with an NY-ESO-1 vaccine for the treatment of high-risk resected melanoma. Of this group, 67 patients were stage III and were selected for comparative analysis with 123 historical control patients with resected stage III melanoma who received no adjuvant therapy. Among the pooled vaccine cohort (median follow-up 61 months), the estimated median recurrence-free survival was 45 months, while the median overall survival was not yet reached. In the control cohort of 123 patients (median follow-up 30 months), the estimated median recurrence-free and overall survival were 22 and 58 months, respectively. Within the retrospective stage III cohort, NY-ESO-1 vaccine was associated with decreased risk of recurrence (HR = 0.56, p < 0.01) and death (HR = 0.51, p = 0.01). Upon controlling for sub-stage, the adjuvant NY-ESO-1 clinical trial cohort continued to exhibit decreased risk of recurrence (HR = 0.45, p < 0.01) and death (HR = 0.40, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:In this small retrospective cohort of resected stage III melanoma patients, adjuvant NY-ESO-1 vaccine immunotherapy was associated with longer recurrence-free and overall survival relative to historical controls. These data support the continued investigation of adjuvant NY-ESO-1 based immunotherapy regimens in melanoma.

BACKGROUND:Immune checkpoint inhibitors (anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1, or the combination) enhance anti-tumor immune responses, yielding durable clinical benefit in several cancer types, including melanoma. However, a subset of patients experience immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which can be severe and result in treatment termination. To date, no biomarker exists that can predict development of irAEs. METHODS:We hypothesized that pre-treatment antibody profiles identify a subset of patients who possess a sub-clinical autoimmune phenotype that predisposes them to develop severe irAEs following immune system disinhibition. Using a HuProt human proteome array, we profiled baseline antibody levels in sera from melanoma patients treated with anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1, or the combination, and used support vector machine models to identify pre-treatment antibody signatures that predict irAE development. RESULTS:We identified distinct pre-treatment serum antibody profiles associated with severe irAEs for each therapy group. Support vector machine classifier models identified antibody signatures that could effectively discriminate between toxicity groups with > 90% accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. Pathway analyses revealed significant enrichment of antibody targets associated with immunity/autoimmunity, including TNFα signaling, toll-like receptor signaling and microRNA biogenesis. CONCLUSIONS:Our results provide the first evidence supporting a predisposition to develop severe irAEs upon immune system disinhibition, which requires further independent validation in a clinical trial setting.

Objectives Ontuxizumab (MORAB-004) is a first-in-class monoclonal antibody that interferes with endosialin function, which is important in tumor stromal cell function, angiogenesis, and tumor growth. This Phase 2 study evaluated the 24-week progression-free survival (PFS) value, pharmacokinetics, and tolerability of 2 doses of ontuxizumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. Patients and methods Patients with metastatic melanoma and disease progression after receiving at least 1 prior systemic treatment were randomized to receive ontuxizumab (2 or 4 mg/kg) weekly, without dose change, until disease progression. Results Seventy-six patients received at least 1 dose of ontuxizumab (40 received 2 mg/kg, 36 received 4 mg/kg). The primary endpoint, 24-week PFS value, was 11.4% (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 5.3%-19.9%) for all patients (13.5% for 2 mg/kg and 8.9% for 4 mg/kg). The median PFS for all patients was 8.3 weeks (95% CI: 8.1-12.3 weeks). One patient receiving 4 mg/kg had a partial response, as measured by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. Twenty-seven of 66 response evaluable patients (40.9%) had stable disease. The median overall survival was 31.0 weeks (95% CI: 28.3-44.0 weeks). The most common adverse events overall were headache (55.3%), fatigue (48.7%), chills (42.1%), and nausea (36.8%), mostly grade 1 or 2. Conclusions Ontuxizumab at both doses was well tolerated. The 24-week PFS value was 11.4% among all ontuxizumab-treated patients. The overall response rate was 3.1% at the 4 mg/kg dose, with clinical benefit achieved in 42.4% of response evaluable patients. Efficacy of single-agent ontuxizumab at these doses in melanoma was low.

The phase Ib BRIM7 study (ClinicalTrials.gov ID, NCT01271803) evaluated the safety and preliminary efficacy of C + V; a subsequent randomized phase 3 trial showed statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of C + V compared with V. Results of BRIM7 with extended follow-up will be presented. Patients (pts) had advanced BRAF^V600-mutated melanoma, ECOG PS 0-1, and either progressed on V (V-PD) or were BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi)-naive. Dose-escalation pts received C at 60, 80, or 100 mg/day for 14 days on/14 days off; 21 days on/7 days off (21/7); or continually in combination with V at 720 or 960 mg twice daily (BID). Two dose levels were expanded: C (60 mg/day 21/7) + V (720 mg/day and 960 mg BID). Of the 129 C + V-treated pts, 49% were BRAFi-naive. Baseline characteristics were as follows: stage M1c, 70% and 82%; LDH > ULN, 46% and 62% for BRAFi-naive and V-PD pts, respectively. We will present data from the updated data cutoff (July 2017). These data will include updated tumor response, survival, and safety data from this study population

PURPOSE: The objectives of the study were to evaluate the safety of daily oral PX-866 in combination with twice daily vemurafenib and to identify potential predictive biomarkers for this novel combination. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We conducted a phase I, open-label, dose escalation study in patients with advanced BRAF V600 mutant solid tumors. PX-866 was administered on a continuous schedule in combination with vemurafenib. Patients underwent a baseline and on-treatment biopsy after 1-week of PX-866 monotherapy for biomarker assessment. RESULTS: 24 patients were enrolled. The most common treatment-related adverse events were gastrointestinal side effects. One dose limiting toxicity (DLT) of grade 3 rash and one DLT of grade 3 pancreatitis were observed in cohort 2 (PX-866 6mg daily; vemurafenib 960mg twice daily) and cohort 3 (PX-866 8mg daily; vemurafenib 960mg twice daily), respectively. Of 23 response evaluable patients, 7 had confirmed partial responses (PRs), 10 had stable disease and 6 had disease progression. Decreases in intra-tumoral pAKT expression were observed following treatment with PX-866. Patients who achieved PRs had higher rates of PTEN loss by immunohistochemistry (80% vs 58%) and pathogenic PTEN mutations and/or deletions (57% vs 25%). Two patients with durable PRs had an increase in intra-tumoral CD8 T-cell infiltration following treatment with PX-866. CONCLUSIONS: PX-866 was well tolerated at its maximal tolerated single-agent dose when given in combination with a modified dose of vemurafenib (720mg twice daily). Response to treatment appeared to be associated with PTEN loss and treatment with PX-866 seemed to increase CD8 T-cell infiltration in some patients.

OBJECTIVE The incidence of brain metastases is increasing with improved systemic therapies, many of which have a limited impact on intracranial disease. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a first-line management option for brain metastases. The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a threshold tumor size below which local control (LC) rates approach 100%, and to relate these findings to the use of routine surveillance brain imaging. METHODS From a prospective registry, 200 patients with 1237 brain metastases were identified who underwent SRS between December 2012 and May 2015. The median imaging follow-up duration was 7.9 months, and the median margin dose was 18 Gy. The maximal diameter and volume of tumors were measured. Histological analysis included 96 patients with non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs), 40 with melanoma, 35 with breast cancer, and 29 with other histologies. RESULTS Almost 50% of brain metastases were NSCLCs and commonly measured less than 6 mm in maximal diameter or 70 mm3 in volume. Thirty-three of 1237 tumors had local progression at a median of 8.8 months. The 1- and 2-year actuarial LC rates were 97% and 93%, respectively. LC of 100% was achieved for all intracranial metastases less than 100 mm3 in volume or 6 mm in diameter. Patients whose tumors at first SRS were less than 10 mm maximal diameter or a volume of 250 mm3 had improved overall survival. CONCLUSIONS SRS can achieve LC rates approaching 100% for subcentimeter metastases. The earlier initial detection and prompt treatment of small intracranial metastases may prevent the development of neurological symptoms and the need for resection, and improve overall survival. To identify tumors when they are small, routine surveillance brain imaging should be considered as part of the standard of care for lung, breast, and melanoma metastases. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE Type of question: prognostic; study design: retrospective cohort; evidence: Class II.

AIM:To evaluate the protocol-specified final analysis of overall survival (OS) in the KEYNOTE-002 study (NCT01704287) of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in patients with ipilimumab-refractory, advanced melanoma. METHODS:mutant-positive. Patients were randomised to pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks or investigator-choice chemotherapy. Crossover to pembrolizumab was allowed following progression on chemotherapy. The protocol-specified final OS was performed in the intent-to-treat population. Survival was positive if p < 0.01 in one pembrolizumab arm. RESULTS:A total of 180 patients were randomised to pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg, 181 to pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg and 179 to chemotherapy. At a median follow-up of 28 months (range 24.1-35.5), 368 patients died and 98 (55%) crossed over to pembrolizumab. Pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg (hazard ratio [HR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-1.10, p = 0.117) and 10 mg/kg (0.74, 0.57-0.96, p = 0.011) resulted in a non-statistically significant improvement in OS versus chemotherapy; median OS was 13.4 (95% CI 11.0-16.4) and 14.7 (95% CI 11.3-19.5), respectively, versus 11.0 months (95% CI 8.9-13.8), with limited improvement after censoring for crossover. Two-year survival rates were 36% and 38%, versus 30%. Progression-free survival, objective response rate and duration of response improved with pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy, regardless of dose. Grade III-V treatment-related adverse events occurred in 24 (13.5%), 30 (16.8%) and 45 (26.3%) patients, respectively. CONCLUSION:Improvement in OS with pembrolizumab was not statistically significant at either dose versus chemotherapy.