Dataset Information

Durvalumab With or Without Tremelimumab for Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

New therapeutic options for patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) are needed. This study evaluated dual checkpoint combination therapy in patients with mPDAC.

Objective

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the anti-PD-L1 (programmed death-ligand 1) antibody using either durvalumab monotherapy or in combination with the anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 antibody using durvalumab plus tremelimumab therapy in patients with mPDAC.

Design, setting, and participants

Part A of this multicenter, 2-part, phase 2 randomized clinical trial was a lead-in safety, open-label study with planned expansion to part B pending an efficacy signal from part A. Between November 26, 2015, and March 23, 2017, 65 patients with mPDAC who had previously received only 1 first-line fluorouracil-based or gemcitabine-based treatment were enrolled at 21 sites in 6 countries. Efficacy analysis included the intent-to-treat population; safety analysis included patients who received at least 1 dose of study treatment and for whom any postdose data were available.

Interventions

Patients received durvalumab (1500 mg every 4 weeks) plus tremelimumab (75 mg every 4 weeks) combination therapy for 4 cycles followed by durvalumab therapy (1500 mg every 4 weeks) or durvalumab monotherapy (1500 mg every 4 weeks) for up to 12 months or until the onset of progressive disease or unacceptable toxic effects.

Main outcomes and measures

Safety and efficacy were measured by objective response rate, which was used to determine study expansion to part B. The threshold for expansion was an objective response rate of 10% for either treatment arm.

Results

Among 65 randomized patients, 34 (52%) were men and median age was 61 (95% CI, 37-81) years. Grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events occurred in 7 of 32 patients (22%) receiving combination therapy and in 2 of 32 patients (6%) receiving monotherapy; 1 patient randomized to the monotherapy arm did not receive treatment owing to worsened disease. Fatigue, diarrhea, and pruritus were the most common adverse events in both arms. Overall, 4 of 64 patients (6%) discontinued treatment owing to treatment-related adverse events. Objective response rate was 3.1% (95% CI, 0.08-16.22) for patients receiving combination therapy and 0% (95% CI, 0.00-10.58) for patients receiving monotherapy. Low patient numbers limited observation of the associations between treatment response and PD-L1 expression or microsatellite instability status.

Conclusion and relevance

Treatment was well tolerated, and the efficacy of durvalumab plus tremelimumab therapy and durvalumab monotherapy reflected a population of patients with mPDAC who had poor prognoses and rapidly progressing disease. Patients were not enrolled in part B because the threshold for efficacy was not met in part A.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02558894.

SUBMITTER: O'Reilly EM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6647002 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceCheckpoint inhibitors targeting programmed cell death 1 or its ligand (PD-L1) as monotherapies or in combination with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 have shown clinical activity in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.ObjectiveTo compare durvalumab, with or without tremelimumab, with chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.Design, setting, and participantsThis open-label, phase 3 randomized clinical trial (MYSTIC) was conducted at 203 cancer treatment centers in 17 countries. Patients with treatment-naive, metastatic non-small cell lung cancer who had no sensitizing EGFR or ALK genetic alterations were randomized to receive treatment with durvalumab, durvalumab plus tremelimumab, or chemotherapy. Data were collected from July 21, 2015, to October 30, 2018.InterventionsPatients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive treatment with durvalumab (20 mg/kg every 4 weeks), durvalumab (20 mg/kg every 4 weeks) plus tremelimumab (1 mg/kg every 4 weeks, up to 4 doses), or platinum-based doublet chemotherapy.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end points, assessed in patients with ≥25% of tumor cells expressing PD-L1, were overall survival (OS) for durvalumab vs chemotherapy, and OS and progression-free survival (PFS) for durvalumab plus tremelimumab vs chemotherapy. Analysis of blood tumor mutational burden (bTMB) was exploratory.ResultsBetween July 21, 2015, and June 8, 2016, 1118 patients were randomized. Baseline demographic and disease characteristics were balanced between treatment groups. Among 488 patients with ≥25% of tumor cells expressing PD-L1, median OS was 16.3 months (95% CI, 12.2-20.8) with durvalumab vs 12.9 months (95% CI, 10.5-15.0) with chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 97.54% CI, 0.56-1.02; P = .04 [nonsignificant]). Median OS was 11.9 months (95% CI, 9.0-17.7) with durvalumab plus tremelimumab (HR vs chemotherapy, 0.85; 98.77% CI, 0.61-1.17; P = .20). Median PFS was 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.8-5.0) with durvalumab plus tremelimumab vs 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.6-5.8) with chemotherapy (HR, 1.05; 99.5% CI, 0.72-1.53; P = .71). Among 809 patients with evaluable bTMB, those with a bTMB ≥20 mutations per megabase showed improved OS for durvalumab plus tremelimumab vs chemotherapy (median OS, 21.9 months [95% CI, 11.4-32.8] vs 10.0 months [95% CI, 8.1-11.7]; HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.32-0.74). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 55 (14.9%) of 369 patients who received treatment with durvalumab, 85 (22.9%) of 371 patients who received treatment with durvalumab plus tremelimumab, and 119 (33.8%) of 352 patients who received treatment with chemotherapy. These adverse events led to death in 2 (0.5%), 6 (1.6%), and 3 (0.9%) patients, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceThe phase 3 MYSTIC study did not meet its primary end points of improved OS with durvalumab vs chemotherapy or improved OS or PFS with durvalumab plus tremelimumab vs chemotherapy in patients with ≥25% of tumor cells expressing PD-L1. Exploratory analyses identified a bTMB threshold of ≥20 mutations per megabase for optimal OS benefit with durvalumab plus tremelimumab.Trial registrationClinicalT rials.gov Identifier: NCT02453282.

Project description:ImportanceDual blockade of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) may overcome immune checkpoint inhibition. It is unknown whether dual blockade can potentiate antitumor activity without compromising safety in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) and low or no PD-L1 tumor cell expression.ObjectiveTo assess safety and objective response rate of durvalumab combined with tremelimumab.Design, setting, and participantsThe CONDOR study was a phase 2, randomized, open-label study of Durvalumab, Tremelimumab, and Durvalumab in Combination With Tremelimumab in Patients With R/M HNSCC. Eligibility criteria included PD-L1-low/negative disease that had progressed after 1 platinum-containing regimen in the R/M setting. Patients were randomized (N = 267) from April 15, 2015, to March 16, 2016, at 127 sites in North America, Europe, and Asia Pacific.InterventionsDurvalumab (20 mg/kg every 4 weeks) + tremelimumab (1 mg/kg every 4 weeks) for 4 cycles, followed by durvalumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks), or durvalumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks) monotherapy, or tremelimumab (10 mg/kg every 4 weeks for 7 doses then every 12 weeks for 2 doses) monotherapy.Main outcomes and measuresSafety and tolerability and efficacy measured by objective response rate.ResultsAmong the 267 patients (220 men [82.4%]), median age (range) of patients was 61.0 (23-82) years. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 21 patients (15.8%) treated with durvalumab + tremelimumab, 8 (12.3%) treated with durvalumab, and 11 (16.9%) treated with tremelimumab. Grade 3/4 immune-mediated adverse events occurred in 8 patients (6.0%) in the combination arm only. Objective response rate (95% CI) was 7.8% (3.78%-13.79%) in the combination arm (n = 129), 9.2% (3.46%-19.02%) for durvalumab monotherapy (n = 65), and 1.6% (0.04%-8.53%) for tremelimumab monotherapy (n = 63); median overall survival (95% CI) for all patients treated was 7.6 (4.9-10.6), 6.0 (4.0-11.3), and 5.5 (3.9-7.0) months, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceIn patients with R/M HNSCC and low or no PD-L1 tumor cell expression, all 3 regimens exhibited a manageable toxicity profile. Durvalumab and durvalumab + tremelimumab resulted in clinical benefit, with minimal observed difference between the two. A phase 3 study is under way.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02319044.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The efficacy of immunotherapy targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway has previously been demonstrated in metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) aims at ablating metastatic lesions and may play a synergistic role with immunotherapy. The purpose of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of triple treatment combination (TTC) consisting of the administration of durvalumab and tremelimumab in combination with SBRT in metastatic HNSCC. METHOD:This is a phase I/II single arm study that will include 35 patients with 2-10 extracranial metastatic lesions. Patients will receive durvalumab (1500?mg IV every 4?weeks (Q4W)) and tremelimumab (75?mg IV Q4W for a total of 4 doses) until progression, unacceptable toxicity or patient withdrawal. SBRT to 2-5 metastases will be administered between cycles 2 and 3 of immunotherapy. The safety of the treatment combination will be evaluated through assessment of TTC-related toxicities, defined as grade 3-5 toxicities based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (v 4.03), occurring within 6?weeks from SBRT start, and that are definitely, probably or possibly related to the combination of all treatments. We hypothesize that dual targeting of PD-L1 and CTLA-4 pathways combined with SBRT will lead to <?35% grade 3-5 acute toxicities related to TTC. Progression free survival (PFS) will be the primary endpoint of the phase II portion of this study and will be assessed with radiological exams every 8?weeks using the RECIST version 1.1 criteria. DISCUSSION:The combination of synergistic dual checkpoints inhibition along with ablative radiation may significantly potentiate the local and systemic disease control. This study constitutes the first clinical trial combining effects of SBRT with dual checkpoint blockade with durvalumab and tremelimumab in the treatment of metastatic HNSCC. If positive, this study would lead to a phase III trial testing this treatment combination against standard of care in metastatic HNSCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT03283605 . Registration date: September 14, 2017; version 1.

Project description:BackgroundImmune checkpoint blockade (ICB) targeting programmed cell death protein 1 and cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein 4 has achieved modest clinical activity as salvage therapy in relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC). We conducted this signal-finding study to assess the efficacy of ICB with or without radiation in relapsed SCLC.MethodsPatients with relapsed SCLC and ?2 previous lines of therapy were randomized to (1) arm A: durvalumab (D) 1500?mg/tremelimumab (T) 75?mg (intravenously every 4 weeks without stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT)) or (2) arm B: immune-sensitizing SBRT to one selected tumor site (9?Gy × 3 fractions) followed by D/T. Treatment continued until progression or a maximum of 12 months. The co-primary endpoints of the study were overall response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). We evaluated circulating lymphocyte repertoire in serial peripheral blood samples and tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) from on-treatment biopsies as pharmacodynamic markers.ResultsEighteen patients were randomized to arms A and B (n=9?each): median age 70 years; 41.2% women. The median PFS and ORR were 2.1 months and 0% in arm A and 3.3 months and 28.6% in arm B. The median overall survival (OS) was 2.8 months in arm A and 5.7 months in arm B (p=0.3772). Pooled efficacy of D/T±SBRT in 15 Response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) evaluable patients across both arms showed the best ORR in terms of partial response in 13.3%, stable disease in 26.6% and progressive disease in 60.0%; the overall median PFS and OS were 2.76 and 3.9 months. The most common adverse events were grade 1 fatigue (66%) and grade 1 elevated amylase (56%) in arm A, and grade 1 fatigue (56%) and pain (44%) in arm B. There was a significant increase in activated CD8(+)ICOS+ T?cells (p=0.048) and a reduction in naïve T cells (p=0.0454) in peripheral blood following treatment, along with a significant amount of activated CD8+ICOS+ T cells in TILs from responders.ConclusionsThe D/T combination with and without SBRT was safe but did not show sufficient efficacy signal in relapsed SCLC. Changes in peripheral blood lymphocyte and TILs were consistent with an immunologic response.Trial registration number NCT02701400.

Project description:Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is typically diagnosed at an advanced stage, with systemic therapy being the mainstay of treatment. Survival continues to be limited, typically less than 1 year. The PDAC microenvironment is characterized by a paucity of malignant epithelial cells, abundant stroma with predominantly immunosuppressive T cells and myelosuppressive-type macrophages (M2), and hypovascularity. The current treatment options for metastatic PDAC are modified (m)FOLFIRINOX /FOLFIRINOX or nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine in patients with good performance status (PS) (ECOG 0-1/KPS 70-100%) and gemcitabine with or without a second agent for those with ECOG PS 2-3. New therapies are emerging, and the current guidelines endorse both germline and somatic testing in PDAC to evaluate actionable findings. Important themes related to new therapeutic approaches include DNA damage repair strategies, immunotherapy, targeting the stroma, and cancer-cell metabolism. Targeted therapy alone (outside small genomically defined subsets) or in combination with standard cytotoxic therapy, thus far, has proven disappointing in PDAC; however, novel therapies are evolving with increased integration of genomic profiling along with a better understanding of the tumor microenvironment and immunology. A small but important sub-group of patients have some of these agents available in the clinics for use. Olaparib was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for maintenance therapy in germline BRCA1/2 mutated PDAC following demonstration of survival benefit in a phase 3 trial. Pembrolizumab is approved for patients with defects in mismatch repair/microsatellite instability. PDAC with wild-type KRAS represents a unique subgroup who have enrichment of potentially targetable oncogenic drivers. Small-molecule inhibitors including ERBB inhibitors (e.g., afatinib, MCLA-128), TRK inhibitors (e.g., larotrectinib, entrectinib), ALK/ROS inhibitor (e.g., crizotinib), and BRAF/MEK inhibitors are in development. In a small subset of patients with the KRASG12C mutation, a KRASG12C inhibitor, AMG510, and other agents are being investigated. Major efforts are underway to effectively target the tumor microenvironment and to integrate immunotherapy into the treatment of PDAC, and although thus far the impact has been modest to ineffective, nonetheless, there is optimism that some of the challenges will be overcome.