Dataset Information

Clinical outcomes of advanced stage cancer patients treated with sequential immunotherapy in phase 1 clinical trials.

ABSTRACT: Background Given the increasing number of available immunotherapeutic agents, more patients are presenting after failing immunotherapy in need of new treatment options. In this study, we investigated the clinical outcomes of patients treated with sequential immunotherapy. Methods We performed a retrospective review of 90 advanced stage cancer patients treated on immunotherapy-based phase 1 clinical trials at Winship Cancer Institute from 2009 to 2017. We included 49 patients with an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-indicated histology. Patients were analyzed based on whether they had received prior ICI. Clinical outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and clinical benefit (best response of complete response, partial response, or stable disease). Univariate analysis (UVA) and multivariate analysis (MVA) were performed using Cox proportional hazard or logistic regression model. Covariates included age, liver metastases, number of prior lines of therapy, histology, and Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) risk group. Results The most common histologies were melanoma (61%) and lung/head and neck cancers (37%). More than half of patients (n?=?27, 55%) received at least one ICI prior to trial enrollment: ten received anti-PD-1, two received anti-CTLA-4, five received anti-PD-1/CTLA-4 combination, and ten received multiple ICI. In MVA, ICI-naïve patients had significantly longer OS (HR: 0.22, CI: 0.07-0.70, p?=?0.010) and trended towards higher chance of CB (HR: 2.52, CI: 0.49-12.97, p?=?0.268). Patients who received prior ICI had substantially shorter median OS (10.9 vs 24.3 months, p?=?0.046) and PFS (2.8 vs. 5.1 months, p?=?0.380) than ICI-naïve patients per Kaplan-Meier estimation. Within the ICI-naïve group, 78% (7 of 9) of patients who received prior interleukin (IL-2) or interferon gamma (IFN?) experienced disease control for at least 6 months, compared to a disease control rate of 15% (2 of 13) in patients who had received chemotherapy, targeted therapy, or no prior treatment. Conclusions ICI-naïve patients may experience improved clinical outcomes on immunotherapy-based phase 1 clinical trials than patients who have received prior ICI. This may be particularly true for patients who received prior IL-2 or IFN?. Further development of immunotherapy combination therapies is needed to improve clinical outcomes of these patients. These results should be validated in a larger study.

SUBMITTER: Martini DJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6684862 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical outcomes of advanced stage cancer patients treated with sequential immunotherapy in phase 1 clinical trials.

Martini Dylan J DJ Liu Yuan Y Shabto Julie M JM Lewis Colleen C Kline Meredith R MR Collins Hannah H Akce Mehmet M Kissick Haydn T HT Carthon Bradley C BC Shaib Walid L WL Alese Olatunji B OB Pillai Rathi N RN Steuer Conor E CE Wu Christina S CS Lawson David H DH Kudchadkar Ragini R RR Master Viraj A VA El-Rayes Bassel F BF Ramalingam Suresh S SS Owonikoko Taofeek K TK Harvey R Donald RD Bilen Mehmet Asim MA

Investigational new drugs 20190206 6

Background Given the increasing number of available immunotherapeutic agents, more patients are presenting after failing immunotherapy in need of new treatment options. In this study, we investigated the clinical outcomes of patients treated with sequential immunotherapy. Methods We performed a retrospective review of 90 advanced stage cancer patients treated on immunotherapy-based phase 1 clinical trials at Winship Cancer Institute from 2009 to 2017. We included 49 patients with an immune check ...[more]

PMID: 30725388

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundImmuno-oncology (IO) agents have demonstrated efficacy across many tumor types and have led to change in standard of care. In breast cancer, atezolizumab and pembrolizumab were recently FDA-approved in combination with chemotherapy specifically for patients with PD-L1-positive metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, the single agent PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors demonstrate only modest single agent efficacy in breast cancer. The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of novel IO agents in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), beyond TNBC, treated in phase I clinical trials at the University of Colorado.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis using a database of patients with MBC who received treatment with IO agents in phase I/Ib clinical trials at the University of Colorado Hospital from January 1, 2012 to July 1, 2018. Patient demographics, treatments and clinical outcomes were obtained.ResultsWe identified 43 patients treated with an IO agent either as a single agent or in combination. The average age was 53 years; 55.8% had hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer, 39.5% TNBC and 4.7% HER2-positive. Patients received an average of 2 prior lines of chemotherapy (range 0-7) in the metastatic setting. Most patients (72.1%) received IO alone and 27.9% received IO plus chemotherapy. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.3 months and median overall survival (OS) was 12.1 months. Patients remaining on study ≥ 6 months (20.9%) were more likely to be treated with chemotherapy plus IO compared to patients with a PFS < 6 months (77.8% v. 14.7%). No differences in number of metastatic sites, prior lines of chemotherapy, breast cancer subtype, absolute lymphocyte count, or LDH were identified between patients with a PFS ≥ 6 months vs. < 6 months.ConclusionsOur phase I experience demonstrates benefit from IO therapy that was not limited to patients with TNBC and confirms improved efficacy from IO agents in combination with chemotherapy. A subset of patients with MBC treated in phase I clinical trials with an IO agent derived prolonged clinical benefit. Predictors of response to immunotherapy in breast cancer remain uncharacterized and further research is needed to identify these factors.

Project description:ImportanceImmune checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated atypical response patterns, which may not be fully captured by conventional response criteria. There is a need to better understand the potential benefit of continued immune checkpoint inhibition beyond progression.ObjectiveTo evaluate the safety and potential benefit of nivolumab (anti-programmed cell death receptor 1) monotherapy beyond Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1-defined progression.Design, setting, and participantsPooled, retrospective analysis of data from phase 3 trials of nivolumab in treatment-naive patients with advanced melanoma (CheckMate 066 or CheckMate 067) conducted at academic and clinical cancer centers. Participants were patients treated beyond first disease progression, defined as those who received their last dose of nivolumab more than 6 weeks after progression (TBP group); and patients not treated beyond progression, who discontinued nivolumab therapy before or at progression (non-TBP group). Data analyses were conducted from November 6, 2015, to January 11, 2017.InterventionsNivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) administered until progression or unacceptable toxic effects. Patients could be treated beyond progression if deriving apparent clinical benefit and tolerating study drug, at the investigator's discretion.Main outcomes and measuresTumor response and safety in TBP and non-TBP patients.ResultsAmong 526 randomized patients (39% [n = 203] female; median age, 62 years [range, 18-90 years]), 306 (58%) experienced disease progression, including 85 (28%) TBP patients and 221 (72%) non-TBP patients. Twenty-four (28%) of the TBP patients had a target lesion reduction of greater than 30% after progression compared with baseline (TBP>30% group). At the time of this analysis, 65 (76%) TBP patients and 21 (87%) TBP>30% patients were still alive; 27 (32%) and 11 (46%), respectively, continued to receive treatment. Median (range) time from progression to last dose of treatment was 4.7 (1.4-25.8) months for TBP patients and 7.6 (2.4-19.4) months for TBP>30% patients. Median (range) time from progression to greater than 30% tumor reduction was 1.4 (0.2-7.0) months. Treatment-related select grade 3 to 4 adverse events were similar in the TBP and non-TBP groups (5 [6%] and 9 [4%], respectively).Conclusions and relevanceA substantial proportion of selected patients treated with frontline nivolumab who were clinically stable and judged to be eligible for treatment beyond RECIST v1.1-defined progression by the treating investigators derived apparent clinical benefit without compromising safety. Further analysis will help define the potential benefit of continued nivolumab treatment beyond progression.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01721772 (CheckMate 066) and NCT01844505 (CheckMate 067).

Project description:BackgroundDespite immunotherapy's promise in oncology, its use for sarcoma remains challenging. There are no sarcoma-specific biomarkers for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Previously, we reported our institutional experience highlighting ICI activity in 29 patients with sarcoma. In this study, we explore responses to ICI based on ICI regimen and other covariates to identify significant clinical factors in advanced sarcoma outcomes.MethodsPatients in The Ohio State University Sarcoma Clinics were enrolled in the Sarcoma Retrospective ICI database from January 1, 2015 through November 1, 2021. Data included treatment regimen (single-agent ICI or ICI + combination) along with clinical covariates. ICI + combination was further categorized into ICI + medication, ICI + radiation, ICI + surgery, or ICI + multiple (more than 2 modalities). Statistical analysis included log-rank tests and proportional hazard regression. The primary objective was to evaluate overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsOf the patients in the database, 135 met inclusion criteria. We demonstrated improved OS in patients treated with ICI + combination (p = 0.014, median 64 weeks), but no effect on PFS (p = 0.471, median 31 weeks). Patients with a documented immune-related adverse event (irAE) of dermatitis had improved OS, but only in the ICI + combination cohort (p = 0.021). Patients who received single-agent ICI and whose change in the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was less than 5 had an improved OS (p = 0.002); this was not seen in patients who received ICI + combination therapy (p = 0.441). There were no differences in OS based on age, gender, histology, or subcategories of ICI + combination. This was not the case for PFS; patients who received any ICI regimen and were younger than 70 had a worse PFS (p = 0.036) compared with their older counterparts in this dataset. Patients who developed an irAE, specifically colitis (p = 0.009), hepatitis (p = 0.048), or dermatitis (p = 0.003), had an improved PFS. There were no differences in PFS based on ICI regimen (or subcategories of ICI + combination), gender, histology, change in NLR, or grade of irAE.ConclusionsThis retrospective study demonstrates that ICI + combination therapy can improve OS in some patients with advanced sarcoma. This is consistent with our prior results of ICI in sarcoma.

Dataset Information

Clinical outcomes of advanced stage cancer patients treated with sequential immunotherapy in phase 1 clinical trials.

Publications

Clinical outcomes of advanced stage cancer patients treated with sequential immunotherapy in phase 1 clinical trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets