Dataset Information

A Phase II Study of Durvalumab in Combination with Tremelimumab in Patients with Rare Cancers.

ABSTRACT:

Lessons learned

Disease control with signals of response were demonstrated, which should lead to future validating clinical trials using checkpoint inhibitors in this underserved rare malignancy population. Although the study of single types of rare cancers is practically challenging, clinical trial designs that aggregate such patients into cohorts treated similarly are feasible, even in the community setting.

Background

Patients with rare cancers are an underserved population with limited access to clinical trials aside from phase I trials in the refractory setting. Treatment of these patients is often based on collections of anecdotes and small denominator review articles. Despite broad evidence of efficacy of combined immune checkpoint blockade across multiple tumor types, patients with rare tumors have not been afforded the opportunity for these therapies.

Methods

A phase II, investigator-initiated, single institution trial using durvalumab (1,500 mg every [Q]4 weeks × 13) and tremelimumab (75 mg Q4 weeks × 7, then Q12 weeks × 2) is reported. The population included 50 patients with advanced rare solid tumors (incidence <6/100,000 per year). The phase II dose and safety profile were defined in prior phase I trials. All patients had exhausted standard therapy options and all had received at least one prior line of systemic therapy (n = 49) unless a standard treatment option did not exist (n = 1).

Results

A complete response was demonstrated in one patient with anal cancer. Striking partial responses were seen in four patients. Prolonged disease stability was noted in 18 patients. Thirteen patients experienced disease progression. Patients were considered unevaluable if unable to initiate therapy (n = 6) or unable to complete two cycles of therapy (n = 8). In all cases, patients were unevaluable because of clinical deterioration. The toxicity profile paralleled prior published studies. Toxicities were manageable and without new signals. There were two events of grade 4 immune-mediated hepatitis and one death from pneumonitis.

Conclusion

This single-cohort basket trial demonstrated clinical activity from combined checkpoint blockade in 23 of the 36 evaluable patients. Patients with rare cancers, not eligible for immunotherapy via conventional clinical trial mechanisms, should be considered for this therapy through compassionate use, further clinical trials, and national registry programs.

SUBMITTER: Edenfield WJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8417875 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors have significantly improved outcomes in first line cutaneous melanoma. However, there is a high unmet need for patients who progress on these therapies and combination therapies are being explored to improve outcomes. Tebentafusp is a first-in-class gp100×CD3 ImmTAC bispecific that demonstrated overall survival (OS) benefit (HR 0.51) in metastatic uveal melanoma despite a modest overall response rate of 9%. This phase 1b trial evaluated the safety and initial efficacy of tebentafusp in combination with durvalumab (anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PDL1)) and/or tremelimumab (anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4) in patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma (mCM), the majority of whom progressed on prior checkpoint inhibitors.MethodsIn this open-label, multicenter, phase 1b, dose-escalation trial, HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with mCM received weekly intravenous tebentafusp with increasing monthly doses of durvalumab and/or tremelimumab starting day 15 of each cycle. The primary objective was to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or recommended phase 2 dose for each combination. Efficacy analyses were performed in all tebentafusp with durvalumab±tremelimumab treated patients with a sensitivity analysis in those who progressed on prior anti-PD(L)1 therapy.Results85 patients were assigned to receive tebentafusp in combination with durvalumab (n=43), tremelimumab (n=13), or durvalumab and tremelimumab (n=29). Patients were heavily pretreated with a median of 3 prior lines of therapy, including 76 (89%) who received prior anti-PD(L)1. Maximum target doses of tebentafusp (68 mcg) alone or in combination with durvalumab (20 mg/kg) and tremelimumab (1 mg/kg) were tolerated; MTD was not formally identified for any arm. Adverse event profile was consistent with each individual therapy and there were no new safety signals nor treatment-related deaths. In the efficacy subset (n=72), the response rate was 14%, tumor shrinkage rate was 41% and 1-year OS rate was 76% (95% CI: 70% to 81%). The 1-year OS for triplet combination (79%; 95% CI: 71% to 86%) was similar to tebentafusp plus durvalumab (74%; 95% CI: 67% to 80%).ConclusionAt maximum target doses, the safety of tebentafusp with checkpoint inhibitors was consistent with safety of each individual therapy. Tebentafusp with durvalumab demonstrated promising efficacy in heavily pretreated patients with mCM, including those who progressed on prior anti-PD(L)1.Trial registration numberNCT02535078.

Project description:BackgroundThe primary objective of this phase I, open-label trial was to assess safety and tolerability of tremelimumab monotherapy and combination therapy with durvalumab in Japanese patients with advanced cancer. Tremelimumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody against CTLA-4 in clinical trials; durvalumab is a monoclonal antibody against PD-L1 for the treatment of bladder and lung cancer.MethodsIn part 1, tremelimumab 3 or 10 mg/kg was given every 4 weeks (Q4W) for 6 doses, and thereafter every 12 weeks until discontinuation (n = 8); subsequently tremelimumab 10 mg/kg Q4W for 6 doses/Q12W and thereafter until discontinuation was administered in 41 patients with malignant pleural or peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM). In part 2, tremelimumab 10 mg/kg (Q4W for 6 doses followed by Q12W for 3 doses) was given in combination with durvalumab 15 mg/kg (Q4W for 13 doses) in cohort 1 (n = 4). In cohort 2 (n = 6), tremelimumab 1 mg/kg (Q4W for 4 doses) was given in combination with durvalumab 20 mg/kg (Q4W for 4 doses followed by 10 mg/kg Q2W for 22 doses), while in cohort 3 (n = 6), fixed-dose tremelimumab 75 mg Q4W for 4 doses plus durvalumab 1500 mg Q4W for 13 doses was given.ResultsIn part 1, no dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) for tremelimumab 3 or 10 mg/kg (Q4W for 6 doses/Q12W thereafter until discontinuation) were observed. Six (75%) patients reported treatment-related adverse events (trAEs). In the MPM dose-expansion cohort, 38 (92.7%) patients reported trAEs. In part 2, one DLT (Grade 4 myasthenia gravis) was reported for tremelimumab 10 mg/kg (Q4W for 6 doses/Q12W for 3 doses) plus durvalumab 15 mg/kg (Q4W for 13 doses). One DLT (Grade 4 hyperglycemia) was reported for tremelimumab 75 mg (Q4W for 4 doses) plus durvalumab 1500 mg (Q4W for 13 doses). Fourteen (87.5%) patients reported trAEs. Tremelimumab demonstrated low immunogenicity; 1 (16.7%) patient developed antidrug antibodies.ConclusionTremelimumab 10 mg/kg (Q4W/Q12W), tremelimumab 1 mg/kg (Q4W) plus durvalumab 20 mg/kg (Q4W/10 mg/kg Q2W), and fixed-dose tremelimumab 75 mg (Q4W) plus durvalumab 1500 mg (Q4W) were safe and tolerable.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02141347 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02141347).

Project description:PurposeThis phase I/II study evaluated tremelimumab (anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 monoclonal antibody) and durvalumab (antiprogrammed death ligand-1 monoclonal antibody) as monotherapies and in combination for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), including a novel regimen featuring a single, priming dose of tremelimumab (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02519348).Patients and methodsPatients with HCC who had progressed on, were intolerant to, or refused sorafenib were randomly assigned to receive T300 + D (tremelimumab 300 mg plus durvalumab 1,500 mg [one dose each during the first cycle] followed by durvalumab 1,500 mg once every 4 weeks), durvalumab monotherapy (1,500 mg once every 4 weeks), tremelimumab monotherapy (750 mg once every 4 weeks [seven doses] and then once every 12 weeks), or T75 + D (tremelimumab 75 mg once every 4 weeks plus durvalumab 1,500 mg once every 4 weeks [four doses] followed by durvalumab 1,500 mg once every 4 weeks). Safety was the primary end point. Secondary end points included objective response rate (ORR) by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1 and overall survival; exploratory end points included circulating lymphocyte profiles.ResultsA total of 332 patients were enrolled (T300 + D, n = 75; durvalumab, n = 104; tremelimumab, n = 69; and T75 + D, n = 84). Tolerability was acceptable across arms, with grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurring in 37.8%, 20.8%, 43.5%, and 24.4%, respectively. Confirmed ORRs (95% CI) were 24.0% (14.9 to 35.3), 10.6% (5.4 to 18.1), 7.2% (2.4 to 16.1), and 9.5% (4.2 to 17.9), respectively. An early expansion of CD8+ lymphocytes was associated with response across arms, with highest proliferating CD8+ lymphocyte levels occurring in the T300 + D arm. The median (95% CI) overall survival was 18.7 (10.8 to 27.3), 13.6 (8.7 to 17.6), 15.1 (11.3 to 20.5), and 11.3 (8.4 to 15.0) months in the T300 + D, durvalumab, tremelimumab, and T75 + D arms, respectively.ConclusionAll regimens were found to be tolerable and clinically active; however, the T300 + D regimen demonstrated the most encouraging benefit-risk profile. The unique pharmacodynamic activity and association with ORR of the T300 + D regimen further support its continued evaluation in HCC.

Project description:PurposeDespite high tumor mutationburden, immune checkpoint blockade has limited efficacy in SCLC. We hypothesized that poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition could render SCLC more susceptible to immune checkpoint blockade.MethodsA single-arm, phase II trial (NCT02484404) enrolled patients with relapsed SCLC who received durvalumab, 1500 mg every 4 weeks, and olaparib, 300 mg twice a day. The primary outcome was objective response rate. Correlative studies included mandatory collection of pretreatment and during-treatment biopsy specimens, which were assessed to define SCLC immunephenotypes: desert (CD8-positive T-cell prevalence low), excluded (CD8-positive T cells in stroma immediately adjacent/within tumor), and inflamed (CD8-positive T cells in direct contact with tumor).ResultsA total of 20 patients were enrolled. Their median age was 64 years, and most patients (60%) had platinum-resistant/refractory disease. Of 19 evaluable patients, two were observed to have partial or complete responses (10.5%), including a patient with EGFR-transformed SCLC. Clinical benefit was observed in four patients (21.1% [95% confidence interval: 6.1%-45.6%]) with confirmed responses or prolonged stable disease (≥8 months). The most common treatment-related adverse events were anemia (80%), lymphopenia (60%), and leukopenia (50%). Nine of 14 tumors (64%) exhibited an excluded phenotype; 21% and 14% of tumors exhibited the inflamed and desert phenotypes, respectively. Tumor responses were observed in all instances in which pretreatment tumors showed an inflamed phenotype. Of the five tumors without an inflamed phenotype at baseline, no during-treatment increase in T-cell infiltration or programmed death ligand 1 expression on tumor-infiltrating immune cells was observed.ConclusionsThe study combination did not meet the preset bar for efficacy. Pretreatment and during-treatment biopsy specimens suggested that tumor immune phenotypes may be relevant for SCLC responses to immune checkpoint blockade combinations. The predictive value of preexisting CD8-positive T-cell infiltrates observed in this study needs to be confirmed in larger cohorts.

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.