Dose Rationalization of Pembrolizumab and Nivolumab Using Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Simulation and Cost Analysis

ELISA assay for the quantification of ipilimumab in human serum, plasma, milk, and cerebrospinal fluid

Ipilimumab is an immune checkpoint inhibitor of the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4). Ipilimumab has become part of the standard of care for different types of cancer. The efficacy of these treatments is limited due to immune-related toxicity and high economic costs. Dose rationalization studies based on pharmacokinetic data may help to address these limitations. For this purpose, more sensitive analytical methods are needed. We report the development and validation of the first enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for sensitive determination of ipilimumab concentrations in human serum, plasma, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and milk. Our assay is based on the specific capture of ipilimumab by immobilized CTLA-4. The lower limit of quantifications of ipilimumab in serum, plasma, and milk are 50 ng/mL and 10 ng/mL in CSF. The ELISA method showed long-term storage stability for at least one year at -80°C and was successfully cross-validated with ultraperformance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry. The ELISA method is reliable, relatively inexpensive, and can be used in serum, plasma, CSF, and milk from patients treated with ipilimumab, as evidenced by the analysis of real clinical samples.

Determining acceptance and perceptions of chemotherapy dose banding in an ambulatory cancer centre

INTRODUCTION

Despite the advantages of dose banding (DB) and numerous plans to adopt this practice, uptake of DB is still poor. As opinions of healthcare professionals were deemed essential in DB's acceptance, this study surveyed key stakeholders to determine the acceptance, facilitators, and barriers of DB in chemotherapy to improve its implementation.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study at the National Cancer Centre Singapore, involving physicians, nurses, and pharmacy staff, was conducted in February 2022. The Theory of Planned Behaviour was adapted to design a survey questionnaire to obtain the acceptance, facilitators, and barriers of DB. Additional questions on maximum acceptable dose variance and essential criteria for selecting drugs for DB were included.

RESULTS

A total of 93 participants responded, with a mean 9.75  ±  7.37 years of clinical experience. Less than half have heard of DB while few had prior experience. Drug cost was the top selection criteria for DB, followed by toxicity, therapeutic index, frequency of use and drug wastage. Acceptance rate of DB was 41.9%, with majority agreeing to use DB in various drugs but to determine patient suitability before usage. Being greatly affected by subjective norms, having a positive outlook for DB's impacts, and no effect on toxicity significantly influenced acceptance.

CONCLUSION

Prior to implementing DB at the institutional level, educational training addressing concerns over toxicity, and providing technological support can help improve acceptance. Future studies can involve patients' perspectives and more institutions for greater diversity in opinions.

Cost-utility analysis of Pembrolizumab compared to other alternative immunotherapy and chemotherapy treatments for patients with advanced melanoma in Iran

OBJECTIVES

Immunotherapy drugs like Pembrolizumab have shown significant improvements in treatment outcomes of advanced melanoma. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-utility of Pembrolizumab compared to other immunotherapy and chemotherapy drugs in the first-line treatment of advanced melanoma in Iran.

METHODS

A partitioned-survival model, based on data from a recent randomized phase 3 study (KEYNOTE-006) and recent meta-analysis, was used to divide Overall survival (OS) time into Progression-free survival (PFS) and post-progression survival for Pembrolizumab, Nivolumab, Ipilimumab, Dacarbazine, Temozolomide, Carboplatin, and Paclitaxel combination. Quality Life Years (QALY) and Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) were considered as the final outcome.

RESULTS

The ICER of Ipilimumab, Nivolumab, Nivolumab & Ipilimumab, and Pembrolizumab compared to Temozolomide was calculated as $40,365.53, $19,591.13, $24,578, and $47,324.2 per QALY, respectively. Scenario analysis demonstrated if the price of one vial of Nivolumab 100 is $90.51, each vial of Pembrolizumab is $119.20, and each vial of Ipilimumab is $101.54, they will be cost-effective in Iran.

CONCLUSION

None of the immunotherapy drugs studied were found to be cost-effective when considering the cost-effectiveness threshold of $3,532. Therefore, a cost reduction of more than 90% in the prices of immunotherapy drugs would be necessary for them to be considered cost-effective in Iran.

Utilization and toxicity patterns of 2-weekly (Q2W) versus 4-weekly (Q4W) nivolumab for treatment of adjuvant and metastatic melanoma at BC cancer

BACKGROUND

Nivolumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor used to treat several malignancies, is associated with immune-related adverse events (IrAEs). Original dosing for melanoma was 3 mg/kg (maximum 240 mg) every 2 weeks (Q2W). Based on simulation studies depicting similar efficacy and toxicity to original dosing, extended interval dosing of 6 mg/kg (maximum 480 mg) every 4 weeks (Q4W) was introduced.

OBJECTIVE

This study will compare safety between Q2W and Q4W dosing at BC Cancer in melanoma patients.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review for reported incidence, onset, and severity of IrAEs in melanoma patients treated with nivolumab Q2W and Q4W dosing was completed. Fisher's test was conducted for first incidence IrAEs using Microsoft Excel.

RESULTS

Seventy-one patients were identified (Q2W n = 35, Q4W n = 36). Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. No statistically significant difference was found in incidence of IrAEs between Q2W and Q4W dosing (Q2W 40% vs Q4W 50%, p = 0.477). Rash was most common (Q2W 79% vs Q4W 50%) followed by hypothyroidism (Q2W 33% vs Q4W 20%). Median onset of IrAEs seemed later with Q4W dosing (Q2W cycle 1 vs Q4W cycle 4). Regardless of dosing, most IrAEs were grade 1-2 in severity (Q2W 100% vs Q4W 89%).

CONCLUSION

Q4W dosing is associated with comparable incidence and potentially later onset of IrAEs compared to Q2W dosing. Most IrAEs in both dosing groups were similar and mild. Therefore, Q4W dosing offers a safe alternative to Q2W dosing while providing benefits including decreased workload for staff, decreased clinic visits, and viral exposure by patients.

Adopting Weight-Based Dosing With Pharmacy-Level Stewardship Strategies Could Reduce Cancer Drug Spending By Millions

Immune checkpoint inhibitors, a class of drugs used in approximately forty unique cancer indications, are a sizable component of the economic burden of cancer care in the US. Instead of personalized weight-based dosing, immune checkpoint inhibitors are most commonly administered at "one-size-fits-all" flat doses that are higher than necessary for the vast majority of patients. We hypothesized that personalized weight-based dosing along with common stewardship efforts at the pharmacy level, such as dose rounding and vial sharing, would lead to reductions in immune checkpoint inhibitor use and lower spending. Using data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and Medicare drug prices, we estimated reductions in immune checkpoint inhibitor use and spending that would be associated with pharmacy-level stewardship strategies, in a case-control simulation study of individual patient-level immune checkpoint inhibitor administration events. We identified baseline annual VHA spending for these drugs of approximately $537 million. Combining weight-based dosing, dose rounding, and pharmacy-level vial sharing would generate expected annual VHA health system savings of $74 million (13.7 percent). We conclude that adoption of pharmacologically justified immune checkpoint inhibitor stewardship measures would generate sizable reductions in spending for these drugs. Combining these operational innovations with value-based drug price negotiation enabled by recent policy changes may improve the long-term financial viability of cancer care in the US.

Pembrolizumab for the adjuvant treatment of IIB or IIC melanoma

INTRODUCTION

Up to 30% of patients with stage IIB and 50% of stage IIC melanoma experience recurrence within 5 years after radical surgery. Adjuvant treatment is expected to improve this prognosis.

AREAS COVERED

Pembrolizumab (MK-3475) is a humanized monoclonal antibody that acts against the programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) receptor. Pembrolizumab was first approved in monotherapy for the treatment of unresectable/metastatic melanoma based on the results of the prospective KEYNOTE-001, KEYNOTE-002, and KEYNOTE-006 trials. KEYNOTE-716 is the randomized phase III trial of pembrolizumab treatment in resected stage II melanoma. Treatment with pembrolizumab is statistically significant, reducing the risk of recurrence as well as distant metastases risk after primary tumor resection. Pembrolizumab treatment has a 24-month RFS rate of 81.2% (HR 0.64 vs placebo) and a DMFS rate of 88.1%.

EXPERT OPINION

1-year adjuvant pembrolizumab treatment of stage IIB/C melanoma patients significantly reduces recurrence or death risk. The safety profile of adjuvant treatment is not different from previously reported and is manageable. Longer follow-up is required to fully understand the efficacy and safety of adjuvant therapy for stage II melanoma, as the number of patients needed to treat is twice as high as for stage III patients.

Long-term clinical evidence of comparable efficacy and toxicity of nivolumab and pembrolizumab in advanced melanoma treatment

Pembrolizumab and nivolumab (anty-PD-1 antibody) are commonly used for the treatment of melanoma patients. However, their efficacy and safety have never been directly compared, leaving little guidance for clinicians to select the best therapy. The study included patients with inoperable or metastatic melanoma treated in first line with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy (nivolumab or pembrolizumab). In total 1037 patients were enrolled in the study, 455 (44%) patients were treated with pembrolizumab and 582 (56%) with nivolumab. The estimated median overall survival (OS) in the pembrolizumab and nivolumab groups was 17.4 and 20.0 months [P = 0.2323; hazard ratio (HR), 1.1; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.94-1.28], respectively, whereas the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.6 and 7.5 months (P = 0.0941; HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.98-1.29), respectively. The estimated 2- and 3-year OS in the pembrolizumab and nivolumab groups were 42/34% and 47/37%, respectively, and the PFS was 25/21% and 29/23%, respectively. There were 391 (49%) immune-related adverse events (irAEs) of any grade during treatment, including 133 (42%) related to pembrolizumab treatment and 258 (53%) to nivolumab treatment. A total of 72 (9.6%) irAEs were in G3 or G4, including during pembrolizumab 29 (9%) and nivolumab 48 (11%). There were no differences in OS, PFS and overall response rates between nivolumab and pembrolizumab therapy in previously untreated patients with advanced/metastatic melanoma. There were no differences in the frequency of G1/G2 or G3/G4 irAEs. The choice of treatment should be based on the preferences of the patient and the clinician.

Low-Dose Immunotherapy: Is It Just an Illusion?

The development and use of immunotherapy in the last decade have led to a drastic improvement in results in the onco-haematological field. This has implied, on the one hand, the need for clinicians to manage a new type of adverse event and, on the other hand, a significant increase in costs. However, emerging scientific evidence suggests that, as with other drugs in the recent past, the registry dosage can be drastically reduced for immunotherapies without penalizing their effectiveness. This would also lead to an important reduction in costs, expanding the audience of cancer patients who could access immunotherapy-based treatments. In this “Commentary”, we analyze the available evidence of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics and the most recent literature in favor of low-dose immunotherapy.

Clinical efficacy and safety of individualized pembrolizumab administration based on pharmacokinetic in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A prospective exploratory clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Pembrolizumab is recommended with a fixed dose of 200 mg 3-weekly. We performed this study to explore the clinical efficacy and safety of pharmacokinetic (PK)-guided pembrolizumab administration in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

In this prospective exploratory study, we enrolled advanced NSCLC patients in Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center. Eligible patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg 3-weekly with or without chemotherapy for four cycles, then for patients without progressive disease (PD), pembrolizumab was administrated in new dose-intervals according to steady state plasma-concentration (Css) of pembrolizumab until PD. We set the effective concentration (Ce) at 15 μg/ml and new dose-intervals (T) was calculated according to Css of pembrolizumab using following equation: Css × 21D = Ce (15 μg/ml) × T. Primary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) and safety. Besides, advanced NSCLC patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg 3-weekly and more than four cycles in our center were defined as the history-controlled cohort. Patients with Css of pembrolizumab underwent genetic polymorphism analysis of variable number of tandem repeats (VNTR) region in neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn). The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05226728.

RESULTS

A total 33 patients received pembrolizumab in new adjusted dose-intervals. The Css of pembrolizumab ranged from 11.01 to 61.21 μg/ml, 30 patients need prolonged intervals (22-80d) and 3 shortened intervals (15-20 d). In PK-guided cohort, the median PFS was 15.1 months and ORR 57.6 %, whereas in history-controlled cohort was 7.7 months and ORR 48.2 %. The immune-related adverse events were 15.2 % and 17.9 % between two cohort. The VNTR3/VNTR3 genotype of FcRn had significantly higher Css of pembrolizumab than VNTR2/VNTR3 (p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

PK-guided pembrolizumab administration showed promising clinical efficacy and manageable toxicity. Meanwhile less frequent dosing of pembrolizumab by PK-guided could reduce financial toxicity potentially. This provided an alternative rational therapeutic strategy of pembrolizumab in advanced NSCLC.

Case report: Pharmacokinetics of pembrolizumab in a patient with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer after a single 200 mg administration

Background

Pembrolizumab is a well-tolerated biologic agent with a potentially stable and durable anti-tumor response. Unfortunately, discontinuation of therapy can occur as a consequence of immune-related adverse effects (irAEs). These irAEs appear independent of dose and exposure. However, such irAEs might also result from pembrolizumab's highly specific mechanism of action and current dosing regimens. However, the currently available pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data to reassess dosing strategies are insufficient.To highlight the importance of additional PK/PD studies, we present a case describing the complexity of pembrolizumab's PK/PD after a single 200 mg pembrolizumab dose in a treatment-naive patient with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Case description

A 72-year-old man with stage IV NSCLC presented hepatotoxic symptoms 19 days after receiving the first 200 mg pembrolizumab dose. Hence, pembrolizumab therapy was paused, and prednisolone therapy was initiated, which successfully inhibited the toxic effect of pembrolizumab. However, repeated flare-ups due to prednisolone tapering suggest that the toxic effect of pembrolizumab outlasts the presence of pembrolizumab in the bloodstream. This further suggests that the T-cell-mediated immune response outlasts the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) receptor occupancy by pembrolizumab, which challenges the need for the current fixed-interval strategies and their stop criteria.Furthermore, a validated ELISA quantified pembrolizumab levels in 15 samples within 123 days after administration. A shift in the pembrolizumab clearance rate was evident ensuing day 77 (0.6 µg/mL) after administration. Pembrolizumab levels up to day 77 (9.1-0.6 µg/mL) strongly exhibited a linear, first-order clearance (R² = 0.991), whereas after day 77, an accelerated non-linear clearance was observed. This transition from a linear to non-linear clearance was most likely a result of full target receptor saturation to non-full target receptor saturation, in which the added effect of target-mediated drug disposition occurs. This suggests that pembrolizumab's targets were fully saturated at levels above 0.6 µg/mL, which is 43 to 61 times lower than the steady-state trough levels (C_trough,ss) of the currently registered fixed-dosing regimens (3-5).

Real-world assessment of attenuated dosing anti-PD1 therapy as an alternative dosing strategy in a high-income country (as defined by World Bank)

The rising cost of oncological drugs poses a global challenge to patients, insurers, and policy makers, with the leading drugs worldwide by revenue from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Despite its cost, ICI is marked as a paradigm shift, offering the potential of a long-term cure. To reduce cost, an attenuated dose of ICI based on pharmacological principles can be used while maintaining efficacy. This real-world study aims to examine the prescribing patterns, the effect of financial constraints, and the outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). All patients receiving palliative intent ICI treatment for advanced NSCLC between January 2014 and April 2021 in National University Hospital, Singapore were recruited. Demographics, prescription trends, factors affecting the prescription of attenuated dose ICI (AD ICI) versus standard dose ICI (SD ICI), and the effect of dose on survival outcomes, toxicities, and costs were examined. Two hundred seventy-four received ICI. The majority of them were treated in first-line setting. One hundred sixty-two (59%) of patients received AD ICI, whereas 112 (41%) received SD ICI. Patients who did not have a supplemental private as-charged health insurance plan were more likely to have received AD ICI (OR: 4.53 [2.69–7.61] p < 0.001). There was no difference in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)—adjusted HR 1.07 CI [0.76, 1.50] p = 0.697 and HR 0.95 CI [0.67, 1.34] p = 0.773, respectively, between patients who received AD versus SD ICI. A cost minimization analysis evaluating the degree of cost savings related to drug costs estimated a within study cost saving of USD 7,939,059 over 7 years. Our study provides evidence for AD-ICI as a promising strategy to maximize the number of patients who can be treated with ICI. This has the potential to make significant economic impact and allow more patients to benefit from novel therapies.

Value-Based Care in Systemic Therapy: The Way Forward

The rising cost of cancer care has shed light on an important aspect of healthcare delivery. Financial toxicity of therapy must be considered in clinical practice and policy-making. One way to mitigate the impact of financial toxicity of cancer care is by focusing on an approach of healthcare delivery that aims to deliver value to the patient. Should value of therapy be one of the most important determinants of cancer care? If so, how do we measure it? How can we implement it in routine clinical practice? In this viewpoint, we discuss value-based care in systemic therapy in oncology. Strategies to improve the quality of care by incorporating value-based approaches are discussed: use of composite tools to assess the value of drugs, alternative dosing strategies, and the use of Health Technology Assessment in regulatory procedures. We propose that there must be a greater emphasis on value of therapy in determining its use and its cost.

Anti-PD-1 for the treatment of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma in elderly patients: a French multicenter retrospective survey

Background

Anti-PD1 agents are currently recommended as first-line treatment in advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (acSCC) by updated European guidelines. Although acSCC frequently affects elderly patients with multiple comorbidities, this subset of patients is often excluded of registration clinical trials.

Purpose

To assess anti-PD-1 efficacy and safety in elderly acSCC patients in real-life conditions and describe this specific population with oncogeriatric evaluation tools.

Methods

A multicenter retrospective study including acSCC patients at least 70 years old treated with PD-1 inhibitors was conducted in French referral centers. The primary endpoint was the overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included safety data, time to response (TTR), duration of response (DOR), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

63 patients were included. ORR was 57.1% (95% CI 44.0–69.5), median TTR and DOR were 3 and 5.5 months respectively. Median OS was not reached (95% CI 12.5 months-not reached) at data cut-off after a median follow-up of 8 months while median PFS was 8 months. (95% CI 5 months-not reached). Grade 3–5 adverse effects occurred in 47.6% of patients. 41.3% of patients experienced degradation of ECOG performance status during anti-PD-1 treatment. Nutritional state worsened in 27% of patients and 57.1% lost weight during treatment.

Conclusion

In this particular subset of acSCC patients PD-1 inhibitors obtain results similar to those obtained in younger populations included in pivotal clinical trials, with acceptable safety. A specific oncogeriatric evaluation at treatment initiation and during follow-up appears important in this setting most notably to help manage toxicity.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00432-022-04246-0.

Dosing Regimens of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: Attempts at Lower Dose, Less Frequency, Shorter Course

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a revolutionary breakthrough in the field of cancer by modulating patient's own immune system to exert anti-tumor effects. The clinical application of ICIs is still in its infancy, and their dosing regimens need to be continuously adjusted. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies showed a significant plateau in the exposure-response curve, with high receptor occupancy and plasma concentrations achieved at low dose levels. Coupled with concerns about drug toxicity and heavy economic costs, there has been an ongoing quest to reevaluate the current ICI dosing regimens while preserving maximum clinical efficacy. Many clinical data showed remarkable anticancer effects with ICIs at the doses far below the approved regimens, indicating the possibility of dose reduction. Our review attempts to summarize the clinical evidence for ICIs regimens with lower-dose, less-frequency, shorter-course, and provide clues for further ICIs regimen optimization.

Review of the Clinical Pharmacokinetics, Efficacy and Safety of Pembrolizumab

BACKGROUND

Treatment of various types of cancer has been improved significantly with the discovery of biologic drugs that act as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Pembrolizumab is a humanized monoclonal anti-PD-1 antibody currently approved for the treatment of a wide range of tumors, with more indications still being investigated in ongoing clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper is to present all currently available data regarding pembrolizumab pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics. Also, the possibility of using predicative biomarkers to monitor patients during cancer treatment is discussed.

METHODS

Database research was carried out (PubMed, ScienceDirect). Information was gathered from original articles, the European Medicines Agency datasheets and results from clinical trials.

RESULTS

This review summarizes present-day knowledge about the pharmacokinetics, different modeling approaches and dosage regimens, efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab and therapeutic monitoring of disease progression.

CONCLUSION

This review points out consistent pharmacokinetic characteristics of pembrolizumab in various cancer patients, the lack of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic/outcome relationships, the need of adequate biomarkers predicting treatment success. Hence, there is a clear necessity for more data and experience in order to optimize pembrolizumab treatment for each individual patient.

Pharmacokinetic Simulation Analysis of Less Frequent Nivolumab and Pembrolizumab Dosing: Pharmacoeconomic Rationale for Dose Deescalation

Nivolumab and pembrolizumab, anti-programmed cell death protein 1 monoclonal antibodies, have revolutionized oncology but are expensive. Using an interventional pharmacoeconomic approach, these drugs can be administered less often to reduce costs and increase patient convenience while maintaining efficacy. Both drugs are good candidates for less frequent dosing because of long half-lives and no evidence of a relationship of dose to efficacy. Established population pharmacokinetic models for both nivolumab and pembrolizumab were used to simulate profiles for multiple dosing regimens on 1000 randomly generated virtual patients. Simulations were initially performed on standard dose regimens to validate these in silico predictions. Next, simulations of nivolumab 0.3 mg/kg every 3 weeks revealed that >95% of patients maintained ≥1.5 μg/mL at steady state, which was inferred as the minimum effective concentration (MEC) for both drugs. Various alternative dosing regimens were simulated for both drugs to determine which regimen(s) can maintain this MEC in >95% of patients. Extended dosing regimens of nivolumab 240 mg every 4 weeks and 480 mg every 8 weeks along with pembrolizumab 200 mg every 6 weeks were simulated, showing that >95% of patients maintained MEC or greater. These simulations demonstrate the potential to reduce drug exposure by at least 50%, thus substantially reducing patient visits (as well as costs), while maintaining equivalent efficacy. These models provide the scientific justification for an ongoing prospective randomized clinical trial comparing standard interval fixed dosing with extended interval fixed dosing, and ultimately an efficacy-driven comparative trial.

Dose Banding – weighing up benefits, risks and therapeutic failure

Aims

Dose banding is a method of dose individualisation in which all patients with similar characteristics are allocated to the same dose. Dose banding results in some patients receiving less intensive treatment which risks a reduction in therapeutic benefit (iatrogenic therapeutic failure) because of variability not predicted by dose banding. This study aims to explore the effects of dose banding on therapeutic success and failure.

Methods

This was a simulation study. Virtual patients were simulated under a simple pharmacokinetic model where the response of interest is the steady‐state average concentration. Clearance was correlated with a covariate used for dose banding. Dose individualisation was based on: one‐dose‐fits‐all, covariate‐based dosing, empirical dose banding, dose banding optimised for net therapeutic benefit and optimised for both benefit and minimising iatrogenic therapeutic failure.

Results

The lowest and highest probability of target attainment (PTA) were 44% for one‐dose‐fits‐all and 72% for covariate‐based dosing. Neither dosing approach would result in iatrogenic therapeutic failure as lower dose intensities do not occur. Empirical dose banding performed better than one‐dose‐fits‐all with 59% PTA but not as good as either optimised method (64–69% PTA) while carrying a risk of iatrogenic therapeutic failure in 25% of patients. Optimising for benefit (only) improved PTA but carried a risk of iatrogenic therapeutic failure of up to 10%. Optimising for benefit and minimising iatrogenic therapeutic failure provided the best balance.

Conclusion

Future application of dose banding needs to consider both the probability of benefit as well the risk of causing iatrogenic therapeutic failure.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Standard-Dose and Low-Dose Pembrolizumab in Patients with Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Multi-Institutional Cohort Study in Taiwan

Fixed doses at 200 mg of pembrolizumab or 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks are the standard dosages for first- and second-line treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, in clinical practice, patients with NSCLC may receive lower doses of pembrolizumab due to drug product availability or economic factors. To date, the comparative effectiveness and safety of the standard dose and lower doses of pembrolizumab in these patients still remains limited. We conducted a retrospective cohort study by analyzing electronic medical records data from the largest multi-institutional hospital system in Taiwan. Advanced NSCLC patients newly receiving pembrolizumab with or without chemotherapy were included. Patients were classified into: (1) the standard-dose group (≥2 mg/kg), and (2) the low-dose group (<2 mg/kg). We applied inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to compare the overall survival (OS) and immune-related adverse events (irAEs) between the two treatment groups, and to evaluate the minimum clinically effective dose of pembrolizumab. We included a total of 147 NSCLC patients receiving standard-dose pembrolizumab (mean [range] age: 63.7 [58.0−73.0] years; male: 62.6%; mean [range] body weight: 60.5 [58.0−73.0] kg) and 95 patients receiving low-dose pembrolizumab (mean [range] age: 62.0 [50.0−68.8] years; male: 64.2%; mean [range] body weight: 63.9 [55.0−73.8] kg). After IPTW adjustments, the median OS was similar for both the standard-dose and low-dose pembrolizumab groups (19.3 vs. 14.3 months, log-rank p = 0.15). Also, the rate for all classes of irAEs was similar for both groups. We found that patients with a pembrolizumab dose ≥1.8 mg/kg were associated with better OS than those receiving <1.8 mg/kg. Our findings suggested no significant difference in OS and irAEs between patients receiving pembrolizumab ≥2 mg/kg and <2 mg/kg in clinical practice. A pembrolizumab dose ≥1.8 mg/kg may be the clinically most efficient dose.

Impacts of cachexia progression in addition to serum IgG and blood lymphocytes on serum nivolumab in advanced cancer patients

PURPOSE

Serum nivolumab concentrations exhibit a large variation in cancer patients. Cancer cachexia inducing systemic inflammation promotes the elimination of endogenous proteins, while its association with serum nivolumab remains unclear. The present study aimed to evaluate the impacts of cachexia progression in addition to blood components on serum nivolumab in cancer patients.

METHODS

Thirty-eight non-small-cell lung cancer or renal cell cancer patients receiving biweekly intravenous nivolumab were enrolled. Blood samples were collected just before dosing at the 7th administration of nivolumab or later. Serum nivolumab together with serum proteins, inflammatory markers, and peripheral blood leukocytes were determined. Cancer cachexia was classified using the Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS). Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were monitored during the study period.

RESULTS

Cancer patients had a large variation in serum nivolumab concentrations (interquartile range, 12-21 µg/mL per mg/kg). The serum nivolumab concentration was positively correlated with serum albumin, while negatively associated with serum globulin and immunoglobulin G (IgG). A negative correlation was observed between serum nivolumab and blood lymphocytes. Regarding cachexia progression, the patients with GPS 2 had a higher serum interleukin-6 concentration and a lower serum nivolumab concentration than those with GPS 0 or 1. The GPS, serum IgG, and blood lymphocytes were identified as independent variables for serum nivolumab. The incidence of irAEs was not associated with the nivolumab dose or serum nivolumab.

CONCLUSION

Cachexia progression had a negative impact on serum nivolumab in cancer patients. The interindividual variation in serum nivolumab was characterized by cachexia progression in addition to blood components.

Cost-Effectiveness of Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab as First-Line Therapy in Advanced Non-small-cell Lung Cancer

Purpose: The effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been demonstrated. Decisions have to be made about allocating healthcare resources. Economic evidence could support policy decisions to fund expensive interventions. The current analysis evaluated the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced NSCLC harboring no EGFR or ALK mutations. It is set in the context of the US and China, representing developed and resource-constrained settings, respectively.

Patients and Methods: A Markov model consisting of three discrete health states was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. chemotherapy. The key clinical data were derived from the CheckMate-227 trial, and the cost and health preference data were derived from the literature. Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and incremental net health benefits (INHBs) were calculated for the two strategies. Subgroup, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results: In the United States, nivolumab plus ipilimumab increased by 1.260 QALYs with an additional cost of $95,617 compared with the features of chemotherapy, which led to an ICER of $75,871 per QALY gained. INHB indicated that nivolumab plus ipilimumab treatment had a 99% probability of being cost-effective at the ICER threshold of $100,000/QALY in all subgroups. The results of sensitivity analyses revealed that the model outcomes were robust. In China, the ICER of nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. chemotherapy was $59,773/QALY, and the INHB was -1.972 QALY at the threshold of $27,351/QALY.

Conclusion: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab treatment is a cost-effective option compared with chemotherapy for patients with advanced NSCLC harboring no EGFR or ALK mutations in the United States. However, nivolumab plus ipilimumab is not a preferred option in China.

Fixed Dose of Cemiplimab in Patients with Advanced Malignancies Based on Population Pharmacokinetic Analysis

Introduction

This study outlined cemiplimab intravenous (IV) dosing strategy to move from body weight (BW)-based 3 mg/kg every-2-week (Q2W) dosing in first-in-human study (study 1423; NCT02383212) to fixed 350 mg every-3-week (Q3W) dosing, utilizing population pharmacokinetics (PopPK) modeling and simulations, and supported by a limited dataset from a phase 2 study (study 1540; NCT02760498).

Methods

Cemiplimab concentration data from a total of 505 patients were pooled from study 1423 in advanced malignancies and study 1540 in advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC). All patients received weight-based cemiplimab dose (1, 3, 10 mg/kg Q2W or 3 mg/kg Q3W) except 4% who received 200 mg Q2W. A linear two-compartment PopPK model incorporating covariates that improved goodness-of-fit statistics was developed to compare cemiplimab exposure at 350 mg Q3W versus 3 mg/kg Q2W. Upon availability, observed cemiplimab concentration at 350 mg Q3W in study 1540 was then compared with the simulated values.

Results

Post hoc estimates of cemiplimab exposure and variability (505 patients; weight range 30.9–156 kg; median 76.1 kg) at steady state were found to be similar at 350 mg Q3W and 3 mg/kg Q2W. Effect of BW on cemiplimab exposure was described by exposure versus BW plots and at extreme BW. Overlay of individual observed cemiplimab concentrations in 51 patients with metastatic CSCC on simulated concentration–time profiles in 2000 patients at 350 mg Q3W confirmed cemiplimab exposure similarity and demonstrated the robustness of dose optimization based on PopPK modeling and simulations.

Conclusions

Cemiplimab 350 mg Q3W is being further investigated in multiple indications.

Graphical Abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01638-5.

Evaluating the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors by detecting the exposure-response: An inductive review

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been demonstrated an effective treatment in multiple tumor type, which restore the immune response to against cancer cell. Currently, approved ICIs include anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4); anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). In most these drugs, unique pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) have shown significant influence on clinical outcomes, which occurred by target-mediated drug concentration and time-varying drug clearance. An exposure-response (E-R) relationship has been used to describe the safety and efficacy of ICIs, and shown a plateaued E-R and time dependent changes in exposure. Using an enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) or LC-MS/MS method to measure the peak concentration, trough concentration or area under the curve (AUC) of ICIs to assess the drug exposure. There are lots of covariates that have an influence on exposure, such as sex, clearance, body weight and tumor burden. In this review, we pooled data from studies of concentration or other pharmacokinetics parameter of mAbs to assess E-R in efficacy and safety.

Unraveling the complexity of therapeutic drug monitoring for monoclonal antibody therapies to individualize dose in oncology

Monoclonal antibodies (Mabs) have become key drugs in cancer treatment, either as targeted therapies or more recently as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). The fact that only some patients benefit from these drugs poses the usual question in the field of onco-hematology: that of the benefit of individual dosing and the potential of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) to carry out this individualization. However, Mabs present unique pharmacological characteristics for TDM, and the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationship observed should be interpreted differently than that observed for conventional drugs and small molecules. This pharmacology practice review has been summarized from a public debate between the authors at the International TDM and Clinical Toxicology meeting in Banff, 2020, regarding the potential roles of TDM in the Mab/ICI setting.

Preparation of intravenous chemotherapy bags: evaluation of a dose banding approach in an Italian oncology hospital

Introduction

Dose banding is an original approach that manages intravenous (IV) chemotherapy preparation by generating on a weekly basis a series of bags containing scaled dosages of the active agent. These predetermined, fixed dosage bags are intended to replace the traditional bags prepared daily that contain fully individualized dosages.

Methods

Three different scenarios were examined: (1) the current method of daily preparation of individualized bags at the hospital pharmacy; (2) the weekly preparation at the hospital pharmacy of non-individualized bags containing discrete, predefined doses covering an adequate range of doses (dose banding); (3) the use of commercial ready-to-use bags based on the same approach of dose banding. The objective of this study was to compare these three different approaches in terms of cost per patient. We considered five cancer drugs (gemcitabine, oxaliplatin, paclitaxel, trastuzumab and 5-fluorouracil) that were suitable for the dose ranging approach. Appropriate dose bands for these five agents were identified. Costs were estimated for each of the three approaches.

Results

A total of 13,490 fully individualized bags were studied, which corresponded to the real bags prepared at our institution for these five agents in 2018. Dose banding was predicted to determine savings ranging from €10,998 (-0.84%) for trastuzumab to €169,429.60 (-8.39%) for paclitaxel.

Conclusion

The introduction of dose banding can determine economic savings along with other advantages, such as improved work conditions, management reorganization and containment of waste. The pharmaceutical industry can hopefully support these experiences by producing ready-to-use bags in predetermined dosages.

Low-dose pembrolizumab in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer

A dose of 200 mg 3‐weekly of pembrolizumab was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as treatment for advanced non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without oncogenic drivers. This is despite evidence showing no difference in efficacy with 2 mg/kg. Our study aimed to assess the efficacy of a lower fixed dose of 100 mg, which is closer to 2 mg/kg weight‐based dose in an average‐sized Asian patient. All patients receiving pembrolizumab for advanced NSCLC from January 2016 to March 2020 in National University Hospital, Singapore, were included in this retrospective observational study. The effect of pembrolizumab 100 mg (Pem100) vs 200 mg (Pem200) upon survival outcomes, toxicity and cost were examined. One hundred fourteen patients received pembrolizumab. Sixty‐five (57%) and 49 (43%) received Pem100 and Pem200, respectively. There was no difference in progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) between Pem100 vs Pem200 as a single agent (PFS: 6.8 vs 4.2 months, hazard ratio [HR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36‐1.46, P = .36; 9 month OS: 58% vs 63%, HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.48‐2.41, P = .86) and when combined with chemotherapy (9‐month PFS: 60% vs 50%, HR0.84, 95% CI 0.34‐2.08, P = .71; 9‐month OS: 85% vs 58%, HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.062‐1.20, P = .09). No significant difference in response rate or ≥G3 immune‐related toxicities between Pem100 and Pem200 was observed. A cost minimisation analysis evaluating the degree of cost savings related to drug costs estimated a within study cost saving of SGD4,290,912 and cost saving per patient of SGD39,942 in the Pem100 group. A 100 mg of pembrolizumab appears to be effective with reduction in cost. A randomised trial should be done to investigate a lower dose of pembrolizumab.

What's new?

Pembrolizumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against the PD‐1 receptor, has received FDA approval for the treatment of lung cancer at a fixed dose of 200 mg every 3 weeks. However, doses above 2 mg/kg show a lack of benefit, calling for further evaluation in Asian populations. This retrospective observational study demonstrates the efficacy of a lower fixed dose of pembrolizumab (100 mg every 3 weeks) compared with standard‐dose pembrolizumab. The results also confirm the clinical activity of pembrolizumab at a lower dose than 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks, which could provide considerable cost savings to patients and the health system.

Dosage of anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies: a cardinal open question

Discovery and clinical development of monoclonal antibodies with the ability to interfere in the regulation of the immune response have significantly changed the landscape of oncology in recent years. Among the active agents licensed by the regulatory agencies, nivolumab and pembrolizumab are paradigmatic as the most relevant ones according to the magnitude of available data derived from the extensive preclinical and clinical experience. Although in both cases the respective data sheets indicate well-defined dosage regimens, a review of the literature permits to verify the existence of many issues still unresolved about dosing the two agents, so it must be considered an open question of potentially important consequences, in which to work to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of use.

Quantification of nivolumab in human plasma by LC-MS/HRMS and LC-MS/MS, comparison with ELISA

Nivolumab is a fully human immunoglobulin G4 used for the treatment of several advanced solid cancers as immune checkpoint inhibitors. There are some challenges for the quantification of mAb in plasma because IgG are present intrinsically in complex biologic matrices and this determination must be based on reliable, selective, and accurate analytical methods. This study described two validated methods carried out in two separate laboratories, one developed with a triple quadrupole tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and the other with high resolution mass spectrometry with an orbitrap system (LC-MS/HRMS). Both methods used full-length stable isotope-labeled nivolumab-like (Arginine ¹³C6-¹⁵N₄ and Lysine ¹³C₆-¹⁵N₂) as internal standard. The sample preparation was based on IgG immunocapture, then trypsin digestion was performed and one surrogate peptide was quantified in positive mode. Assays showed good linearity over the range of 5-100 μg/mL and 5-150 μg/mL for LC-MS/HRMS and LC-MS/MS, respectively. The limit of quantification was set at 2 and 5 μg/mL for LC-MS/HRMS and LC-MS/MS, respectively. Acceptable accuracy (from - 13.6% to 3.0%) and precision (within 20%) values were also obtained with both methods. The two LC-MS methods showed a very different matrix effect linked to the use of different analytical columns and elution gradients. Nivolumab plasma concentrations from 60 cancer outpatients were compared with the two mass spectrometry methods and also with a home-made ELISA method. The Bland-Altman analysis did not show any significant bias between the three methods. The Passing-Bablock linear regression analysis showed a good agreement between the three methods with a better correlation between the two mass spectrometry methods.

Cancer Immunotherapy Dosing: A Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Perspective

Immune check-point inhibitors are drugs that are markedly different from other anticancer drugs because of their indirect mechanisms of antitumoral action and their apparently random effect in terms of efficacy and toxicity. This marked pharmacodynamics variability in patients calls for reconsidering to what extent approved dosing used in clinical practice are optimal or whether they should require efforts for customization in outlier patients. To better understand whether or not dosing could be an actionable item in oncology, in this review, preclinical and clinical development of immune checkpoint inhibitors are described, particularly from the angle of dose finding studies. Other issues in connection with dosing issues are developed, such as the flat dosing alternative, the putative role therapeutic drug monitoring could play, the rise of combinatorial strategies, and pharmaco-economic aspects.

A cost analysis study of the implementation of fixed-dosing of monoclonal antibodies in the Netherlands Cancer Institute

Background There is a strong rationale for fixed-dosing of monoclonal antibodies in oncology. Although fixed-dosing of recently introduced monoclonal antibodies is well accepted, the rationale is also applicable for other monoclonal antibodies that already have been used for years, but are still body-size-based dosed in many hospitals. In the Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek (NKI-AVL), fixed-dosing has been implemented now for all monoclonal antibodies and, therefore, this site offers an ideal opportunity for a cost analysis study. Objective To investigate the financial impact of switching to fixed-dosing in the NKI-AVL. Setting The NKI-AVL. Method Information on the preparations of monoclonal antibodies was collected from August 2017 to February 2020. We compared the number of vials needed during preparation for fixed-dosing and body-size -based dosing strategies. The economic impact was calculated for 2 scenarios: scenario 1 assumed clustering of all preparations per day and scenario 2 assumed no clustering of preparations. Main outcome measure Number of saved vials and the correlating savings in health care costs. Results The implementation of fixed-dosing resulted in a substantial reduction in vials used for almost all monoclonal antibodies. The economic savings were calculated to be €0,8 and €3,1 million per year for scenario 1 and 2, respectively. Conclusion Fixed-dosing resulted in substantial savings in health care costs.

Opportunities for using in silico-based extended dosing regimens for monoclonal antibody immune checkpoint inhibitors

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) involves frequent measurements of drug concentrations to ensure levels remain within a therapeutic window, and it is especially useful for drugs with narrow therapeutic indices or extensive interindividual pharmacokinetic variability. This technique has never been applied to immuno-oncology drugs, but, given recent examinations of clinical data (both exposure and response) on a number of these drugs, further investigations into TDM may be justified to reduce costs as well as potentially reducing the severity and/or duration of immune-related adverse events. Specifically, all but one of the approved PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors (pembrolizumab, nivolumab, cemiplimab-rwlc, atezolizumab, avelumab, durvalumab) have been shown to exhibit a plateaued exposure-response (E-R) curve at doses evaluated extensively to date, as well as time-dependent changes in drug exposure. Furthermore, responders have a greater decrease in drug clearance over time and would, therefore, have supratherapeutic serum concentrations. With frequent trough measurements, it is possible to use pharmacokinetic modelling and simulation to estimate drug clearance via Bayesian methods. Based on patient-specific estimates for clearance, optimal alternative dosing strategies can be simulated to lower drug and cost burden yet maintain therapeutic levels, especially as the clearance of the drug decreases over time. This review will comprehensively discuss each of the FDA approved PD-1, PD-L1/2 and CTLA-4 inhibitors regarding their indications and current recommended dosing, with evidence supporting the investigation of these types of TDM strategies.

Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated significant clinical impact in improving overall survival of several malignancies associated with poor outcomes; however, only 20–40% of patients will show long-lasting survival. Further clarification of factors related to treatment response can support improvements in clinical outcome and guide the development of novel immune checkpoint therapies. In this article, we have provided an overview of the pharmacokinetic (PK) aspects related to current ICIs, which include target-mediated drug disposition and time-varying drug clearance. In response to the variation in treatment exposure of ICIs and the significant healthcare costs associated with these agents, arguments for both dose individualization and generalization are provided. We address important issues related to the efficacy and safety, the pharmacodynamics (PD), of ICIs, including exposure–response relationships related to clinical outcome. The unique PK and PD aspects of ICIs give rise to issues of confounding and suboptimal surrogate endpoints that complicate interpretation of exposure–response analysis. Biomarkers to identify patients benefiting from treatment with ICIs have been brought forward. However, validated biomarkers to monitor treatment response are currently lacking.

A comprehensive review of economic evaluations of therapeutic drug monitoring interventions for cancer treatments

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of cancer drugs has been shown to improve treatment effectiveness and safety. The aim of this paper was to comprehensively review economic evaluations of TDM interventions for cancer drugs. Searches were conducted in 4 electronic databases, Medline, EMBASE, and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database), from their inception to June 2019. Studies were included if they were economic evaluations of TDM interventions for an active cancer treatment. The quality of reporting of economic evaluations was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS checklist). Of the 11 publications identified, imatinib with TDM and 5-fluorouracil with TDM were the most commonly assessed interventions (4 publications each). Overall study quality was good, with publications meeting 61 to 91% (median 80%) of CHEERS checklist criteria. A variety of studies were used to estimate the clinical effectiveness inputs for the cost effectiveness models. All publications considered TDM to be cost-effective based on an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below the willingness to pay threshold (64%) or being cost-saving (36%). TDM interventions were considered cost-effective across the economic evaluations. Further clinical research assessing the impact of TDM on overall survival or other long-term health outcomes may enhance the evidence base for TDM in oncology. Future economic evaluations of TDM should explicitly consider uncertainty in the underlying clinical evidence and incorporate changes in the use of newer targeted drugs that form the current standard of care.

Extended-Interval Dosing Strategy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Lung Cancer: Will it Outlast the COVID-19 Pandemic?

Patients with lung cancer are particularly vulnerable to complications from coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Recurrent hospital visits and hospital admission are potential risk factors for acquiring infection with its causative pathogen, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). As immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) constitute the therapeutic backbone for the vast majority of patients with advanced lung cancer in the absence of actionable driver oncogenes, there have been intense discussions within the oncology community regarding risk-benefit of delaying these treatments or use of alternative extended-interval treatment strategies to minimize the risk of viral transmission secondary to unintended nosocomial exposures. In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval for extended-interval strategy of pembrolizumab at a dose of 400 mg every 6 weeks for all already approved oncologic indications. Herein, we summarize the evidence from the in silico pharmacokinetic modeling/simulation studies supporting extended-interval dosing strategies for the ICIs used in lung cancer. We further review the evolving clinical evidence behind these approaches and predict that they will continue to be used in routine practice even long after the pandemic, particularly for patients with durable disease control.

ImmunoPET in Multiple Myeloma-What? So What? Now What?

Despite constant progress over the past three decades, multiple myeloma (MM) is still an incurable disease, and the identification of new biomarkers to better select patients and adapt therapy is more relevant than ever. Recently, the introduction of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) (including direct-targeting mAbs and immune checkpoint inhibitors) appears to have changed the paradigm of MM management, emphasizing the opportunity to cure MM patients through an immunotherapeutic approach. In this context, immuno-positron emission tomography (immunoPET), combining the high sensitivity and resolution of a PET camera with the specificity of a radiolabelled mAb, holds the capability to cement this new treatment paradigm for MM patients. It has the potential to non-invasively monitor the distribution of therapeutic antibodies or directly monitor biomarkers on MM cells, and to allow direct observation of potential changes over time and in response to various therapeutic interventions. Tumor response could, in the future, be anticipated more effectively to provide individualized treatment plans tailored to patients according to their unique imaging signatures. This work explores the important role played by immunotherapeutics in the management of MM, and focuses on some of the challenges for this drug class and the significant interest of companion imaging agents such as immunoPET.

Real-World Nivolumab Wastage and Leftover Drug Stability Assessment to Facilitate Drug Vial Optimization for Cost Savings

PURPOSE

Nivolumab dosage was initially selected on the basis of body weight, often resulting in leftover drug after sterile compounding. This study sought to investigate the real-world wastage of nivolumab and assess the long-term stability of leftover nivolumab within vials to facilitate drug vial optimization (DVO).

METHODS

We collected all discarded vials after preparation from 17 regional hospitals in Japan over a 6-month period preceding the adoption of a fixed dose of 240 mg per administration. The actual amount of waste was measured for each preparation. Stability assessment was performed under different storage conditions.

RESULTS

A total of 2,789 100-mg vials and 4,069 20-mg vials were collected. Overall, the drug cost associated with the expenditure of nivolumab alone was $12.1 million, whereas the total cost due to drug wastage was $0.735 million (rate of wastage, 6.1%). Furthermore, the immunoglobulin G concentrations of nivolumab remaining within vials, as well as binding activity to programmed death-1 protein, did not change significantly over 4 weeks of storage at either 4°C or room temperature.

CONCLUSION

Significant drug wastage occurs during sterile preparation of nivolumab according to body weight-based dosing. Although nivolumab dosing has been changed to a fixed dose in Japan, body weight-based dosing is still applied in some other countries, as well as in combination therapy with ipilimumab. Our findings regarding the long-term stability of leftover nivolumab within the vials should motivate hospitals to implement DVO for cost savings.

Economics of alternative dosing strategies for pembrolizumab and nivolumab at a single academic cancer center

Background

The FDA initially approved pembrolizumab and nivolumab for doses based on patient weight, but subsequently amended approval to fixed doses. We estimated savings from novel dosing strategies based on real‐world patient data from a single cancer center.

Methods

We analyzed all outpatient doses of pembrolizumab and nivolumab administered at three infusion centers affiliated with our academic hospital between July 1, 2018 and Oct 31, 2018. We estimated savings from several dosing strategies with and without vial sharing between patients.

Results

A total of 1029 doses of pembrolizumab or nivolumab were administered for multiple cancer types. For 77% of doses, the weight‐based dose was less than the fixed dose. “Dose‐minimization” (DM), defined as the lesser of weight‐based and fixed dose decreased nivolumab spending by 9% without affecting pembrolizumab spending. DM plus vial sharing decreased pembrolizumab spending by 19% without affecting nivolumab. The differences in savings were due to availability of multiple vial sizes for nivolumab but not pembrolizumab. DM plus vial sharing for both drugs would have saved $1.5 million USD over the 4‐month study period.

Conclusion

New dosing strategies for pembrolizumab and nivolumab can generate large savings without anticipated decrease in efficacy. Barriers include FDA dosing labels, hospital policies against vial sharing, and inaccessibility of smaller vial sizes, which are currently available in other worldwide markets.

Structure and Optimization of Checkpoint Inhibitors

With the advent of checkpoint inhibitor treatment for various cancer types, the optimization of drug selection, pharmacokinetics and biomarker assays is an urgent and as yet unresolved dilemma for clinicians, pharmaceutical companies and researchers. Drugs which inhibit cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein-4 (CTLA-4), such as ipilimumab and tremelimumab, programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1), such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab, and programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1), such as atezolizumab, durvalumab and avelumab, each appear to have varying pharmacokinetics and clinical activity in different cancer types. Each drug differs in terms of dosing, which becomes an issue when drug comparisons are attempted. Here, we examine the various checkpoint inhibitors currently used and in development. We discuss the antibodies and their protein targets, their pharmacokinetics as measured in various tumor types, and their binding affinities to their respective antigens. We also examine the various dosing regimens for these drugs and how they differ. Finally, we examine new developments and methods to optimize delivery and efficacy in the field of checkpoint inhibitors, including non-fucosylation, prodrug formations, bispecific antibodies, and newer small molecule and peptide checkpoint inhibitors.

Precision dosing to avoid adverse drug reactions

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) have traditionally been managed by trial and error, adjusting drug and dose selection reactively following patient harm. With an improved understanding of ADRs, and the patient characteristics that increase susceptibility, precision medicine technologies enable a proactive approach to ADRs and support clinicians to change prescribing accordingly. This commentary revisits the famous pharmacology–toxicology continuum first postulated by Paracelsus 500 years ago and explains why precision dosing is needed to help avoid ADRs in modern clinical practice. Strategies on how to improve precision dosing are given, including more research to establish better precision dosing targets in the cases of greatest need, easier access to dosing instructions via e-prescribing, improved monitoring of patients with novel biomarkers of drug response, and further application of model-informed precision dosing.

Is there an Exposure-Response Relationship for Nivolumab in Real-World NSCLC Patients?

Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data from real-world cohort are sparse in non small–cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with nivolumab. The aim of this prospective observational study was to explore the exposure-response relationship for effectiveness and toxicity of nivolumab in 81 outpatients with metastatic lung cancer. Nivolumab plasma trough concentrations (Cmin) were assayed at days 14, 28, and 42. Prognostic factors (including Cmin) regarding progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were explored using a multivariate Cox model. A Spearman’s rank test was used to investigate the relationship between Cmin and grade >2 immune-related adverse events (irAE). Mean nivolumab Cmin was 16.2 ± 6.0 µg/mL (n = 76), 25.6 ± 10.2 µg/mL (n = 64) and 33.4 ± 11.3 µg/mL (n = 53) at days 14, 28, and 42, respectively. No pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) relationship was observed with either survival or onset of irAE. Multivariable Cox regression analysis identified Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (hazard ratio 1.85, 95%confidence interval 1.02–3.38, p-value = 0.043) and baseline use of corticosteroids (HR 8.08, 95%CI 1.78–36.62, p-value = 0.007) as independent risk factor for PFS and only baseline use of corticosteroids (HR 6.29, 95%CI 1.46–27.08, p-value = 0.013) for OS. No PK/PD relationship for nivolumab was observed in real-world NSCLC patients. This supports the recent use of flat dose regimens without plasma drug monitoring.

Development of an Enzyme-Linked Immune Sorbent Assay to Measure Nivolumab and Pembrolizumab Serum Concentrations

BACKGROUND

Treatment with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against programmed cell death protein 1 receptor is subject to high variation in treatment outcome among cancer patients. For these agents, no exposure-response (ER) relationships have been investigated in routine health care settings. However, ER relationships have been identified for several other mAbs used in oncology. Methods to conveniently measure serum concentrations of anti-programmed cell death protein 1 mAbs in routine health care may clarify possible ER relationships. Therefore, the authors aimed to develop an enzyme-linked immune sorbent assay (ELISA) for the measurement of both nivolumab and pembrolizumab serum concentrations of treated cancer patients.

METHODS

Optimal capture antigen and detection antibody concentrations were selected based on titrations. Nivolumab calibration standards ranging from 0.2 to 300 ng/mL were tested in duplicate. Accuracy was assessed in 2 recovery experiments. Intra- and interassay variations were assessed on 3 different days by 2 independent technicians. The developed ELISA was also set up for pembrolizumab calibration curves. Cross-reactivity of nivolumab measurements with ipilimumab was assessed. Of one nivolumab treated patient, serum concentrations in follow up samples were measured and presented.

RESULTS

Nivolumab calibration standards of 0.20-25 ng/mL were used. Nivolumab trough concentrations after 1 cycle in 8 patients ranged from 17.3 to 31.1 mcg/mL. The range of accuracy was 84%-105%, whereas intra- and interassay variations showed a coefficient of variation of 5.5% and 10.1%, respectively. No cross-reactivity with ipilimumab was detected. Pembrolizumab trough concentrations (n = 8) ranged from 9.1 to 19.7 mcg/mL after 1 infusion.

CONCLUSIONS

The in-house-developed ELISA provides the opportunity to measure both nivolumab and pembrolizumab serum concentrations. This may help identify possible ER relationships in treated cancer patients and may potentially lead to dose adjustments in the future.

Correlation between nivolumab exposure and treatment outcomes in non-small-cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

Nivolumab treatment is subject to large interpatient variability in both efficacy and toxicity, which may partly be explained by differences in nivolumab exposure. Exposure-response relationships in regular healthcare have not been extensively investigated for nivolumab. Therefore, we aimed to identify possible exposure-response relationships in nivolumab-treated patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Patients with NSCLC who started second-line nivolumab therapy (3 mg/kg Q2W) between May 5th 2016 and August 1st 2017, and from whom serial blood samples, toxicity data and outcome data were prospectively collected, were included. Follow-up was carried out until November 1st 2017. Patients were classified according to the best overall response (BOR) based on the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours, v1.1, and toxicities according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Nivolumab trough concentrations were measured after 2, 4 and 10 weeks of treatment, excluding dose delays, and calculated geometric means were tested versus BOR or toxicity using analysis of variance and an independent samples t-test, respectively. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were compared between high and low trough concentration groups.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients were evaluable for analyses. Responders (n = 15) had higher mean trough concentrations than patients with progression (n = 33): 47% higher after 2 weeks (p = 0.001), 53% higher after 4 weeks (p = 0.008) and 73% higher after 10 weeks (p = 0.002). Higher trough concentrations were associated with longer OS (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that patients with NSCLC with a response to nivolumab had a higher nivolumab exposure than patients with progression, indicating a potential exposure-response relationship. Further clinical research should focus on clarifying these exposure-response relationships.

What Does it Take to Make Model-Informed Precision Dosing Common Practice? Report from the 1st Asian Symposium on Precision Dosing

Model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) is modeling and simulation in healthcare to predict the drug dose for a given patient based on their individual characteristics that is most likely to improve efficacy and/or lower toxicity in comparison to traditional dosing. This paper describes the background and status of MIPD and the activities at the 1st Asian Symposium of Precision Dosing. The theme of the meeting was the question, "What does it take to make MIPD common practice?" Formal presentations highlighted the distinction between genetic and non-genetic sources of variability in drug exposure and response, the use of modeling and simulation as decision support tools, and the facilitators to MIPD implementation. A panel discussion addressed the types of models used for MIPD, how the pharmaceutical industry views MIPD, ways to upscale MIPD beyond academic hospital centers, and the essential role of healthcare professional education as a way to progress. The meeting concluded with an ongoing commitment to use MIPD to improve patient care.

The role of nivolumab in melanoma

The incidence of melanoma continues to rise worldwide. Prior to 2010, there had been no progress in the treatment of advanced melanoma in living memory. Since then, immunotherapy has become a standard of care in the treatment of advanced melanoma. Nivolumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody against PD-1, which is a negative regulatory checkpoint in the T cells. The clinical benefit of nivolumab as a single agent is well established, with response rates of ≥40%, durable responses and a favorable tolerability profile. The combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab has also become a standard of care and the role of nivolumab in the adjuvant setting for high-risk patients has been recently confirmed.