Is the "3+3" dose-escalation phase I clinical trial design suitable for therapeutic cancer vaccine development? A recommendation for alternative design

The Right Dose: Results of a Patient Advocate-Led Survey of Individuals With Metastatic Breast Cancer Regarding Treatment-Related Side Effects and Views About Dosage Assessment to Optimize Quality of Life

PURPOSE

Although patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) have been living longer with the advent of more effective treatments such as targeted therapy and immunotherapy, the disease remains incurable, and most patients will undergo therapy indefinitely. When beginning therapy, patients are typically prescribed dose often based upon the maximum tolerated dose identified in phase I clinical trials. However, patients' perspectives about tolerability and willingness to discuss individualized dosing of drugs upon initiation of a new regimen and throughout the course of treatment have not been comprehensively evaluated.

METHODS

Patient advocates and medical oncologists from the Patient-Centered Dosing Initiative (PCDI) developed a survey to ascertain the prevalence and severity of MBC patients' treatment-related side effects, the level of patient-physician communication, mitigation strategies, perception about the relative efficacy of higher versus lower doses, and willingness to discuss alternative dosing. The PCDI distributed the anonymous confidential online survey in August 2020 to individuals with self-reported MBC.

RESULTS

One thousand and two hundred twenty-one patients with MBC completed the survey. 86.1% (n = 1,051) reported experiencing at least one significant treatment-related side effect, and of these, 20.3% (n = 213) visited the emergency room/hospital and 43.2% (n = 454) missed at least one treatment. Nearly all patients with side effects (97.6%, n = 1,026) informed their doctor and 81.7% (n = 838) received assistance. Of the 556 patients given a dose reduction for side-effect mitigation, 82.6% (n = 459) reported relief. Notably, majority of patients (53.3%, n = 651) do not believe that higher dose is always more effective than lower dose, and 92.3% (n = 1,127) would be willing to discuss flexible dosing options with their physicians based upon personal characteristics to optimize quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Given that the majority of patients with MBC experienced at least one substantial treatment-related side effect and most patients given a dose reduction reported improvement, innovative dosage-related strategies are warranted to sustain and improve patients' well-being. Patient-physician discussions in which the patient's unique attributes and circumstances are assessed upon initiation of new treatment and throughout the course of therapy may facilitate the identification of the most favorable dose for each patient, and the majority of patients would be receptive to this approach.

Dose optimization of an adjuvanted peptide-based personalized neoantigen melanoma vaccine

The advancements in next-generation sequencing have made it possible to effectively detect somatic mutations, which has led to the development of personalized neoantigen cancer vaccines that are tailored to the unique variants found in a patient's cancer. These vaccines can provide significant clinical benefit by leveraging the patient's immune response to eliminate malignant cells. However, determining the optimal vaccine dose for each patient is a challenge due to the heterogeneity of tumors. To address this challenge, we formulate a mathematical dose optimization problem based on a previous mathematical model that encompasses the immune response cascade produced by the vaccine in a patient. We propose an optimization approach to identify the optimal personalized vaccine doses, considering a fixed vaccination schedule, while simultaneously minimizing the overall number of tumor and activated T cells. To validate our approach, we perform in silico experiments on six real-world clinical trial patients with advanced melanoma. We compare the results of applying an optimal vaccine dose to those of a suboptimal dose (the dose used in the clinical trial and its deviations). Our simulations reveal that an optimal vaccine regimen of higher initial doses and lower final doses may lead to a reduction in tumor size for certain patients. Our mathematical dose optimization offers a promising approach to determining an optimal vaccine dose for each patient and improving clinical outcomes.

Immunotherapy for colorectal cancer: Rational strategies and novel therapeutic progress

There are increasing incidences and mortality rates for colorectal cancer in the world. It is common for chemotherapy and radiation given to patients with colorectal cancer to cause toxicities that limit their effectiveness and cause cancer cells to become resistant to these treatments. Additional targeted treatments are needed to improve patient's quality of life and outcomes. Immunotherapy has rapidly emerged as an incredibly exciting and promising avenue for cancer treatment in recent years. This innovative approach provides novel options for tackling solid tumors, effectively establishing itself as a new cornerstone in cancer treatment. Specifically, in the realm of colorectal cancer (CRC), there is great promise in developing new drugs that target immune checkpoints, offering a hopeful and potentially transformative solution. While immunotherapy of CRC has made significant advances, there are still obstacles and limitations. CRC patients have a poor response to treatment because of the immune-suppressing function of their tumor microenvironment (TME). In addition to blocking inhibitory immune checkpoints, checkpoint-blocking antibodies may also boost immune responses against tumors. The review summarizes recent advances in immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for CRC, including CTLA-4, PD-1, PD-L1, LAG-3, and TIM-3.

The "Great Debate" at Immunotherapy Bridge 2022, Naples, November 30th-December 1st, 2022

The 2022 Immunotherapy Bridge congress (November 30-December 1, Naples, Italy) featured a Great Debate session which addressed three contemporary topics in the field of immunotherapy. The debates included counterpoint views from leading experts and considered whether adoptive cell therapy (ACT) has a role in the treatment of solid tumors, the use of peripheral/blood biomarkers versus tumor microenvironment biomarkers for cancer immunotherapy and the role of chimeric antigen receptor T cell versus natural killer cell therapy. As is the tradition in the Immunotherapy Bridge Great Debates, speakers are invited by the meeting Chairs to express one side of the assigned debate and the opinions given may not fully reflect their own personal views. Audiences voted in favour of either side of the topic both before and after each debate.

Vaccination-Based Immunoprevention of Colorectal Tumors: A Primer for the Clinician

Colorectal cancer (CRC) continues to be a significant public health problem worldwide. CRC screening programs have reduced the incidence rates of CRCs but still suffer from the problems of missed lesions and interval cancers. Chemopreventive strategies against CRC would benefit high-risk populations but trials testing synthetic and naturally occurring compounds have not yielded a front runner. Immune mechanisms promoting cancer have been modulated to develop immunotherapy for cancer treatment that has revolutionized cancer management, but could also be applied to cancer interception, that is, cancer immunoprevention. Cancer immunoprevention refers to approaches that can enhance the immune system, either directly or by removing natural breaks such as immune checkpoints, to survey and destroy tumor cells. In this primer, we aim to explain the concepts behind vaccine-based cancer immunoprevention. Multiple cancer vaccines have been tried in advanced cancer populations, but most have failed primarily because of an immunosuppressive environment that accompanies advanced cancers. Preventive vaccines in immunocompetent hosts may have a better clinical response compared with therapeutic vaccines in immunosuppressed hosts. The first randomized controlled trial testing the mucin1 vaccine against CRC in the prevention setting has been successfully completed. For the benefit of the clinician, we briefly discuss important concepts related to the workings of preventive vaccines. Prevention with vaccines is a highly attractive approach because of the potential for highly targeted therapy with minimal side effects that could theoretically provide lifelong protection.

A risk stratification model for toxicities in phase 1 immunotherapy trials

INTRODUCTION

Despite the increased number of novel immunotherapy (IO) agents under current development, their toxicity profile remains to be fully elucidated.

METHODS

An IO risk stratification model was developed based on 5 different variables: treatment-related deaths; rate of grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events or treatment-emergent adverse events; grade ≥2 encephalopathy or central nervous system toxicity; grade ≥2 cytokine release syndrome; and the number and type of dose-limiting toxicity. Phase 1 IO trials published from January 2014 to December 2020 were reviewed and categorised based on our risk stratification model into three categories: low-, intermediate- and high-risk. Clinical trial variables were associated with the high-risk category. To review the quality of reporting across phase 1 IO trials, a subset of studies was further examined by the use of the ASCO/SITC Trial Reporting in Immuno-Oncology (TRIO) standards.

RESULTS

Different IO compounds demonstrated diverse risk profiles. In multivariable analysis, combination versus IO single agent treatment, and testing IO agents different from anti-programmed death-1/programmed death ligand-1 (anti-PD1/L1), anti-cytotoxic t-lymphocyte antigen-4 (anti-CTLA4) antibodies and anti-cancer vaccines were associated with a higher toxicity risk. None of the studies examined in our dataset reported all the items included in the TRIO standards.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results have important implications for future clinical trial design. Additionally, standards for reporting are urgently needed.

Colorectal cancer vaccines: The current scenario and future prospects

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers worldwide. Current therapies such as surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy encounter obstacles in preventing metastasis of CRC even when applied in combination. Immune checkpoint inhibitors depict limited effects due to the limited cases of CRC patients with high microsatellite instability (MSI-H). Cancer vaccines are designed to trigger the elevation of tumor-infiltrated lymphocytes, resulting in the intense response of the immune system to tumor antigens. This review briefly summarizes different categories of CRC vaccines, demonstrates the current outcomes of relevant clinical trials, and provides particular focus on recent advances on nanovaccines and neoantigen vaccines, representing the trend and emphasis of CRC vaccine development.

Current challenges in the manufacture of clinical-grade autologous whole cell vaccines for hematological malignancies

Autologous whole cell vaccines use a patient's own tumor cells as a source of antigen to elicit an anti-tumor immune response in vivo. Recently, the authors conducted a systematic review of clinical trials employing these products in hematological cancers that showed a favorable safety profile and trend toward efficacy. However, it was noted that manufacturing challenges limit both the efficacy and clinical implementation of these vaccine products. In the current literature review, the authors sought to define the issues surrounding the manufacture of autologous whole cell products for hematological cancers. The authors describe key factors, including the acquisition, culture, cryopreservation and transduction of malignant cells, that require optimization for further advancement of the field. Furthermore, the authors provide a summary of pre-clinical work that informs how the identified challenges may be overcome. The authors also highlight areas in which future basic research would be of benefit to the field. The goal of this review is to provide a roadmap for investigators seeking to advance the field of autologous cell vaccines as it applies to hematological malignancies.

Beyond Sequencing: Prioritizing and Delivering Neoantigens for Cancer Vaccines

Neoantigens are tumor-specific proteins and peptides that can be highly immunogenic. Immune-mediated tumor rejection is strongly associated with cytotoxic responses to neoantigen-derived peptides in noncovalent association with self-HLA molecules. Neoantigen-based therapies, such as adoptive T cell transfer, have shown the potential to induce remission of treatment-resistant metastatic disease in select patients. Cancer vaccines are similarly designed to elicit or amplify antigen-specific T cell populations and stimulate directed antitumor immunity, but the selection and prioritization of the neoantigens remains a challenge. Bioinformatic algorithms can predict tumor neoantigens from somatic mutations, insertion-deletions, and other aberrant peptide products, but this often leads to hundreds of potential neoepitopes, all unique for that tumor. Selecting neoantigens for cancer vaccines is complicated by the technical challenges of neoepitope discovery, the diversity of HLA molecules, and intratumoral heterogeneity of passenger mutations leading to immune escape. Despite strong preclinical evidence, few neoantigen cancer vaccines tested in vivo have generated epitope-specific T cell populations, suggesting suboptimal immune system activation. In this chapter, we review factors affecting the prioritization and delivery of candidate neoantigens in the design of therapeutic and preventive cancer vaccines and consider synergism with standard chemotherapies.

Breast cancer vaccines for treatment and prevention

Breast cancer is immunogenic and a variety of vaccines have been designed to boost immunity directed against the disease. The components of a breast cancer vaccine, the antigen, the delivery system, and the adjuvant, can have a significant impact on vaccine immunogenicity. There have been numerous immunogenic proteins identified in all subtypes of breast cancer. The majority of these antigens are weakly immunogenic nonmutated tumor-associated proteins. Mutated proteins and neoantigen epitopes are found only in a small minority of patients and are enriched in the triple negative subtype. Several vaccines have advanced to large randomized Phase II or Phase III clinical trials. None of these trials met their primary endpoint of either progression-free or overall survival. Despite these set-backs investigators have learned important lessons regarding the clinical application of breast cancer vaccines from the type of immune response needed for tumor eradication, Type I T-cell immunity, to the patient populations most likely to benefit from vaccination. Many therapeutic breast cancer vaccines are now being tested in combination with other forms of immune therapy or chemotherapy and radiation. Breast cancer vaccines as single agents are now studied in the context of the prevention of relapse or development of disease. Newer approaches are designing vaccines to prevent breast cancer by intercepting high-risk lesions such as ductal carcinoma in situ to limit the progression of these tumors to invasive cancer. There are also several efforts to develop vaccines for the primary prevention of breast cancer by targeting antigens expressed during breast cancer initiation.

Vaccine-Based Immunotherapy for Head and Neck Cancers

Simple Summary

Therapeutic vaccines are given to patients with cancer, as opposed to prophylactic vaccines given to a healthy population. The challenge for therapeutic oncological vaccines is to stimulate an immune T cell response against endogenous (or derived) antigens that is sufficiently potent to induce cytotoxic activity and broad enough to take tumor heterogeneity into account. The purpose of this article is to provide an updated review of the prophylactic and therapeutic vaccines that target viral or non-viral antigens, particularly in head and neck cancers.

Abstract

In 2019, the FDA approved pembrolizumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting PD-1, for the first-line treatment of recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancers, despite only a limited number of patients benefiting from the treatment. Promising effects of therapeutic vaccination led the FDA to approve the use of the first therapeutic vaccine in prostate cancer in 2010. Research in the field of therapeutic vaccination, including possible synergistic effects with anti-PD(L)1 treatments, is evolving each year, and many vaccines are in pre-clinical and clinical studies. The aim of this review article is to discuss vaccines as a new therapeutic strategy, particularly in the field of head and neck cancers. Different vaccination technologies are discussed, as well as the results of the first clinical trials in HPV-positive, HPV-negative, and EBV-induced head and neck cancers.

Immunization with a Plasmid DNA Vaccine Encoding the N-Terminus of Insulin-like Growth Factor Binding Protein-2 in Advanced Ovarian Cancer Leads to High-level Type I Immune Responses

BACKGROUND

Cancer vaccines targeting nonmutated proteins elicit limited type I T-cell responses and can generate regulatory and type II T cells. Class II epitopes that selectively elicit type I or type II cytokines can be identified in nonmutated cancer-associated proteins. In mice, a T-helper I (Th1) selective insulin-like growth factor binding protein-2 (IGFBP-2) N-terminus vaccine generated high levels of IFNγ secreting T cells, no regulatory T cells, and significant antitumor activity. We conducted a phase I trial of T-helper 1 selective IGFBP-2 vaccination in patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

METHODS

Twenty-five patients were enrolled. The IGFBP-2 N-terminus plasmid-based vaccine was administered monthly for 3 months. Toxicity was graded by NCI criteria and antigen-specific T cells measured by IFNγ/IL10 ELISPOT. T-cell diversity and phenotype were assessed.

RESULTS

The vaccine was well tolerated, with 99% of adverse events graded 1 or 2, and generated high levels of IGFBP-2 IFNγ secreting T cells in 50% of patients. Both Tbet⁺ CD4 (P = 0.04) and CD8 (P = 0.007) T cells were significantly increased in immunized patients. There was no increase in GATA3⁺ CD4 or CD8, IGFBP-2 IL10 secreting T cells, or regulatory T cells. A significant increase in T-cell clonality occurred in immunized patients (P = 0.03, pre- vs. post-vaccine) and studies showed the majority of patients developed epitope spreading within IGFBP-2 and/or to other antigens. Vaccine nonresponders were more likely to have preexistent IGFBP-2 specific immunity and demonstrated defects in CD4 T cells, upregulation of PD-1, and downregulation of genes associated with T-cell activation, after immunization.

CONCLUSIONS

IGFBP-2 N-terminus Th1 selective vaccination safely induces type I T cells without evidence of regulatory responses.

Multi-Epitope-Based Vaccines for Colon Cancer Treatment and Prevention

Background

Overexpression of nonmutated proteins involved in oncogenesis is a mechanism by which such proteins become immunogenic. We questioned whether overexpressed colorectal cancer associated proteins found at higher incidence and associated with poor prognosis could be effective vaccine antigens. We explored whether vaccines targeting these proteins could inhibit the development of intestinal tumors in the azoxymethane (AOM)-induced colon model and APC Min mice.

Methods

Humoral immunity was evaluated by ELISA. Web-based algorithms identified putative Class II binding epitopes of the antigens. Peptide and protein specific T-cells were identified from human peripheral blood mononuclear cells using IFN-gamma ELISPOT. Peptides highly homologous between mouse and man were formulated into vaccines and tested for immunogenicity in mice and in vivo tumor challenge. Mice treated with AOM and APC Min transgenic mice were vaccinated and monitored for tumors.

Results

Serum IgG for CDC25B, COX2, RCAS1, and FASCIN1 was significantly elevated in colorectal cancer patient sera compared to volunteers (CDC25B p=0.002, COX-2 p=0.001, FASCIN1 and RCAS1 p<0.0001). Epitopes predicted to bind to human class II MHC were identified for each protein and T-cells specific for both the peptides and corresponding recombinant protein were generated from human lymphocytes validating these proteins as human antigens. Some peptides were highly homologous between mouse and humans and after immunization, mice developed both peptide and protein specific IFN-γ-secreting cell responses to CDC25B, COX2 and RCAS1, but not FASCIN1. FVB/nJ mice immunized with CDC25B or COX2 peptides showed significant inhibition of growth of the syngeneic MC38 tumor compared to control (p<0.0001). RCAS1 peptide vaccination showed no anti-tumor effect. In the prophylactic setting, after immunization with CDC25B or COX2 peptides mice treated with AOM developed significantly fewer tumors as compared to controls (p<0.0002) with 50% of mice remaining tumor free in each antigen group. APC Min mice immunized with CDC25B or COX2 peptides developed fewer small bowel tumors as compared to controls (p=0.01 and p=0.02 respectively).

Conclusions

Immunization with CDC25B and COX2 epitopes consistently suppressed tumor development in each model evaluated. These data lay the foundation for the development of multi-antigen vaccines for the treatment and prevention of colorectal cancer.

Therapeutic Cancer Vaccination With a Peptide Derived From the Calreticulin Exon 9 Mutations Induces Strong Cellular Immune Responses in Patients With CALR-Mutant Chronic Myeloproliferative Neoplasms

Background

The calreticulin (CALR) exon 9 mutations that are identified in 20% of patients with Philadelphia chromosome negative chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) generate immunogenic antigens. Thus, therapeutic cancer vaccination against mutant CALR could be a new treatment modality in CALR-mutant MPN.

Methods

The safety and efficacy of vaccination with the peptide CALRLong36 derived from the CALR exon 9 mutations was tested in a phase I clinical vaccination trial with montanide as adjuvant. Ten patients with CALRmut MPN were included in the trial and received 15 vaccines over the course of one year. The primary end point was evaluation of safety and toxicity of the vaccine. Secondary endpoint was assessment of the immune response to the vaccination epitope (www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT03566446).

Results

Patients had a median age of 59.5 years and a median disease duration of 6.5 years. All patients received the intended 15 vaccines, and the vaccines were deemed safe and tolerable as only two grade three AE were detected, and none of these were considered to be related to the vaccine. A decline in platelet counts relative to the platelets counts at baseline was detected during the first 100 days, however this did not translate into neither a clinical nor a molecular response in any of the patients. Immunomonitoring revealed that four of 10 patients had an in vitro interferon (IFN)-γ ELISPOT response to the CALRLong36 peptide at baseline, and four additional patients displayed a response in ELISPOT upon receiving three or more vaccines. The amplitude of the immune response increased during the entire vaccination schedule for patients with essential thrombocythemia. In contrast, the immune response in patients with primary myelofibrosis did not increase after three vaccines.

Conclusion

Therapeutic cancer vaccination with peptide vaccines derived from mutant CALR with montanide as an adjuvant, is safe and tolerable. The vaccines did not induce any clinical responses. However, the majority of patients displayed a marked T-cell response to the vaccine upon completion of the trial. This suggests that vaccines directed against mutant CALR may be used with other cancer therapeutic modalities to enhance the anti-tumor immune response.

Cytotoxic T cells isolated from healthy donors and cancer patients kill TGFβ-expressing cancer cells in a TGFβ-dependent manner

Transforming growth factor-beta (TGFβ) is a highly potent immunosuppressive cytokine. Although TGFβ is a tumor suppressor in early/premalignant cancer lesions, the cytokine has several tumor-promoting effects in advanced cancer; abrogation of the antitumor immune response is one of the most important tumor-promoting effects. As several immunoregulatory mechanisms have recently been shown to be targets of specific T cells, we hypothesized that TGFβ is targeted by naturally occurring specific T cells and thus could be a potential target for immunomodulatory cancer vaccination. Hence, we tested healthy donor and cancer patient T cells for spontaneous T-cell responses specifically targeting 38 20-mer epitopes derived from TGFβ1. We identified numerous CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses against several epitopes in TGFβ. Additionally, several ex vivo responses were identified. By enriching specific T cells from different donors, we produced highly specific cultures specific to several TGFβ-derived epitopes. Cytotoxic CD8+ T-cell clones specific for both a 20-mer epitope and a 9-mer HLA-A2 restricted killed epitope peptide were pulsed in HLA-A2+ target cells and killed the HLA-A2+ cancer cell lines THP-1 and UKE-1. Additionally, stimulation of THP-1 cancer cells with cytokines that increased TGFβ expression increased the fraction of killed cells. In conclusion, we have shown that healthy donors and cancer patients harbor CD4+ and CD8+ T cells specific for TGFβ-derived epitopes and that cytotoxic T cells with specificity toward TGFβ-derived epitopes are able to recognize and kill cancer cell lines in a TGFβ-dependent manner.

Early 3+3 Trial Dose-Escalation Phase I Clinical Trial Design and Suitability for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

PURPOSE

Despite the expansion of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) indications, the relationship between ICI dose and toxicity or response is not well established. To understand this correlation, we performed a meta-analysis of ICI trials that used dose escalation.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

We searched PubMed and abstracts presented at (inter)national meetings for trials using FDA-approved ICIs. The reported rates of grade 3-5 adverse events (G3-5 AE), immune-related adverse events (irAE), and response were correlated with doses within each ICI using marginal exact generalized linear models.

RESULTS

A total of 74 trials (7,469 patients) published between January 2010 and January 2017 were included. For ipilimumab, the incidence of G3-5 AEs was 34% with a significant 27% reduced risk in lower doses (P = 0.002). However, no relationship was observed between dose and irAEs or response. For nivolumab, the incidence of G3-5 AEs was 20.1% which was lower in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) compared with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) or melanoma (P ≤ 0.05) with no dose-toxicity relationship. In melanoma and NSCLC, a dose-response association was observed, which was not observed in RCC. For pembrolizumab, the incidence of G3-5 AEs was 13.3%, which was lower in melanoma compared with NSCLC (P = 0.03) with no dose-toxicity relationship. In melanoma, lower dose levels correlated with decreased odds of response (P = 0.01), a relationship that was not observed in NSCLC.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis shows a lack of consistent dose-toxicity or dose-response correlation with ICIs. Therefore, dose escalation is not an appropriate design to conduct ICI studies. Here we present an innovative trial design for immune-modulating agents.

Personalized Cancer Vaccines: Clinical Landscape, Challenges, and Opportunities

Tremendous innovation is underway among a rapidly expanding repertoire of promising personalized immune-based treatments. Therapeutic cancer vaccines (TCVs) are attractive systemic immunotherapies that activate and expand antigen-specific CD8⁺ and CD4⁺ T cells to enhance anti-tumor immunity. Our review highlights key issues impacting TCVs in clinical practice and reports on progress in development. We review the mechanism of action, immune-monitoring, dosing strategies, combinations, obstacles, and regulation of cancer vaccines. Most trials of personalized TCVs are ongoing and represent diverse platforms with predominantly early investigations of mRNA, DNA, or peptide-based targeting strategies against neoantigens in solid tumors, with many in combination immunotherapies. Multiple delivery systems, routes of administration, and dosing strategies are used. Intravenous or intramuscular administration is common, including delivery by lipid nanoparticles. Absorption and biodistribution impact antigen uptake, expression, and presentation, affecting the strength, speed, and duration of immune response. The emerging trials illustrate the complexity of developing this class of innovative immunotherapies. Methodical testing of the multiple potential factors influencing immune responses, as well as refined quantitative methodologies to facilitate optimal dosing strategies, could help resolve uncertainty of therapeutic approaches. To increase the likelihood of success in bringing these medicines to patients, several unique development challenges must be overcome.

Multicenter Phase I Trial of a DNA Vaccine Encoding the Androgen Receptor Ligand-binding Domain (pTVG-AR, MVI-118) in Patients with Metastatic Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

Preclinical studies demonstrated that a DNA vaccine (pTVG-AR, MVI-118) encoding the androgen receptor ligand-binding domain (AR LBD) augmented antigen-specific CD8⁺ T cells, delayed prostate cancer progression and emergence of castration-resistant disease, and prolonged survival of tumor-bearing mice. This vaccine was evaluated in a multicenter phase I trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) who had recently begun androgen deprivation therapy were randomly assigned to receive pTVG-AR on one of two treatment schedules over one year, and with or without GM-CSF as a vaccine adjuvant. Patients were followed for 18 months. Primary objectives were safety and immune response. Secondary objectives included median time to PSA progression, and 18-month PSA-PFS (PPFS).

RESULTS

Forty patients were enrolled at three centers. Twenty-seven patients completed treatment and 18 months of follow-up. Eleven patients (28%) had a PSA progression event before the 18-month time point. No grade 3 or 4 adverse events were observed. Of 30 patients with samples available for immune analysis, 14 (47%) developed Th1-type immunity to the AR LBD, as determined by IFNγ and/or granzyme B ELISPOT. Persistent IFNγ immune responses were observed irrespective of GM-CSF adjuvant. Patients who developed T-cell immunity had a significantly prolonged PPFS compared with patients without immunity (HR = 0.01; 95% CI, 0.0-0.21; P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

pTVG-AR was safe and immunologically active in patients with mCSPC. Association between immunity and PPFS suggests that treatment may delay the time to castration resistance, consistent with preclinical findings, and will be prospectively evaluated in future trials.See related commentary by Shenderov and Antonarakis, p. 5056.

Tailoring early-phase clinical trial design to address multiple research objectives

INTRODUCTION

In contemporary oncology drug development, implementation of novel early-phase designs with the ability to address multiple research objectives is needed to better refine regimens. This paper describes an adaptive design strategy for identifying a range of optimal regimens based on two endpoints within multiple cohorts. The proposed design was developed to address objectives in an early-phase trial of cancer vaccines in combination with agonistic antibodies to CD40 and CD27.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We describe a model-based design strategy that was developed for a trial evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of vaccination with (1) peptides plus CD40 antibody and TLR3 ligand, (2) systemic administration of an agonistic CD27 antibody, and (3) to assess immune response from (1) and (2) compared to optimal controls in participants with stage IIB-IV melanoma.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The proposed design is a practical adaptive method for use with combined immunotherapy regimens with multiple objectives within multiple cohorts of interest. Further advances in the effectiveness of cancer immunotherapies will require new approaches that include redefining optimal strategies to take multiple regimens forward into later phases, incorporating additional endpoints in the dose selection process and testing drug combination therapies to improve efficacy and reduce toxicity. Our goal is to facilitate the acceptance and application of more novel designs in contemporary early development trials.

Colorectal cancer vaccines: Tumor-associated antigens vs neoantigens

Therapeutic options for the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) are diverse but still not always satisfying. Recent success of immune checkpoint inhibition treatment for the subgroup of CRC patients suffering from hyper-mutated tumors suggests a permanent role of immune therapy in the clinical management of CRC. Substantial improvement in treatment outcome could be achieved by development of efficient patient-individual CRC vaccination strategies. This mini-review summarizes the current knowledge on the two general classes of targets: tumor-associated antigens (TAAs) and tumor-specific antigens. TAAs like carcinoembryonic antigen and melanoma associated antigen are present in and shared by a subgroup of patients and a variety of clinical studies examined the efficacy of different TAA-derived peptide vaccines. Combinations of several TAAs as the next step and the development of personalized TAA-based peptide vaccines are discussed. Improvements of peptide-based vaccines achievable by adjuvants and immune-stimulatory chemotherapeutics are highlighted. Finally, we sum up clinical studies using tumor-specific antigens - in CRC almost exclusively neoantigens - which revealed promising results; particularly no severe adverse events were reported so far. Critical progress for clinical outcomes can be expected by individualizing neoantigen-based peptide vaccines and combining them with immune-stimulatory chemotherapeutics and immune checkpoint inhibitors. In light of these data and latest developments, truly personalized neoantigen-based peptide vaccines can be expected to fulfill modern precision medicine’s requirements and will manifest as treatment pillar for routine clinical management of CRC.

Uniformly most powerful Bayesian interval design for phase I dose-finding trials

Interval designs have recently attracted much attention in phase I clinical trials because of their simplicity and desirable finite-sample performance. However, existing interval designs typically cannot converge to the optimal dose level since their intervals do not shrink to the target toxicity probability as the sample size increases. The uniformly most powerful Bayesian test (UMPBT) is an objective Bayesian hypothesis testing procedure, which results in the largest probability that the Bayes factor against null hypothesis exceeds the evidence threshold for all possible values of the data generating parameter. On the basis of the rejection region of UMPBT, we develop the uniformly most powerful Bayesian interval (UMPBI) design for phase I dose-finding trials. The proposed UMPBI design enjoys convergence properties because the induced interval indeed shrinks to the toxicity target and the recommended dose converges to the true maximum tolerated dose as the sample size increases. Moreover, it possesses an optimality property that the probability of incorrect decisions is minimized. We conduct simulation studies to demonstrate the competitive finite-sample operating characteristics of the UMPBI in comparison with other existing interval designs. As an illustration, we apply the UMPBI design to a panitumumab and standard gemcitabine-based chemoradiation combination trial.

Immuno-Oncology: The Third Paradigm in Early Drug Development

Clinical researchers in oncology face the difficulty of developing new drugs for treating cancer patients. This challenge nowadays extends towards new horizons since a high number of drugs are developed in each of the three paradigms: classical cytotoxics, new targeted agents, and emergent immunotherapeutic approaches. Over the last decade, there has been an unstoppable progress in this third paradigm, to the extent that in 2013 immunotherapy was granted the scientific breakthrough of the year. However, the novel mechanisms of action of these immunotherapeutic agents entail a whole new series of concepts, resulting in a number of unresolved questions to which clarification is crucial for their success: establishment of accurate preclinical models able to predict human toxicities, better selection of candidate populations, finding and validation of predictive biomarkers, definition of suitable endpoints, improvements in first-in-human study designs, proposal of more accurate radiological response criteria, management of novel immune-related toxicities and development of combinations based on a biological rationale. In this article, we review the major challenges to overcome in forthcoming years. The final role of immunotherapy in cancer will be determined by our capacity to shed some light on some of these key points.

Immunotherapy is different: Implications for vaccine clinical trial design

Cancer Immunotherapetics differ fundamentally from most cancer therapies in that they involve manipulation of the immune system to induce an anti-tumor response. This fundamental difference results in differences in the pre-clinical and clinical development of immunotherapeutics. Even the regulatory culture of developing one drug at a time and demonstrating that it, when added to standard therapy, prolongs patient survival, is often not suitable for the development of effective immunotherapy regimens. In this commentary, we explore some of these differences and describe novel clinical trial designs which may be useful in immunotherapeutics regimen development.

Statistical controversies in clinical research: early-phase adaptive design for combination immunotherapies

Background

In recent years, investigators have asserted that the 3 + 3 design lacks flexibility, making its use in modern early-phase trial settings, such as combinations and/or biological agents, inefficient. More innovative approaches are required to address contemporary research questions, such as those posed in trials involving immunotherapies.

Design

We describe the implementation of an adaptive design for identifying an optimal treatment regimen, defined by low toxicity and high immune response, in an early-phase trial of a melanoma helper peptide vaccine plus novel adjuvant combinations.

Results

Operating characteristics demonstrate the ability of the method to effectively recommend optimal regimens in a high percentage of trials with reasonable sample sizes.

Conclusions

The proposed design is a practical, early-phase, adaptive method for use with combined immunotherapy regimens. This design can be applied more broadly to early-phase combination studies, as it was used in an ongoing study of two small molecule inhibitors in relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma.

Recognizing and managing on toxicities in cancer immunotherapy

Over the past 4 years, cancer immunotherapy has significantly prolonged survival time of patients with prostate cancer, melanoma, lung cancer, and liver cancer, but its side effects are also impressive. Different types of the immune therapeutic agents have different on-target or off-target toxicity due to high affinity or weak specificity, respectively. Treatment toxicity spectrums vary greatly even in patients with the same type of cancer. Common toxicities are fevers, chills, diarrhea colitis, maculopapular rash, hepatitis, and hormone gland disorder; therefore, routine monitoring of thyroid function, liver function, renal function, and complete blood count are absolutely necessary once treatment begins. Some side effects are reversible, and can be processed through the standard medicines. However, serious toxicities are lethal, which should be frequently followed-up, identified at an early stage and immediately symptomatic treated by high-dose immunosuppressors. In this case, thereafter, the same agent should not be challenged again.

Radiotherapy combination opportunities leveraging immunity for the next oncology practice

Approximately one-half of patients with newly diagnosed cancer and many patients with persistent or recurrent tumors receive radiotherapy (RT), with the explicit goal of eliminating tumors through direct killing. The current RT dose and schedule regimens have been empirically developed. Although early clinical studies revealed that RT could provoke important responses not only at the site of treatment but also on remote, nonirradiated tumor deposits-the so-called "abscopal effect"- the underlying mechanisms were poorly understood and were not therapeutically exploited. Recent work has elucidated the immune mechanisms underlying these effects and has paved the way for developing combinations of RT with immune therapy. In the wake of recent therapeutic breakthroughs in the field of immunotherapy, rational combinations of immunotherapy with RT could profoundly change the standard of care for many tumor types in the next decade. Thus, a deep understanding of the immunologic effects of RT is urgently needed to design the next generation of therapeutic combinations. Here, the authors review the immune mechanisms of tumor radiation and summarize the preclinical and clinical evidence on immunotherapy-RT combinations. Furthermore, a framework is provided for the practicing clinician and the clinician investigator to guide the development of novel combinations to more rapidly advance this important field. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:65-85. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Selection of epitopes from self-antigens for eliciting Th2 or Th1 activity in the treatment of autoimmune disease or cancer

Vaccines have been valuable tools in the prevention of infectious diseases, and the rapid development of new vectors against constantly mutating foreign antigens in viruses such as influenza has become a regular, seasonal exercise. Harnessing the immune response against self-antigens is not necessarily analogous or as achievable by iterative processes, and since the desired outcome includes leaving the targeted organism intact, requires some precision engineering. In vaccine-based treatment of autoimmunity and cancer, the proper selection of antigens and generation of the desired antigen-specific therapeutic immunity has been challenging. Both cases involve a threshold of existing, undesired immunity that must be overcome, and despite considerable academic and industry efforts, this challenge has proven to be largely refractory to vaccine approaches leveraging enhanced vectors, adjuvants, and administration strategies. There are in silico approaches in development for predicting the immunogenicity of self-antigen epitopes, which are being validated slowly. One simple approach showing promise is the functional screening of self-antigen epitopes for selective Th1 antitumor immunogenicity, or inversely, selective Th2 immunogenicity for treatment of autoimmune inflammation. The approach reveals the importance of confirming both Th1 and Th2 components of a vaccine immunogen; the two can confound one another if not parsed but may be used individually to modulate antigen-specific inflammation in autoimmune disease or cancer.

Experimental Therapeutic Trial Design for Pediatric Brain Tumors

Pediatric brain tumors are the leading cause of cancer-related death during childhood. Since the first pediatric brain tumor clinical trials, the field has seen improved outcomes in some, but not all tumor types. In the past few decades, a number of promising new therapeutic agents have emerged, yet only a few of these agents have been incorporated into clinical trials for pediatric brain tumors. In this review, the authors discuss the process of and challenges in pediatric clinical trial design; this will allow for highly efficient and effective clinical trials with appropriate endpoints to ensure rapid and safe investigation of novel therapeutics for children with brain tumors.

Cancer vaccines in colon and rectal cancer over the last decade: lessons learned and future directions

INTRODUCTION

Great advances have been made in screening for and treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC), but recurrence rates remain high and additional therapies are needed. There is great excitement around the field of immunotherapy and many attempts have been made to bring immunotherapy to CRC through a cancer vaccine. Areas covered: This is a detailed review of the last decade's significant CRC vaccine trials. Expert commentary: Monotherapy with a CRC vaccine is likely best suited for adjuvant therapy in disease free patients. Vaccine therapy elicits crucial tumor infiltrating lymphocytes, which are lacking in microsatellite-stable tumors, and therefore may be better suited for these patients. The combination of CRC vaccines with checkpoint inhibitors may unlock the potential of immunotherapy for a much broader range of patients. Future studies should focus on vaccine monotherapy in correctly selected patients and combination therapy in more advanced disease.

Topical treatment of melanoma metastases with imiquimod, plus administration of a cancer vaccine, promotes immune signatures in the metastases

INTRODUCTION

Infiltration of cancers by T cells is associated with improved patient survival and response to immune therapies; however, optimal approaches to induce T cell infiltration of tumors are not known. This study was designed to assess whether topical treatment of melanoma metastases with the TLR7 agonist imiquimod plus administration of a multipeptide cancer vaccine will improve immune cell infiltration of melanoma metastases.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients were immunized with a vaccine comprised of 12 melanoma peptides and a tetanus toxoid-derived helper peptide, and imiquimod was applied topically to metastatic tumors daily. Adverse events were recorded, and effects on the tumor microenvironment were evaluated from sequential tumor biopsies. T cell responses were assessed by IFNγ ELIspot assay and T cell tetramer staining. Patient tumors were evaluated for immune cell infiltration, cytokine and chemokine production, and gene expression.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Four eligible patients were enrolled, and administration of imiquimod and vaccination were well tolerated. Circulating T cell responses to the vaccine was detected by ex vivo ELIspot assay in 3 of 4 patients. Treatment of metastases with imiquimod induced immune cell infiltration and favorable gene signatures in the patients with circulating T cell responses. This study supports further study of topical imiquimod combined with vaccines or other immune therapies for the treatment of melanoma.

Immunologic approaches to cancer prevention-current status, challenges, and future perspectives

The potential of the immune system to recognize and reject tumors has been investigated for more than a century. However, only recently impressive breakthroughs in cancer immunotherapy have been seen with the use of checkpoint inhibitors. The experience with various immune-based strategies in the treatment of late cancer highlighted the importance of negative impact advanced disease has on immunity. Consequently, use of immune modulation for cancer prevention rather than therapy has gained considerable attention, with many promising results seen already in preclinical and early clinical studies. Although not without challenges, these results provide much excitement and optimism that successful cancer immunoprevention could be within our reach. In this review we will discuss the current state of predominantly primary and secondary cancer immunoprevention, relevant research, potential barriers, and future directions.

Critical issues in cancer vaccine trial design

As the clinical experience with cancer vaccines and cancer immunotherapy increases, there are important lessons that can be learned from the successes and failures of past trials. Many lessons affect the design and conduct of clinical trials themselves. Appropriate patient selection, clinical trial design, immunologic monitoring, and appropriate endpoints are all essential to the efficiency and success of bringing cancer vaccines from conception to clinical use.

The FDA guidance on therapeutic cancer vaccines: the need for revision to include preventive cancer vaccines or for a new guidance dedicated to them

Cancer vaccines based on antigens derived from self molecules rather than pathogens have been under basic and clinical investigations for many years. Up until very recently, they had been tested primarily in the setting of metastatic disease with the goal to engage the immune system in slowing down disease progression. Many therapeutic vaccine trials, either investigator initiated or led by pharmaceutical companies, have been completed and many are currently ongoing, following the FDA Guidance on therapeutic cancer vaccines published in 2011. In recent years, the target of cancer vaccines is being shifted to early cancer and even premalignant disease with the goal of preventing cancer. Although some issues addressed in the FDA Guidance on therapeutic vaccines apply to preventive vaccines, many do not. Here, we discuss a set of recommendations for revising the current Guidance to also cover preventive vaccines, or to include in a new Guidance dedicated specifically to vaccines for cancer prevention.

Toxicities of Immunotherapy for the Practitioner

The toxicities of immunotherapy for cancer are as diverse as the type of treatments that have been devised. These range from cytokine therapies that induce capillary leakage to vaccines associated with low levels of autoimmunity to cell therapies that can induce damaging cross-reactivity with normal tissue to checkpoint protein inhibitors that induce immune-related adverse events that are autoinflammatory in nature. The thread that ties these toxicities together is their mechanism-based immune nature and the T-cell-mediated adverse events seen. The basis for the majority of these adverse events is a hyperactivated T-cell response with reactivity directed against normal tissue, resulting in the generation of high levels of CD4 T-helper cell cytokines or increased migration of cytolytic CD8 T cells within normal tissues. The T-cell immune response is not tissue specific and may reflect a diffuse expansion of the T-cell repertoire that induces cross-reactivity with normal tissue, effectively breaking tolerance that is active with cytokines, vaccines, and checkpoint protein inhibitors and passive in the case of adoptive cell therapy. Cytokines seem to generate diffuse and nonspecific T-cell reactivity, whereas checkpoint protein inhibition, vaccines, and adoptive cell therapy seem to activate more specific T cells that interact directly with normal tissues, potentially causing specific organ damage. In this review, we summarize the toxicities that are unique to immunotherapies, emphasizing the need to familiarize the oncology practitioner with the spectrum of adverse events seen with newly approved and emerging modalities.

Phase I trial of active specific immunotherapy with autologous dendritic cells pulsed with autologous irradiated tumor stem cells in hepatitis B-positive patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Background and Objectives

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is often associated with chronic hepatitis due to hepatitis‐B or ‐C viruses. Active specific immunotherapy (ASI) with autologous dendritic cells (DC) presenting antigens from autologous tumor stem cell (TC) lines is associated with promising long‐term survival in metastatic cancer, but hepatitis patients were excluded. ASI might benefit high‐risk primary HCC patients following surgical resection, but first it is important to show that ASI does not exacerbate hepatitis.

Methods

Previously untreated HCC patients with a solitary lesion > 5 cm, or three lesions with at least one > 3 cm, or more than three lesions, underwent surgical resection from which autologous TC lines were established. Irradiated TC were incubated with autologous DC to create DC‐TC. After one course of trans‐arterial chemoembolization therapy (TACE), three weekly subcutaneous injections of DC‐TC suspended in granulocyte‐macrophage colony stimulating factor were administered. Patients were monitored for eight weeks.

Results

HCC cell lines were established within five weeks for 15/15 patients. Eight patients, all with chronic hepatitis B, were treated. There was no increase in hepatic transaminases, hepatitis B antigens, or viral DNA.

Conclusion

Autologous DC‐TC did not exacerbate HBV in these HCC patients. A phase II efficacy trial is being planned. J. Surg. Oncol. 2015 111:862–867. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

A Phase I/II adaptive design to determine the optimal treatment regimen from a set of combination immunotherapies in high-risk melanoma

In oncology, vaccine-based immunotherapy often investigates regimens that demonstrate minimal toxicity overall and higher doses may not correlate with greater immune response. Rather than determining the maximum tolerated dose, the goal of the study becomes locating the optimal biological dose, which is defined as a safe dose demonstrating the greatest immunogenicity, based on some predefined measure of immune response. Incorporation of adjuvants, new or optimized peptide vaccines, and combining vaccines with immune modulators may enhance immune response, with the aim of improving clinical response. Innovative dose escalation strategies are needed to establish the safety and immunogenicity of new immunologic combinations. We describe the implementation of an adaptive design for identifying the optimal treatment strategy in a multi-site, FDA-approved, phase I/II trial of a novel vaccination approach using long-peptides plus TLR agonists for resected stage IIB-IV melanoma. Operating characteristics of the design are demonstrated under various possible true scenarios via simulation studies. Overall performance indicates that the design is a practical Phase I/II adaptive method for use with combined immunotherapy agents. The simulation results demonstrate the method's ability to effectively recommend optimal regimens in a high percentage of trials with manageable sample sizes. The numerical results presented in this work include the type of simulation information that aid review boards in understanding design performance, such as average sample size and frequency of early trial termination, which we hope will augment early-phase trial design in cancer immunotherapy.