T Cell-Engaging Bispecific Antibodies Targeting gp100 and PRAME: Expanding Application from Uveal Melanoma to Cutaneous Melanoma

Uveal melanoma represents a rare and aggressive subtype of melanoma with limited treatment options and poor prognosis, especially in the metastatic setting. Tebentafusp, a bispecific fusion protein, offers a promising therapeutic approach by targeting gp100, an antigen highly expressed in uveal melanoma cells, and redirecting T cell-mediated cytotoxicity towards tumor cells. This review provides an overview of the preclinical and clinical data on tebentafusp in the management of metastatic uveal melanoma. We summarize the mechanism of action, clinical efficacy, safety profile, and ongoing research efforts surrounding this innovative immunotherapy. Preclinical studies have demonstrated the ability of tebentafusp to induce potent and specific anti-tumor immune responses against gp100-expressing uveal melanoma cells. Clinical trials have shown encouraging results, with tebentafusp exhibiting meaningful clinical activity in a subset of patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. Importantly, tebentafusp has also demonstrated a manageable safety profile. By specifically targeting tumor cells expressing gp100, tebentafusp offers a promising therapeutic avenue for individuals with metastatic uveal melanoma, meeting a significant clinical need in this context. Continued clinical trials will provide additional insights into the impact of tebentafusp on treatment-resistant metastatic cutaneous melanoma. Furthermore, we are exploring the potential of T cell engagers directed against the cancer testis antigen PRAME, which could have widespread utility in the treatment of cutaneous melanoma as well as other PRAME-expressing malignancies.

Immuno-oncology approaches in uveal melanoma: tebentafusp and beyond

Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common ocular malignancy in adults, associated with the poorest prognosis, with metastatic disease occurring in up to 50% of patients. In contrast to metastatic cutaneous melanoma, the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors is associated with poor outcomes in metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM). Tebentafusp, a bispecific molecule, has recently become the first treatment in decades to improve overall survival for mUM. This review summarises the existing and emerging immuno-oncology approaches for the treatment of mUM, and biomarkers of response and resistance to the same. Finally, we propose future research directions that could maximise treatment benefit to a wider pool of patients with UM.

Tebentafusp in the Treatment of Metastatic Uveal Melanoma: Patient Selection and Special Considerations

Uveal melanoma (UM) is a rare type of melanoma with distinct features from cutaneous melanoma, low response rates to immune checkpoint inhibition, and poor survival rates. Tebentafusp, a bispecific antibody engaging T cells with gp 100 on HLA-A*02:01, was recently approved by the FDA as the first drug of its class and the first treatment approved by the FDA to treat UM. In this review, we summarize the preclinical and clinical data on tebentafusp for UM. We additionally discuss patient selection and the relevant challenges. For the literature search, PubMed search and relevant articles presented at international conferences were used.

Intermittent MEK inhibition for the treatment of metastatic uveal melanoma

Introduction

Uveal melanoma (UM) is associated with poor outcomes in the metastatic setting and harbors activating mutations resulting in upregulation of MAPK signaling in almost all cases. The efficacy of selumetinib, an oral allosteric inhibitor of MEK1/2, was limited when administered at a continual dosing schedule of 75 mg BID. Preclinical studies demonstrate that intermittent MEK inhibition reduces compensatory pathway activation and promotes T cell activation. We hypothesized that intermittent dosing of selumetinib would reduce toxicity, allow for the administration of increased doses, and achieve more complete pathway inhibition, thus resulting in improved antitumor activity.

Methods

We conducted a phase Ib trial of selumetinib using an intermittent dosing schedule in patients with metastatic UM. The primary objective was to estimate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and assess safety and tolerability. Secondary objectives included assessment of the overall response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Tumor biopsies were collected at baseline, on day 3 (on treatment), and between days 11-14 (off treatment) from 9 patients for pharmacodynamic (PD) assessments.

Results

29 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of selumetinib across 4 dose levels (DL; DL1: 100 mg BID; DL2: 125 mg BID; DL3: 150 mg BID; DL4: 175 mg BID). All patients experienced a treatment-related adverse event (TRAE), with 5/29 (17%) developing a grade 3 or higher TRAE. Five dose limiting toxicities (DLT) were observed: 2/20 in DL2, 2/5 in DL3, 1/1 in DL4. The estimated MTD was 150 mg BID (DL3), with an estimated probability of toxicity of 29% (90% probability interval 16%-44%). No responses were observed; 11/29 patients achieved a best response of stable disease (SD). The median PFS and OS were 1.8 months (95% CI 1.7, 4.5) and 7.1 months (95% CI 5.3, 11.5). PD analysis demonstrated at least partial pathway inhibition in all samples at day 3, with reactivation between days 11-14 in 7 of those cases.

Conclusions

We identified 150 mg BID as the MTD of intermittent selumetinib, representing a 100% increase over the continuous dose MTD (75 mg BID). However, no significant clinical efficacy was observed using this dosing schedule.

Phase I Study of Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Tebentafusp Using a Step-Up Dosing Regimen and Expansion in Patients With Metastatic Uveal Melanoma

PURPOSE

This phase I study aimed to define the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of tebentafusp, a first-in-class T-cell receptor/anti-CD3 bispecific protein, using a three-week step-up dosing regimen, and to assess its safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary clinical activity in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM).

METHODS

In this open-label, international, phase I/II study, HLA-A*02 or HLA-A*02:01+ patients with mUM received tebentafusp 20 μg once in week 1 and 30 μg once in week 2. Dose escalation (starting at 54 μg) began at week 3 in a standard 3 + 3 design to define RP2D. Expansion-phase patients were treated at the RP2D (20-30-68 μg). Blood and tumor samples were collected for pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics assessment, and treatment efficacy was evaluated for all patients with baseline efficacy data as of December 2017.

RESULTS

Between March 2016 and December 2017, 42 eligible patients who failed a median of two previous treatments were enrolled: 19 in the dose escalation cohort and 23 in an initial dose expansion cohort. Of the dose levels investigated, 68 μg was identified as the RP2D. Most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events regardless of attribution were pyrexia (91%), rash (83%), pruritus (83%), nausea (74%), fatigue (71%), and chills (69%). Toxicity attenuated following the first three doses. The overall response rate was 11.9% (95% CI, 4.0 to 25.6). With a median follow-up of 32.4 months, median overall survival was 25.5 months (range, 0.89-31.1 months) and 1-year overall survival rate was 67%. Treatment was associated with increased tumor T-cell infiltration and transient increases in serum inflammatory mediators.

CONCLUSION

Using a step-up dosing regimen of tebentafusp allowed a 36% increase in the RP2D compared with weekly fixed dosing, with a manageable side-effect profile and a signal of efficacy in mUM.

Tebentafusp for the treatment of metastatic uveal melanoma

Uveal melanoma is a rare disease; nevertheless, it is the most common primary intraocular malignancy among adults. Approximately half of affected patients will suffer from metastatic disease, mostly to the liver. No standard-of-care treatment exists for these patients. Median progression-free survival and overall survival for all types of treatment, including checkpoint inhibitors, have remained poor. However, the most recent phase III study results for tebentafusp, a member of a new-in-class molecule, are raising hopes for stage IV uveal melanoma patients. In this review, we examine the current literature, focusing on the most recent trial results for this new reagent. We evaluate the latest clinical results for tebentafusp and aim to shed light on its immunological strategy.

Development of a Metastatic Uveal Melanoma Prognostic Score (MUMPS) for Use in Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Simple Summary

This is a retrospective cohort study of metastatic uveal melanoma patients. This study undertook to identify clinical characteristics that were predictive and prognostics of benefit to immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. We developed a Metastatic Uveal Melanoma Prognostic risk Score based on retrospective data that is comprised of 3 readily available clinical variables (time to metastatic diagnosis, presence of bone metastases, and LDH). Our findings demonstrated that the Metastatic Uveal Melanoma Prognostic risk Score was associated with a statistically significant association with overall survival outcomes in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma treated with ICI. There was a significant predictive association with disease control to ICI for patients with a ‘good risk’ Metastatic Uveal Melanoma Prognostic risk score. This is one of the larger analysis of clinical outcomes in metastatic uveal melanoma patients to date and could inform clinical decision-making.

Abstract

Metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM) is a rare disease. There are limited data on prognostic clinical factors for overall survival (OS) in patients with mUM treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Retrospective and non-randomized prospective studies have reported response rates of 0–17% for anti-PD1/L1 ± anti-CTLA4 ICI in mUM, indicating a potential benefit only in a subset of patients. This study evaluates the characteristics associated with ICI benefit in patients with mUM. We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study of patients with mUM who received anti-PD1/L1 ± anti-CTLA4 ICI between 2014–2019. Clinical and genomic characteristics were collected from a chart review. Treatment response and clinical progression were determined by physician assessment. Multivariable Cox regression models and Kaplan–Meier log-rank tests were used to assess differences in clinical progression-free survival (cPFS) and OS between groups and identify clinical variables associated with ICI outcomes. We identified 71 mUM patients who received 75 lines of ICI therapy. Of these, 54 received anti-PD1/L1 alone, and 21 received anti-PD1/L1 + anti-CTLA4. Patient characteristics were: 53% female, 48% were 65 or older, 72% received one or fewer lines of prior therapy. Within our cohort, 53% of patients had developed metastatic disease <2 years after their initial diagnosis. Bone metastases were present in 12% of patients. The median cPFS was 2.7 months, and the median OS was 10.0 months. In multivariable analyses for both cPFS and OS, the following variables were associated with a good prognosis: ≥2 years from the initial diagnosis to metastatic disease (n = 25), LDH < 1.5 × ULN (n = 45), and absence of bone metastases (n = 66). We developed a Metastatic Uveal Melanoma Prognostic Score (MUMPS). Patients were divided into 3 MUMPS groups based on the number of the above-mentioned prognostic variables: Poor prognosis (0–1), Intermediate prognosis (2) and Good prognosis (3). Good prognosis patients experienced longer cPFS (6.0 months) and OS (34.5 months) than patients with intermediate (2.3 months cPFS, 9.4 months OS) and poor prognosis disease (1.8 months cPFS, 3.9 months OS); p < 0.0001. We developed MUMPS—a prognostic score based on retrospective data that is comprised of 3 readily available clinical variables (time to metastatic diagnosis, presence of bone metastases, and LDH). This MUMPS score has a potential prognostic value. Further validation in independent datasets is warranted to determine the role of this MUMPS score in selecting ICI treatment management for mUM.