Dual targeting of CD19 and CD22 with bicistronic CAR-T cells in patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma

Relapse after CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy for large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) is commonly ascribed to antigen loss or CAR-T exhaustion. Multiantigen targeting and programmed cell death protein-1 blockade are rational approaches to prevent relapse. Here, we test CD19/22 dual-targeting CAR-T (AUTO3) plus pembrolizumab in relapsed/refractory LBCL (NCT03289455). End points include toxicity (primary) and response rates (secondary). Fifty-two patients received AUTO3 and 48/52 received pembrolizumab. Median age was 59 years (range, 27-83), 46/52 had stage III/ IV disease and median follow-up was 21.6 months. AUTO3 was safe; grade 1-2 and grade 3 cytokine release syndrome affected 18/52 (34.6%) and 1/52 (1.9%) patients, neurotoxicity arose in 4 patients (2/4, grade 3-4), and hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis affected 2 patients. Outpatient administration was tested in 20 patients, saving a median of 14 hospital days per patient. Overall response rates were 66% (48.9%, complete response [CR]; 17%, partial response). Median duration of remission (DOR) for CR patients was not reached and for all responding patients was 8.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.0-not evaluable). 54.4% (CI: 32.8-71.7) of CR patients and 42.6% of all responding patients were projected to remain progression-free at ≥12 months. AUTO3 ± pembrolizumab for relapsed/refractory LBCL was safe and delivered durable remissions in 54.4% of complete responders, associated with robust CAR-T expansion. Neither dual-targeting CAR-T nor pembrolizumab prevented relapse in a significant proportion of patients, and future developments include next-generation-AUTO3, engineered for superior expansion in vivo, and selection of CAR binders active at low antigen densities.

ACCELERATE and European Medicines Agency Paediatric Strategy Forum for medicinal product development of checkpoint inhibitors for use in combination therapy in paediatric patients

The third multistakeholder Paediatric Strategy Forum organised by ACCELERATE and the European Medicines Agency focused on immune checkpoint inhibitors for use in combination therapy in children and adolescents. As immune checkpoint inhibitors, both as monotherapy and in combinations have shown impressive success in some adult malignancies and early phase trials in children of single agent checkpoint inhibitors have now been completed, it seemed an appropriate time to consider opportunities for paediatric studies of checkpoint inhibitors used in combination. Among paediatric patients, early clinical studies of checkpoint inhibitors used as monotherapy have demonstrated a high rate of activity, including complete responses, in Hodgkin lymphoma and hypermutant paediatric tumours. Activity has been very limited, however, in more common malignancies of childhood and adolescence. Furthermore, apart from tumour mutational burden, no other predictive biomarker for monotherapy activity in paediatric tumours has been identified. Based on these observations, there is collective agreement that there is no scientific rationale for children to be enrolled in new monotherapy trials of additional checkpoint inhibitors with the same mechanism of action of agents already studied (e.g. anti-PD1, anti-PDL1 anti-CTLA-4) unless additional scientific knowledge supporting a different approach becomes available. This shared perspective, based on scientific evidence and supported by paediatric oncology cooperative groups, should inform companies on whether a paediatric development plan is justified. This could then be proposed to regulators through the available regulatory tools. Generally, an academic-industry consensus on the scientific merits of a proposal before submission of a paediatric investigational plan would be of great benefit to determine which studies have the highest probability of generating new insights. There is already a rationale for the evaluation of combinations of checkpoint inhibitors with other agents in paediatric Hodgkin lymphoma and hypermutated tumours in view of the activity shown as single agents. In paediatric tumours where no single agent activity has been observed in multiple clinical trials of anti-PD1, anti-PDL1 and anti-CTLA-4 agents as monotherapy, combinations of checkpoint inhibitors with other treatment modalities should be explored when a scientific rationale indicates that they could be efficacious in paediatric cancers and not because these combinations are being evaluated in adults. Immunotherapy in the form of engineered proteins (e.g. monoclonal antibodies and T cell engaging agents) and cellular products (e.g. CAR T cells) has great therapeutic potential for benefit in paediatric cancer. The major challenge for developing checkpoint inhibitors for paediatric cancers is the lack of neoantigens (based on mutations) and corresponding antigen-specific T cells. Progress critically depends on understanding the immune macroenvironment and microenvironment and the ability of the adaptive immune system to recognise paediatric cancers in the absence of high neoantigen burden. Future clinical studies of checkpoint inhibitors in children need to build upon strong biological hypotheses that take into account the distinctive immunobiology of childhood cancers in comparison to that of checkpoint inhibitor responsive adult cancers.

Activity of the oral MEK inhibitor trametinib in patients with advanced melanoma: a phase 1 dose-escalation trial

BACKGROUND

MEK is a member of the MAPK signalling cascade that is commonly activated in melanoma. Direct inhibition of MEK blocks cell proliferation and induces apoptosis. We aimed to analyse safety, efficacy, and genotyping data for the oral, small-molecule MEK inhibitor trametinib in patients with melanoma.

METHODS

We undertook a multicentre, phase 1 three-part study (dose escalation, cohort expansion, and pharmacodynamic assessment). The main results of this study are reported elsewhere; here we present data relating to patients with melanoma. We obtained tumour samples to assess BRAF mutational status, and available tissues underwent exploratory genotyping analysis. Disease response was measured by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, and adverse events were defined by common toxicity criteria. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00687622.

FINDINGS

97 patients with melanoma were enrolled, including 81 with cutaneous or unknown primary melanoma (36 BRAF mutant, 39 BRAF wild-type, six BRAF status unknown), and 16 with uveal melanoma. The most common treatment-related adverse events were rash or dermatitis acneiform (n=80; 82%) and diarrhoea (44; 45%), most of which were grade 2 or lower. No cutaneous squamous-cell carcinomas were recorded. Of 36 patients with BRAF mutations, 30 had not received a BRAF inhibitor before; two complete responses (both confirmed) and ten partial responses (eight confirmed) were noted in this subgroup (confirmed response rate, 33%). Median progression-free survival of this subgroup was 5·7 months (95% CI 4·0-7·4). Of the six patients who had received previous BRAF inhibition, one unconfirmed partial response was recorded. Of 39 patients with BRAF wild-type melanoma, four partial responses were confirmed (confirmed response rate, 10%).

INTERPRETATION

Our data show substantial clinical activity of trametinib in melanoma and suggest that MEK is a valid therapeutic target. Differences in response rates according to mutations indicate the importance of mutational analyses in the future.

FUNDING

GlaxoSmithKline.

Abstract 5220: Increased expression of formyl peptide receptor (FPR) and formyl peptide receptor like-1 (FPRL1) correlates with high-risk clinical/histologic features in melanoma

Melanoma is an aggressive malignancy with a relatively high metastatic rate, responsible for almost 60% of lethal skin tumors. Despite numerous efforts, there is still a need to better understand the molecular pathways involved in malignant melanoma metastasis. FPR and its variant FPRL1, which belong to the GPCR family, have been shown to be involved in metastasis of glioma and ovarian tumor cells via activation of various signaling cascades. It is unknown whether expression of these receptors contributes to the pathogenesis of melanoma. In order to test the hypothesis that aberrant expression of these GPCRs plays a significant role in melanoma progression, we have performed semiquantitative immunohistochemical analysis of FPR and FPRL1 in benign nevi (n=49), primary melanomas with and without metastasis (n=130), and melanoma metastases (n=47 cases). A significant positive correlation was observed between the percentage of positive cells and staining intensity for FPR (p=0.001) and FPRL1 (p=0.009) with progression from benign nevi to primary melanoma. Significantly higher levels of FPR were observed in those lesions having higher Breslow thickness (p=0.044) and ulceration (p=0.019), which are well-established markers of poor clinical outcomes in patients with cutaneous melanoma. On the other hand, lesions showing a radial growth pattern expressed low levels of FPR (p=0.027). A gain in FPRL1 staining was seen in lesions displaying microscopic satellitosis (p=0.051). Disease-specific survival was significantly shorter in patients with increased cytoplasmic expression of FPR (log rank test, p=0.022). Thus, overexpression of FPR and FPRL1 correlates with disease progression and high-risk clinical and histologic features in melanoma. In addition, FPR expression is associated with shorter disease-free survival. Therefore, these markers may be an important therapeutic target in patients with melanoma.

Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 102nd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2011 Apr 2-6; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2011;71(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 5220. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2011-5220