OA03.03 JAVELIN Solid Tumor: Safety and Clinical Activity of Avelumab (Anti-PD-L1) as First-Line Treatment in Patients with Advanced NSCLC

TQB2450 in patients with advanced malignant tumors: results from a phase I dose-escalation and expansion study

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy has demonstrated impressive clinical benefits in multiple tumor types. TQB2450, a novel monoclonal antibody targeting programmed cell death ligand 1, has shown safety and efficacy in preclinical studies.

Objectives

This first-in-human study aimed to evaluate the safety/tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), immunogenicity, and preliminary antitumor activity of TQB2450 in patients with advanced malignant tumors.

Design and methods

In this phase I study, eligible patients with advanced malignant tumors received intravenous TQB2450 once every 3 weeks. This study consisted of a 3 + 3 dose-escalation phase (1-30 mg/kg) and a specific dose-expansion phase (1200 mg). The primary endpoints were maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), and safety. The secondary endpoints were PK, immunogenicity, and investigator-assessed response rate.

Results

Between April 2018 and February 2020, 40 patients were enrolled (22 in the dose-escalation phase and 18 in the dose-expansion phase). No DLT was reported and the MTD was not reached. Grade ⩾3 or worse treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) occurred in 11 (27.50%) patients, with the most frequent being aspartate aminotransferase increased (5.00%), leukopenia (5.00%), and anemia (5.00%). Treatment-related serious AEs were reported in six patients, the most common of which was decompensated liver function (5.00%). No treatment-related death was reported. The maximum serum concentration of TQB2450 increased in a dose-proportional manner. Treatment-induced anti-drug antibodies were detected in 31.58% (12/38) of patients. The investigator assessed the objective response rate as 5.00% and the disease control rate was 52.50%, including 2 partial responses and 19 stable diseases. The median progression-free survival was 2.69 (95% confidence interval, 2.07-6.14) months.

Conclusion

TQB2450 has a manageable safety profile with favorable PK and immunogenicity and has shown early evidence of clinical activity in advanced malignant tumors.

ClinicalTrialsgov identifier

NCT03460457.

Response Rate and Survival at Key Timepoints With PD-1 Blockade vs Chemotherapy in PD-L1 Subgroups: Meta-Analysis of Metastatic NSCLC Trials

Background

Expression of programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) on tumor cells with or without immune cells is widely reported in clinical trials of programmed cell death receptor 1 (PD-1) blockade in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. Various cutpoints have been studied.

Methods

We performed a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and conference proceedings up to December 2019 for randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials of anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 monotherapy in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. We retrieved data on objective response rate (ORR), 1-year and 2-year progression-free survival (PFS), and 2-year and 3-year overall survival (OS) in various PD-L1 subgroups. Results were pooled and analyzed based on different cutpoints, with nonrandomized comparisons made with pooled chemotherapy outcomes.

Results

A total of 9810 patients in 27 studies were included. In treatment-naïve patients, benefits with PD-1 blockade over chemotherapy were seen in ORR in patients having PD-L1 50% or greater, in 2-year OS for PD-L1 1% or greater, and in 1-year PFS, 2-year PFS, and 3-year OS for unselected patients. First-line PD-1 blockade compared with chemotherapy demonstrated higher ORR, 2-year PFS, and 3-year OS if PD-L1 was 50% or greater; lower ORR, higher 2-year PFS, and similar 3-year OS if PD-L1 was 1%-49%; and lower ORR, similar 1-year PFS, and lower 2-year OS if PD-L1 was less than 1%. In previously treated patients, PD-1 blockade demonstrated similar or superior outcomes to chemotherapy in all PD-L1 subgroups.

Conclusions

PD-L1 should guide the choice of PD-1 blockade vs chemotherapy in treatment-naïve patients. In previously treated patients, PD-1 blockade provides a favorable outcome profile to chemotherapy in all PD-L1 subgroups.

Avelumab Versus Docetaxel in Patients With Platinum-Treated Advanced NSCLC: 2-Year Follow-Up From the JAVELIN Lung 200 Phase 3 Trial

INTRODUCTION

In the JAVELIN Lung 200 trial, avelumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1] antibody) did not significantly prolong overall survival (OS) versus docetaxel in patients with platinum-treated PD-L1+ NSCLC. We report greater than 2-year follow-up data.

METHODS

Patients with stage IIIB or IV or recurrent NSCLC with disease progression after platinum-doublet chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or docetaxel 75 mg/m² every 3 weeks. The primary end point was OS in patients with PD-L1+ tumors (greater than or equal to 1% tumor cell expression; IHC 73-10 pharmDx assay).

RESULTS

Of 792 patients, 529 had PD-L1+ tumors (264 versus 265 in the avelumab versus docetaxel arms, respectively). As of March 4, 2019, median duration of follow-up for OS in the PD-L1+ population was 35.4 months in the avelumab arm and 34.7 months in the docetaxel arm; study treatment was ongoing in 25 (9.5%) versus 0 patients, respectively. In the PD-L1+ population, 2-year OS rates (95% confidence interval [CI]) with avelumab versus docetaxel were 29.9% (24.5%-35.5%) versus 20.5% (15.6%-25.8%); in greater than or equal to 50% PD-L1+ subgroups, 2-year OS rates were 36.4% (29.1%-43.7%) versus 17.7% (11.8%-24.7%) and in the greater than or equal to 80% subgroup were 40.2% (31.3%-49.0%) versus 20.3% (12.9%-28.8%), respectively. Median duration of response (investigator assessed) was 19.1 months (95% CI: 10.8-34.8) versus 5.7 months (95% CI: 4.1-8.3). Safety profiles for both arms were consistent with the primary analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the JAVELIN Lung 200 primary analysis (reported previously) revealed that avelumab did not significantly prolong OS versus docetaxel in patients with platinum-treated PD-L1+ NSCLC, posthoc analyses at 2 years of follow-up revealed that 2-year OS rates were doubled with avelumab in subgroups with higher PD-L1 expression (greater than or equal to 50% and greater than or equal to 80%).

Predictive biomarkers for response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in lung cancer: PD-L1 and beyond

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapies, including the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) axis blockade, are considered a major oncological breakthrough of the early twenty-first century and have led to remarkable response rates and survival in a subset of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the available therapies work only for one in five unselected, advanced NSCLC patients; thus, patient selection needs to be performed with the use of efficient biomarkers. Although imperfect, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) on tumor cells and/or immune cells has been established as a predictive biomarker for response to the PD-1 axis blockade. There remain several pre-analytical, analytical, and post-analytical issues, however, before implementing a PD-L1 IHC assay(s) in the pathology laboratory. In addition, given the lack of robust sensitivity and specificity of PD-L1 IHC for predicting response to ICIs, other biomarkers including tumor mutation burden (TMB) are under investigation. In this review, issues associated with PD-L1 IHC and TMB estimations will be discussed, and other promising biomarkers for predicting response to ICIs will be briefly introduced.

Genotype Driven Therapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Resistance, Pan Inhibitors and Immunotherapy

Eighty-five percent of patients with lung cancer present with Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC). Targeted therapy approaches are promising treatments for lung cancer. However, despite the development of targeted therapies using Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (TKI) as well as monoclonal antibodies, the five-year relative survival rate for lung cancer patients is still only 18%, and patients inevitably become resistant to therapy. Mutations in Kirsten Ras Sarcoma viral homolog (KRAS) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) are the two most common genetic events in lung adenocarcinoma; they account for 25% and 20% of cases, respectively. Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase (ALK) is a transmembrane receptor tyrosine kinase, and ALK rearrangements are responsible for 3-7% of NSCLC, predominantly of the adenocarcinoma subtype, and occur in a mutually exclusive manner with KRAS and EGFR mutations. Among drug-resistant NSCLC patients, nearly half exhibit the T790M mutation in exon 20 of EGFR. This review focuses on some basic aspects of molecules involved in NSCLC, the development of resistance to treatments in NSCLC, and advances in lung cancer therapy in the past ten years. Some recent developments such as PD-1-PD-L1 checkpoint-based immunotherapy for NSCLC are also covered.

Prognostic Significance of Potential Immune Checkpoint Member HHLA2 in Human Tumors: A Comprehensive Analysis

Immunological checkpoint inhibitors have been immensely successfully applied in the treatment of cancer, however, a portion of tumor patients can't benefit from checkpoint therapy. The low PD-1/CTLA-4 positive rate and involvement of multiple immunosuppressive pathways are thought to be one of the reasons for treatment failure in non-responding patients. A new immune checkpoint molecule, HHLA2, which was widely expressed in PD-1 negative human tumors, may be a promising target for the improvement of recent immune therapy. Yet, the prognostic value and transcriptional regulatory mechanisms of HHLA2 remains unclear. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the prognostic value and transcriptional regulation mechanism of HHLA2 according to clinical and experimental data from multiple databases, including cBioPortal, TCGA, Cistrome, TIMER, Oncomine, Kaplan-Meier, GeneXplain. It was found that the expression of HHLA2 was significantly elevated in renal tumors, and significantly decreased in colorectal tumors. Pan-cancer survival analysis indicates that HHLA2 was an independent prognostic factor in 9/20 of human cancers. Especially in renal clear cell carcinoma (P = 3.0E-7). Through plotting survival curve in Kaplan-Meier Plotter, it was found that hypomethylation of HHLA2 DNA was a favorable prognostic factor for KIRC patients. Yet, the copy number variant of HHLA2 was not significantly correlated with the overall survival of KIRC patients. Finally, by analyzing the motif of HHLA2 co-expression genes, we identified 15 transcription factors that may be involved in the regulation of the HHLA2 co-expression network. Among these transcription factors, BATF in B lymphocyte and SMAD in monocyte were confirmed to be able to directly bind to HHLA2 DNA according to chip-seq experimental data from Cistrome database.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Approaches on special subgroups and unresolved burning questions

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been incorporated in the treatment strategy of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Beyond the already approved indications in first- and second-line setting of advanced NSCLC, new data has recently emerged demonstrating its efficacy in locally advanced disease as maintenance after chemo-radiotherapy and currently several trials are also exploring its efficacy in earlier stages of the disease to evaluate whether these results could be extrapolated to the adjuvant setting. With the advent of all these new therapies, their potential in other thoracic malignancies such as mesothelioma and small-cell lung cancer are also being evaluated with encouraging preliminary data that endorses their short-term incorporation as new therapeutic options in these thoracic malignancies. However, despite all these new evidence, there are still several open questions that remain to be solved like the use of immune agents in special subpopulations such as elderly or fragile patients or the case of patients with brain metastases or autoimmune disorders. In addition some other open questions remain with regards ICIs activity in patients receiving corticosteroid or antibiotics, the potential use in oncogenic addicted tumours, as well as the safety of retreatment after the onset of immune-related adverse events (ir-AE) or the optimal dose schedule or time on treatment for ICIs administration. Herein, we propose to address all these questions, reviewing most recent evidence available in order to give readers some practical advises and guidance on how to deal with these challenges when treating NSCLC patients with immunotherapy.

Drug Monographs: Avelumab and Ribociclib

The complexity of cancer chemotherapy requires pharmacists be familiar with the complicated regimens and highly toxic agents used. This column reviews various issues related to preparation, dispensing, and administration of antineoplastic therapy, and the agents, both commercially available and investigational, used to treat malignant diseases. Questions or suggestions for topics should be addressed to Dominic A. Solimando, Jr, President, Oncology Pharmacy Services, Inc, 4201 Wilson Blvd #110-545, Arlington, VA 22203, email: OncRxSvc@comcast.net; or J. Aubrey Waddell, Professor, University of Tennessee College of Pharmacy; Oncology Pharmacist, Pharmacy Department, Blount Memorial Hospital, 907 E. Lamar Alexander Parkway, Maryville, TN 37804, e-mail: waddfour@charter.net.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

The emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of cancer has led to major changes to the therapeutic landscape of lung cancer. Improvements in overall survival relative to standard chemotherapy have been observed in the first-line and second-line therapy settings for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who are treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Consequently, every patient with advanced-stage NSCLC is now a candidate for immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. However, it is clear that the benefit from therapy is not universal, and identification of biomarkers to select therapy has assumed importance. In addition to programmed cell death receptor ligand 1 expression, both tissue-based and blood-based markers are under evaluation to select patients. In an era of increasing costs of care and potential for toxicities related to immune checkpoint inhibition, proper patient selection is critical to the optimal use of this new class of agents. In addition, development of novel combination approaches has also emerged as an important way to improve the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibition. Studies in earlier stages of NSCLC are already underway with the hope of improving the cure rate. In this article, the authors review the current landscape of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of advanced NSCLC. Cancer 2018;124:248-61. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Immunohistochemistry Testing: A Review of Analytical Assays and Clinical Implementation in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Purpose Three programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors are currently approved for treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Treatment with pembrolizumab in NSCLC requires PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) testing. Nivolumab and atezolizumab are approved without PD-L1 testing, though US Food and Drug Administration-cleared complementary PD-L1 tests are available for both. PD-L1 IHC assays used to assess PD-L1 expression in patients treated with programmed death-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in clinical trials include PD-L1 IHC 28-8 pharmDx (28-8), PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx (22C3), Ventana PD-L1 SP142 (SP142), and Ventana PD-L1 SP263 (SP263). Differences in antibodies and IHC platforms have raised questions about comparability among these assays and their diagnostic use. This review provides practical information to help physicians and pathologists understand analytical features and comparability of various PD-L1 IHC assays and their diagnostic use. Methods We reviewed and summarized published or otherwise reported studies (January 2016 to January 2017) on clinical trial and laboratory-developed PD-L1 IHC assays (LDAs). Studies assessing the effect of diagnostic methods on PD-L1 expression levels were analyzed to address practical issues related to tissue samples used for testing. Results High concordance and interobserver reproducibility were observed with the 28-8, 22C3, and SP263 clinical trial assays for PD-L1 expression on tumor cell membranes, whereas lower PD-L1 expression was detected with SP142. Immune-cell PD-L1 expression was variable and interobserver concordance was poor. Inter- and intratumoral heterogeneity had variable effects on PD-L1 expression. Concordance among LDAs was variable. Conclusion High concordance among 28-8, 22C3, and SP263 when assessing PD-L1 expression on tumor cell membranes suggests possible interchangeability of their clinical use for NSCLC but not for assessment of PD-L1 expression on immune cells. Development of LDAs requires stringent standardization before their recommendation for routine clinical use.

Multicenter Comparison of 22C3 PharmDx (Agilent) and SP263 (Ventana) Assays to Test PD-L1 Expression for NSCLC Patients to Be Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

INTRODUCTION

Among the several agents targeting the programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) pathway, pembrolizumab is currently the only one approved for the treatment of patients with NSCLC in association with a companion diagnostic assay, the anti-PD-L1 immunohistochemical (IHC) 22C3 PharmDx (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA) using the Dako Autostainer (Dako, Carpinteria, CA). However, the Dako platform is not present in each pathology department, and this technical limitation is a major problem for the diffusion of the PD-L1 IHC predictive test for pembrolizumab.

METHODS

The Italian Society of Anatomic Pathology and Cytopathology and the Italian Association of Medical Oncology in an independent, multicenter study compared the in vitro diagnostics PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx test (Agilent) on the Dako Autostainer and the in vitro diagnostics Ventana PD-L1 (SP263) test on the Ventana BenchMark platform (Ventana Medical Systems, Tucson, AZ). Using serial sections from tissue microarrays, 100 lung adenocarcinomas were locally stained and scored in four centers with the same antibody batches.

RESULTS

A high analytical correlation (more than 90% at the lower 95% confidence interval [CI] value) between PD-L1 expression levels obtained with the 22C3 and SP263 assays was observed. At the proposed clinically relevant cutoffs (≥50% and ≥1%), the overall concordances between 22C3 and SP263 data were 0.99 (95% CI: 0.96-1) and 0.80 (95% CI: 0.68-0.91), respectively. The lower agreement between data obtained with the 22C3 and SP263 clones at the cutoff of 1% or higher was mainly related to the lower (about 80%) interrater agreement at this cutoff with each clone.

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicate a high correlation between PD-L1 IHC expression data obtained with the Agilent PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx and the Ventana PD-L1 (SP263) tests in NSCLC and suggest that the two assays could be utilized interchangeably as an aid to select patients for first-line and second-line treatment with pembrolizumab and potentially with other anti-PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors.

Scientific Advances in Thoracic Oncology 2016

Lung cancer care is rapidly changing with advances in genomic testing, the development of next-generation targeted kinase inhibitors, and the continued broad study of immunotherapy in new settings and potential combinations. The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer and the Journal of Thoracic Oncology publish this annual update to help readers keep pace with these important developments. Experts in thoracic cancer and care provide focused updates across multiple areas, including prevention and early detection, molecular diagnostics, pathology and staging, surgery, adjuvant therapy, radiotherapy, molecular targeted therapy, and immunotherapy for NSCLC, SCLC, and mesothelioma. Quality and value of care and perspectives on the future of lung cancer research and treatment have also been included in this concise review.

Immune-checkpoint inhibition in first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients: Current status and future approaches

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are considered standard second-line treatment in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients. This strategy has also become standard in first-line setting for a subgroup of patients with strongly positive PD-L1 tumors; therefore, PD-L1 status might be considered a new biomarker that deserves upfront testing. New combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors and with chemotherapy have been tested in first-line treatment. However, some questions remain unanswered such as the best treatment strategy or the real upfront efficacy of these therapeutic strategies in the whole lung cancer population. In this review we summarize the main results in the first-line setting of recent phase III trials with immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients.