Mahadevan, Daruka

Abstract Background: The prognosis of patients with MM with CNS mets is poor. E6201 is an intravenous (IV) MEK inhibitor with activity against BRAF V600-mutated MM cell lines, including MAPK resistance alteration. A previous phase I trial demonstrated activity of E6201 in BRAF V600E mutated MM with a Maximal Tolerated Dose of 320mg/m2 given IV once a week x 3 weeks q 28 days. 2/23 (8.7%) of patients had a PR, 8/23 (34.8%) had SD. Two patients with MM and brain mets achieved near-CR which led to preclinical studies that demonstrated E6201 is unaffected by P-gp and BCRP transport and achieved higher brain to blood concentration (266%).In this trial, patients with BRAF mutation + MM with brain mets, single agent E6201 given at 320mg/m2 twice weekly x 3 weeks q 28 days was determined to be safe. One patient had CNS SD and a PR in lung mets, and a second patient achieved CNS stable disease and CR in a leg melanotic lesion. The drug was well-tolerated with one reversible AE thrombocytopenia (Gr 2). The final review showed intracranial response of SD in 2/4 (50%) patients and systemic SD in 3/4 (75%) patients. Methods: We are currently accruing to the dose escalation cohort of E6201 with dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily orally (n=up to 22 evaluable patients). E6201 is administered IV at 320mg/m2 twice weekly for 3 weeks every 28 days. Patients must have stage IV melanoma with BRAF mutation with at least one active lesion in the brain. Prior local therapy is allowed if done at least 3 weeks prior to cycle 1. Participants must be on a stable dose of steroids for at least 7 days and have an ECOG <!–=2. The study allows one prior BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy. The primary objectives are to determine the MTD of E6201 when combined with dabrafenib and the response rate of brain mets. The secondary objectives include duration of response, extracranial response, progression free survival, overall survival, and impact of BRAF mutation subtype and safety of the combination. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05388877 References:1.Gampa G, et al. Brain distribution of a novel MEK inhibitor E6201: implications in the treatment of melanoma brain metastases. 2018. Drug Metab Dispos.2.Tibes R et al. Safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of E6201 in patients with advanced solid tumors, including melanoma: results of a phase I study. 2018. Brit J of Cancer. 3.Babiker Gm et al, E6201, an intravenous MEK1 inhibitor, achieves an exceptional response in BRAF V600E mutated metastatic malignant melanoma with brain metastases. 2018. Inv New Drugs4.Gampa G, Kim M, Cook-Rostie N, Laramy JK, Sarkaria JN, Paradiso L, DePalatis L, Elmquist WF. Brain distribution of a novel MEK inhibitor E6201: Implications in the treatment of melanoma brain metastases. 2018. Drug Met Disp.–> Citation Format: Mahesh Seetharam, Roxana Dronca, Arkadiusz Z. Dudek, Garth Nelson, Matthew Block, Skylar Starling, Amber Baskin, Renee Bradshaw, Courtney Nelson, Kylee Andrews, Alisha Birgin, Cristina Watson, Yiyi Yan, Daruka Mahadevan, Svetomir Markovic, Tom Myers, Linda Paradiso, Hani Babiker. Phase 1 trial of MEK1 inhibitor E6201 plus dabrafenib in patients (pts) with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma (MM) with central nervous system (CNS) metastases (mets) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 2 (Late-Breaking, Clinical Trial, and Invited Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(7_Suppl):Abstract nr CT157.

ImportanceSystematic data on the association between anticancer therapies and thromboembolic events (TEEs) in patients with COVID-19 are lacking.ObjectiveTo assess the association between anticancer therapy exposure within 3 months prior to COVID-19 and TEEs following COVID-19 diagnosis in patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients who were hospitalized and had active cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data were accrued from March 2020 to December 2021 and analyzed from December 2021 to October 2022.ExposureTreatments of interest (TOIs) (endocrine therapy, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors/tyrosine kinase inhibitors [VEGFis/TKIs], immunomodulators [IMiDs], immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICIs], chemotherapy) vs reference (no systemic therapy) in 3 months prior to COVID-19.Main Outcomes and MeasuresMain outcomes were (1) venous thromboembolism (VTE) and (2) arterial thromboembolism (ATE). Secondary outcome was severity of COVID-19 (rates of intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, 30-day all-cause mortality following TEEs in TOI vs reference group) at 30-day follow-up.ResultsOf 4988 hospitalized patients with cancer (median [IQR] age, 69 [59-78] years; 2608 [52%] male), 1869 had received 1 or more TOIs. Incidence of VTE was higher in all TOI groups: endocrine therapy, 7%; VEGFis/TKIs, 10%; IMiDs, 8%; ICIs, 12%; and chemotherapy, 10%, compared with patients not receiving systemic therapies (6%). In multivariable log-binomial regression analyses, relative risk of VTE (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69) but not ATE (aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.56-1.16) was significantly higher in those exposed to all TOIs pooled together vs those with no exposure. Among individual drugs, ICIs were significantly associated with VTE (aRR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.01-2.07). Also noted were significant associations between VTE and active and progressing cancer (aRR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01-2.03), history of VTE (aRR, 3.10; 95% CI, 2.38-4.04), and high-risk site of cancer (aRR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.14-1.75). Black patients had a higher risk of TEEs (aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.50) than White patients. Patients with TEEs had high intensive care unit admission (46%) and mechanical ventilation (31%) rates. Relative risk of death in patients with TEEs was higher in those exposed to TOIs vs not (aRR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.91-1.38) and was significantly associated with poor performance status (aRR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.30-2.40) and active/progressing cancer (aRR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.13-2.13).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, relative risk of developing VTE was high among patients receiving TOIs and varied by the type of therapy, underlying risk factors, and demographics, such as race and ethnicity. These findings highlight the need for close monitoring and perhaps personalized thromboprophylaxis to prevent morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19–related thromboembolism in patients with cancer.

ImportanceCytokine storm due to COVID-19 can cause high morbidity and mortality and may be more common in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy (IO) due to immune system activation.ObjectiveTo determine the association of baseline immunosuppression and/or IO-based therapies with COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm in patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis registry-based retrospective cohort study included 12 046 patients reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from March 2020 to May 2022. The CCC19 registry is a centralized international multi-institutional registry of patients with COVID-19 with a current or past diagnosis of cancer. Records analyzed included patients with active or previous cancer who had a laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction and/or serologic findings.ExposuresImmunosuppression due to therapy; systemic anticancer therapy (IO or non-IO).Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was a 5-level ordinal scale of COVID-19 severity: no complications; hospitalized without requiring oxygen; hospitalized and required oxygen; intensive care unit admission and/or mechanical ventilation; death. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of cytokine storm.ResultsThe median age of the entire cohort was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-74) years and 6359 patients were female (52.8%) and 6598 (54.8%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 599 (5.0%) patients received IO, whereas 4327 (35.9%) received non-IO systemic anticancer therapies, and 7120 (59.1%) did not receive any antineoplastic regimen within 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Although no difference in COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm was found in the IO group compared with the untreated group in the total cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56-1.13, and aOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.41-1.93, respectively), patients with baseline immunosuppression treated with IO (vs untreated) had worse COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm (aOR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.38-8.01, and aOR, 4.41; 95% CI, 1.71-11.38, respectively). Patients with immunosuppression receiving non-IO therapies (vs untreated) also had worse COVID-19 severity (aOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.36-2.35) and cytokine storm (aOR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.42-3.79).Conclusions and RelevanceThis cohort study found that in patients with cancer and COVID-19, administration of systemic anticancer therapies, especially IO, in the context of baseline immunosuppression was associated with severe clinical outcomes and the development of cytokine storm.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04354701

Abstract Purpose: Tilsotolimod is an investigational synthetic Toll-like receptor 9 (TLR9) agonist that has demonstrated antitumor activity in preclinical models. The ILLUMINATE-101 phase I study explored the safety, dose, efficacy, and immune effects of intratumoral (it) tilsotolimod monotherapy in multiple solid tumors. Patients and Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of refractory cancer not amenable to curative therapies received tilsotolimod in doses escalating from 8 to 32 mg into a single lesion at weeks 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, and 11. Additional patients with advanced malignant melanoma were enrolled into an expansion cohort at the 8 mg dose. Objectives included characterizing the safety, establishing the dose, efficacy, and immunologic assessment. Blood samples and tumor biopsies of injected and noninjected lesions were obtained at baseline and 24 hours after treatment for immune analyses. Results: Thirty-eight and 16 patients were enrolled into the dose escalation and melanoma expansion cohorts, respectively. Deep visceral injections were conducted in 91% of patients. No dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) or grade 4 treatment-related adverse events were observed. Biopsies 24 hours after treatment demonstrated an increased IFN pathway signature and dendritic cell maturation. Immunologic profiling revealed upregulation of IFN-signaling genes and modulation of genes for checkpoint proteins. In the dose escalation cohort, 12 (34%) of 35 evaluable patients achieved a best overall response rate (ORR) of stable disease (SD), whereas 3 (19%) of 16 evaluable patients in the melanoma cohort achieved stable disease. Conclusions: Overall, tilsotolimod monotherapy was generally well tolerated and induced rapid, robust alterations in the tumor microenvironment. See related commentary by Punekar and Weber, p. 5007

Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNSTs) represent a rare subtype of neural crest cell-derived soft tissue sarcomas (STS). Standard of care therapy comprises surgical resection followed by adjuvant radiation, and most clinical studies have demonstrated finite survival benefit of radiation and chemotherapy. In metastatic disease, palliative chemotherapy provides very limited efficacy. We report a 60-year-old male patient with a primary para vertebral tumor at T7–T8 with lung metastases who recurred after surgical resection and later progressed on epirubicin plus ifosfamide. He was an international patient and referred to the phase 1 clinic. Molecular profiling and immunohistochemistry of the tumor revealed a PD-L1 expression of 70% (2+) and pathogenic genetic alterations by next-generation sequencing in ARID1A, CDKN2A, KMT2A, NF1, and TP53. Immune checkpoint therapy (ICT) with pembrolizumab was commenced, and interval computed tomography revealed a complete remission by cycle 6. Randomized clinical trials illustrate that ICTs such as anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies in STS cohorts display low or modest response rates by variable PD-L1 expression. This and 3 other case reports of disparate PD-L1 expression demonstrate complete responses in PD-L1 positive MPNSTs treated with ICT. These case reports necessitate further study of ICT in neural crest cell subtype of STS.

512 Background: The tumor microenvironment in PDA is heterogeneous and immunosuppressive given the presence of regulatory T cells and exhausted effector T cells. Despite the upsurge of effective immunotherapeutic agents (IA) in other tumor types, the role in PDA remains unknown. We conducted a meta-analysis of IA in PDA. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Elsevier/Embase, Wiley/Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov. Articles were selected per the following criteria: (1) Study participants had a diagnosis of PDA; (2) An IA was used in the trial. Titles, abstracts and full text articles were reviewed by 2 independent reviewers; disagreements were resolved by a third. Data extraction and analysis were performed by 3 independent reviewers. Descriptive analysis, mean, median, confidence interval and forest plots were used for statistical analysis. Results: We found 20,792 studies through the database, 16,105 remained after duplicates were removed and 15,889 were excluded due to irrelevance. Strict inclusion criteria were applied to the full text of 216 articles. The most common reason for exclusion were conference abstracts (44%) and ongoing trials (16%). Fifty-four trials (39 metastatic (met), 12 adjuvant (Ad) and 3 neoadjuvant (nAd) met criteria for further analysis. Age range was 27-86 (median 61) and 52.3% were males. IA included cytokine therapy (33%), peptide vaccines (22%), dendritic cell vaccine (13%), oncolytic viruses (9%), CTLA-4 inhibitors (2%) and others. IA in met-PDA had a median overall survival (mOS) of 8.1 months (ms) and a disease control rate (DCR) of 55.4% (95% CI, 51.85-58.95). There was no statistical difference in DCR among IA subtypes (range 49-60%) (p = 0.22). The mOS of Ad-PDA trials was 25 ms (historically comparable to gemcitabine, p = 0.75) and 18 ms for nAd-PDA. The most common Gr1/2 toxicities were skin reactions, fever, and chills and Gr3/4 were cytopenias, diarrhea, and mucositis. One death occurred due to neutropenic sepsis. Conclusions: IA demonstrates modest efficacy in the treatment of met-PDA albeit exhibits a favorable toxicity profile. Many trial results are available only in abstract format and some are ongoing.