Back to Authors

Cho, May Thet

Mayo Clinic

UC Irvine Health

Citations 2

Phase I/II trial of BMS-986205 and nivolumab as first line therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma.
Huynh, Jasmine , Cho, May Thet, Tam, Kit , Singh, Amisha , Naderi, Sima, Lamba, Ramit, McGahan, John P. , Loehfelm, Thomas W. , Navarro, Shannon M. , Lara, Frances, Martinez, Anthony, Garcia, Leslie, Kim, Edward , Cho, May , Monjazeb, Arta Monir , Fananapazir, Ghaneh , STEWART, SUSAN LEROY , Martinez, Anthony

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 6, 2022 | Volume: 40 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: e16200-e16200

10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.e16200 Get It

e16200 Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Indoleamine-2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) is an intracellular enzyme expressed by HCC which helps to orchestrate immune suppression within the tumor microenvironment (TME) and may contribute to primary and acquired resistance of PD-(L)1 inhibitors. BMS-986205 is a novel oral drug that potently and selectively inhibits IDO1. This Phase I/II study is evaluating the safety and tolerability of the combination of BMS-986205 and nivolumab as first-line therapy in HCC. Methods: Patients (pts) ≥18y with untreated, unresectable/metastatic HCC received BMS-986205 in combination with nivolumab. A fixed dose of Nivolumab 240mg/m2 IV was administered on Day 1 of each 14-day cycle. BMS-986205 was an oral tablet administered daily; a total of two dose levels (50-100mg) were given to determine dose limiting toxicities (DLT) during the dose-escalation Phase I of the study. Safety was assessed using CTCAE v5.0 criteria, and efficacy was assessed by objective response rate (ORR) using RECIST v1.1 criteria. Secondary objectives included preliminary data on disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DOR), ORR using immune RECIST criteria (iRECIST), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Here we report the results of the dose escalation cohort. Eight pts were treated with median age 69y [60-76]; 75% male; and PS 0 (3 pts) or 1 (5 pts). Pts were White (62.5%), Asian (25%), and African American (12.5%). Six of 8 pts had underlying viral hepatitis (5 hepatitis C, 1 hepatitis B), and all pts were Child Pugh A at enrollment with median baseline alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) level 41.8 [3.8–917.2]; 4 pts received prior local therapies. A total of 91 cycles of therapy were administered; 2 pts received 27 and 43 cycles of treatment each. Six pts were evaluable for DLT; 2 pts were replaced for DLT assessment due to insufficient dose administered, unrelated to toxicity. No DLTs were observed at either the 50 or 100mg dose of BMS-986205. There were 24 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), 4 of which were Grade 3 events; there were no Grade 4-5 events. The most common TRAEs of all grades were AST elevation and ALT elevation in 3 pts, and diarrhea, maculopapular rash and increased alkaline phosphatase in 2 pts each. Grade 3 events were diarrhea and AST elevation (1 pt), and hyperglycemia and pancreatitis requiring treatment discontinuation (1 pt). Eight pts were evaluable for efficacy with best response of partial response in 1 pt (12.5%) and stable disease in 3 pts (37.5%), yielding a DCR of 50%. Median PFS was 8.5 weeks; median OS has not been reached. Conclusions: Combination BMS-986205 and nivolumab showed a manageable safety profile with durable benefit as 1st line therapy in a meaningful subset of patients with unresectable/metastatic HCC. Clinical trial information: NCT03695250.
Perspectives on under-representation of minority patients (pts) in clinical trials.
Holcombe, Randall F. , Roberts, Lewis R. , Mita, Monica , Vidal, Gregory A. , Hendifar, Andrew , Cho, May Thet, Roberts, Lewis R , Owonikoko, Taofeek Kunle , Raez, Luis , Schwartzberg, Lee Steven , Rini, Brian I. , Cho, May

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 2, 2021 | Volume: 39 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: e18521-e18521

10.1200/jco.2021.39.15_suppl.e18521 Get It

e18521 Background: About 40% of the US population are from minority groups. Minority pts are under-represented in oncology clinical trials, which limits the applicability of results to the general population and perpetuates poor relationships between healthcare systems and minority communities. This assessment investigated underlying causes of this lack of minority representation in clinical trials and proposes plans to promote diversity. Methods: To better understand the limited inclusion of under-represented pts in oncology clinical trials, 10 specialists in cancer care were selected to provide their perspectives. Specialists were chosen because of their experience enrolling minority pts in clinical trials and met virtually in Dec 2020 via Within3, a secure digital communication platform, to discuss obstacles faced in recruiting minority pts and potential strategies to address these concerns. Specificity and alignment in responses were achieved through software analytics and follow-up queries. Results: The 10 specialists identified as Asian (10%), Black (30%), White (50%), and Hispanic (10%), and began practicing medicine in the 1980s-2010s. All are involved in clinical research and treat a range of minority pts in both urban and suburban settings. Most specialists (8/10) reported treating > 20 minority pts with cancer annually. However, few specialists (2/10) reported that > 20% of their minority pts have enrolled in clinical trials. Specialists agreed that minority pts experience barriers to participation in clinical research, including lack of trust in the healthcare system, materials in their native languages, financial support, minority investigators involved in clinical trials, and accessible study sites. The specialists proposed strategies that could be implemented to increase minority enrollment. These included study sites where minority populations live and industry funded outreach and educational efforts in minority communities. If sites are more accessible, this can reduce time and financial pressures associated with study participation. The specialists recommended that studies be designed to be more supportive of minority populations, specifically regarding inclusion and exclusion criteria and reimbursement of costs. They also advised that increased diversity among clinical researchers and allied personnel may increase the ability of the clinical team to connect with pts and assist in building trust in their communities. Finally, they emphasized the importance of providing informed consent forms and study materials in pts’ native languages. Conclusions: While challenges exist to increasing diversity in oncology clinical studies, a broad consortium of clinical specialists agreed that they can be addressed by community outreach and education, making study sites more accessible, availability of study materials in pts’ native languages, and improving diversity of clinical teams.