Balar, Arjun Vasant

Abstract Background: PD-L1 blockade with durvalumab (D) is approved as second-line therapy in platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). Adding CTLA-4 blockade with tremelimumab (T) may improve responses, particularly in pts with low PD-L1 expression. Here we report safety and efficacy in the mUC cohort of the dose-expansion phase of a phase I, multicenter, open-label study of D+T in pts with advanced solid tumors (NCT02261220). Methods: Pts with platinum-refractory mUC received D 20 mg/kg + T 1 mg/kg Q4W for 4 months, followed by D 10 mg/kg Q2W for a total of 12 months of treatment. The primary objectives were safety in the mUC cohort and antitumor activity in the subgroup with tumor cell and immune cell PD-L1 expression <25% (assessed by SP263 IHC assay). Secondary objectives included antitumor activity per RECIST v1.1 in other subgroups. Results: As of Oct 20 2017, 168 pts received treatment and had ≥24 weeks' follow-up. Median age was 65.5 yr (range, 35-85), 78.0% were male, 81.0% had visceral metastases (32.1% liver metastases) and 32.1% had received >1 prior line of chemotherapy. Median duration of follow-up was 11.6 mo. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 75.6% of pts and were Grade 3-4 in 28.6%. One pt died due to a treatment-related AE (pulmonary hemorrhage). Treatment-related AEs led to discontinuation of therapy in 11.9% of pts. Confirmed objective response rate (ORR) was 35/168 (20.8%) including 4 CRs. Responses occurred early (median 1.8 mo) and are durable (median DOR not reached, range 1.9-24.9 mo). At 6 months, the PFS rate was 25.4% and the OS rate was 60.9%. Median PFS was 1.9 mo and median OS was 9.5 mo. Clinical activity was seen regardless of PD-L1 status, but patients with either tumor or immune cell expression ≥25% had numerically higher response rates (29.4% vs 15.1%) and 6-month OS rates than those with <25% expression (Table). Conclusions: D+T had a manageable safety profile and encouraging antitumor activity and survival rate in previously treated mUC regardless of PD-L1 status. Response and survivalPD-L1 ≥25% (n=68)PD-L1 <25% (n=86)PD-L1 unknown (n=14)Total (N=168)Confirmed ORR (CR+PR)(95% CI), %29.4 (19.0-41.7)15.1 (8.3-24.5)14.3 (1.8-42.8)20.8 (15.0-27.8)Ongoing ORR, %60.092.310074.3Disease control rate (CR+PR+SD≥24 weeks) (95% CI), %32.4 (21.5-44.8)24.4 (15.8-34.9)42.9 (17.7-71.1)29.2 (22.4-36.7)Median PFS, months (95% CI)3.5 (1.9-3.7)1.8 (1.8-1.9)4.9 (1.8-NE)1.9 (1.8-3.4)PFS 6-month rate, %26.122.638.525.4Median OS, months (95% CI)*18.9 (8.1-NE)8.0 (4.8-10.0)16.4 (7.3-16.4)9.5 (8.1-18.9)OS 6-month rate, %66.451.991.760.9NE, not estimable *Should be interpreted with caution due to limited follow-up at data cutoff Citation Format: Arjun V. Balar, Amit Mahipal, Enrique Grande, Victor M. Villalobos, Sebastien Salas, Taek Won Kang, Se Hyun Kim, Thomas Powles, Frank Tsai, Aung Naing, Albiruni Razak, Yohann Loriot, Ji Youl Lee, Sang Joon Shin, Rafael Morales-Barrera, Natasha Angra, Feng Xiao, Shaad Abdullah, Michiel S. Van der Heijden. Durvalumab + tremelimumab in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT112.

TPS389 Background: Recent data have shown that up to 25% of patients with advanced prostate cancer, including mCRPC, have a deleterious germline or somatic mutation in BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, or another homologous recombination DNA repair gene. Such mutations can be used as a molecular marker to select patients for targeted treatment with poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis), which are lethal to cells with HRD. Treatment with PARPis has shown preliminary evidence of antitumor activity in patients with mCRPC and a mutation in a homologous recombination DNA repair gene (Mateo et al. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1697-708). These data provide a compelling rationale for evaluating rucaparib, a potent inhibitor of PARP1, PARP2, and PARP3, in patients with mCRPC associated with HRD. Methods: TRITON3 (NCT02975934) is a randomized, phase 3 study evaluating rucaparib 600 mg BID vs physician’s choice of abiraterone, enzalutamide, or docetaxel in patients with mCRPC and a deleterious germline or somatic BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM mutation (identified by prior local testing or central testing during screening). Patients must have progressed on androgen receptor signaling–directed therapy in the mCRPC setting; prior PARPi treatment or chemotherapy for mCRPC are exclusion criteria. Patients will be randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to either rucaparib or physician’s choice, with the possibility for cross over from the comparator treatment to rucaparib upon radiographic progression confirmed by independent radiology review. The primary endpoint is radiographic progression-free survival (modified RECIST v1.1/PCWG3 criteria) assessed by independent radiology review. Secondary endpoints include objective response rate, duration of response, patient-reported outcomes, overall survival, and safety. Pretreatment blood samples collected from all patients will enable development of a noninvasive plasma-based companion diagnostic to select patients who may benefit from rucaparib treatment. Patients (≈400) will be enrolled at > 100 sites worldwide. Clinical trial information: NCT02975934.

TPS388 Background: Up to 25% of patients with advanced prostate cancer, including mCRPC, have a deleterious germline or somatic mutation in BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM or another homologous recombination (HR) DNA repair gene that can serve as a molecular marker to select those who may respond to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis). PARPis are lethal to cells with HRD, and PARPi treatment has shown preliminary evidence of an antitumor effect in patients with mCRPC who harbor a mutation in an HR DNA repair gene (Mateo et al. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1697-708). These data provide a compelling rationale for evaluating rucaparib, a potent PARP1, PARP2 and PARP3 inhibitor, in patients with mCRPC associated with HRD. Methods: TRITON2 (NCT02952534) is a phase 2 study evaluating rucaparib 600 mg BID in patients with mCRPC. Patients with a deleterious germline or somatic BRCA1, BRCA2 or ATM mutation (per prior local test or central test during screening) will be enrolled into 1 of 2 cohorts based on the presence or absence of measurable visceral and/or nodal disease. An exploratory cohort will enroll patients with an alteration in any of 12 other prespecified HR genes (eg, RAD51C, RAD51D and PALB2), with or without measurable visceral and/or nodal disease. Patients must have progressed on androgen receptor signaling–directed therapy and 1 prior taxane-based chemotherapy for mCRPC. Patients who received prior treatment with a PARPi, mitoxantrone, cyclophosphamide or platinum-based chemotherapy are excluded. The primary endpoint is objective response rate measured using modified RECIST v1.1/PCWG3 for patients with soft-tissue disease and prostate-specific antigen response for patients with nonmeasurable disease. Secondary endpoints include duration of response, radiographic progression-free survival, overall survival, clinical benefit rate and safety. Pretreatment blood samples collected from all patients will enable development of a plasma-based companion diagnostic to select patients who may benefit from rucaparib treatment. Patients (≈160) will be enrolled at > 100 sites worldwide. Clinical trial information: NCT02952534.

LBA4500 Background: Cisplatin-based chemo is a standard 1L treatment (tx) for mUC and the only tx that prolongs OS; however, age or comorbidities render many pts ineligible, and 30-50% receive no tx. Atezo (MPDL3280A) is active and well tolerated in platinum-treated mUC, justifying testing atezo as 1L tx in cisplatin-ineligible pts. Methods: Pts were chemo naive in the metastatic setting and cisplatin ineligible (renal [GFR > 30 but < 60 mL/min]/hearing impairment, ≥ G2 peripheral neuropathy [PN] or ≥ ECOG PS2). Atezo 1200 mg was given IV q3w until PD (RECIST v1.1). Centrally assessed PD-L1 on tumor infiltrating immune cells (IC; SP142 IHC assay) was scored IC2/3, 1 or 0. The primary efficacy endpoint was confirmed ORR assessed per RECIST v1.1 (central independent review facility) using a data cutoff of Sep 14, 2015. Results: 119 efficacy/safety-evaluable pts of any PD-L1 IC had a median age of 73 y: 21% ≥ 80 y. 18% had prior systemic tx (21% [neo]adjuvant); 10% had radiotherapy. 66% had visceral mets. 71% had CrCl < 60 mL/min; 13% had hearing loss ≥ 25 dB; 6% had prior PN ≥ G2; 20% had ECOG PS2. ORR was 19% (95% CI 13-28; 5% CR), and responses occurred in all IC subgroups (Table; includes DCR/PFS/OS) and in pts with poor prognostic factors. 22/23 responses were ongoing with mDOR not reached. Median follow-up was 8.5 mo (range 0.2-14.3); median tx duration was 15 wk. Atezo was generally well tolerated. Tx-related all-G and G3-4 AEs were seen in 64% and 12% of pts, respectively. Related all-G AEs ≥ 10% included fatigue, pruritus, diarrhea. 1 G5 related AE occurred (sepsis). 3% had a G3-4 immune-mediated AE. Conclusions: Atezo has clinically meaningful activity in 1L cisplatin-ineligible mUC pts, and preliminary OS is encouraging. The durable nature of response and favorable AE profile makes this an attractive alternative to chemo. NCT02108652. Clinical trial information: NCT02108652. [Table: see text]