Johnson, Daniel Hartman

Background Management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is important as they cause treatment interruption or discontinuation, more often seen with combination immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. Here, we retrospectively evaluated the safety and effectiveness of anti-interleukin-6 receptor (anti-IL-6R) as therapy for irAEs. Methods We performed a retrospective multicenter study evaluating patients diagnosed with de novo irAEs or flare of pre-existing autoimmune disease following ICI and were treated with anti-IL-6R. Our objectives were to assess the improvement of irAEs as well as the overall tumor response rate (ORR) before and after anti-IL-6R treatment. Results We identified a total of 92 patients who received therapeutic anti-IL-6R antibodies (tocilizumab or sarilumab). Median age was 61 years, 63% were men, 69% received anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) antibodies alone, and 26% patients were treated with the combination of anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 and anti-PD-1 antibodies. Cancer types were primarily melanoma (46%), genitourinary cancer (35%), and lung cancer (8%). Indications for using anti-IL-6R antibodies included inflammatory arthritis (73%), hepatitis/cholangitis (7%), myositis/myocarditis/myasthenia gravis (5%), polymyalgia rheumatica (4%), and one patient each with autoimmune scleroderma, nephritis, colitis, pneumonitis and central nervous system vasculitis. Notably, 88% of patients had received corticosteroids, and 36% received other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) as first-line therapies, but without adequate improvement. After initiation of anti-IL-6R (as first-line or post-corticosteroids and DMARDs), 73% of patients showed resolution or change to ≤grade 1 of irAEs after a median of 2.0 months from initiation of anti-IL-6R therapy. Six patients (7%) stopped anti-IL-6R due to adverse events. Of 70 evaluable patients by RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) V.1.1 criteria; the ORR was 66% prior versus 66% after anti-IL-6R (95% CI, 54% to 77%), with 8% higher complete response rate. Of 34 evaluable patients with melanoma, the ORR was 56% prior and increased to 68% after anti-IL-6R (p=0.04). Conclusion Targeting IL-6R could be an effective approach to treat several irAE types without hindering antitumor immunity. This study supports ongoing clinical trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of tocilizumab (anti-IL-6R antibody) in combination with ICIs ( NCT04940299 , NCT03999749 ).

TPS9595 Background: There is a need for novel immunotherapies to address the patient population that never or no longer responds to immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI). VV1 is an oncolytic vesicular stomatitis virus engineered to express human interferon beta (IFNβ) to enhance cellular anti-tumor immune responses and tumor selectivity. Phase 1 studies demonstrated VV1 anti-tumor activity in several malignancies with or without a CPI. We are exploring ways to optimize VV1 efficacy in combination with cemiplimab, an anti-PD1 antibody approved for lung, basal and squamous cell skin cancers. Recent clinical data support a 5-fold higher dose of VV1 than was previously explored, and pre-clinical data show synergy between the oncolytic and an anti-CTLA4 antibody, in addition to cemiplimab, supporting exploration of a triplet. What was originally a five-arm study of intravenous (IV) VV1 in combination with IV cemiplimab has been amended to focus on 2 means of optimizing efficacy: use of a higher dose of VV1 and triplet combination in proof-of-concept populations. Methods: We are now enrolling pts with advanced melanoma (after progression on anti-PD1) and plan to include 1 st -line NSCLC pts with PD-L1 expression ≥50%. The study is first exploring the preliminary anti-tumor activity, safety, and immunogenic activity of the combination of IV VV1 at a dose of 1.0 x 10 11 TCID 50 once on D1 followed by IV cemiplimab Q3W starting on D8, or the same regimen with an additional intratumoral injection of VV1 1.0 x 10 9 TCID 50 once on D1 for pts with accessible lesions. Pts receive IV cemiplimab Q3W until confirmed disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Once at least 6 pts have been treated with acceptable safety across the 2 melanoma doublet cohorts using this higher dose of VV1, a 3 rd melanoma cohort will open to add a single dose of ipilimumab 50 mg on D1 (all IV triplet). Once 6 melanoma pts have received the triplet safely, the 1 st -line NSCLC cohort will open. All cohort decisions are guided by a Data Review Committee. Cohorts will be expanded based on a Simon 2-stage design using a type I error rate of 0.05 and power of 85%. Null ORR is 10% with a target of 35% for 2 nd line melanoma and null ORR is 40% in 1 st line NSCLC with a target of 70%. Each melanoma cohort will require a response in ≥2 of 10 pts in the 1 st stage to add 11 more in the 2 nd stage, while NSCLC will first need 5/9 evaluable pts to respond, then an additional 13 to complete the design. Response is assessed at week 7 then Q9W per RECIST v1.1. The study includes serial biopsies in ≥3/10 pts in Stage 1 of each of the IV melanoma cohorts (doublet and triplet therapy), all pts in Stage 2 of these IV melanoma cohorts, and all pts in both Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the IV/IT melanoma cohort, to permit a thorough investigation of the impact of the 3 immunotherapies under investigation. The study is currently ongoing in the USA. Clinical trial information: NCT04291105.