Powles, Thomas

4504 Background: C, a multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), promotes an immune-permissive environment that may enhance response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). COSMIC-021, a multicenter phase 1b study, is evaluating C + A (anti‒PD-L1 therapy) in various solid tumors (NCT03170960). C + A demonstrated encouraging clinical activity in cohort 2 of COSMIC-021 in patients (pts) with UC previously treated with platinum-containing chemotherapy (chemo) (Pal S et al. ASCO 2020. Abstract 5013). Outcomes of C + A from 3 other UC cohorts (C3, C4, C5) are presented. Methods: Pts with inoperable locally advanced/metastatic UC with transitional cell histology and ECOG PS 0‒1 were eligible. Pts enrolled in C3 and C4 had no prior therapy and were cisplatin-based chemo ineligible (C3) or eligible (C4). C5 enrolled pts with one prior ICI and no prior VEGFR-TKI therapy. Pts received C 40 mg PO QD and A 1200 mg IV Q3W. CT/MRI scans were performed Q6W for first year and Q12W thereafter. The primary endpoint is objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1 by investigator. Other endpoints: safety, duration of response (DOR), PFS, and OS. Results: Thirty pts each were enrolled in C3 and C4, and 31 in C5. Baseline characteristics for C3, C4, and C5, respectively: median age, 74 y, 66 y, 68 y; male, 67%, 73%, 55%; ECOG PS 1, 63%, 57%, 74%; lung/liver metastasis; 33%/17%, 40%/20%, 58%/23%; ≥3 tumor sites, 30%, 43%, 45%; bladder as primary site, 67%, 70%, 71%. As of Nov 30, 2021, the median follow-up for C3, C4, and C5 was 27.9, 19.1, and 32.9 mo, respectively, with 1, 6, and 1 pts on treatment. C + A demonstrated clinical benefit across all cohorts (Table). Most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade across C3, C4, and C5, respectively, were diarrhea (43%, 33%, 35%), nausea (27%, 17%, 26%), fatigue (27%, 27%, 48%), and decreased appetite (33%, 27%, 39%); grade 3/4 TRAEs occurred in 63%, 43%, and 45%, and there was no grade 5 TRAE. Conclusions: C + A demonstrated encouraging clinical activity with manageable toxicity in inoperable locally advanced/metastatic UC as first-line systemic therapy in cisplatin-based chemo eligible/ineligible pts and as second- or later line in pts who received prior ICI. Clinical trial information: NCT03170960. [Table: see text]

4505 Background: While inhibiting VEGF improves outcomes in mRCC pts, most develop resistance, often within a year. Here, we report results from a Ph II study of atezo (anti–PD-L1) and bev (anti-VEGF) vs and following atezo or sun (TKI) in mRCC pts. Methods: Pts with untreated mRCC were enrolled in the hypothesis generating IMmotion150 study (NCT01984242) and randomized to atezo 1200 mg IV q3w + bev 15 mg/kg IV q3w, atezo alone or sun 50 mg PO QD 4 wk on/2 wk off. After progression on atezo or sun, crossover to atezo + bev was allowed. PD-L1 status was scored on tumor-infiltrating immune cells (IC, SP142 IHC assay). The primary analysis was modified prior to final analysis to reflect the coprimary endpoints of IRF-assessed PFS (RECIST v1.1) in ITT pts and pts with PD-L1 expression on ≥ 1% of IC (PD-L1+). Results: 54% of pts were PD-L1+. In PD-L1+ pts 1L treatment resulted in a PFS hazard ratio (HR) of 0.64 for atezo + bev vs sun (table). After 1L treatment, 78% of sun and 60% of atezo pts who progressed subsequently received atezo + bev and achieved ORRs of 28% and 24%, respectively (table). Safety was comparable to the known individual profiles of atezo and bev. Additional clinical, safety and biomarker data will be presented. Conclusions: Atezo + bev resulted in encouraging antitumor activity in 1L pts with PD-L1+ mRCC. Preliminary activity in the 2L setting was demonstrated in pts who crossed over to atezo + bev, regardless of prior therapy. 1L atezo + bev vs sun is being evaluated in the ongoing Ph III study IMmotion151 (NCT02420821). Clinical trial information: NCT01984242. [Table: see text]

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.

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]