Mansfield, Aaron S.

Abstract Objectives To evaluate SATB2 expression and prognostic implications in a large cohort of thoracic neuroendocrine tumors. Methods Surgical pathology files (1995-2017) and an institutional thymic epithelial tumor database (2010-2020) were searched for resected neuroendocrine tumors. Cases were stained with SATB2 (clone EP281). Percent SATB2-positive tumor cells and expression intensity were scored. Results In the lung, SATB2 was expressed in 5% or more of tumor cells in 29 (74.4%) of 39 small cell carcinomas and 9 (22.5%) of 40 atypical and 26 (40.6%) of 64 typical carcinoid tumors. SATB2 percent tumor cell expression and intensity were higher in small cell carcinomas than in carcinoid tumors (both P < .001, respectively). After adjusting for tumor subtype, SATB2 expression did not correlate with outcome. In the thymus, four (100%) of four atypical carcinoid tumors and one large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma but no small cell carcinoma (n = 2) expressed SATB2 in 5% or more of tumor cells. Conclusions SATB2 (clone EP281) is expressed in a large subset of pulmonary and thymic neuroendocrine tumors and therefore does not appear to be a useful marker to identify the origin of neuroendocrine tumors. Validation studies are needed, specifically including thymic neuroendocrine tumors, as the expression pattern might be different in those tumors.

467 Background: Recent tumor-agnostic drug approvals have resulted in a paradigm shift in cancer treatment away from organ/histology specific indications to biomarker-guided tumor-agnostic approaches. Pralsetinib is a potent and selective RET inhibitor, which has recently been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of adults with metastatic RET fusion–positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and is under New Drug Application review for RET mutant thyroid cancers by the FDA. RET fusions occur in up to approximately 7‒8% of patients with gastrointestinal malignancies, including pancreatic, liver, and colorectal cancers. There are currently no approved selective RET inhibitors for patients with RET fusion–positive solid tumors other than NSCLC and thyroid cancer. Here, we present data on the clinical activity of pralsetinib in patients with RET fusion–positive solid tumor types other than NSCLC enrolled in the Phase I/II ARROW study (NCT03037385). Methods: ARROW consists of a phase I dose escalation (30–600 mg once [QD] or twice daily) followed by a phase II expansion (400 mg QD) in patients with advanced RET-altered solid tumors. Primary objectives are overall response rate (ORR), per RECICT v1.1 and safety. Results: A total of 13 patients with RET fusion–positive thyroid cancer (12 papillary, 1 poorly differentiated; enrollment cutoff July 11, 2019) and 14 patients with RET fusion–positive solid tumors other than NSCLC and thyroid (3 pancreatic, 3 colon, 2 cholangiocarcinoma, 6 other; enrollment cutoff November 19, 2019) were enrolled in ARROW and received pralsetinib. At the February 13, 2020, data cutoff, the ORR (blinded central review) in response-evaluable patients with RET fusion–positive thyroid cancer was 91% (10/11; 95% CI: 59‒100) and disease control rate was 100% (95% CI: 72‒100). Treatment was ongoing in 7 of 11 patients. In RET fusion–positive solid tumors other than NSCLC and thyroid, ORR (investigator’s assessment) was 50% (6/12; 95% CI: 21‒79) and responses were observed in all patients with pancreatic cancer (3/3) and cholangiocarcinoma (2/2). Treatment was ongoing in 6 of 12 patients, including 2 of 3 patients with pancreatic cancer and 1 of 2 patients with cholangiocarcinoma. Responses were observed across multiple fusion genotypes. In the 27 patients with RET fusion–positive tumors other than NSCLC, most frequent treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were grade 1–2, and included anemia (33%), increased aspartate aminotransferase (33%), decreased white blood cell count (33%), hypertension (30%), increased alanine aminotransferase (26%), hyperphosphatemia (19%), and neutropenia (19%). No patients discontinued due to TRAEs. Conclusions: Pralsetinib demonstrated broad and durable antitumor activity across multiple advanced solid tumor types, regardless of RET fusion genotype, and was well tolerated. The study is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03037385.

PURPOSE: IMpower133 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02763579 ), a randomized, double-blind, phase I/III study, demonstrated that adding atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1]) to carboplatin plus etoposide (CP/ET) for first-line (1L) treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) resulted in significant improvement in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo plus CP/ET. Updated OS, disease progression patterns, safety, and exploratory biomarkers (PD-L1, blood-based tumor mutational burden [bTMB]) are reported. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with untreated ES-SCLC were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive four 21-day cycles of CP (area under the curve 5 mg per mL/min intravenously [IV], day 1) plus ET (100 mg/m 2 IV, days 1-3) with atezolizumab (1,200 mg IV, day 1) or placebo, and then maintenance atezolizumab or placebo until unacceptable toxicity, disease progression, or loss of clinical benefit. Tumor specimens were collected; PD-L1 testing was not required for enrollment. The two primary end points, investigator-assessed PFS and OS, were statistically significant at the interim analysis. Updated OS and PFS and exploratory biomarker analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Patients received atezolizumab plus CP/ET (n = 201) or placebo plus CP/ET (n = 202). At the updated analysis, median follow-up for OS was 22.9 months; 302 deaths had occurred. Median OS was 12.3 and 10.3 months with atezolizumab plus CP/ET and placebo plus CP/ET, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.95; descriptive P = .0154). At 18 months, 34.0% and 21.0% of patients were alive in atezolizumab plus CP/ET and placebo plus CP/ET arms, respectively. Patients derived benefit from the addition of atezolizumab, regardless of PD-L1 immunohistochemistry or bTMB status. CONCLUSION: Adding atezolizumab to CP/ET as 1L treatment for ES-SCLC continued to demonstrate improved OS and a tolerable safety profile at the updated analysis, confirming the regimen as a new standard of care. Exploratory analyses demonstrated treatment benefit independent of biomarker status.

Abstract Mesothelioma is a universally lethal cancer lacking effective therapy. The spindle poison vinorelbine exhibits clinical activity in the relapsed setting, and in preclinical models requires BRCA1 to initiate apoptosis. However, the mechanisms underlying this regulation and the clinical implications have not been explored. Here, we show that BRCA1 silencing abrogated vinorelbine-induced cell-cycle arrest, recruitment of BUBR1 to kinetochores, and apoptosis. BRCA1 silencing led to codepletion of MAD2L1 at the mRNA and protein levels consistent with its status as a transcriptional target of BRCA1. Silencing of MAD2L1 phenocopied BRCA1 and was sufficient to confer resistance to vinorelbine. This was recapitulated in cell lines selected for resistance to vinorelbine, which acquired loss of both BRCA1 and MAD2L1 expression. Following ex vivo vinorelbine in 20 primary tumor explants, apoptotic response rate was 59% in BRCA1/MAD2L1-positive explants compared with 0% in BRCA1/MAD2L1-negative explants. In 48 patients, BRCA1 and/or MAD2L1 loss of expression was not prognostic; however, in a subset of patients treated with vinorelbine, survival was shorter for patients lacking BRCA1/MAD2L1 expression compared with double-positive patients (5.9 vs. 36.7 months, P = 0.03). Our data implicate BRCA1/MAD2L1 loss as a putative predictive marker of resistance to vinorelbine in mesothelioma and warrant prospective clinical evaluation.

Abstract Background: IMpower133 (NCT02763579), a global Phase I/III, randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled trial, showed that the addition of atezo (anti-PD-L1) to CE for 1L ES-SCLC led to statistically and clinically significant OS and PFS improvement vs CE alone. Here we report updated OS and exploratory analyses. Methods: Pts with untreated ES-SCLC were randomized 1:1 to receive four 21-day cycles of E (100 mg/m2 IV, days 1-3) + C (AUC 5 mg/mL/min IV, day 1) with atezo (1200 mg IV, day 1) or PBO, followed by maintenance therapy with atezo or PBO until intolerable toxicity, progression or loss of clinical benefit. PD-L1 testing was not required for enrollment. Coprimary endpoints were investigator-assessed PFS (RECIST 1.1) and OS. Interim and final OS analyses were planned for ≈240 and ≈306 events, respectively. OS was significant at the interim analysis. Updated OS, exploratory biomarkers and patterns of disease progression were analyzed. Results: 201 and 202 pts were randomized to receive atezo+CE and PBO+CE, respectively. The median follow-up was 22.9 mo and 302 deaths had occurred. Median OS for the atezo and PBO arms was 12.3 and 10.3 mo, respectively (HR, 0.76 [95% CI: 0.60, 0.95]; descriptive P = 0.0154). At the 18-mo landmark, the OS rate was 13% higher with atezo+CE than with PBO+CE (Table). Exploratory analyses showed treatment benefit with atezo+CE regardless of biomarker status. 181 (90.0%) And 194 (96.0%) pts in the atezo+CE and PBO+CE arms, respectively, had RECIST-defined disease progression. Progression at existing, new or existing and new lesions was numerically lower with atezo+CE than with PBO+CE. Common sites of new lesions included the CNS, lung, lymph node and liver, with similar incidences between arms. Conclusion: Adding atezo to CE continued to provide OS improvement for 1L ES-SCLC in an all-comer population. The updated results of IMpower133 further support this regimen for untreated ES-SCLC. Landmark OSAtezo + CE, n = 201PBO + CE, n = 20212 Mo, n (%)93 (51.9)74 (39.0)18 Mo, n (%)61 (34.0)39(21.0)Median OS in biomarker subgroupsAtezo + CEPBO + CEITT (N = 403), mo12.310.3HR (95% CI)0.76 (0.61, 0.96)aITT-BEP (n = 137), mo9.98.9HR (95% CI)0.70 (0.48, 1.02)Non-BEP (n = 266), mo14.611.2HR (95% CI)0.81 (0.61, 1.08)PD-L1 expression, 1% TC or IC< 1% (n = 65), mo10.28.3HR (95% CI)0.51 (0.30, 0.89)≥ 1% (n = 72), mo9.710.6HR (95% CI)0.87 (0.51, 1.49)PD-L1 expression, 5% TC or IC< 5% (n = 108), mo9.28.9HR (95% CI)0.77 (0.51, 1.17)≥ 5% (n = 29), mo21.69.2HR (95% CI)0.60 (0.25, 1.46)Disease progression at sites, n (%)Atezo + CEPBO + CEExisting116 (57.7)131 (64.9)New86 (42.8)99 (49.0)Existing and new42 (20.9)57 (28.2)BEP, biomarker-evaluable population; ITT, intention-to-treat population.a Stratified HR. BEP included pts evaluable by PD-L1 IHC using the VENTANA SP263 assay. Citation Format: Leora Horn, Stephen V. Liu, Aaron S. Mansfield, Tony Mok, Arnaud Scherpereel, Niels Reinmuth, Marina Chiara Garassino, Javier De Castro Carpeno, Raffaele Califano, Makoto Nishio, Francisco Orlandi, Jorge Arturo Alatorre Alexander, Ticiana Leal, Ying Cheng, Jong-Seok Lee, Sivuonthanh Lam, Mark McCleland, Yu Deng, See Phan, Martin Reck. IMpower133: Updated OS and exploratory analyses of first-line (1L) atezolizumab (atezo) + carboplatin (C) + etoposide (E) in extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr CT220.

Abstract Despite progress of immune checkpoint therapies, many cases of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are refractory or acquire resistance to current therapies. Antibody blockade of semaphorin 4D (SEMA4D, CD100) can overcome resistance mechanisms of immune exclusion and myeloid suppression. Importantly, combinations of anti-SEMA4D with various immunotherapies enhanced T cell infiltration and activity, leading to durable tumor regression in preclinical models. Pepinemab (VX15/2503) is a first-in-class humanized monoclonal antibody targeting SEMA4D. The CLASSICAL-Lung clinical trial tests the combination of pepinemab with avelumab to couple immune activation via checkpoint inhibition with beneficial modifications of the tumor immune microenvironment via pepinemab. Here, we present interim results of the Phase 2 portion of the CLASSICAL-Lung study. This phase 1b/2, open label, single arm, first-in-human combination study is designed to evaluate the safety, tolerability and efficacy of pepinemab in combination with avelumab in 62 subjects with advanced stage (IIIB/IV) NSCLC, including immunotherapy-naïve (ION) patients and patients whose tumors progressed during or following immunotherapy (IOF). Dose escalation was successfully completed, presented previously, and no concerning safety signals have been identified to date. Among 29 evaluable IOF patients, 2 experienced confirmed partial response (PR) with 66% and 52% tumor reduction following acquired resistance to prior treatment with pembrolizumab, 15 additional patients experienced stable disease (SD), and at least 7 patients had durable clinical benefit of ≥ 23 weeks. Among 21 evaluable ION patients, 5 experienced PR, and 3 patients had clinical benefit ≥ 1 year. The disease control rate was 81%. Analysis of pre- and on-treatment biopsies demonstrated increased CD8+ T cell density correlating with response, with reduction or elimination of tumor in 10/11 biopsies from subjects with PR or SD. It was notable that 79% of patients who experienced PR or SD were reported to have tumors with negative or low PD-L1 expression. Enrollment is complete and this interim analysis suggest the combination of pepinemab plus avelumab is well tolerated and shows initial clinical signals of antitumor activity. Updated clinical response data, as well as additional immunophenotyping of both inflammatory and suppressive myeloid cells will be presented. Citation Format: Jonathan W. Goldman, Terrence L. Fisher, Elizabeth Evans, John E. Leonard, Desa Rae Pastore, Crystal Mallow, Ernest Smith, Andreas Schröeder, Kevin Chin, Michael Shafique, Thaddeus Beck, Megan A. Baumgart, Ramaswamy Govindan, Nashat Gabrail, Rachel E. Sanborn, Alexander I. Spira, Nagashree Seetharamu, Yanyan Lou, Aaron S. Mansfield, Maurice Zauderer. Interim results from CLASSICAL-Lung, phase 1b/2 study of pepinemab (VX15/2503) in combination with avelumab in advanced NSCLC [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr CT191.

Background Trans-acting programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) derives from malignant cells in three known forms. High levels of secreted splice variant PD-L1 (sPD-L1), ADAM10/ADAM17-shed sPD-L1, and PD-L1-positive extracellular vesicles (evPD-L1) each predict poor prognosis and limited response to PD-(L)1 checkpoint inhibitors in cancer. To our knowledge, no clinical intervention has reduced any of these circulating forms of extracellular PD-L1. Here, we explore therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) as a treatment to reduce circulating extracellular PD-L1. Results In patients with melanoma, sPD-L1 levels above 0.277 ng/mL predicted inferior overall survival. In patients undergoing TPE for non-malignant indications, each TPE session removed a mean 70.8% sPD-L1 and 73.1% evPD-L1 detectable in plasma. TPE also reduced total and ADAM10-positive extracellular vesicles. Conclusion Here, we report the first known clinical intervention to remove either sPD-L1 or evPD-L1 from plasma in vivo. TPE reduces plasma sPD-L1 and evPD-L1 in vivo and may have a role in treatment with immunotherapy. TPE may also prove useful in patients with other extracellular vesicle-related conditions.

AimsRecently, a novel isoform of anaplastic lymphoma kinase, with alternative transcription initiation (ALKATI), has been described in melanoma and is susceptible to targeted ALK‐inhibitor therapy. Clinical outcomes of patients with ALKATI mutated melanoma as well as correlation with immunohistochemical (IHC) methods have not yet been described.Methods and resultsClinicopathological characteristics were abstracted for 324 patients with metastatic melanoma (MM). IHC, fluorescence in‐situ hybridisation and RNA‐based digital molecular analysis assays were performed on archival tissue from 173 stage III and 192 stage IV tumours. ALKATI was identified in 12.7 and 4.8% stage III and IV tumours, respectively. Discrete presentations of the ALKATI are seen: isolated ALKATI (n = 20) and mixed ALKATI (combined ALKATI and ALKWT; n = 7). Isolated ALKWT expression (n = 4) was seen with no ALK fusions. Stage III patients showed improved survival with ALKATI expression compared to those with ALKWT or no expression [5‐year survival 80, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 57–100% versus 43%, 95% CI = 34–55%, P = 0.013]. Clinicopathological characteristics were not statistically significant. Strong diffuse cytoplasmic staining of ALK IHC (n = 12) has a sensitivity of 52.2%, specificity 100%, PPV of 100% and NPV of 92.5% of detecting isolated ALKATI.ConclusionPresence of ALKATI is a good prognostic indicator in MM. ALK IHC and digital molecular analysis can be incorporated into MM evaluation to identify patients with ALKATI for targeted therapy.

PURPOSE NCI-MATCH is a nationwide, histology-agnostic, signal-finding, molecular profile–driven trial for patients with refractory cancers, lymphomas, or myelomas. Patients with tumors harboring actionable aberration(s) in fibroblast growth factor receptor ( FGFR) 1-3 were treated with AZD4547, an oral FGFR1-3 inhibitor. METHODS Patients’ tumors were screened by next-generation sequencing for predefined FGFR amplification, activating mutations, or fusions. Patients were treated with AZD4547, 80 mg orally twice daily until progression of disease or drug intolerance. A response rate of 16% was considered promising. RESULTS Between July 2016 and June 2017, 70 patients were assigned and 48 received protocol therapy and are eligible for analysis. Patients’ tumors harbored FGFR1 or FGFR2 amplification (n = 20), FGFR2 or FGFR3 single-nucleotide variants (n = 19), or FGFR1 or FGFR3 fusions (n = 9). The most common primary tumors were breast (33.3%), urothelial (12.5%), and cervical cancer (10.4%).Grade 3 adverse events were consistent with those described in previous clinical trials. Confirmed partial responses were seen in 8% (90% CI, 3% to 18%) and were observed only in patients whose tumors harbored FGFR1-3 point mutations or fusions. Stable disease was observed in 37.5% (90% CI, 25.8% to 50.4%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.4 months, and the 6-month PFS rate was 15% (90% CI, 8% to 31%). For patients with tumors harboring FGFR fusions, the response rate was 22% (90% CI, 4.1% to 55%), and 6-month PFS rate was 56% (90% CI, 31% to 100%). CONCLUSION Preliminary signals of activity appeared to be limited to cancers harboring FGFR activating mutations and fusions, although AZD4547 did not meet the primary end point. Different FGFR somatic alterations may confer different levels of signaling potency and/or oncogene dependence.