Vaishampayan, Ulka

2651 Background: Etigilimab (etig), a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody, blocks TIGIT interaction with PVR (poliovirus receptor) and inhibits downstream signalling with target cell killing. Etig +/- nivolumab (nivo) showed acceptable safety and preliminary activity in a FIH Phase 1a/b study in solid tumors. ACTIVATE, an open-label Phase 1b/2 basket study is evaluating further efficacy, safety, tolerability and PK/PD of etig+nivo. This is a preliminary efficacy and safety analysis from ACTIVATE. Methods: Subjects with advanced/metastatic solid tumors without curative/standard of care therapies are given IV etig+nivo Q2W until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Six open cohorts are enrolling in parallel: endometrial cancer (post-front-line platinum), endometrial cancer (2-3 prior lines), PD-L1+ checkpoint-inhibitor-naïve (CPI-n) cervical cancer, rare cancers (germ cell tumor (GCT), sarcoma, uveal melanoma), ovarian cancer (post-front-line platinum) and TMB-h/MSS, (TMB >10mut/mb) tumors. Tumor assessments are done every 8 weeks following baseline scan. Primary endpoint is investigator-assessed ORR by RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints include duration of response and safety. Results: Of 27 efficacy-evaluable subjects enrolled in the 6 open cohorts with minimum 1 staging scan or radiological/clinical progression at data cut-off of 02/10/22, 12 had clinical benefit with 1 complete response (CR), 2 partial responses (PRs) and 9 stable diseases (SDs) and 15 had radiological/clinical progressive disease (PD), with an overall response rate (ORR) of 11% and disease control rate (DCR) of 44%. Conclusions: Etig+nivo is safe and well tolerated with no new safety signals. Early efficacy was noted in cervical cancer (1CR, 1PR and 1SD) and uveal melanoma (3 SDs >20 weeks). Encouraging activity was also noted in ovarian cancer and post-CPI treated TMB-H/MSS NSCLC. These early data support continued evaluation of the combination of etig+nivo. Clinical activity was notable as below. Clinical trial information: NCT04761198. [Table: see text]

PURPOSE COSMIC-021 is evaluating cabozantinib plus atezolizumab in patients with solid tumors. We report results from patients with advanced clear cell (cc) and non–clear cell (ncc) renal cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS This phase Ib study ( NCT03170960 ) enrolled patients age ≥ 18 years with advanced RCC. A dose-escalation stage was followed by expansion cohorts. For cohort expansion, prior systemic therapy was not permitted for ccRCC but allowed for nccRCC. Patients received oral cabozantinib 40 mg once a day (ccRCC and nccRCC) or 60 mg once a day (ccRCC only) plus atezolizumab (1,200 mg intravenously, once every 3 weeks). The primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1; the secondary end point was safety. RESULTS A total of 102 patients were enrolled. Median follow-up was 25.8, 15.3, and 13.3 months for the 40-mg ccRCC, 60-mg ccRCC, and nccRCC groups, respectively. ORR was 53% (80% CI, 41 to 65) in the 40-mg ccRCC group (n = 34) and 58% (80% CI, 46 to 70) in the 60-mg ccRCC group (n = 36), 3% and 11%, respectively, with complete response; median progression-free survival (exploratory end point) was 19.5 and 15.1 months, respectively. In nccRCC (n = 32), ORR was 31% (80% CI, 20 to 44), all partial responses; median progression-free survival was 9.5 months. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported by 71% of patients in the 40-mg ccRCC group, 67% in the 60-mg ccRCC group, and 38% in the nccRCC group; TRAEs leading to discontinuation of both agents occurred in 15%, 6%, and 3% of patients, respectively. There were no grade 5 TRAEs. CONCLUSION The novel combination of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab demonstrated encouraging clinical activity and acceptable tolerability in patients with advanced ccRCC and nccRCC. Disease control was observed across dose levels and histologic subtypes.

Abstract Purpose: Men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have limited treatment options after progressing on hormonal therapy and chemotherapy. Here, we evaluate the safety and efficacy of atezolizumab (anti–PD-L1) + radium-223 dichloride (radium-223) in men with mCRPC. Patients and Methods: This phase Ib study evaluated atezolizumab + radium-223 in men with mCRPC and bone and lymph node and/or visceral metastases that progressed after androgen pathway inhibitor treatment. Following safety assessment of concurrent dosing, 45 men were randomized 1:1:1 to concurrent or one of two staggered dosing schedules with either agent introduced one cycle before the other. This was followed by a safety–efficacy expansion cohort (randomized 1:1:1). The primary endpoints were safety and objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints included radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), PSA responses, and overall survival (OS). Results: As of October 4, 2019, 44 of 45 men were evaluable. All 44 had ≥1 all-cause adverse event (AE); 23 (52.3%) had a grade 3/4 AE. Fifteen (34.1%) grade 3/4 and 3 (6.8%) grade 5 AEs were related to atezolizumab; none were related to radium-223. Confirmed ORR was 6.8% [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.4–18.7], median rPFS was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8–4.6), median PSA progression was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8–3.3), and median OS was 16.3 months (95% CI, 10.9–22.3). Conclusions: This phase Ib study demonstrated that atezolizumab + radium-223, regardless of administration schedule, had greater toxicity than either drug alone, with no clear evidence of additional clinical benefit for patients with mCRPC and bone and lymph node and/or visceral metastases.

BackgroundSystemic therapy (ST) can be deferred in patients who have metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and slow‐growing metastases. Currently, this subset of patients managed with active surveillance (AS) is not well described in the literature.MethodsThis was a prospective observational study of patients with mRCC across 46 US community and academic centers. The objective was to describe baseline characteristics and demographics of patients with mRCC initially managed by AS, reasons for AS, and patient outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize demographics, baseline characteristics, and patient‐related outcomes. Wilcoxon 2‐sample rank‐sum tests and χ2 tests were used to assess differences between ST and AS cohorts in continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Kaplan‐Meier survival curves were used to assess survival.ResultsOf 504 patients, mRCC was initially managed by AS (n = 143) or ST (n = 305); 56 patients were excluded from the analysis. Disease was present in 69% of patients who received AS, whereas the remaining 31% had no evidence of disease. At data cutoff, 72 of 143 patients (50%) in the AS cohort had not received ST. The median overall survival was not reached (95% CI, 122 months to not estimable) in patients who received AS versus 30 months (95% CI, 25‐44 months) in those who received ST. Quality of life at baseline was significantly better in patients who were managed with AS versus ST.ConclusionsAS occurs frequently (32%) in real‐world clinical practice and appears to be a safe and appropriate alternative to immediate ST in selected patients.

TPS366 Background: First-line treatment of mRCC has rapidly changed to include IPI-NIVO or CABO, with clinical benefit of each based on the Checkmate 214 and CABOSUN (A031203) trials. Combination immunotherapy with VEGF therapies has shown benefit over sunitinib in the JAVELIN 101 and KEYNOTE 426 trials. It is yet unclear which patients (pts) benefit most from combination immunotherapy-VEGF inhibitors, and the optimal sequence of drugs. Methods: In an adaptive, randomized, multicenter phase III trial (Alliance A031704, PDIGREE), pts start treatment with induction IPI 1 mg/kg and NIVO 3 mg/kg intravenously (IV) once every 3 weeks. Key inclusion criteria include clear cell mRCC, International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) intermediate or poor risk, Karnofsky performance status >70, and no prior treatments for mRCC. Based on 3-month radiographic assessment (after completing IPI-NIVO combination), pts with complete responses (CR) undergo maintenance NIVO 480 mg IV every 4 weeks; pts with progression of disease (PD) switch to CABO 60 mg oral daily; pts with non-CR/non-PD are randomized to NIVO 480 mg IV every 4 weeks versus NIVO 480 mg IV every 4 weeks with CABO 40 mg oral daily. Randomization is stratified by IMDC risk criteria and presence of bone metastases. The primary endpoint of the study is overall survival (OS). We hypothesize that 3-year OS will improve to 70% for NIVO-CABO compared to 60% for NIVO alone; to achieve 85% power with a two-sided alpha of 0.05 and exponential distribution, 696 patients will be randomized. Accounting for 30% patients with either CR or PD, and 5% dropout from toxicity, up to 1046 pts will be enrolled. Key secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, 12-month CR rate, overall response rate based on RECIST 1.1 and iRECIST criteria, and toxicity profiles. Quality of life will be assessed based on the FKSI-19, PROMIS-fatigue, and EQ5D-5L questionnaires. Biomarkers associated with CR, tissue-based and plasma-based biomarkers will be assessed. Updated enrollment through January 2021 will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT03793166 .

Abstract Purpose: Romidepsin dosing recommendations for patients with malignancy and varying degrees of hepatic dysfunction was lacking at the time of regulatory approval for T-cell lymphoma. We conducted a multicenter phase I clinical trial (ETCTN-9008) via the NCI Organ Dysfunction Working Group to investigate safety, first cycle MTD, and pharmacokinetic profile of romidepsin in this setting. Patients and Methods: Patients with select advanced solid tumors or hematologic malignancies were stratified according to hepatic function. Romidepsin was administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle and escalation followed a 3 + 3 design in moderate and severe impairment cohorts. Blood samples for detailed pharmacokinetic analyses were collected after the first dose. Results: Thirty-one patients received one dose of romidepsin and were evaluable for pharmacokinetic analyses in normal (n = 12), mild (n = 8), moderate (n = 5), and severe (n = 6) cohorts. Adverse events across cohorts were similar, and dose-limiting toxicity occurred in two patients (mild and severe impairment cohorts). The MTD was not determined because the geometric mean AUC values of romidepsin in moderate (7 mg/m2) and severe (5 mg/m2) impairment cohort were 114% and 116% of the normal cohort (14 mg/m2). Conclusions: Data from the ETCTN-9008 trial led to changes in the romidepsin labeling to reflect starting dose adjustment for patients with cancer and moderate and severe hepatic impairment, with no adjustment for mild hepatic impairment.

TPS5100 Background: First-line treatment of mRCC has rapidly changed to include IPI-NIVO or CABO, with clinical benefit of each based on the Checkmate 214 and CABOSUN (A031203) trials. Combination immunotherapy with VEGF therapies has shown benefit over sunitinib in the JAVELIN 101 and KEYNOTE 426 trials. It is yet unclear which patients (pts) benefit most from combination immunotherapy-VEGF inhibitors, and the optimal sequence of drugs. Methods: In an adaptive, randomized, multicenter phase 3 trial (Alliance A031704, PDIGREE), pts start treatment with induction IPI 1 mg/kg and NIVO 3 mg/kg intravenously (IV) once every 3 weeks. Key inclusion criteria include clear cell mRCC, International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) intermediate or poor risk, Karnofsky performance status > 70, and no prior treatments for mRCC. Based on 3-month radiographic assessment (after completing IPI-NIVO combination), pts with complete responses (CR) undergo maintenance NIVO 480 mg IV every 4 weeks; pts with progression of disease (PD) switch to CABO 60 mg oral daily; pts with non-CR/non-PD are randomized to NIVO 480 mg IV every 4 weeks versus NIVO 480 mg IV every 4 weeks with CABO 40 mg oral daily. Randomization is stratified by IMDC risk criteria and presence of bone metastases. The primary endpoint of the study is overall survival (OS). We hypothesize that 3-year OS will improve to 70% for NIVO-CABO compared to 60% for NIVO alone; to achieve 85% power with a two-sided alpha of 0.05 and exponential distribution, 696 patients will be randomized. Accounting for 30% patients with either CR or PD, and 5% dropout from toxicity, up to 1046 pts will be enrolled. Key secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, 12-month CR rate, overall response rate based on RECIST 1.1 and irRECIST criteria, and toxicity profiles. Quality of life will be assessed based on the FKSI-19, PROMIS-fatigue, and EQ5D-5L questionnaires. Biomarkers associated with CR, tissue-based and plasma-based biomarkers will be assessed. Updated enrollment through May 2020 will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT03793166 .

5565 Background: mCRPC patients (pts) tend to have a poor prognosis and limited treatment (tx) options, especially those with concomitant bone metastases (mets). We explored the ability of combination tx with atezo (anti–PD-L1) and r-223 (α-particle emitter) to stimulate anti-tumor immunity in mCRPC pts. Methods: This Phase Ib study evaluated the safety and tolerability of atezo + r-223 in pts with mCRPC and multiple bone mets, visceral mets and/or lymphadenopathy who progressed after androgen pathway inhibitor tx. The initial cohort phase evaluated the safety and tolerability of a concurrent dosing schedule (CDS), in which atezo and r-223 were administered on the same day. Following assessment of CDS, pts were randomized 1:1:1 to CDS or 1 of 2 staggered dosing schedules (atezo or r-223 introduced a full cycle before the other). This was followed by an expansion of enrollment (randomized 1:1:1). Pts got atezo 840 mg IV q2w and r-223 at 55 kBq/kg IV 6 times at 4-wk intervals until unacceptable toxicity or loss of clinical benefit. Exploratory measures of efficacy included investigator-assessed ORR (RECIST 1.1), PSA response rate, time to PSA progression, radiographic PFS (rPFS; PCWG2 criteria) and OS. Biopsy samples were collected at baseline and prior to cycle 2 to evaluate changes in the tumor microenvironment during tx. Results: As of Oct 4, 2019, 45 pts were enrolled and 44 had evaluable data. Baseline characteristics were generally similar across groups. All 44 evaluable pts had ≥ 1 all-cause AE; 23 (52.3%) had Gr 3-4 AE. Eight pts (18.2%) had Gr 5 AE as per protocol reporting of deaths; 4 (9.1%) were from disease progression. Median follow-up was 13.9 mo (range, 1.7–34.2). Confirmed ORR was 6.8% (95% CI: 1.43, 18.66). Confirmed PSA response rate was 4.5% and median time to PSA progression was 3.0 mo (95% CI: 2.8, 3.3). Median rPFS was 3.0 mo (95% CI: 2.8, 4.6) and median OS was 16.3 mo (95% CI: 10.9, 22.3). Changes in PD-L1 and CD8 IHC were consistent with the known mechanism of action of atezo, as were changes in alkaline phosphatase with radium. Conclusions: No dose-limiting toxicities, safety signals, or changes in serum biomarkers were observed beyond the known safety profiles of atezo and r-223. This Phase 1b study did not seem to show clinical benefit from combination tx. Ongoing subgroup and biomarker analyses may provide additional insights. Studies of PD-1/PD-L1 targeted therapies in combination with tumor-directed radiation in molecularly selected mCRPC pts are planned or underway. Clinical trial information: NCT02814669 .

5564 Background: Cabozantinib (C) may enhance response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) by promoting an immune-permissive microenvironment and has shown encouraging activity in combination with ICIs in tumor types including RCC and HCC. C and atezolizumab (A) have shown low objective response rates as monotherapy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) (Smith JCO 2012; Kim JCO 2018). COSMIC-021 (NCT03170960), a multinational phase 1b study, is evaluating the combination of C + A in various solid tumors. We report results for Cohort 6 in mCRPC. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) were required to have radiographic progression in soft tissue after enzalutamide and/or abiraterone, measurable disease, and an ECOG PS of 0 or 1. Prior chemotherapy for mCSPC was permitted. Pts received C 40 mg PO QD and A 1200 mg IV Q3W. CT/MRI scans were performed Q6W for the first year and Q12W thereafter. The primary endpoint is ORR per RECIST 1.1. Other endpoints include safety, ORR per irRECIST, duration of response (DOR), PFS, and OS. Results are presented for the first 44 pts enrolled. Results: Median follow-up as of Dec 20, 2019 was 12.6 mo (range 5, 20) for the 44 mCRPC pts. Median age was 70 y (range 49, 90), 50% had ECOG PS 1, 34% had visceral metastases, and 61% had extrapelvic lymph node metastases. 27% had prior docetaxel and 52% had 2 prior novel hormonal therapies. The most common any grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were fatigue (50%), nausea (43%), decreased appetite (39%), diarrhea (39%), dysgeusia (34%), and PPE (32%). One grade 5 TRAE of dehydration was reported in a 90 y/o. Median duration of treatment was 6.3 mo. ORR per RECIST 1.1 among all 44 pts was 32% (2 CRs [4.5%] and 12 PRs [27%]); 21 (48%) pts had SD resulting in a disease control rate of 80% in all pts. One pt with PD per RECIST 1.1 had an irPR per irRECIST. ORR per RECIST 1.1 was 33% in 36 pts with high-risk disease (visceral and/or extrapelvic lymph node metastases). Median DOR for all pts with response per RECIST 1.1 was 8.3 mo (range 2.8, 9.8+). 17 (50%) of 34 pts with post-baseline PSA evaluation had a decrease in PSA. In 12 responders with post-baseline PSA evaluation, 8 (67%) had a PSA decrease ≥50%. Tumor PD-L1 expression will also be reported. Conclusions: The combination of C + A had a tolerable safety profile and demonstrated clinically meaningful activity with durable responses in men with mCRPC. Given the encouraging activity in these pts, especially in those with high-risk disease, further evaluation of C + A in men with mCRPC is being pursued. Clinical trial information: NCT03170960 .

5013 Background: Cabozantinib (C), an inhibitor of MET, AXL, and VEGFR, has been shown to promote an immune-permissive environment and has shown promising clinical activity in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in solid tumors including renal cell carcinoma and urothelial carcinoma (UC). ICI monotherapy is approved for patients (pts) with locally advanced or metastatic UC with disease progression after platinum-containing chemotherapy. COSMIC-021, a multi-center phase 1b study, is evaluating the combination of C with atezolizumab (A) in various solid tumors (NCT03170960). We report results from Cohort 2 in UC pts with prior platinum-containing chemotherapy. Methods: Eligible pts had ECOG PS 0-1 and had progressed on or after a platinum-containing chemotherapy (including pts with disease recurrences < 12 months after the end of perioperative chemotherapy). 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 include safety, duration of response (DOR), PFS, and OS. Results: As of Dec 20, 2019, 30 pts with advanced UC were enrolled with a median follow-up of 16.5 mo (range 12, 21). Median age was 66 yrs (range 44, 84), 73% were male, and 60% had ECOG PS 1. Primary tumor sites were bladder (80%), renal pelvis (10%), and ureter (10%); the most frequent metastatic sites included lung (40%) and liver (27%). Fourteen pts (47%) had received ≥2 prior systemic anticancer therapies. The most common treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) of any grade were asthenia (37%), diarrhea (27%), decreased appetite (23%), increased transaminases (23%), and mucosal inflammation (20%). Grade 3/4 TRAEs occurred in 57% of pts, with no grade 5 TRAEs. Confirmed ORR per RECIST v1.1 was 27% (8 of 30 pts), including 2 pts with CR. DCR (CR+PR+SD) was 64%. Median DOR was not reached, with the longest DOR ongoing at 14.3+ mos. Median PFS was 5.4 mo (range 0.0+, 17.3+). Conclusions: C in combination with A demonstrated encouraging clinical activity in pts with advanced UC with an acceptable safety profile. Additional cohorts of pts with advanced UC are being explored in the study. Clinical trial information: NCT03170960 .