Sonpavde, Guru

TPS504 Background: Patients with high-risk MIBC have a poor prognosis. Radical cystectomy remains the standard treatment. Yet despite substantial improvements in surgical techniques, mortality from metastatic recurrence remains high. A large number of MIBC patients are ineligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy or have persistent muscle-invasive disease despite neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, has demonstrated significant activity and is FDA-approved for patients with advanced/chemotherapy-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma. We hypothesize that pembrolizumab given post-cystectomy will improve overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with high-risk MIBC. Methods: Patients must have histologically confirmed muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder or upper tract, have received NAC and have ≥ pT2 and/or pN+ at surgery or be cisplatin-ineligible and have ≥ pT3 and/or pN+ at surgery or have declined adjuvant cisplatin-based therapy and have ≥ pT3 and/or pN+ at surgery. Surgery could be radical cystectomy, nephrectomy, or ureterectomy. Patients are stratified by pathologic stage, central PD-L1 status, and prior NAC. Patients are randomized to receive pembrolizumab 240 mg every 3 weeks for 1 year, or observation. The dual primary objectives are to determine DFS and OS. Secondary objectives are to determine DFS and OS in PD-L1-positive and -negative patients and assess safety. Correlative objectives are to determine whether 12 immune gene signatures, tumor molecular subtypes, diversity of T-cell receptor (TCR) clonotypes, persistence of TCR clonotypes, tumor and neoantigen burden, HLA subtypes, and plasma HGF and VEGF levels with IL-10 and IL-17 are associated with OS and DFS. Quality of Life Correlative objectives are to compare health-related quality of life as assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30. Clinical trial information: NCT03244384.

475 Background: The vascular disrupting agent (VDA) BNC105P shows synergy with everolimus in preclinical models. The DisrupTOR-1 trial included a phase I component exploring this combination and a randomized phase II component comparing everolimus with BNC105P (Arm A) to everolimus monotherapy (Arm B) (Pal et al. ESMO 2014). Methods: Pts with clear cell mRCC and 1-2 prior therapies (including ≥1 VEGF-TKI) were randomized in the phase II study component. In Arm A, patients received a 7 day lead-in dose of everolimus followed by dosing with BNC105P. Patients in Arm A had optional blood collections prior to administration of BNC105P and 3 hours after receiving BNC105P. A fluorescence-based assay was used to characterize a broad panel of analytes at each time point. Biomarkers were assessed in both a static and dynamic fashion. For the former, biomarkers were stratified by median value, and progression-free survival (PFS) was compared in resulting subgroups using the Kaplan-Meier method. For the latter, change in biomarker level before and after BNC105P infusion was stratified by median difference, and PFS was compared in resulting subgroups using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: 139 pts were randomized with 69 and 67 evaluable pts in Arms A and B, respectively. Dynamic biomarkers were assessed in a total of 44 patients who received everolimus with BNC105P. Increases in matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) and stem cell factor (SCF) were associated with improved PFS (p=0.0421 and p=0.0291, respectively). Decreases in sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) and serum amyloid protein (SAP) were associated with improved PFS (p=0.0184 and p=0.0063). With respect to static biomarkers, elevated baseline ferritin and lower baseline IL-8 were associated with improved PFS (p=0.0291 and p=0.0149, respectively). Conclusions: Several static and dynamic biomarkers in the DisrupTOR-1 trial were associated with PFS. A prospective biomarker-driven study examining everolimus with BNC105P selected by baseline IL-8 and ferritin is in development. Clinical trial information: NCT01034631.

213 Background: Daily oral prednisone (P) has been employed for the therapy of mCRPC, alone or in combination regimens. Despite palliative benefits and PSA responses, the overall clinical impact of P is unknown and it may foster resistance mechanisms. We performed a pooled analysis of control arms of randomized trials which either did or did not administer single agent P to evaluate its impact on overall survival (OS) and toxicities. Methods: Individual patient data from control arms ofrandomized trials of post-docetaxel men receiving placebo or P + placebo were eligible for analysis. Patient demographics, survival, and toxicity data were collected. The impact of P on OS and toxicities was investigated in Cox regression models adjusted for known clinical and laboratory prognostic factors. Statistical significance was defined as a p-value < 0.05 and all tests were two-sided. Results: The control arms of 2 randomized phase III trials were available totaling 794 men: the COU-AA-301 trial (n = 394) administered P plus placebo and the CA184-043 trial (n = 400) administered placebo alone. P plus placebo was not significantly associated with OS compared to placebo alone in a multivariable analysis (HR = 0.89 [95% CI 0.72-1.10], p = 0.27). Other factors associated with poor OS were Eastern Cooperative Oncology group (ECOG)-performance status (PS) ≥ 1, Gleason Score ≥ 8, liver metastasis, high PSA, hypoalbuminemia, and elevated LDH.In contrast, CTCAE grade ≥ 3 therapy-related toxicities were significantly increased with P plus placebo compared to placebo alone (HR = 1.48 (1.03-2.13), p = 0.034) in a multivariable analysis. Other baseline factors significantly associated with a higher risk of grade ≥ 3 toxicities were ECOG-PS ≥ 1, hypoalbuminemia and elevated LDH. Conclusions: P plus placebo compared with placebo alone for post-docetaxel men with mCRPC was not associated with extension of OS, but was associated with higher grade ≥ 3 toxicities. With the exception of the use of P in combination with abiraterone, P alone or in combination regimens should be questioned given its unclear palliative benefits and association with increased toxicities.

Abstract Purpose: BNC105P inhibits tubulin polymerization, and preclinical studies suggest possible synergy with everolimus. In this phase I/II study, efficacy and safety of the combination were explored in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Experimental Design: A phase I study in patients with clear cell mRCC and any prior number of therapies was conducted using a classical 3 + 3 design to evaluate standard doses of everolimus with increasing doses of BNC105P. At the recommended phase II dose (RP2D), patients with clear cell mRCC and one to two prior therapies (including ≥ 1 VEGF-TKI) were randomized to BNC105P with everolimus (arm A) or everolimus alone (arm B). The primary endpoint of the study was 6-month progression-free survival (6MPFS). Secondary endpoints included response rate, PFS, overall survival, and exploratory biomarker analyses. Results: In the phase I study (N = 15), a dose of BNC105P at 16 mg/m2 with everolimus at 10 mg daily was identified as the RP2D. In the phase II study, 139 patients were randomized, with 69 and 67 evaluable patients in arms A and B, respectively. 6MPFS was similar in the treatment arms (arm A: 33.82% vs. arm B: 30.30%, P = 0.66) and no difference in median PFS was observed (arm A: 4.7 mos vs. arm B: 4.1 mos; P = 0.49). Changes in matrix metalloproteinase-9, stem cell factor, sex hormone-binding globulin, and serum amyloid A protein were associated with clinical outcome with BNC105P. Conclusions: Although the primary endpoint was not met in an unselected population, correlative studies suggest several biomarkers that warrant further prospective evaluation. Clin Cancer Res; 21(15); 3420–7. ©2015 AACR.