An Illustrative Case of Combination Cabozantinib/Nivolumab for Progressive Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC)

We report a case using combination cabozantinib plus nivolumab to salvage disease control in a patient with refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma. The patient had previously experienced disease progression from high‐dose interleukin‐2, sunitinib, pazopanib, cabozantinib, and nivolumab, all given sequentially. Combination cabozantinib plus nivolumab resulted in 22 months of disease control. Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors including cabozantinib have immunomodulatory effects when combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors, with multiple ongoing phase III trials exploring the cabozantinib plus nivolumab combination in the first‐line setting. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of progression on nivolumab and cabozantinib when given as sequential monotherapies but stable disease on combination cabozantinib plus nivolumab.     

The promising role of nivolumab in renal cell cancers

The therapeutic efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors across numerous tumor types has resulted in approval for neoplasms such as melanoma and lung cancer. Nivolumab is a fully humanized IgG4 antibody that inhibits immune checkpoint between programmed death 1 (PD-1) on T cells and PD-1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) and ligand 2 (PD-L2) on immune and cancer cells. Motzer and Colleagues published the findings of Nivolumab versus everolimus in advanced kidney cancer in the November issue of the New England Journal of Medicine. This trial showed that nivolumab resulted in better median overall survival of 25 months compared to everolimus at 19.6 months, with a hazard ratio for death at 0.73, meeting pre-specified criterion for superiority in favor of nivolumab. These findings mark the defining beneficial role of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic kidney cancer.     

A Phase II Trial of Nivolumab With Chemotherapy Followed by Maintenance Nivolumab in Patients With Pleural Mesothelioma After Surgery: The NICITA Study Protocol

BackgroundIn selected patients with early-stage malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), a multimodal therapy that includes surgical cytoreduction, chemotherapy, and/or radiotherapy is recommended. Several clinical trials have demonstrated the beneficial effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors in pretreated MPM patients with advanced disease. Recent clinical data have suggested that the combination of chemotherapy and checkpoint inhibition might improve efficacy.Trial DesignThe NICITA (nivolumab with chemotherapy in pleural mesothelioma after surgery) trial is a prospective, 1:1 randomized, open-label, multicenter phase II clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04177953). Ninety-two patients with MPM epithelioid subtype, who had undergone extended pleurectomy and decortication with or without hyperthermic intrathoracic chemoperfusion, will be included to receive adjuvant treatment. All patients will receive ≤ 4 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy with pemetrexed (arms A and B). Patients in arm B will additionally receive nivolumab, together with the adjuvant chemotherapy, and subsequently for ≤ 12 cycles as maintenance therapy. The primary endpoint of this study is the time-to-next-treatment. The secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, overall survival, proportion of patients with treatment beyond progression, duration of treatment beyond progression in this population, and quality of life.ConclusionThis prospective trial will contribute data to assess the efficacy of standard chemotherapy combined with nivolumab in the context of multimodal management of early-stage MPM. The study is currently enrolling patients.     

Cutaneous adverse effects of the immune checkpoint inhibitors

The immune checkpoint targeted agents, anti–cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and anti–programed cell death 1 (PD-1) or anti–programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors are frequently associated with cutaneous side effects that are often dose limiting and can lead to discontinuation of therapy. Ipilimumab, a CTLA-4 inhibitor, is most commonly associated with a morbilliform eruption on the trunk and extremities and pruritus. More severe cutaneous toxicities reported include toxic epidermal necrolysis and severe drug rash with eosinophila and systemic symptoms. Recent case reports of Sweet syndrome and cutaneous sarcoidosis have also recently been described after treatment with ipilimumab. The cutaneous events usually occur early in the course of treatment and are dose dependent. PD-1 inhibitors, nivolumab and pembrolizumab, induce similar but less severe toxicities compared with the CTLA-4 inhibitors. The most common cutaneous adverse events include lichenoid reactions, eczema, vitiligo, and pruritus. Lichenoid oral mucosal lesions located on the tongue, buccal mucosa, lips, or gingivae or located on all of these have also recently been described. The time of onset of the cutaneous events with the PD-1 inhibitors occurs later than that seen with the CTLA-4 inhibitors. Anti–PD-L1 antibodies, such as atezolizumab, have a similar side effect profile compared with the PD-1 inhibitors. Combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors, ipilimumab and nivolumab, has recently been approved for the treatment of advanced melanoma. The combination therapy is associated with a more severe side effect profile compared with the agents used as monotherapy. We discuss the most frequently encountered cutaneous side effects of the immune checkpoint inhibitors and review the recommended management strategies.     

Mechanistic overview of immune checkpoints to support the rational design of their combinations in cancer immunotherapy

Checkpoint receptor blockers, known to act by blocking the pathways that inhibit immune cell activation and stimulate immune responses against tumor cells, have been immensely successful in the treatment of cancer. Among several checkpoint receptors of immune cells, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein-4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1), T-cell immunoglobulin and ITIM domain (TIGIT), T-cell immunoglobulin-3 (TIM-3) and lymphocyte activation gene 3 (LAG-3) are the most commonly targeted checkpoints for cancer immunotherapy. Six drugs including one CTLA-4 blocker (ipilimumab), two PD-1 blockers (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) and three PD-L1 blockers (atezolizumab, avelumab and durvalumab) are approved for the treatment of different types of cancers including both solid tumors such as melanoma, lung cancer, head and neck cancer, bladder cancer and Merkel cell cancer as well as hematological tumors such as classic Hodgkin's lymphoma. The main problem with checkpoint blockers is that only a fraction of patients respond to the therapy. Insufficient immune activation is considered as one of the main reason for low response rates and combination of checkpoint blockers has been proposed to increase the response rates. The combination of checkpoint blockers was successful in melanoma but had significant adverse events. A combination that is selected based on the mechanistic differences between checkpoints and the differences in expression of checkpoints and their ligands in the tumor microenvironment could have a synergistic effect in a given cancer subtype and also have a manageable safety profile. This review aims to help in design of optimal checkpoint blocker combinations by discussing the mechanistic details and outlining the subtle differences between major checkpoints targeted for cancer immunotherapy.     

A pathological complete response after nivolumab plus ipilimumab therapy for DNA mismatch repair-deficient/microsatellite instability-high metastatic colon cancer: A case report

The standard treatment for colorectal cancer has always been surgery and chemotherapy, which may be used in combination to treat patients. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have been a significant advancement in the standard treatment of metastatic, unresectable colorectal cancer with deficient mismatch repair. However, little information is available about their use in neoadjuvant and conversion settings with only a few case reports and only one phase 2 trial. The present study reports the case of a large, locally advanced right-sided metastatic deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high colon cancer, which showed a pathological complete response after combination treatment with nivolumab and ipilimumab. To the best of our knowledge, resected metastatic colon cancer with a pathological complete response after treatment using dual immune checkpoint inhibitors has not been previously reported. Overall, this case report suggests the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors before colorectal surgery.     

Pomalidomide alone or in combination with dexamethasone in Japanese patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma

This phase 1, open‐label, dose‐escalation study investigated the tolerated dose (recommended dose), safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of pomalidomide alone or pomalidomide plus low‐dose dexamethasone in Japanese patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Twelve patients were enrolled. Patients received pomalidomide 2 mg (Cohort 1) or 4 mg (Cohort 2) orally on day 1 and days 3–21 of a 28‐day cycle. The tolerated dose of pomalidomide was determined to be 4 mg given on days 1–21 of a 28‐day cycle. Efficacy outcomes with pomalidomide plus low‐dose dexamethasone were consistent with those of previous studies. Responses (partial response or better) were achieved by three patients (25%; 1 [17%] in Cohort 1 and 2 [33%] in Cohort 2), and the median time to response was 6.4 months overall (9.0 months for Cohort 1 and 4.2 months for Cohort 2). The median progression‐free survival was 5.5 months overall (5.1 months for Cohort 1 and not reached for Cohort 2). The most frequently occurring grade ≥3 adverse events were neutropenia (67%), anemia (25%), lymphopenia (25%), and pneumonia (25%), consistent with previous studies of pomalidomide plus low‐dose dexamethasone in refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Further investigation of pomalidomide is recommended for Japanese patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01568294).     

Activity of Nivolumab and Utility of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio as a Predictive Biomarker for Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Prospective Observational Study

BackgroundThe immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab is entering routine oncologic practice. We investigated the safety and efficacy of nivolumab in the real world and alternative predictive factors for survival in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Patients and MethodsWe performed a prospective observational study to evaluate the activity of nivolumab treatment for chemotherapy-refractory NSCLC. Patients were treated with nivolumab once every 2 weeks, and the efficacy was assessed every 8 ± 2 weeks.ResultsFifty-two patients were enrolled after nivolumab approval in Japan. These patients received a median of 4 (range, 1-43) cycles of nivolumab. Overall objective response was observed in 12 patients (23.1%). Median progression-free survival was 2.1 (95% confidence interval, 1.0-3.2) months, and 1-year overall survival rate was 59.9%. A total of 23 immune-related adverse events occurred in 20 patients, as follows: 7 cases of pneumonitis, 6 of oral mucositis, 5 of hypothyroidism, 2 of colitis, 2 of liver dysfunction, and 1 of arthritis. All patients recovered after appropriate management. A pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) of ≥ 5 was significantly associated with poor prognosis compared to NLR < 5 (hazard ratio, 4.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.84-11.14; P = .013), independently.ConclusionNivolumab showed promising activity with a manageable safety profile in clinical practice, consistent with effects of previous clinical trials. This drug could affect a specific population of patients with advanced NSCLC, and pretreatment NLR was a candidate for surrogate markers for survival benefit of patients with NSCLC treated with nivolumab.     

Myasthenic crisis and polymyositis induced by one dose of nivolumab

An 80‐year‐old man, who developed multiple lymph node and skin metastasis of malignant melanoma, received nivolumab monotherapy. Two weeks after the first dose, he experienced anorexia and fatigue, and suffered from progressive, severe dyspnea and muscle weakness. We diagnosed him with myocarditis, myositis, and myasthenic crisis induced by nivolumab. We commenced steroid therapy, immune absorption therapy, plasma exchange therapy, and i.v. immunoglobulin therapy, and succeeded in saving his life. Because his serum level of anti‐acetylcholine receptor antibodies in a sample collected before nivolumab treatment were positive and were elevated significantly after nivolumab, we suspected that nivolumab triggered a severe autoimmune response, which progressed subclinical myasthenia gravis to myasthenic crisis. We carried out T cell receptor repertoire analysis using next‐generation sequencing technologies and identified infiltration of clonally expanded T cell populations in the skeletal muscle after nivolumab treatment, implying a very strong T cell immune response against muscular cells. To avoid severe immune‐related adverse events, the exclusion of patients with subclinical autoimmune disease is very important for treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors.     

Immunotherapy for Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Purpose of Review

Discussion of current strategies targeting the immune system related to solid tumors with emphasis on head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).This review will outline the current challenges with immunotherapy and future goals for treatment using these agents.

Recent Findings

Agents targeting immune checkpoint receptors (IR) such as program death 1 (PD1) have been used in the clinical realm for melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and the use of these agents for these malignancies has provided crucial information about how and why patients respond or not to inhibitory checkpoint receptor blockade therapy (ICR). The anti PD1 agent, nivolumab, was recently approved by the FDA as a standard of care regimen for patients with platinum refractory recurrent/metastatic (R/M) HNSCC. Molecular pathways leading to resistance are starting to be identified, and work is underway to understand the most optimal treatment regimen with incorporation of immunotherapy.

Summary

ICR has renewed interest in the immunology of cancer, but resistance is not uncommon, and thus understanding of these mechanisms will allow the clinician to appropriately select patients that will benefit from this therapy.

     

纳武单抗对晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效和安全性的单中心分析

背景与目的：纳武单抗（nivolumab）是一种免疫检查点抑制剂,对T细胞表面的程序性死亡［蛋白］-1（programmed death-1,PD-1）具有高度亲和力,通过与其结合来恢复T细胞的抗肿瘤免疫反应。回顾性分析纳武单抗对于既往接受过含铂类药物方案化疗后疾病进展或不可耐受的局部晚期或转移性非小细胞肺癌（non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC）患者的疗效和安全性。方法：收集上海市胸科医院2016年1月—2019年4月期间接受纳武单抗治疗的30例NSCLC患者,统计用药过程中发生的不良事件。治疗方法为按3 mg/kg的剂量静脉输注纳武单抗,每次输注60 min,每2周1次,直到出现疾病进展或不能接受的毒性。结果：所有不良事件按照常见不良事件评价标准（Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events,CTCAE）4.0版评估,30例患者中有25例至少报告了1个不良事件,出现的药物相关不良事件有疲劳、红疹、贫血等,其中以疲劳（50%）最常见。有3例患者出现3级药物相关不良事件：疲劳、贫血和总胆红素升高,没有出现4~5级不良事件以及治疗相关死亡事件。药物相关不良事件级别大多数较低（1~2级）,无需特殊处理,少数患者出现甲状腺功能亢进以及间质性肺炎等,予对症治疗后均好转。结论：纳武单抗用于二线治疗晚期NSCLC耐受性较好,具有较高的安全性。     

Assessment of nivolumab benefit–risk profile of a 240-mg flat dose relative to a 3-mg/kg dosing regimen in patients with advanced tumors

BackgroundNivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W) has shown benefit versus the standard of care in melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, flat dosing is expected to shorten preparation time and improve ease of administration. With knowledge of nivolumab safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics across a wide dose range in body weight (BW) dosing, assessment of the benefit–risk profile of a 240-mg flat dose relative to the approved 3-mg/kg dose was approached by quantitative clinical pharmacology.Patients and methodsA flat dose of 240 mg was selected based on its equivalence to the 3-mg/kg dose at the median BW of ∼80 kg in patients in the nivolumab program. The benefit–risk profile of nivolumab 240 mg was evaluated by comparing exposures at 3 mg/kg Q2W and 240 mg Q2W across BW and tumor types; clinical safety at 3 mg/kg Q2W by BW and exposure quartiles in melanoma, NSCLC, and RCC; and safety and efficacy at 240 mg Q2W relative to 3 mg/kg Q2W in melanoma, NSCLC, and RCC.ResultsThe median nivolumab exposure and its distribution at 240 mg Q2W were similar to 3 mg/kg Q2W in the simulated population. Safety analyses did not demonstrate a clinically meaningful relationship between BW or nivolumab exposure quartiles and frequency or severity of adverse events. The predicted safety and efficacy were similar across nivolumab exposure ranges achieved with 3 mg/kg Q2W or 240 mg Q2W flat dose.ConclusionBased on population pharmacokinetic modeling, established flat exposure–response relationships for efficacy and safety, and clinical safety, the benefit–risk profile of nivolumab 240 mg Q2W was comparable to 3 mg/kg Q2W. The quantitative clinical pharmacology approach provided evidence for regulatory decision-making on dose modification, obviating the need for an independent clinical study.     

Safety and pharmacokinetics of milademetan,a MDM2 inhibitor,in Japanese patients with solid tumors: A phase I study

Milademetan (DS-3032, RAIN-32) is an orally available mouse double minute 2 (MDM2) antagonist with potential antineoplastic activity owing to increase in p53 activity through interruption of the MDM2-p53 interaction. This phase I, dose-escalating study assessed the safety, tolerability, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of milademetan in 18 Japanese patients with solid tumors who relapsed after or were refractory to standard therapy. Patients aged ≥ 20 years received oral milademetan once daily (60 mg, n = 3; 90 mg, n = 11; or 120 mg, n = 4) on days 1 to 21 in a 28-day cycle. Dose-limiting toxicities, safety, tolerability, maximum tolerated dose, pharmacokinetics, and recommended dose for phase II were determined. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events included nausea (72.2%), decreased appetite (61.1%), platelet count decreased (61.1%), white blood cell count decreased (50.0%), fatigue (50.0%), and anemia (50.0%). Dose-limiting toxicities (three events of platelet count decreased and one nausea) were observed in the 120-mg cohort. The plasma concentrations of milademetan increased in a dose-dependent manner. Stable disease was observed in seven out of 16 patients (43.8%). Milademetan was well tolerated and showed modest antitumor activity in Japanese patients with solid tumors. The recommended dose for phase II was considered to be 90 mg in the once-daily 21/28-day schedule. Future studies would be needed to further evaluate the potential safety, tolerability, and clinical activity of milademetan in patients with solid tumors and lymphomas. The trial was registered with Clinicaltrials.jp: JapicCTI-142693.     

CheckMate 73L: A Phase 3 Study Comparing Nivolumab Plus Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Nivolumab With or Without Ipilimumab Versus Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Durvalumab for Previously Untreated,Locally Advanced Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

IntroductionThe 5 year survival rate for patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) not amenable for definitive resection with historical standard-of-care concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) ranges from 15% to 32%. cCRT primes anti-tumor immunity and also upregulates programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1), providing a rationale for combining an immune checkpoint inhibitor with cCRT to improve outcomes. In the PACIFIC trial, consolidation therapy with the PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) vs. placebo in patients with stage III NSCLC who did not have disease progression after cCRT. CheckMate73L (NCT04026412), a randomized phase 3 study, evaluates the efficacy of nivolumab plus cCRT followed by nivolumab with or without ipilimumab vs. cCRT followed by durvalumab for untreated, stage III NSCLC.Patients and MethodsPatients with untreated, stage III NSCLC will be randomized 1:1:1 to nivolumab plus cCRT followed by nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab (Arm A) or nivolumab alone (Arm B); or cCRT followed by durvalumab (Arm C). Primary endpoints are PFS and OS (Arm A vs. Arm C). Secondary endpoints include additional analyses of PFS and OS (Arm A vs. Arm B; Arm B vs. Arm C), as well as objective response rate, complete response rate, time to response, duration of response, time to death or distant metastases, and safety and tolerability. Recruitment began on August 20, 2019, and the estimated primary completion date is October 17, 2022.     

Safety and efficacy of nivolumab in the treatment of cancers: A meta‐analysis of 27 prospective clinical trials

Immune checkpoint inhibition therapy has benefited people and shown powerful anti‐tumor activity during the past several years. Nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 monoclonal antibody against PD‐1, is a widely studied immune checkpoint inhibitor for the treatment of cancers. To assess the safety and efficacy of nivolumab, 27 clinical trials on nivolumab were analyzed. Results showed that the summary risks of all grade adverse effects (AEs) and grade ≥3 AEs were 0.65 and 0.12. The rate of nivolumab‐related death was 0.25%. The most common any grade AEs were fatigue (25.1%), rush (13.0%), pruritus (12.5%), diarrhea (12.1%), nausea (11.8%) and asthenia (10.4%). The most common grade ≥3 AEs were hypophosphatemia (only 2.3%) and lymphopenia (only 2.1%). The pooled objective response rate (ORR), 6‐month progression‐free survival (PFS) rate and 1‐year overall survival (OS) rate were 0.26, 0.40 and 0.52, respectively. The odds ratio of ORR between PD‐L1 positive and negative was 2.34 (95% CI 1.77–3.10, p < 0.0001). The odds ratios of ORR, 6‐month PFS rate and 1‐year OS rate between nivolumab and chemotherapeutics were 2.77 (95% CI 1.69–4.56, p < 0.0001), 1.97 (95% CI 1.02–3.81, p = 0.04) and 1.87 (95% CI 1.46–2.40, p <0.0001), respectively. In conclusion, nivolumab has durable outcomes with tolerable AEs and drug‐related deaths in cancer patients. Nivolumab monotherapy has better treatment response compared with chemotherapy, whereas chemotherapeutics have significantly higher risk of adverse effects than nivolumab.     

Looking for the best immune‐checkpoint inhibitor in pre‐treated NSCLC patients: An indirect comparison between nivolumab,pembrolizumab and atezolizumab

Immune‐checkpoint inhibitors represent the new standard of care in patients with advanced NSCLC who progressed after first‐line treatment. This work aim to assess any difference in both efficacy and safety profiles among Nivolumab, Pembrolizumab and Atezolizumab in pre‐treated NSCLC patients. Randomized clinical trials comparing immune‐checkpoint inhibitor versus docetaxel in pre‐treated patients with advanced NSCLC were included and direct comparison meta‐analysis of selected trials have been performed. Subsequently the summary estimates of Nivolumab, Pembrolizumab and Atezolizumab emerging from the direct meta‐analysis were selected to provide the pooled estimates of hazard ratio (HR) and relative risk (RR) for the indirect comparisons among these agents. A total of 5 studies met the selection criteria and were included in the meta‐analysis. Indirect comparisons for efficacy outcomes showed the RR for ORR nivolumab versus atezolizumab 1.66 (95% CI 1.07?2.58), pembrolizumab versus atezolizumab 1.94 (95% CI 1.30?2.90). No significant differences in both PFS and OS have been observed. Indirect comparisons for safety showed the RR for G3‐5 AEs nivolumab versus pembrolizumab 0.41 (95% CI 0.29?0.60), nivolumab versus atezolizumab 0.50 (95% CI 0.35?0.72). No significant differences in both pneumonitis and discontinuation rate have been observed. The results of this work revealed that nivolumab and pembrolizumab are associated with a significant increase of ORR as compared to atezolizumab and nivolumab is associated with a significant lower incidence of G3‐5 AEs as compared to the other drugs. These evidences could support the oncologists to select the best drug for each patient.     

Infectious Complications Among Patients With AML Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

BackgroundThe incidence and spectrum of infections in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) in combination with a hypomethylating agents (HMAs) is not known. Nivolumab is a PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor approved in many solid tumors and lymphoma.Materials/MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of 75 adult patients at MD Anderson Cancer Center with relapsed/refractory AML treated with azacitidine and nivolumab or with nivolumab and ipilimumab from March 2016 through March 2020 and described the infectious complications that occurred during their treatment.ResultsSixty-four (85%) patients developed an infection during the study period, and bacterial infections were by far the most common type of infection. A comparison of risk factors and characteristic between the 75 patients on CPIs who developed infection and those who did not found that corticosteroid use (odds ratio [OR], 28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-490; P =.02) and lymphopenia (OR, 4; 95% CI, 1-15.5; P =.04) were significantly associated with infections.ConclusionPatient with relapsed/refractory AML treated with salvage CPI-based therapy were more likely to develop infections when treated with corticosteroids in the setting of an immune-related adverse event, compared to those who were not.     

First‐in‐human phase I study of E7090, a novel selective fibroblast growth factor receptor inhibitor,in patients with advanced solid tumors

Fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFR) are a family of transmembrane receptor tyrosine kinases involved in regulating cellular processes. FGFR mutations are implicated in oncogenesis, representing therapeutic potential in the form of FGFR inhibitors. This phase I, first‐in‐human study in Japan evaluated safety and tolerability of E7090, a potent selective FGFR1‐3 inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumors. Dose escalation (daily oral dose of 1‐180 mg) was carried out to assess dose‐limiting toxicity (DLT), maximum tolerated dose, and pharmacokinetics. Pharmacodynamic markers (serum phosphate, fibroblast growth factor 23, and 1,25‐(OH)₂‐vitamin D) were also evaluated. A total of 24 patients refractory to standard therapy or for whom no appropriate treatment was available were enrolled. No DLT were observed up to the 140‐mg dose; one patient in the 180‐mg cohort experienced a DLT (increased aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase, grade 3). The maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Dose‐dependent increases in the maximum concentration and area under the curve from time 0 to the last measurable concentration were observed up to 180 mg. Dose‐dependent increases were observed in all pharmacodynamic markers and plateaued at 100‐140 mg, indicating sufficient FGFR pathway inhibition at doses ≥100 mg. In conclusion, E7090 showed a manageable safety profile with no DLT at doses ≤140 mg. Maximum tolerated dose was not determined. The recommended dose for the follow‐up expansion part, restricted to patients with tumors harboring FGFR alterations, was determined as 140 mg, once daily.     

First-in-human study of ONO-4578, an antagonist of prostaglandin E2 receptor 4, alone and with nivolumab in solid tumors

EP4, a prostaglandin E₂ receptor, has shown an immunosuppressive activity on cancer cells. This first-in-human study evaluated ONO-4578, a highly selective EP4 antagonist, as monotherapy and in combination with nivolumab in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors. A daily dose ranging from 30 mg to 100 mg of ONO-4578 monotherapy and that ranging from 2 mg to 60 mg of ONO-4578 with biweekly nivolumab 240 mg were administered. A total of 31 patients were enrolled, 10 receiving monotherapy and 21 receiving combination therapy. Overall, 26 patients experienced treatment-related adverse events. Dose-limiting toxicities were observed in three patients; one of six patients receiving 100 mg monotherapy developed grade 3 duodenal ulcer and two of six patients receiving 60 mg combination therapy developed either grade 3 erythema multiforme or grade 3 increased amylase and grade 4 increased lipase. One patient with small-cell lung cancer who received 40 mg combination therapy had a partial response, and three patients with monotherapy and six patients with combination therapy had stable disease. Pharmacodynamics analyses showed that ONO-4578 had EP4 antagonistic activity at doses as low as 2 mg. In conclusion, the maximum tolerated dose of ONO-4578 alone or in combination with nivolumab was not reached. ONO-4578 was well tolerated at the tested doses and showed signs of antitumor activity. Considering safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics results, ONO-4578 40 mg daily with nivolumab 240 mg biweekly was selected as the recommended dose for future clinical trials. (Registration: JapicCTI-173,496 and NCT03155061).     

An update on the immune landscape in lung and head and neck cancers

Immunotherapy has dramatically changed the treatment landscape for patients with cancer. Programmed death–ligand 1/programmed death-1 checkpoint inhibitors have been in the forefront of this clinical revolution. Currently, there are 6 US Food and Drug Administration-approved checkpoint inhibitors for approximately 18 different histologic types of cancer. Lung cancer and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) are 2 diseases that have led the way in the development of immunotherapy. Atezolizumab, durvalumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab are all currently used as part of standard-of-care treatment for different stages of lung cancer. Similarly, nivolumab and pembrolizumab have US regulatory approval as treatment for advanced metastatic HNSCC. This is significant because lung cancer represents the most common and most fatal cancer globally, and HNSCC is the sixth most common. Currently, most of the approvals for the use of immunotherapy agents are for patients diagnosed in the metastatic setting. However, research is ongoing to evaluate these drugs in earlier stage disease. There is plausible biological rationale to expect that pharmacologic activation of the immune system will be effective for early-stage and smaller tumors. In addition, selecting patients who are more likely to respond to immunotherapy and understanding why resistance develops are crucial areas of ongoing research. The objective of this review was to provide an overview of the current immune landscape and future directions in lung cancer and HNSCC.