Osama E. Rahma

Second-line treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer: a comprehensive analysis of published clinical trials

BACKGROUND There is currently no standard of care for the second-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. The aim of this analysis was to compare the different therapeutic approaches in this setting. METHODS We carried out a systematic analysis of second-line studies in advanced pancreatic cancer that have progressed on or following gemcitabine and published or presented from 2000 to 2012. RESULTS Forty-four clinical trials (t) were identified; of which 34 met the inclusion criteria treating an aggregate total of 1503 patients (n). Patients who received treatments (t: 33; n: 1269) had a median overall survival (OS) of 6 months compared with 2.8 months for patients who received best supportive care only (t: 2; n: 234) (P = 0.013). The gemcitabine and platinum-based combination (t: 5; n: 154) provided a median progression-free survival and OS of 4 and 6 months compared with 1.6 and 5.3 for the rest of the regimens (t: 29; n: 1349) (P = 0.059 and 0.10, respectively) and 2.9 and 5.7 for the combination of 5-fluorouracil and platinum agents (t: 12; n: 450) (P = 0.60 and 0.22, respectively). CONCLUSION(S) Although not conclusive, these data showed that the advantage of second-line chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer is very limited and there is a need for more studies.

Tremelimumab in combination with ablation in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS Tremelimumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that binds to cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) on the surface of activated T lymphocytes. Ablative therapies induce a peripheral immune response which may enhance the effect of anti-CTLA4 treatment in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study aimed to demonstrate whether tremelimumab could be combined safely and feasibly with ablation. METHODS Thirty-two patients with HCC were enrolled: male:female: 28:4; median age: 62 (range 36-76). Patients were given tremelimumab at two dose levels (3.5 and 10mg/kg i.v.) every 4weeks for 6 doses, followed by 3-monthly infusions until off-treatment criteria were met. On day 36, patients underwent subtotal radiofrequency ablation or chemoablation. Staging was performed by contrast-enhanced CT or MRI scan every 8weeks. RESULTS No dose-limiting toxicities were encountered. The most common toxicity was pruritus. Of the 19 evaluable patients, five (26.3%; 95% CI: 9.1-51.2%) achieved a confirmed partial response. Twelve of 14 patients with quantifiable HCV experienced a marked reduction in viral load. Six-week tumor biopsies showed a clear increase in CD8+ T cells in patients showing a clinical benefit only. Six and 12-month probabilities of tumor progression free survival for this refractory HCC population were 57.1% and 33.1% respectively, with median time to tumor progression of 7.4months (95% CI 4.7 to 19.4months). Median overall survival was 12.3months (95% CI 9.3 to 15.4months). CONCLUSIONS Tremelimumab in combination with tumor ablation is a potential new treatment for patients with advanced HCC, and leads to the accumulation of intratumoral CD8+ T cells. Positive clinical activity was seen, with a possible surrogate reduction in HCV viral load. LAY SUMMARY Studies have shown that the killing of tumors by direct methods (known as ablation) can result in the immune system being activated or switched on. The immune system could potentially also recognize and kill the cancer that is left behind. There are new drugs available known as immune checkpoint inhibitors which could enhance this effect. Here, we test one of these drugs (tremelimumab) together with ablation. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01853618.

From bench to bedside a comprehensive review of pancreatic cancer immunotherapy

The incidence of pancreatic cancer has been increasing while its 5-year survival rate has not changed in decades. In the era of personalized medicine, immunotherapy has emerged as a promising treatment modality in a variety of malignancies, including pancreatic cancer. This review will discuss the unique pancreatic tumor microenvironment, including the cells and receptors that transform the pancreas from its normal architecture into a complex mix of suppressor immune cells and dense extracellular matrix that allows for the unrestricted growth of cancer cells. Next, we will highlight the recently completed immunotherapy clinical trials in pancreatic cancer. Finally, we will explore the on-going immunotherapy clinical trials and future directions of this engaging and changing field.

Earlier presentation and application of curative treatments in hepatocellular carcinoma

The purpose of the study was to assess the use of curative therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the population. HCC treatment patterns were examined in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) 18 registries (28% of U.S.). Joinpoint regression analyses were performed to assess 2000‐2010 incidence trends by tumor size, count, and receipt of potentially curative treatments (transplantation, resection, and ablation). SEER‐Medicare data enabled evaluation of treatment patterns including receipt of sorafenib or transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) by HCC‐associated comorbidities. Diagnoses of tumors ≤5.0 cm in diameter significantly increased during 2000‐2010, surpassing diagnosis of larger tumors. Overall, 23% of cases received potentially curative treatment. Joinpoint models indicated incidence rates of treatment with curative intent increased 17.6% per year during 2000‐2005, then declined by −2.9% per year during 2005‐2010 (P < 0.001). Among HCC cases with a single tumor ≤5.0 cm and no extension beyond the liver, use of ablative therapy significantly increased during 2000‐2010. Use of invasive surgery for single tumors, regardless of size, significantly increased during the initial years of the decade, then plateaued. The group most likely to receive curative treatment in the SEER‐Medicare cases was patients with one, small tumor confined to the liver (657 of 1,597 cases, 41%), with no difference in treatment by hepatic comorbidity status (P = 0.24). A higher proportion of cases with reported liver‐associated comorbidities were, however, diagnosed with tumors ≤5.0 cm in diameter (1,745 0f 2,464, 71%) compared to patients with no reported comorbidities (996 of 2,596, 38%, P < 0.001). Conclusion: Although more HCC patients were diagnosed with early disease over time, the use of curative treatments in this patient group has recently plateaued. Efforts to identify and treat more eligible candidates for curative therapy could be beneficial. (Hepatology 2014;60:1637–1644)

The immunological and clinical effects of mutated ras peptide vaccine in combination with IL-2, GM-CSF, or both in patients with solid tumors

BackgroundMutant Ras oncogenes produce proteins that are unique to cancer cells and represent attractive targets for vaccine therapy. We have shown previously that vaccinating cancer patients with mutant ras peptides is feasible and capable of inducing a specific immune response against the relevant mutant proteins. Here, we tested the mutant ras peptide vaccine administered in combination with low dose interleukin-2 (IL-2) or/and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in order to enhance the vaccine immune response.Methods5000μg of the corresponding mutant ras peptide was given subcutaneously (SQ) along with IL-2 (Arm A), GM-CSF (Arm B) or both (Arm C). IL-2 was given SQ at 6.0 million IU/m2/day starting at day 5, 5 days/week for 2 weeks. GM-CSF was given SQ in a dose of 100μg/day one day prior to each ras peptide vaccination for 4 days. Vaccines were repeated every 5 weeks on arm A and C, and every 4 weeks on arm B, for a maximum of 15 cycles or until disease progression.ResultsWe treated 53 advanced cancer patients (38 with colorectal, 11 with pancreatic, 1 with common bile duct and 3 with lung) on 3 different arms (16 on arm A, 18 on arm B, and 19 on arm C). The median progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was 3.6 and 16.9 months, respectively, for all patients evaluable for clinical response (n = 48). There was no difference in PFS or OS between the three arms (P = 0.73 and 0.99, respectively). Most adverse events were grade 1-2 toxicities and resolved spontaneously. The vaccine induced an immune response to the relevant ras peptide in a total of 20 out of 37 evaluable patients (54%) by ELISPOT, proliferative assay, or both. While 92.3% of patients on arm B had a positive immune response, only 31% of patients on arm A and 36% of patients on arm C had positive immune responses (P = 0.003, Fisher’s exact test).ConclusionsThe reported data showed that IL-2 might have a negative effect on the specific immune response induced by the relevant mutant ras vaccine in patients with advanced cancer. This observation deserves further investigations.Trial registrationNCI97C0141

A pilot clinical trial testing mutant von Hippel- Lindau peptide as a novel immune therapy in metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

BackgroundDue to the lack of specific tumor antigens, the majority of tested cancer vaccines for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are based on tumor cell lysate. The identification of the von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) gene mutations in RCC patients provided the potential for developing a novel targeted vaccine for RCC. In this pilot study, we tested the feasibility of vaccinating advanced RCC patients with the corresponding mutant VHL peptides.MethodsSix patients with advanced RCC and mutated VHL genes were vaccinated with the relevant VHL peptides. Patients were injected with the peptide mixed with Montanide subcutaneously (SQ) every 4 weeks until disease progression or until the utilization of all available peptide stock.ResultsFour out of five evaluable patients (80%) generated specific immune responses against the corresponding mutant VHL peptides. The vaccine was well tolerated. No grade III or IV toxicities occurred. The median overall survival (OS) and median progression-free survival (PFS) were 30.5 and 6.5 months, respectively.ConclusionsThe vaccine demonstrated safety and proved efficacy in generating specific immune response to the mutant VHL peptide. Despite the fact that the preparation of these custom-made vaccines is time consuming, the utilization of VHL as a vaccine target presents a promising approach because of the lack of other specific targets for RCC. Accordingly, developing mutant VHL peptides as vaccines for RCC warrants further investigation in larger trials. Trial registration: 98C0139

Beyond melanoma: inhibiting the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway in solid tumors.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have been identified as breakthrough treatment in melanoma given its dramatic response to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade. This is likely to extend to many other cancers as hundreds of clinical trials are being conducted or proposed using this exciting modality of therapy in a variety of malignancies. While immune checkpoint inhibitors have been extensively studied in melanoma and more recently in lung cancer, little is known regarding immune checkpoint blockade in other cancers. This review will focus on the tumor immune microenvironment, the expression of PD-1/PD-L1 and the effect of immune modulation using PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with head and neck, prostate, urothelial, renal, breast, gastrointestinal and lung cancers.

A phase II study of TRC105 in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who have progressed on sorafenib

Background Endoglin is an endothelial cell membrane receptor essential for angiogenesis and highly expressed on the vasculature of many tumor types, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). TRC105 is a chimeric IgG1 anti-CD105 monoclonal antibody that inhibits angiogenesis and tumor growth by endothelial cell growth inhibition, ADCC and apoptosis, and complements VEGF inhibitors. Objective The aim of this phase II study was to evaluate the efficacy of anti-endoglin therapy with TRC105 in patients with advanced HCC, post-sorafenib. Methods Patients with HCC and compensated liver function (Childs-Pugh A/B7), ECOG 0/1, were enrolled to a single-arm, phase II study of TRC105 15 mg/kg IV every two weeks. Patients must have progressed on or been intolerant of prior sorafenib. A Simon optimal two-stage design was employed with a 50% four-month PFS target for progression to the second stage. Correlative biomarkers evaluated included DCE-MRI as well as plasma levels of angiogenic biomarkers and soluble CD105. Results A total accrual of 27 patients was planned. However, because of lack of efficacy and in accordance with the Simon two-stage design, 11 patients were enrolled. There were no grade 3/4 treatment-related toxicities. Most frequent toxicities were headache (G2; N = 3) and epistaxis (G1; N = 4). One patient had a confirmed partial response by standard RECIST criteria and biologic response on DCE-MRI but the four-month PFS was insufficient to proceed to the second stage of the study. Conclusions: TRC105 was well tolerated in this HCC population following sorafenib. Although there was evidence of clinical activity, this did not meet prespecified criteria to proceed to the second stage. TRC105 development in HCC continues as combination therapy with sorafenib.

Is the “3+3” Dose-Escalation Phase I Clinical Trial Design Suitable for Therapeutic Cancer Vaccine Development? A Recommendation for Alternative Design

Purpose: Phase I clinical trials are generally conducted to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or the biologically active dose (BAD) using a traditional dose-escalation design. This design may not be applied to cancer vaccines, given their unique mechanism of action. The FDA recently published “Guidance for Industry: Clinical Considerations for Therapeutic Cancer Vaccines.” However, many questions about the design of cancer vaccine studies remain unanswered. Experimental Design: We analyzed the toxicity profile in 239 phase I therapeutic cancer vaccine trials. We addressed the ability of dose escalation to determine the MTD or the BAD in trials that used a dose-escalation design. Results: The rate of grade 3/4 vaccine-related systemic toxicities was 1.25 adverse events per 100 patients and 2 per 1,000 vaccines. Only two of the 127 dose-escalation trials reported vaccine-related dose limiting toxicities, both of which used bacterial vector vaccines. Out of the 116 trials analyzed for the dose–immune response relationship, we found a statistically significant dose–immune response correlation only when the immune response was measured by antibodies (P < 0.001) or delayed type hypersensitivity (P < 0.05). However, the increase in cellular immune response did not appear further sustainable with the continued increase in dose. Conclusions: Our analysis suggests that the risks of serious toxicities with therapeutic cancer vaccines are extremely low and that toxicities do not correlate with dose levels. Accordingly, the conventional dose-escalation design is not suitable for cancer vaccines with few exceptions. Here, we propose an alternative design for therapeutic cancer vaccine development. Clin Cancer Res; 20(18); 4758–67. ©2014 AACR.

Modulation of tumor eIF4E by antisense inhibition: A phase I/II translational clinical trial of ISIS 183750 – an antisense oligonucleotide against eIF4E – in combination with irinotecan in solid tumors and irinotecan‐refractory colorectal cancer

The eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4E (eIF4E) is a potent oncogene that is found to be dysregulated in 30% of human cancer, including colorectal carcinogenesis (CRC). ISIS 183750 is a second‐generation antisense oligonucleotide (ASO) designed to inhibit the production of the eIF4E protein. In preclinical studies we found that EIF4e ASOs reduced expression of EIF4e mRNA and inhibited proliferation of colorectal carcinoma cells. An additive antiproliferative effect was observed in combination with irinotecan. We then performed a clinical trial evaluating this combination in patients with refractory cancer. No dose‐limiting toxicities were seen but based on pharmacokinetic data and tolerability the dose of irinotecan was reduced to 160 mg/m2 biweekly. Efficacy was evaluated in 15 patients with irinotecan‐refractory colorectal cancer. The median time of disease control was 22.1 weeks. After ISIS 183750 treatment, peripheral blood levels of eIF4E mRNA were decreased in 13 of 19 patients. Matched pre‐ and posttreatment tumor biopsies showed decreased eIF4E mRNA levels in five of nine patients. In tumor tissue, the intracellular and stromal presence of ISIS 183750 was detected by IHC in all biopsied patients. Although there were no objective responses stable disease was seen in seven of 15 (47%) patients who were progressing before study entry, six of whom were stable at the time of the week 16 CT scan. We were also able to confirm through mandatory pre‐ and posttherapy tumor biopsies penetration of the ASO into the site of metastasis.