Explore the vast range of titles available.

PD-L1 and VEGF blockade with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab has been shown to improve survival in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. TIGIT is an immune checkpoint regulator implicated in many cancers, including unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Here, we evaluate the clinical activity and safety of the addition of tiragolumab, an anti-TIGIT monoclonal antibody, to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. This randomised, open-label, phase 1b–2 umbrella study was conducted at 26 centres across China, France, Israel, New Zealand, South Korea, Taiwan, and the USA. Eligible patients were adults aged 18 years old or older with previously untreated locally advanced unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1, Child-Pugh class A disease, and a life expectancy of at least 3 months. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1) using permuted block randomisation to receive either tiragolumab 600 mg plus atezolizumab 1200 mg plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg or atezolizumab 1200 mg plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg, administered via intravenous infusion every 3 weeks on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. Patients received treatment until unacceptable toxic effects or loss of clinical benefit, whichever occurred first. The primary endpoint was objective response rate. Analysis of clinical activity was done in the efficacy-evaluable population (all patients who received at least one dose of each drug for their assigned treatment regimen) and safety was assessed in all patients who received any study treatment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04524871, and is ongoing. Between Aug 20, 2020, and Feb 10, 2022, we assessed 154 patients for eligibility and 59 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive tiragolumab plus atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n=41) or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n=18); one patient in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group experienced an adverse event before receiving any treatment and withdrew from the study. Median age was 65·0 years (IQR 61·0–73·0). 46 (79%) of 58 patients were male and 12 (21%) were female. Most patients were Asian (23 [40%]) or White (21 [36%]). At the time of clinical cutoff (Aug 21, 2023), median follow-up was 20·6 months (IQR 10·6–28·0) in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 14·0 months (4·2–18·5) in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group. The confirmed objective response rate was 43% (95% CI 27–59, n=17) in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 11% (1–35, n=2) in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group. All patients in both groups experienced an adverse event. The incidence of pruritis (20 [50%] of 40 patients vs three [17%] of 18 patients), arthralgia (13 [33%] vs two [11%]), and diarrhoea (12 [30%] vs one [6%]) was notably higher in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group than in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group, although these were mainly grade 1–2. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were hypertension (six [15%] of 40 patients in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group vs two [11%] of 18 patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group), aspartate aminotransferase increased (three [8%] of 40 patients vs one [6%] of 18 patients), and proteinuria (two [5%] of 40 patients vs two [11%] of 18 patients). Serious adverse events occurred in 21 (53%) of 40 patients in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and in ten (56%) of 18 patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in one patient in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group (due to cholestasis) and two patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group (due to oesophageal varices haemorrhage and upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage). The addition of tiragolumab to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab did not appear to result in a substantial worsening of treatment-related or immune-mediated adverse events, and no new safety signals were identified. This signal-seeking study suggests that the addition of tiragolumab to atezolizumab and bevacizumab might be more clinically active than atezolizumab plus bevacizumab alone in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Based on these data, further study of combination tiragolumab plus atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is warranted. F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

Background The MORPHEUS platform comprises multiple open-label, randomized, phase Ib/II trials designed to identify early efficacy and safety signals of treatment combinations across cancers. Atezolizumab (anti-programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 [PD-L1]) was evaluated in combination with PEGylated recombinant human hyaluronidase (PEGPH20). Methods In 2 randomized MORPHEUS trials, eligible patients with advanced, previously treated pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) or gastric cancer (GC) received atezolizumab plus PEGPH20, or control treatment (mFOLFOX6 or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel [MORPHEUS-PDAC]; ramucirumab plus paclitaxel [MORPHEUS-GC]). Primary endpoints were objective response rates (ORR) per RECIST 1.1 and safety. Results In MORPHEUS-PDAC, ORRs with atezolizumab plus PEGPH20 (n = 66) were 6.1% (95% CI, 1.68%-14.80%) vs. 2.4% (95% CI, 0.06%-12.57%) with chemotherapy (n = 42). In the respective arms, 65.2% and 61.9% had grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs); 4.5% and 2.4% had grade 5 AEs. In MORPHEUS-GC, confirmed ORRs with atezolizumab plus PEGPH20 (n = 13) were 0% (95% CI, 0%-24.7%) vs. 16.7% (95% CI, 2.1%-48.4%) with control (n = 12). Grade 3/4 AEs occurred in 30.8% and 75.0% of patients, respectively; no grade 5 AEs occurred. Conclusion Atezolizumab plus PEGPH20 showed limited clinical activity in patients with PDAC and none in patients with GC. The safety of atezolizumab plus PEGPH20 was consistent with each agent’s known safety profile. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03193190 and NCT03281369). In this clinical trial, atezolizumab was evaluated in combination with PEGPH20 to assess clinical activity in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma or gastric cancer.

As the field of cancer immunotherapy continues to advance at a fast pace, treatment approaches and drug development are evolving rapidly to maximize patient benefit. New agents are commonly evaluated for activity in patients who had previously received a programmed death receptor 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor as standard of care or in an investigational study. However, because of the kinetics and patterns of response to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade, and the lack of consistency in the clinical definitions of resistance to therapy, the design of clinical trials of new agents and interpretation of results remains an important challenge. To address this unmet need, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer convened a multistakeholder taskforce—consisting of experts in cancer immunotherapy from academia, industry, and government—to generate consensus clinical definitions for resistance to PD-(L)1 inhibitors in three distinct scenarios: primary resistance, secondary resistance, and progression after treatment discontinuation. The taskforce generated consensus on several key issues such as the timeframes that delineate each type of resistance, the necessity for confirmatory scans, and identified caveats for each specific resistance classification. The goal of this effort is to provide guidance for clinical trial design and to support analyses of emerging molecular and cellular data surrounding mechanisms of resistance.

There is an unmet need for additional and more efficacious therapies for patients with unresectable metastatic oesophageal cancer. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding tiragolumab and atezolizumab to chemotherapy as first-line treatment for unresectable or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The SKYSCRAPER-08 randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial was done at 67 centres in mainland China, South Korea, Thailand, Taiwan, and Hong Kong and enrolled adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with treatment-naive, unresectable locally advanced, unresectable recurrent, or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive tiragolumab (600 mg) plus atezolizumab (1200 mg) and chemotherapy (paclitaxel [175 mg/m2] and cisplatin [60–80 mg/m2]) or placebo and chemotherapy through intravenous infusion for six 21-day cycles. The primary outcomes were independent review facility-assessed progression-free survival and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population (defined as all randomly assigned patients, regardless of whether they received any study treatment). This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04540211, and is ongoing. Between Oct 30, 2020, and Nov 30, 2021, 461 patients were assigned to receive tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and chemotherapy (n=229) or placebo and chemotherapy (n=232); 406 (88%) were male and 55 (12%) female, and all patients were Asian. Median survival follow-up was 12·6 months (IQR 6·8–18·0). Median independent review facility-assessed progression-free survival (cutoff June 15, 2022) in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and chemotherapy group was 6·2 months (95% CI 5·7–7·2) versus 5·4 months (95% CI 4·4–5·5) in the placebo and chemotherapy group (HR 0·56, 95% CI 0·45–0·70; p<0·0001). Median overall survival (cutoff Feb 13, 2023) was 15·7 months (95% CI 13·3–20·4) and 11·1 months (95% CI 9·6–13·6; HR 0·70, 95% CI 0·55–0·88; p=0·0024). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and chemotherapy group versus the placebo and chemotherapy group were white blood cell count decrease (46 [20%] of 228 vs 35 [15%] of 227), neutrophil count decrease (78 [34%] vs 78 [34%]), and anaemia (19 [8%] vs 24 [11%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 94 (41%) of 228 patients in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and chemotherapy group and 89 (39%) of 227 in the placebo and chemotherapy group; the most common serious adverse event was pneumonia (17 [7%] of 228 and 13 [6%] of 227). Treatment-related deaths occurred in six patients (3%) in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and chemotherapy group (immune-mediated lung disease, pneumonitis, cardiac arrest, gastrointestinal haemorrhage, hepatic failure, and bacterial pneumonia) and two (1%) in the placebo and chemotherapy group (gastrointestinal infection and death of unknown cause). No new safety signals were identified. Independent review facility-assessed progression-free survival and overall survival were significantly better in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and chemotherapy group compared with chemotherapy alone for unresectable locally advanced, unresectable recurrent, or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. These data support the rationale for exploring dual checkpoint inhibition added to chemotherapy for this group of patients with a high unmet need. F Hoffmann-La Roche–Genentech.

Chemotherapy, with or without immunotherapy, is a standard of care for first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic oesophageal cancer. However, outcomes remain poor. We aimed to evaluate the activity and safety of tiragolumab, an anti-TIGIT monoclonal antibody, plus atezolizumab, an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody, and chemotherapy in treatment-naive locally advanced unresectable or metastatic oesophageal cancer. MORPHEUS-EC is a phase 1b/2, randomised, open-label, umbrella study done at 20 sites in Taiwan, South Korea, Australia, Israel, the UK, and the USA. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had treatment-naive, locally advanced unresectable or metastatic oesophageal cancer, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1. Patients were randomly assigned using a permuted-block method to receive tiragolumab (600 mg intravenously every 21 days) plus atezolizumab (1200 mg intravenously every 21 days) and chemotherapy (cisplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously every 21 days plus intavenous fluorouracil 800 mg/m2 per 24 h on days 1–5 of each 21 day cycle), or atezolizumab and chemotherapy, or chemotherapy alone. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1 in patients who received at least one dose of each drug for their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03281369, and is ongoing. Between June 5, 2020 and Nov 8, 2022, 152 patients were assigned to the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and chemotherapy (n=63), atezolizumab and chemotherapy (n=65), or chemotherapy (n=24) groups (136 [89%] were male and 16 [11%] were female, 98 [64%] were Asian and 50 [33%] were White). Median survival follow-up was 10·9 months (IQR 7·1–17·3) in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and chemotherapy group, 11·4 months (IQR 7·9–14·7) in the atezolizumab and chemotherapy group, and 8·7 months (3·9–12·0) in the chemotherapy group. Investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate was 67·7% (95% CI 54·7–79·1; 42 of 62 patients) in the tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and chemotherapy group, 53·8% (41·0–66·3; 35 of 65) in the atezolizumab and chemotherapy group, and 47·8% (26·8–69·4; 11 of 23 patients) in the chemotherapy group. 49 (79%) of 62, 52 (80%) of 65, and 17 (74%) of 23 patients had a grade 3–4 adverse event in each group respectively, and 36 (58%) of 62, 33 (51%) of 65, and 11 (48%) of 23 had a serious adverse event. The most common treatment-related adverse events were nausea (46 [74%] of 62, 47 [72%] of 65, and 18 [78%] of 23) and decreased appetite (29 [47%], 29 [45%], and 10 [43%]). No deaths were treatment related. These results support the additional benefit of tiragolumab combined with atezolizumab and chemotherapy for patients with treatment-naive, locally advanced unresectable or metastatic oesophageal cancer. Further validation of tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and chemotherapy has been performed in the phase 3 SKYSCRAPER-08 trial (NCT04540211). F Hoffmann-La Roche–Genentech.

BackgroundXL092 is a novel oral multi-targeted inhibitor of receptor tyrosine kinases. In preclinical studies, oral dosing with XL092 resulted in pharmacodynamic inhibition of MET, TAM kinases (AXL, MER), and VEGFR2 phosphorylation and was associated with significant anti-tumor activity in xenograft tumor models. Drugs targeting TAM kinases may promote an immune-permissive environment, which may enhance response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). The combination of XL092 and anti–PD-1 ICI exhibited greater anti-tumor activity in a syngeneic tumor model than either agent alone.[1] Preliminary XL092 pharmacokinetic data indicate a median terminal half-life of 21 hours, suitable for daily dosing.MethodsThis multi-center, phase 1, open-label study aims to enroll approximately 800 patients total in dose-escalation and cohort-expansion stages (NCT03845166). The dose-escalation stage will enroll patients with inoperable locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors in a 3+3 design (monotherapy cohorts) or rolling 6 design (combination cohorts). Patients will receive escalating doses of XL092 alone or in combination with ICIs (atezolizumab 1200mg Q3W or avelumab 800mg Q2W). Following identification of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and/or recommended dose (RD) of XL092 monotherapy, the expansion stage will enroll XL092 monotherapy cohorts in 3 tumor-specific indications (renal cell carcinoma [RCC], metastatic castration-resistant prostate carcinoma [mCRPC], and hormone-receptor positive breast carcinoma [HR+ BC]) using a Simon’s optimal 2-stage design. Once the MTDs/RDs are identified for XL092 in combination with each ICI, the expansion stage will also enroll patients in tumor-specific cohorts for XL092+atezolizumab (RCC, mCRPC, HR+ BC, and colorectal carcinoma) and XL092+avelumab (urothelial carcinoma) using Simon’s optimal 2-stage design or a Precision-Based design. A limited number of patients will be enrolled in dedicated biomarker cohorts, with tumor and blood samples collected, to evaluate the pharmacodynamic effects of XL092 alone and in combination with ICIs. Key eligibility criteria include unresectable or metastatic solid tumors; measurable disease per RECIST 1.1 (expansion cohorts only); available tumor tissue (archival or fresh biopsy); and ECOG 0-1. The primary objective of the dose-escalation stage is to determine MTDs/RDs of XL092 when administered alone or in combination with ICIs, and the primary objective of the expansion stage is to evaluate objective response rate and progression-free survival rate by investigator per RECIST 1.1 of XL092 as monotherapy or in combination with ICIs. Secondary objectives include evaluation of the safety of XL092 alone and in combination with ICIs and evaluation of plasma pharmacokinetics of XL092 and its potential metabolites. The study is open for enrollment.AcknowledgementsMedical writing support provided by Griselda Zuccarino-Catania, PhD (Exelixis, Inc.)Trial RegistrationNCT03845166ReferencesHsu J, Chong C, Goon L, et al. XL092, a Multi-targeted Inhibitor of MET, VEGFR2, AXL and MER with an Optimized Pharmacokinetic Profile. European Journal of Cancer [abstract 33] 2020;138 Suppl 2:S16.Ethics ApprovalStudy approved by institutional Review Boards at each investigational site.

No adjuvant treatment has been established for patients who remain at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after curative-intent resection or ablation. We aimed to assess the efficacy of adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance in patients with high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma. In the global, open-label, phase 3 IMbrave050 study, adult patients with high-risk surgically resected or ablated hepatocellular carcinoma were recruited from 134 hospitals and medical centres in 26 countries in four WHO regions (European region, region of the Americas, South-East Asia region, and Western Pacific region). Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio via an interactive voice–web response system using permuted blocks, using a block size of 4, to receive intravenous 1200 mg atezolizumab plus 15 mg/kg bevacizumab every 3 weeks for 17 cycles (12 months) or to active surveillance. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival by independent review facility assessment in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04102098. The intention-to-treat population included 668 patients randomly assigned between Dec 31, 2019, and Nov 25, 2021, to either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n=334) or to active surveillance (n=334). At the prespecified interim analysis (Oct 21, 2022), median duration of follow-up was 17·4 months (IQR 13·9–22·1). Adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was associated with significantly improved recurrence-free survival (median, not evaluable [NE]; [95% CI 22·1–NE]) compared with active surveillance (median, NE [21·4–NE]; hazard ratio, 0·72 [adjusted 95% CI 0·53–0·98]; p=0·012). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 136 (41%) of 332 patients who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 44 (13%) of 330 patients in the active surveillance group. Grade 5 adverse events occurred in six patients (2%, two of which were treatment related) in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group, and one patient (<1%) in the active surveillance group. Both atezolizumab and bevacizumab were discontinued because of adverse events in 29 patients (9%) who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Among patients at high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence following curative-intent resection or ablation, recurrence-free survival was improved in those who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance. To our knowledge, IMbrave050 is the first phase 3 study of adjuvant treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma to report positive results. However, longer follow-up for both recurrence-free and overall survival is needed to assess the benefit–risk profile more fully. F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.

Treatment for advanced prostate cancer has and will continue to grow increasingly complex, owing to the introduction of multiple new therapeutic approaches with the potential to substantially improve outcomes for this disease. Agents that modulate the patient's immune system to fight prostate cancer – immunotherapeutics – are among the most exciting of these new approaches. The addition of antigen‐specific immunotherapy to the treatment of castration‐resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) has paved the way for additional research that seeks to augment the activity of the immune system itself. The monoclonal antibody ipilimumab, approved in over 40 countries to treat advanced melanoma and currently under phase 2 and 3 investigation in prostate cancer, is thought to act by augmenting immune responses to tumors through blockade of cytotoxic T‐lymphocyte antigen 4, an inhibitory immune checkpoint molecule. Ipilimumab has been studied in seven phase 1 and 2 clinical trials that evaluated various doses, schedules, and combinations across the spectrum of patients with advanced prostate cancer. The CRPC studies of ipilimumab to date suggest that the agent is active in prostate cancer as monotherapy or in combination with radiotherapy, docetaxel, or other immunotherapeutics, and that the adverse event profile is as expected given the safety data in advanced melanoma. The ongoing phase 3 program will further characterize the risk/benefit profile of ipilimumab in chemotherapy‐naïve and ‐pretreated CRPC. Ipilimumab, a cytotoxic T‐lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA‐4)‐blocking monoclonal antibody, is thought to augment natural immune responses to tumors. Ipilimumab is approved in several countries to treat advanced melanoma, and it is now under phase 3 investigation in prostate cancer based on the results of 7 smaller clinical trials, as reviewed in this article.

Melanoma treatment has progressed in the past decade with the development and approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting programmed death 1 (PD-1) or its ligand (PD-L1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4, as well as small molecule inhibitors of BRAF and/or MEK for the subgroup of patients with BRAFV600 mutations1–9. BRAF/MEK-targeted therapies have effects on the tumor microenvironment that support their combination with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors10–20. This phase Ib study (ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01656642) evaluated the safety and anti-tumor activity of combining atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) with vemurafenib (BRAF inhibitor), or cobimetinib (MEK inhibitor) + vemurafenib, in patients with BRAFV600-mutated metastatic melanoma. Triple combination therapy with atezolizumab + cobimetinib + vemurafenib, after a 28-d run-in period with cobimetinib + vemurafenib, had substantial but manageable toxicity. Exploratory biomarker data show that the cobimetinib + vemurafenib run-in was associated with an increase in proliferating CD4+ T-helper cells but not with an increase in T-regulatory cells, as observed in the vemurafenib-only run-in period. The confirmed objective response rate was 71.8% (95% confidence interval 55.1–85.0). The estimated median duration of response was 17.4 months (95% confidence interval 10.6–25.3) with ongoing response in 39.3% of patients after 29.9 months of follow-up. Further investigation in a phase III trial is underway.Treatment with BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors followed by addition of anti-PD-L1 in BRAF-mutant melanoma patients is safe and shows promising anti-tumor activity.

Cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA4) represents a crucial immune checkpoint, the blockade of which can potentiate anti-tumour immunity. This treatment in patients with advance prostate cancer may provide insights into the targets that the immune system recognizes to drive tumour regression. Although cancer cells can be immunogenic, tumour progression is associated with the evasion of immunosurveillance, the promotion of tumour tolerance and even the production of pro-tumorigenic factors by immune cells. Cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA4) represents a crucial immune checkpoint, the blockade of which can potentiate anti-tumour immunity. CTLA4-blocking antibodies are now an established therapeutic approach for malignant melanoma, and clinical trials with CTLA4-specific antibodies in prostate cancer have also shown clinical activity. This treatment may provide insights into the targets that the immune system recognizes to drive tumour regression, and could potentially improve both outcome and toxicity for patients with prostate cancer.