Sandip Pravin Patel1, Edward Mayerson2,3, Young Kwang Chae4, Jonathan Strosberg5, Jue Wang6, Bhavana Konda7, Jourdain Hayward8, Christine M McLeod8, Helen X Chen9, Elad Sharon9, Megan Othus2,3, Christopher W Ryan10, Melissa Plets2,3, Charles D Blanke11, Razelle Kurzrock1. 1. Moores Cancer Center, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California. 2. SWOG Statistical Center, Seattle, Washington. 3. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington. 4. Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois. 5. Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida. 6. University of Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona. 7. Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio. 8. SWOG Data Operations Center/Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, Washington. 9. Investigational Drug Branch, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland. 10. Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon. 11. SWOG Group Chair's Office, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The authors previously reported the results of the nonpancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm cohort of the SWOG S1609 DART (Dual Anti-CTLA-4 and Anti-PD-1 Blockade in Rare Tumors) trial, which permitted all histologic grades and had a 44% overall response rate (ORR) among patients with high-grade disease. Here they sought to validate their findings in a dedicated prospective cohort of high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms within S1609. METHODS: A prospective, open-label, multicenter, phase 2 clinical trial of ipilimumab plus nivolumab was conducted across multiple rare tumor cohorts. The dedicated, high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasm cohort was examined here. The primary end point was the ORR according to version 1.1 of the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. RESULTS: Nineteen patients with high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms (defined by local pathology review) were enrolled in this cohort of S1609. The most common primary sites were unknown primaries (21%), which were followed by the rectum, gastroesophageal junction, cervix, and pancreas (11%). The median number of lines of prior therapy was 1 (range, 0-3). All patients were microsatellite-stable. The median Ki-67 value was 80%. The ORR was 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11%-45%), and the clinical benefit rate (stable disease for ≥6 months plus partial responses plus complete responses) was 32% (95% CI, 13%-57%). The 6-month PFS rate was 32% (95% CI, 16%-61%) with a median PFS of 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.8 months to ∞) and a median OS of 8.7 months (95% CI, 6.1 months to ∞). The most common toxicities were fatigue (32%) and rash (26%), and the most common grade 3/4 immune-related adverse event was rash (15%); there were no events that required treatment discontinuation and no grade 5 events. CONCLUSIONS: Ipilimumab plus nivolumab demonstrated a 26% ORR in patients with high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms, with durable responses seen in patients with refractory disease.
BACKGROUND: The authors previously reported the results of the nonpancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm cohort of the SWOG S1609 DART (Dual Anti-CTLA-4 and Anti-PD-1 Blockade in Rare Tumors) trial, which permitted all histologic grades and had a 44% overall response rate (ORR) among patients with high-grade disease. Here they sought to validate their findings in a dedicated prospective cohort of high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms within S1609. METHODS: A prospective, open-label, multicenter, phase 2 clinical trial of ipilimumab plus nivolumab was conducted across multiple rare tumor cohorts. The dedicated, high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasm cohort was examined here. The primary end point was the ORR according to version 1.1 of the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. RESULTS: Nineteen patients with high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms (defined by local pathology review) were enrolled in this cohort of S1609. The most common primary sites were unknown primaries (21%), which were followed by the rectum, gastroesophageal junction, cervix, and pancreas (11%). The median number of lines of prior therapy was 1 (range, 0-3). All patients were microsatellite-stable. The median Ki-67 value was 80%. The ORR was 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11%-45%), and the clinical benefit rate (stable disease for ≥6 months plus partial responses plus complete responses) was 32% (95% CI, 13%-57%). The 6-month PFS rate was 32% (95% CI, 16%-61%) with a median PFS of 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.8 months to ∞) and a median OS of 8.7 months (95% CI, 6.1 months to ∞). The most common toxicities were fatigue (32%) and rash (26%), and the most common grade 3/4 immune-related adverse event was rash (15%); there were no events that required treatment discontinuation and no grade 5 events. CONCLUSIONS: Ipilimumab plus nivolumab demonstrated a 26% ORR in patients with high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms, with durable responses seen in patients with refractory disease.
Authors: M Heetfeld; C N Chougnet; I H Olsen; A Rinke; I Borbath; G Crespo; J Barriuso; M Pavel; D O'Toole; T Walter Journal: Endocr Relat Cancer Date: 2015-06-25 Impact factor: 5.678
Authors: Hussein A Tawbi; Peter A Forsyth; Alain Algazi; Omid Hamid; F Stephen Hodi; Stergios J Moschos; Nikhil I Khushalani; Karl Lewis; Christopher D Lao; Michael A Postow; Michael B Atkins; Marc S Ernstoff; David A Reardon; Igor Puzanov; Ragini R Kudchadkar; Reena P Thomas; Ahmad Tarhini; Anna C Pavlick; Joel Jiang; Alexandre Avila; Sheena Demelo; Kim Margolin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-08-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Van K Morris; Mohamed E Salem; Halla Nimeiri; Syma Iqbal; Preet Singh; Kristen Ciombor; Blase Polite; Dustin Deming; Emily Chan; James L Wade; Lianchun Xiao; Tanios Bekaii-Saab; Luis Vence; Jorge Blando; Armeen Mahvash; Wai Chin Foo; Chimela Ohaji; Manolo Pasia; Gail Bland; Aki Ohinata; Jane Rogers; Amir Mehdizadeh; Kimberly Banks; Richard Lanman; Robert A Wolff; Howard Streicher; James Allison; Padmanee Sharma; Cathy Eng Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2017-02-18 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Leora Horn; Aaron S Mansfield; Aleksandra Szczęsna; Libor Havel; Maciej Krzakowski; Maximilian J Hochmair; Florian Huemer; György Losonczy; Melissa L Johnson; Makoto Nishio; Martin Reck; Tony Mok; Sivuonthanh Lam; David S Shames; Juan Liu; Beiying Ding; Ariel Lopez-Chavez; Fairooz Kabbinavar; Wei Lin; Alan Sandler; Stephen V Liu Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-09-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Pamela L Kunz; Diane Reidy-Lagunes; Lowell B Anthony; Erin M Bertino; Kari Brendtro; Jennifer A Chan; Herbert Chen; Robert T Jensen; Michelle Kang Kim; David S Klimstra; Matthew H Kulke; Eric H Liu; David C Metz; Alexandria T Phan; Rebecca S Sippel; Jonathan R Strosberg; James C Yao Journal: Pancreas Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 3.327
Authors: Oliver Klein; Damien Kee; Ben Markman; Michael Michael; Craig Underhill; Matteo S Carlino; Louise Jackett; Caroline Lum; Clare Scott; Adnan Nagrial; Andreas Behren; Jane Y So; Jodie Palmer; Jonathan Cebon Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2020-06-12 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Sandip P Patel; Young Kwang Chae; Megan Othus; Francis J Giles; Donna E Hansel; Preet Paul Singh; Annette Fontaine; Manisha H Shah; Anup Kasi; Tareq Al Baghdadi; Marc Matrana; Zoran Gatalica; W Michael Korn; Jourdain Hayward; Christine McLeod; Helen X Chen; Elad Sharon; Edward Mayerson; Christopher W Ryan; Melissa Plets; Charles D Blanke; Razelle Kurzrock Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2020-01-22 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Mark B Ulanja; Bryce D Beutler; Daniel Antwi-Amoabeng; Samuel B Governor; Ganiyu A Rahman; Francis Tanam Djankpa; Olatunji B Alese Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2022-08-25 Impact factor: 4.339