0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Phase I study of peposertib and avelumab with or without palliative radiotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumors

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          We report results from a phase I, three-part, dose-escalation study of peposertib, a DNA-dependent protein kinase inhibitor, in combination with avelumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor, with or without radiotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumors.

          Materials and methods

          Peposertib 100-400 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) or 100-250 mg once daily (q.d.) was administered in combination with avelumab 800 mg every 2 weeks in Part A or avelumab plus radiotherapy (3 Gy/fraction × 10 days) in Part B. Part FE assessed the effect of food on the pharmacokinetics of peposertib plus avelumab. The primary endpoint in Parts A and B was dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Secondary endpoints were safety, best overall response per RECIST version 1.1, and pharmacokinetics. The recommended phase II dose (RP2D) and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) were determined in Parts A and B.

          Results

          In Part A, peposertib doses administered were 100 mg ( n = 4), 200 mg ( n = 11), 250 mg ( n = 4), 300 mg ( n = 6), and 400 mg ( n = 4) b.i.d. Of DLT-evaluable patients, one each had DLT at the 250-mg and 300-mg dose levels and three had DLT at the 400-mg b.i.d. dose level. In Part B, peposertib doses administered were 100 mg ( n = 3), 150 mg ( n = 3), 200 mg ( n = 4), and 250 mg ( n = 9) q.d.; no DLT was reported in evaluable patients. Peposertib 200 mg b.i.d. plus avelumab and peposertib 250 mg q.d. plus avelumab and radiotherapy were declared as the RP2D/MTD. No objective responses were observed in Part A or B; one patient had a partial response in Part FE. Peposertib exposure was generally dose proportional.

          Conclusions

          Peposertib doses up to 200 mg b.i.d. in combination with avelumab and up to 250 mg q.d. in combination with avelumab and radiotherapy were tolerable in patients with advanced solid tumors; however, antitumor activity was limited.

          ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier

          NCT03724890.

          Highlights

          • Genomic instability induced by the disruption of DNA damage response pathways can increase sensitivity to immunotherapies.

          • Peposertib, a DNA-dependent protein kinase inhibitor, had preclinical antitumor efficacy in combination with radiotherapy.

          • We assessed the safety and antitumor activity of peposertib + avelumab ± radiotherapy in advanced solid tumors.

          • Peposertib was well tolerated at doses ≤200 mg b.i.d. with avelumab and ≤250 mg q.d. with avelumab + radiotherapy.

          • Peposertib + avelumab ± radiotherapy had limited clinical activity.

          Related collections

          Most cited references52

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          PD-1 Blockade in Tumors with Mismatch-Repair Deficiency.

          Somatic mutations have the potential to encode "non-self" immunogenic antigens. We hypothesized that tumors with a large number of somatic mutations due to mismatch-repair defects may be susceptible to immune checkpoint blockade.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Mismatch repair deficiency predicts response of solid tumors to PD-1 blockade

            The genomes of cancers deficient in mismatch repair contain exceptionally high numbers of somatic mutations. In a proof-of-concept study, we previously showed that colorectal cancers with mismatch repair deficiency were sensitive to immune checkpoint blockade with antibodies to programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1). We have now expanded this study to evaluate the efficacy of PD-1 blockade in patients with advanced mismatch repair-deficient cancers across 12 different tumor types. Objective radiographic responses were observed in 53% of patients, and complete responses were achieved in 21% of patients. Responses were durable, with median progression-free survival and overall survival still not reached. Functional analysis in a responding patient demonstrated rapid in vivo expansion of neoantigen-specific T cell clones that were reactive to mutant neopeptides found in the tumor. These data support the hypothesis that the large proportion of mutant neoantigens in mismatch repair-deficient cancers make them sensitive to immune checkpoint blockade, regardless of the cancers' tissue of origin.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The DNA-damage response in human biology and disease.

              The prime objective for every life form is to deliver its genetic material, intact and unchanged, to the next generation. This must be achieved despite constant assaults by endogenous and environmental agents on the DNA. To counter this threat, life has evolved several systems to detect DNA damage, signal its presence and mediate its repair. Such responses, which have an impact on a wide range of cellular events, are biologically significant because they prevent diverse human diseases. Our improving understanding of DNA-damage responses is providing new avenues for disease management.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                ESMO Open
                ESMO Open
                ESMO Open
                Elsevier
                2059-7029
                05 February 2024
                February 2024
                05 February 2024
                : 9
                : 2
                : 102217
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa
                [2 ]Stephenson Cancer Center, Oklahoma City
                [3 ]Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York
                [4 ]Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville
                [5 ]Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville
                [6 ]University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago
                [7 ]UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh
                [8 ]Greenville Health System, Institute for Translational Oncology Research, Greenville
                [9 ]University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, USA
                [10 ]Merck Serono Co., Ltd. (An Affiliate of Merck KGaA), Beijing, China
                [11 ]Merck Healthcare KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany
                [12 ]EMD Serono Research & Development Institute, Inc. (An Affiliate of Merck KGaA), Billerica, USA
                [13 ]Merck, S.L.U. (An Affiliate of Merck KGaA), Madrid, Spain
                [14 ]Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, USA
                Author notes
                [] Correspondence to: Prof. Scott J. Antonia, Duke Cancer Institute, 300 W Morgan Street, Durham 27701, NC, USA. Tel: +1-919-660-9674 scott.antonia@ 123456duke.edu
                Article
                S2059-7029(23)01458-8 102217
                10.1016/j.esmoop.2023.102217
                10937199
                38320431
                ddca57f1-8779-4e0f-aad8-23bb8110a2da
                © 2023 The Authors

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                Categories
                Original Research

                avelumab,peposertib,phase i,radiotherapy,immunotherapy
                avelumab, peposertib, phase i, radiotherapy, immunotherapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article