Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (N+I) in patients (pts) with colorectal cancer (CRC) with BRCA1/2 alterations (alts): Results from the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) study.
Abstract
127 Background: TAPUR is a phase II basket study evaluating antitumor activity of commercially available targeted agents in pts with advanced cancers with genomic alts. Results in a cohort of pts with CRC with BRCA1/2 mutation (mut) or deletion (del) treated with N+I are reported. Methods: Eligible pts had measurable disease, ECOG performance status (PS) 0-2, adequate organ function, and no standard treatment (tx) options or prior immune checkpoint inhibitor tx. PD-L1 expression testing was not required. Genomic testing was performed in CLIA-certified, CAP-accredited site selected labs. Most genomic tests did not distinguish between germline or somatic muts. Pts received I at 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks (wks) for 4 doses with N at 1 mg/kg IV every 3 wks for 4 doses. N alone was then continued at 240 mg every 2 wks or 480 mg every 4 wks until disease progression. Primary endpoint was disease control (DC) per investigator defined as complete or partial (PR) response per RECIST v. 1.1, or stable disease (SD) of at least 16 wks duration (SD16+). Simon 2-stage design tested null DC rate of 15% vs. 35% (power = 0.85; α = 0.10). If ≥2 of 10 pts in stage I have DC, 18 more pts are enrolled; otherwise, the cohort is closed. If ≥7 of 28 pts have DC, the null DC rate is rejected. Secondary endpoints were objective response (OR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), duration of response and SD, and safety. Results: 33 pts with CRC and BRCA1 mut (n=5), BRCA2 mut (n=20), BRCA1 del (n=7), or BRCA1 del and BRCA2 mut (n=1) were enrolled from October 2017 to September 2023. 3 pts were not evaluable for efficacy. Table shows demographics and outcomes. 1 PR ( BRCA1 del) and 4 SD16+ (all BRCA2 mut) were observed for a DC rate of 24% (90% CI, 9 to 100) and OR rate of 3% (95% CI, <1 to 17). The null DC rate failed to be rejected (p=0.33). Microsatellite instability or high tumor mutational burden were not detected in pts with DC. 12 pts (36%) had ≥1 tx-related grade 3-4 adverse event (AE) or serious AE. All were consistent with tx labels except: encephalopathy, generalized muscle weakness, hypophosphatemia, hypotension, INR increase, leukocytosis, proteinuria, and sinus tachycardia. Conclusions: N+I did not meet prespecified criteria to declare a signal of activity in pts with CRC with BRCA1/2 alts. Other tx should be considered for these pts, including tx offered in clinical trials. Clinical trial information: NCT02693535 . Demographics (N=33) and efficacy outcomes (n=30). Median (Med) age, yrs (range) 64 (31-76) ECOG PS, N % 0 10 (30) 1 20 (61) 2 3 (9) Prior systemic regimens, N % 1-2 ≥3 627 (18) (82) DC rate, % (90% CI), p-value 24 (9, 100), p=0.33 OR rate, % (95% CI) 3 (<1, 17) Med PFS, wks (95% CI) 8 (7, 9) Med OS, wks (95% CI) 19 (11, 25)
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (20)
Olatunji B. Alese
Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, GA
Michael Rothe
Institute of Experimental Hematology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer
ASCO, Alexandria, VA
Carolyn Anne Carrera
Trinity Health IHA Medical Group, Ypsilanti, MI
Evan P. Pisick
City of Hope - Chicago, Zion, IL
Timothy Lewis Cannon
Inova Schar Cancer Institute, Fairfax, VA
Justin Tyler Moyers
The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, A Cedars-Sinai Affiliate, Los Angeles, CA
Mehmet Akce
O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL
Jimmy J. Hwang
Levine Cancer Institute, Charlotte, NC
Mridula Krishnan
University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE
Ankoor Biswas
Aurora Cancer Care, Aurora Health Care, Milwaukee, WI
Majd Chahin
Lewis Cancer and Research Pavilion, St. Joseph’s/Candler, Bluffton, SC
Meredith McKean
Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Tennessee Oncology, Nashville, TN
Davendra Sohal
Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Cincinnati Cancer Center, Cincinnati, OH
Tilak Kumar Sundaresan
San Francisco Medical Center, Kaiser Permanente, San Francisco, CA
Uma Suryadevara
Sutter Cancer Research Consortium, Sacramento, CA
Muhammad Usman
Abigail Gregory
ASCO, Alexandria, VA
Susan Halabi
From the Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda (A.B.A., N.S., S.N., L.L., L.C.), the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore (J.H.-C.), and the Investigational Drug Branch, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville (H.S., E.S.) — all in Maryland; the Alliance Statistics and Data Management Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (K.V.B., M.O., C.M., G.P.B.); AdventHealth Cancer Institute and the University of Central Florida, Orlando (G.S.); Dana–Farber/Harvard Cancer Center, Boston (S.B., B.M.); UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill (W.Y.K.), and Duke University Medical Center and Duke Cancer Institute, Durham (J.H., S.H.) — both in North Carolina; the University of Kansas Cancer Center, Westwood (R.P.); Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York (M.Y.T., M.J.M., J.E.R.), and Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo (G.C.) — both in...
Richard L. Schilsky
ASCO, Alexandria, VA