Emerging Biomarkers of VEGF and mtor Inhibitors in 2015

Similar documents
Sequencing of therapies in mrcc. Ari Hakimi MD Assistant Professor Urology Service, Department of Surgery MSKCC

Have Results of Recent Randomized Trials Changed the Role of mtor Inhibitors?

Clinical Biomarker in Kidney Cancer. Maria Nirvana Formiga, M.D., Ph.D.

CLINICAL CHALLENGES IN METASTATIC RENAL CELL CARCINOMA: THE RIGHT THERAPY FOR THE RIGHT PATIENT

Negative Trials in RCC: Where Did We Go Wrong? Can We Do Better?

Timing of targeted therapy in patients with low volume mrcc. Eli Rosenbaum Davidoff Cancer Center Beilinson Hospital

Developping the next generation of studies in RCC

Evidenze cliniche nel trattamento del RCC

Metastatic renal cancer (mrcc): Evidence-based treatment

Medical Management of Renal Cell Carcinoma

Fifteenth International Kidney Cancer Symposium

Innovaciones en el tratamiento del ca ncer renal. Enrique Grande

I Kid(ney) You Not: Updates on Renal Cell Carcinoma

The Therapeutic Landscape in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma

pan-canadian Oncology Drug Review Stakeholder Feedback on a pcodr Request for Advice Axitinib (Inlyta) for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

Renal Cell Carcinoma: Status of Medical and Surgical Therapy. Ronald M. Bukowski Emeritus Physician Cleveland Clinic Foundation

Cytoreductive Nephrectomy

How does histology alter treatment? Cora N. Sternberg, MD, FACP Department of Medical Oncology San Camillo and Forlanini Hospitals Rome, Italy

La revolución de la inmunoterapia: dónde la posicionamos? Javier Puente, MD, PhD

Characterization of Patients with Poor-

Immunotherapy versus targeted treatments in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: The return game?

Dose individualization of sunitinib in mrcc: Toxicity-adjusted dose or Therapeutic drug monitoring

New strategies and future of target therapy in advanced kidney cancer

A randomized phase 2 trial of CRLX101 in combination with bevacizumab in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mrcc) vs standard of care

Complete Remission is a Reachable Goal in mrcc L. Albiges Institut Gustave Roussy

Linee guida terapeutiche oncologiche. Francesco Massari U.O.C. di Oncologia Medica d.u. Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona

Indication for- and timing of cytoreductive nephrectomy Kidney- and bladder cancer: Immunotherapy

David N. Robinson, MD

NEXT GENERATION DRUGS IN KIDNEY CANCER. Dr Aine O Reilly Karolinska Institutet Stockholm, Sweden

Kidney Cancer Session

Prospettive future nel trattamento medico del mrcc. Francesco Massari Oncologia Medica Policlinico S Orsola-Malpighi Bologna

Integrating novel therapy in advanced renal cell carcinoma

Sergio Bracarda MD. Head, Medical Oncology Department of Oncology AUSL-8 Istituto Toscano Tumori (ITT) San Donato Hospital Arezzo, Italy

Treatment Algorithm and Therapy Management in mrcc. Manuela Schmidinger Medical University of Vienna Austria

EGFR inhibitors in NSCLC

Carcinoma renale. Francesco Atzori. Oncologia Medica Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Cagliari. Posters & Oral abstracts

The Really Important Questions Current Immunotherapy Trials are Not Answering

Renal Cell Carcinoma: Systemic Therapy Progress and Promise

Medical treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mrcc) in the elderly ( 65y): Position of a SIOG Taskforce

Fifteenth International Kidney Cancer Symposium November 4-5, 2016 Marriott Miami Biscayne Bay, Miami, Florida, USA

Prognostic Factors for mrcc: Relevance in Clinical Practice

Current experience in immunotherapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Surgical Management of Metastatic and Locally Recurrent Kidney Cancer: Does it Make Sense?

Targeted and immunotherapy in RCC

Renal Cell Cancer: Present and Future. Bernard Escudier, Gustave Roussy

UPDATE FROM ASCO GU FEBRUARY 2018, SAN FRANCISCO, USA. Prof. David Pfister University Hospital of Cologne Germany RENAL CELL CARCINOMA

Antiangiogenic Agents in NSCLC Where are we? Which biomarkers? VEGF Is the Only Angiogenic Factor Present Throughout the Tumor Life Cycle

Management of High Risk Renal Cell Carcinoma

Targeted Therapy in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma

DISCLOSURE SLIDE. ARGOS: research funding, scientific advisory board

Molecular Pathology of Renal Cell Carcinoma: An Update

Second - Line Debate: Axitinib

Prostate cancer Management of metastatic castration sensitive cancer

Why was HOPE 205 a Positive After Years of Negative Studies?

Pieter de Mulder Lecture

A Review in the Treatment Options for Renal Cell Cancer

Inmunoterapia en cáncer renal metastásico: redefiniendo el tratamiento de segunda línea

The Current Champion: Angiogenesis inhibitors

Genomic tests to personalize therapy of metastatic breast cancers. Fabrice ANDRE Gustave Roussy Villejuif, France

Brain mets under I.O.

Advances in the Treatment of Renal Cell Carcinoma

Teresa Alonso Gordoa Servicio de Oncología Médica Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal

Immunotherapy for Renal Cell Carcinoma. James Larkin

Update in the treatment of Her2- overexpressing breast cancers. Fabrice ANDRE Institut Gustave Roussy Villejuif, France

Targeted Agents as Maintenance Therapy. Karen Kelly, MD Professor of Medicine UC Davis Cancer Center

ASCO 2011 Genitourinary Cancer

ESMO Madrid, Spain Associate Professor Brian Costello Division of Medical Oncology, Genitourinary Tumour Group, Mayo Clinic, USA

III Sessione I risultati clinici

New Agents for Head and Neck Cancer. Ezra Cohen, MD Associate Professor of Medicine University of Chicago Chicago, IL

Metastatic Renal Cancer Medical Treatment

IMMUNOTHERAPY FOR GASTROINTESTINAL CANCERS

What can we expect from running phase III trials: will all of them alter the current treatment algorithm?

Fifteenth International Kidney Cancer Symposium

2015 EUROPEAN CANCER CONGRESS

非臨床試験 臨床の立場から 京都大学医学部附属病院戸井雅和

Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Kidney and Bladder Cancer

Renal Cell Carcinoma

MÁS ALLA DE LA PRIMERA LÍNEA: SECUENCIA DE TRATAMIENTO. Dra. Ruth Vera Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra

pan-canadian Oncology Drug Review Final Clinical Guidance Report Axitinib (Inlyta) for metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma March 7, 2013

Treatment of Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) in the Era of Targeted Agents

Nivolumab: esperienze italiane nel carcinoma polmonare avanzato

pan-canadian Oncology Drug Review Final Clinical Guidance Report Nivolumab (Opdivo) for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma September 1, 2016

Metastatic NSCLC: Expanding Role of Immunotherapy. Evan W. Alley, MD, PhD Abramson Cancer Center at Penn Presbyterian

RCC in Adolescents and Young Adults (AYAs): Diagnosis and Management

Post-ASCO Immunotherapy Highlights (Part 2): Biomarkers for Immunotherapy

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Lung Cancer William N. William Jr.

EVIDENCE IN BRIEF OVERALL CLINICAL BENEFIT

The Met Pathway as a Target in RCC

Take home message. Emilio Bria. II SESSIONE: Immunoterapia nel tumore del polmone

Carcinoma renale metastatico: cambia la pratica clinica? Camillo Porta Fondazione I.R.C.C.S. Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia

Association of Circulating Tumor DNA (ctdna) Detection in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mrcc) with Tumor Burden

Improving our understanding of papillary renal cell carcinoma with integrative genomic analysis

Highlights STOMACH CANCER

Sequential Therapy in Renal Cell Carcinoma*

Κίκα Πλοιαρχοπούλου. Παθολόγος Ογκολόγος Ευρωκλινική Αθηνών

Carcinoma de Tiroide: Teràpies Diana

MEETING SUMMARY ESMO 2018, Munich, Germany. Dr. Jenny Seligmann University of Leeds, UK HIGHLIGHTS ON COLORECTAL CANCER

Revisione Oral Abstracts

Resistance to anti-her2 therapies. Service d Oncologie Médicale

Management Guidelines and Targeted Therapies in Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: An Oncologist s Perspective

Transcription:

Emerging Biomarkers of VEGF and mtor Inhibitors in 2015 Laurence Albiges Institut Gustave Roussy, France Fourteenth International Kidney Cancer Symposium Miami, Florida, USA November 6-7, 2015 www.kidneycancersymposium.com

Biomarker use Early diagnosis Prognosis Risk of recurrence prediction (Recurrence score, MET polymorphism ) Early detection of recurrence (ct DNA?) Predictive Selection of treatment (efficacy/toxicity) Therapeutic window (drug exposure: PK/PD) Response/resistance marker (under Tx)

Biomarker use Early diagnosis Prognosis Risk of recurrence prediction (Recurrence score, MET polymorphism ) Early detection of recurrence (ct DNA?) Predictive Selection of treatment (efficacy/toxicity) Therapeutic window (drug exposure: PK/PD) How did we explore biomakers so far? What is new in 2015? Response/resistance marker (under Tx) VEGF inhibition mtor inhibition (no immunotherapy!)

Where do we stand? Tumor Host: germline Blood Imaging VHL HIF1a, HIF2a CAIX PTEN, ps6k Polymorphism VEGF-A, IL8, HIF1a, VEGFR2 VEGF, VEGFR2, CAIX CAF (OPN, VEGF,CAIX,VEGFR2, TRAIL) IL6 DCE-US,PET CT Sonpavde G and Choueiri TK. Urol Oncol. 2014;32:5-15. To date: no biological maker is routinely used to guide therapy choice Toxicity under treatement is a routinely used biomarker Still at the biomarker identification step for prediction!

Moving forward with biomarker identification? Large molecular screening (e.g. TCGA) Extreme responders (e.g. mtor) Large scale study population (e.g. IMDC) Pre-clinical work (e.g. MET, RANK) Clinical trial (e.g. Comparz, RECORD3) Mandatory samples collection & Dedicated trial for biomarker validation

Moving forward with biomarker identification? Large molecular screening (e.g. TCGA) Extreme responders (e.g. mtor) Large scale study population (e.g. IMDC) Pre-clinical work (e.g. MET, RANK) Clinical trial (e.g. Comparz, RECORD3) Mandatory samples collection & Dedicated trial for biomarker validation

From biological datasets to clinical mrcc trials Rationale: New molecular classifications from TCGA and other groups has widely been investigated in localised disease Few datasets included metastatic disease let alone treatement response to systemic therapy Approach: Explore the impact of PBRM1, SETD2, BAP1 mutations in a prospective dataset cohort of mrcc patients treated with targeted therapy

Identification of efficacy biomarkers through next generation sequencing (NGS): Results from RECORD-3 Somatic mutations in exons of 341 cancer related genes were identified by an NGS assay (MSK IMPACT platform) at ~530X coverage on tumor (archival tissues, 260 patients) DNA matched germline (181 patients) DNA Association between genotypes and first-line PFS was assessed by Cox PH models and log-rank tests Hsieh J, et al. ASCO 2015. Abstract 4509.

RECORD 3 : BAP1 and 1st Line PFS BAP1: BRCA1 Associated Protein Mutations of BAP1 correlates with poor prognosis ( similar findings were seen with SETD2) Hsieh J, et al. ASCO 2015. Abstract 4509.

RECORD 3: PBMR1 and 1st Line PFS PBMR1: Mutations of PBMR1 may correlate with improved efficacy to everolimus Hsieh J, et al. ASCO 2015. Abstract 4509.

RECORD 3: KDM5C and 1st Line PFS KDM5C: Mutations of KDM5C may correlate with improved efficacy to sunitinib: first biomarker to predict upfront who should be treated with sunitinib? Hsieh J, et al. ASCO 2015. Abstract 4509.

Moving forward with biomarker identification? Large molecular screening (e.g. TCGA) Extreme responders (e.g. mtor) Large scale study population (e.g. IMDC) Pre-clinical work (e.g. RANK) Clinical trial (e.g. Comparz, RECORD3) Mandatory samples collection & Dedicated trial for biomarker validation

Wagle et al. Cancer Discovery, 2014 Voss et al, Clinical Cancer Res, 2014 Wagle wt al. N Engl J Med, 2014 Iyer et al. Science, 2012

mtor Mutations in mrcc: Study Design Dataset of 79 mrcc patients treated with temsirolimus or everolimus Responders: CR or PR (RECIST 1.0) No tumor growth or any tumor shrinkage for at least 6 months Non-Responders: PD at first restaging (first 3 months) while on therapy Targeted sequencing was performed to investigate genes of interest across the mtor pathway Primary endpoint: mutations in core mtor pathway Exploratory endpoints: mutations in PI3K-mTOR pathway genes, mutational status in patients with extreme response (PR/CR > 6 mos) vs. pts with PD Fay AP, et al. ASCO 2015. Abstract 4519.

mtor Mutations in mrcc According to Response Status Trend toward higher response rate in pts with MTOR, TSC1, and TSC2 mutations: Pts, % Responders (n = 43) MTOR, TSC1, TSC2 Mutation Status Nonresponders (n = 36) Mutation detected 28 11 Mutation not detected 72 89 P Value Odds Ratio.06 3.05 Association between mutation status, responses were significant when comparing pts with robust responses (CR/PR > 6 mos) vs primary refractory Pts, % CR/PR > 6 mos (n = 12) MTOR, TSC1, TSC2 Mutation Status P. Refractory (n = 35) Mutation detected 42 11 Mutation not detected 58 89 Odds Ratio Mutations in MTOR, TSC1, and TSC2 may be associated with good responses to mtor inhibitors in mrcc P Value 5.28.04 Results need validation but suggest an strategy for selecting more rational and tailored therapies for patients with mrcc Fay AP, et al. ASCO 2015. Abstract 4519.

Extreme responders to VEGF TT Whole-exome sequencing to predict two extreme phenotypes of response to VEGF-targeted therapies Gene Mutation Extreme Responder Total=13 n(%) Primary Refractory Total=14 n(%) p-value* VHL 9(64.3) 7(50) p=0.44 PBRM1** 7(53.8) 1(7.1) p=0.012 SETD2 ** 6(46.1) 2(14.2) p=0.10 BAP1** 1(7.7) 2(14.2) - KDM5C** 1(7.7) 2(14.2) - KDM6A** 1(7.7) 0(0) - MLL2** 1(7.7) 0(0) - HIF1A 0(0) 1(7.1) - MTOR 2(14.2) 1(7.1) - PTEN 1(7.7) 2(14.2) - TSC2 1(7.7) 0(0) - ATM 2(15.4) 0(0) p=0.22 TP53 0(0) 4(28.5) p=0.097 Fay, MERIT AWARD recipient ASCO GU Symposium 2015

Moving forward with biomarker identification? Large molecular screening (e.g. TCGA) Extreme responders (e.g. mtor) Large scale study population (e.g. IMDC) Pre-clinical work (e.g. MET, RANK) Clinical trial (e.g. Comparz, RECORD3) Mandatory samples collection & Dedicated trial for biomarker validation

Probability BMI Correlates with Outcome in IMDC Cohort High BMI in the IMDC (N = 1975) is independently associated with OS and TTF after adjustment for IMDC prognostic risk 1.0 Obese 0.8 0.6 Overweight Normal Underweight Median, months OS HR a (95% CI) P Value Median, months TTF HR a (95% CI) P Value 0.4 0.2 0.0 0 12 24 36 48 60 No. of patients at risk Months Since Therapy Initiation BMI <25 BMI 25 17.1 0.84 5.7 0.86 0.008 (0.73-25.6 0.95) 8.1 (0.75-0.90) 0.007 Underweight Normal Overweight Obese 66 719 663 527 27 365 404 356 11 187 221 207 3 100 114 131 1 42 53 67 1 14 26 31 a After adjustment for IMDC prognostic risk group. TTF, time to treatment failure Albiges L et al. Presented at: 2014 ASCO annual meeting; 30 May 30-3 June 2014; Chicago, IL. Abstract 4576. 18

Proportion of Patients Alive Proportion of Patients Alive BMI Correlates with Outcome in an External Validation Set BMI correlated with OS, PFS and ORR in an external validation set (N = 4567) of Phase II-III clinical trial data 2003-2013 after adjustment a OS PFS ORR 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 BMI 25: 23.4 months BMI< 25: 14.5 months HR a (95% CI) 0.83 (0.74-0.93) P = 0.0008 0.0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 BMI 25: 8.2 months BMI< 25: 5.5 months HR a (95% CI) 0.82 (0.75-0.90) P < 0.0001 BMI 25: 25.3% BMI <25: 17.6% OR a (95% CI) 1.527 (1.258-1.855) P < 0.0001 Survival, (months) 0.0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Survival, months OR, objective response; ORR, objective response rate. *Adjustment factors included age, gender, ethnicity, prior nephrectomy, histology, ECOG PS, IMDC risk groups, liver and bone metastases, baseline statins, dyslipidaemia, hypertension, angiotensin system inhibitors. Albiges L et al. Presented at: 2015 ASCO-GU annual meeting; 26-28 February 2015; Orlando, FL. Abstract 405.

Proportion of Patients Alive Proportion of Patients Alive Predicitive value of NLR: Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio IMDC Cohort a (N = 1199) Median OS (95% CI) NLR >3 14.6 months (12.7-16.4) NLR 3 28.1 months (25.6-31.6) HR b (95% CI) 1.45 (1.21-1.73) P < 0.001 Validation Cohort a (N = 4350) Median OS (95% CI) NLR >3 12.4 months (11.7-13.2) NLR 3 26.7 months (25.2-29.2) HR a (95% CI) 1.47 (1.32-1.63) P < 0.0001 Survival, months Survival, months a IMDC cohort data was collected retrospectively from 9 sites, the validation cohort data included 12 prospective randomised trials. b HR was calculated after adjustment for IMDC variables. Alimohamed NS et al. 2015 ASCO annual meeting; 29 May-3 June 2015; Chicago, IL. Abstract 404.

Moving forward with biomarker identification? Large molecular screening (e.g. TCGA) Extreme responders (e.g. mtor) Large scale study population (e.g. IMDC) Pre-clinical work (e.g. MET, RANK) Clinical trial (e.g. Comparz, RECORD3) Mandatory samples collection & Dedicated trial for biomarker validation

Cumulative Survival Prop 0 >median CS (64 e vents/ 70 cases) Prop The c-met Pathway: c-met Expression Retrospective Analysis of Tumour c-met Expression with Sunitinib Treatment (N = 137) 1 0.5 + + + + ++ + + + + + MET high ++ ++ +++ + +++ ++ + OS MET low + 1. Peltola KJ, et al. Presented at: 2014 ESMO; 26-30 September; Madrid, Spain. Poster 822P. 50 ++ ++ N at Risk 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 <=median CS 73 33 22 13 9 8 4 >median CS 70 35 18 10 9 6 4 Years since 1st TKI start Retrospective Analysis RCC of cohort Tumour c-met Expression with cmet:max VEGF Combined TT Score (N, n=143= 143) 2 Open Questions Years since 1st TKI start RCC cohort Prognostic or predictive? Interest in the context of cmet:tp: cabozantinib Max Combined Score, approval n=143 Proprotion free of treatment failure (%) 100 80 60 40 20 0 <=median CS (66 e vents/ 75 cases) >median CS (62 e vents/ 68 cases) N at Risk 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 <=median CS 75 38 24 13 10 9 5 >median CS 68 30 16 10 8 5 3 ure (%) 100 Albiges L et al. Presented at: 2015 IKCS Miami; 6-7 November ; Florida N at Ri Low:0 High:2 Proprotion free of treatment failure (%) 1 N at Ri Low:0 High:2 ure (%) 1

Moving forward with biomarker identification? Large molecular screening (e.g. TCGA) Large scale study population (e.g. IMDC) Extreme responders (e.g. mtor) Pre-clinical work (e.g. MET, RANK) Clinical trial with samples collection & Dedicated trial for biomarker validation

Probability of OS PD- L1 expression Prospective RCT with PD-L1 expression assessment: a prognostic value of PD-L1, no predictive role PD-L1 expression in COMPARZ: VEGFR-TKI (N = 453) High tumour PD-L1 expression was associated with shorter OS with sunitinib and pazopanib PD-L1 expression in CHECKMATE 025 EVEROLIMUS pts No predictive role of response to everolimus 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 Pazopanib low Pazopanib high Sunitinib low Sunitinib high Median OS, months (95% CI) 35.6 (27.2, 40.8) 15.1 (9.4, 45.1) 27.8 (23.7, 32.9) 15.3 (11.2, 30.5) P = 0.0302 0.2 0.0 H-score; low ( 55) vs high (>55) 0 10 20 30 40 50 Time, months 60 Motzer et al. NEJM 2015 Choueiri et al, Clin Can Res 2015

Conclusion In a emerging era where both VEGF and mtor inhibition will be challenged in the management of mrcc, the question of biomarker able to predict response / guide patients toward TT is crucial. The biomarqueur quest is hampered by tissue collection and prospective collection of treatement response What shall we do in 2016? Large scale data base (clinical response) with matching annotated samples Sequential biopsy in responders with secondary resistance Validation datasets : Role of company sponsored trials

Fourteenth International Kidney Cancer Symposium Miami, Florida, USA November 6-7, 2015 www.kidneycancersymposium.com