Purpose
This phase I study was conducted to determine the safety profile and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of IMP321, a soluble lymphocyte activation gene-3 (LAG-3) Ig fusion protein and MHC Class II agonist, combined with gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.
Patients and methods
Patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma were treated with gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2)(level 1), gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2) plus IMP 321 at 0.5 mg (level 2) and 2.0 mg (level 3), respectively. Safety, toxicity, and immunological markers at baseline and post treatment were assessed.
Results
A total of 18 patients were enrolled to the study, and 17 were evaluable for toxicity. None of the 6 patients who received 0.5 mg IMP321 experienced IMP321-related adverse events. Of the 5 patients who received IMP321 at the 2 mg dose level, 1 experienced rash, 1 reported hot flashes and 2 had mild pain at the injection sites. No severe adverse events previously attributed to IMP321 were observed. No significant differences were observed when comparing pre- and post-treatment levels of monocytes (CD11b+CD14+), conventional dendritic cells (CD11c+) or T cell subsets (CD4, CD8).
Conclusions
IMP321 in combination with gemcitabine is a well-tolerated regimen. IMP321 did not result in any severe adverse events. No incremental activity observed for the additional IMP 321 to gemcitabine at the dose levels evaluated, likely due to sub-optimal dosing. Immunological markers suggested that higher dose levels of IMP321 are needed for future clinical studies.
Background
Preoperative radiation therapy with 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy is a standard of care for cT3-4 rectal cancer. Studies incorporating additional cytotoxic agents demonstrate increased morbidity with little benefit. We evaluate a template that: (1) includes the benefits of preoperative radiation therapy on local response/control; (2) provides preoperative multidrug chemotherapy; and (3) avoids the morbidity of concurrent radiation therapy and multidrug chemotherapy.
Methods and Materials
Patients with cT3-4, any N, any M rectal cancer were eligible. Patients were confirmed to be candidates for pelvic surgery, provided response was sufficient. Preoperative treatment was 5 fractions radiation therapy (25 Gy to involved mesorectum, 20 Gy to elective nodes), followed by 4 cycles of FOLFOX [5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, leucovorin]. Extirpative surgery was performed 4 to 9 weeks after preoperative chemotherapy. Postoperative chemotherapy was at the discretion of the medical oncologist. The principal objectives were to achieve T stage downstaging (ypT < cT) and preoperative grade 3+ gastrointestinal morbidity equal to or better than that of historical controls.
Results
76 evaluable cases included 7 cT4 and 69 cT3; 59 (78%) cN+, and 7 cM1. Grade 3 preoperative GI morbidity occurred in 7 cases (9%) (no grade 4 or 5). Sphincter-preserving surgery was performed on 57 (75%) patients. At surgery, 53 patients (70%) had ypT0-2 residual disease, including 21 (28%) ypT0 and 19 (25%) ypT0N0 (complete response); 24 (32%) were ypN+. At 30 months, local control for all evaluable cases and freedom from disease for M0 evaluable cases were, respectively, 95% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 89%–100%) and 87% (95% CI: 76%–98%). Cases were subanalyzed by whether disease met requirements for the recently activated PROSPECT trial for intermediate-risk rectal cancer. Thirty-eight patients met PROSPECT eligibility and achieved 16 ypT0 (42%), 15 ypT0N0 (39%), and 33 ypT0-2 (87%).
Conclusion
This regimen achieved response and morbidity rates that compare favorably with those of conventionally fractionated radiation therapy and concurrent chemotherapy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.