Three-year survival, correlates and salvage therapies in patients receiving first-line pembrolizumab for advanced Merkel cell carcinoma

Paul Nghiem, Shailender Bhatia, Evan J Lipson, William H Sharfman, Ragini R Kudchadkar, Andrew S Brohl, Philip A Friedlander, Adil Daud, Harriet M Kluger, Sunil A Reddy, Brian C Boulmay, Adam Riker, Melissa A Burgess, Brent A Hanks, Thomas Olencki, Kari Kendra, Candice Church, Tomoko Akaike, Nirasha Ramchurren, Michi M Shinohara, Bob Salim, Janis M Taube, Erin Jensen, Mizuho Kalabis, Steven P Fling, Blanca Homet Moreno, Elad Sharon, Martin A Cheever, Suzanne L Topalian, Paul Nghiem, Shailender Bhatia, Evan J Lipson, William H Sharfman, Ragini R Kudchadkar, Andrew S Brohl, Philip A Friedlander, Adil Daud, Harriet M Kluger, Sunil A Reddy, Brian C Boulmay, Adam Riker, Melissa A Burgess, Brent A Hanks, Thomas Olencki, Kari Kendra, Candice Church, Tomoko Akaike, Nirasha Ramchurren, Michi M Shinohara, Bob Salim, Janis M Taube, Erin Jensen, Mizuho Kalabis, Steven P Fling, Blanca Homet Moreno, Elad Sharon, Martin A Cheever, Suzanne L Topalian

Abstract

Background: Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is an aggressive skin cancer associated with poor survival. Programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) pathway inhibitors have shown high rates of durable tumor regression compared with chemotherapy for MCC. The current study was undertaken to assess baseline and on-treatment factors associated with MCC regression and 3-year survival, and to explore the effects of salvage therapies in patients experiencing initial non-response or tumor progression after response or stable disease following first-line pembrolizumab therapy on Cancer Immunotherapy Trials Network-09/KEYNOTE-017.

Methods: In this multicenter phase II trial, 50 patients with advanced unresectable MCC received pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks for ≤2 years. Patients were followed for a median of 31.8 months.

Results: Overall response rate to pembrolizumab was 58% (complete response 30%+partial response 28%; 95% CI 43.2 to 71.8). Among 29 responders, the median response duration was not reached (NR) at 3 years (range 1.0+ to 51.8+ months). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 16.8 months (95% CI 4.6 to 43.4) and the 3-year PFS was 39.1%. Median OS was NR; the 3-year OS was 59.4% for all patients and 89.5% for responders. Baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, greater per cent tumor reduction, completion of 2 years of treatment and low neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio were associated with response and longer survival. Among patients with initial disease progression or those who developed progression after response or stable disease, some had extended survival with subsequent treatments including chemotherapies and immunotherapies.

Conclusions: This study represents the longest available follow-up from any first-line anti-programmed death-(ligand) 1 (anti-PD-(L)1) therapy in MCC, confirming durable PFS and OS in a proportion of patients. After initial tumor progression or relapse following response, some patients receiving salvage therapies survived. Improving the management of anti-PD-(L)1-refractory MCC remains a challenge and a high priority.

Trial registration number: NCT02267603.

Keywords: immunotherapy; programmed cell death 1 receptor; skin neoplasms.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: PN reports grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb and EMD-Serono; advisory fees from EMD-Serono, Pfizer and Merck & Co.; travel expenses from Sanofi/Regeneron and Merck & Co. and has a pending patent related to high-affinity T-cell receptors that target the Merkel polyomavirus. SB reports personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, EMD-Serono and personal fees and other from Sanofi-Genzyme; grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, EMD-Serono, Merck & Co., NantKwest, Novartis, Immune Design, Oncosec, Exicure, Nektar; and personal fees from Castle Biosciences. EJ reports grants from Merck & Co., Bristol-Myers Squibb and Sanofi/Regeneron; personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Array BioPharma, Macrogenics, Sanofi/Regeneron and Genentech. RK reports grants from Merck & Co., Bristol-Myers Squibb and Regeneron; advisory fees from Merck & Co., Bristol-Myers Squibb, Regeneron, Novartis and Array. ASB reports personal fees from Bayer, Deciphera and EMD Serono. BAH reports grants from Merck & Co., Tempest Therapeutics, Olatec Therapeutics, A*STAR Singapore, Sanofi, Leap Therapeutics, GSK and AstraZeneca; personal fees from Merck & Co., Novartis, G1 Therapeutics and CE Concepts; travel fees from ASCO and ASCI and patents related to dendritic cell vaccines, immunotherapy biomarkers and methods for augmenting anti-PD-1 therapy. CC reports a pending patent related to high-affinity T-cell receptors that target the Merkel polyomavirus. JT reports consulting/advisory fees from Merck & Co, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca and Compugen; and a grant from Bristol-Myers Squibb. EJ, MK and BHM are employees of Merck & Co. SPF reports research funding from Merck. MAC reports research funding from Merck & Co. SLT reports that she or an immediate family member has stock and other ownership interests in Aduro Biotech, DNAtrix, Dracen Pharmaceuticals, Dragonfly Therapeutics, Ervaxx, Five Prime Therapeutics, Potenza Therapeutics, RAPT, Tizona Therapeutics, Trieza Therapeutics and WindMIL; a consulting or advisory role in Amgen, DNAtrix, Dragonfly Therapeutics, Dynavax, Ervaxx, Five Prime Therapeutics, Immunocore, Immunomic Therapeutics, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, MedImmune/AstraZeneca, Merck & Co., RAPT and WindMIL; research grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Compugen; patents, royalties and/or other intellectual property with Aduro Biotech, Arbor Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Immunomic Therapeutics, NexImmune and WindMIL and travel, accommodations, and expenses from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Dragonfly and Five Prime Therapeutics.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Duration of response (DOR). Kaplan-Meier curve showing duration of response among 29 patients having a complete or partial tumor regression by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1. Patients without an event were censored (tick mark) at the last disease assessment date. Rates of ongoing response at 12, 24 and 36 months are indicated. NR, not reached.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Kinetics of response to pembrolizumab, and subsequent treatments received by patients with tumor relapse or with no response. Each lane in these swimmer plots depicts an individual patient. Dotted vertical lines indicate the maximum on-study pembrolizumab treatment interval (24 months). (A) Patients with a confirmed complete response (CR) to pembrolizumab (n=15). a, bTwo patients were censored for progression/response because they started a new anticancer therapy without documented disease progression. (B) Patients with a confirmed partial response (PR) to pembrolizumab therapy (n=14). aThis patient was censored for progression/response because they started a new anticancer therapy without documented disease progression. (C) Patients with CR (red triangle), PR (yellow triangle) or stable disease (SD) (patients #9, 10, 11) after receiving pembrolizumab on-study, who later experienced disease progression (n=11). Subsequent treatments are shown. Patients with CR or PR are also depicted in panels (A) and (B), respectively. Details of subsequent treatments are presented in online supplemental table S6. (D) Patients with initial progressive disease (PD) (no CR, PR or SD) on pembrolizumab (n=16), showing subsequent treatments received. Details of subsequent treatments are presented in online supplemental table S6.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Survival among patients with advanced Merkel cell carcinoma (aMCC) receiving pembrolizumab. (A) Progression-free survival (PFS). Kaplan-Meier curve depicting PFS measured from the time of treatment initiation until either disease progression (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1) or death, whichever occurred first. At 36 months, the estimated PFS was 39.1%. Median PFS was 16.8 months (95% CI 4.6 to 43.4). (B) Overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier curves depicting OS among all 50 patients in green, or among those with objective tumor regression (complete response (CR)+partial response (PR)) in blue. At 36 months, the estimated OS was 59.4% for all patients, and 89.5% for those with objective response. Median OS was not reached in either group at the time of analysis. NR, not reached.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Association between magnitude of tumor burden reduction and overall survival (OS). Waterfall plot showing the maximum change in tumor burden (sum of target lesion diameters) compared with baseline, for radiographically evaluable patients (n=45). Horizontal dashed lines indicate Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1 criteria for partial response (≥30% decrease in sum of target lesion diameters from baseline, in the absence of new lesions) and progressive disease (≥20% increase in sum of target lesion diameters). Vertical bars are color-coded to indicate OS duration in individual patients.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Association of overall survival with 30 months’ follow-up, with baseline demographics and tumor and treatment characteristics. Forest plot showing overall survival HRs (with 95% CI) for characteristics which are listed from top to bottom in increasing order of HR magnitude. Total numbers of evaluable patients in each category are shown. Patients with baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 1 vs 0 had significantly reduced survival, while those who completed 2 years of pembrolizumab therapy experienced significantly longer survival. programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) positive, ≥1% of tumor cells expressed cell surface PD-L1, assessed by immunohistochemistry.

References

    1. Harms KL, Healy MA, Nghiem P, et al. . Analysis of prognostic factors from 9387 merkel cell carcinoma cases forms the basis for the new 8th edition AJCC staging system. Ann Surg Oncol 2016;23:3564–71. 10.1245/s10434-016-5266-4
    1. Paulson KG, Park SY, Vandeven NA, et al. . Merkel cell carcinoma: Current US incidence and projected increases based on changing demographics. J Am Acad Dermatol 2018;78:457–63. 10.1016/j.jaad.2017.10.028
    1. Engels EA, Frisch M, Goedert JJ, et al. . Merkel cell carcinoma and HIV infection. Lancet 2002;359:497–8. 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07668-7
    1. Clarke CA, Robbins HA, Tatalovich Z, et al. . Risk of Merkel cell carcinoma after solid organ transplantation. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015;107:dju382. 10.1093/jnci/dju382
    1. Koljonen V, Kukko H, Pukkala E, et al. . Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia patients have a high risk of Merkel-cell polyomavirus DNA-positive Merkel-cell carcinoma. Br J Cancer 2009;101:1444–7. 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605306
    1. Heath M, Jaimes N, Lemos B, et al. . Clinical characteristics of Merkel cell carcinoma at diagnosis in 195 patients: the AEIOU features. J Am Acad Dermatol 2008;58:375–81. 10.1016/j.jaad.2007.11.020
    1. Lipson EJ, Vincent JG, Loyo M, et al. . PD-L1 expression in the Merkel cell carcinoma microenvironment: association with inflammation, Merkel cell polyomavirus and overall survival. Cancer Immunol Res 2013;1:54–63. 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-13-0034
    1. Feng H, Shuda M, Chang Y, et al. . Clonal integration of a polyomavirus in human Merkel cell carcinoma. Science 2008;319:1096–100. 10.1126/science.1152586
    1. Jing L, Ott M, Church CD, et al. . Prevalent and Diverse Intratumoral Oncoprotein-Specific CD8+ T Cells within Polyomavirus-Driven Merkel Cell Carcinomas. Cancer Immunol Res 2020;8:648–59. 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-19-0647
    1. Afanasiev OK, Yelistratova L, Miller N, et al. . Merkel polyomavirus-specific T cells fluctuate with merkel cell carcinoma burden and express therapeutically targetable PD-1 and Tim-3 exhaustion markers. Clin Cancer Res 2013;19:5351–60. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-0035
    1. Goh G, Walradt T, Markarov V, et al. . Mutational landscape of MCPyV-positive and MCPyV-negative Merkel cell carcinomas with implications for immunotherapy. Oncotarget 2016;7:3403–15. 10.18632/oncotarget.6494
    1. Harms PW, Vats P, Verhaegen ME, et al. . The distinctive mutational spectra of polyomavirus-negative Merkel cell carcinoma. Cancer Res 2015;75:3720–7. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-15-0702
    1. Wong SQ, Waldeck K, Vergara IA, et al. . UV-associated mutations underlie the etiology of MCV-negative Merkel cell carcinomas. Cancer Res 2015;75:5228–34. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-15-1877
    1. Knepper TC, Montesion M, Russell JS, et al. . The genomic landscape of Merkel cell carcinoma and clinicogenomic biomarkers of response to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Clin Cancer Res 2019;25:5961–71. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-4159
    1. Iyer JG, Blom A, Doumani R, et al. . Response rates and durability of chemotherapy among 62 patients with metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma. Cancer Med 2016;5:2294–301. 10.1002/cam4.815
    1. Nghiem P, Bhatia S, Lipson EJ, et al. . Durable tumor regression and overall survival in patients with advanced Merkel cell carcinoma receiving pembrolizumab as first-line therapy. J Clin Oncol 2019;37:693–702. 10.1200/JCO.18.01896
    1. D'Angelo SP, Bhatia S, Brohl AS, et al. . Avelumab in patients with previously treated metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma: long-term data and biomarker analyses from the single-arm phase 2 javelin Merkel 200 trial. J Immunother Cancer 2020;8:e000674. 10.1136/jitc-2020-000674
    1. D'Angelo SP, Russell J, Lebbé C, et al. . Efficacy and safety of first-line avelumab treatment in patients with stage IV metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma: a preplanned interim analysis of a clinical trial. JAMA Oncol 2018;4:e180077. 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.0077
    1. Merkel cell carcinoma. (Version 1.2020), 2019. Available: [Accessed 01 Dec 2020].
    1. Nghiem PT, Bhatia S, Lipson EJ, et al. . PD-1 blockade with pembrolizumab in advanced Merkel-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2016;374:2542–52. 10.1056/NEJMoa1603702
    1. Paulson KG, Carter JJ, Johnson LG, et al. . Antibodies to Merkel cell polyomavirus T antigen oncoproteins reflect tumor burden in Merkel cell carcinoma patients. Cancer Res 2010;70:8388–97. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-2128
    1. Moshiri AS, Doumani R, Yelistratova L, et al. . Polyomavirus-negative Merkel cell carcinoma: a more aggressive subtype based on analysis of 282 cases using multimodal tumor virus detection. J Invest Dermatol 2017;137:819–27. 10.1016/j.jid.2016.10.028
    1. Edge S, Byrd DR, Compton CC. Ajcc cancer staging Handbook. 7th edn. New York: Springer, 2010.
    1. Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC, et al. . Toxicity and response criteria of the eastern cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol 1982;5:649–56. 10.1097/00000421-198212000-00014
    1. Topalian SL, Hodi FS, Brahmer JR, et al. . Five-year survival and correlates among patients with advanced melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, or Non–Small cell lung cancer treated with nivolumab. JAMA Oncology 2019;5:1411–20. 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.2187
    1. Robert C, Long GV, Larkin J, et al. . 1082MO 5-year characterization of complete responses in patients with advanced melanoma who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) or NIVO alone. Annals of Oncology 2020;31:S734–5. 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.08.1206
    1. Topalian SL, Sznol M, McDermott DF, et al. . Survival, durable tumor remission, and long-term safety in patients with advanced melanoma receiving nivolumab. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:1020–30. 10.1200/JCO.2013.53.0105
    1. Miller NJ, Bhatia S, Parvathaneni U, et al. . Emerging and mechanism-based therapies for recurrent or metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2013;14:249–63. 10.1007/s11864-013-0225-9
    1. Waterhouse DM, Garon EB, Chandler J, et al. . Continuous versus 1-year fixed-duration nivolumab in previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: CheckMate 153. J Clin Oncol 2020;38:3863–73. 10.1200/JCO.20.00131
    1. Robert C, Ribas A, Hamid O, et al. . Durable complete response after discontinuation of pembrolizumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol 2018;36:1668–74. 10.1200/JCO.2017.75.6270
    1. Garon EB, Hellmann MD, Rizvi NA, et al. . Five-Year overall survival for patients with advanced Non‒Small-Cell lung cancer treated with pembrolizumab: results from the phase I KEYNOTE-001 study. J Clin Oncol 2019;37:2518–27. 10.1200/JCO.19.00934
    1. Templeton AJ, McNamara MG, Šeruga B, et al. . Prognostic role of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2014;106:dju124. 10.1093/jnci/dju124
    1. Malietzis G, Giacometti M, Kennedy RH, et al. . The emerging role of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio in determining colorectal cancer treatment outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2014;21:3938–46. 10.1245/s10434-014-3815-2
    1. Zaragoza J, Kervarrec T, Touzé A, et al. . A high neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio as a potential marker of mortality in patients with Merkel cell carcinoma: a retrospective study. J Am Acad Dermatol 2016;75:712–21. 10.1016/j.jaad.2016.05.045
    1. Bartlett EK, Flynn JR, Panageas KS, et al. . High neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is associated with treatment failure and death in patients who have melanoma treated with PD-1 inhibitor monotherapy. Cancer 2020;126:76–85. 10.1002/cncr.32506
    1. Hasegawa T, Yanagitani N, Utsumi H, et al. . Association of high neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio with poor outcomes of pembrolizumab therapy in high-PD-L1-expressing non-small cell lung cancer. Anticancer Res 2019;39:6851–7. 10.21873/anticanres.13902
    1. Lalani A-KA, Xie W, Martini DJ, et al. . Change in neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in response to immune checkpoint blockade for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Immunother Cancer 2018;6:5. 10.1186/s40425-018-0315-0
    1. Ameratunga M, Chénard-Poirier M, Moreno Candilejo I, et al. . Neutrophil-Lymphocyte ratio kinetics in patients with advanced solid tumours on phase I trials of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Eur J Cancer 2018;89:56–63. 10.1016/j.ejca.2017.11.012
    1. Ascierto ML, Makohon-Moore A, Lipson EJ, et al. . Transcriptional mechanisms of resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy. Clin Cancer Res 2017;23:3168–80. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-0270
    1. Kluger HM, Tawbi HA, Ascierto ML, et al. . Defining tumor resistance to PD-1 pathway blockade: recommendations from the first meeting of the SITC immunotherapy resistance Taskforce. J Immunother Cancer 2020;8:e000398. 10.1136/jitc-2019-000398
    1. Ravi P, Mantia C, Su C, et al. . Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of immunotherapy rechallenge in patients with renal cell carcinoma. JAMA Oncol 2020;6:1606. 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.2169
    1. Betof Warner A, Palmer JS, Shoushtari AN, et al. . Long-term outcomes and responses to retreatment in patients with melanoma treated with PD-1 blockade. J Clin Oncol 2020;38:1655–63. 10.1200/JCO.19.01464
    1. Sheth S, Gao C, Mueller N, et al. . Durvalumab activity in previously treated patients who stopped durvalumab without disease progression. J Immunother Cancer 2020;8:e000650. 10.1136/jitc-2020-000650
    1. Robert C, Ribas A, Schachter J, et al. . Pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab in advanced melanoma (KEYNOTE-006): post-hoc 5-year results from an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol 2019;20:1239–51. 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30388-2
    1. LoPiccolo J, Schollenberger MD, Dakhil S, et al. . Rescue therapy for patients with anti-PD-1-refractory Merkel cell carcinoma: a multicenter, retrospective case series. J Immunother Cancer 2019;7:170. 10.1186/s40425-019-0661-6
    1. Bhatia S, Miller NJ, Lu H, et al. . Intratumoral G100, a TLR4 agonist, induces antitumor immune responses and tumor regression in patients with Merkel cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 2019;25:1185–95. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-0469
    1. Song L, Bretz AC, Gravemeyer J, et al. . The HDAC inhibitor Domatinostat promotes cell-cycle arrest, induces apoptosis, and increases immunogenicity of Merkel cell carcinoma cells. J Invest Dermatol 2020:32074–1. 10.1016/j.jid.2020.08.023
    1. Knackstedt R, Sussman TA, McCahon L, et al. . Pre-treated anti-PD-1 refractory Merkel cell carcinoma successfully treated with the combination of PD-1/PD-L1 axis inhibitors and TVEC: a report of two cases. Ann Oncol 2019;30:1399–400. 10.1093/annonc/mdz187
    1. Tabachnick-Cherny S, Pulliam T, Church C, et al. . Polyomavirus-driven Merkel cell carcinoma: prospects for therapeutic vaccine development. Mol Carcinog 2020;59:807–21. 10.1002/mc.23190
    1. Topalian SL, Bhatia S, Amin A, et al. . Neoadjuvant nivolumab for patients with resectable Merkel cell carcinoma in the CheckMate 358 trial. J Clin Oncol 2020;38:2476–87. 10.1200/JCO.20.00201

Source: PubMed

3
Předplatit