Evaluation of Cyclophosphamide/GVAX Pancreas Followed by Listeria-Mesothelin (CRS-207) with or without Nivolumab in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer

Takahiro Tsujikawa(Oregon Health & Science University), Todd S. Crocenzi(Providence Portland Medical Center), Jennifer N. Durham(Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center), Elizabeth A. Sugar(Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center), Annie A. Wu(Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center), Beth Onners(Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center), Julie M. Nauroth(Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center), Robert A. Anders(Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center), Elana J. Fertig(Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center), Daniel A. Laheru(Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center), Kim A. Reiss(University of Pennsylvania), Robert H. Vonderheide(University of Pennsylvania), Andrew H. Ko(University of California, San Francisco), Margaret A. Tempero(University of California, San Francisco), George A. Fisher(Palo Alto University), Michael Considine(Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center), Ludmila Danilova(Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center), Dirk G. Brockstedt(490 BioTech (United States)), Lisa M. Coussens(Oregon Health & Science University), Elizabeth M. Jaffee(Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center), Dung T. Le(Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center)
Clinical Cancer Research
April 9, 2020
Cited by 149Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

Abstract Purpose: Two studies in previously treated metastatic pancreatic cancer have been completed combining GVAX pancreas vaccine (GM-CSF–secreting allogeneic pancreatic tumor cells) with cyclophosphamide (Cy) and CRS-207 (live, attenuated Listeria monocytogenes–expressing mesothelin). In the current study, we compared Cy/GVAX followed by CRS-207 with (Arm A) or without nivolumab (Arm B). Patients and Methods: Patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma who received one prior therapy for metastatic disease and RECIST measurable disease were randomized 1:1 to receive treatment on Arm A or Arm B. The primary objective was to compare overall survival (OS) between the arms. Additional objectives included assessment of progression-free survival, safety, tumor responses, CA19-9 responses, and immunologic correlates. Results: Ninety-three patients were treated (Arm A, 51; Arm B, 42). The median OS in Arms A and B were 5.9 [95% confidence interval (CI), 4.7–8.6] and 6.1 (95% CI, 3.5–7.0) months, respectively, with an HR of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.55–1.34). Objective responses were seen in 3 patients using immune-related response criteria (4%, 2/51, Arm A; 2%, 1/42, Arm B). The grade ≥3 related adverse event rate, whereas higher in Arm A (35.3% vs. 11.9%) was manageable. Changes in the microenvironment, including increase in CD8+ T cells and a decrease in CD68+ myeloid cells, were observed in long-term survivors in Arm A only. Conclusions: Although the study did not meet its primary endpoint of improvement in OS of Arm A over Arm B, the OS was comparable with standard therapy. Objective responses and immunologic changes in the tumor microenvironment were evident.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis