These data support the lack of dose or exposure dependency in pembrolizumab OS for melanoma and NSCLC between 2 and 10 mg/kg. An association of pembrolizumab CL with OS potentially reflects catabolic activity as a marker of disease severity versus a direct PK-related impact of pembrolizumab on efficacy. Similar data from other trials suggest such patterns of exposure-response confounding may be a broader phenomenon generalizable to antineoplastic mAbs..

The purpose of this study was to assess the association of baseline tumor size (BTS) with other baseline clinical factors and outcomes in pembrolizumab-treated patients with advanced melanoma in KEYNOTE-001 (NCT01295827). BTS was quantified by adding the sum of the longest dimensions of all measurable baseline target lesions. BTS as a dichotomous and continuous variable was evaluated with other baseline factors using logistic regression for objective response rate (ORR) and Cox regression for overall survival (OS). Nominal values with no multiplicity adjustment describe the strength of observed associations. Per central review by RECIST v1.1, 583 of 655 patients had baseline measurable disease and were included in this analysis. Median BTS was 10.2 cm (range, 1-89.5). Larger median BTS was associated with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 1, elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), stage M1c disease, and liver metastases (with or without any other sites; all ≤ 0.001). In univariate analyses, BTS below the median was associated with higher ORR (44% vs. 23%; < 0.001) and improved OS (HR, 0.38; < 0.001). In multivariate analyses, BTS below the median remained an independent prognostic marker of OS ( < 0.001) but not ORR. In 459 patients with available tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, BTS below the median and PD-L1-positive tumors were independently associated with higher ORR and longer OS. BTS is associated with many other baseline clinical factors but is also independently prognostic of survival in pembrolizumab-treated patients with advanced melanoma. .

No abstract

NCT01295827.

One of the key objectives of oncology first-in-human trials has often been to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). However, targeted therapies might not exhibit doselimiting toxicities (DLT) at doses significantly higher than sufficiently active doses, and there is frequently a limited ability to objectively quantify adverse events. Thus, while MTD-based determination of recommended phase II dose may have yielded appropriate dosing for some cytotoxics, targeted therapeutics (including monoclonal antibodies and/or immunotherapies) sometimes need alternative or complementary strategies to help identify dose ranges for a randomized dose-ranging study. One complementary strategy is to define a biologically efficacious dose (BED) using an "effect marker." An effect marker could be a target engagement, pharmacodynamic, or disease progression marker (change in tumor size for solid tumors or bone marrow blast count for some hematologic tumors). Although the concept of BED has been discussed extensively, we review specific examples in which the approach influenced oncology clinical development. Data extracted from the literature and the examples support improving dose selection strategies to benefit patients, providers, and the biopharmaceutical industry. Although the examples illustrate key contributions of effect markers in dose selection, no one-size-fits-all approach to dosing can be justified. Higher-than-optimal dosing can increase toxicity in later trials (and in clinical use), which can have a negative impact on efficacy (via lower adherence or direct sequelae of toxicities). Proper dose selection in oncology should follow a multifactorial decision process leading to a randomized, dose-ranging study instead of a single phase II dose.