Purpose: Urelumab is an agonist antibody to CD137 with potential application as an immuno-oncology therapeutic. Data were analyzed to assess safety, tolerability, and pharmacodynamic activity of urelumab, including the dose selected for ongoing development in patients with advanced solid tumors and lymphoma.Experimental Design: A total of 346 patients with advanced cancers who had progressed after standard treatment received at least one dose of urelumab in one of three dose-escalation, monotherapy studies. Urelumab was administered at doses ranging from 0.1 to 15 mg/kg. Safety analyses included treatmentrelated and serious adverse events (AEs), as well as treatmentrelated AEs leading to discontinuation and death, with a focus on liver function test abnormalities and hepatic AEs.Results: Urelumab doses between 1 and 15 mg/kg given every 3 weeks resulted in a higher frequency of treatment-related AEs than 0.1 or 0.3 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Dose was the single most important factor contributing to transaminitis development, which was more frequent and severe at doses 1 mg/kg. At the MTD of 0.1 mg/kg every 3 weeks, urelumab was relatively well tolerated, with fatigue (16%) and nausea (13%) being the most common treatment-related AEs, and was associated with immunologic and pharmacodynamic activity demonstrated by the induction of IFN-inducible genes and cytokines.Conclusions: Integrated evaluation of urelumab safety data showed significant transaminitis was strongly associated with doses of 1 mg/kg. However, urelumab 0.1 mg/kg every 3 weeks was demonstrated to be safe, with pharmacodynamic activity supporting continued clinical evaluation of this dose as monotherapy and in combination with other immuno-oncology agents.

BackgroundNivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W) has shown benefit versus the standard of care in melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, flat dosing is expected to shorten preparation time and improve ease of administration. With knowledge of nivolumab safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics across a wide dose range in body weight (BW) dosing, assessment of the benefit–risk profile of a 240-mg flat dose relative to the approved 3-mg/kg dose was approached by quantitative clinical pharmacology.Patients and methodsA flat dose of 240 mg was selected based on its equivalence to the 3-mg/kg dose at the median BW of ∼80 kg in patients in the nivolumab program. The benefit–risk profile of nivolumab 240 mg was evaluated by comparing exposures at 3 mg/kg Q2W and 240 mg Q2W across BW and tumor types; clinical safety at 3 mg/kg Q2W by BW and exposure quartiles in melanoma, NSCLC, and RCC; and safety and efficacy at 240 mg Q2W relative to 3 mg/kg Q2W in melanoma, NSCLC, and RCC.ResultsThe median nivolumab exposure and its distribution at 240 mg Q2W were similar to 3 mg/kg Q2W in the simulated population. Safety analyses did not demonstrate a clinically meaningful relationship between BW or nivolumab exposure quartiles and frequency or severity of adverse events. The predicted safety and efficacy were similar across nivolumab exposure ranges achieved with 3 mg/kg Q2W or 240 mg Q2W flat dose.ConclusionBased on population pharmacokinetic modeling, established flat exposure–response relationships for efficacy and safety, and clinical safety, the benefit–risk profile of nivolumab 240 mg Q2W was comparable to 3 mg/kg Q2W. The quantitative clinical pharmacology approach provided evidence for regulatory decision-making on dose modification, obviating the need for an independent clinical study.

9520 Background: Signaling via LAG-3 and other T-cell inhibitory receptors (eg, PD-1) can lead to T-cell dysfunction and tumor immune escape. Simultaneous blockade of LAG-3 + PD-1 may synergistically restore T-cell activation and enhance antitumor immunity. In a phase 1/2a study, BMS-986016 (IgG4 mAb targeting LAG-3) ± nivo (IgG4 mAb targeting PD-1) demonstrated tolerability, peripheral T-cell activation, and preliminary clinical activity (NCT01968109; Lipson E, et al. J Immunother Cancer. 2016;4[s1]:173 [P232]). Here we describe preliminary efficacy of BMS-986016 + nivo in pts with MEL whose disease progressed on/after prior anti–PD-1/PD-L1 therapy, along with updated safety from all dose expansion pts. Methods: Pts with MEL must have had prior anti–PD-1/PD-L1 (± anti–CTLA-4 or BRAF/MEK inhibitors) and progressive disease (PD). Pts received BMS-986016 80 mg + nivo 240 mg IV Q2W. Primary objectives were safety and objective response rate (ORR; complete [CR] + partial [PR] response), disease control rate (DCR; CR + uCR + PR + uPR + stable disease [SD] > 12 wk), and duration of response (RECIST v1.1). Results: At data cutoff, 43 pts with MEL had been treated with BMS-986016 + nivo following PD on/after prior anti–PD-1/PD-L1 with known prior best responses of 1 CR, 9 PR, 12 SD, and 16 PD. Of the 43 pts, 30 (70%) also had prior anti–CTLA-4, 20 (47%) had ≥ 3 prior therapies, and 15 (35%) had BRAFmutations .In the 31 efficacy-evaluable pts to date, ORR was 16% (confirmed/unconfirmed) and DCR was 45% with benefit observed even in some pts refractory to prior anti–PD-1. Evaluations are ongoing for most pts, with median treatment duration of 10 wk for all 43 pts. Immunopathologic (eg, PD-1/PD-L1 and LAG-3 expression) and clinical characteristics of responders vs nonresponders will be presented. Any grade and grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 46% and 9%, respectively, across all dose expansion pts (n = 129). Conclusion: Addition of BMS-986016 to nivolumab demonstrates encouraging initial efficacy in pts with MEL whose disease progressed on/after prior anti–PD-1/PD-L1 therapy, and a safety profile similar to nivolumab monotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01968109.

No abstract

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and their derivatives are increasingly used in pediatric pharmacotherapy, and the number of antibody-based drug products with approved pediatric indications is continuously growing. In most instances, pediatric use is being pursued after the efficacy and safety of novel antibody medications have been established in adult indications. The pediatric extrapolation exercise that is frequently used in this context to bridge efficacy and safety from adults to children is oftentimes challenged through uncertainties and knowledge gaps in how to reliably extrapolate pharmacokinetics and clinical pharmacology of mAbs to different pediatric age groups, and how to derive age-appropriate dosing regimens that strike a balance between precision dosing and practicability. The article highlights some of the pharmacokinetic and clinical pharmacology challenges with regard to therapeutic use of mAbs and antibody derivatives in children, including immunogenicity events. Although considering body size-based differences in drug disposition can account for many of the perceived and actual differences in the distribution and elimination of antibody-based therapeutics between children and adults, increasing evidence suggests potential or actual age-associated differences beyond size differences, especially for young pediatric patients such as newborns and infants. To overcome age-associated differences in antibody disposition, various different dosing approaches have been applied to ensure safe and efficacious antibody exposure for pediatric populations of different ages. The development of such dosing regimens and the associated pathway to pediatric indication approval is illustrated in more detail for two antibody-based biologics, the fusion protein abatacept and the mAb tocilizumab.