pembrolizumab | Biotech Strategy Blog

A look at why we get mixed results with phase 3 checkpoint trials

Berlin: Checkpoint Charlie

With a series of inconsistent results involving phase 3 trials involving checkpoint antibody therapy, even in similar indications, it’s time to get down and dirty and look at some of the factors that might be influencing the outcomes since three of the five approved anti-PD(L)1 products have now been similarly affected.

It’s an interesting and intriguing conundrum, to be sure…

Instead of obeying traffic rules, with immune checkpoints maybe we need to consider following immunology rules instead 🙂

The potential hidden answers, however, might be surprising to some readers.

To learn more about our latest insights, subscribers can log-in or you can purchase access to BSB Premium Content.

Predictions in 1L NSCLC trials

Back in January this year, we posted an early look on what to expect from the evolving 1L NSCLC landscape following the controversial FDA submission of Merck’s pembrolizumab with chemotherapy. This lead to subsequent approval in May.

Checkpoint Charlie, Berlin July 2017

At that time, quite a few people were shocked and surprised that the phase 2 KEYNOTE–021 Cohort G data presented ESMO was neatly parlayed into accelerated approval in the US.

Since then, a lot has happened and now many readers are on tenterhooks as we await the next round of lung cancer trial results in the upfront setting.

First up is AstraZeneca’s MYSTIC trial exploring an IO-IO combination with durvalumab plus tremelimumab. Merck’s confirmatory trial for pembrolizumab plus chemo is also expected in the fall – will it support the accelarated approval – or not? Meanwhile, we also await Roche/Genentech’s IMpower150 study evaluating their checkpoint inhibitor, atezolizumab, in combination with chemotherapy by the year end.

These are quite different strategies with diverse endpoints so following them closely will be key to understanding what happens next. Based on what we’ve seen in lung cancer to date, the roller coaster looks set to continue. The C-suite shenanigans have only added to the intrigue and mystique – do they mean anything? Who knows, but we’re focusing on the hard data i.e. science and the clinical clues that are available.

It’s all to play for and many readers wrote in asking for an update on the landscape and what to expect now that we’re much nearer to the shoes actually dropping.

To learn more about our insights and predictions in 1L NSCLC, subscribers can log-in or you can purchase access to BSB Premium Content.

New IO developments in breast cancer

#ASCO17 Poster Hall aka rugby scrum

There were a lot of gems in the poster halls at ASCO this year, a fact that is partly a reflection of the wealth of new data with various IO combos and also the early cutoff date.

Now I jested before the meeting that these sessions were akin to a rugby scrum and lo and behold (see photo right) they were even more jam packed than usual!

If you wanted to best the eager and energetic Wall St analysts then remembering your ruck and maul skills were not a bad thing to have in muscle memory… It was not something I attempted in the Go-Cart this year for fear of bowling people over in the stampede to nab the QR codes 🙂

Much of the previous readouts have been with monotherapy in immunogenic tumours such as melanoma, lung, bladder, gastric, renal cell carcinoma etc. Objective response rates in metastatic triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) have generally been under 20%, however.

Lately, the focus has turned to the deepening of responses in these tumours with various combination approaches and also moving earlier in the disease setting, where immunotherapies might be expected to be more effective with a lower tumour burden.

While in Chicago, we spoke to a breast cancer specialist about where IO combos are going and his thoughts on future opportunities in our third post in a series on various aspects of new developments in breast cancer.

To learn more insights, subscribers can log-in or you can purchase access to BSB Premium Content.

Can AstraZeneca leapfrog the competition in lung cancer AGAIN?

Until recently, we followed the race to market in EGFR T790M lung cancer with Clovis’s rociletinib and AstraZeneca’s osimertinib (Tagrisso). In phase 2, AstraZeneca caused quite a stir when they came from behind and leapfrogged their biotech rival with a large global randomized controlled trial seemingly out of nowhere. They never looked back.

Can they do the same thing with durvalumab (Imfinzi), one of their IO therapies that targets PD-L1?

If there’s one thing that many astute observers of the IO space have learned this week it’s that irrational exuberance and the hopeful sentiment that ‘everything’ will just tweak the immune system and work positively no matter what has thankfully come to an end.

We’ve seen several highs and lows already with Merck’s pembrolizumab gaining accelerated approval in 1L NSCLC in allcomers when combined with chemotherapy and AstraZeneca reporting positive phase 3 data for durvalumab in unresectable (stage 3) NSCLC based on meeting the study endpoint (PFS).

There is much to be learned because the nivolumab disaster in 1L NSCLC last year was not a singular aberration given that durvalumab has seen some missteps in the past and even atezolizumab had some unexpected news with urothelial cancer this week (Check out our insights), as compared to chemo in the second line setting. Just like mutations, there will be many more to come, perhaps even some additional ones before the year is out.

What about today’s news from AstraZeneca in unresectable NSCLC?

Subscribers can login to read our latest insights and analysis

On Kite’s cerebral edema and Genentech’s IMvigor211 miss

We’re overdue a roundup and discussion on various key topics of interest to BSB readers, so here goes…

Today’s topics include an in-depth look at the impact of some negative events:

Kite and the cerebral oedema death with axi-cel
Genentech’s atezolizumab OS miss in urothelial cancer

Subscribers can login to read our latest expert interview

AACR 2017 Preview 10

We’ve been saying for a while that 2017 and onwards would be when we start to see a few IO combination trials start to shake out. Interestingly, that process seems to have already started, if recent news is any thing to go by.

With this in mind, the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) coming up this weekend gives us a timely moment to explore combinations that are looking interesting… or not.

In the last of our AACR 2017 Conference Previews, we take a look at what to expect on this year’s program in the IO and Checkpoint arena. In short, it’s quite a lot and not without some controversy either!

Subscribers can log-in to learn more…

Asking Good Questions is both an Art and a Science

The recent PARP inhibitor data has stirred up a lot of interest amongst BSB subscribers (See post: PARP! PARP! what’s hot in ovarian cancer at SGO and AACR?).

So, rather than do another AACR 2017 Preview (more coming next week!), it seemed timely to take a look at some of the interesting questions we’ve received from subscribers.

Five questions have been selected for answer in this week’s BSB reader Q&A. We don’t award prizes if your question is selected, nor do we name who asked the question, but everyone benefits when interesting questions are asked and we can all learn from each other.

As author Thomas Berger aptly said:

“The art and science of asking questions is the source of all knowledge.”

What differentiates many world class cancer researchers is frequently the scientific questions they ask in their work. The same holds true if you are a C level executive or a journalist. The quality of the answer you obtain is often dependent on the quality of the question you ask.

We hope that being better informed about the issues and topics we write about on BSB will enable subscribers to ask better questions, and in the process make better decisions.

Subscribers can login to read more (and see if your question was answered)

AACR 2017 Preview 5

There’s no secret or surprise with our latest AACR Preview as this week the focus takes a slight turns or detour to the annual meeting of the Society for Gynecology Oncology being held in National Harbor, Maryland.

PARP inhibitors in ovarian cancer have been a hot topic since last autumn when the PARP inhibitor data dropped at ESMO in Copenhagen, and was not without controversy either.

We’ve been following the trials, tribulations and even machinations, of the clinical development of olaparib, rucaparib and niraparib for a while now so what’s in store in the latest round of salvoes?

And importantly, what else can we expect to see in DC at AACR next month?

For a tumour type that hasn’t received much attention over the last decade or two, things are distinctly picking up. Is it all good though?

To learn more, subscribers can sign in

New developments in advanced colorectal cancer

San Francisco: ASCO Gastrointestinal symposium 2017 – Update on metastatic colorectal cancer

It might surprise quite a few people that colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer globally, especially in the western hemisphere where hereditary, dietary and lifestyle factors can be important.

The bedrock of therapeutic approaches in this disease have largely centred around chemotherapy (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI) along with targeted therapies against EGFR (cetuximab, panitumumab) or VEGF (bevacizumab, ziv-aflibercept, regorafenib etc).

In our second report from #GI17, we take a look at some of the emerging monotherapy and combination approaches that are showing early signs of moving the needle in advanced CRC, an area that has been relatively dormant of late. This is partly because it’s a cold tumour and with the focus on cancer immunotherapies, it’s not the first tumour type that companies will necessarily rush to evaluate.

Things are changing though, even in colorectal cancer so it’s time to look at some key studies that may teach us more about this disease.

To learn more insights, subscribers can log in

Can we expect more surprises in 1L NSCLC?

Challenges and Opportunities in the evolving 1L NSCLC Landscape

Rolling English Landscape in Devon

Following a series of events – from BMS’s failure with nivolumab monotherapy… to Merck’s sudden announcement to file their combination of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy… to AstraZeneca’s delay of the MYSTIC trial exploring durvalumab plus tremelimumab this week, there’s never a dull moment in lung cancer!

So can we expect some more surprises in store in 1L NSCLC?

I say yes we can!

The big questions are what are they and what impact will they have?

2017 is ironically, the year of the Rooster – so who’s going to crow loudly at dawn and who is going to get strangled in the process?

In the world of cancer research it is unlikely that everything wins or is successful, so figuring out the early signs and hints is an important part of the process.

One thing I learned early in this business is that it pays for companies to be humble, flexible and open minded rather than arrogant and dogmatic in their thinking… otherwise you can easily be blindsided.

There were a few examples of that in oncology R&D last year, a repeat could very well follow in 2017 for the unwary.

Here we look at 1L NSCLC in the context of multiple phase 3 trials that are slated to read out… from AstraZeneca, BMS, Merck and Genentech.

If you want to know what the potential impact of these events are on the landscape, including what we can expect from MYSTIC, CheckMate-227 and several others, then this is the post for you because some surprises are likely in store.

We cut through the chase to explain the what and the why in clear simple language.

Biotech Strategy Blog

Commentary on Science, Innovation & New Products with a focus on Oncology, Hematology & Cancer Immunotherapy

Posts tagged ‘pembrolizumab’