Pembrolizumab plus either epacadostat or placebo for cisplatin-ineligible urothelial carcinoma: results from the ECHO-307/KEYNOTE-672 study

Andrea Necchi*, Michiel S. Van der Heijden, Dmytro Trukhin, Avivit Peer, Howard Gurney, Boris Y. Alekseev, Francis X. Parnis, Raya Leibowitz, Maria De Santis, Petros Grivas, Jason Clark, Mihaela Munteanu, Ritesh Kataria, Calvin Jia, Arjun V. Balar, Ronald de Wit

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: Indoleamine 2,3- dioxygenase 1 (IDO1) is an immunosuppressive enzyme that has been correlated with shorter disease-specific survival in patients with urothelial carcinoma (UC). IDO1 may counteract the antitumor effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors. Epacadostat is a potent and highly selective inhibitor of IDO1. In the phase I/II ECHO-202/KEYNOTE-037 study, epacadostat plus pembrolizumab resulted in a preliminary objective response rate (ORR) of 35% in a cohort of patients with advanced UC. Methods: ECHO-307/KEYNOTE-672 was a double-blinded, randomized, phase III study. Eligible adults had confirmed locally advanced/unresectable or metastatic UC of the urinary tract and were ineligible to receive cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive epacadostat (100 mg twice daily) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks) or placebo plus pembrolizumab for up to 35 pembrolizumab infusions. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed ORR per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1). Results: A total of 93 patients were randomized (epacadostat plus pembrolizumab, n = 44; placebo plus pembrolizumab, n = 49). Enrollment was stopped early due to emerging data from the phase III ECHO-301/KEYNOTE-252 study. The median duration of follow-up was 64 days in both arms. Based on all available data at cutoff, ORR (unconfirmed) was 31.8% (95% CI, 22.46–55.24%) for epacadostat plus pembrolizumab and 24.5% (95% CI, 15.33–43.67%) for placebo plus pembrolizumab. Circulating kynurenine levels numerically increased from C1D1 to C2D1 in the placebo-plus-pembrolizumab arm and decreased in the epacadostat-plus-pembrolizumab arm. Epacadostat-plus-pembrolizumab combination treatment was well tolerated with a safety profile similar to the placebo arm. Treatment discontinuations due to treatment-related adverse events were more frequent with epacadostat (11.6% vs. 4.1%). Conclusions: Treatment with epacadostat plus pembrolizumab resulted in a similar ORR and safety profile as placebo plus pembrolizumab in cisplatin-ineligible patients with previously untreated locally advanced/unresectable or metastatic UC. At a dose of 100 mg twice daily, epacadostat did not appear to completely normalize circulating kynurenine levels when administered with pembrolizumab. Larger studies with longer follow-up and possibly testing higher doses of epacadostat, potentially in different therapy settings, may be warranted. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03361865, retrospectively registered December 5, 2017.

Original languageEnglish
Article number1252
JournalBMC Cancer
Volume23
Issue numberSuppl 1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2024

Funding

FundersFunder number
Intel Corporation
Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC

    Keywords

    • Epacadostat
    • IDO1
    • Immune checkpoint inhibition
    • Immunotherapy
    • PD-L1
    • PD1
    • Pembrolizumab
    • Randomized controlled study
    • Urinary tract neoplasms
    • Urothelial carcinoma

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Pembrolizumab plus either epacadostat or placebo for cisplatin-ineligible urothelial carcinoma: results from the ECHO-307/KEYNOTE-672 study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this