This phase Ib/II trial studies the best dose of carboplatin when given together with berzosertib, gemcitabine and pembrolizumab and to see how well it works in treating patients with stage IV squamous cell non-small cell lung cancer that has spared to other placed in the body (advanced). Berzosertib may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Chemotherapy drugs, such as carboplatin and gemcitabine, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Immunotherapy with monoclonal antibodies, such as pembrolizumab, may help the body's immune system attack the cancer, and may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Giving berzosertib together with carboplatin, gemcitabine, and pembrolizumab may work better in treating patients with squamous cell non-small cell lung cancer compared to carboplatin, gemcitabine, and pembrolizumab alone.
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: I. To determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of carboplatin in combination with berzosertib (M6620) and gemcitabine/pembrolizumab, in patients with squamous cell non-small cell lung cancer (Sq-NSCLC). (Lead-in Phase 1B) II. To compare progression-free survival (PFS) of carboplatin/gemcitabine/pembrolizumab with and without berzosertib (M6620, VX-970) in patients with Sq-NSCLC, as measured by a hazard ratio in an intent-to-treat analysis. (Phase 2) SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare progression-free survival (PFS) of carboplatin/gemcitabine/pembrolizumab with and without berzosertib (M6620, VX-970) in patients with Sq-NSCLC, as measured by a hazard ratio in an as-treated analysis. II. To compare PFS of carboplatin/gemcitabine/pembrolizumab with and without berzosertib (M6620, VX-970) in patients with ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM)-deficient Sq-NSCLC, as measured by a hazard ratio. III. To compare overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR) of carboplatin/gemcitabine/pembrolizumab with and without berzosertib (M6620, VX-970), in patients with chemotherapy-naive Sq-NSCLC. IV. To determine the systemic drug exposure of berzosertib (M6620, VX-970) and gemcitabine, as correlates of efficacy and toxicity. V. To determine the safety and tolerability of berzosertib (M6620, VX-970) in combination with carboplatin/gemcitabine/pembrolizumab. VI. To observe and record anti-tumor activity. EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVES: I. To identify molecular subpopulations of patients who have increased sensitivity to the berzosertib (M6620, VX-970)/carboplatin/gemcitabine/pembrolizumab combination. II. To explore the prognostic and predictive qualities of the ATM immunohistochemistry (IHC) assay for clinical response and PFS. III. To explore inflammation-associated gene signatures and clinical response. OUTLINE: This is a phase Ib, dose de-escalation study of carboplatin followed by a phase II study. Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM A: Patients receive pembrolizumab intravenously (IV) over 30 minutes on day 1, gemcitabine hydrochloride IV over 30 minutes on days 1 and 8, carboplatin IV over 30 minutes on day 1, and berzosertib IV over 60 minutes on days 2 and 9. Treatment repeats every 21 days for up to 4 cycles in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients then receive pembrolizumab IV over 30 minutes on day 1 and berzosertib IV over 60 minutes on days 2 and 9. Cycles repeat every 21 days for up to 9 months in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients then receive pembrolizumab alone IV over 30 minutes on day 1. Cycles repeat every 6 weeks for up to 1 more year in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans and/or computed tomography (CT) scans, and undergo blood specimen collection on study. ARM B: Patients receive pembrolizumab, gemcitabine hydrochloride, and carboplatin as in Arm A. Patients undergo MRI scans and/or CT scans, and undergo blood specimen collection on study. After completion of study treatment, patients are followed up every 3 months for 12 months.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
12
Given IV
Correlative studies
Given IV
Undergo CT
Given IV
Undergo MRI
Given IV
Keck Medicine of USC Koreatown
Los Angeles, California, United States
Los Angeles General Medical Center
Los Angeles, California, United States
USC / Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center
Los Angeles, California, United States
USC Norris Oncology/Hematology-Newport Beach
Newport Beach, California, United States
UM Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center at Aventura
Aventura, Florida, United States
Recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) (Phase 1B)
The RP2D will be the dose selected during Phase 1B.
Time frame: Up to completion of cycle 1
Progression-free survival (PFS) (Phase 2)
Proportional hazards (Cox) regression will be used to estimate the hazard ratio and the primary null hypothesis, that PFS is identical between arms, will be tested by a one-sided likelihood ratio test at alpha = 0.10. The hazard ratio will be estimated with a 95% confidence interval. The assumption of proportionality of hazards will be checked graphically and by the method of Therneau and Grambsch. If it is found that the assumption is violated, the log-rank test will be used to compare the product-limit estimates of the survival functions.
Time frame: From the date of randomization to time of progression or death, whichever occurs first, assessed up to 12 months post treatment
PFS in the subset of patients with ATM-deficient squamous cell non-small cell lung cancer
Proportional hazards (Cox) regression will be used to estimate the hazard ratio. The hazard ratio will be estimated with a 95% confidence interval. The assumption of proportionality of hazards will be checked graphically and by the method of Therneau and Grambsch. If it is found that the assumption is violated, the log-rank test will be used to compare the product-limit estimates of the survival functions. PFS of the participants in the M6620 arm will be modeled as a function of total M6620 exposure using logistic regression, proportional hazards (Cox) regression and cumulative logit models, as appropriate.
Time frame: From the date of randomization to time of progression or death, whichever occurs first, assessed up to 12 months post treatment
Overall survival (OS)
Proportional hazards (Cox) regression will be used to estimate the hazard ratio. The hazard ratio will be estimated with a 95% confidence interval. The assumption of proportionality of hazards will be checked graphically and by the method of Therneau and Grambsch. If it is found that the assumption is violated, the log-rank test will be used to compare the product-limit estimates of the survival functions. OS of the participants in the M6620 arm will be modeled as a function of total M6620 exposure using logistic regression, proportional hazards (Cox) regression and cumulative logit models, as appropriate.
Time frame: Up to 12 months post treatment
Overall response (OR)
Overall response will be analyzed by means of Fisher's exact test. Objective response of the participants in the M6620 arm will be modeled as a function of total M6620 exposure using logistic regression, proportional hazards (Cox) regression and cumulative logit models, as appropriate.
Time frame: Up to 12 months post treatment
Worst grade of adverse events
Adverse events will be tabulated according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0 type, grade and relation to treatment. The worst grade of adverse event will be determined for each participant, and the distributions of worst grades will be compared between arms using a cumulative logit model. Worst grade of adverse event experienced of the participants in the M6620 arm will be modeled as a function of total M6620 exposure using logistic regression, proportional hazards (Cox) regression and cumulative logit models, as appropriate.
Time frame: Up to 12 months post treatment
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
UM Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center at Coral Gables
Coral Gables, Florida, United States
UM Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center at Deerfield Beach
Deerfield Beach, Florida, United States
University of Miami Miller School of Medicine-Sylvester Cancer Center
Miami, Florida, United States
University of Kansas Clinical Research Center
Fairway, Kansas, United States
HaysMed
Hays, Kansas, United States
...and 24 more locations