While the feared side effect of severe lung inflammation (pneumonitis) did not increase, other immune-mediated adverse events did. This led to higher rates of treatment discontinuation in the experimental arm, potentially negating any benefits of the concurrent approach and contributing to the trial's failure.
Related Insights
The failure of an adjuvant trial for the TKI pazopanib was likely caused by a protocol change that reduced the dose to manage transaminitis. While well-intentioned to improve tolerability and adherence, the lower dose was sub-therapeutic. This serves as a critical lesson that managing side effects by compromising dose can nullify a drug's potential efficacy.
The failure of the concurrent chemo-immuno-radiation approach has not stalled progress. Instead, new clinical trials are actively exploring novel strategies like SBRT boosts, dual checkpoint inhibitors, radiosensitizing nanoparticles, and induction immunotherapy to improve upon the current standard of care.
When debating immunotherapy risks, clinicians separate manageable side effects from truly life-altering events. Hypothyroidism requiring a daily pill is deemed acceptable, whereas toxicities like diabetes or myocarditis (each ~1% risk) are viewed as major concerns that heavily weigh on the risk-benefit scale for early-stage disease.
A leading hypothesis for why adding immunotherapy to chemoradiation failed is that radiation, particularly for central tumors, destroys the very lymphocytes immunotherapy aims to activate. This biological mechanism suggests the radiation essentially canceled out the drug's intended effect.
Initial studies combining menin inhibitors with venetoclax/azacitidine showed high remission rates but also high mortality. Using each agent at its full, 28-day dose caused severe, fatal myelosuppression, forcing protocol amendments to shorten drug exposure to manage toxicity.
Developers often test novel agents in late-line settings because the control arm is weaker, increasing the statistical chance of success. However, this strategy may doom effective immunotherapies by testing them in biologically hostile, resistant tumors, masking their true potential.
A significant criticism of the pivotal KEYNOTE-564 trial is that only half the patients in the control arm received standard-of-care immunotherapy upon relapse. This lack of subsequent optimal treatment complicates the interpretation of the overall survival benefit, raising questions about its true magnitude.
The TRILINX trial revealed Xevinapant's toxicity was so high that it forced reductions in standard, effective treatments like cisplatin and radiation. This compromised the foundational therapy, leading to worse patient outcomes and demonstrating a key risk in adding novel agents to established regimens.
The TRILINX trial found that adding Xevinapant to local chemoradiation did not improve local control but was associated with a higher rate of distant cancer failures. This counterintuitive outcome highlights the risk of unintended, detrimental systemic effects when developing combination therapies for localized disease.
Bi-specific T-cell engagers (BiTEs) are highly immunogenic because the mechanism activating T-cells to kill cancer also primes them to mount an immune response against the drug itself. This 'collateral effect' is an inherent design challenge for this drug class.
