Dose Escalation of HLA-A2-WT1 CD3 T-Cell Bispecific Antibody in a Phase I Study in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: RO7283420 (RG6007) is a 2+1 TCR-like (TCR-L) T-cell bispecific (TCB) antibody targeting CD3 and the RMFPNAPYL peptide of Wilms Tumor 1 (WT1) protein presented by the major histocompatibility complex-I HLA-A*02 on acute myeloid leukemia (AML) blasts and other antigen presenting cells. The pre-clinical evaluation of RO7283420 in our in vivo humanized AML xenografts and ex vivo AML co-culture models showed strong T-cell mediated AML cell killing (Augsberger C, et al. Blood 2021). A Phase 1 dose-escalation (DE) study (NCT04580121) evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, anti-drug antibodies (ADAs), and anti-leukemic activity of RO7283420 in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) AML. Methods: In this open-label, multi-center study, DE was performed using a 3+3 design. Patients received RO7283420 every 3 weeks (Q3W, n=46), or every week (QW, n=4) as intravenous (IV) infusions. Preliminary anti-leukemic activity included response assessment according to European Leukemia Net (ELN) response categories (adapted from Döhner H, et al. Blood 2017). Results: As of 13 April 2023, 50 HLA-A2+ R/R AML patients received at least one dose of RO7283420. Patients had a median age of 65.5 years (range 35-84), presented with ECOG of 0 (56%) or 1 (38%) or 2 (6%), and 58% were male. Median prior line of therapy was 2 (range 1-5). Overall, 58% of patients had relapsed and 42% had primary refractory disease. According to the ELN 2017 risk stratification, patients were of adverse (48%), intermediate (38%) or favorable (8%) risk category, for 6% of patients the risk category missing. The most common genetic abnormalities reported were RUNX1 (21%), ASXL1 (17%), TP53 (10.6%), FLT3-ITD (6.4%) and NPM1 (6.4%) of the 47 patients tested. Median bone marrow blast percentage at baseline was 35% (range 3-90%), while the median of circulating blast was 17% (range 0-88%). Study patients received RO7283420 IV at 13 different dose levels, ranging from a Minimum Anticipated Biological Effect Level (MABEL) of 0.15 mg (flat) to 18 mg Q3W (with a preceding weekly 1/3 mg ‘double step-up’ during Cycle 1) and one QW dose level with 9 mg preceded by a 1/3 mg step-up. Maximum tolerated dose was reached at 1/3/12 mg double step-up Q3W. Explored alternative QW schedule was not tolerable at 1/3/9 mg. The most common (≥20%) adverse events (AEs) were cytokine release syndrome (CRS) occurring in 34 (68%), pneumonia 14 (28%), pyrexia 13 (26%), febrile neutropenia 13 (26%), hyperglycemia 12 (24%), hypokalemia 11 (22%), and nausea 10 (20%) of patients. Eight dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were reported: five G3 CRS (at 1/3, 2/12, 1/6/12 mg dose levels), G3 stomatitis (at 1/3/12 mg), G3 myositis (at 1/3/18 mg), and G4 thrombocytopenia (at 1/3/18 mg). Eleven patients (22%) experienced Grade 5 AEs with pneumonia, sepsis, and hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) reported in >1 patient; all Grade 5 events were considered unrelated to RO728342 except 1 (at 1/3/9 mg) of 2 HLH events. IV PK has been overall dose-linear and characterized by a terminal half-life of 29 to 84 hours and a clearance of 58 to 92 mL/h. Preliminary ADA incidence within the study population was 19%. In the dose ranges tested, a trend for study drug exposure-dependent blast reduction was observed in blood, while a clear exposure-response relationship could not be established with BM blast reduction. Furthermore, our preliminary pharmacodynamic analysis identified expansion of naive and memory CD8 T cells in blood and activated CD8+ T cells in bone marrow, in line with the expected mode of action (MoA) of RO7283420. Preliminary efficacy signals were observed with 3 complete responses (CR), including 1 CR with incomplete blood count recovery. Conclusions: RO7283420 is the first TCR-L TCB antibody evaluated in AML. We observed pharmacodynamic evidence of T-cell activation and expansion in the clinic, in line with the expected MoA of TCBs, however, at the explored doses, no clear exposure-response relationship and only a modest clinical activity were observed. The safety profile was shown to be consistent with the other TCBs and R/R AML population. Based on the totality of data, the study was discontinued.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".