Clinical dose rationale of tislelizumab in patients with solid or hematological advanced tumors

• Published in: Clinical and translational science Vol. 17; no. 3; pp. e13769 - n/a
• Main Authors: Yu, Tian, Liu, Xiangyu, Wu, Chi‐Yuan, Tang, Zhiyu, Wang, Hongwei, Schnell, Patrick, Wan, Ya, Wang, Kun, Liu, Lucy, Gao, Yuying, Sahasranaman, Srikumar, Budha, Nageshwar
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.03.2024; Wiley
• Subjects: Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized - pharmacokinetics; Apoptosis; Bladder cancer; Cell death; Clinical trials; Dosage; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Esophageal cancer; Hematologic Neoplasms; Hodgkin's lymphoma; Humans; Lung cancer; Lymphoma; Metastasis; Monoclonal antibodies; Neoplasms - pathology; Patients; PD-1 protein; Pharmacokinetics; Safety; Solid tumors; Statistical analysis; Tumors
• ISSN: 1752-8054; 1752-8062
• DOI: 10.1111/cts.13769

Tislelizumab, an anti‐programmed cell death protein 1 monoclonal antibody, has demonstrated improved survival benefits over standard of care for multiple cancer indications. We present the clinical rationale and data supporting tislelizumab dose recommendation in patients with advanced tumors. The phase I, first‐in‐human, dose‐finding BGB‐A317‐001 study (data cutoff [DCO]: August 2017) examined the following tislelizumab dosing regimens: 0.5–10 mg/kg every 2 weeks (q2w), 2–5 mg/kg q2w or q3w, and 200 mg q3w. Similar objective response rates (ORRs) were reported in the 2 and 5 mg/kg q2w or q3w cohorts. Safety outcomes (grade ≥3 adverse events [AEs], AEs leading to dose modification/discontinuation, immune‐mediated AEs, and infusion‐related reactions) were generally comparable across the dosing range examined. These results, alongside the convenience of a fixed q3w dose, formed the basis of choosing 200 mg q3w as the recommended dosing regimen for further clinical use. Pooled exposure–response (E–R) analyses by logistic regression using data from study BGB‐A317‐001 (DCO: August 2020) and three additional phase I/II studies (DCOs: 2018–2020) showed no statistically significant correlation between tislelizumab pharmacokinetic exposure and ORR across multiple solid tumor types or classical Hodgkin's lymphoma, nor was exposure associated with any of the safety end points evaluated over the dose range tested. Hence, tislelizumab showed a relatively flat E–R relationship. Overall, the totality of data, including efficacy, safety, and E–R analyses, together with the relative convenience of a fixed q3w dose, provided clinical rationale for the recommended dosing regimen of tislelizumab 200 mg q3w for multiple cancer indications.