Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39979069›Full record

ArticleJournal for immunotherapy of cancer2025

Phase I dose-escalation and pharmacodynamic study of STING agonist E7766 in advanced solid tumors.

Jason J Luke, David J Pinato, Dejan Juric, Patricia LoRusso, Peter J Hosein, Anupam M Desai, Robert Haddad, María de Miguel, Andrés Cervantes, Won Seog Kim and 5 more

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase I
In one paragraph

Article in Journal for immunotherapy of cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Innate immunity: current understandings and future perspectives.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Therapeutic targeting of the cGAS-STING pathway in human disease.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Jason J LukeUPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA lukejj@upmc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1182-4908
David J PinatoImperial College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3529-0103
Dejan JuricMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Patricia LoRussoYale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Peter J HoseinUniversity of Miami Leonard M. Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, USA.
Anupam M DesaiBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Robert HaddadDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1413-0079
María de MiguelSTART Madrid-HM CIOCC, Centro Integral Oncológico Clara Campal, Hospital Universitario HM Sanchinarro, Madrid, Spain.
Andrés CervantesINCLIVA Biomedical Research Institute, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3806-3691
Won Seog KimSamsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Aurélien MarabelleUniversity of Paris Saclay, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5816-3019
Yan ZhangEisai Inc, Nutley, New Jersey, USA.
Yuanxin RongEisai Inc, Nutley, New Jersey, USA.
Xiaobin YuanEisai Inc, Nutley, New Jersey, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-8389-6059
Stéphane ChampiatUniversity of Paris Saclay, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

E7766 is a novel stimulator of interferon genes (STING) agonist, capable of potent activation of immune cells and generating strong antitumor response in preclinical murine tumor models. Here we present the safety, efficacy, and biomarker results of the first-in-human phase I/Ib study of intratumoral E7766 in patients with advanced solid tumors. Eligible patients with relapsing/refractory cancers (n=24) were enrolled in dose-escalating cohorts to receive intratumoral injections of E7766 from 75 to 1000 µg. The most frequent treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events were chills (50.0%; 85.7%), fever (40.0%; 85.7%), and fatigue (30.0%; 35.7%) in patients who received non-visceral and visceral injections, respectively. Eight patients (33.3%) achieved stable disease as their best response per modified Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1 with variability between injected and non-injected lesions. Plasma levels of IFN-α, IFN-β, IFN-γ, TNF-α, IL-6, IP-10, MCP1, and MIP1b transiently increased in all evaluable patients within 10 hours postinjection, then dropped to baseline levels. Levels of blood and tumor gene expression increased in most interferon-related and STING genes tested. Further increases in programmed death ligand 1 and cluster of differentiation 8 expression at both the RNA and protein levels were also observed in some patients across dose levels. In total, E7766 generated on-target pharmacodynamic effects in patients with solid tumors. Further exploration in a homogeneous patient population is necessary to assess efficacy.

Indexed as

Membrane ProteinsNeoplasmsAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSTING ProteinMembrane ProteinsSTING1 protein, humanSTING ProteinBiomarkerImmunotherapySolid tumor

Identifiers

PMID39979069
PMCPMC11842995

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.