A Phase 2 Proof-of-Concept Study of ACP-196 Alone and in Combination With Pembrolizumab in Subjects With Recurrent Ovarian Cancer
Phase: PHASE2
Conditions: Ovarian Cancer
Sponsor: Acerta Pharma BV

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 1 of 160 
 
 
PROTOCOL 
TITLE: 
A Phase 2 Proof-of-Concept Study of ACP-196 Alone and 
in Combination with Pembrolizumab in Subjects with 
Recurrent Ovarian Cancer 
PROTOCOL NUMBER: 
ACE-ST-208 
STUDY DRUG: 
ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) and KEYTRUDA® 
(pembrolizumab) 
IND NUMBER: 
124755 
MEDICAL MONITOR: 
 
 
 
 
SPONSOR: 
Acerta Pharma BV 
Kloosterstraat 9 
5349 AB Oss 
The Netherlands 
ORIGINAL PROTOCOL: 
Version 0.0 – 06 May 2015 
AMENDMENT 1: 
Version 1.0 – 18 December 2015 
AMENDMENT 2: 
Version 2.0 – 15 January 2016 
AMENDMENT 3: 
Version 3.0 – 17 May 2016 
 
Confidentiality Statement 
This document contains proprietary and confidential information of Acerta Pharma BV 
that must not be disclosed to anyone other than the recipient study staff and members of 
the institutional review board (IRB)/independent ethics committee (IEC). This information 
cannot be used for any purpose other than the evaluation or conduct of the clinical 
investigation without the prior written consent of Acerta Pharma BV.  
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 2 of 160 
 
PROTOCOL APPROVAL PAGE 
I have carefully read Protocol ACE-ST-208 entitled “A Phase 2 Proof-of-Concept Study 
of ACP-196 Alone and in Combination with Pembrolizumab in Subjects with Recurrent 
Ovarian Cancer”.  I agree to conduct this study as outlined herein and in compliance with 
Good Clinical Practices (GCP) and all applicable regulatory requirements.  Furthermore, 
I understand that the sponsor, Acerta Pharma, and the IRB/IEC must approve any 
changes to the protocol in writing before implementation. 
I agree not to divulge to anyone, either during or after the termination of the study, any 
confidential information acquired regarding the investigational product and processes or 
methods of Acerta Pharma.  All data pertaining to this study will be provided to Acerta 
Pharma.  The policy of Acerta Pharma requires that any presentation or publication of 
study data by clinical investigators be reviewed by Acerta Pharma, before release, as 
specified in the protocol. 
 
Principal Investigator’s Signature 
Date 
 
 
Print Name 
 
 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 3 of 160 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
1.0 
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ............................................................ 31 
1.1 
Ovarian Cancer ........................................................................................ 31 
1.2 
Programmed Death Ligand/Receptor Interactions in Cancer ................... 31 
1.3 
Bruton Tyrosine Kinase Inhibition in Cancer ............................................ 32 
1.4 
A Case for Combination BTK and Checkpoint Blockade ......................... 39 
1.5 
ACP-196 .................................................................................................. 42 
1.5.1 
Mechanism of Action .................................................................. 42 
1.5.2 
Safety Pharmacology ................................................................. 42 
1.5.3 
Drug-drug Interaction Potential................................................... 42 
1.6 
Clinical Experience – ACP-196 ................................................................ 42 
1.7 
KEYTRUDA (Pembrolizumab) ................................................................. 43 
1.8 
Benefit/Risk .............................................................................................. 43 
2.0 
STUDY OBJECTIVES ............................................................................. 44 
2.1 
Primary Objective: ................................................................................... 44 
2.2 
Secondary Objective: ............................................................................... 44 
2.3 
Exploratory Objectives ............................................................................. 44 
3.0 
STUDY DESIGN ...................................................................................... 45 
3.1 
Study Parameters .................................................................................... 46 
3.1.1 
Safety Parameters ...................................................................... 46 
3.1.2 
Pharmacodynamic, Pharmacokinetic and Biomarker 
Parameters ................................................................................. 47 
3.1.3 
Efficacy Parameters ................................................................... 47 
3.2 
Rationale for Study Design and Dosing Regimen .................................... 48 
3.3 
Selection of Study Population .................................................................. 50 
3.3.1 
Inclusion Criteria ......................................................................... 50 
3.3.2 
Exclusion Criteria ....................................................................... 51 
3.3.3 
Replacement of Subjects ........................................................... 53 
3.3.4 
Enrollment and Randomization Procedures ............................... 53 
3.4 
Study Drugs ............................................................................................. 53 
3.4.1 
Premedications ........................................................................... 53 
3.4.2 
Formulation, Packaging, and Storage ........................................ 53 
3.4.3 
Administration of Study Drug ...................................................... 54 
3.4.4 
Assuring Subject Compliance..................................................... 55 
3.5 
Study Treatment Schedule ...................................................................... 55 
3.5.1 
Arm 1 – ACP-196 Monotherapy ................................................. 55 
3.5.2 
Arm 2 – Combination Treatment ................................................ 55 
3.6 
Duration of Therapy ................................................................................. 56 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 4 of 160 
 
3.7 
Dosing Delays and Modifications ............................................................. 56 
3.7.1 
Dose Modifications for ACP-196 ................................................ 56 
3.7.2 
Dose Modifications for Pembrolizumab ...................................... 58 
3.7.3 
Supportive Care Guidelines for Pembrolizumab......................... 59 
3.8 
Concomitant Therapy............................................................................... 62 
3.8.1 
Permitted Concomitant Therapy ................................................. 62 
3.8.2 
Prohibited or Restricted Concomitant Therapy ........................... 62 
3.9 
Precautions .............................................................................................. 63 
3.9.1 
Transaminase Elevations for ACP-196 in Combination with 
Pembrolizumab .......................................................................... 63 
3.9.2 
Hepatitis B Reactivation ............................................................. 64 
3.9.3 
Dietary Restrictions .................................................................... 64 
3.9.4 
Drug-drug Interactions ................................................................ 64 
3.9.5 
Surgery ....................................................................................... 65 
3.9.6 
Reproductive Toxicity ................................................................. 65 
3.9.7 
Overdose Instructions ................................................................ 67 
3.10 
Treatment After Initial Radiologic Progression ......................................... 68 
3.11 
Withdrawal of Subjects From Study Treatment ........................................ 71 
3.12 
Reasons for Study Exit ............................................................................ 72 
3.13 
Data and Safety Monitoring ..................................................................... 72 
4.0 
STUDY ACTIVITIES AND ASSESSMENTS ........................................... 72 
4.1 
Description of Procedures ........................................................................ 72 
4.1.1 
Informed Consent ....................................................................... 72 
4.1.2 
Medical History ........................................................................... 73 
4.1.3 
Adverse Events .......................................................................... 73 
4.1.4 
Concomitant Medications and Therapy ...................................... 73 
4.1.5 
Confirmation of Eligibility ............................................................ 73 
4.1.6 
ECOG Performance Status ........................................................ 73 
4.1.7 
Physical Examination, Vital Signs, Height & Weight ................... 73 
4.1.8 
Electrocardiogram (ECG) ........................................................... 74 
4.1.9 
Urine or Serum Pregnancy Test ................................................. 74 
4.1.10 Hematology ................................................................................ 74 
4.1.11 Serum Chemistry ........................................................................ 74 
4.1.12 Amylase and Lipase ................................................................... 75 
4.1.13 Thyroid Panel ............................................................................. 75 
4.1.14 Hepatitis B and C Testing ........................................................... 75 
4.1.15 Urinalysis .................................................................................... 76 
4.1.16 T/B/Natural Killer (NK) Cell Count .............................................. 76 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 5 of 160 
 
4.1.17 Serum Immunoglobulin .............................................................. 76 
4.1.18 CA-125 ....................................................................................... 76 
4.1.19 Pharmacodynamics/Pharmacokinetics and Biomarker Studies . 76 
4.1.20 Tumor Assessments ................................................................... 77 
4.1.21 Treatment Termination Visit ....................................................... 77 
4.1.22 Study Drug Accountability .......................................................... 78 
4.2 
Investigator’s Assessment of Response to Treatment ............................. 78 
4.2.1 
Determination of Response at Each Timepoint (RECIST 1.1) .... 79 
4.2.2 
Confirmation of Tumor Status and Determination of Best Overall 
Response (RECIST 1.1) ............................................................. 80 
4.2.3 
Immune-related Response Criteria (irRECIST) .......................... 80 
4.3 
Safety Follow-up Visit .............................................................................. 81 
4.4 
Survival .................................................................................................... 81 
4.5 
Missed Evaluations .................................................................................. 81 
5.0 
STATISTICAL METHODS OF ANALYSIS .............................................. 81 
5.1 
General Considerations ........................................................................... 81 
5.2 
Definition of Analysis Populations ............................................................ 82 
5.3 
Missing Data Handling ............................................................................. 82 
5.4 
Endpoint Data Analysis ............................................................................ 82 
5.4.1 
Safety Endpoint .......................................................................... 82 
5.4.2 
Demographics and Baseline Characteristics .............................. 83 
5.4.3 
Study Treatment Administration and Compliance ...................... 83 
5.4.4 
Analysis of Efficacy Parameters ................................................. 83 
5.4.5 
PD or Biomarker Analyses ......................................................... 84 
5.5 
Futility Monitoring ..................................................................................... 84 
6.0 
ASSESSMENT OF SAFETY ................................................................... 85 
6.1 
Definitions ................................................................................................ 85 
6.1.1 
Adverse Events .......................................................................... 85 
6.1.2 
Serious Adverse Event ............................................................... 85 
6.1.3 
Severity ...................................................................................... 86 
6.2 
Documenting and Reporting of Adverse and Serious Adverse Events .... 87 
6.2.1 
Adverse Event Reporting Period ................................................ 87 
6.2.2 
Assessment of Adverse Events .................................................. 87 
6.2.3 
Pregnancy .................................................................................. 88 
6.2.4 
Expedited Reporting Requirements for Serious Adverse Events 89 
6.2.5 
Reporting Events of Clinical Interest .......................................... 90 
6.2.6 
Type and Duration of Follow-up of Subjects after Adverse 
Events ........................................................................................ 90 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 6 of 160 
 
6.2.7 
Other Safety Issues Requiring Expedited Reporting .................. 91 
7.0 
STUDY ADMINISTRATION AND INVESTIGATOR OBLIGATIONS ...... 91 
7.1 
Institutional Review Board and Independent Ethics Committee ............... 91 
7.2 
Informed Consent and Protected Subject Health Information 
Authorization ............................................................................................ 92 
7.3 
Subject Screening Log ............................................................................. 93 
7.4 
Case Report Forms ................................................................................. 93 
7.5 
Study Monitoring Requirements ............................................................... 93 
7.6 
Investigational Study Drug Accountability ................................................ 93 
7.7 
Record Retention ..................................................................................... 94 
7.8 
Protocol Amendments.............................................................................. 95 
7.9 
Publication of Study Results .................................................................... 95 
7.10 
Clinical Trial Insurance............................................................................. 95 
7.11 
General Investigator Responsibilities ....................................................... 96 
8.0 
REFERENCES ........................................................................................ 97 
APPENDICES .................................................................................................. 100 
 
 
IN-TEXT TABLES 
 
Table 3-1.  Pembrolizumab Product Descriptions ..........................................................54 
Table 3-2.  Drug Modification Actions for ACP-196 ........................................................57 
Table 3-3.  Dose Modification Guidelines for Pembrolizumab for Drug-Related Adverse 
Events ...................................................................................................................58 
Table 3-4.  Infusion Reaction Treatment Guidelines for Pembrolizumab ........................62 
Table 3-5.  Imaging and Treatment After 1st Radiologic Evidence of Disease 
Progression ...........................................................................................................70 
Table 4-1.  Evaluation of Target Lesions (RECIST 1.1) .................................................78 
Table 4-2.  Evaluation of Nontarget Lesions (RECIST 1.1) ............................................79 
Table 4-3.  Timepoint Response (RECIST) ...................................................................79 
Table 4-4.  Best Overall Response Assessment and Requirements for Confirmation 
(RECIST 1.1) .........................................................................................................80 
 
IN-TEXT FIGURES 
 
Figure 1-1.  ACP-196 Impairs ID8 Ovarian Cancer Growth and Decreased 
Immunosuppressive Cellular Subsets in Syngeneic Murine Model ........................34 
Figure 1-2.  Efficacy of ACP-196 Monotherapy in a Genetic Model of Lung Cancer ......35 
Figure 1-3.  Effects of ACP-196 on Tumor-Associated  Immunosuppressive Cells in a 
Genetic Model of Lung Cancer ..............................................................................36 
Figure 1-4.  Effects of ACP-196 on Cytolytic T Cells in a Genetic Model of Lung Cancer
 ..............................................................................................................................36 
Figure 1-5.  Efficacy of ACP-196 Monotherapy in a Genetic Model of Pancreatic Cancer
 ..............................................................................................................................37 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 7 of 160 
 
Figure 1-6.  Effects of ACP-196 on Tumor-Associated  Immunosuppressive Cells in a 
Genetic Model of Pancreatic Cancer ......................................................................38 
Figure 1-7.  Effects of ACP-196 on Cytolytic T Cells in a Genetic Model of Pancreatic 
Cancer ...................................................................................................................38 
Figure 1-8.  Efficacy of ACP-196 Monotherapy and Combination Therapy  with 
Gemcitabine in an Orthotopic Model of Pancreatic Cancer ....................................39 
Figure 1-9.  ACP-196 Antitumor Effect Enhanced in Combination with α-PD-L1 in the ID8 
Orthotopic Ovarian Cancer Model ..........................................................................40 
Figure 1-10.  Effect on Tumor Infiltrating TAMs and MDSCs .........................................41 
Figure 1-11.  Effect on Treg and CD8+ Cells ..................................................................41 
Figure 3-1.  Study Schema ............................................................................................46 
 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 8 of 160 
 
SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT 3 
This protocol is being amended to include findings from aggregate analyses from the 
ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) clinical program of observed increases in frequency and 
severity of serum transaminase elevations in subjects exposed to the combination of 
ACP-196 and pembrolizumab, as compared with subjects exposed to pembrolizumab 
monotherapy and subjects exposed to ACP-196 monotherapy. 
Additional changes in this protocol amendment include updated background information 
on ACP-196 and changes made to align this protocol with other Acerta Pharma 
protocols. 
Clarifying edits and typographical changes have been made throughout the protocol.  In 
addition, the following substantive changes were made as part of this amendment: 
Change 
Rationale 
Title Page 
Changed medical monitor 
 
Acerta Pharma medical monitor 
change. 
Protocol Approval Page:  Removed Acerta approver. 
Acerta Pharma process change. 
Synopsis  
Updated to reflect changes 
made throughout the protocol.   
Section 1.5.3 Drug-drug Interaction Potential 
Replaced text with reference to the ACP-196 Investigator 
Brochure 
The Investigator Brochure is the 
primary source for detailed 
information on ACP-196 
drug-drug interaction potential. 
Section 1.6 Clinical Experience – ACP-196 
Updated summary of data from the ACE-CL-001 study. 
 
Deleted Table 1-1. 
The summary of data from the 
ACE CL-001 study was updated 
based on the most recent data 
cut (October 2015) per the 
ACP-196 Investigator Brochure. 
Section 1.7 KEYTRUDA (Pembrolizumab) 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
Pembrolizumab (Keytruda [US]), is a potent and highly 
selective humanized monoclonal antibody against the PD-1 
protein, has been developed by Merck & Co for the 
treatment of patients with cancer of the immunoglobulin (Ig) 
G4/kappa isotype designed to directly block interaction 
between PD-1 and its ligands, PD-L1 and PD-L2.  
Pembrolizumab is approved for treatment of patients with 
melanoma in several countries; in the United States and 
European Union it is approved for the treatment of adult 
patients with advanced (patients with unresectable or 
metastatic) melanoma and disease progression following 
ipilimumab and, if BRAF V600 mutation positive, a BRAF 
inhibitor.  Pembrolizumab has also been approved for the 
treatment of patients with NSCLC in several countries; 
Updated text to reflect currently 
approved indications in the 
KEYTRUDA US prescribing 
information. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 9 of 160 
 
granted approval in the United States it is indicated for the 
treatment of patients with metastatic NSCLC whose tumors 
express PD-L1 as determined by an FDA-approved test and 
who have disease progression on or after platinum-containing 
chemotherapy.  Patients with NSCLC and EGFR or ALK 
genomic tumor aberrations should also have disease 
progression on FDA-approved therapy for these 
aberrations prior to receiving pembrolizumab.   
Section 1.8 Benefit/Risk 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
ACP-196 is a potent, orally administeredbioavailable small 
molecule inhibitor of BTK.  No SAEs have been reported in 
the hepatic impairment study or in the healthy volunteer 
studies.  In the Phase 1/2 study of ACP-196 in subjects with 
CLL, an ORR of 95% has been observed with a median 
follow-up of 14.3 months no DLTs have been identified at 
dosages of ≤ 400 mg QD or 100 to 200 mg BID.  The ORR in 
the evaluable subjects for this study is 94%, with some 
subjects obtaining PRs after only 2 cycles of therapy.   
Revised text to reflect updates 
made in Section 1.6. 
Section 1.8 Benefit/Risk 
Added the following text: 
In the second-line treatment of ovarian cancer, tumor 
response rates have been found to be directly related to 
the duration of platinum-free interval in subjects with 
platinum-sensitive or platinum-resistant disease 
(Armstrong 2002).  Extending the platinum-free interval by 
delaying rechallenge with platinum in favor of clinical trial 
participation may therefore improve patient outcomes, 
including in subjects with platinum-sensitive ovarian 
cancer. 
Added to further describe the 
rationale for providing a 
nonplatinum-based treatment for 
subjects with platinum-sensitive 
ovarian cancer at the time of 
study entry. 
Section 3.0 Study Design 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
Subjects who have confirmed progressive disease on 
ACP-196 monotherapy arm may continue on ACP-196 with 
the addition of pembrolizumab until a second disease 
progression; in these subjects, the visit schedule will start over 
with WeekCycle 1 as listed in Appendix 54, with 
coadministration of ACP-196 and pembrolizumab beginning in 
WeekCycle 1. 
Updated reference to 
Appendix 5.  Revised text to 
align with presentation in 
Schedule of Assessments, 
which lists weeks instead of 
cycles. 
Section 3.3.1 Inclusion Criteria 
Revised text as follows (bold indicates new text): 
3. 
Radiographic pProgression of disease after the most 
recent anticancer treatment.  At least 1 prior chemotherapy 
regimen must have included a taxane. 
Revised text to clarify that prior 
disease progression cannot be 
solely due to rise in CA-125. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 10 of 160 
 
Section 3.3.2 Exclusion Criteria 
Revised text as follows (bold indicates new text): 
6. 
Prior therapy with an anti-PD-1, anti-PD-L1, anti-PD-
L2, anti-CD137, or anti-CTLA-4 antibody (including 
ipilimumab, tremelimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, 
MPDL3280A or any other antibody or drug specifically 
targeting T-cell costimulation or checkpoint pathways). 
Added tremilumumab as an 
example therapy. 
Section 3.3.2 Exclusion Criteria 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
19) Known history of HIV or serologic status indicating active 
HCV or HBV infection, or any uncontrolled active systemic 
infection.  Note:  Subjects receiving prophylactic 
antibiotics (eg, for prevention of a urinary tract infection 
or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) are eligible. 
a)  Subjects who are anti-HBc with hepatitis B core 
antibody positive and who are surface antigen negative or 
who are hepatitis C antibody positive will need to have a 
negative PCR result before enrollment.  Those who are 
hepatitis B surface antigen HBsAg positive or hepatitis B 
PCR positive and those who are hepatitis C PCR positive 
will be excluded.  Note:  Subjects receiving prophylactic 
antibiotics (eg, for prevention of a urinary tract infection or 
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) are eligible. 
b) Subjects who are hepatitis C antibody positive will 
need to have a negative PCR result before enrollment.  
Those who are hepatitis C PCR positive will be 
excluded. 
Section 4.1.14 Hepatitis B and C Testing 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
Hepatitis serology testing must include hepatitis B surface 
antigen (HBsAg), hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBsAb), 
hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc), and HCV antibody.  In 
addition, any subjects testing positive for any hepatitis 
serology, must have PCR testing during screening and on 
study (see Appendix 4, Appendix 5, and exclusion criterion 
#19).  Testing will be done by a local or central laboratory.   
Subjects who are anti-HBc positive should have 
quantitative PCR testing for HBV DNA performed during 
screening and monthly thereafter.  Monitoring should 
continue every 4 weeks (± 7 days) until 12 months after 
last dose of study drug(s).  Any subject with a rising viral 
load (above lower limit of detection) should discontinue 
study drug and have antiviral therapy instituted and a 
consultation with a physician with expertise in managing 
hepatitis B.  Since intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) 
Clarified on-study testing criteria 
for patients who test positive for 
any hepatitis serology during 
screening.  Added HCV PCR 
testing at Weeks 13 and 25 to 
ensure that subjects maintain a 
sustained virologic response, 
based on 2015 guidelines from 
the American Association for the 
Study of Liver Diseases. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 11 of 160 
 
may cause false positive hepatitis serology, monthly PCR 
testing is not required in subjects who are currently 
receiving or received prophylactic IVIG within 3 months 
prior to study enrollment and have a documented 
negative anti-HBc before the initiation of IVIG therapy, 
unless clinically indicated (eg, in the setting of rising 
transaminase levels).   
Subjects with a known history of hepatitis C or who are 
hepatitis C antibody positive should have quantitative 
PCR testing for HCV DNA performed during screening 
and at Weeks 13 and 25.  No further testing beyond Week 
25 is necessary if PCR results are negative.   
Refer to Section 3.9.2, Appendix 4, and Appendix 5 regarding 
monitoring of subjects who are anti-HBc positive or hepatitis 
C antibody positive or who have a known history of HBV or 
hepatitis C. 
Appendix 4 Schedule of Assessments – Treatment Arms 1 
and 2  
Added HBV PCR at screening 
Added row for HCV PCR, with HCV PCR testing at screening, 
Week 13, and Week 25. 
Revised footnotes as shown (bold indicates new text): 
u. 
Subjects who are anti-HBc positive (or have a known 
history of HBV infection) should be monitored monthly with 
have a quantitative PCR test for HBV DNA performed during 
screening and monthly thereafter.  Monthly Mmonitoring 
should continue Q4W (± 7 days) until 12 months after last 
dose of study drug(s).  Any subject with a rising viral load 
(above lower limit of detection) should discontinue study 
drug(s) and have antiviral therapy instituted and a consultation 
with a physician with expertise in managing hepatitis B.   
v. 
Subjects with a known history of hepatitis C or 
who are hepatitis C antibody positive should have 
quantitative PCR testing for HCV DNA performed during 
screening and at Weeks 13 and 25.  No further testing 
beyond Week 25 is necessary if PCR results are negative. 
Table 3-1 Pembrolizumab Product Descriptions 
Removed the following text: 
MK-3475 100 mg/ 4mL 
Solution for Injection 
Removed as this dosage form is 
no longer being provided by the 
sponsor. 
Section 3.4.2 Formulation, Packaging, and Storage 
Revised text as shown: 
If a drug shipment arrives damaged, or if there are any other 
Revised for consistency with 
other ACP-196 protocols. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 12 of 160 
 
drug complaints, a SAE/Product Complaint Form should be 
completed and emailed or faxed to the sponsor or the 
sponsor’s representative.   
Section 6.2 Documenting and Reporting of Adverse and 
Serious Adverse Events 
Revised text as shown: 
All SAEs must be reported on the SAE/Product Complaint 
form or clinical database. 
Section 6.2.4 Expedited Reporting Requirements for Serious 
Adverse Events 
Revised text as shown: 
If electronic SAE reporting is not available, paper SAE/Product 
Complaint forms must be emailed or faxed to Acerta Pharma 
Drug Safety, or designee.   
Section 3.4.4 Assuring Subject Compliance 
Added the following text: 
Missed doses of pembrolizumab should not be made up, 
with the next dose occurring in agreement with the 
original schedule for this agent (every 3 weeks). 
Section 3.7 Dosing Delays and Modifications 
In cases where pembrolizumab is held, pembrolizumab 
should be restarted in agreement with its original dosing 
schedule (every 3 weeks).   
Text added to clarify that missed 
doses of pembrolizumab should 
not be made up. 
Section 3.5.2 Arm 2 – Combination Treatment 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
Pembrolizumab 200 mg will be administered every 3 weeks 
(± 3 days) by IV infusion for a maximum of 24 months from 
the date of first dose.   
Clarified window for 
pembrolizumab treatment. 
Section 3.7.1 Dose Modifications for ACP-196 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text):  
• 
Grade 3 platelets decreases in presence of significant 
bleeding. 
• 
Grade 4 platelets decreases.   
Edits made for clarity.  
 
Section 3.7.1 Dose Modifications for ACP-196 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text):  
For treatment-emergent hepatotoxicity in the combination arm 
only or for subjects who cross over to receive 
combination therapy:  Important guidelines for treatment-
emergent hepatotoxicity are provided in Section 3.7.3 for 
Edits made for clarity. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 13 of 160 
 
pembrolizumab.  In the combination arm or for subjects who 
cross over to receive combination therapy, treatment with 
ACP-196 should be withheld for Grade 3 or 4 hepatitis. 
Added Section 3.9.1 Transaminase Elevations for ACP-196 
in Combination with Pembrolizumab 
Serum transaminase elevations (including elevations of 
AST and/or ALT) may be increased in severity and 
frequency in subjects exposed to the combination of 
ACP-196 and pembrolizumab, as compared with subjects 
exposed to pembrolizumab monotherapy and subjects 
exposed to ACP-196 monotherapy. Routine monitoring 
for serum transaminase elevations must follow the 
Schedule of Assessments (serum chemistry lab 
assessments in Appendix 4 and Appendix 5).  Dosing 
delays and modifications for subjects with serum 
transaminase elevations must follow guidance provided 
in Section 3.7. 
Section has been added based 
on findings from aggregate data 
analyses from the ACP-196 
clinical program of observed 
increases in frequency and 
severity of serum transaminase 
elevations in subjects exposed 
to the combination of ACP-196 
and pembrolizumab, as 
compared with subjects exposed 
to pembrolizumab monotherapy 
and subjects exposed to 
ACP-196 monotherapy. 
Section 3.9.6 Reproductive Toxicity 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
Men and womenWomen of reproductive potential must agree 
to avoid becoming pregnant or impregnating a partner, 
respectively, while receiving study drug and for 120 days after 
the last dose of study drug by complying with one of the 
following:   
Corrected as men are not 
enrolled in this protocol. 
Section 3.10 Treatment After Initial Radiologic Progression 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
• 
If repeat imaging confirms disease progression due to 
any of the scenarios listed below, subjects will be 
discontinued from study therapy (except subjects who 
or if on ACP-196 alone arm may be eligible for 
cross over to receive pembrolizumab in addition to 
ACP-196).    
Revised for clarity. 
Section 4.1.1 Informed Consent  
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
The subject must read, understand and sign the ICF approved 
by the institutional review board or independent ethics 
committee (IRB/IEC), confirming his or her willingness to 
participate in this study before initiating any screening activity 
that is not considered standard of care by institutional 
standards.  Subjects must also grant permission to use 
protected health information if required by local regulations. 
Revised text to align with 
language in other ACP-196 
protocols 
Section 4.1.13 Thyroid Panel and Appendix 4 Schedule of 
Assessments – Arms 1 and 2, footnote k;  
Clarified that after Screening, 
thyroid testing is required only 
for subjects randomized to 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 14 of 160 
 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
Post-Screening, tThyroid testing is required ONLY for 
subjects randomized to Arm 2 and for subjects who cross 
over from Arm 1 to Arm 2 due to disease progression 
receiving pembrolizumab.   
Arm 2 and for subjects who 
cross over from Arm 1 to Arm 2 
due to disease progression. 
Section 4.1.20 Tumor Assessments 
Added the following text: 
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be used for 
subjects who are either allergic to CT contrast media or 
have renal insufficiency that per institutional guidelines 
restricts the use of CT contrast media.  If MRI is used, the 
MRI must be obtained at baseline and at all subsequent 
response evaluations.  If MRI is required for any other 
reason, this must be discussed with the study medical 
monitor first. 
Added option for use of MRI in 
subjects who are allergic to CT 
contrast media or have renal 
insufficiency that restricts use of 
CT contrast media. 
Section 5.1 General Considerations 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
For Arm 1, a sample size of 38 subjects at final analysis will 
provide 80% power to test the null hypothesis that ORR is 
≤ 15% versus the alternative hypothesis that ORR is ≥ 31% 
with a 12-sided one sample Chi-square test at 0.10.05 
significance level.  For Arm 2, a sample size of 38 subjects at 
final analysis will provide over 80% power to test the null 
hypothesis that ORR is ≤ 20% versus the alternative 
hypothesis that ORR is ≥ 38% with a 12-sided one sample 
Chi-square test at 0.05 0.1 significance level.   
Corrected 2-sided significance 
level of 0.1 to 1-sided 
significance level of 0.05 to align 
with the statement of alternative 
hypothesis. 
Section 5.2 Definition of Analysis Populations Sets 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
The following definitions will be used for the efficacy and 
safety analysis populations sets. 
• 
All-treated population Safety analysis set: All 
enrolled subjects who receive ≥ 1 dose of any study 
drug (either ACP-196 or pembrolizumab). The 
safety analyses and primary efficacy analyses will 
be performed on the All-treated population. 
• 
Efficacy-evaluable populationPer-protocol (PP) 
analysis set: All subjects in the All-treated 
population who receive ≥ 1 evaluable response 
assessment after the first dose of study drug 
(either ACP-196 or pembrolizumab) enrolled 
subjects who receive ≥ 1 dose of study drug, have 
sufficient baseline measurements, and undergo 
≥ 1 assessment for the endpoint of interest (eg, 
Revised for consistency with 
other ACP-196 protocols. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 15 of 160 
 
response and PD parameters) treatment. Sensitivity 
analyses for efficacy will be carried out on the 
Efficacy-evaluable population. 
The safety analysis set will be used for evaluating the safety 
and efficacy parameters in this study (with the exception of 
assessment of duration of response).  The PP analysis sets 
will be analyzed for efficacy and PD parameters in this study. 
Section 5.5 Futility Monitoring 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
Enrollment in either arm will be stopped early if there is > 95% 
probability that the irDCR is < 20% in that arm, where θE 
denotes the marginal response rate, assuming that θE follows 
a prior distribution of beta (a, b), where a and b represent 
nonresponse and nonresponse rates (0.2, 0.8).   
Correction to text. 
Section 6.1.1 Adverse Events 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
An AE is any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or 
disease temporally associated with the use of an 
investigational (medicinal) product or other protocol-imposed 
intervention, regardless of attribution. 
This includes the following: 
• 
AEs not previously observed in the subject that 
emerge during the protocol specified AE reporting 
period, including signs or symptoms associated 
with ovarian cancer that were not present before 
the AE reporting period (see Section 6.2.1). 
• 
Complications that occur as a result of protocol-
mandated interventions (eg, invasive procedures 
such as biopsies). 
• 
Preexisting medical conditions (other than the 
condition being studied) judged by the investigator 
to have worsened in severity or frequency or 
changed in character during the protocol-specified 
AE reporting period. 
Abnormal laboratory values should not be reported as AEs; 
however, any considered clinically significant laboratory 
values (eg, causing withdrawal from study or any type of 
intervetions) by the investigator should be reported as AEs. 
Revised text to be consistent 
with ICH and FDA guidelines. 
Section 6.2.1 Adverse Event Reporting Period 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
Revised to match recent 
language from Merck Sharp & 
Dohme Corp and for 
consistency with other ACP-196 
protocols. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 16 of 160 
 
After the signing of the ICF, all SAEs must be reported.  
After the first dose of study drug, all AEs, irrespective of 
seriousness, must be reported.  
For ACP-196, AE reporting, irrespective of seriousness, 
ends 30 days after the last dose of study drug(s).  For 
pembrolizumab, all AEs must be reported through 30 
days after the last dose of pembrolizumab; any SAEs, or 
follow-up to a SAE, including death due to any cause 
other than progression of the cancer under study, must 
be reported through 90 days after the last dose or 30 days 
after the last dose of pembrolizumab if the subject 
initiates a new anticancer therapy within the 90 day 
posttreatment timeframe.    
SAEs considered related to study drug(s) occurring after 
the end of the AE reporting period (as defined above) 
must be reported.   
If an SAE is present at the last study visit, the SAE should 
be followed to resolution or until the investigator 
assesses the subject as stable, or the subject is lost to 
follow-up or withdraws consent.  Resolution/stable means 
the subject has returned to baseline state of health or the 
investigator does not expect any further improvement or 
worsening of the event. 
 The AE reporting period for this study begins when the 
subject receives the first dose of study drug and ends with the 
safety follow-up visit unless a subject received a new 
anticancer therapy before the safety follow-up visit.  An 
exception to this reporting period is any AE occurring due to a 
protocol-defined screening procedure.  If a fatal AE occurs 
beyond 30 days after the last dose of ACP-196 and/or 
pembrolizumab AND it is assessed by the investigator as 
related to ACP-196 and/or pembrolizumab it must be reported 
as an SAE. 
Section 6.2.2 Assessment of Adverse Events 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
All AEs and SAEs whether volunteered by the subject, 
discovered by study personnel during questioning, or detected 
through physical examination, or other means, that occurs to 
any subject that occur to any subject from the time of first 
dose through 30 days following the cessation of study 
drug(s), and all SAEs that occur to any subject receiving 
pembrolizumab from the time of first dose through 90 days 
following cessation of pembrolizumab, or 30 days following 
cessation of pembrolizumab if the subject initiates new 
anticancer therapy, (whichever is earlier), will be recorded in 
the subject’s medical record and on the AE CRF. 
Revised guidance for 
documenting AEs and SAEs to 
match recent language from 
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp and 
for consistency with other 
ACP-196 protocols. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 17 of 160 
 
 
Section 6.2.3 Pregnancy 
Revised text as follows (bold indicates new text): 
All pregnancies that are identified during or after this study, 
wherein the estimated date of conception is determined to 
have occurred from the time of consent to 90 days after the 
last dose of ACP-196, 120 days after the last dose of 
pembrolizumab, or 30 days after the last dose of either 
treatment if the subject initiates new anticancer therapy 
(whichever is earlier) will be reported, followed to conclusion, 
and the outcome reported, as long as the subject or partner 
is willing to participate in follow-up. 
Added the following text: 
Upon completion of the pregnancy, additional information 
on the mother, pregnancy, and baby will be collected and 
sent to DrugSafety@acerta-pharma.com. 
Revised for consistency with 
other ACP-196 protocols. 
Section 6.2.4 Expedited Reporting Requirements for Serious 
Adverse Events 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
Whenever possible, AEs/SAEs should be reported by 
diagnosis term, not as a constellation of symptoms.   
Death due to disease progression should be recorded on 
the appropriate form in the electronic data capture 
system.  If the primary cause of death is disease 
progression, the death due to disease progression should 
not be reported as an SAE. If the primary cause of death 
is something other than disease progression, then the 
death All deaths should be reported as an SAE with the 
primary cause of death as the event AE term, as death is 
typically the outcome of the event, not the event itself.  The 
primary cause of death on the autopsy report should be the 
term reported.  Autopsy and postmortem reports must be 
forwarded to Acerta Pharma Drug Safety, or designee, as 
outlined above.  
If study drug is discontinued because of an SAE, this 
information must be included in the SAE report. 
An SAE may qualify for mandatory expedited reporting to 
regulatory authorities if the SAE is attributable to the 
investigational product (or if a causality assessment is not 
provided for the SAE, in which case the default of 
‘related’ must be used for expedited reporting purposes) 
and the SAE is not listed in the current Investigator’s 
Brochure (ie, an unexpected event).   
Greater detail has been added 
to aid sites with reporting of 
deaths due to disease 
progression and to encourage 
sites to report causality of SAEs 
on the initial report. 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 18 of 160 
 
Added Section 6.2.7 Other Safety Issues Requiring  
Expedited Reporting 
For studies being conducted in Europe expedited 
reporting is required for safety issues that might 
materially alter the current benefit-risk assessment of an 
investigational medicinal product or that would be 
sufficient to consider changes in the investigational 
medicinal products administration or in the overall 
conduct of the trial.  For a detailed description of safety 
issues that may qualify for expedited reporting please 
refer to the European Commission guidance titled, 
“Detailed guidance on the collection, verification and 
presentation of adverse reaction reports arising from 
clinical trials on medicinal products for human use – April 
2006” available at 
http://ec.europa.eu/health/files/eudralex/vol-
10/21_susar_rev2_2006_04_11_en.pdf. 
Added new section and text that 
is standard across all Acerta 
Pharma protocols  
Section 7.6 Investigational Study Drug Accountability 
Revised text as shown (bold indicates new text): 
ACP-196 and pembrolizumab capsules must be kept in a 
locked limited access cabinet or space. 
Revised to correct omission of 
pembrolizumab. 
Section 8.0 References 
Revised as needed to reflect 
changes in the protocol. 
Appendix 4. Schedule of Assessments – Treatment Arms 1 
and 2 
Thyroid panel, ≥ 10 Weeks: Revised text to clarify that thyroid 
panel is conducted at Week 10, then every 6 weeks. 
Removed study drug compliance at Week 8 visit. 
Removed study window from Week 1 visit. 
 
 
Added the following text to footnote p: 
Tissue sections at confirmation of progression are 
optional.   
 
 
 
Clarifying edits. 
 
Correction 
 
Correction, as the study window 
does not apply to the Week 1 
visit 
 
 
 
Clarification. 
Added Appendix 5 Schedule of Assessments - Crossover 
Added Schedule of 
Assessments for subjects who 
cross over to receive ACP-196 
and pembrolizumab. 
 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 19 of 160 
 
ABBREVIATIONS 
λz 
terminal elimination rate constant 
AE 
adverse event 
AKT 
protein kinase b 
ALT 
alanine aminotransferase 
ANC 
absolute neutrophil count 
anti-HBc 
hepatitis B core antibody 
anti-HBs 
hepatitis B surface antibody 
AST 
aspartate aminotransferase 
AUC 
area under the concentration-time curve 
BID 
twice per day (dosing) 
BOR 
best overall response 
BTK 
Bruton tyrosine kinase 
BUN 
blood urea nitrogen 
CBC 
complete blood count 
CFR 
Code of Federal Regulations 
cGMP 
current Good Manufacturing Practice 
CI 
confidence interval 
CL/F 
oral clearance 
CLL 
chronic lymphocytic leukemia 
Cmax 
maximum concentration 
COPD 
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 
CR 
complete response (remission) 
CRF 
case report form 
CSC 
cancer stem cell 
CSSF 
Clinical Supplies Shipping Receipt Form 
CT 
computed tomography 
CTCAE 
Common Terminology Criteria For Adverse Events 
CTLA-4 
cytotoxic t-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 
CYP 
cytochrome p450 
DCR 
disease control rate 
DKA 
diabetic ketoacidosis 
DLT 
dose-limiting toxicity 
DOR 
duration of response 
ECG 
electrocardiogram 
ECI 
Events of Clinical Interest 
ECOG 
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 
EGFR 
epidermal growth factor receptor 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 20 of 160 
 
FDA 
Food and Drug Administration 
GCP 
Good Clinical Practice 
Gem 
gemcitabine 
HBsAg 
hepatitis B surface antigen 
HBV 
hepatitis B virus 
HCV 
hepatitis C virus 
HIV 
human immunodeficiency virus 
IC50 
half-maximal inhibitory concentration 
ICF 
informed consent form 
IEC 
independent ethics committee 
Ig 
immunoglobulin 
IRB 
institutional review board 
ir 
immune-related 
irRECIST 
immune-related response criteria 
IUD 
intrauterine device 
IV 
intravenous or intravenously  
IXRS 
Interactive Voice/Web Response System 
JAK 
Janus kinase 
LDH 
lactate dehydrogenase 
MDSC 
myeloid-derived suppressor cell(s) 
MedDRA 
Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities 
MTD 
maximum tolerated dose 
MRI 
magnetic resonance imaging 
mTOR 
mammalian target of rapamycin 
NE 
nonevaluable 
NK 
natural killer (cells) 
NSAID 
nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug 
NSCLC 
non-small cell lung cancer 
ORR 
overall response rate 
OS 
overall survival 
PARP 
poly ADP ribose polymerase 
PBMC 
peripheral blood mononuclear cells 
PCR 
polymerase chain reaction 
PFS 
progression-free survival 
PD 
pharmacodynamic, pharmacodynamics, or progressive disease 
PD-1 
programmed death-1 (receptor) 
PD-L1 
programmed death ligand-1 
PD-L2 
programmed death ligand-2 
P-gp 
p-glycoprotein 1 (transporter) 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 21 of 160 
 
PI3K 
phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase 
PK 
pharmacokinetic or pharmacokinetics 
PO 
oral 
PP 
per protocol (analysis set) 
PR 
partial response (remission) 
PRL 
partial response with lymphocytosis 
Q4W 
every 4 weeks 
Q3M 
every 3 months 
Q3W 
every 3 weeks 
Q12W 
every 12 weeks 
Q2W 
every 2 weeks 
QD 
once per day (dosing) 
QTc 
corrected QT interval 
RECIST 
Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 
SAE 
serious adverse event 
SD 
stable disease  
SUSAR 
suspected unexpected serious adverse reaction 
SYK 
spleen tyrosine kinase 
t½ 
terminal elimination half-life 
T3 
triiodothyronine 
T4 
thyroxine 
TAM 
tumor-associated macrophage 
Tmax 
time to maximum concentration 
Treg 
regulatory T cell(s) 
TSH 
thyroid-stimulating hormone (thyrotropin) 
TT 
treatment termination 
ULN 
upper limit of normal 
Vz/F 
oral volume of distribution 
WHODRUG 
World Health Organization Drug Dictionary 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 22 of 160 
 
STUDY SYNOPSIS 
Protocol Number: 
ACE-ST-208 
Study Drugs: 
ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
KEYTRUDA® (pembrolizumab) 
Protocol Title: 
A Phase 2 Proof-of-Concept Study of ACP-196 Alone and in 
Combination with Pembrolizumab in Subjects with Recurrent 
Ovarian Cancer 
Phase: 
Phase 2 
Comparator: 
KEYTRUDA® (pembrolizumab) 
Study Centers: 
Up to 31 centers in the United States will participate on this 
protocol. 
Background and 
Rationale for Study 
Ovarian cancer is the eighth most common cause of cancer death 
worldwide for women and is the deadliest of the gynecological 
cancers, resulting in approximately 152,000 deaths from this 
disease in 2012.   
Despite multiple treatment approaches, ovarian cancer survival 
rates are much lower than other cancers that affect women. The 
relative 5-year survival rate for ovarian cancer is 45% and survival 
rates vary widely depending on the stage of diagnosis.  Five-year 
survival by stage at diagnosis is 92% for localized (confined to 
primary site); however, only 15% of ovarian cancers are diagnosed 
at the localized stage.  Five-year survival by stage at diagnosis is 
72% for regional (spread to regional lymph nodes), 27% for distant 
(metastasized), and 22% for unstaged.  Novel targeted 
approaches are still needed in the treatment of ovarian cancer. 
Over half of solid tumors (including lung cancer, melanoma, renal 
cell carcinoma, pancreatic cancer, ovarian cancer, and others) 
express programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) in the tumor 
microenvironment, which results in immune tolerance and impaired 
immune response against the tumor.  Additionally, PD-L1 
expression in the tumor microenvironment has been shown to be a 
poor prognostic factor in several cancers.  Targeting immune 
infiltrates and disrupting PD-1 ligand-receptor interactions may 
impair stromal support and enhance immune cell destruction of 
tumors that could offer therapeutic benefits to patients with solid 
tumors.  Indeed, objective responses were seen in patients with 
advanced or relapsed, platinum-resistant ovarian cancer in a 
Phase 2 trial of an anti-PD-1 antibody (nivolumab); 3 of 13 (23%) 
subjects had a partial response (PR) and 4 of 13 (31%) subjects 
had stable disease (SD).   
Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) are important in 
promoting tumor growth and metastases by inducing 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 23 of 160 
 
epithelial-mesenchymal transition, allowing tumor invasion, and 
promoting angiogenesis. Therefore, MDSCs can be a mechanism 
of resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy.  When used in combination with 
checkpoint inhibitors, agents that inhibit MDSCs can improve 
outcomes in murine models of metastatic disease.  
Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) is a non-receptor enzyme of the Tec 
kinase family that is expressed in B cells, myeloid cells, and mast 
cells, where it regulates cellular proliferation, differentiation, 
apoptosis, and cell migration.  BTK inhibition leads to preferential 
differentiation of macrophages into M1 instead of 
immunosuppressive M2 macrophages; BTK inhibition thus 
decreases the tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) that 
promote tumor invasion and metastasis.  BTK is also 
overexpressed in ovarian cancer stem cells (CSCs).  CSCs are 
associated with resistance to chemotherapy including platinum-
based chemotherapy.  Recently reported results, using ovarian 
cancer cells lines, suggest BTK inhibition can sensitize cancer 
cells to cisplatin.   
Acerta Pharma BV is developing ACP-196, an orally administered, 
small molecule inhibitor of BTK.  A Phase 1 study of ACP-196 in 
60 subjects with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia 
(CLL) showed an overall response rate (ORR) of 95%.  ACP-196 
monotherapy has shown robust antitumor activity in murine solid 
tumor models.  The antitumor effect observed with ACP-196 
correlates with biomarkers of response similar to those reported for 
other immunomodulating agents such as inhibitors of cytotoxic 
t-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), PD-1 and PD-L1.  
To determine whether there is potential synergy between BTK 
inhibition and PD-1 blockade, Acerta has conducted a nonclinical 
study of ACP-196 in combination with an anti-PD-L1 antibody in an 
orthotopic colon cancer murine model.  Treatment with anti-PD-L1 
as a single agent reduced tumor growth, but tumor regression was 
not observed. However, combined anti-PD-L1 and ACP-196 
treatment showed a further reduction in tumor growth.  Specifically, 
6 of 9 animals displayed tumor regression compared with no 
animals treated with anti-PD-L1 alone (Figure 1-9). These results 
suggest the combination therapy of BTK inhibition and PD-1 
blockade leads to greater benefit compared with PD-1 blockade 
alone. 
This proof-of-concept study will assess the clinical potential of a 
targeted dual inhibition approach by evaluating the safety, 
pharmacodynamics (PD), pharmacokinetics (PK), and efficacy of 
ACP-196 and pembrolizumab in subjects with recurrent ovarian 
cancer. 
Study Design: 
This clinical trial is a Phase 2, multicenter, open-label, randomized 
study evaluating ACP-196 monotherapy and the combination of 
ACP-196 and pembrolizumab in subjects who have recurrent 
ovarian cancer.   

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 24 of 160 
 
Subjects meeting the eligibility criteria for the study will be 
randomized 1:1 using an Interactive Voice/Web Response System 
(IXRS) to one of the following arms: 
 
Arm 1:  ACP-196 100 mg administered orally (PO) twice per day 
(BID) 
Arm 2:  ACP-196 100 mg PO BID plus pembrolizumab 200 mg 
administered as an intravenous (IV) infusion every 3 weeks (Q3W) 
 
Analyses for futility will be done as outlined in Section 5.5. 
ACP-196 treatment can continue for subjects who are tolerating 
therapy and not progressing.  Pembrolizumab treatment is for 
24 months from the date of first dose for subjects who are 
tolerating therapy and not progressing.  Subjects who have 
confirmed progressive disease on the combination of 
pembrolizumab and ACP-196 will discontinue study treatment 
while those in the ACP-196 monotherapy arm with confirmed 
progressive disease may continue on ACP-196 with the addition of 
pembrolizumab until a second disease progression.  The 
immune-related response criteria (irRECIST; Appendix 8) will be 
used to determine progression on this study.  Subjects who 
discontinue study drug for any reason other than disease 
progression, death, lost to follow-up, or withdrawal of consent will 
be followed for tumor assessment until disease progression or 
initiation of any other anticancer therapies, whichever comes first. 
Pembrolizumab treatment can end for subjects with confirmed 
complete response (CR) if treatment has been administered for at 
least 24 weeks and 2 doses of pembrolizumab have been 
administered after confirmation of CR.  ACP-196 treatment on this 
protocol can continue for a minimum of 12 months after the last 
subject is randomized to the study.   
Refer to Appendix 4 and Appendix 5 for comprehensive lists of 
study assessments and their timing.  A study schema is provided 
in Figure 3-1. 
Study Objectives: 
Primary Objectives: 
To characterize the safety profile of ACP-196 monotherapy and 
ACP-196 plus pembrolizumab in subjects with recurrent ovarian 
cancer 
Secondary Objective: 
To evaluate the efficacy of ACP-196 monotherapy and ACP-196 
and pembrolizumab combination treatment in subjects with 
recurrent ovarian cancer using standard response criteria  

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 25 of 160 
 
Exploratory Objectives: 
• 
To determine the effects of ACP-196 alone and in 
combination with pembrolizumab on peripheral blood 
T cells and MDSCs 
• 
To evaluate the PK of ACP-196 alone and in combination 
with pembrolizumab 
• 
To determine if any characteristics of peripheral blood 
T cells and/or MDSCs correlate with immune-mediated 
toxicities 
• 
To assess if any characteristics of peripheral blood T cells 
and/or MDSCs correlate with response to ACP-196 alone 
or ACP-196 and pembrolizumab  
• 
To explore whether any baseline tumor characteristics 
correlate with response to ACP-196 alone or ACP-196 and 
pembrolizumab 
• 
To evaluate the efficacy of adding pembrolizumab to 
ACP-196 in subjects who progress on ACP-196 
monotherapy 
Safety Endpoints: 
Type, frequency, severity, timing of onset, duration, and 
relationship to study drug of any treatment-emergent AEs or 
abnormalities of laboratory tests; serious adverse events (SAEs); 
AEs of clinical interest, or AEs leading to discontinuation of study 
treatment. 
Pharmacodynamic, 
Pharmacokinetic and 
Biomarker 
Parameters: 
The occupancy of BTK by ACP-196 will be measured in peripheral 
blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) with the aid of a biotin-tagged 
ACP-196 analogue probe.  The effect of ACP-196 alone and 
ACP-196 and pembrolizumab on B cells, T cells, and MDSCs will 
also be evaluated.  Tumor tissue, when available, will be evaluated 
for PD-L1 and BTK expression.  ACP-196 concentrations will be 
measured in blood plasma. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 26 of 160 
 
Efficacy Endpoints: 
• 
ORR, defined as partial response (PR) and complete response 
(CR), based on modified RECIST 1.1 criteria (Appendix 7) 
• 
Disease control rate (DCR), defined as CR, PR, and stable 
disease (SD) based on modified RECIST 1.1 criteria 
• 
Duration of response (DOR) 
• 
Progression-free survival (PFS) 
• 
Overall survival (OS) 
• 
Change in serum CA-125 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Sample Size: 
 
. 
Inclusion Criteria: 
1. Women ≥ 18 years of age. 
2. Histologically confirmed ovarian epithelial (including fallopian 
tube and primary peritoneal) carcinoma.  
3. Radiographic progression of disease after the most recent 
anticancer treatment.  At least 1 prior chemotherapy regimen 
must have included a taxane. 
4. Platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer defined by recurrence or 
progression of disease > 6 AND < 24 months after completion 
of the most recent platinum-based therapy. 
5. Measurable disease as defined by RECIST 1.1. 
6. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance 
status of 0 or 1. 
7. Completion of all therapy (including surgery, radiotherapy, 
chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or investigational therapy) for 
the treatment of cancer ≥ 2 weeks before the start of study 
therapy and recovered (ie, Grade ≤ 1 or baseline) from AEs 
associated with prior cancer therapy.  Note:  Subjects with 
Grade ≤ 2 neuropathy or Grade ≤ 2 alopecia are an exception 
to the latter criterion and may qualify for the study. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 27 of 160 
 
8. Women who are sexually active and can bear children must 
agree to use acceptable forms of contraception during the 
study and for 90 days after the last dose of ACP-196 or 
120 days after the last dose of pembrolizumab, whichever is 
longer.  Note:  Acceptable forms of contraception are defined in 
Section 3.9.6. 
9. Able to provide tissue for biomarker analysis from either an 
archived tissue sample or newly obtained core or excisional 
biopsy of a tumor lesion not previously irradiated. 
10. Willing and able to participate in all required evaluations and 
procedures in this study protocol including swallowing capsules 
without difficulty. 
11. Ability to understand the purpose and risks of the study and 
provide signed and dated informed consent and authorization 
to use protected health information (in accordance with 
national and local patient privacy regulations). 
Exclusion Criteria: 
1. Evidence of platinum-refractory ovarian cancer defined as 
recurrence or progression during the first 6 cycles of or 
< 6 months after the beginning of first-line platinum-based 
chemotherapy. 
2. Evidence of platinum-resistant ovarian cancer defined as 
recurrence or progression within 6 months after completing the 
most recent platinum-based therapy. 
3. Ascites requiring paracentesis every 2 weeks or more 
frequently. 
4. More than 3 prior lines of cytotoxic chemotherapy for ovarian 
cancer.  Hormonal therapy, maintenance therapy, and 
molecular-targeted interventions (such as bevacizumab, 
tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and poly ADP ribose polymerase 
[PARP] inhibitors) are not counted as separate lines of 
treatment, unless administered in conjunction with cytotoxic 
chemotherapy.  See specific treatment exclusions below. 
5. Prior therapy with any inhibitor of BTK, protein kinase B (AKT), 
Janus kinase (JAK), mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), 
phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase (PI3K), or spleen tyrosine kinase 
(SYK). 
6. Prior therapy with an anti-PD-1, anti-PD-L1, anti-PD ligand 2 
(anti-PD-L2), anti-CD137, or anti-CTLA-4 antibody (including 
ipilimumab, tremelimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, 
MPDL3280A or any other antibody or drug specifically 
targeting T-cell costimulation or checkpoint pathways). 
7. Prior malignancy (other than ovarian cancer), except for 
adequately treated basal cell or squamous cell skin cancer, in 
situ cervical cancer, or other cancer from which the subject has 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 28 of 160 
 
been disease free for ≥ 2 years.  Note: These cases must be 
discussed with the medical monitor. 
8. Known central nervous system metastases and/or 
carcinomatous meningitis.  Brain metastases, but not 
carcinomatous meningitis, are allowed if they had been 
previously treated (either surgically resected or by radiation 
therapy) and had remained stable by repeat imaging ≥ 4 weeks 
after treatment before enrolling on this protocol.  
9. Significant cardiovascular disease such as uncontrolled or 
symptomatic arrhythmias, congestive heart failure, or 
myocardial infarction within 6 months of screening, or any 
Class 3 or 4 cardiac disease as defined by the New York Heart 
Association Functional Classification, or corrected QT interval 
(QTc) > 480 msec at screening. 
10. Malabsorption syndrome, disease significantly affecting 
gastrointestinal function, resection of the stomach, 
symptomatic inflammatory bowel disease, gastric restrictions 
and/or bariatric surgery. 
11. Receiving ongoing immunosuppressive therapy, including 
systemic or enteric corticosteroids except for minimally 
systemically absorbed treatments (such as inhaled or topical 
steroid therapy for asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary 
disease [COPD], or allergic rhinitis) within 7 days before the 
first dose of pembrolizumab. 
12. Active autoimmune disease that has required systemic 
treatment in past 2 years (ie, with use of disease modifying 
agents, corticosteroids or immunosuppressive drugs).  Note: 
Replacement therapy (eg, thyroxine, insulin, or physiologic 
corticosteroid replacement therapy for adrenal or pituitary 
insufficiency) is not considered a form of systemic treatment. 
13. Has evidence of active, non-infectious pneumonitis or a history 
of interstitial lung disease. 
14. History of severe allergic, anaphylactic, or other 
hypersensitivity reactions to chimeric or humanized antibodies 
or fusion proteins. 
15. History of bleeding diathesis (eg, hemophilia or von Willebrand 
disease). 
16. Requires treatment with a strong cytochrome P450 3A 
(CYP3A) inhibitor/inducer. 
17. Requires or receiving anticoagulation with warfarin or 
equivalent vitamin K antagonists (eg, phenprocoumon) within 
7 days of first dose of study drug. 
18. Requires treatment with proton-pump inhibitors (eg, 
omeprazole, esomeprazole, lansoprazole, dexlansoprazole, 
rabeprazole, or pantoprazole). 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 29 of 160 
 
19. Known history of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or 
serologic status indicating active hepatitis C virus (HCV) or 
hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, or any uncontrolled active 
systemic infection.  Note:  Subjects receiving prophylactic 
antibiotics (eg, for prevention of a urinary tract infection or 
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) are eligible. 
a. Subjects who are hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) 
positive and who are surface antigen negative will need 
to have a negative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) 
result before enrollment.  Those who are hepatitis B 
surface antigen (HBsAg) positive or hepatitis B PCR 
positive will be excluded.   
b. Subjects who are hepatitis C antibody positive will 
need to have a negative PCR result before enrollment.  
Those who are hepatitis C PCR positive will be 
excluded. 
20. History of stroke or intracranial hemorrhage within 6 months 
before the first dose of study drug. 
21. Major surgical procedure within 28 days of first dose of study 
drug.  Note:  If a subject had major surgery, they must have 
recovered adequately from any toxicity and/or complications 
from the intervention before the first dose of study drug. 
22. Has received a live vaccine within 30 days of planned start of 
study therapy. 
23. Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) < 1.5 x 109/L or platelet count 
< 100 x 109/L or hemoglobin < 8.0 g/dL. 
24. Total bilirubin > 1.5 x upper limit of normal (ULN); or aspartate 
aminotransferase (AST) or alanine aminotransferase (ALT) 
> 3.0 x ULN. 
25. Estimated creatinine clearance of < 30 mL/min, calculated 
using the formula of Cockroft and Gault [(140-Age) • Mass 
(kg)/(72 • creatinine mg/dL); multiply by 0.85 if female]. 
26. Breastfeeding or pregnant or expecting to conceive children 
within the projected duration of the trial, starting with the 
screening visit through 120 days after the last dose of trial 
treatment. 
27. Is currently participating in a clinical trial and receiving study 
therapy or has participated in a study of an investigational 
agent and received study therapy or used an investigational 
device within 4 weeks of the first dose of treatment. 
28. Immediate family members of the sponsor personnel or site 
staff directly involved with the conduct of this protocol are 
excluded from participating on this study. 
29. Presence of a gastrointestinal ulcer diagnosed by endoscopy 
within 3 months before screening. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 30 of 160 
 
30. Known or active tuberculosis infection.  Note:  Tuberculosis 
testing is not required for this protocol. 
Dose Regimen/Route 
of Administration: 
ACP-196 is provided as hard gelatin capsules for oral 
administration. 
KEYTRUDA® (pembrolizumab) for injection is provided as a 
lyophilized powder for reconstitution (50 mg/vial).  It is 
administered as an IV infusion over 30 minutes. 
ACP-196 administration will begin on Day 1 with the first dose 
taken before the initial pembrolizumab infusion.   
Concomitant 
Medications: 
The concomitant use of strong inhibitors/inducers of CYP3A with 
ACP-196 should be avoided when possible.  The effect of agents 
that reduce gastric acidity (eg, proton-pump inhibitors, H2-receptor 
antagonists or antacids) on ACP-196 absorption was evaluated in 
a healthy volunteer study (ACE-HV-004).  Results from this study 
indicate that subjects should avoid the use of calcium carbonate-
containing drugs or supplements and short-acting H2-receptor 
antagonists for a period of at least 2 hours before and after taking 
ACP-196.  Use of omeprazole or esomeprazole or any other 
proton-pump inhibitors while taking ACP-196 is not recommended 
due to a potential decrease in study drug exposure.   
Statistical Methods: 
Descriptive statistics (including means, standard deviations, and 
medians for continuous variables and proportions and confidence 
intervals [CIs] for discrete variables) will be used to summarize 
data as appropriate. 
Statistical Basis for the Sample Size 
The sample size for this study is 
 in each arm.  The 
sample size for this study will provide adequate estimation utility 
for both the safety endpoint and the key efficacy endpoint of 
investigator-assessed ORR (per RECIST 1.1). In each treatment 
arm, the probability of observing one or more instances of a 
specific AE with a true incidence rate of 5% is 86%. This provides 
reasonable assurance that events occurring at ≥ 5% frequency will 
be detected in this phase 2 study. For Arm 1, a sample size of 
 at final analysis will provide 80% power to test the null 
hypothesis that ORR is ≤ 15% versus the alternative hypothesis 
that ORR is ≥ 31% with a 1-sided one sample Chi-square test at 
0.05 significance level.  For Arm 2, a sample size of 
 at 
final analysis will provide over 80% power to test the null 
hypothesis that ORR is ≤ 20% versus the alternative hypothesis 
that ORR is ≥ 38% with a 1-sided one sample Chi-square test at 
0.05 significance level.   
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 31 of 160 
 
1.0 
BACKGROUND INFORMATION 
1.1 
OVARIAN CANCER 
Ovarian cancer is the eighth most common cause of cancer death worldwide for women 
and is the deadliest of the gynecological cancers, resulting in approximately 
152,000 deaths from this disease in 2012 (Ferlay 2013).  Surgical resection is the main 
treatment for most ovarian cancers with treatment goals of staging and debulking.  
Systemic chemotherapy, often a combination of 2 or more drugs, is useful for cancers 
that have metastasized (ie, Stages II-IV).  The standard approach is the combination of a 
platinum compound, such as cisplatin or carboplatin, and a taxane, such as paclitaxel 
(Taxol®) or docetaxel (Taxotere®).  Radiation therapy is also used, depending on the 
type and stage of the cancer being treated.  
Despite multiple treatment approaches, ovarian cancer survival rates are much lower 
than other cancers that affect women.  The relative 5-year survival rate for ovarian 
cancer is 45% (SEER 2015) and survival rates vary widely depending on the stage of 
diagnosis.  Five-year survival by stage at diagnosis is 92% for localized (confined to 
primary site); however, only 15% of ovarian cancers are diagnosed at the localized 
stage.  Five-year survival by stage at diagnosis is 72% for regional (spread to regional 
lymph nodes), 27% for distant (metastasized), and 22% for unstaged.  Novel targeted 
approaches are still needed in the treatment of ovarian cancer. 
1.2 
PROGRAMMED DEATH LIGAND/RECEPTOR INTERACTIONS IN 
CANCER 
Several negative regulatory checkpoint molecules function to check overstimulation of 
immune responses and contribute to the maintenance of immune tolerance to 
self-antigens (McDermott 2013).  These molecules include CTLA-4 as well as the PD-1 
receptor and its ligands (PD-L1 and PD-L2).  CTLA-4 acts as a signal dampener that 
acts largely within the lymph nodes to regulate the magnitude of early activation of naive 
and memory T cells.  By contrast, PD-1 is induced on T cells after activation in response 
to inflammatory signals and limits T-cell function at sites of infection or tumor in 
peripheral tissues.  As the T-cell response increases, these negative regulatory 
molecules are induced, limiting the magnitude and duration of the response to prevent 
healthy tissue damage.  Tumors are capable of exploiting the homeostatic mechanisms 
regulated by these checkpoint molecules, thus limiting immune destruction.  

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 32 of 160 
 
Over half of solid tumors (including lung cancer, melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, 
pancreatic cancer, ovarian cancer, and others) express PD-L1 in the tumor 
microenvironment, which results in immune tolerance and impaired immune response 
against the tumor (Zou 2006).  Additionally, PD-L1 expression in the tumor 
microenvironment has been shown to be a poor prognostic factor in several cancers 
(Pardoll 2012).  Targeting immune infiltrates and disrupting PD-1 ligand-receptor 
interactions may impair stromal support and enhance immune cell destruction of tumors 
that could offer therapeutic benefits to patients with solid tumors.  Indeed, 
pembrolizumab, a monoclonal antibody directed at PD-1, has been approved for 
treatment of melanoma, and in a recent clinical study of pembrolizumab in subjects with 
advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; N=282), a 21% ORR was observed by 
RECIST v1.1 (26% for treatment naive and 20% for previously treated) (Garon 2014).  
Pembrolizumab was well tolerated with few serious drug-related AEs.  In addition, 
objective responses were seen in patients with advanced or relapsed, platinum-resistant 
ovarian cancer in a Phase 2 trial of another anti-PD-1 antibody (nivolumab); 3 of 13 
(23%) subjects had a PR and 4 of 13 (31%) subjects had SD (Hamanishi 2014). 
1.3 
BRUTON TYROSINE KINASE INHIBITION IN CANCER 
Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) is a non-receptor enzyme in the Tec kinase family that is 
expressed among cells of hematopoietic origin, including B cells, myeloid cells, mast 
cells and platelets, where it regulates multiple cellular processes including proliferation, 
differentiation, apoptosis, and cell migration (Khan 2001, Mohamed 2009, Bradshaw 
2010).  In addition, BTK-dependent activation of mast cells, myeloid cells, and other 
immunocytes in peritumoral inflammatory stroma has been shown to sustain the 
complex microenvironment needed for lymphoid and solid tumor maintenance (Soucek 
2011, Ponader 2012, de Rooij 2012).  
BTK is also expressed in ovarian cancer tissue and overexpression of BTK in ovarian 
cancer is associated with metastasis, stage, and lower survival rate (Zucha 2015; 
PrognoScan bioinformatics database).  BTK expression has been reported specifically in 
ovarian CSCs.  These cells are associated with resistance to chemotherapy including 
platinum-based chemotherapy.  Recently reported results, using ovarian cancer cells 
lines, suggest inhibiting BTK with ibrutinib can sensitize ovarian cancer cells to cisplatin 
treatment (Zucha 2015).  Taken together, these findings suggest inhibition of BTK may 
offer an attractive strategy for targeting ovarian cancer.   

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 33 of 160 
 
In model systems, ex vivo analyses demonstrated BTK inhibition results in macrophages 
that polarize into M1 macrophages, instead of showing enhanced induction of 
immunosuppressive M2 macrophages (Ni Gabhann 2014).  These data suggest 
inhibition of BTK may impair the capacity of TAMs critical for promotion of tumor invasion 
and metastasis (Mouchemore 2013).  Several lines of evidence demonstrate BTK 
inhibition interferes with cross-talk between malignant cells and their microenvironment, 
suggesting disruption of intrinsic and extrinsic survival signals may be a critical 
mechanism for the clinical activity of BTK inhibitors (Ponader 2012, Herman 2013).  
Furthermore, epithelial derived tumors contain large numbers of TAMs, which are the 
dominant innate immune cell in mammary cancers of humans (Pollard 2009).  Therefore, 
the clinical usefulness of BTK inhibitors may extend to the treatment of invasive solid 
tumors. 
BTK is also a signaling hub in immature myeloid cells known as MDSCs (Schmidt 2004).  
Recent evidence suggests MDSCs play an important part in suppression of host immune 
responses through several mechanisms such as production of arginase 1, release of 
reactive oxygen species, nitric oxide and secretion of immune-suppressive cytokines.  
This leads to an immunosuppressive environment necessary for the growth of malignant 
cells (Condamine 2014, Wesolowski 2013).   
Immune evasion is one of the multiple characteristics of cancer.  Monoclonal antibodies 
that block negative regulators of T cells, such as PD-1, amplify immune responses. 
Antibodies against PD-1 are showing impressive results in advanced hematologic and 
solid malignancies (Hamid 2013, Westin 2014, Berger 2008, Topalian 2014). 
Interestingly, studies examining circulating MDSCs in anti-CTL4 and anti-PD-1/PD-L1–
treated patients have shown alterations in the myeloid cell compartment correlate with 
clinical outcome.  Specifically, solid tumor progressors had proportionally higher 
circulating MDSC levels and a high myeloid gene signature (Powles 2014, Heery 2014, 
Weide 2014, Meyer 2014).  Recent preclinical results show elevated MDSC levels are 
responsible for this lack of response and elimination of MDSCs may lead to increased 
efficacy with immune checkpoint blockade (Highfill 2014, Kim 2014).  
Given the potential for BTK inhibition to affect TAMs and MDSCs, single-agent ACP-196 
(15 mg/kg BID) was evaluated in mice in the ID8 syngeneic orthotopic ovarian model.  
Figure 1-1 shows a substantial decrease of tumor growth in this model with ACP-196 
monotherapy compared with vehicle.   

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 34 of 160 
 
Figure 1-1.  ACP-196 Impairs ID8 Ovarian Cancer Growth and Decreased 
Immunosuppressive Cellular Subsets in Syngeneic Murine Model 
 
Abbreviation: MDSC = myeloid-derived suppressor cells. 
Single-agent ACP-196 was also evaluated in mice with NSCLC arising as the result of 
G12D mutant Kras triggered by spontaneous intrachromosomal recombination (KrasLA2 
mice).  This model has several advantages over traditional transgenic strategies, 
including that it more closely recapitulates spontaneous oncogene activation as seen in 
human cancers (Johnson 2001).  Mice were enrolled after identification of spontaneously 
appearing tumors in the lung by micro-computed tomography (CT) scanning (~ 8 to 
10 weeks of age).  Mice were treated with vehicle (N=19) or ACP-196 administered 
orally at a dosage of 15 mg/kg/dose BID (N=18) for 28 days.  As shown in Figure 1-2, 
treatment with single-agent ACP-196 produced tumor regressions, as measured by 
micro-CT scanning, in 14 of 18 mice (78%) compared with 2 of 19 mice (11%) treated 
with vehicle.  

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 35 of 160 
 
Figure 1-2.  Efficacy of ACP-196 Monotherapy in a Genetic Model of Lung Cancer 
 
 
Analysis of tumor tissues showed that immunosuppressive MDSCs (Gr1+Ly6CHi), TAMs 
(CD11b+Ly6ClowF4/80+Csf1r+), and regulatory T cells (Treg) (CD4+CD25+FoxP3+) were 
significantly reduced with ACP-196 treatment (Figure 1-3) by 42%, 58% and 36%, 
respectively.  As seen with the ID8 ovarian model, the decrease in these 
immunosuppressive cell subsets correlated with a significant increase (41%) in CD8+ 
cells (Figure 1-4).  
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 36 of 160 
 
Figure 1-3.  Effects of ACP-196 on Tumor-Associated  
Immunosuppressive Cells in a Genetic Model of Lung Cancer 
 
Abbreviations: MDSCs = myeloid-derived suppressor cells, TAMs = tumor-associated macrophages, Treg = 
regulatory T cells. 
Figure 1-4.  Effects of ACP-196 on Cytolytic T Cells in a Genetic Model of Lung 
Cancer 
 
 
Single-agent ACP-196 was also evaluated in mice with advanced pancreatic cancer 
arising as the result of genetic modifications of oncogenes KRAS and p53, and the 
pancreatic differentiation promoter PDX-1 (KPC mice).  The KPC mouse model 
recapitulates many of the molecular, histopathologic, and clinical features of human 
disease (Westphalen 2012).  Mice were enrolled after identification of spontaneously 
appearing tumors in the pancreas that were ≥ 100 mm3 (as assessed by high-resolution 
ultrasonography).  Mice were treated with vehicle (N=6) or ACP-196 administered orally 
at a dosage of 15 mg/kg/dose BID (N=6). As shown in Figure 1-5, treatment with 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 37 of 160 
 
single-agent ACP-196 substantially slowed pancreatic cancer growth and increased 
animal survival.  
Figure 1-5.  Efficacy of ACP-196 Monotherapy in a Genetic Model of Pancreatic 
Cancer 
 
As seen in the lung and ovarian cancer model, analysis of tumor tissues showed that 
immunosuppressive TAMs (CD11b+Ly6ClowF4/80+Csf1r+), MDSCs (Gr1+Ly6CHi), and Treg 
(CD4+CD25+FoxP3+) were significantly reduced with ACP-196 treatment by 47%, 30%, 
and 20%, respectively (Figure 1-6).  As expected, the decrease in these 
immunosuppressive cell subsets correlated with a significant increase in CD8+ cells 
(Figure 1-7).  

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 38 of 160 
 
Figure 1-6.  Effects of ACP-196 on Tumor-Associated  
Immunosuppressive Cells in a Genetic Model of Pancreatic Cancer 
 
Abbreviations: MDSCs = myeloid-derived suppressor cells, TAMs = tumor-associated macrophages, Treg = 
regulatory T cells. 
Figure 1-7.  Effects of ACP-196 on Cytolytic T Cells in a Genetic Model of 
Pancreatic Cancer 
 
 
Lastly, the activity of ACP-196 was confirmed in an orthotopic mouse model evaluating 
both single-agent and combination efficacy.  In this study, 10,000 KPC mouse pancreatic 
cancer cells were injected into the pancreases of 24 female mice.  After 1 week of 
expansion, drug treatment was started in mice developing pancreatic tumors.  Animals 
were treated with vehicle (N=6); ACP-196, 15 mg/kg/BID given orally (N=6); gemcitabine 
50 mg/kg IV administered every 4 days for 3 injections (N=6); or ACP-196, 15 mg/kg/BID 
given orally together with gemcitabine, 50 mg/kg IV administered every 4 days for 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 39 of 160 
 
3 injections (N=6).  At 2 weeks after initiation of treatment, mice in the vehicle group 
showed signs of deteriorating health and all groups were euthanized.  Tumors were 
collected and measured (Figure 1-8); relative to the vehicle treatment, ACP-196 
monotherapy resulted in a 2-fold reduction in tumor growth, results which compared 
favorably with gemcitabine alone.  The combination of ACP-196 and gemcitabine 
resulted in a further reduction in tumor growth when compared to each single agent. 
Figure 1-8.  Efficacy of ACP-196 Monotherapy and Combination Therapy  
with Gemcitabine in an Orthotopic Model of Pancreatic Cancer 
 
Abbreviation: Gem = gemcitabine. 
In summary, ACP-196 alone and in combination with gemcitabine produces robust 
antitumor effects in established solid tumor models.  The antitumor effect observed with 
ACP-196 correlates with biomarkers of response similar to those reported for other 
immunomodulating agents, such as inhibitors of CTLA-4, PD-1 and PD-L1.   
1.4 
A CASE FOR COMBINATION BTK AND CHECKPOINT BLOCKADE 
To determine whether there is potential synergy between BTK inhibition and PD-1 
blockade, Acerta has conducted a nonclinical study of ACP-196 in combination with an 
anti-PD-L1 antibody in the ID8 ovarian model (described in Section 1.3).  Anti-PD-L1 
antibody (150 μg every 3 days) and ACP-196 (15 mg/kg BID) treatment was begun 
2 weeks after implantation, when the tumors were well established.  Results after 
8 weeks of treatment are provided in Figure 1-9.  The results show the antitumor effect 
of ACP-196 alone is enhanced with the addition of the anti-PD-L1 antibody.  Both of 
these treatment arms produced statistically significant reductions in tumor volume 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 40 of 160 
 
compared with vehicle.  In contrast, the anti-PD-L1 antibody alone did not produce a 
statistically significant reduction in tumor volume.  Similar results were observed when 
ACP-196 was evaluated in combination with the anti-PD-L1 antibody in a murine 
orthotopic colorectal cancer model (Acerta data on file).  These results suggest the 
combination therapy of BTK inhibition and PD-1 blockade leads to greater benefit 
compared with PD-1 blockade alone. 
Figure 1-9.  ACP-196 Antitumor Effect Enhanced in Combination with α-PD-L1 in 
the ID8 Orthotopic Ovarian Cancer Model 
 
Abbreviations: PD-L1 = programmed death ligand-1; TAMs = tumor-associated macrophages; Treg = regulatory T cells. 
In the tumor microenvironment, we observed a significant reduction in the number of 
MDSCs and TAMs in mice treated with ACP-196 alone and in combination with 
anti-PD-L1 antibody (Figure 1-10).  The decrease of MDSCs and TAMs is directly 
related to BTK inhibition.  This effect has been observed in monotherapy studies of 
ACP-196 in murine pancreatic and lung cancer models (as described in Section 1.3).  In 
contrast, the anti-PD-L1 antibody alone had no significant effect on the number of 
MDSCs and TAMs.  As seen in the other cancer models, a statistically significant 
decrease in Treg cells also was observed along with a statistically significant increase in 
CD8+ cells in the tumors (Figure 1-11).  Together, these data implicate tumor-associated 
MDSCs and TAMs in preventing the full benefit of immune checkpoint blockade and 
offer a translatable, therapeutic option by targeting these populations with ACP-196 to 
improve the efficacy of checkpoint blockade. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 41 of 160 
 
Figure 1-10.  Effect on Tumor Infiltrating TAMs and MDSCs 
 
Abbreviations: PD-L1 = programmed death ligand-1; TAMs = tumor-associated macrophages; Treg = 
regulatory T cells. 
Figure 1-11.  Effect on Treg and CD8+ Cells 
 
Abbreviations: PD-L1 = programmed death ligand-1; Treg = regulatory T cells. 
This proof-of-concept study will assess the clinical potential of combined BTK inhibition 
and checkpoint blockade by evaluating the safety, PD, PK and efficacy of ACP-196 
alone and in combination with pembrolizumab in subjects with recurrent ovarian cancer. 
Summaries of preclinical and clinical studies for ACP-196 are provided below.  For more 
detailed information please refer to the Investigator Brochure for ACP-196.  For detailed 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 42 of 160 
 
information on pembrolizumab refer to the KEYTRUDA prescribing information provided 
in Appendix 6 or the Pembrolizumab Investigator Brochure. 
1.5 
ACP-196 
ACP-196 (also known by the nonproprietary name of acalabrutinib) is an 
imidazopyrazine analogue with a molecular weight of 465.5 g/mol.  The compound has 
1 stereogenic center and ACP-196 is the S-enantiomer.  ACP-196 is orally administered 
in animals and is suitable for formulating in capsules.  For clinical testing, ACP-196 has 
been manufactured and formulated according to current Good Manufacturing Practices 
(cGMP). 
ACP-196 is an investigational product and has not been approved for marketing in any 
country.   
1.5.1 
Mechanism of Action 
ACP-196 was specifically designed to be a more potent and selective inhibitor of BTK to 
avoid off-target side effects as seen with ibrutinib.  When profiled against 395 human 
kinases, ACP-196 is more selective than ibrutinib (Covey 2015).  For more detailed 
information please refer to the Investigator Brochure. 
1.5.2 
Safety Pharmacology 
In vitro and in vivo safety pharmacology studies with ACP-196 have demonstrated a 
favorable nonclinical safety profile.  
1.5.3 
Drug-drug Interaction Potential 
For more detailed information on drug-drug interaction potential for ACP-196, refer to the 
Investigator Brochure. 
Please refer to Section 3.9.4 for guidance on drugs that may cause drug-drug 
interactions. 
1.6 
CLINICAL EXPERIENCE – ACP-196 
As of 01 October 2015, ACP-196 has been administered to > 800 participants in clinical 
studies, including subjects with hematologic malignancies, solid tumors, or rheumatoid 
arthritis, and participants who are healthy volunteers or with mild to moderate hepatic 
impairment.  No SAEs have been reported in the hepatic impairment study or in the 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 43 of 160 
 
healthy volunteer studies.  For more detailed information on the clinical experience for 
ACP-196, please refer to the Investigator Brochure.   
This section briefly summarizes data from ACE-CL-001 (NCT02029443), an ongoing 
non-randomized, sequential group, dose-escalation Phase 1/2 study in subjects with 
relapsed/refractory or previously untreated CLL, Richter’s syndrome, or prolymphocytic 
leukemia. 
As of 01 October 2015, 60 subjects with relapsed CLL have been evaluated for tumor 
response based on International Working Group response criteria (Hallek 2008) as 
recently updated (Cheson 2012) to include PR with treatment-induced lymphocytosis 
(PRL).  With a median follow up of 14.3 months, an ORR of 95% has been observed 
(Byrd 2016).  Few subjects have had disease progression and no Richter’s 
transformation has been observed in these subjects. 
1.7 
KEYTRUDA (PEMBROLIZUMAB) 
Pembrolizumab (Keytruda [US]), a humanized monoclonal antibody against the PD-1 
protein, has been developed by Merck & Co for the treatment of patients with cancer.  
Pembrolizumab is approved for treatment of patients with melanoma in several 
countries; in the United States and European Union it is approved for the treatment of 
adult patients with advanced (unresectable or metastatic) melanoma.  Pembrolizumab 
has also been approved for the treatment of patients with NSCLC in several countries; in 
the United States it is indicated for the treatment of patients with metastatic NSCLC 
whose tumors express PD-L1 as determined by an FDA-approved test and who have 
disease progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy.  Patients with 
NSCLC and EGFR or ALK genomic tumor aberrations should also have disease 
progression on FDA-approved therapy for these aberrations prior to receiving 
pembrolizumab.  For complete information on pembrolizumab refer to the KEYTRUDA 
prescribing information (Appendix 6) or to the Investigator Brochure for pembrolizumab.   
Serious adverse reactions associated with pembrolizumab are described in the 
prescribing information (Appendix 6) and also Section 3.7.2 of this protocol. 
1.8 
BENEFIT/RISK 
ACP-196 is a potent, orally administered small molecule inhibitor of BTK.  No SAEs have 
been reported in the hepatic impairment study or in the healthy volunteer studies.  In the 
Phase 1/2 study of ACP-196 in subjects with CLL, an ORR of 95% has been observed 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 44 of 160 
 
with a median follow-up of 14.3 months.  In summary, the preliminary data suggest that 
ACP-196 is well tolerated and has robust activity as a single agent in the treatment of 
subjects with CLL, including those with 17p del.   
Based on the currently known toxicity profiles of ACP-196 and pembrolizumab, 
overlapping toxicities are not anticipated.  In nonclinical studies, ACP-196 monotherapy 
has shown robust antitumor activity in murine solid tumor models of ovarian, lung, and 
pancreatic cancer.  Preliminary results in preclinical cancer models suggests a 
synergistic anti-tumor effect of BTK inhibition in combination with PD-1 blockade.  These 
results support evaluating ACP-196 monotherapy and ACP-196 in combination with 
pembrolizumab in this protocol.   
In the second-line treatment of ovarian cancer, tumor response rates have been found to 
be directly related to the duration of platinum-free interval in subjects with platinum-
sensitive or platinum-resistant disease (Armstrong 2002).  Extending the platinum-free 
interval by delaying rechallenge with platinum in favor of clinical trial participation may 
therefore improve patient outcomes, including in subjects with platinum-sensitive ovarian 
cancer. 
2.0 
STUDY OBJECTIVES 
2.1 
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: 
To characterize the safety profile of ACP-196 and pembrolizumab in subjects with 
recurrent ovarian cancer. 
2.2 
SECONDARY OBJECTIVE: 
To evaluate the efficacy of ACP-196 monotherapy and ACP-196 plus pembrolizumab in 
subjects with recurrent ovarian cancer using standard response criteria. 
2.3 
EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVES 
• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 45 of 160 
 
• 
 
 
 
 
3.0 
STUDY DESIGN 
This clinical trial is a Phase 2, multicenter, open-label, randomized study evaluating 
ACP-196 monotherapy and the combination of ACP-196 and pembrolizumab in subjects 
who have recurrent ovarian cancer.  
Subjects meeting the eligibility criteria for the study will be randomized 1:1 to one of the 
following arms: 
Arm 1:  ACP-196 100 mg administered PO BID 
Arm 2:  ACP-196 100 mg administered PO BID plus pembrolizumab 200 mg IV Q3W 
Analyses for futility will be done as outlined in Section 5.5. 
ACP-196 treatment can continue for subjects who are tolerating therapy and not 
progressing.  Pembrolizumab treatment is for 24 months from the date of first dose for 
subjects who are tolerating therapy and not progressing.  Subjects who have confirmed 
progressive disease on the combination of pembrolizumab and ACP-196 will discontinue 
study treatment.  Subjects who have confirmed progressive disease on ACP-196 
monotherapy arm may continue on ACP-196 with the addition of pembrolizumab until a 
second disease progression; in these subjects, the visit schedule will start over with 
Week 1 as listed in Appendix 5, with coadministration of ACP-196 and pembrolizumab 
beginning in Week 1.  Disease progression will be determined based on irRECIST 
guidelines (Appendix 8 and detailed in Section 3.10).  Subjects who discontinue study 
drug for any reason other than disease progression, death, lost to follow-up or 
withdrawal of consent will be followed for tumor assessment until disease progression or 
initiation of any other anticancer therapies, whichever comes first. 
Pembrolizumab treatment can end for subjects with confirmed CR if treatment has been 
administered for at least 24 weeks and 2 doses of pembrolizumab have been 
administered after confirmation of CR.  ACP-196 treatment on this protocol can continue 
for a minimum of 12 months after the last subject is randomized.   
All subjects will have hematology, chemistry, and urinalysis safety panels performed at 
screening.  Once dosing commences (Day 1), all subjects will be evaluated for safety, 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 46 of 160 
 
including serum chemistry, serum amylase and lipase, and hematology. 
Pharmacodynamic and PK testing will be performed during the first few months of 
treatment.  Radiologic tumor assessments will be completed at baseline and at 
approximately 6-week intervals during the trial. 
Refer to Appendix 4 and Appendix 5 for comprehensive lists of study assessments and 
their timing.  The study schema is provided below (Figure 3-1). 
Figure 3-1.  Study Schema 
 
 
Abbreviations:  BID = twice per day; IV = intravenous; Q3W = every 3 weeks. 
* ACP-196 and pembrolizumab administration begin on the same day.  When both are administered on the 
same day, ACP-196 is administered first followed by the pembrolizumab infusion. 
3.1 
STUDY PARAMETERS 
3.1.1 
Safety Parameters 
The safety of ACP-196 and pembrolizumab will be characterized by the type, frequency, 
severity, timing of onset, duration, and relationship to study drug(s) of any 
treatment-emergent AEs or abnormalities of laboratory tests; SAEs; AEs of clinical 
interest, or AEs leading to discontinuation of study treatment.  
For consistency of interpretation, AEs will be coded using the Medical Dictionary for 
Regulatory Activities (MedDRA), and the severity of AEs and laboratory abnormalities 
will be graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), 
Version 4.03 or higher.  Standard definitions for seriousness will be applied (see 
Section 6.1). 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 47 of 160 
 
3.1.2 
Pharmacodynamic, Pharmacokinetic and Biomarker 
Parameters 
The occupancy of BTK by ACP-196 will be measured in PBMCs with the aid of a 
biotin-tagged ACP-196 analogue probe.  The effect of ACP-196 and pembrolizumab on 
B cells, T cells and MDSCs will also be evaluated.  Tumor tissue, when available, will be 
evaluated for PD-L1 and BTK expression.  Additional exploratory correlative studies of 
tumor tissue, when available, may include characterization of tumor subtypes by 
immunohistochemistry, gene expression or mutation analysis.   
The following PK parameters will be calculated, whenever possible, from plasma 
concentrations of ACP-196: 
• 
AUC0-last:  Area under the plasma concentration-time curve calculated using 
linear trapezoidal summation from time 0 to time last, where “last” is the time of 
the last measurable concentration. 
• 
AUC0-12:  Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 hours, 
calculated using linear trapezoidal summation. 
• 
AUC0-inf:  Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to infinity, 
calculated using the formula: AUC0-inf = AUC0-last + Clast / λz, where λz is the 
apparent terminal elimination rate constant. 
• 
AUC0-24calc:  Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 hours, 
calculated by doubling the value for AUC0-12 
• 
Cmax:  Maximum observed plasma concentration 
• 
Tmax:  Time of the maximum plasma concentration (obtained without interpolation) 
• 
t½:  Terminal elimination half-life (whenever possible) 
• 
λz: Terminal elimination rate constant (whenever possible) 
• 
CL/F:  Oral clearance 
• 
Vz/F:  Oral volume of distribution 
3.1.3 
Efficacy Parameters 
Efficacy will be evaluated based on assessments of tumor response and progression 
using RECIST, Version 1.1 (Eisenhauer 2009; Appendix 7). 
Efficacy endpoints will include: 
• 
Overall response rate (ORR)  
• 
Disease control rate (DCR) 
• 
Duration of response (DOR) 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 48 of 160 
 
• 
Progression-free survival (PFS) 
• 
Overall survival (OS) 
• 
Change in serum CA-125  
Exploratory efficacy endpoints in this study will use the irRECIST to take into account the 
clinical finding that some study subjects receiving immunotherapies can experience 
transient increases in lesion size or new lesions (“pseudoprogression”) before 
immunotherapy-induced tumor regression (Wolchok 2009, Hamid 2013, Nishino 2013, 
Bohnsack 2014).  Guidelines on the irRECIST are provided in Appendix 8.  
Exploratory efficacy endpoints will include: 
• 
irORR (irCR + irPR) 
• 
irDCR (irCR + irPR + irSD) 
• 
irDOR 
• 
irPFS 
3.2 
RATIONALE FOR STUDY DESIGN AND DOSING REGIMEN 
As described in Section 1.6, ACP-196 is currently being evaluated in a Phase 1/2 study 
in subjects with CLL (ACE-CL-001).  In this study, subjects have received oral dosages 
of 100 to 400 mg QD and 100 to 200 mg BID of ACP-196.  All tested dose levels have 
been well tolerated.  No DLT has occurred at any dose level and the MTD has not been 
reached. 
Robust clinical responses have been observed with dosages as low as 100 mg QD.  
Preliminary PK data from ACE-CL-001 suggests a plateauing of exposure after 250 mg 
QD.  PD results from this study also show 100 and 200 mg BID have the highest BTK 
occupancy at 24 hours of all the regimens evaluated.   
The dose of pembrolizumab planned to be studied in this trial is 200 mg Q3W.  The dose 
recently approved in the United States and several other countries for treatment of 
melanoma subjects is 2 mg/kg Q3W.  Information on the rationale for selecting 200 mg 
Q3W is summarized below. 
KEYNOTE-001 was an open-label Phase 1 study conducted to evaluate the safety, 
tolerability, PK and PD, and antitumor activity of pembrolizumab when administered as 
monotherapy.  The dose escalation portion of this trial evaluated 3 dose levels, 1 mg/kg, 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 49 of 160 
 
3 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg, administered every 2 weeks (Q2W) and dose expansion cohorts 
evaluated 2 mg/kg Q3W and 10 mg/kg Q3W in subjects with advanced solid tumors.  All 
dose levels were well tolerated and no DLTs were observed.  This first-in-human study 
of pembrolizumab showed evidence of target engagement and objective evidence of 
tumor size reduction at all dose levels.  No MTD has been identified.  In addition, 
2 randomized cohort evaluations of melanoma subjects receiving pembrolizumab at a 
dose of 2 mg/kg versus 10 mg/kg Q3W have been completed, and 1 randomized cohort 
evaluating 10 mg/kg Q3W versus 10 mg/kg Q2W has also been completed.  The clinical 
efficacy and safety data demonstrate a lack of important differences in efficacy or safety 
profile across doses.  
An integrated body of evidence suggests that 200 mg Q3W is expected to provide 
similar response to 2 mg/kg Q3W, 10 mg/kg Q3W and 10 mg/kg Q2W.  Previously, a flat 
pembrolizumab exposure-response relationship for efficacy and safety has been found 
in subjects with melanoma in the range of doses between 2 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg.  
Exposures for 200 mg Q3W are expected to lie within this range and will be close to 
those obtained with 2 mg/kg Q3W dose.   
A population pharmacokinetic (PK) model, which characterized the influence of body 
weight and other patient covariates on exposure, has been developed.  The PK profile of 
pembrolizumab is consistent with that of other humanized monoclonal antibodies, which 
typically have a low clearance and a limited volume of distribution.  The distribution of 
exposures from the 200 mg fixed dose are predicted to considerably overlap those 
obtained with the 2 mg/kg dose and importantly will maintain individual patient 
exposures within the exposure range established in melanoma as associated with 
maximal clinical response.  PK properties of pembrolizumab, and specifically the weight-
dependency in clearance and volume of distribution are consistent with no meaningful 
advantage to weight-based dosing relative to fixed dosing.    
In translating to other tumor indications, similarly flat exposure-response relationships for 
efficacy and safety as observed in subjects with melanoma can be expected, as the 
antitumor effect of pembrolizumab is driven through immune system activation rather 
than through a direct interaction with tumor cells, rendering it independent of the specific 
tumor type.  In addition, available PK results in subjects with melanoma, NSCLC, and 
other tumor types support a lack of meaningful difference in pharmacokinetic exposures 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 50 of 160 
 
obtained at tested doses among tumor types.  Thus the 200 mg Q3W fixed-dose 
regimen is considered an appropriate fixed dose for other tumor indications as well.   
A fixed dose regimen will simplify the dosing regimen to be more convenient for 
physicians and to reduce potential for dosing errors.  A fixed dosing scheme will also 
reduce complexity in the logistical chain at treatment facilities and reduce wastage.  The 
existing data suggest 200 mg Q3W as the appropriate dose for pembrolizumab.  
As described in Section 1.3 and Section 1.4, Acerta Pharma has conducted nonclinical 
solid tumor studies of ACP-196 monotherapy and ACP-196 in combination with an 
anti-PD-L1 antibody to evaluate the potential synergy of BTK inhibition with PD-1 
blockade.  The robust results observed for ACP-196 monotherapy and in combination 
with PD-1 blockade warrant testing these regimens on this protocol.   
3.3 
SELECTION OF STUDY POPULATION 
3.3.1 
Inclusion Criteria 
Eligible subjects will be considered for inclusion in this study if they meet all of the 
following criteria:  
1. Women ≥ 18 years of age. 
2. Histologically confirmed ovarian epithelial (including fallopian tube and primary 
peritoneal) carcinoma.  
3. Radiographic progression of disease after the most recent anticancer treatment.  At 
least 1 prior chemotherapy regimen must have included a taxane.  
4. Platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer defined by recurrence or progression of disease 
> 6 AND < 24 months after completion of the most recent platinum-based therapy. 
5. Measurable disease as defined by RECIST 1.1. 
6. ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. 
7. Completion of all therapy (including surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, 
immunotherapy, or investigational therapy) for the treatment of cancer ≥ 2 weeks 
before the start of study therapy and recovered (ie, Grade ≤ 1 or baseline) from AEs 
associated with prior cancer therapy.  Note:  Subjects with Grade ≤ 2 neuropathy or 
Grade ≤ 2 alopecia are an exception to the latter criterion and may qualify for the 
study. 
8. Women who are sexually active and can bear children must agree to use acceptable 
forms of contraception during the study and for 90 days after the last dose of 
ACP-196 or 120 days after the last dose of pembrolizumab, whichever is longer.  
Note:  Acceptable forms of contraception are defined in Section 3.9.6. 
9. Able to provide tissue for biomarker analysis from either an archived tissue sample 
or newly obtained core or excisional biopsy of a tumor lesion not previously 
irradiated. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 51 of 160 
 
10. Willing and able to participate in all required evaluations and procedures in this study 
protocol including swallowing capsules without difficulty. 
11. Ability to understand the purpose and risks of the study and provide signed and 
dated informed consent and authorization to use protected health information (in 
accordance with national and local patient privacy regulations).  
3.3.2 
Exclusion Criteria 
Subjects will be ineligible for this study if they meet any of the following criteria: 
1. Evidence of platinum-refractory ovarian cancer defined as recurrence or progression 
during the first 6 cycles of or < 6 months after the beginning of first-line 
platinum-based chemotherapy. 
2. Evidence of platinum-resistant ovarian cancer defined as recurrence or progression 
within 6 months after completing the most recent platinum-based therapy. 
3. Ascites requiring paracentesis every 2 weeks or more frequently. 
4. More than 3 prior lines of cytotoxic chemotherapy for ovarian cancer.  Hormonal 
therapy, maintenance therapy, and molecular-targeted interventions (such as 
bevacizumab, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and PARP inhibitors) are not counted as 
separate lines of treatment, unless administered in conjunction with cytotoxic 
chemotherapy. See specific treatment exclusions below. 
5. Prior therapy with any inhibitor of BTK, AKT, JAK, mTOR, PI3K, or SYK. 
6. Prior therapy with an anti-PD-1, anti-PD-L1, anti-PD-L2, anti-CD137, or anti-CTLA-4 
antibody (including ipilimumab, tremelimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, 
MPDL3280A or any other antibody or drug specifically targeting T-cell costimulation 
or checkpoint pathways). 
7. Prior malignancy (other than ovarian cancer), except for adequately treated basal 
cell or squamous cell skin cancer, in situ cervical cancer, or other cancer from which 
the subject has been disease free for ≥ 2 years. Note: These cases must be 
discussed with the medical monitor. 
8. Known central nervous system metastases and/or carcinomatous meningitis.  Brain 
metastases, but not carcinomatous meningitis, are allowed if they had been 
previously treated (either surgically resected or by radiation therapy) and had 
remained stable by repeat imaging ≥ 4 weeks after treatment before enrolling on this 
protocol. 
9. Significant cardiovascular disease such as uncontrolled or symptomatic arrhythmias, 
congestive heart failure, or myocardial infarction within 6 months of screening, or any 
Class 3 or 4 cardiac disease as defined by the New York Heart Association 
Functional Classification, or QTc > 480 msec at screening. 
10. Malabsorption syndrome, disease significantly affecting gastrointestinal function, 
resection of the stomach, symptomatic inflammatory bowel disease, gastric 
restrictions and/or bariatric surgery. 
11. Receiving ongoing immunosuppressive therapy, including systemic or enteric 
corticosteroids except for minimally systemically absorbed treatments (such as 
inhaled or topical steroid therapy for asthma, COPD, or allergic rhinitis) within 7 days 
before the first dose of pembrolizumab. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 52 of 160 
 
12. Active autoimmune disease that has required systemic treatment in past 2 years (ie, 
with use of disease modifying agents, corticosteroids or immunosuppressive drugs). 
Note: Replacement therapy (eg, thyroxine, insulin, or physiologic corticosteroid 
replacement therapy for adrenal or pituitary insufficiency) is not considered a form of 
systemic treatment. 
13. Has evidence of active, non-infectious pneumonitis or a history of interstitial lung 
disease. 
14. History of severe allergic, anaphylactic, or other hypersensitivity reactions to chimeric 
or humanized antibodies or fusion proteins. 
15. History of bleeding diathesis (eg, hemophilia or von Willebrand disease). 
16. Requires treatment with a strong CYP3A inhibitor/inducer. 
17. Requires or receiving anticoagulation with warfarin or equivalent vitamin K 
antagonists (eg, phenprocoumon) within 7 days of first dose of study drug. 
18. Requires treatment with proton-pump inhibitors (eg, omeprazole, esomeprazole, 
lansoprazole, dexlansoprazole, rabeprazole, or pantoprazole). 
19. Known history of HIV or serologic status indicating active HCV or HBV infection, or 
any uncontrolled active systemic infection.  Note:  Subjects receiving prophylactic 
antibiotics (eg, for prevention of a urinary tract infection or chronic obstructive 
pulmonary disease) are eligible. 
a) Subjects who are anti-HBc positive and who are surface antigen negative will 
need to have a negative PCR result before enrollment.  Those who are HBsAg 
positive or hepatitis B PCR positive will be excluded.   
b) Subjects who are hepatitis C antibody positive will need to have a negative PCR 
result before enrollment.  Those who are hepatitis C PCR positive will be 
excluded. 
20. History of stroke or intracranial hemorrhage within 6 months before the first dose of 
study drug. 
21. Major surgical procedure within 28 days of first dose of study drug.  Note:  If a 
subject had major surgery, they must have recovered adequately from any toxicity 
and/or complications from the intervention before the first dose of study drug. 
22. Has received a live vaccine within 30 days of planned start of study therapy. 
23. ANC < 1.5 x 109/L or platelet count < 100 x 109/L or hemoglobin < 8.0 g/dL. 
24. Total bilirubin > 1.5 x ULN; and AST or ALT > 3.0 x ULN. 
25. Estimated creatinine clearance of < 30 mL/min, calculated using the formula of 
Cockroft and Gault [(140-Age) • Mass (kg)/(72 • creatinine mg/dL); multiply by 0.85 if 
female]. 
26. Breastfeeding or pregnant or expecting to conceive children within the projected 
duration of the trial, starting with the screening visit through 120 days after the last 
dose of trial treatment. 
27. Is currently participating in a clinical trial and receiving study therapy or has 
participated in a study of an investigational agent and received study therapy or used 
an investigational device within 4 weeks of the first dose of treatment. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 53 of 160 
 
28. Immediate family members of the sponsor personnel or site staff directly involved 
with the conduct of this protocol are excluded from participating on this study. 
29. Presence of a gastrointestinal ulcer diagnosed by endoscopy within 3 months before 
screening. 
30. Known or active tuberculosis infection.  Note:  Tuberculosis testing is not required for 
this protocol. 
3.3.3 
Replacement of Subjects 
Subjects will not be replaced on this study.  
3.3.4 
Enrollment and Randomization Procedures 
Enrollment of a subject into the study will be performed according to the following 
procedure:  
• 
The study center will notify the sponsor when a clinically eligible subject is 
identified and is ready to screen, to ensure enrollment availability on the study. 
• 
After the subject has signed and dated the Informed Consent Form (ICF), all 
screening procedures have been completed, and eligibility has been confirmed, 
the subject can be officially enrolled into the study.  
• 
To enroll a subject, the study center will fax/email a completed Enrollment 
Confirmation Form to the sponsor.  The enrollment date will be the date that the 
sponsor confirms enrollment.   
• 
The sponsor will aim to fax/email a completed Enrollment Confirmation Form to 
the study center within 24 hours. 
• 
Treatment assignment will occur through the use of an IXRS.  As subjects qualify 
for enrollment, designated study center personnel will contact the IXRS, which 
will assign a treatment arm to each eligible subject.   
Treatment must begin within the screening window (Section 4.1) and after the site has 
received the treatment allocation per IXRS.   
3.4 
STUDY DRUGS  
3.4.1 
Premedications 
No specific premedications or supporting medications are required in conjunction with 
ACP-196 or pembrolizumab administration.  
3.4.2 
Formulation, Packaging, and Storage 
ACP-196 
ACP-196 is manufactured according to cGMP regulations and will be provided to the 
investigational site by Acerta Pharma or designee.  ACP-196 should be stored according 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 54 of 160 
 
to the instructions on the label that is affixed to the package of the drug product.  
ACP-196 will be provided in white, high-density polyethylene bottles.   
If a drug shipment arrives damaged, or if there are any other drug complaints, a Product 
Complaint Form should be completed and emailed or faxed to the sponsor or the 
sponsor’s representative.  Refer to the ACP-196 Investigator Brochure for additional 
information regarding the drug product to be used in this trial. 
Pembrolizumab 
Pembrolizumab Clinical Supplies will be provided by the sponsor as summarized in 
Table 3-1.   
Table 3-1.  Pembrolizumab Product Descriptions 
Product Name & Potency 
Dosage Form 
MK-3475 50 mg 
Lyophilized Powder for Injection 
Information on the formulation, packaging and storage of pembrolizumab is provided in 
the Pharmacy Manual. 
3.4.3 
Administration of Study Drug  
Investigators are prohibited from supplying ACP-196 to any subjects not properly 
enrolled in this study.  The investigator must ensure that subjects receive ACP-196 or 
pembrolizumab only from personnel who fully understand the procedures for 
administering the drugs. 
ACP-196 100 mg is intended to be administered orally twice daily with 8 ounces 
(approximately 240 mL) of water (avoid grapefruit juice or Seville orange juice due to 
potential inhibition of CYP3A).  Doses should be administered 12 hours apart (a window 
of ± 1 hour is allowed).  The capsules should be swallowed intact and subjects should 
not attempt to open capsules or dissolve them in water.   
If a dose is missed, it can be taken up to 3 hours after the scheduled time with a return 
to the normal schedule the same or following day.  If it has been > 3 hours, the dose 
should not be taken and the subject should take the next dose at the scheduled time the 
next day.  The missed dose will not be made up and must be returned to the site at the 
next scheduled visit. 
Guidance on coadministration of ACP-196 with agents that affect gastric pH is provided 
in Section 3.9.4. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 55 of 160 
 
Pembrolizumab will be administered as a dose of 200 mg using a 30-minute IV infusion.  
Sites should make every effort to target infusion timing to be as close to 30 minutes as 
possible.  However, given the variability of infusion pumps from site to site, a window 
between -5 minutes and +10 minutes is permitted (ie, infusion time is 
30 minutes, -5 min/+10 min).  Detailed information on preparation of pembrolizumab for 
infusion is provided in Appendix 6.  
When ACP-196 and pembrolizumab are administered on the same day, ACP-196 should 
be administered first, followed by pembrolizumab.  When PK sampling is done, the 
pembrolizumab infusion should begin within 10 minutes of ingesting ACP-196. 
3.4.4 
Assuring Subject Compliance 
For treatments that are taken in the clinic, subjects should take the dose from the drug 
dispensed for them for that particular time period.  All other ACP-196 treatments will be 
taken at home.  Subjects will receive a drug diary to record the specific time each dose 
was taken and to record reasons for any missed doses.   
Pembrolizumab infusions will be administered only at the clinics per the study schedule.  
Missed doses of pembrolizumab should not be made up, with the next dose occurring in 
agreement with the original schedule for this agent (every 3 weeks).  
Subject compliance with ACP-196 dosing will be assessed at every visit.  The subject 
will be instructed to bring the diary and any remaining capsules to the clinic at their next 
visit.  The study staff will review the diary and ask the subject if all of the capsules were 
administered.  Any remaining or returned capsules will be counted and recorded as 
described in Section 7.6.  Returned capsules must not be redispensed to another 
subject.  
3.5 
STUDY TREATMENT SCHEDULE 
3.5.1 
Arm 1 – ACP-196 Monotherapy 
The ACP-196 100 mg BID will be PO.   
3.5.2 
Arm 2 – Combination Treatment 
The dose of ACP-196 is 100 mg BID PO.    
Pembrolizumab 200 mg will be administered every 3 weeks (± 3 days) by IV infusion for 
a maximum of 24 months from the date of first dose.   

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 56 of 160 
 
ACP-196 and pembrolizumab dosing will begin on the same day of Week 1.  When 
ACP-196 and pembrolizumab are administered on the same day, ACP-196 should be 
administered first, followed by pembrolizumab.   
3.6 
DURATION OF THERAPY 
Subjects may continue to receive ACP-196 treatment until disease progression or an 
unacceptable drug-related toxicity occurs as defined in the protocol.  Pembrolizumab 
treatment is for 24 months from the date of first dose for subjects who are tolerating 
therapy and not progressing.  Pembrolizumab treatment can end for subjects with 
confirmed CR if treatment has been administered for at least 24 weeks and 2 doses of 
pembrolizumab have been administered after confirmation of CR. 
ACP-196 treatment on this protocol can continue for a minimum of 12 months after the 
last subject is randomized to the study.   
3.7 
DOSING DELAYS AND MODIFICATIONS 
Subjects should be followed closely for AEs or laboratory abnormalities that might 
indicate ACP-196- or pembrolizumab-related toxicity.  If a subject experiences an 
intolerable AE during the course of therapy, then ACP-196, pembrolizumab, or both 
drugs should be held, as necessary, until the AE resolves or stabilizes to an acceptable 
degree.  In cases where pembrolizumab is held, pembrolizumab should be restarted in 
agreement with its original dosing schedule (every 3 weeks).  As appropriate, certain 
laboratory abnormalities may warrant more frequent monitoring (eg, once per week) until 
abnormalities have recovered to Grade ≤ 1.   
3.7.1 
Dose Modifications for ACP-196 
The actions in Table 3-2 should be followed for the following treatment-emergent 
toxicities: 
• 
Grade 4 ANC (< 500/μL) for > 7 days (neutrophil growth factors are permitted per 
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines [Smith 2015] and use 
must be recorded on the case report form [CRF]). 
• 
Grade 3 platelet decreases in presence of significant bleeding. 
• 
Grade 4 platelet decreases.  
• 
Grade 3 or 4 nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea, if persistent despite optimal 
antiemetic and/or antidiarrheal therapy. 
• 
Any other Grade 4 toxicity or unmanageable Grade 3 toxicity. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 57 of 160 
 
 
Table 3-2.  Drug Modification Actions for ACP-196 
Occurrence 
Action 
1st – 2nd 
Hold ACP-196 until recovery to Grade ≤ 1 or baseline; may restart at 
original dose level 
3rd 
Hold ACP-196 until recovery to Grade ≤ 1 or baseline; restart at one 
dose level lower (100 mg QD) 
4th 
Discontinue ACP-196 
 
If ACP-196 is reduced for apparent treatment-related toxicity, the dose need not be re-
escalated, even if there is minimal or no toxicity with the reduced dose.  However, if the 
subject tolerates a reduced dose of ACP-196 for ≥ 4 weeks then the dose may be 
increased to the next higher dose level, at the discretion of the investigator.  Such 
re-escalation may be particularly warranted if further evaluation reveals that the AE that 
led to the dose reduction was not treatment-related.  However, the maximum dose of 
ACP-196 is 100 mg BID for this protocol. 
Treatment with ACP-196 should be withheld for any unmanageable, potentially study 
drug-related toxicity that is Grade ≥ 3 in severity.  Any other clinically important events 
where dose delays may be considered appropriate by the investigator must be 
discussed with the medical monitor.  ACP-196 may be withheld for a maximum of 
28 consecutive days from expected dose due to toxicity.  ACP-196 should be 
discontinued in the event of a toxicity lasting > 28 consecutive days, unless reviewed 
and approved by the medical monitor.   
For full study treatment discontinuation criteria, refer to Section 3.11. 
For treatment-emergent hepatotoxicity in the combination arm or for subjects who 
cross over to receive combination therapy:  Important guidelines for treatment-
emergent hepatotoxicity are provided in Section 3.7.3 for pembrolizumab.  In the 
combination arm or for subjects who cross over to receive combination therapy, 
treatment with ACP-196 should be withheld for Grade 3 or 4 hepatitis.  For Grade 4 
events, ACP-196 may be restarted only after discussion with the medical monitor.  For 
Grade 3 events, treatment with ACP-196 can be considered after the LFT laboratory 
values have returned to Grade ≤ 1 or to baseline. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 58 of 160 
 
Note:  Temporary withholding of study drug for as little as 7 days can cause a transient 
worsening of disease and/or of constitutional symptoms.  Refer to Section 3.11 for more 
information on assessing disease progression under these circumstances. 
3.7.2 
Dose Modifications for Pembrolizumab 
AEs (nonserious and serious) associated with pembrolizumab exposure may represent 
an immunologic etiology.  These AEs may occur shortly after the first dose or several 
months after the last dose of treatment.  Pembrolizumab must be withheld for drug-
related toxicities and severe or life-threatening AEs as per Table 3-3 below.  See 
Section 3.7.3 for supportive care guidelines, including use of corticosteroids. 
Table 3-3.  Dose Modification Guidelines for Pembrolizumab for Drug-Related 
Adverse Events 
Toxicity 
Hold 
Treatment 
For Grade 
Timing for Restarting 
Treatment 
Treatment Discontinuation 
Diarrhea/Colitis 
2/3 
 
Toxicity resolves to Grade 0-1 
Toxicity does not resolve within 12 weeks 
of last dose or inability to reduce 
corticosteroid to 10 mg or less of 
prednisone or equivalent per day within 
12 weeks 
4 
Permanently discontinue 
Permanently discontinue 
AST, ALT, or 
Increased 
Bilirubin 
2 
Toxicity resolves to Grade 0-1 
Toxicity does not resolve within 12 weeks 
of last dose 
3/4 
Permanently discontinue (see 
exception below)a 
 
Permanently discontinue 
Type 1 diabetes 
mellitus (if new 
onset) or 
Hyperglycemia 
T1DM or  
3/4 
Hold pembrolizumab for new 
onset Type 1 diabetes mellitus 
or Grade 3/4 hyperglycemia 
associated with evidence of 
beta cell failure. 
Resume pembrolizumab when patients are 
clinically and metabolically stable 
Hypophysitis 
2 to 4 
Toxicity resolves to Grade 0-1. 
Therapy with pembrolizumab 
can be continued while 
endocrine replacement 
therapy is instituted. 
Toxicity does not resolve within 12 weeks 
of last dose or inability to reduce 
corticosteroid to 10 mg or less of 
prednisone or equivalent per day within 
12 weeks 
Hyperthyroidism  
3 
Toxicity resolves to Grade 0-1 
Toxicity does not resolve within 12 weeks 
of last dose or inability to reduce 
corticosteroid to 10 mg or less of 
prednisone or equivalent per day within 
12 weeks 
4 
Permanently discontinue 
Permanently discontinue 
Hypothyroidism 
 
Therapy with pembrolizumab 
can be continued while thyroid 
replacement therapy is 
instituted 
Therapy with pembrolizumab can be 
continued while thyroid replacement 
therapy is instituted 
Infusion 
Reaction 
2b 
Toxicity resolves to Grade 0-1 
Permanently discontinue if toxicity develops 
despite adequate premedication. 
 
3/4 
Permanently discontinue 
Permanently discontinue 
Pneumonitis 
2 
Toxicity resolves to Grade 0-1 
Toxicity does not resolve within 12 weeks 
of last dose or inability to reduce 
corticosteroid to 10 mg or less of 
prednisone or equivalent per day within 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 59 of 160 
 
Toxicity 
Hold 
Treatment 
For Grade 
Timing for Restarting 
Treatment 
Treatment Discontinuation 
12 weeks 
3/4 
Permanently discontinue 
Permanently discontinue 
Renal Failure or 
Nephritis 
2 
Toxicity resolves to Grade 0-1 
Toxicity does not resolve within 12 weeks 
of last dose or inability to reduce 
corticosteroid to 10 mg or less of 
prednisone or equivalent per day within 
12 weeks 
3/4 
Permanently discontinue 
Permanently discontinue 
All Other Drug-
Related Toxicityc 
3 or Severe 
Toxicity resolves to Grade 0-1 
Toxicity does not resolve within 12 weeks 
of last dose or inability to reduce 
corticosteroid to 10 mg or less of 
prednisone or equivalent per day within 
12 weeks 
4 
Permanently discontinue 
Permanently discontinue 
Note: Permanently discontinue for any severe or Grade 3 (Grade 2 for pneumonitis) drug-related AE that 
recurs or any life-threatening event. 
a.  For patients with liver metastasis who begin treatment with Grade 2 AST or ALT, if AST or ALT increases by greater 
than or equal to 50% relative to baseline and lasts for at least 1 week then patients should be discontinued. 
b..  If symptoms resolve within one hour of stopping drug infusion, the infusion may be restarted at 50% of the original 
infusion rate (e.g., from 100 mL/hr to 50 mL/hr).  Otherwise dosing will be held until symptoms resolve and the subject 
should be premedicated for the next scheduled dose; Refer to Table 3-4 for further management details. 
c. Patients with intolerable or persistent Grade 2 drug-related AE may hold study medication at physician discretion.  
Permanently discontinue study drug for persistent Grade 2 adverse reactions for which treatment with study drug has 
been held, that do not recover to Grade 0-1 within 12 weeks of the last dose. 
Abbreviations: AE = adverse event; ALT = alanine aminotransferase; AST = aspartate aminotransferase.  
3.7.3 
Supportive Care Guidelines for Pembrolizumab 
Subjects should receive appropriate supportive care measures as deemed necessary by 
the treating investigator.  Suggested supportive care measures for the management of 
AEs with potential immunologic etiology are outlined below.  Where appropriate, these 
guidelines include the use of oral or intravenous treatment with corticosteroids as well as 
additional anti-inflammatory agents if symptoms do not improve with administration of 
corticosteroids.  Note that several courses of steroid tapering may be necessary as 
symptoms may worsen when the steroid dose is decreased.  For each disorder, 
attempts should be made to rule out other causes such as metastatic disease or 
bacterial or viral infection, which might require additional supportive care.  The treatment 
guidelines are intended to be applied when the investigator determines the events to be 
related to pembrolizumab.  
Note:  If after the evaluation the event is determined not to be related, the investigator 
does not need to follow the treatment guidance (as outlined below).  Refer to 
Section 3.7.2 for dose modification.  
It may be necessary to perform conditional procedures such as bronchoscopy, 
endoscopy, or skin photography as part of evaluation of the event.   

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 60 of 160 
 
• 
Pneumonitis:  
o For Grade 2 events, treat with systemic corticosteroids.  When 
symptoms improve to Grade 1 or less, steroid taper should be started and 
continued over no less than 4 weeks. 
o For Grade 3/4 events, immediately treat with intravenous steroids.  
Administer additional anti-inflammatory measures, as needed. 
o Add prophylactic antibiotics for opportunistic infections in the case of 
prolonged steroid administration. 
• 
Diarrhea/Colitis:  
Subjects should be carefully monitored for signs and symptoms of enterocolitis 
(such as diarrhea, abdominal pain, blood or mucus in stool, with or without fever) 
and of bowel perforation (such as peritoneal signs and ileus).   
o All subjects who experience diarrhea/colitis should be advised to drink 
liberal quantities of clear fluids.  If sufficient oral fluid intake is not feasible, 
fluid and electrolytes should be substituted via IV infusion.  For Grade ≥ 2 
diarrhea, consider gastrointestinal consultation and endoscopy to confirm 
or rule out colitis. 
o For Grade 2 diarrhea/colitis, administer oral corticosteroids. 
o For Grade 3 or 4 diarrhea/colitis, treat with intravenous steroids 
followed by high dose oral steroids.   
o When symptoms improve to Grade ≤ 1, steroid taper should be started 
and continued over no fewer than 4 weeks. 
• 
Type 1 diabetes mellitus (if new onset, including diabetic ketoacidosis 
[DKA]) or  Grade ≥ 3 Hyperglycemia, if associated with ketosis (ketonuria) 
or metabolic acidosis (DKA) 
o For T1DM or Grade 3/4 Hyperglycemia 
 
Insulin replacement therapy is recommended for Type I diabetes 
mellitus and for Grade 3/4 hyperglycemia associated with 
metabolic acidosis or ketonuria.  
 
Evaluate patients with serum glucose and a metabolic panel, urine 
ketones, glycosylated hemoglobin, and C-peptide.  
• 
Hypophysitis: 
o For Grade 2 events, treat with corticosteroids.  When symptoms improve 
to Grade ≤ 1, steroid taper should be started and continued over no fewer 
than 4 weeks.  Replacement of appropriate hormones may be required as 
the steroid dose is tapered. 
o For Grade 3/4 events, treat with an initial dose of IV corticosteroids 
followed by oral corticosteroids.  When symptoms improve to Grade ≤ 1, 
steroid taper should be started and continued over no fewer than 
4 weeks.  Replacement of appropriate hormones may be required as the 
steroid dose is tapered. 
• 
Hyperthyroidism or Hypothyroidism:  

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 61 of 160 
 
Thyroid disorders can occur at any time during treatment. Monitor patients for 
changes in thyroid function (at the start of treatment, periodically during 
treatment, and as indicated based on clinical evaluation) and for clinical signs 
and symptoms of thyroid disorders. 
o Grade 2 hyperthyroidism events (and Grade 2 to 4 hypothyroidism): 
 
In hyperthyroidism, nonselective beta-blockers (eg, propranolol) 
are suggested as initial therapy. 
 
In hypothyroidism, thyroid hormone replacement therapy, with 
levothyroxine or liothyroinine, is indicated per standard of care. 
o Grade 3/4 hyperthyroidism  
 
Treat with an initial dose of IV corticosteroid followed by oral 
corticosteroids.  When symptoms improve to Grade ≤ 1, steroid 
taper should be started and continued over no fewer than 
4 weeks.  Replacement of appropriate hormones may be required 
as the steroid dose is tapered. 
• 
Hepatic: 
o For Grade 2 events, treatment with pembrolizumab should be withheld.  
Administer corticosteroids (initial dose of 0.5 to 1 mg/kg/day prednisone 
or equivalent) (Appendix 6).  When LFT laboratory values resolve to 
baseline or return to Grade ≤ 1, then taper the corticosteroids over no 
fewer than 4 weeks while continuing to monitor LFTs at least weekly.  
Further treatment with pembrolizumab can be considered after the LFT 
laboratory values have returned to Grade ≤ 1 or to baseline either during 
the steroid taper or after stopping corticosteroids.    
o For Grade 3/4 events, permanently discontinue pembrolizumab.  Treat 
with corticosteroids (initial dose 1 to 2 mg/kg/day prednisone or 
equivalent) (Appendix 6) until LFT laboratory values resolve to baseline or 
return to Grade ≤ 1, and then taper the corticosteroids over no fewer than 
4 weeks while continuing to monitor LFTs at least weekly. 
• 
Renal Failure or Nephritis: 
o For Grade 2 events, treat with corticosteroids. 
o For Grade 3/4 events, treat with systemic corticosteroids. 
o When symptoms improve to Grade ≤ 1, steroid taper should be started 
and continued over no fewer than 4 weeks.  
• 
Management of Infusion Reactions: 
o Signs and symptoms usually develop during or shortly after drug infusion 
and generally resolve completely within 24 hours of completion of 
infusion.  
o Table 3-4 shows treatment guidelines for subjects who experience an 
infusion reaction associated with administration of pembrolizumab. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 62 of 160 
 
Table 3-4.  Infusion Reaction Treatment Guidelines for Pembrolizumab 
NCI CTCAE Grade 
Treatment 
Premedication at subsequent 
dosing 
Grade 1 
Mild reaction; infusion 
interruption not indicated; 
intervention not indicated 
Increase monitoring of vital signs as medically 
indicated until the subject is deemed medically 
stable in the opinion of the investigator. 
None 
Grade 2 
Requires infusion interruption 
but responds promptly to 
symptomatic treatment (eg, 
antihistamines, NSAIDS, 
narcotics, IV fluids); prophylactic 
medications indicated for 
≤ 24 hr 
Stop Infusion and monitor symptoms. 
Additional appropriate medical therapy may 
include but is not limited to: 
IV fluids 
Antihistamines 
NSAIDS 
Acetaminophen 
Narcotics 
Increase monitoring of vital signs as medically 
indicated until the subject is deemed medically 
stable in the opinion of the investigator. 
If symptoms resolve within one hour of stopping 
drug infusion, the infusion may be restarted at 
50% of the original infusion rate (eg, from 100 
mL/hr to 50 mL/hr).  Otherwise dosing will be 
held until symptoms resolve and the subject 
should be premedicated for the next scheduled 
dose. 
Subjects who develop Grade 2 toxicity 
despite adequate premedication should be 
permanently discontinued from further trial 
treatment administration. 
Subject may be premedicated 
1.5 hr (± 30 min) before infusion 
of pembrolizumab with: 
 
Diphenhydramine 50 mg PO (or 
equivalent dose of 
antihistamine). 
 
Acetaminophen 500-1000 mg 
PO (or equivalent dose of 
antipyretic). 
Grades 3 or 4 
Grade 3: 
Prolonged (i.e., not rapidly 
responsive to symptomatic 
medication and/or brief 
interruption of infusion); 
recurrence of symptoms 
following initial improvement; 
hospitalization indicated for 
other clinical sequelae (eg, 
renal impairment, pulmonary 
infiltrates) 
 
Grade 4: 
Life-threatening; pressor or 
ventilatory support indicated 
Stop Infusion. 
Additional appropriate medical therapy may 
include but is not limited to: 
IV fluids 
Antihistamines 
NSAIDS 
Acetaminophen 
Narcotics 
Oxygen 
Pressors 
Corticosteroids 
Epinephrine 
 
Increase monitoring of vital signs as medically 
indicated until the subject is deemed medically 
stable in the opinion of the investigator. 
Hospitalization may be indicated. 
Subject is permanently discontinued from 
further trial treatment administration. 
No subsequent dosing 
Appropriate resuscitation equipment should be available in the room and a physician readily available during the period 
of drug administration. 
Abbreviations: IV = intravenous; NSAID = nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug; PO = oral. 
3.8 
CONCOMITANT THERAPY 
3.8.1 
Permitted Concomitant Therapy 
Antiemetics are permitted if clinically indicated. Standard supportive care medications 
are permitted as per institutional standards.   
3.8.2 
Prohibited or Restricted Concomitant Therapy 
Any chemotherapy, anticancer immunotherapy, experimental therapy, or radiotherapy 
for treating ovarian cancer are prohibited.   

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 63 of 160 
 
Warfarin or equivalent vitamin K antagonists (eg, phenprocoumon) are prohibited.   
Note:  Radiation therapy to a symptomatic solitary lesion or to the brain may be 
considered on an exceptional case-by-case basis after consultation with sponsor.  The 
subject must have clear measurable disease outside the radiated field.  Administration of 
palliative radiation therapy will be considered clinical progression for the purposes of 
determining PFS. 
At study entry, subjects may be using topical or inhaled corticosteroids as therapy for 
comorbid conditions.  During study participation, subjects may also receive systemic or 
enteric corticosteroids at any required dosage as needed for treatment-emergent 
immune-mediated adverse reactions associated with pembrolizumab therapy (see 
Section 3.7.3), but use of corticosteroids (at dosages equivalent to prednisone 
> 20 mg/day for longer than 2 weeks) as therapy for cancer is not permitted.  
Live vaccines within 30 days before the first dose of trial treatment and while 
participating in the trial are prohibited.  Examples of live vaccines include, but are not 
limited to, the following: measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, yellow fever, rabies, 
BCG, and typhoid (oral) vaccine.  Seasonal influenza vaccines for injection are generally 
killed virus vaccines and are allowed.  However, intranasal influenza vaccines (eg, Flu - 
Mist®) are live attenuated vaccines and are not allowed. 
Use of calcium carbonate-containing drugs or supplements and short-acting H2-receptor 
antagonists should be avoided for at least 2 hours before or after ACP-196 
administration (see Section 3.9.4). 
The concomitant use of strong inhibitors/inducers of CYP3A (see Appendix 2) should be 
avoided when possible (see Section 3.9.4).  If a subject requires a strong CYP3A 
inhibitor while on study, monitor the subject closely for potential toxicities.  Conversely, 
concomitant administration of a strong inducer of CYP3A has the potential to decrease 
exposure of ACP-196 and could reduce efficacy.  For additional information on drugs 
with potential drug-drug interactions, refer to Section 3.9.4. 
3.9 
PRECAUTIONS 
3.9.1 
Transaminase Elevations for ACP-196 in Combination with 
Pembrolizumab 
Serum transaminase elevations (including elevations of AST and/or ALT) may be 
increased in severity and frequency in subjects exposed to the combination of ACP-196 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 64 of 160 
 
and pembrolizumab, as compared with subjects exposed to pembrolizumab 
monotherapy and subjects exposed to ACP-196 monotherapy. Routine monitoring for 
serum transaminase elevations must follow the Schedule of Assessments (serum 
chemistry lab assessments in Appendix 4 and Appendix 5). Dosing delays and 
modifications for subjects with serum transaminase elevations must follow guidance 
provided in Section 3.7.  
3.9.2 
Hepatitis B Reactivation 
Serious or life-threatening reactivation of viral hepatitis may occur in subjects treated 
with ACP-196.  Therefore, subjects who are hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) 
positive, or have a known history of HBV infection, should be monitored monthly with a 
quantitative PCR test for HBV DNA.  Monthly monitoring should continue until 12 months 
after last dose of study drug(s).  Any subject with a rising viral load (above lower limit of 
detection) should discontinue study drug(s) and have antiviral therapy instituted and a 
consultation with a physician with expertise in managing hepatitis B.  Insufficient data 
exist regarding the safety of resuming ACP-196 in subjects who develop HBV 
reactivation.   
3.9.3 
Dietary Restrictions 
ACP-196 can be taken with or without food.  Because ACP-196 is metabolized by 
CYP3A, subjects should be strongly cautioned against excessive consumption of 
grapefruit, grapefruit juice, or Seville orange juice (which contain potent CYP3A 
inhibitors) or using herbal remedies or dietary supplements (in particular, St John’s wort, 
which is a potent CYP3A inducer). 
Otherwise subjects should maintain a normal diet unless modifications are required to 
manage an AE such as diarrhea, nausea or vomiting. 
3.9.4 
Drug-drug Interactions 
At the systemic exposure levels expected in this study, ACP-196 inhibition of CYP 
metabolism is not anticipated.  However, concomitant administration of ACP-196 with a 
strong CYP3A increased exposure by approximately 5-fold.  Consequently, the 
concomitant use of strong inhibitors/inducers of CYP3A (see Appendix 2) should be 
avoided when possible.   

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 65 of 160 
 
Based on these considerations, subjects who require therapy with drugs listed in 
Appendix 2 should not be enrolled into the study.  If medically justified, subjects may be 
enrolled if such inhibitors or inducers can be discontinued or alternative drugs that do not 
affect these enzymes can be substituted within 7 days before first dose of study drug.  If 
a subject requires a strong CYP3A inhibitor while on study, monitor the subject closely 
for potential drug-related toxicities.  Conversely, concomitant administration of a strong 
inducer of CYP3A has the potential to decrease exposure of ACP-196 and could reduce 
efficacy.      
The effect of agents that reduce gastric acidity (eg, proton-pump inhibitors, H2-receptor 
antagonists or antacids) on ACP-196 absorption was evaluated in a healthy volunteer 
study (ACE-HV-004).  Results from this study indicate that subjects should avoid the use 
of calcium carbonate-containing drugs or supplements (eg, antacids and calcium 
supplements) and short-acting H2-receptor antagonists for a period of at least 2 hours 
before and after taking ACP-196.  Use of omeprazole, esomeprazole, lansoprazole or 
any other proton-pump inhibitors (eg, rabeprazole or pantoprazole) while taking 
ACP-196 is not recommended due to a potential decrease in study drug exposure.   
No formal PK drug interaction studies have been conducted with pembrolizumab. 
3.9.5 
Surgery 
Susceptibility to bleeding has been observed with the first generation BTK inhibitor, 
ibrutinib [IMBRUVICA prescribing information].  As a precaution, it is suggested that 
ACP-196 be held for 3 days before and after any major surgical procedure. 
3.9.6 
Reproductive Toxicity 
ACP-196  
Note for subjects receiving only ACP-196, the information below applies. 
Pilot reproductive toxicity studies have been performed that evaluate the effects of 
ACP-196 on embryofetal development.  Definitive studies of ACP-196 on embryofetal 
development are pending.  Women who are sexually active and can bear children (see 
definition below) must agree to use highly effective forms of contraception during the 
study and for 90 days after the last dose of ACP-196 as defined below.   
Pembrolizumab   
Note for subjects receiving ACP-196 plus pembrolizumab the information below applies. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 66 of 160 
 
Pembrolizumab may have adverse effects on a fetus in utero.   
Women will be considered of non-reproductive potential if they are either:  
(1) postmenopausal (defined as at least 12 months with no menses without an 
alternative medical cause; in women < 45 years of age a high follicle stimulating 
hormone (FSH) level in the postmenopausal range may be used to confirm a post-
menopausal state in women not using hormonal contraception or hormonal replacement 
therapy. In the absence of 12 months of amenorrhea, a single FSH measurement is 
insufficient.);  
OR  
(2) have had a hysterectomy and/or bilateral oophorectomy, bilateral salpingectomy or 
bilateral tubal ligation/occlusion, at least 6 weeks prior to screening;  
OR  
(3) has a congenital or acquired condition that prevents childbearing. 
Women of reproductive potential must agree to avoid becoming pregnant while receiving 
study drug and for 120 days after the last dose of study drug by complying with one of 
the following:   
(1) practice abstinence† from heterosexual activity;  
OR  
(2) use (or have their partner use) acceptable contraception during heterosexual activity.   
 
Acceptable methods of contraception are‡: 
Single method (1 of the following is acceptable): 
• 
intrauterine device (IUD) 
• 
vasectomy of a female subject’s male partner  
• 
contraceptive rod implanted into the skin 
Combination method (requires use of 2 of the following): 
• 
diaphragm with spermicide (cannot be used in conjunction with cervical 
cap/spermicide) 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 67 of 160 
 
• 
cervical cap with spermicide (nulliparous women only)   
• 
contraceptive sponge (nulliparous women only)  
• 
male condom or female condom (cannot be used together) 
• 
hormonal contraceptive: oral contraceptive pill (estrogen/progestin pill or 
progestin-only pill), contraceptive skin patch, vaginal contraceptive ring, or 
subcutaneous contraceptive injection 
†Abstinence (relative to heterosexual activity) can be used as the sole method of 
contraception if it is consistently employed as the subject’s preferred and usual lifestyle 
and if considered acceptable by local regulatory agencies and ERCs/IRBs.  Periodic 
abstinence (eg, calendar, ovulation, sympto-thermal, and post-ovulation methods) and 
withdrawal are not acceptable methods of contraception.  
‡If a contraceptive method listed above is restricted by local regulations/guidelines, then 
it does not qualify as an acceptable method of contraception for subjects participating at 
sites in this country/region. 
Subjects should be informed that taking the study medication may involve unknown risks 
to the fetus (unborn baby) if pregnancy were to occur during the study.  To participate in 
the study subjects of childbearing potential must adhere to the contraception 
requirement (described above) from the day of study medication initiation (or 14 days 
prior to the initiation of study medication for oral contraception) throughout the study 
period up to 120 days after the last dose of trial therapy.  If there is any question that a 
subject of childbearing potential will not reliably comply with the requirements for 
contraception, that subject should not be entered into the study. 
Subjects should promptly notify the investigator if they become pregnant during this 
period. If a woman becomes pregnant during the treatment period, she must discontinue 
ACP-196 and pembrolizumab immediately.  Pregnancy must be reported as outlined in 
Section 6.2.3. 
3.9.7 
Overdose Instructions 
For any subject experiencing an ACP-196 or pembrolizumab overdose (administration of 
a dose ≥ 1000 mg of ACP-196 or ≥ 1000 mg of pembrolizumab at once), observation for 
any symptomatic side effects should be instituted, and vital signs, biochemical and 
hematologic parameters should be followed closely (consistent with the protocol or more 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 68 of 160 
 
frequently, as needed).  Appropriate supportive management to mitigate adverse effects 
should be initiated.  If the overdose ingestion of ACP-196 is recent and substantial, and 
if there are no medical contraindications, use of gastric lavage or induction of emesis 
may be considered. 
The Acerta Pharma medical monitor must be contacted if a study drug overdose occurs 
(Section 6.2.5). 
3.10 TREATMENT AFTER INITIAL RADIOLOGIC PROGRESSION 
RECIST 1.1 will be adapted to account for the unique tumor response characteristics 
seen with treatment of pembrolizumab.  Immunotherapeutic agents such as 
pembrolizumab may produce antitumor effects by potentiating endogenous 
cancer-specific immune responses.  The response patterns seen with such an approach 
may extend beyond the typical time course of responses seen with cytotoxic agents and 
can manifest a clinical response after an initial increase in tumor burden or even the 
appearance of new lesions.  Standard RECIST may not provide an accurate response 
assessment of immunotherapeutic agents such as pembrolizumab.  Therefore, 
RECIST 1.1 will be used with the following adaptations: 
• 
If radiologic imaging verifies initial disease progression, tumor assessment 
should be repeated ≥ 4 weeks later to confirm disease progression with the 
option of continuing treatment per below.   
• 
If repeat imaging shows < 20% increase in tumor burden compared to nadir, 
stable or improved previous new lesion (if identified as cause for initial disease 
progression), and stable/improved non-target disease (if identified as cause for 
initial disease progression), treatment may be continued / resumed.   
• 
If repeat imaging confirms disease progression due to any of the scenarios listed 
below, subjects will be discontinued from study therapy (or if on ACP-196 alone 
arm may be eligible for cross over to receive pembrolizumab in addition to 
ACP-196).   
In determining whether or not the tumor burden has increased or decreased, site study 
team should consider all target lesions as well as non-target lesions (if needed, the tip 
sheet provided in the study binder can be used as a reference to assess lesions). 
Scenarios where disease progression is confirmed at repeat imaging: 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 69 of 160 
 
• 
Tumor burden remains ≥ 20% and at least 5 mm absolute increase compared to 
nadir 
• 
Non-target disease resulting in initial disease progression is worse (qualitative) 
• 
New lesion resulting in initial disease progression is worse (qualitative) 
• 
Additional new lesion(s) since last evaluation 
In subjects who have initial evidence of radiological disease progression, it is at the 
discretion of the treating physician whether to continue a subject on study treatment until 
repeat imaging is obtained.  This clinical judgment decision should be based on the 
subject’s overall clinical condition, including performance status, clinical symptoms, and 
laboratory data.  Subjects may receive study treatment while waiting for confirmation of 
disease progression if they are clinically stable as defined by the following criteria: 
• 
Absence of signs and symptoms indicating disease progression 
• 
No decline in ECOG performance status 
• 
Absence of rapid progression of disease 
• 
Absence of progressive tumor at critical anatomical sites (eg, cord compression) 
requiring urgent alternative medical intervention 
When feasible, subjects should not be discontinued until progression is confirmed.  This 
allowance to continue treatment despite initial radiologic progression takes into account 
the observation that some subjects can have a transient tumor flare in the first few 
months after the start of immunotherapy, but with subsequent disease response.  
Subjects that are deemed clinically unstable are not required to have repeat imaging for 
confirmation of progressive disease.  The decision to continue study treatment after the 
first evidence of disease progression is at the investigator’s discretion based on the 
clinical status of the subject as described in Table 3-5 below.   
 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 70 of 160 
 
 
Table 3-5.  Imaging and Treatment After 1st Radiologic Evidence of Disease 
Progression 
Abbreviations: CR = complete response; PD = progressive disease; PR = partial response; SD = stable 
disease. 
 
In determining whether or not the tumor burden has increased or decreased, study site 
investigators should consider all target lesions as well as non-target lesions (if needed, 
the tip sheet provided in the study binder can be used as a reference to assess lesions).  
Subjects that are deemed clinically unstable are not required to have repeat tumor 
imaging for confirmation.  If radiologic progression is confirmed by subsequent scan then 
the subject will be discontinued from trial treatment (or if on ACP-196 alone arm may be 
eligible for cross over to receive pembrolizumab in addition to ACP-196).  If radiologic 
progression is not confirmed, then the subject should resume or continue assigned 
treatment and have their next tumor imaging according to the protocol schedule.   
Note:  If a subject has confirmed radiographic progression (ie, 2 scans at least 4 weeks 
apart demonstrating progressive disease) per irRECIST, but the subject is achieving a 
clinically meaningful benefit, an exception to continue treatment may be considered 
following consultation with the sponsor. 
irRECIST data will be collected in the clinical database. 
Clinically Stable 
Clinically Unstable 
Tumor Imaging 
Treatment 
Tumor Imaging 
Treatment 
First radiologic 
evidence of PD 
Repeat imaging at 
> 4 weeks at site 
to confirm PD 
May continue study 
treatment at the 
investigator’s discretion 
while awaiting 
confirmatory tumor 
imaging by site 
Repeat tumor 
imaging at > 4 weeks 
to confirm PD per 
physician discretion 
only 
Discontinue treatment 
Repeat tumor 
imaging  
confirms 
PD 
No additional tumor 
imaging required 
 
Discontinue treatment 
No additional tumor 
imaging required 
N/A 
Repeat tumor 
imaging shows 
SD, PR or CR 
Continue regularly 
scheduled 
tumor imaging 
assessments 
Continue study 
treatment at the 
investigator’s 
discretion 
Continue regularly 
scheduled tumor 
imaging 
assessments 
May restart study 
treatment if 
condition has 
improved and/or 
clinically stable per 
investigator’s 
discretion 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 71 of 160 
 
3.11 WITHDRAWAL OF SUBJECTS FROM STUDY TREATMENT 
The investigator, in consultation with the Acerta Pharma medical monitor, may withdraw 
any subject from study treatment, if, in the investigator’s opinion, it is not in the subject’s 
best interest to continue.  
Any subject has the right to withdraw from the study at any time.  In addition, subjects 
may be withdrawn from study treatment for the following reasons: 
• 
Study treatment should be discontinued in the event of a toxicity lasting 
> 28 consecutive days, unless reviewed and approved by the medical monitor.   
• 
Any subject who has confirmed objective evidence of cancer progression while 
receiving ACP-196 and pembrolizumab should discontinue study treatment.  
Note:  Study subjects receiving immunotherapies can experience transient 
immunotherapy-related increases in lesion size (“pseudoprogression”) preceding 
tumor regression (Hodi 2010).  If there is uncertainty regarding whether there is 
true cancer progression, the subject may continue study treatment and remain 
under close observation (eg, evaluated at 4-week intervals) pending confirmation 
of progression (Section 3.10).  In particular, transient worsening of disease early 
in therapy or during temporary interruption of study therapy (eg, for drug-related 
toxicity, surgery, or intercurrent illness) may not indicate cancer progression.  In 
such circumstances, and if medically appropriate, subjects may resume therapy 
and relevant clinical, laboratory, and/or radiographic assessment can be 
attempted to document whether tumor control can be maintained or whether 
cancer progression has occurred. 
• 
Any subject whose medical condition substantially changes after entering the 
study should be carefully evaluated by the investigator in consultation with the 
Acerta Pharma medical monitor.  Such subjects should be withdrawn from study 
treatment if continuing would place them at risk.  
• 
Any subject who becomes pregnant should be removed from study treatment. 
• 
Any subject who becomes significantly noncompliant with study drug 
administration, study procedures, or study requirements should be withdrawn 
from study treatment in circumstances that increase risk or substantially 
compromise the interpretation of study results. 
Subjects who discontinue study therapy will continue to be followed on study for 
follow-up of safety (Section 4.3) and survival unless they withdraw consent for further 
follow-up.  Thus, all subjects receiving ≥ 1 dose of study drug will be followed during the 
immediate post-therapy and long-term follow-up assessments unless the subject 
withdraws consent for such follow-up to be conducted.  The date the subject is 
withdrawn from study treatment or from the study (including long-term follow-up) and the 
reason for discontinuation will be recorded and also should be described on the 
appropriate case report form (CRF).   

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 72 of 160 
 
3.12 REASONS FOR STUDY EXIT 
Reasons for study exit are: 
• 
Subject’s withdrawal of consent from study 
• 
Decision by sponsor to terminate the study 
• 
Subject lost to follow-up 
• 
Death 
3.13 DATA AND SAFETY MONITORING 
This trial will be monitored in accordance with the sponsor’s pharmacovigilance 
procedures.  AEs and SAEs will be reviewed internally on an ongoing basis to identify 
safety concerns.  Quarterly conference calls with the investigators and applicable site 
staff will be conducted to discuss study progress, obtain investigator feedback and 
exchange, and discuss "significant safety events" (ie, AEs leading to dose reductions, 
related SAEs, and deaths).    
4.0 
STUDY ACTIVITIES AND ASSESSMENTS 
The schedule of events is provided in Appendix 4.  Descriptions of the scheduled 
evaluations are outlined below and complete information on study drug and dosing is 
provided in Section 3.4. 
Before study entry, throughout the study, and at the follow-up evaluation, various clinical 
and diagnostic laboratory evaluations are outlined.  The purpose of obtaining these 
detailed measurements is to ensure adequate safety and tolerability assessments.  
Clinical evaluations and laboratory studies may be repeated more frequently if clinically 
indicated.  This study will primarily use central laboratory testing for laboratory 
evaluations.  Samples from sites’ local laboratories will be used if central testing is 
unavailable. 
4.1 
DESCRIPTION OF PROCEDURES 
4.1.1 
Informed Consent 
The subject must read, understand and sign the ICF approved by the institutional review 
board or independent ethics committee (IRB/IEC), confirming his or her willingness to 
participate in this study before initiating any screening activity that is not considered 
standard of care by institutional standards.  Subjects must also grant permission to use 
protected health information if required by local regulations. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 73 of 160 
 
4.1.2 
Medical History 
Collect and record the subject’s complete history through review of medical records and 
by interview.  Concurrent medical signs and symptoms must be documented to establish 
baseline severities.  A disease history, including the date of initial diagnosis and list of all 
prior anticancer treatments, and responses and duration of response to these 
treatments, also will be recorded. 
4.1.3 
Adverse Events 
The accepted regulatory definition for an AE is provided in Section 6.1.  All medical 
occurrences from the time of first dose that meet this definition must be recorded. 
Important additional requirements for reporting SAEs are explained in Section 6.2. 
4.1.4 
Concomitant Medications and Therapy 
Document all concomitant medications and procedures from within 21 days before the 
start of study drug administration through 30 days after the last dose of study drug. 
4.1.5 
Confirmation of Eligibility 
Subject eligibility for enrollment will be assessed per Section 3.3.  All screening 
procedures, unless otherwise indicated, should be completed within 28 days of the first 
dose of study drug. 
4.1.6 
ECOG Performance Status 
The ECOG performance index is provided in Appendix 1. 
4.1.7 
Physical Examination, Vital Signs, Height & Weight 
The screening physical examination will include, at a minimum, the general appearance 
of the subject, height (screening only) and weight, and examination of the skin, eyes, 
ears, nose, throat, lungs, heart, abdomen, extremities, musculoskeletal system, nervous 
system, and lymphatic system. 
Symptom-directed physical exams will be done during the treatment period and at the 
safety follow-up visits. 
Vital signs (blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, and body temperature) will be 
assessed after the subject has rested in the sitting position.   

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 74 of 160 
 
4.1.8 
Electrocardiogram (ECG) 
Subjects should be in supine position and resting for at least 10 minutes before any 
study related ECGs.  Before first dose of study drug on Day 1, Week 1, 3 ECGs will be 
done at least 1 minute apart.  These ECGs and the screening ECG will be considered 
the baseline ECGs.  If an unscheduled ECG is done at any time, then an electrolyte 
panel (ie, calcium, magnesium, and potassium) must be done to coincide with the ECG 
testing. 
Single on-treatment ECGs will be done at any time during the following visits: 
• 
Week 2 
• 
Week 4 
• 
Week 7 
• 
Treatment termination and/or safety follow-up visit 
4.1.9 
Urine or Serum Pregnancy Test 
Pregnancy tests will be required only for women of childbearing potential.  Women of 
childbearing potential must have a negative urine or serum pregnancy testing within 
72 hours prior to receiving the first dose of study medication. If the urine test is positive 
or cannot be confirmed as negative, a serum pregnancy test is required.  Testing will be 
done by a local or central laboratory as listed on the investigator’s Form FDA 1572.   
4.1.10 
Hematology 
Hematology studies must include complete blood count (CBC) with differential and 
platelet counts.  Testing will be done by a local or central laboratory as listed on the 
investigator’s Form FDA 1572. 
4.1.11 
Serum Chemistry 
Chemistry will include albumin, alkaline phosphatase, ALT, AST, bicarbonate, blood 
urea nitrogen (BUN), bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, calcium, chloride, creatinine, 
glucose, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), magnesium, phosphate/phosphorus, potassium, 
sodium, total bilirubin, total protein, and uric acid.  If an unscheduled ECG is done at any 
time, then an electrolyte panel (ie, calcium, magnesium, and potassium) must be done to 
coincide with the ECG testing.  Testing will be done by a local or central laboratory as 
listed on the investigator’s Form FDA 1572. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 75 of 160 
 
4.1.12 
Amylase and Lipase 
Serum amylase and serum lipase testing will be performed at the study center’s local 
laboratory or other clinical laboratory listed on the investigator’s form FDA 1572. 
4.1.13 
Thyroid Panel 
Post-Screening, thyroid testing is required ONLY for subjects randomized to Arm 2 and 
for subjects who cross over from Arm 1 to Arm 2 due to disease progression.  The 
thyroid panel will include total triiodothyronine (T3), free thyroxine (T4), and 
thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH).  Testing will be done by a local or central laboratory 
as listed on the investigator’s Form FDA 1572. 
4.1.14 
Hepatitis B and C Testing 
Hepatitis serology testing must include hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), hepatitis B 
surface antibody (anti-HBs), hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc), and HCV antibody.  In 
addition, any subjects testing positive for any hepatitis serology must have PCR testing 
during screening and on study (see Appendix 4, Appendix 5, and exclusion criterion 
#19).  Testing will be done by local or central laboratory.   
Subjects who are anti-HBc positive should have quantitative PCR testing for HBV DNA 
performed during screening and monthly thereafter.  Monitoring should continue every 
4 weeks (± 7 days) until 12 months after last dose of study drug(s).  Any subject with a 
rising viral load (above lower limit of detection) should discontinue study drug and have 
antiviral therapy instituted and a consultation with a physician with expertise in managing 
hepatitis B.   
Subjects with a known history of hepatitis C or who are hepatitis C antibody positive 
should have quantitative PCR testing for HCV DNA performed during screening and at 
Weeks 13 and 25.  No further testing beyond Week 25 is necessary if PCR results are 
negative.   
Refer to Section 3.9.2, Appendix 4, and Appendix 5 regarding monitoring of subjects 
who are anti-HBc positive or hepatitis C antibody positive or who have a known history 
of HBV or hepatitis C. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 76 of 160 
 
4.1.15 
Urinalysis 
Urinalysis includes pH, ketones, specific gravity, bilirubin, protein, blood, and glucose.  
Testing will be done by a local or central laboratory as listed on the investigator’s Form 
FDA 1572.  
4.1.16 
T/B/Natural Killer (NK) Cell Count 
Flow cytometry testing will include CD3+, CD4+, CD8+, CD19+, CD14+ and CD16/56+ 
cells.  Testing will be done by a local or central laboratory as listed on the investigator’s 
Form FDA 1572. 
4.1.17 
Serum Immunoglobulin  
Testing for immunoglobulin G (IgG), IgM, and IgA will be done by a local or central 
laboratory as listed on the investigator’s Form FDA 1572. 
4.1.18 
CA-125 
CA-125 levels will be done by a local or central laboratory as listed on the investigator’s 
Form FDA 1572. 
4.1.19 
Pharmacodynamics/Pharmacokinetics and Biomarker Studies 
Blood samples will be used for PD testing including, but not limited to, BTK occupancy, 
B-cell activation, MDSCs, and T-cell activation, cytokine analysis, and for further 
characterization of circulating tumor cells, lymphocyte and myeloid cell subsets.  
Tissue sections from archival tumor biopsies and/or any newly obtained biopsies 
performed during the study will be used for exploratory biomarker studies (including, but 
not limited to, expression of PD-L1 and BTK, characterization of disease subtype, and 
evaluations of MDSCs and activated CD8+ cells).  Additional exploratory studies may 
include, but are not necessarily limited to, characterization of BTK pathway activation 
status, identification of disease subtype, specific genetic markers with prognostic 
significance and evaluation of tumor microenvironment components and cell cycle 
proteins in malignant cells.  If available, de-identified pathology reports from the most 
recent diagnostic work-up, including immunohistochemistry and cytogenetic analyses of 
tumor tissue, may be requested by the sponsor. 
Refer to the laboratory manual for instructions on collection and shipment of the PD and 
biomarker samples.  All testing will be done by the sponsor or designee.  Leftover blood 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 77 of 160 
 
and tumor samples may also be used for genomic analyses to study mechanisms of 
action. 
The following PK sampling will be done for the measurement of ACP-196 levels:  
0 (predose), 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 hours after ACP-196 administration on Weeks 1, 3, and 7.  
The predose sample can be taken up to 30 minutes before dosing.  The window for 
other timepoints is ± 5 minutes.  Leftover plasma from PK analysis may be repurposed 
for exploratory ACP-196 plasma metabolite analysis.  Testing will be done by a central 
lab.  Refer to the laboratory manual for instructions on collection and shipment of PK 
samples. 
4.1.20 
Tumor Assessments 
A pretreatment CT scan with contrast (unless contraindicated) is required of the chest, 
abdomen, and pelvis and any other disease sites within 30 days before the first dose of 
study drug.  
On-treatment CT scans with contrast (unless contraindicated) of the chest, abdomen, 
and pelvis and any other disease sites will be done for tumor assessments at Week 7, 
13, 19  (± 7 days), then every 12 weeks (± 10 days) thereafter, or more frequently at 
investigator discretion.  At all other visits, tumor assessments will be done by physical 
exam and laboratory results.   
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be used for subjects who are either allergic to 
CT contrast media or have renal insufficiency that per institutional guidelines restricts the 
use of CT contrast media.  If MRI is used, the MRI must be obtained at baseline and at 
all subsequent response evaluations.  If MRI is required for any other reason, this must 
be discussed with the study medical monitor first. 
RECIST 1.1 guidelines (Eisenhauer 2009) will be followed for selection of measurable 
and nonmeasurable lesions and also with regard to the number of lesions to be 
assessed (refer to Appendix 7 for more details on RECIST 1.1).  Response will also be 
assessed by irRECIST (refer to Appendix 8 for more details). 
De-identified copies of all radiology results may be requested by the sponsor.   
4.1.21 
Treatment Termination Visit 
A treatment termination visit is required for safety assessments for any subjects who 
permanently discontinue study drug for any reason, including disease progression.  The 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 78 of 160 
 
treatment termination visit should be performed within 7 days of the last dose of study 
drug, if possible, and is not required for subjects who discontinue from the study within 
10 days of a scheduled study visit. 
4.1.22 
Study Drug Accountability 
See Section 7.6. 
4.2 
INVESTIGATOR’S ASSESSMENT OF RESPONSE TO TREATMENT 
Responses will be categorized as CR, PR, SD, or PD.  The definitions of response in 
target lesions are provided in Table 4-1.  The definitions of response in nontarget lesions 
are provided in Table 4-2. 
Table 4-1.  Evaluation of Target Lesions (RECIST 1.1) 
Response 
Category 
Definition 
CR 
Disappearance of all target and nontarget lesions including normalization of an elevated 
tumor marker level. Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or nontarget) must 
have reduction in short axis to <10 mm.  
PR 
A ≥ 30% decrease in the sum of the diameters of target lesions taking as a reference the 
baseline sum of the diameters.   
SD 
Neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD taking 
as reference the smallest sum diameters while on study. 
PDa 
At least a 20% increase in the sum of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the 
smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline sum if that is the smallest on study). In 
addition to the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also demonstrate an absolute 
increase of at least 5 mm. (Note: The appearance of one or more new lesions is also 
considered progression).   
Abbreviations: CR = complete response; PD = progressive disease; PR = partial response; RECIST =  Response 
Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; SD = stable disease. 
a. 
Transient apparent worsening of disease early in therapy or during temporary interruption of study therapy (eg, 
for drug-related toxicity or intercurrent illness) may not indicate true cancer progression. Refer to Section 3.10 
for more detailed information. 
Evaluation of nontarget lesions:  While some nontarget lesions may actually be 
measurable, they need not be measured and instead should be assessed only 
qualitatively at the timepoints specified in the Schedule of Assessments. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 79 of 160 
 
Table 4-2.  Evaluation of Nontarget Lesions (RECIST 1.1) 
Response 
Category 
Definition 
CR 
Disappearance of all non-target lesions and normalization of tumor marker level. All lymph 
nodes must be non-pathological in size (< 10 mm short axis). 
Non-
CR/Non-
PD 
Persistence of one or more non-target lesion(s) and/or maintenance of tumor marker level 
above the normal limits. 
PDa 
Unequivocal progressionb of existing non-target lesions.  (Note: The appearance of one or 
more new lesions is also considered progression).   
Abbreviations: CR = complete response; PD = progressive disease; RECIST = Response Evaluation Criteria 
in Solid Tumors. 
a. 
Transient apparent worsening of disease early in therapy or during temporary interruption of study 
therapy (eg, for drug-related toxicity or intercurrent illness) may not indicate true cancer progression. 
Refer to Section 3.10 for more detailed information. 
b. 
Refer to RECIST 1.1 criteria for detailed explanation of “unequivocal progression”. 
 
4.2.1 
Determination of Response at Each Timepoint (RECIST 1.1) 
The tumor response at each timepoint will be determined.  Table 4-3 provides a 
summary of the overall response status calculation at each timepoint.  
Table 4-3.  Timepoint Response (RECIST) 
Target Lesions 
Nontarget Lesions 
New Lesions 
Overall 
Response 
CR 
CR 
No 
CR 
CR 
Non-CR/non-PD 
No 
PR 
CR 
Not evaluated 
No 
PR 
PR 
Non-PD or not all evaluated 
No 
PR 
SD 
Non-PD or not all evaluated 
No 
SD 
Not all evaluated 
Non-PD 
No 
NE 
PD 
Any 
Yes or No 
PD 
Any 
PD 
Yes or No 
PD 
Any 
Any 
Yes 
PD 
Abbreviations: CR = complete response; NE = nonevaluable; PD = progressive disease; PR = partial response; 
RECIST = Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; SD = stable disease. 
 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 80 of 160 
 
4.2.2 
Confirmation of Tumor Status and Determination of Best 
Overall Response (RECIST 1.1) 
The best overall response (BOR) recorded from the start of treatment until tumor 
progression will be determined.  Adjudication of BOR is based on evaluation of each 
successive set of 2 scans as indicated in Table 4-4.  
Table 4-4.  Best Overall Response Assessment and Requirements for 
Confirmation (RECIST 1.1) 
Response Category 
at First Timepoint 
Response Category at 
Subsequent Timepoint 
Best Overall Response 
CR  
CR  
CR  
CR  
PR  
SD, PD, or PRa 
CR  
SD  
SD provided minimum criteria for SD duration met 
otherwise PD 
CR  
PD  
SD provided minimum criteria for SD duration met 
otherwise PD  
CR  
NE  
SD provided minimum criteria for SD duration met 
otherwise NE  
PR  
CR  
PR  
PR  
PR  
PR  
PR  
SD  
SD  
PR  
PD  
SD provided minimum criteria for SD duration met 
otherwise PD  
PR  
NE  
SD provided minimum criteria for SD duration met 
otherwise NE  
NE  
NE  
NE  
Abbreviations:  BOR = best overall response; CR = complete response; NE = nonevaluable; PD = 
progressive disease; PR = partial response; RECIST = Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; SD = 
stable disease. 
a. 
If a CR is truly met at first timepoint, then any disease seen at a subsequent timepoint, even disease 
meeting PR criteria relative to baseline, makes the disease PD at that point (since disease must have 
reappeared after CR).  Best response would depend on whether minimum duration for SD was met.  
However, sometimes ‘CR’ may be claimed when subsequent scans suggest small lesions were likely 
still present and in fact the subject had PR, not CR at the first timepoint.  Under these circumstances, 
the original CR should be changed to PR and the best response is PR. 
 
4.2.3 
Immune-related Response Criteria (irRECIST) 
RECIST 1.1 will be adapted to account for the unique tumor response characteristics 
seen with treatment of pembrolizumab.  Immunotherapeutic agents such as 
pembrolizumab may produce antitumor effects by potentiating endogenous 
cancer-specific immune responses.  The response patterns seen with such an approach 
may extend beyond the typical time course of responses seen with cytotoxic agents and 
can manifest a clinical response after an initial increase in tumor burden or even the 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 81 of 160 
 
appearance of new lesions.  Standard RECIST may not provide an accurate response 
assessment of immunotherapeutic agents such as pembrolizumab.  Therefore, 
RECIST 1.1 will be used with the adaptations described for the irRECIST (Appendix 8). 
4.3 
SAFETY FOLLOW-UP VISIT 
Each subject should be followed until the safety follow-up visit at 30 (+ 7) days after his 
or her last dose of study drug to monitor for resolution or progression of AEs (see 
Section 6.2.5) and to document the occurrence of any new events, regardless of 
whether the subject receives a new anticancer therapy or demonstrates disease 
progression within this time frame.  Subjects who withdraw consent for study treatment 
should still be encouraged to complete the safety follow-up assessments, but these 
assessments cannot be mandated if subject consent for further study participation is 
withdrawn.  The Schedule of Assessments (Appendix 5) describes the procedures 
required for safety follow-up.  
4.4 
SURVIVAL 
After discontinuing study therapy, subjects will be contacted approximately every 
12 weeks until death, withdrawal by subject, lost to follow-up, or study terminated by the 
sponsor, whichever comes first.  
4.5 
MISSED EVALUATIONS 
Missed evaluations should be rescheduled and performed as close to the original 
scheduled date as possible.  An exception is made when rescheduling becomes, in the 
investigator’s opinion, medically unnecessary or unsafe because it is too close in time to 
the next scheduled evaluation.  In that case, the missed evaluation should be 
abandoned. 
5.0 
STATISTICAL METHODS OF ANALYSIS  
5.1 
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 
Descriptive statistics (including means, standard deviations, and medians for continuous 
variables and proportions and CIs for discrete variables) will be used to summarize data 
as appropriate.  
The sample size for this study is 
 in each arm.  The sample size for this study 
will provide adequate estimation utility for both the safety endpoint and the key efficacy 
endpoint of investigator-assessed ORR (per RECIST 1.1). In each treatment arm, the 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 82 of 160 
 
probability of observing one or more instances of a specific AE with a true incidence rate 
of 5% is 86%. This provides reasonable assurance that events occurring at ≥
 
frequency will be detected in this phase 2 study. For Arm 1, a sample size of 
 
at final analysis will provide 80% power to test the null hypothesis that ORR is ≤ 15% 
versus the alternative hypothesis that ORR is ≥ 31% with a 1-sided one sample Chi-
square test at 0.05 significance level.  For Arm 2, a sample size of 
 at final 
analysis will provide over 80% power to test the null hypothesis that ORR is ≤ 
 
versus the alternative hypothesis that 
 
 
 with a 1-sided one sample Chi-
square test at 0.05 significance level.   
5.2 
DEFINITION OF ANALYSIS POPULATIONS 
The following definitions will be used for the efficacy and safety analysis populations. 
• 
All-treated population: All enrolled subjects who receive ≥ 1 dose of any study 
drug (either ACP-196 or pembrolizumab).  The safety analyses and primary 
efficacy analyses will be performed on the All-treated population.   
• 
Efficacy-evaluable population: All subjects in the All-treated population who 
receive ≥ 1 evaluable response assessment after the first dose of study drug 
(either ACP-196 or pembrolizumab).  Sensitivity analyses for efficacy will be 
carried out on the Efficacy-evaluable population. 
5.3 
MISSING DATA HANDLING 
No imputation of values for missing data will be performed except that missing or partial 
start and end dates for AEs and concomitant medication will be imputed according to 
prespecified, conservative imputation rules.  Subjects lost to follow-up (or drop out) will 
be included in statistical analyses to the point of their last evaluation. 
5.4 
ENDPOINT DATA ANALYSIS 
5.4.1 
Safety Endpoint 
Safety summaries will include summaries in the form of tables and listings.  The 
frequency (number and percentage) of treatment emergent AEs and Events of Clinical 
Interest (ECI) will be reported in each treatment group by MedDRA System Organ Class 
and Preferred Term.  Summaries will also be presented by the severity of the AE (per 
CTCAE, v4.03 or higher) and by relationship to study drug (eg, either ACP-196, 
pembrolizumab, or both). 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 83 of 160 
 
Laboratory shift tables containing counts and percentages will be prepared by treatment 
assignment, laboratory parameter, and time.  Summary tables will be prepared for each 
laboratory parameter.  Figures of changes in laboratory parameters over time will be 
generated. 
Results of vital sign assessments and physical exams will be tabulated and summarized.   
5.4.2 
Demographics and Baseline Characteristics 
Additional analyses will include summaries of subject demographics, baseline 
characteristics, compliance, and concurrent treatments.  Concomitant medications will 
be coded and tabulated according to the World Health Organization Drug Dictionary 
(WHODRUG). 
5.4.3 
Study Treatment Administration and Compliance 
Descriptive information will be provided regarding the number of ACP-196 and 
pembrolizumab doses prescribed, the total number of doses taken, the number of days 
of treatment, and the number and timing of prescribed dose reductions and interruptions.   
For each subject, ACP-196 and pembrolizumab compliance will be described in terms of 
the proportion of study drug actually taken. 
5.4.4 
Analysis of Efficacy Parameters 
Disease Control and Response Rate 
The individual and composite endpoints of response and progression will be determined. 
Tumor control will be documented at each assessment by response category (see 
Section 4.2) as defined for each response parameter, date that response is first 
documented, and date of disease progression.  DCR will be defined as the proportion of 
subjects who achieve a SD, PR or CR.  ORR will be defined as the proportion of 
subjects who achieve a CR or PR (see Section 4.2).  
DCR and ORR will be calculated and the corresponding 2-sided 95% CI will be derived.  
In addition to evaluation of DCR and ORR by RECIST 1.1 criteria (Eisenhauer 2009), 
these endpoints will also be evaluated by the irRECIST (Appendix 8), though the ORR 
by RECIST will be considered the primary endpoint. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 84 of 160 
 
Duration of Response 
The DOR is defined as the interval from the first documentation of response to the 
earlier of the first documentation of definitive disease progression or death from any 
cause.  Kaplan-Meier methods will be used to estimate event-free curves and 
corresponding quartiles (including the median).  
Progression-free Survival 
PFS is defined as the interval from the start of therapy to the earlier of the first 
documentation of objective disease progression or death from any cause.  Kaplan-Meier 
methods will be used to estimate the event-free curves and corresponding quartiles 
(including the median).   
Overall Survival 
OS is defined as the time from date of the start of therapy until date of death due to any 
cause.  The analysis methods for overall survival will be similar to those described for 
PFS.  
5.4.5 
PD or Biomarker Analyses 
Additional pharmacodynamic, PK and biomarker analyses may be performed, as 
deemed appropriate. 
Correlations between subject characteristics and outcome measures and correlations 
among outcomes measures will be explored using regression models or other 
appropriate techniques. 
5.5 
FUTILITY MONITORING 
The futility monitoring will be analyzed in the 2 treatment arms separately.  Futility will be 
monitored with respect to irDCR, which is defined as irCR, irPR, and irSD by the 
irRECIST (Appendix 8).  irDCR of at least 20% is clinically meaningful in this population.  
The response outcome within the 12 weeks will be used in the futility analyses.  A 
Bayesian method (Thall 1995) will be used for futility monitoring for each treatment, 
respectively.  The stopping rule for each arm is: 
• 
Pr(θE< 0.20 |data)>0.95 
Enrollment in either arm will be stopped early if there is > 95% probability that the irDCR 
is < 20% in that arm, where θE denotes the marginal response rate, assuming that θE 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 85 of 160 
 
follows a prior distribution of beta (a, b), where a and b represent response and 
nonresponse rates (0.2, 0.8).   
The above futility monitoring rule will be implemented once the first 10 subjects have 
been evaluated in each arm.  The corresponding stopping boundaries for the futility 
monitoring for each arm are:  Enrollment will be stopped early due to futility if (number 
of subjects with irDCR/number subjects evaluated) ≤ 0/(10-15), 1/(16-23), 2/(24-30) and 
3/(31-37).  
6.0 
ASSESSMENT OF SAFETY 
Safety assessments will consist of monitoring and recording AEs and SAEs; 
measurements of protocol-specified hematology, clinical chemistry, urinalysis, and other 
laboratory variables; measurement of protocol-specified vital signs; and other 
protocol-specified tests that are deemed critical to the safety evaluation of the study 
drug(s). 
6.1 
DEFINITIONS 
6.1.1 
Adverse Events 
An AE is any unfavorable and unintended sign, symptom, or disease temporally 
associated with the use of an investigational (medicinal) product, regardless of 
attribution. 
This includes the following: 
• 
AEs not previously observed in the subject that emerge during the 
protocol-specified AE reporting period, including signs or symptoms associated 
with ovarian cancer that were not present before the AE reporting period (see 
Section 6.2.1). 
• 
Preexisting medical conditions (other than the condition being studied) judged by 
the investigator to have worsened in severity or frequency or changed in 
character during the protocol-specified AE reporting period. 
Abnormal laboratory values considered clinically significant by the investigator should be 
reported as AEs. 
6.1.2 
Serious Adverse Event 
The terms “severe” and “serious” are not synonymous.  Severity (or intensity) refers to 
the grade of an AE (see below).  “Serious” is a regulatory definition and is based on 
subject or event outcome or action criteria usually associated with events that pose a 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 86 of 160 
 
threat to a subject’s life or functioning.  Seriousness (not severity) serves as the guide 
for defining regulatory reporting obligations from the sponsor to applicable regulatory 
authorities. 
An AE should be classified as an SAE if it meets any 1 of the following criteria: 
• 
It results in death (ie, the AE actually causes or leads to death). 
• 
It is life-threatening (ie, the AE, in the view of the investigator, places the 
subject at immediate risk of death.  It does not include an AE that, had it 
occurred in a more severe form, might have caused death). 
• 
It requires or prolongs inpatient hospitalization. 
• 
It results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity (ie, the AE results in 
substantial disruption of the subject’s ability to conduct normal life 
functions). 
• 
It results in a congenital anomaly/birth defect in a neonate/infant born to a 
mother exposed to the investigational product. 
• 
It is considered a significant medical event by the investigator based on 
medical judgment (eg, may jeopardize the subject or may require 
medical/surgical intervention to prevent 1 of the outcomes listed above). 
6.1.3 
Severity 
Definitions found in the CTCAE version 4.03 or higher will be used for grading the 
severity (intensity) of AEs.  The CTCAE displays Grades 1 through 5 with unique clinical 
descriptions of severity for each referenced AE.  Should a subject experience any AE 
not listed in the CTCAE, the following grading system should be used to assess severity: 
• 
Grade 1 (Mild AE) – experiences which are usually transient, requiring no 
special treatment, and not interfering with the subject’s daily activities 
• 
Grade 2 (Moderate AE) – experiences which introduce some level of 
inconvenience or concern to the subject, and which may interfere with daily 
activities, but are usually ameliorated by simple therapeutic measures 
• 
Grade 3 (Severe AE) – experiences which are unacceptable or intolerable, 
significantly interrupt the subject’s usual daily activity, and require systemic 
drug therapy or other treatment 
• 
Grade 4 (Life-threatening or disabling AE) – experiences which cause the 
subject to be in imminent danger of death 
• 
Grade 5 (Death related to AE) – experiences which result in subject death 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 87 of 160 
 
6.2 
DOCUMENTING AND REPORTING OF ADVERSE AND SERIOUS 
ADVERSE EVENTS 
The investigator is responsible for ensuring that all AEs and SAEs that are observed or 
reported during the study, as outlined in the prior sections, are recorded on the CRF.  All 
SAEs must be reported on the SAE form or clinical database. 
6.2.1 
Adverse Event Reporting Period 
After the signing of the ICF, all SAEs must be reported.  After the first dose of study 
drug, all AEs, irrespective of seriousness, must be reported.  
For ACP-196, AE reporting, irrespective of seriousness, ends 30 days after the last dose 
of study drug(s).  For pembrolizumab, all AEs must be reported through 30 days after 
the last dose of pembrolizumab; any SAEs, or follow-up to a SAE, including death due to 
any cause other than progression of the cancer under study, must be reported through 
90 days after the last dose or 30 days after the last dose of pembrolizumab if the subject 
initiates a new anticancer therapy within the 90 day posttreatment timeframe.   
SAEs considered related to study drug(s) occurring after the end of the AE reporting 
period (as defined above) must be reported.   
If an SAE is present at the last study visit, the SAE should be followed to resolution or 
until the investigator assesses the subject as stable, or the subject is lost to follow-up or 
withdraws consent.  Resolution/stable means the subject has returned to baseline state 
of health or the investigator does not expect any further improvement or worsening of 
the event.  
6.2.2 
Assessment of Adverse Events 
Investigators will assess the occurrence of AEs and SAEs at all subject evaluation 
timepoints during the study.  All AEs and SAEs whether volunteered by the subject, 
discovered by study personnel during questioning, or detected through physical 
examination, or other means, that occur to any subject from the time of first dose 
through 30 days following the cessation of study drug(s), and all SAEs that occur to any 
subject receiving pembrolizumab from the time of first dose through 90 days following 
cessation of pembrolizumab, or 30 days following cessation of pembrolizumab if the 
subject initiates new anticancer therapy (whichever is earlier) will be recorded in the 
subject’s medical record and on the AE CRF.  

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 88 of 160 
 
Disease progression itself is not considered an AE; however, signs and symptoms of 
disease progression may be recorded as AEs or SAEs. 
Each recorded AE or SAE will be described by its diagnostic term, duration (eg, start and 
end dates), severity, regulatory seriousness criteria, if applicable, suspected relationship 
to the study drugs (see following guidance), and any actions taken.  The causality of AEs 
to the study drugs will be assessed by means of the question: ‘Is there a reasonable 
possibility that the event may have been caused by the study drugs?’ per FDA guidance 
on safety reporting requirements (FDA Guidance 2012).  
See Appendix 3 for more detail on assessing relationship. 
6.2.3 
Pregnancy 
The investigator should report all pregnancies within 24 hours using the Pregnancy 
Report Form.  This form should be faxed or emailed to Acerta Pharma Drug Safety.  Any 
pregnancy-associated SAE must be reported to Acerta Pharma, according to the usual 
timelines and directions for SAE reporting (Section 6.2.4). 
Any uncomplicated pregnancy that occurs with the subject during this study will be 
reported.  All pregnancies that are identified during or after this study, wherein the 
estimated date of conception is determined to have occurred from the time of consent to 
90 days after the last dose of ACP-196, 120 days after the last dose of pembrolizumab, 
or 30 days after the last dose of either treatment if the subject initiates new anticancer 
therapy (whichever is earlier) will be reported, followed to conclusion, and the outcome 
reported, as long as the subject or partner is willing to participate in follow-up. 
A pregnancy itself is not regarded as an AE unless there is suspicion that the 
investigational product under study may have interfered with the effectiveness of a 
contraceptive medication.  Likewise, elective abortions without complications are not 
considered AEs.  Any SAEs associated with pregnancy (eg, congenital 
abnormalities/birth defects/spontaneous miscarriage or any other serious events) must 
additionally be reported as such using the SAE report form. 
Subjects should be instructed to immediately notify the investigator of any pregnancies.  
Any women receiving study drug who become pregnant must immediately discontinue 
study drug.  The investigator should counsel the subject, discussing any risks of 
continuing the pregnancy and any possible effects on the fetus. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 89 of 160 
 
Upon completion of the pregnancy, additional information on the mother, pregnancy, and 
baby will be collected and sent to DrugSafety@acerta-pharma.com. 
6.2.4 
Expedited Reporting Requirements for Serious Adverse 
Events 
All SAEs must be reported within 24 hours of discovery.  All initial SAE reports and 
follow-up information will be reported using the protocol-specific electronic data capture 
system.  If electronic SAE reporting is not available, paper SAE forms must be emailed 
or faxed to Acerta Pharma Drug Safety, or designee.  Acerta Pharma may request 
follow-up and other additional information from the investigator (eg, hospital 
admission/discharge notes and laboratory results). 
Whenever possible, AEs/SAEs should be reported by diagnosis term not as a 
constellation of symptoms.   
Death due to disease progression should be recorded on the appropriate form in the 
electronic data capture system.  If the primary cause of death is disease progression, the 
death due to disease progression should not be reported as an SAE. If the primary 
cause of death is something other than disease progression, then the death should be 
reported as an SAE with the primary cause of death as the event term, as death is 
typically the outcome of the event, not the event itself.  The primary cause of death on 
the autopsy report should be the term reported.  Autopsy and postmortem reports must 
be forwarded to Acerta Pharma Drug Safety, or designee, as outlined above. 
If study drug is discontinued because of an SAE, this information must be included in the 
SAE report. 
An SAE may qualify for mandatory expedited reporting to regulatory authorities if the 
SAE is attributable to the investigational product (or if a causality assessment is not 
provided for the SAE, in which case the default of ‘related’ must be used for expedited 
reporting purposes) and the SAE is not listed in the current Investigator Brochure (ie, an 
unexpected event).  In this case, Acerta Pharma Drug Safety/Designee will forward a 
formal notification describing the suspected unexpected serious adverse reaction 
(SUSAR) to all investigators. Each investigator must then notify his or her IRB/IEC of the 
SUSAR. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 90 of 160 
 
Drug Safety Contact Information 
Fax: 
+1 866 467 0304 (United States)  
or +1 650 935 4996 (for outside United States) 
Email: DrugSafety@acerta-pharma.com 
 
6.2.5 
Reporting Events of Clinical Interest 
Selected non-serious and serious adverse events are also known as Events of Clinical 
Interest (ECI) and must be reported to the sponsor. 
For the time period beginning when the consent form is signed until treatment 
allocation/randomization, any ECI, or follow up to an ECI, that occurs to any subject 
must be reported within 24 hours to the sponsor if it causes the subject to be excluded 
from the trial, or is the result of a protocol-specified intervention, including but not limited 
to washout or discontinuation of usual therapy, diet, placebo treatment or a procedure. 
For the time period beginning at treatment allocation/randomization through 30 days 
following cessation of treatment, any ECI, or follow up to an ECI, whether or not related 
to study drug within 24 hours to the sponsor either by electronic media or paper as 
described in Section 6.2.4.  ECI for this trial include: 
1. An overdose of study drug (overdose is defined in Section 3.9.7) that is not associated 
with clinical symptoms or abnormal laboratory results.  
2. An elevated AST or ALT lab value that is ≥ 3 times the ULN and an elevated total 
bilirubin value that is ≥ 2 times the ULN and, at the same time, an alkaline phosphatase 
value that is < 2 times the ULN, as determined by way of protocol-specified laboratory 
testing or unscheduled laboratory testing.* 
*Note:  These criteria are based upon available regulatory guidance documents. The 
purpose of the criteria is to specify a threshold of abnormal hepatic tests that may 
require an additional evaluation for an underlying etiology.  The guidance for 
assessment and follow up of these criteria can be found in the study binder provided 
separately from this protocol. 
6.2.6 
Type and Duration of Follow-up of Subjects after Adverse 
Events 
All AEs and SAEs that are encountered during the protocol-specified AE reporting period 
should be followed to resolution, or until the investigator assesses the subject as stable, 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 91 of 160 
 
a new anticancer therapy is initiated, or the subject is lost to follow-up or withdraws 
consent. 
6.2.7 
Other Safety Issues Requiring Expedited Reporting 
For studies being conducted in Europe expedited reporting is required for safety issues 
that might materially alter the current benefit-risk assessment of an investigational 
medicinal product or that would be sufficient to consider changes in the investigational 
medicinal products administration or in the overall conduct of the trial.  For a detailed 
description of safety issues that may qualify for expedited reporting please refer to the 
European Commission guidance titled, “Detailed guidance on the collection, verification 
and presentation of adverse reaction reports arising from clinical trials on medicinal 
products for human use – April 2006” available at 
http://ec.europa.eu/health/files/eudralex/vol-10/21_susar_rev2_2006_04_11_en.pdf. 
7.0 
STUDY ADMINISTRATION AND INVESTIGATOR OBLIGATIONS 
Acerta Pharma retains the right to terminate the study and remove all study materials 
from a study site at any time. Specific circumstances that may precipitate such 
termination are: 
• 
Unsatisfactory subject enrollment with regard to quality or quantity 
• 
Significant or numerous deviations from study protocol requirements, such as 
failures to perform required evaluations on subjects and maintain adequate study 
records 
• 
Inaccurate, incomplete and/or late data recording on a recurrent basis 
• 
The incidence and/or severity of AEs in this or other studies indicating a potential 
health hazard caused by the study treatment 
7.1 
INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD AND INDEPENDENT ETHICS 
COMMITTEE 
The investigator will submit this protocol, the informed consent, Investigator Brochure, 
and any other relevant supporting information (eg, all advertising materials) to the 
appropriate IRB/IEC for review and approval before study initiation.  A signed protocol 
approval page; a letter confirming IRB/IEC approval of the protocol and informed 
consent; and a statement that the IRB/IEC is organized and operates according to Good 
Clinical Practice (GCP) guidelines and the applicable laws and regulations; must be 
forwarded to Acerta Pharma before screening subjects for the study.  Additionally, sites 
must forward a signed Form FDA 1572 (Statement of Investigator) to Acerta Pharma 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 92 of 160 
 
before screening subjects for study enrollment.  Amendments to the protocol must also 
be approved by the IRB/IEC and local regulatory agency, as appropriate, before the 
implementation of changes in this study. 
7.2 
INFORMED CONSENT AND PROTECTED SUBJECT HEALTH 
INFORMATION AUTHORIZATION 
A copy of the IRB/IEC-approved informed consent must be forwarded to Acerta Pharma 
for regulatory purposes.  The investigator, or designee (designee must be listed on the 
Study Personnel Responsibility/Signature Log, see Section 7.11), must explain to each 
subject the purpose and nature of the study, the study procedures, the possible adverse 
effects, and all other elements of consent as defined in § 21 Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) Part 50, and other applicable national and local regulations governing 
informed consent form.  Each subject must provide a signed and dated informed consent 
before enrollment into this study.  In the case of a subject who is incapable of providing 
informed consent, the investigator (or designee) must obtain a signed and dated 
informed consent form from the subject’s legal guardian.  Signed consent forms must 
remain in each subject’s study file and be available for verification by study monitors at 
any time. 
In accordance to individual local and national patient privacy regulations, the investigator 
or designee must explain to each subject that for the evaluation of study results, the 
subject’s protected health information obtained during the study may be shared with 
Acerta Pharma and its designees, regulatory agencies, and IRBs/IECs.  As the study 
sponsor, Acerta Pharma will not use the subject’s protected health information or 
disclose it to a third party without applicable subject authorization.  It is the investigator’s 
or designee’s responsibility to obtain written permission to use protected health 
information from each subject, or if appropriate, the subject’s legal guardian.  If a subject 
or subject’s legal guardian withdraws permission to use protected health information, it is 
the investigator’s responsibility to obtain the withdrawal request in writing from the 
subject or subject’s legal guardian and to ensure that no further data will be collected 
from the subject.  Any data collected on the subject before withdrawal will be used in the 
analysis of study results. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 93 of 160 
 
7.3 
SUBJECT SCREENING LOG 
The investigator must keep a record that lists all subjects considered for enrollment 
(including those who did not undergo screening) in the study.  For those subjects 
subsequently excluded from enrollment, record the reason(s) for exclusion. 
7.4 
CASE REPORT FORMS 
Authorized study site personnel (see Section 7.11) will complete CRFs designed for this 
study according to the completion guidelines that will be provided within the clinical 
database.  The investigator will ensure that the CRFs are accurate, complete, legible, 
and completed promptly.  The investigator will ensure that source documents that are 
required to verify the validity and completeness of data transcribed on the CRFs are 
never obliterated or destroyed. 
7.5 
STUDY MONITORING REQUIREMENTS 
Representatives of Acerta Pharma or its designee will monitor this study until 
completion.  The purpose of monitoring is to ensure compliance with the protocol and 
the quality and integrity of the data.  This study is also subject to reviews or audits. 
Every effort will be made to maintain the anonymity and confidentiality of all subjects 
during this clinical study.  However, because of the experimental nature of this 
treatment, the investigator agrees to allow the IRB/IEC, representatives of Acerta 
Pharma, its designated agents, and authorized employees of the appropriate regulatory 
agencies to inspect the facilities used in this study and, for purposes of verification, allow 
direct access to the hospital or clinic records of all subjects enrolled into this study.  This 
includes providing by fax, email, or regular mail de-identified copies of radiology, 
pathology, and/or laboratory results when requested by the sponsor.  A statement to this 
effect will be included in the informed consent and permission form authorizing the use 
of protected health information. 
7.6 
INVESTIGATIONAL STUDY DRUG ACCOUNTABILITY 
ACP-196 and pembrolizumab must be kept in a locked limited access cabinet or space.  
The study drug must not be used outside the context of the protocol.   
Study drug accountability records must be maintained and readily available for 
inspection by representatives of Acerta Pharma and are open to inspections by 
regulatory authorities at any time.  

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 94 of 160 
 
Each shipment of study drug will contain a Clinical Supplies Shipping Receipt Form 
(CSSF) that must be appended to the site’s drug accountability records.  Additionally a 
Drug Re-order Form for requesting more study drug is provided in the pharmacy binder. 
If it is used, then the Drug Re-order Form must also be included in the site’s drug 
accountability records.   
Contents of each shipment must be visually inspected to verify the quantity and 
document the condition of study drug capsules.  The designated recipient completes and 
signs the CSSF.  A copy of the signed CSSF must be faxed or emailed to Acerta 
Pharma at the fax number/email address listed on the form. 
An Investigational Drug Accountability Log must be used for drug accountability.  For 
accurate accountability, the following information must be noted when drug supplies are 
used during the study: 
1. 
study identification number (ACE-ST-208) 
2. 
subject identification number 
3. 
lot number(s) of ACP-196 dispensed for that subject 
4. 
date and quantity of drug dispensed 
5. 
any unused drug returned by the subject 
At study initiation, the monitor will evaluate and approve the site’s procedure for 
investigational product disposal/destruction to ensure that it complies with Acerta 
Pharma’s requirements.  If the site cannot meet Acerta Pharma’s requirements for 
disposal/destruction, arrangements will be made between the site and Acerta Pharma or 
its designee, for return of unused investigational product.  Before disposal/destruction, 
final drug accountability and reconciliation must be performed by the monitor. 
All study supplies and associated documentation will be regularly reviewed and verified 
by the monitor. 
7.7 
RECORD RETENTION 
The investigator and other appropriate study staff are responsible for maintaining all 
documentation relevant to the study.  Mandatory documentation includes copies of study 
protocols and amendments, each Form FDA 1572, IRB/IEC approval letters, signed 
ICFs, drug accountability records, SAE information transmitted to Acerta Pharma, 
subject files (source documentation) that substantiate entries in CRFs, all relevant 
correspondence and other documents pertaining to the conduct of the study. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 95 of 160 
 
An investigator shall retain records for a period of at least 2 years after the date the last 
marketing application is approved for the drug for the indication for which it is being 
investigated; or, if no application is to be filed or if the application is not approved for 
such indication, until 2 years after the investigation is discontinued and regulatory 
authorities have been notified.  The investigator must notify Acerta Pharma and obtain 
written approval from Acerta Pharma before destroying any clinical study records at any 
time.  Acerta Pharma will inform the investigator of the date that study records may be 
destroyed or returned to Acerta Pharma. 
Acerta Pharma must be notified in advance of, and Acerta Pharma must provide express 
written approval of, any change in the maintenance of the foregoing documents if the 
investigator wishes to move study records to another location or assign responsibility for 
record retention to another party.  If the investigator cannot guarantee the archiving 
requirements set forth herein at his or her study site for all such documents, special 
arrangements must be made between the investigator and Acerta Pharma to store such 
documents in sealed containers away from the study site so that they can be returned 
sealed to the investigator for audit purposes. 
7.8 
PROTOCOL AMENDMENTS 
Acerta Pharma will initiate any change to the protocol in a protocol amendment 
document.  The amendment will be submitted to the IRB/IEC together with, if applicable, 
a revised model ICF.  If the change in any way increases the risk to the subject or 
changes the scope of the study, then written documentation of IRB/IEC approval must 
be received by Acerta Pharma before the amendment may take effect.  Additionally 
under this circumstance, information on the increased risk and/or change in scope must 
be provided to subjects already actively participating in the study, and they must read, 
understand, and sign any revised ICF confirming willingness to remain in the trial. 
7.9 
PUBLICATION OF STUDY RESULTS 
Authorship, in general, will follow the recommendations of the International Committee of 
Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE 2014). 
7.10 CLINICAL TRIAL INSURANCE 
Clinical trial insurance has been undertaken according to the laws of the countries where 
the study will be conducted.  An insurance certificate will be made available to the 
participating sites at the time of study initiation. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 96 of 160 
 
7.11 GENERAL INVESTIGATOR RESPONSIBILITIES 
The principal investigator must ensure that: 
1. He or she will conduct or supervise the study. 
2. His or her staff and all persons who assist in the conduct of the study clearly 
understand their responsibilities and have their names included in the Study 
Personnel Responsibility/Signature Log. 
3. The study is conducted according to the protocol and all applicable regulations. 
4. The protection of each subject’s rights and welfare is maintained. 
5. Signed and dated informed consent and, when applicable, permission to use 
protected health information are obtained from each subject before conducting 
nonstandard of care study procedures.  If a subject or subject’s legal guardian 
withdraws permission to use protected health information, the investigator will 
obtain a written request from the subject or subject’s legal guardian and will 
ensure that no further data be collected from the subject. 
6. The consent process is conducted in compliance with all applicable regulations 
and privacy acts. 
7. The IRB/IEC complies with applicable regulations and conducts initial and 
ongoing reviews and approvals of the study. 
8. Any amendment to the protocol is submitted promptly to the IRB/IEC. 
9. Any significant protocol deviations are reported to Acerta Pharma and the 
IRB/IEC according to the guidelines at each study site. 
10. CRF pages are completed promptly. 
11. All Investigational New Drug Safety Reports/SUSAR Reports are submitted 
promptly to the IRB/IEC. 
12. All SAEs are reported to Acerta Pharma Drug Safety/Designee within 24 hours of 
knowledge via the clinical database and to the IRB/IEC per their requirements. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 97 of 160 
 
8.0 
REFERENCES 
Armstrong DK. Relapsed ovarian cancer: Cchallenges and management strategies for a 
chronic disease. Oncologist. 2002;7 (suppl 5):20-8). 
Berger R, Rotem-Yehudar R, Slama G, et al. Phase I safety and pharmacokinetic study 
of CT-011, a humanized antibody interacting with PD 1, in patients with advanced 
hematologic malignancies. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:3044-51.  
Bohnsack O, Ludajic K, Hoos A.  Adaption of the immune-related response criteria: 
irRECIST. Ann Oncol. 2014;25 (suppl 4):iv369. 
Bradshaw JM. The Src, Syk, and Tec family kinases: distinct types of molecular 
switches. Cell Signal 2010;22:1175-84. 
Byrd JC, Harrington B, O’Brien S, et al.  Acalabrutinib (ACP-196) in relapsed chronic 
lymphocytic leukemia. NEJM 2016;374:323-332. 
Cheson BD, Byrd JC, Rai KR, et al. Novel targeted agents and the need to refine clinical 
end points in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2820-2. 
Condamine T, Gabrilovich DI.  Can the suppressive activity of myeloid-derived 
suppressor cells be “Chop”ped?  Immunity. 2014;41:341-2. 
Covey T, Barf T, Gulrajani M, et al.  ACP-196: a novel covalent Bruton's tyrosine kinase 
(Btk) inhibitor with improved selectivity and in vivo target coverage in chronic 
lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients.  AACR 2015 Annual Meeting Abstract #2596. 
De Rooij MF, Kuil A, Geest CR, et al. The clinically active Btk inhibitor PCI-32765 targets 
B-cell receptor- and chemokine-controlled adhesion and migration in chronic lymphocytic 
leukemia. Blood. 2012;119:2590-4.   
Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid 
tumours: revised  RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:228-47. 
Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, et al. GLOBOCAN 2012 v1.0, Cancer Incidence and 
Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 11 [Internet]. Lyon, France: International 
Agency for Research on Cancer; 2013. Available from: http://globocan.iarc.fr, accessed 
on 01 April 2015. 
Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry and Investigators:  Safety 
Reporting Requirements for INDs and BA/BE Studies (December 2012). Available 
at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/.../Guidances/UCM227351.pdf, accessed 
on:  28January2016. 
Garon EB, Hui E, Eder J, et al.  Antitumor activity of pembrolizumab (Pembro; MK-3475) 
and correlation with programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in a pooled analysis 
of patients (pts) with advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC).  Ann Oncol. 
2014;25:1-41. 
Hallek M, Cheson BD, Catovsky D, et al.  Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of 
chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a report from the International Workshop on Chronic 
Lymphocytic Leukemia updating the National Cancer Institute-Working Group 1996 
guidelines. Blood. 2008;111:5446-56.  Erratum in: Blood. 2008; 112(13):5259. 
Hamanishi J, Mandai M, Ikeda T, et al.  Efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1 antibody 
(Nivolumab: BMS-936558, ONO-4538) in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian 
cancer.  J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:5s (suppl; abstr 5511). 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 98 of 160 
 
Hamid O, Robert C, Daud A, et al. Safety and tumor responses with lambrolizumab 
(anti-PD 1) in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:134-44.  
Heery CR, O’Sullivan Coyne GH, Madan RA, et al. Phase I open-label, multiple 
ascending dose trial of MSB0010718C, an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody, in advanced 
solid malignancies. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:5s (suppl; abstr 3064).   
Herman SE, Sun X, McAuley EM, et al. Modeling tumor-host interactions of chronic 
lymphocytic leukemia in xenografted mice to study tumor biology and evaluate targeted 
therapy. Leukemia. 2013;27:2311-21. 
Highfill SL, Cui Y, Giles AJ, et al. Disruption of CXCR2-mediated MDSC tumor trafficking 
enhances anti-PD1 efficacy. Sci Transl Med. 2014;6:237ra67. 
Hodi FS, O’Day SJ, McDermott DF, et al. Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients 
with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:711-23. Erratum in: N Engl J Med. 
2010;363:1290. 
IMBRUVICA [prescribing information].  Horsham, PA: Janssen Biotech, Inc; 2015. 
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Recommendations for the Conduct, 
Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. 2014 Dec.  
Available from: http://www.ICMJE.org.  Accessed February 04, 2015. 
Johnson, L, Mercer K, Greenbaum D, et al. Somatic activation of the K-ras oncogene 
causes early onset lung cancer in mice. Nature. 2001;410:1111-6. 
KEYTRUDA [prescribing information].  Whitehouse Station, NJ:  Merck & Co, Inc; 2015. 
Khan WN. Regulation of B lymphocyte development and activation by Bruton’s tyrosine 
kinase. Immunol Res. 2001;23:147-56. 
Kim K, Skora AD, Li Z, et al. Eradication of metastatic mouse cancers resistant to 
immune checkpoint blockade by suppression of myeloid-derived cells. Proc Natl Acad 
Sci. 2014;111:11774-9. 
McDermott DF, Atkins MB.  PD-1 as a potential target in cancer therapy.  Cancer Med. 
2013;2:662-73.  
Meyer C, Cagnon L, Costa-Nunes CM, et al. Frequencies of circulating MDSC correlate 
with clinical outcome of melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab. Cancer Immunol 
Immunother. 2014;63:247-57. 
Mohamed AJ, Yu L, Bäckesjö CM, et al. Immunol Rev. 2009;228:58-73. 
Mouchemore KA, Sampaio NG, Murrey MW, et al. Specific inhibition of PI3K p110δ 
inhibits CSF-1-induced macrophage spreading and invasive capacity. FEBS J. 
2013;280:5228-36. 
Ní Gabhann J, HAMs E, Smith S, et al. Btk regulates macrophage polarization in 
response to lipopolysaccharide. PloS One. 2014;9:e85834. 
Nishino M, Giobbie-Hurder A, Gargano M, et al.  Developing a common language for 
tumor response to immunotherapy: Immune-related Response Criteria using 
unidimensional measurements.  Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19:3936-43.  
Pardoll DM.  The blockade of immune checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy.  Nat Rev 
Cancer. 2012;12:252-64. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 99 of 160 
 
Pollard JW. Trophic macrophages in development and disease. Nat Rev Immunol. 
2009;9,259-70. 
Ponader S, Chen SS, Buggy JJ, et al. The Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor PCI-32765 
thwarts chronic lymphocytic leukemia cell survival and tissue homing in vitro and in vivo. 
Blood. 2012;119:1182-9.   
Powles T, Vogelzang NJ, Fine GD, et al. Inhibition of PD-L1 by MPDL3280A and clinical 
activity in pts with metastatic urothelial bladder cancer (UBC). J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:5s 
(suppl; abstr 5011). 
PrognoScan bioinformatics database.  Available at: http://www.Abren.net/PrognoScan/.  
Accessed 04 May 2015.   
Schmidt U, Boucheron N, Ungerf B, Ellmeier W. The role of Tec family kinases in 
myeloid cells. Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2004;134:65-78 
SEER Stat Factsheets: Ovary Cancer. National Cancer Institute. Bethesda MD. 
Available at:  http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/ovary.html.  Accessed April 01, 2015. 
Smith TJ, Bohlke K, Lyman GH, et al.  Recommendations for the Use of WBC Growth 
Factors: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update.  J 
Clin Oncol 2015 Oct 1;33(28):3199-212. 
Soucek L, Buggy JJ, Kortlever R, et al. Modeling pharmacological inhibition of mast cell 
degranulation as a therapy for insulinoma. Neoplasia. 2011;13:1093-100. 
Thall PF, Simon RM, Estey EH.  Bayesian sequential monitoring designs for single-arm 
clinical trials with multiple outcomes.  Stat Med. 1995;14:357-79. 
Topalian SL, Sznol M, McDermott DF, et al. Survival, durable tumor remission, and long-
term safety in patients with advanced melanoma receiving nivolumab. J Clin Oncol. 
2014;32:1020-30. 
Weide B, Martens A, Zelba H, et al. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells predict survival of 
patients with advanced melanoma: comparison with regulatory T cells and NY-ESO-1- or 
melan-A-specific T cells. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:1601-9. 
Wesolowski R, Markowitz J, Carson WE.  Myeloid derived suppressor cells – a new 
therapeutic target in the treatment of cancer.  J Immunother Cancer. 2013;1:10. 
Westin JR, Chu F, Zhang M, et al.  Safety and activity of PD1 blockade by pidilizumab in 
combination with rituximab in patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma: a single group, 
open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:69-77. 
Westphalen CB, Olive KP. Genetically engineered mouse models of pancreatic cancer. 
Cancer. J 2012;18:502-10. 
Wolchok JD, Hoos A, O’Day S, et al.  Guidelines for the evaluation of immune therapy 
activity in solid tumors:  Immune-related Response Criteria.  Clin Cancer Res. 
2009;15:7412-20. 
Zou W.  Regulatory T cells, tumor immunity, and immunotherapy.  Nat Rev Immunol. 
2006;6:295-307. 
Zucha MA, Wu ATH, Lee WH, et al.  Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (Btk) inhibitor ibrutinib 
suppresses stem-like traits in ovarian cancer. Oncotarget. 2015;6:13255-68. 
 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 100 of 160 
 
APPENDICES 
 
Appendix 1. Performance Status Scores 
Grade 
ECOG 
0 
Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without 
restriction 
1 
Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able 
to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature, eg, light house 
work, office work 
2 
Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out any 
work activities.  Up and about more than 50% of waking hours 
3 
Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair more 
than 50% of waking hours 
4 
Completely disabled.  Cannot carry on any self-care. Totally 
confined to bed or chair 
5 
Dead 
As published in Am J Clin Oncol: 
Oken, M.M., Creech, R.H., Tormey, D.C., Horton, J., Davis, T.E., McFadden, E.T., Carbone, 
P.P.: Toxicity And Response Criteria Of The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin 
Oncol. 5:649-55, 1982. 
Credit: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Chair: Robert Comis, MD 
Available at: http://www.ecog.org/general/perf_stat.html.  Accessed 23 August 2013. 
 
 
 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 101 of 160 
 
Appendix 2.  Known Strong in Vivo Inhibitors or Inducers of CYP3A 
 
Strong Inhibitors of CYP3Aa 
Strong Inducers of CYP3Ae 
boceprevir 
carbamazepinef 
clarithromycinb 
phenytoinf 
conivaptinb 
rifampinf 
grapefruit juicec 
St John's wortf  
indinavir 
 
itraconazoleb 
 
ketoconazoleb 
 
lopinavir/ritonavirb (combination drug) 
 
mibefradild 
 
nefazodone 
 
nelfinavir 
 
posaconazole 
 
ritonavirb 
 
saquinavir 
 
telaprevir 
 
telithromycin 
 
voriconazole 
 
  
a. 
A strong inhibitor for CYP3A is defined as an inhibitor that increases the AUC of a substrate for CYP3A 
by ≥ 5-fold. 
b. 
In vivo inhibitor of P-glycoprotein. 
c. 
The effect of grapefruit juice varies widely among brands and is concentration-, dose-, and preparation-
dependent. Studies have shown that it can be classified as a “strong CYP3A inhibitor” when a certain 
preparation was used (eg, high dose, double strength) or as a “moderate CYP3A inhibitor” when 
another preparation was used (eg, low dose, single strength). 
d. 
Withdrawn from the United States market because of safety reasons. 
e. 
A strong inducer for CYP3A is defined as an inducer that results in ≥ 80% decrease in the AUC of a 
substrate for CYP3A. 
f. 
In vivo inducer of P-glycoprotein.   
 
Note: The list of drugs in these tables is not exhaustive.  Any questions about drugs not on this list 
should be addressed to the medical monitor of the protocol. 
Source: 
FDA Drug Development and Drug Interactions: Table of Substrates, Inhibitors and Inducers. Web link 
Accessed 21 January 2015: 
http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DevelopmentResources/DrugInteractionsLabe
ling/ucm093664.htm#inVivo 
 
 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 102 of 160 
 
Appendix 3. Adverse Event Assessment of Causality 
 
Is there a reasonable possibility that the event may have been caused by study drugs?  
No___ Yes___ 
The descriptions provided below will help guide the principal investigator in making the 
decision to choose either “yes” or “no”: 
No = There is no reasonable possibility that the event may have been caused by study 
drugs. 
The adverse event: 
• 
may be judged to be due to extraneous causes such as disease or environment 
or toxic factors 
• 
may be judged to be due to the subject’s clinical state or other therapy being 
administered 
• 
is not biologically plausible 
• 
does not reappear or worsen when study drug is re-administered 
• 
does not follow a temporal sequence from administration of study drug 
Yes = There is a reasonable possibility that the event may have been caused by study 
drugs. 
The adverse event: 
• 
follows a temporal sequence from administration of study drug 
• 
is a known response to the study drug based on clinical or preclinical data 
• 
could not be explained by the known characteristics of the subject’s clinical state, 
environmental or toxic factors, or other therapy administered to the subject 
• 
disappears or decreases upon cessation or reduction of dose of study drug 
• 
reappears or worsens when study drug is re-administered 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 103 of 160 
Appendix 4. Schedule of Assessments – Treatment Arms 1 and 2 
 
Treatment Phase (Weeks)b 
Safety 
Follow 
Visitc 
Follow-up 
Phased 
Study Weeks 
Screeninga 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
≥ 10 
(Q3W) 
TTc 
+ 30 days 
after last 
dose 
Q12W 
Study Window 
-28 days 
 
± 3 days 
± 3 days 
+ 7 days 
+ 7 days 
± 10 days 
Informed consent 
x 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Confirm eligibility 
x 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Medical history 
x 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PEe/Vital signsf/Weight 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
x 
 
ECOG status 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
 
 
 
ECGg 
x 
x 
x 
 
x 
 
 
x 
 
 
x 
x 
 
Lab assessments: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Pregnancy testh 
x 
xr 
 
 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
Hematologyi 
x 
xr 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
Serum chemistryj 
x 
xr 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
x 
 
 Serum lipase/amylases 
x 
xr 
 
 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
Thyroid panelk 
x 
xr 
 
 
 
 
 
x 
 
Week 10 then 
Q6W 
x 
x 
 
 
Urinalysisl 
x 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
T/B/NK cell countm 
x 
xr 
 
 
 
 
 
xr 
 
Week 10 then 
Q3M 
 
 
 
 
Serum Ign 
 
xr 
 
 
 
 
 
xr 
 
Week 10 then 
Q3M 
 
 
 
 
CA-125s 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
 
 
 
Hepatitis serologyt 
x 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
HBV PCRu 
x 
 
 
 
x 
 
 
 
x 
Week 12 then 
Q4W 
 
 
Q4W 
HCV PCRv 
x 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Week 13 and 
25 
 
 
 
 
Pharmacokineticso 
 
x 
 
x 
 
 
 
x 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PD/Biomarkers 
Tumor 
samplep 
xr 
xr 
xr 
xr 
 
 
xr 
 
Week 10 and 
13 onlyr 
 
 
 
Arm 1 
ACP-196 100 mg BID 
 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
 
Arm 2 
ACP-196 100 mg BID 
 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
 
Pembrolizumab 200 mg 
Q3W 
 
x 
 
 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
 
 
 
Study drug compliance 
 
x 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
 
 
 
Tumor assessmentq 
x 
 
 
 
 
 
 
x 
 
Week 13 and 
19 then 
Q12W 
 
 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 104 of 160 
Concomitant medications 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
x 
 
Adverse events 
 
x 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
x 
 
Survival 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
x 
x 
Note: Visits to the sites are not required on Week 5, 6, and 8, but subjects will continue to take ACP-196 100 mg BID during those weeks. 
Abbreviations: anti-HBc = hepatitis B core antibody; anti-HBs = hepatitis B surface antibody; BID = twice per day; ECG = electrocardiogram; ECOG = 
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; HBsAg = hepatitis B surface antigen; HBV = hepatitis B virus; HCV = hepatitis C; TT = treatment termination; Ig 
= immunoglobulin; PCR = polymerase chain reaction; PE = physical exam; Q3M = every 3 months; Q12W = every 12 weeks; Q3W = every 3 weeks; 
Q4W = every 4 weeks; Q6W = every 6 weeks; Q12W = every 12 weeks. 
Footnotes for Schedule of Study Activities: 
a.  Screening tests should be performed within 28 days before the first administration of study drug, unless otherwise indicated. 
b. 
Pembrolizumab treatment may be stopped earlier for confirmed CR as described in the protocol. 
c. 
A treatment termination (TT) visit is required for subjects who permanently discontinue study drug early for any reason, including disease 
progression.  A 30-day (+ 7 days) safety follow-up visit is required when subjects discontinue study drug, regardless of whether the subject receives 
a new anticancer therapy or demonstrates disease progression within this timeframe. The TT visit should be performed within 7 days of the last dose 
of study drug, if possible, and is not required for subjects who discontinue from the study within 10 days of a scheduled study visit or if the TT visit 
would be performed within 14 days of the safety follow-up visit.   
d. 
Subjects who discontinue study therapy will be followed for survival unless they withdraw consent or are lost to follow-up or the sponsor ends the 
study. 
e. 
The screening physical examination will include, at a minimum, the general appearance of the subject, height (screening only) and weight, and 
examination of the skin, eyes, ears, nose, throat, lungs, heart, abdomen, extremities, musculoskeletal system, lymphatic system, and nervous 
system.  Symptom-directed physical exams, including tumor assessments by palpation, are done thereafter.   
f. 
Vital signs (blood pressure, pulse, respiratory rate, and temperature) will be assessed after the subject has rested in the sitting position.   
g. 
Subjects should be in supine position and resting for ≥ 10 minutes before study-related ECGs.  On Day 1, Week 1 ECGs will be done in triplicate 
≥ 1 minute apart.  At all other visits the single ECGs will be done at any time during the visit. 
h. 
Women of childbearing potential must have a negative urine or serum pregnancy testing within 72 hours prior to receiving the first dose of study 
medication. If the urine test is positive or cannot be confirmed as negative, a serum pregnancy test is required. 
i. 
Hematology includes complete blood count with differential and platelet counts.  Week 1 hematology does not need to be repeated if screening 
hematology was done within 7 days. 
j. 
Serum chemistry: albumin, alkaline phosphatase, alanine transaminase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), bicarbonate, blood urea nitrogen 
(BUN), bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, calcium, chloride, creatinine, glucose, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), magnesium, 
phosphate/phosphorus, potassium, sodium, total bilirubin, total protein, and uric acid. Week 1 serum chemistry does not need to be repeated if 
screening serum chemistry was within 7 days. 
k. 
Post-Screening, required ONLY for subjects randomized to Arm 2.  Thyroid panel:  total triiodothyronine (T3), free thyroxine (T4), and 
thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH).  Week 1 thyroid panel does not need to be repeated if screening thyroid panel was within 7 days. 
l. 
Urinalysis: pH, ketones, specific gravity, bilirubin, protein, blood, and glucose.  
m. T/B/NK cell count (ie, CD3, CD4, CD8, CD19, CD14, CD16/56).  Week 1 cell count does not need to be repeated if screening cell count was within 
7 days. 
n. 
Serum immunoglobulin: IgG, IgM, IgA. 
o. 
Refer to Section 4.1.19 for complete instructions on the PK sampling timepoints.   
p. 
Provide tissue sections from either an archived or newly obtained tumor sample (most recent biopsy) for biomarker analysis at screening and, if 
available, whenever progression is confirmed.  Tissue sections at confirmation of progression are optional.   
q. 
A pretreatment computed tomography (CT) scan with contrast (unless contraindicated) is required of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis and any other 
disease sites (eg, neck) within 30 days before the first dose of study drug.  CT scans will be done for tumor assessments at Week 7, 13, 19 
(± 7 days) and then every 12 weeks (± 10 days) or more frequently at the investigator’s discretion.  
r. 
The indicated samples at this timepoint must be drawn predose. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 105 of 160 
s. 
At Week 1, CA-125 and serum lipase/amylase do not need to be repeated if screening was done within 7 days. 
t. 
Hepatitis serology must include hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs), hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc), 
and hepatitis C (HCV) antibody.  In addition, any subjects testing positive for any hepatitis serology, must have PCR testing (see exclusion criterion 
#19). 
u. 
Subjects who are anti-HBc positive (or have a known history of HBV infection) should have a quantitative PCR test for HBV DNA performed during 
screening and monthly thereafter.  Monitoring should continue Q4W (± 7 days) until 12 months after last dose of study drug(s).  Any subject with a 
rising viral load (above lower limit of detection) should discontinue study drug(s) and have antiviral therapy instituted and a consultation with a 
physician with expertise in managing hepatitis B. 
v. 
Subjects with a known history of hepatitis C or who are hepatitis C antibody positive should have quantitative PCR testing for HCV DNA performed 
during screening and at Weeks 13 and 25.  No further testing beyond Week 25 is necessary if PCR results are negative. 
 
 
 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 106 of 160 
Appendix 5.  Schedule of Assessments – Crossover 
Treatment Phase (Weeks)a 
Safety 
Follow 
Visitb 
Follow-
up 
Phasec 
Study Weeks 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
≥ 10 
(Q3W) 
TTb 
+ 30 days 
after last 
dose 
Q12W 
Study Window 
± 3 days 
± 3 days 
+ 7 days 
+ 7 days 
± 10 days 
PEd/Vital signse/Weight 
x 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
x 
 
ECOG status 
x 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
 
 
 
ECGf 
x 
x 
 
x 
 
 
x 
 
 
x 
x 
 
Lab assessments: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Pregnancy testg 
xo 
 
 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
Hematologyh 
xo 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
Serum chemistryi 
xo 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
x 
 
 Serum lipase/amylasep 
xo 
 
 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
Thyroid panelj 
xo 
 
 
 
 
 
x 
 
Week 10 
then Q6W 
x 
x 
 
 
Urinalysisk 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
T/B/NK cell countl 
xo 
 
 
 
 
 
xo 
 
Week 10 
then Q3M 
 
 
 
 
Serum Igm 
xo 
 
 
 
 
 
xo 
 
Week 10 
then Q3M 
 
 
 
 
CA-125p 
x 
 
 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
 
 
 
HBV PCRq 
 
 
 
x 
 
 
 
x 
Week 12 
then Q4W 
 
 
Q4W 
HCV PCRr 
x 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Week 13 
and 25 
 
 
 
ACP-196 100 mg BID 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
 
Pembrolizumab 200 mg Q3W 
x 
 
 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
 
 
 
Study drug compliance 
x 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
 
 
 
Tumor assessmentn 
 
 
 
 
 
 
x 
 
Week 13 
and 19 then 
Q12W 
 
 
 
Concomitant medications 
x 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
x 
 
Adverse events 
x 
x 
x 
x 
 
 
x 
 
x 
x 
x 
 
Survival 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
x 
x 
Note: Visits to the sites are not required on Week 5, 6, and 8, but subjects will continue to take ACP-196 100 mg BID during those weeks. 
Abbreviations: BID = twice per day; ECG = electrocardiogram; ECOG = Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; HBV = hepatitis B virus; HCV = 
hepatitis C; TT = treatment termination; Ig = immunoglobulin; PCR = polymerase chain reaction; PE = physical exam; Q3M = every 3 months; Q12W = 
every 12 weeks; Q3W = every 3 weeks; Q4W = every 4 weeks; Q6W = every 6 weeks; Q12W = every 12 weeks. 
Footnotes for Schedule of Study Activities: 
a. 
Pembrolizumab treatment may be stopped earlier for confirmed CR as described in the protocol. 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 107 of 160 
b. 
A treatment termination (TT) visit is required for subjects who permanently discontinue study drug early for any reason, including disease 
progression.  A 30-day (+ 7 days) safety follow-up visit is required when subjects discontinue study drug, regardless of whether the subject receives 
a new anticancer therapy or demonstrates disease progression within this timeframe. The TT visit should be performed within 7 days of the last dose 
of study drug, if possible, and is not required for subjects who discontinue from the study within 10 days of a scheduled study visit or if the TT visit 
would be performed within 14 days of the safety follow-up visit.   
c. 
Subjects who discontinue study therapy will be followed for survival unless they withdraw consent or are lost to follow-up or the sponsor ends the 
study. 
d. 
Symptom-directed physical exams, including tumor assessments by palpation, are performed.   
e. 
Vital signs (blood pressure, pulse, respiratory rate, and temperature) will be assessed after the subject has rested in the sitting position.   
f. 
Subjects should be in supine position and resting for ≥ 10 minutes before study-related ECGs.  On Day 1, Week 1 ECGs will be done in triplicate 
≥ 1 minute apart.  At all other visits the single ECGs will be done at any time during the visit. 
g. 
Women of childbearing potential must have a negative urine or serum pregnancy testing within 72 hours prior to receiving the first dose of study 
medication. If the urine test is positive or cannot be confirmed as negative, a serum pregnancy test is required. 
h. 
Hematology includes complete blood count with differential and platelet counts.  Week 1 hematology does not need to be repeated if a protocol-
specified visit has collected these laboratory results within 7 days. 
i. 
Serum chemistry: albumin, alkaline phosphatase, alanine transaminase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), bicarbonate, blood urea nitrogen 
(BUN), bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, calcium, chloride, creatinine, glucose, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), magnesium, 
phosphate/phosphorus, potassium, sodium, total bilirubin, total protein, and uric acid. Week 1 serum chemistry does not need to be repeated if 
screening serum chemistry was within 7 days. 
j. 
Thyroid panel:  total triiodothyronine (T3), free thyroxine (T4), and thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH).  Week 1 thyroid panel does not need to be 
repeated if a protocol-specified visit has collected these laboratory results within 7 days. 
k. 
Urinalysis: pH, ketones, specific gravity, bilirubin, protein, blood, and glucose.  
l. 
T/B/NK cell count (ie, CD3, CD4, CD8, CD19, CD14, CD16/56).  Week 1 cell count does not need to be repeated if a protocol-specified visit has 
collected these laboratory results within 7 days. 
m. Serum immunoglobulin: IgG, IgM, IgA. 
n. 
A pretreatment computed tomography (CT) scan with contrast (unless contraindicated) is required of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis and any other 
disease sites (eg, neck) within 30 days of crossover dosing Cycle 1 Day 1.  CT scans that showed disease progression from Arm 1 can be used for 
the crossover pretreatment scan, if within 30 days of crossover dosing Cycle 1 Day 1.  CT scans will be done for tumor assessments at Week 7, 13, 
19 (± 7 days) and then every 12 weeks (± 10 days) or more frequently at the investigator’s discretion.  
o. 
The indicated samples at this timepoint must be drawn predose. 
p. 
At Week 1, CA-125 and serum lipase/amylase do not need to be repeated if a protocol-specified visit has collected these laboratory results within 
7 days. 
q. 
Subjects who are anti-HBc positive (or have a known history of HBV infection) should have a quantitative PCR test for HBV DNA performed monthly.  
Monitoring should continue Q4W (± 7 days) until 12 months after last dose of study drug(s).  Any subject with a rising viral load (above lower limit of 
detection) should discontinue study drug(s) and have antiviral therapy instituted and a consultation with a physician with expertise in managing 
hepatitis B. 
r.  
Subjects with a known history of hepatitis C or who are hepatitis C antibody positive should have quantitative PCR testing for HCV DNA performed at 
Weeks 1, 13, and 25.  No further testing beyond Week 25 is necessary if PCR results are negative. 
 

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 108 of 160 
 
Appendix 6.  KEYTRUDA Prescribing Information 
 
 
 

HIGHLIGHTS OF PRESCRIBING INFORMATION
These highlights do not include all the information needed to use 
KEYTRUDA safely and effectively. See full prescribing 
information for KEYTRUDA.
KEYTRUDA® (pembrolizumab) for injection, for intravenous use 
KEYTRUDA® (pembrolizumab) injection, for intravenous use
Initial U.S. Approval: 2014
---------------------------RECENT MAJOR CHANGES ---------------------------
Indications and Usage (1.1)
12/2015
Indications and Usage (1.2)
10/2015
Dosage and Administration (2.1, 2.3)
10/2015
Dosage and Administration (2.4)
01/2015
Warnings and Precautions (5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 5.7)
12/2015
----------------------------INDICATIONS AND USAGE----------------------------
KEYTRUDA is a programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1)-blocking 
antibody indicated for the treatment of:

patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma. (1.1)

patients with metastatic NSCLC whose tumors express PD-L1 as 
determined by an FDA-approved test and who have disease 
progression on or after platinum-containing chemotherapy. 
Patients with EGFR or ALK genomic tumor aberrations should 
have disease progression on FDA-approved therapy for these 
aberrations prior to receiving KEYTRUDA.
This indication is approved under accelerated approval based on 
tumor response rate and durability of response. An improvement 
in survival or disease-related symptoms has not yet been
established. Continued approval for this indication may be 
contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in 
the confirmatory trials. (1.2)
----------------------- DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION -----------------------

Administer 2 mg/kg as an intravenous infusion over 30 minutes 
every 3 weeks. (2.2)

Dilute prior to intravenous infusion. (2.4)
---------------------DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS ---------------------

For injection: 50 mg lyophilized powder in single-use vial for 
reconstitution (3)

Injection: 100 mg/4 mL (25 mg/mL) solution in a single-use vial (3)
-------------------------------CONTRAINDICATIONS-------------------------------
None. (4)
----------------------- WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS------------------------

Immune-mediated Pneumonitis: Withhold for moderate, and 
permanently discontinue for severe, life-threatening or recurrent 
moderate pneumonitis. (5.1)

Immune-mediated Colitis: Withhold for moderate or severe, and 
permanently discontinue for life-threatening colitis. (5.2)

Immune-mediated Hepatitis: Monitor for changes in hepatic 
function. Based on severity of liver enzyme elevations, withhold or 
discontinue. (5.3)

Immune-mediated Endocrinopathies (5.4): 
o
Hypophysitis: Withhold for moderate and withhold or 
permanently discontinue for severe or life-threatening 
hypophysitis. 
o
Thyroid disorders: Monitor for changes in thyroid function. 
Withhold or permanently discontinue for severe or life-
threatening hyperthyroidism. 
o
Type 1 diabetes mellitus: Monitor for hyperglycemia. 
Withhold KEYTRUDA in cases of severe hyperglycemia. 

Immune-mediated nephritis: Monitor for changes in renal function. 
Withhold for moderate, and permanently discontinue for severe or 
life-threatening nephritis. (5.5)

Infusion-related reactions: Stop infusion and permanently 
discontinue KEYTRUDA for severe or life-threatening infusion 
reactions. (5.7)

Embryofetal toxicity: KEYTRUDA can cause fetal harm. Advise 
females of reproductive potential of the potential risk to a fetus. 
(5.8)
------------------------------ ADVERSE REACTIONS ------------------------------
Most common adverse reactions (reported in ≥20% of patients) with:

melanoma included fatigue, pruritus, rash, constipation, diarrhea, 
nausea, and decreased appetite. (6.1)

NSCLC included fatigue, decreased appetite, dyspnea and 
cough. (6.1)
To report SUSPECTED ADVERSE REACTIONS, contact Merck 
Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., at 1-877-
888-4231 or FDA at 1-800-FDA-1088 or www.fda.gov/medwatch.
----------------------- USE IN SPECIFIC POPULATIONS -----------------------
Lactation: Discontinue nursing or discontinue KEYTRUDA. (8.2)
See 17 for PATIENT COUNSELING INFORMATION and Medication 
Guide.
Revised: 12/2015
FULL PRESCRIBING INFORMATION: CONTENTS*
1
INDICATIONS AND USAGE
1.1
Melanoma
1.2
Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
2
DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION
2.1
Patient Selection
2.2
Recommended Dosing
2.3
Dose Modifications
2.4
Preparation and Administration
3
DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS
4
CONTRAINDICATIONS
5
WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS
5.1
Immune-Mediated Pneumonitis
5.2
Immune-Mediated Colitis
5.3
Immune-Mediated Hepatitis
5.4
Immune-Mediated Endocrinopathies
5.5
Immune-Mediated Nephritis and Renal Dysfunction
5.6
Other Immune-Mediated Adverse Reactions
5.7
Infusion-Related Reactions
5.8
Embryofetal Toxicity
6
ADVERSE REACTIONS
6.1
Clinical Trials Experience
6.2
Immunogenicity
7
DRUG INTERACTIONS
8
USE IN SPECIFIC POPULATIONS
8.1
Pregnancy
8.2
Lactation
8.3
Females and Males of Reproductive Potential
8.4
Pediatric Use
8.5
Geriatric Use
8.6
Renal Impairment
8.7
Hepatic Impairment
10
OVERDOSAGE
11
DESCRIPTION
12
CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
12.1 Mechanism of Action
12.3 Pharmacokinetics
13
NONCLINICAL TOXICOLOGY
13.1 Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, Impairment of Fertility
13.2 Animal Toxicology and/or Pharmacology
14
CLINICAL STUDIES
14.1 Melanoma
14.2 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
16
HOW SUPPLIED/STORAGE AND HANDLING
17
PATIENT COUNSELING INFORMATION
*Sections or subsections omitted from the full prescribing information 
are not listed.

2
FULL PRESCRIBING INFORMATION
1
INDICATIONS AND USAGE
1.1
Melanoma
KEYTRUDA® (pembrolizumab) is indicated for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic 
melanoma [see Clinical Studies (14.1)].
1.2
Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
KEYTRUDA is indicated for the treatment of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)
whose tumors express PD-L1 as determined by an FDA-approved test with disease progression on or 
after platinum-containing chemotherapy. Patients with EGFR or ALK genomic tumor aberrations should 
have disease progression on FDA-approved therapy for these aberrations prior to receiving KEYTRUDA 
[see Clinical Studies (14.2)].
This indication is approved under accelerated approval based on tumor response rate and durability of 
response. An improvement in survival or disease-related symptoms has not yet been established. 
Continued approval for this indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical 
benefit in the confirmatory trials. 
2
DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION
2.1
Patient Selection
Select patients for second line or greater treatment of metastatic NSCLC with KEYTRUDA based on the 
presence of positive PD-L1 expression [see Clinical Studies (14.2)]. Information on FDA-approved tests 
for the detection of PD-L1 expression in NSCLC is available at: 
http://www.fda.gov/CompanionDiagnostics.
2.2
Recommended Dosing
The recommended dose of KEYTRUDA is 2 mg/kg administered as an intravenous infusion over 
30 minutes every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.
2.3
Dose Modifications
Withhold KEYTRUDA for any of the following:

Grade 2 pneumonitis [see Warnings and Precautions (5.1)] 

Grade 2 or 3 colitis [see Warnings and Precautions (5.2)] 

Grade 3 or 4 endocrinopathies [see Warnings and Precautions (5.4)]

Grade 2 nephritis [see Warnings and Precautions (5.5)] 

Aspartate aminotransferase (AST) or alanine aminotransferase (ALT) greater than 3 and up to 
5 times upper limit of normal (ULN) or total bilirubin greater than 1.5 and up to 3 times ULN

Any other severe or Grade 3 treatment-related adverse reaction [see Warnings and Precautions 
(5.6)]
Resume KEYTRUDA in patients whose adverse reactions recover to Grade 0-1.
Permanently discontinue KEYTRUDA for any of the following:

Any life-threatening adverse reaction (excluding endocrinopathies controlled with hormone 
replacement therapy)

Grade 3 or 4 pneumonitis or recurrent pneumonitis of Grade 2 severity [see Warnings and 
Precautions (5.1)]

Grade 3 or 4 nephritis [see Warnings and Precautions (5.5)]

AST or ALT greater than 5 times ULN or total bilirubin greater than 3 times ULN
o
For patients with liver metastasis who begin treatment with Grade 2 AST or ALT, if AST or ALT 
increases by greater than or equal to 50% relative to baseline and lasts for at least 1 week

Grade 3 or 4 infusion-related reactions [see Warnings and Precautions (5.7)]

3

Inability to reduce corticosteroid dose to 10 mg or less of prednisone or equivalent per day within 
12 weeks

Persistent Grade 2 or 3 adverse reactions (excluding endocrinopathies controlled with hormone 
replacement therapy) that do not recover to Grade 0-1 within 12 weeks after last dose of 
KEYTRUDA

Any severe or Grade 3 treatment-related adverse reaction that recurs [see Warnings and 
Precautions (5.6)]
2.4
Preparation and Administration
Reconstitution of KEYTRUDA for Injection (Lyophilized Powder)

Add 2.3 mL of Sterile Water for Injection, USP by injecting the water along the walls of the vial and 
not directly on the lyophilized powder (resulting concentration 25 mg/mL).

Slowly swirl the vial. Allow up to 5 minutes for the bubbles to clear. Do not shake the vial.
Preparation for Intravenous Infusion

Visually inspect the solution for particulate matter and discoloration prior to administration. The 
solution is clear to slightly opalescent, colorless to slightly yellow. Discard the vial if visible particles 
are observed.

Dilute KEYTRUDA injection (solution) or reconstituted lyophilized powder prior to intravenous 
administration.

Withdraw the required volume from the vial(s) of KEYTRUDA and transfer into an intravenous (IV) 
bag containing 0.9% Sodium Chloride Injection, USP or 5% Dextrose Injection, USP. Mix diluted 
solution by gentle inversion. The final concentration of the diluted solution should be between 
1 mg/mL to 10 mg/mL.

Discard any unused portion left in the vial.
Storage of Reconstituted and Diluted Solutions
The product does not contain a preservative.
Store the reconstituted and diluted solution from the KEYTRUDA 50 mg vial either: 

At room temperature for no more than 6 hours from the time of reconstitution. This includes room 
temperature storage of reconstituted vials, storage of the infusion solution in the IV bag, and the 
duration of infusion.

Under refrigeration at 2°C to 8°C (36°F to 46°F) for no more than 24 hours from the time of 
reconstitution. If refrigerated, allow the diluted solution to come to room temperature prior to 
administration.
Store the diluted solution from the KEYTRUDA 100 mg/4 mL vial either: 

At room temperature for no more than 6 hours from the time of dilution. This includes room 
temperature storage of the infusion solution in the IV bag, and the duration of infusion.

Under refrigeration at 2°C to 8°C (36°F to 46°F) for no more than 24 hours from the time of dilution. 
If refrigerated, allow the diluted solution to come to room temperature prior to administration.
Do not freeze.
Administration

Administer infusion solution intravenously over 30 minutes through an intravenous line containing a 
sterile, non-pyrogenic, low-protein binding 0.2 micron to 5 micron in-line or add-on filter.

Do not co-administer other drugs through the same infusion line.
3
DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS

For injection: 50 mg lyophilized powder in a single-use vial for reconstitution

Injection: 100 mg/4 mL (25 mg/mL) solution in a single-use vial

4
4
CONTRAINDICATIONS
None.
5
WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS
5.1
Immune-Mediated Pneumonitis
Immune-mediated pneumonitis, including fatal cases, occurred in patients receiving KEYTRUDA. Monitor 
patients for signs and symptoms of pneumonitis. Evaluate patients with suspected pneumonitis with 
radiographic imaging and administer corticosteroids (initial dose of 1 to 2 mg/kg/day prednisone or 
equivalent followed by a taper) for Grade 2 or greater pneumonitis. Withhold KEYTRUDA for moderate 
(Grade 2) pneumonitis, and permanently discontinue KEYTRUDA for severe (Grade 3), life-threatening 
(Grade 4), or recurrent moderate (Grade 2) pneumonitis [see Dosage and Administration (2.3) and 
Adverse Reactions (6.1)].
Melanoma
Pneumonitis occurred in 32 (2.0%) of 1567 patients receiving KEYTRUDA in Trials 1, 2, and 6, including 
Grade 1 (0.8%), Grade 2 (0.8%), and Grade 3 (0.4%) pneumonitis. The median time to development of 
pneumonitis was 4.3 months (range: 2 days to 19.3 months). The median duration was 2.6 months
(range: 2 days to 15.1 months). Twelve (38%) of the 32 patients received corticosteroids, with 9 of the 12 
receiving high-dose systemic corticosteroids for a median duration of 8 days (range: 1 day to 1.1 months)
followed by a corticosteroid taper. Pneumonitis led to discontinuation of KEYTRUDA in 9 (0.6%) patients. 
Pneumonitis completely resolved in 21 (66%) of the 32 patients. 
NSCLC
Pneumonitis occurred in 19 (3.5%) of 550 patients with NSCLC, including Grade 2 (1.1%), Grade 3 
(1.3%), Grade 4 (0.4%), or Grade 5 (0.2%) pneumonitis in patients receiving KEYTRUDA in Trial 1. The 
median time to development of pneumonitis was 1.7 months (range: 4 days to 12.9 months). In patients 
receiving KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg every 14 days, the median time to development of pneumonitis was 
shorter (1.5 months) compared with patients receiving 10 mg/kg every 21 days (3.5 months). Sixteen of 
the 19 patients (84%) received corticosteroids, with 14 of the 19 (74%) requiring high-dose systemic 
corticosteroids (greater than or equal to 40 mg prednisone or equivalent per day). The median starting 
dose of high-dose corticosteroid treatment for these fourteen patients was 60 mg/day with a median 
duration of treatment of 8 days (range: 1 day to 4.2 months). The median duration of pneumonitis was 
1.2 months (range: 5 days to 12.4 months). Pneumonitis occurred more frequently in patients with a 
history of asthma/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (5.4%) than in patients without a history of these 
diseases (3.1%). Pneumonitis occurred more frequently in patients with a history of prior thoracic 
radiation (6.0%) than in patients who did not receive prior thoracic radiation (2.6%). Pneumonitis led to 
discontinuation of KEYTRUDA in 12 (2.2%) patients. Pneumonitis completely resolved in 9 patients. 
Pneumonitis was reported as ongoing in 9 patients and one patient with ongoing pneumonitis died within 
30 days of the last dose of KEYTRUDA.
5.2
Immune-Mediated Colitis
Immune-mediated colitis occurred in patients receiving KEYTRUDA. Monitor patients for signs and 
symptoms of colitis. Administer corticosteroids (initial dose of 1 to 2 mg/kg/day prednisone or equivalent 
followed by a taper) for Grade 2 or greater colitis. Withhold KEYTRUDA for moderate (Grade 2) or severe 
(Grade 3) colitis, and permanently discontinue KEYTRUDA for life-threatening (Grade 4) colitis [see 
Dosage and Administration (2.3) and Adverse Reactions (6.1)].
Melanoma
Colitis occurred in 31 (2.0%) of 1567 patients receiving KEYTRUDA in Trials 1, 2, and 6, including 
Grade 2 (0.5%), Grade 3 (1.1%), and Grade 4 (0.1%) colitis. The median time to onset of colitis was 
3.4 months (range: 10 days to 9.7 months). The median duration of colitis was 1.4 months (range: 1 day
to 7.2 months). Twenty-one (68%) of the 31 patients received corticosteroids, all of whom required high-
dose systemic corticosteroids for a median duration of 6 days (range: 1 day to 5.3 months) followed by a 

5
corticosteroid taper. Colitis led to discontinuation of KEYTRUDA in 14 (0.9%) patients. Colitis resolved in 
27 (87%) of the 31 patients. 
NSCLC
Colitis occurred in 4 (0.7%) of 550 patients, including Grade 2 (0.2%) or Grade 3 (0.4%) colitis in patients 
receiving KEYTRUDA in Trial 1. The median time to onset of colitis was 1.6 months (range: 28 days to 
2.2 months) and the median duration was 16 days (range: 7 days to 1.3 months). Two patients were 
started on high-dose corticosteroids (greater than or equal to 40 mg prednisone or equivalent per day) 
and two patients were started on low dose corticosteroids. One patient (0.2%) discontinued KEYTRUDA 
due to colitis. Three patients with colitis experienced complete resolution of the event.
5.3
Immune-Mediated Hepatitis
Immune-mediated hepatitis occurred in patients receiving KEYTRUDA. Monitor patients for changes in 
liver function. Administer corticosteroids (initial dose of 0.5 to 1 mg/kg/day [for Grade 2 hepatitis] and 1 to 
2 mg/kg/day [for Grade 3 or greater hepatitis] prednisone or equivalent followed by a taper) and, based 
on severity of liver enzyme elevations, withhold or discontinue KEYTRUDA [see Dosage and 
Administration (2.3) and Adverse Reactions (6.1)].
Melanoma
Hepatitis occurred in 16 (1.0%) of 1567 patients receiving KEYTRUDA in Trials 1, 2, and 6, including 
Grade 2 (0.1%), Grade 3 (0.7%), and Grade 4 (0.1%) hepatitis. The time to onset was 26 days (range: 
8 days to 21.4 months). The median duration was 1.2 months (range: 8 days to 4.7 months). Eleven 
(69%) of the 16 patients received corticosteroids, with 10 of the 11 receiving high-dose systemic 
corticosteroids for a median duration of 5 days (range: 1 to 14 days) followed by a corticosteroid taper. 
Hepatitis led to discontinuation of KEYTRUDA in 6 (0.4%) patients. Hepatitis resolved in 14 (88%) of the 
16 patients.
5.4
Immune-Mediated Endocrinopathies
Hypophysitis
Hypophysitis occurred in patients receiving KEYTRUDA. Monitor for signs and symptoms of hypophysitis 
(including hypopituitarism and adrenal insufficiency). Administer corticosteroids and hormone 
replacement as clinically indicated. Withhold KEYTRUDA for moderate (Grade 2) hypophysitis and 
withhold or discontinue KEYTRUDA for severe (Grade 3) or life-threatening (Grade 4) hypophysitis [see
Dosage and Administration (2.3) and Adverse Reactions (6.1)].
Melanoma
Hypophysitis occurred in 13 (0.8%) of 1567 patients receiving KEYTRUDA in Trials 1, 2, and 6 including 
Grade 2 (0.3%), Grade 3 (0.3%), and Grade 4 (0.1%) hypophysitis. The time to onset was 3.3 months 
(range: 1 day to 7.2 months). The median duration was 2.7 months (range: 12 days to 12.7 months). 
Twelve (92%) of the 13 patients received corticosteroids, with 4 of the 12 patients receiving high-dose
systemic corticosteroids. Hypophysitis led to discontinuation of KEYTRUDA in 4 (0.3%) patients. 
Hypophysitis resolved in 7 (54%) of the 13 patients.
NSCLC
In Trial 1, hypophysitis occurred in 1 (0.2%) of 550 patients, which was Grade 3 in severity. The time to 
onset was 3.7 months. The patient was treated with systemic corticosteroids and physiologic hormone 
replacement therapy. The patient did not discontinue KEYTRUDA due to hypophysitis.
Thyroid Disorders
Thyroid disorders can occur at any time during treatment. Monitor patients for changes in thyroid function 
(at the start of treatment, periodically during treatment, and as indicated based on clinical evaluation) and 
for clinical signs and symptoms of thyroid disorders.

6
Administer replacement hormones for hypothyroidism and manage hyperthyroidism with thionamides and 
beta-blockers as appropriate. Withhold or discontinue KEYTRUDA for severe (Grade 3) or life-threatening 
(Grade 4) hyperthyroidism [see Dosage and Administration (2.3) and Adverse Reactions (6.1)].
Melanoma
Hyperthyroidism occurred in 51 (3.3%) of 1567 patients receiving KEYTRUDA in Trials 1, 2, or 6, 
including Grade 2 (0.6%) and Grade 3 (0.1%) hyperthyroidism. The median time to onset was 1.4 months 
(range: 1 day to 21.9 months). The median duration was 1.7 months (range: 1 day to 12.8 months). 
Hyperthyroidism led to discontinuation of KEYTRUDA in 2 (0.1%) patients. Hyperthyroidism resolved in 
36 (71%) of the 51 patients.
Hypothyroidism occurred in 127 (8.1%) of 1567 patients receiving KEYTRUDA in Trials 1, 2, and 6 
including Grade 3 (0.1%) hypothyroidism. The median time to onset of hypothyroidism was 3.3 months 
(range: 5 days to 18.9 months). The median duration was 5.4 months (range: 6 days to 24.3 months). No 
patients discontinued KEYTRUDA due to hypothyroidism. Hypothyroidism resolved in 24 (19%) of the 
127 patients.
NSCLC
Hyperthyroidism occurred in 10 (1.8%) of 550 patients receiving KEYTRUDA in Trial 1, including Grade 2 
(0.7%) or Grade 3 (0.3%) hyperthyroidism. The median time to onset was 1.8 months (range: 2 days to 
3.4 months), and the median duration was 4.5 months (range: 4 weeks to 7.5 months). No patients 
discontinued KEYTRUDA due to hyperthyroidism. 
Hypothyroidism occurred in 38 (6.9%) of 550 patients receiving KEYTRUDA in Trial 1, including Grade 2 
(5.5%) or Grade 3 (0.2%) hypothyroidism. The median time to onset was 4.2 months (range: 20 days to 
11.2 months), and the median duration was 5.8 months (range: 11 days to 22.8 months). No patients 
discontinued KEYTRUDA due to hypothyroidism.
Type 1 Diabetes mellitus
Type 1 diabetes mellitus, including diabetic ketoacidosis, occurred in 3 (0.1%) of 2117 patients with 
melanoma or NSCLC receiving KEYTRUDA in Trials 1, 2, and 6. Monitor patients for hyperglycemia or 
other signs and symptoms of diabetes. Administer insulin for type 1 diabetes, and withhold KEYTRUDA 
and administer anti-hyperglycemics in patients with severe hyperglycemia [see Dosage and 
Administration (2.3) and Adverse Reactions (6.1)].
5.5
Immune-Mediated Nephritis and Renal Dysfunction
Immune-mediated nephritis occurred in patients receiving KEYTRUDA. Monitor patients for changes in 
renal function. Administer corticosteroids (initial dose of 1 to 2 mg/kg/day prednisone or equivalent 
followed by a taper) for Grade 2 or greater nephritis. Withhold KEYTRUDA for moderate (Grade 2), and 
permanently discontinue KEYTRUDA for severe (Grade 3) or life-threatening (Grade 4) nephritis [see 
Dosage and Administration (2.3) and Adverse Reactions (6.1)].
Melanoma
Nephritis occurred in 7 (0.4%) of 1567 patients receiving KEYTRUDA in Trials 1, 2, and 6, including 
Grade 2 (0.2%), Grade 3 (0.2%), and Grade 4 (0.1%) nephritis. The median time to onset of nephritis was 
5.1 months (range: 12 days to 12.8 months). The median duration was 1.1 months (range: 3 days to 
3.3 months). Six (86%) of the 7 patients received corticosteroids, with 5 of the 6 receiving high-dose 
systemic corticosteroids for a median duration of 15 days (range: 3 days to 1.6 months) followed by a 
corticosteroid taper. Nephritis led to discontinuation of KEYTRUDA in 2 (0.1%) patients. Nephritis 
resolved in 4 (57%) of the 7 patients.
5.6
Other Immune-Mediated Adverse Reactions
Other clinically important immune-mediated adverse reactions can occur.

7
For suspected immune-mediated adverse reactions, ensure adequate evaluation to confirm etiology or 
exclude other causes. Based on the severity of the adverse reaction, withhold KEYTRUDA and 
administer corticosteroids. Upon improvement to Grade 1 or less, initiate corticosteroid taper and 
continue to taper over at least 1 month. Based on limited data from clinical studies in patients whose 
immune-related adverse reactions could not be controlled with corticosteroid use, administration of other 
systemic immunosuppressants can be considered. Resume KEYTRUDA when the immune-mediated 
adverse reaction remains at Grade 1 or less following corticosteroid taper. Permanently discontinue
KEYTRUDA for any Grade 3 immune-mediated adverse reaction that recurs and for any life-threatening 
immune-mediated adverse reaction [see Dosage and Administration (2.3) and Adverse Reactions (6.1)].
Melanoma
The following clinically significant, immune-mediated adverse reactions occurred in less than 1% (unless 
otherwise indicated) of 1567 patients with melanoma treated with KEYTRUDA in Trials 1, 2, and 6: 
arthritis (1.6%), exfoliative dermatitis, bullous pemphigoid, uveitis, myositis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, 
myasthenia gravis, vasculitis, pancreatitis, hemolytic anemia, and partial seizures arising in a patient with 
inflammatory foci in brain parenchyma.
NSCLC
The following clinically significant, immune-mediated adverse reactions occurred in less than 1% of 
550 patients with NSCLC treated with KEYTRUDA in Trial 1: rash, vasculitis, hemolytic anemia, serum 
sickness, and myasthenia gravis.
5.7 
Infusion-Related Reactions
Severe and life-threatening infusion-related reactions have been reported in 3 (0.1%) of 2117 patients
receiving KEYTRUDA in Trials 1, 2, and 6. Monitor patients for signs and symptoms of infusion-related 
reactions including rigors, chills, wheezing, pruritus, flushing, rash, hypotension, hypoxemia, and fever. 
For severe (Grade 3) or life-threatening (Grade 4) infusion-related reactions, stop infusion and 
permanently discontinue KEYTRUDA [see Dosage and Administration (2.3)].
5.8
Embryofetal Toxicity
Based on its mechanism of action, KEYTRUDA can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant 
woman. Animal models link the PD-1/PD-L1 signaling pathway with maintenance of pregnancy through 
induction of maternal immune tolerance to fetal tissue. If this drug is used during pregnancy, or if the 
patient becomes pregnant while taking this drug, apprise the patient of the potential hazard to a fetus. 
Advise females of reproductive potential to use highly effective contraception during treatment with 
KEYTRUDA and for 4 months after the last dose of KEYTRUDA [see Use in Specific Populations (8.1, 
8.3)].
6
ADVERSE REACTIONS
The following adverse reactions are discussed in greater detail in other sections of the labeling. 

Immune-mediated pneumonitis [see Warnings and Precautions (5.1)].

Immune-mediated colitis [see Warnings and Precautions (5.2)].

Immune-mediated hepatitis [see Warnings and Precautions (5.3)].

Immune-mediated endocrinopathies [see Warnings and Precautions (5.4)].

Immune-mediated nephritis and renal dysfunction [see Warnings and Precautions (5.5)].

Other immune-mediated adverse reactions [see Warnings and Precautions (5.6)].

Infusion-related reactions [see Warnings and Precautions (5.7)].
6.1
Clinical Trials Experience
Because clinical trials are conducted under widely varying conditions, adverse reaction rates observed in 
the clinical trials of a drug cannot be directly compared to rates in the clinical trials of another drug and 
may not reflect the rates observed in practice. 

8
The data described in the WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS section reflect exposure to KEYTRUDA in 
2117 patients in two randomized, open-label, active-controlled clinical trials, which enrolled 912 patients 
with unresectable or metastatic melanoma and one single-arm trial which enrolled 655 patients with 
metastatic melanoma and 550 patients with NSCLC. Across all studies, KEYTRUDA was administered at 
doses of 2 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks (19%), 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks (31%), or 
10 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks (50%). Among these 2117, 43% of the patients were exposed for 
6 months or more and 10% of the patients were exposed for 12 months or more.
The data described below were obtained in two randomized, open-label, active-controlled clinical trials 
(Trials 2 and 6), which enrolled 912 patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma or in a single-arm 
trial (Trial 1), which enrolled 550 patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In these 
trials, KEYTRUDA was administered at 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks or 10 mg/kg every 2 or 3 weeks. 
Unresectable or Metastatic Melanoma
Ipilimumab-Naive Melanoma (Trial 6)
The safety of KEYTRUDA for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma who 
had not received prior ipilimumab and who had received no more than one prior systemic therapy was 
investigated in Trial 6. Trial 6 was a multicenter, open-label, active-controlled trial where patients were 
randomized (1:1:1) and received KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks (n=278) or KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg 
every 3 weeks (n=277) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 
3 weeks for 4 doses unless discontinued earlier for disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (n=256) 
[see Clinical Studies (14.1)]. Patients with autoimmune disease, a medical condition that required 
systemic corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive medication; a history of interstitial lung disease; or 
active infection requiring therapy, including HIV or hepatitis B or C, were ineligible. 
The median duration of exposure was 5.6 months (range: 1 day to 11.0 months) for KEYTRUDA and 
similar in both treatment arms. Fifty-one and 46% of patients received KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg every 2 or 
3 weeks, respectively, for ≥6 months. No patients in either arm received treatment for more than one 
year.
The study population characteristics were: median age of 62 years (range: 18 to 89 years), 60% male, 
98% White, 32% had an elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) value at baseline, 65% had M1c stage 
disease, 9% with history of brain metastasis, and approximately 36% had been previously treated with 
one or more lines of systemic therapy which included a BRAF inhibitor (15%), chemotherapy (13%), and 
immunotherapy (6%). 
In Trial 6, the adverse reaction profile was similar for the every 2 week and every 3 week schedule, 
therefore summary safety results are provided in a pooled analysis (n=555) of both KEYTRUDA arms. 
Adverse reactions leading to permanent discontinuation of KEYTRUDA occurred in 9% of patients. 
Adverse reactions leading to discontinuation of KEYTRUDA in more than one patient were colitis (1.4%), 
autoimmune hepatitis (0.7%), allergic reaction (0.4%), polyneuropathy (0.4%), and cardiac failure (0.4%). 
Adverse reactions leading to interruption of KEYTRUDA occurred in 21% of patients; the most common 
(≥1%) was diarrhea (2.5%). The most common adverse reactions (reported in at least 20% of patients) 
were fatigue and diarrhea. Table 1 and Table 2 summarize the incidence of selected adverse reactions
and laboratory abnormalities, respectively, that occurred in at least 10% of patients receiving 
KEYTRUDA.

9
Table 1: Selected* Adverse Reactions Occurring in ≥10% of Patients Receiving KEYTRUDA 
(Trial 6)
KEYTRUDA
10 mg/kg every 2 or 3 weeks
n=555
Ipilimumab
n=256
Adverse Reaction
All Grades†
(%)
Grade 3-4
(%)
All Grades
(%)
Grade 3-4
(%)
General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions
Fatigue
28
0.9
28
3.1
Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Disorders
Rash‡
24
0.2
23
1.2
Vitiligo§
13
0
2
0
Musculoskeletal and Connective Tissue Disorders
Arthralgia
18
0.4
10
1.2
Back pain
12
0.9
7
0.8
Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders
Cough
17
0
7
0.4
Dyspnea
11
0.9
7
0.8
Metabolism and Nutrition Disorders
Decreased appetite
16
0.5
14
0.8
Nervous System Disorders
Headache
14
0.2
14
0.8
*
Adverse reactions occurring at same or higher incidence than in the ipilimumab arm
†
Graded per NCI CTCAE v4.0
‡
Includes rash, rash erythematous, rash follicular, rash generalized, rash macular, rash maculo-
papular, rash papular, rash pruritic, and exfoliative rash.
§
Includes skin hypopigmentation
Other clinically important adverse reactions occurring in ≥10% of patients receiving KEYTRUDA were 
diarrhea (26%), nausea (21%), and pruritus (17%).
Table 2: Selected* Laboratory Abnormalities Worsened from Baseline Occurring in ≥20% of 
Melanoma Patients Receiving KEYTRUDA (Trial 6)
KEYTRUDA
10 mg/kg every 2 or 
3 weeks
Ipilimumab
Laboratory Test†
All Grades‡
%
Grades 3-4
%
All Grades
%
Grades 3-4
%
Chemistry
Hyperglycemia
45
4.2
45
3.8
Hypertriglyceridemia
43
2.6
31
1.1
Hyponatremia
28
4.6
26
7
Increased AST
27
2.6
25
2.5
Hypercholesterolemia
20
1.2
13
0
Hematology
Anemia
35
3.8
33
4.0
Lymphopenia
33
7
25
6
*
Laboratory abnormalities occurring at same or higher incidence than in ipilimumab arm
†
Each test incidence is based on the number of patients who had both baseline and at least one on-
study laboratory measurement available: KEYTRUDA (520 to 546 patients) and ipilimumab (237 to 
247 patients); hypertriglyceridemia: KEYTRUDA n=429 and ipilimumab n=183; hypercholesterolemia:
KEYTRUDA n=484 and ipilimumab n=205).
‡
Graded per NCI CTCAE v4.0
Other laboratory abnormalities occurring in ≥20% of patients receiving KEYTRUDA were increased 
hypoalbuminemia (27% all Grades; 2.4% Grades 3-4), increased ALT (23% all Grades; 3.1% Grades 3-
4), and increased alkaline phosphatase (21% all Grades, 2.0% Grades 3-4).

10
Ipilimumab-Refractory Melanoma (Trial 2)
The safety of KEYTRUDA in patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma with disease progression 
following ipilimumab and, if BRAF V600 mutation positive, a BRAF inhibitor, was evaluated in Trial 2. 
Trial 2 was a multicenter, partially blinded (KEYTRUDA dose), randomized (1:1:1), active-controlled trial 
in which 528 patients received KEYTRUDA 2 mg/kg (n=178) or 10 mg/kg (n=179) every 3 weeks or 
investigator’s choice of chemotherapy (n=171), consisting of dacarbazine (26%), temozolomide (25%), 
paclitaxel and carboplatin (25%), paclitaxel (16%), or carboplatin (8%) [see Clinical Studies (14.1)]. The 
trial excluded patients with autoimmune disease, severe immune-related toxicity related to ipilimumab, 
defined as any Grade 4 toxicity or Grade 3 toxicity requiring corticosteroid treatment (greater than 
10 mg/day prednisone or equivalent dose) for greater than 12 weeks; medical conditions that required 
systemic corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive medication; a history of interstitial lung disease; or 
an active infection requiring therapy, including HIV or hepatitis B or C.
The median duration of exposure to KEYTRUDA 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks was 3.7 months (range: 1 day to 
16.6 months) and to KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks was 4.8 months (range: 1 day to 16.8 months). 
The data described below reflect exposure to KEYTRUDA 2 mg/kg in 36% of patients exposed to 
KEYTRUDA for ≥6 months and in 4% of patients exposed for ≥12 months. In the KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg 
arm, 41% of patients were exposed to KEYTRUDA for ≥6 months and 6% of patients were exposed to 
KEYTRUDA for ≥12 months.
The study population characteristics were: median age of 62 years (range: 15 to 89 years), 61% male, 
98% White, 41% with an elevated LDH value at baseline, 83% with M1c stage disease, 73% received two 
or more prior therapies for advanced or metastatic disease (100% received ipilimumab and 25% a BRAF 
inhibitor), and 15% with history of brain metastasis. 
In Trial 2, the adverse reaction profile was similar for the 2 mg/kg dose and 10 mg/kg dose, therefore 
summary safety results are provided in a pooled analysis (n=357) of both KEYTRUDA arms. Adverse 
reactions resulting in permanent discontinuation occurred in 12% of patients receiving KEYTRUDA; the 
most common (≥1%) were general physical health deterioration (1%), asthenia (1%), dyspnea (1%), 
pneumonitis (1%), and generalized edema (1%). Adverse reactions leading to interruption of KEYTRUDA 
occurred in 14% of patients; the most common (≥1%) were dyspnea (1%), diarrhea (1%), and maculo-
papular rash (1%). The most common adverse reactions (reported in at least 20% of patients) of 
KEYTRUDA were fatigue, pruritus, rash, constipation, nausea, diarrhea, and decreased appetite.
Table 3 summarizes the incidence of adverse reactions occurring in at least 10% of patients receiving 
KEYTRUDA. 

11
Table 3: Selected* Adverse Reactions Occurring in ≥10% of Patients Receiving KEYTRUDA 
(Trial 2)
KEYTRUDA
2 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg 
every 3 weeks
n=357
Chemotherapy†
n=171
Adverse Reaction
All Grades‡
(%)
Grade 3-4
(%)
All Grades
(%)
Grade 3-4
(%)
General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions
Pyrexia
14
0.3
9
0.6
Asthenia
10
2.0
9
1.8
Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Disorders
Pruritus
28
0
8
0
Rash§
24
0.6
8
0
Gastrointestinal Disorders
Constipation
22
0.3
20
2.3
Diarrhea
20
0.8
20
2.3
Abdominal pain
13
1.7
8
1.2
Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders
Cough
18
0
16
0
Musculoskeletal and Connective Tissue Disorders
Arthralgia
14
0.6
10
1.2
*
Adverse reactions occurring at same or higher incidence than in chemotherapy arm
†
Chemotherapy : dacarbazine, temozolomide, carboplatin plus paclitaxel, paclitaxel, or carboplatin 
‡
Graded per NCI CTCAE v4.0
§ 
Includes rash, rash erythematous, rash generalized, rash macular, rash maculo-papular, rash 
papular, and rash pruritic
Other clinically important adverse reactions occurring in patients receiving KEYTRUDA were fatigue 
(43%), nausea (22%), decreased appetite (20%), vomiting (13%), and peripheral neuropathy (1.7%).
Table 4: Selected* Laboratory Abnormalities Worsened from Baseline Occurring in ≥20% of 
Melanoma Patients Receiving KEYTRUDA (Trial 2)
KEYTRUDA
2 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg every 
3 weeks
Chemotherapy
Laboratory Test†
All Grades‡
%
Grades 3-4
%
All Grades
%
Grades 3-4
%
Chemistry
Hyperglycemia
49
6
44
6
Hypoalbuminemia
37
1.9
33
0.6
Hyponatremia
37
7
24
3.8
Hypertriglyceridemia
33
0
32
0.9
Increased Alkaline Phosphatase 
26
3.1
18
1.9
Increased AST
24
2.2
16
0.6
Bicarbonate Decreased
22
0.4
13
0
Hypocalcemia 
21
0.3
18
1.9
Increased ALT
21
1.8
16
0.6
*
Laboratory abnormalities occurring at same or higher incidence than in chemotherapy arm.
†
Each test incidence is based on the number of patients who had both baseline and at least one on-study 
laboratory measurement available: KEYTRUDA (range: 320 to 325 patients) and chemotherapy (range: 154
to 161 patients); hypertriglyceridemia: KEYTRUDA n=247 and chemotherapy n=116; bicarbonate decreased:
KEYTRUDA n=263 and chemotherapy n=123).
‡
Graded per NCI CTCAE v4.0
Other laboratory abnormalities occurring in ≥20% of patients receiving KEYTRUDA were anemia (44% all 
Grades; 10% Grades 3-4) and lymphopenia (40% all Grades; 9% Grades 3-4).

12
NSCLC
Among the 550 patients with metastatic NSCLC enrolled in Trial 1, the median duration of therapy was 
2.8 months (range: 1 day to 25.6 months). Patients with NSCLC and autoimmune disease, a medical 
condition that required immunosuppression, or who had received more than 30 Gy of thoracic radiation 
within the prior 26 weeks were ineligible for Trial 1. The median age of patients was 64 years (range: 28 
to 93), 47% were age 65 years or older, 53% were male, 83% were White, and 67% received two or more 
prior systemic treatments. Disease characteristics were Stage III (4%), Stage IV (96%), and brain 
metastases (11%). Baseline ECOG performance status (PS) was 0 (35%) or 1 (65%).
KEYTRUDA was discontinued due to adverse reactions in 14% of patients. Serious adverse reactions 
occurred in 38% of patients receiving KEYTRUDA. The most frequent serious adverse reactions reported 
in at least 2% of patients were pleural effusion, pneumonia, dyspnea, pulmonary embolism, and 
pneumonitis. The incidence of adverse reactions, including serious adverse reactions, was similar 
between the two 10 mg/kg dosing schedules; therefore, these data were pooled. The majority of patients 
treated with KEYTRUDA 2 mg/kg every three weeks had shorter follow-up compared with patients treated 
with the 10 mg/kg schedules; therefore, comparisons of adverse reactions between doses were not 
appropriate.
Table 5 summarizes adverse reactions that occurred in at least 10% of patients. The most common 
adverse reactions (reported in at least 20% of patients) were fatigue, decreased appetite, dyspnea, and 
cough.

13
Table 5: Adverse Reactions in ≥10% of Patients with NSCLC (Trial 1)
KEYTRUDA
2 mg/kg every 3 weeks or 
10 mg/kg every 2 or 
3 weeks
n=550
Adverse Reaction
All Grades
(%)
Grade 3*
(%)
General Disorders and Administration Site Conditions
Fatigue†
44
4
Pyrexia
12
1
Peripheral Edema
10
0
Metabolism and Nutrition Disorders
Decreased appetite
25
1
Respiratory, Thoracic and Mediastinal Disorders
Dyspnea
23
4
Cough‡
29
<1
Gastrointestinal Disorders
Nausea
18
1
Diarrhea
15
1
Constipation
15
<1
Vomiting
12
1
Musculoskeletal and Connective Tissue Disorders
Arthralgia
15
1
Back pain
10
2
Blood and Lymphatic System Disorders
Anemia
12
2
Skin and Subcutaneous Tissue Disorders
Pruritus
12
0
Rash§
18
<1
*
Of the ≥10% adverse reactions, none was reported as Grade 4 or 5.
†
Includes the terms fatigue and asthenia
‡
Includes the terms cough, productive cough and hemoptysis
§
Includes the terms dermatitis, dermatitis acneiform, erythema multiforme, 
drug eruption, rash, rash generalized, rash pruritic, rash macular/maculo-
papular, papular
Table 6: Laboratory Abnormalities Worsened from 
Baseline in ≥20% of Patients with NSCLC (Trial 1)
KEYTRUDA
n=550
Laboratory Test
All Grades
%
Grades 3-4
%
Chemistry
Hyperglycemia
48
3*
Hyponatremia
38
6
Hypoalbuminemia
32
1
Increased alkaline 
phosphatase 
26
1
Hypertriglyceridemia
23
0
Increased aspartate 
aminotransferase 
20
1
Hypercholesterolemia
20
1*
Hematology
Anemia
36
2*
*
Grade 4 abnormalities in this table limited to hyperglycemia 
(n=4), hypercholesterolemia (n=3), and anemia (n=1).

14
6.2
Immunogenicity
As with all therapeutic proteins, there is the potential for immunogenicity. Trough levels of pembrolizumab 
interfere with the electrochemiluminescent (ECL) assay results; therefore, a subset analysis was 
performed in the patients with a concentration of pembrolizumab below the drug tolerance level of the 
anti-product antibody assay. In clinical studies in patients treated with pembrolizumab at a dose of
2 mg/kg every 3 weeks or 10 mg/kg every two or three weeks, 1 (0.3%) of 392 evaluable patients tested 
positive for treatment-emergent anti-pembrolizumab antibodies and confirmed positive in the neutralizing 
assay. 
The detection of antibody formation is highly dependent on the sensitivity and specificity of the assay. 
Additionally, the observed incidence of antibody (including neutralizing antibody) positivity in an assay 
may be influenced by several factors including assay methodology, sample handling, timing of sample 
collection, concomitant medications, and underlying disease. For these reasons, comparison of incidence 
of antibodies to KEYTRUDA with the incidences of antibodies to other products may be misleading.
7
DRUG INTERACTIONS
No formal pharmacokinetic drug interaction studies have been conducted with KEYTRUDA. 
8
USE IN SPECIFIC POPULATIONS
8.1
Pregnancy
Risk Summary
Based on its mechanism of action, KEYTRUDA can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant 
woman. In animal models, the PD-1/PD-L1 signaling pathway is important in the maintenance of 
pregnancy through induction of maternal immune tolerance to fetal tissue [see Data]. Human IgG4 
(immunoglobulins) are known to cross the placenta; therefore, pembrolizumab has the potential to be 
transmitted from the mother to the developing fetus. There are no available human data informing the risk
of embryo-fetal toxicity. Apprise pregnant women of the potential risk to a fetus.
In the U.S. general population, the estimated background risk of major birth defects and miscarriage in 
clinically recognized pregnancies is 2-4% and 15-20%, respectively.
Data
Animal Data
Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with KEYTRUDA to evaluate its effect on 
reproduction and fetal development, but an assessment of the effects on reproduction was provided. A 
central function of the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway is to preserve pregnancy by maintaining maternal immune 
tolerance to the fetus. Blockade of PD-L1 signaling has been shown in murine models of pregnancy to 
disrupt tolerance to the fetus and to result in an increase in fetal loss; therefore, potential risks of 
administering KEYTRUDA during pregnancy include increased rates of abortion or stillbirth. As reported 
in the literature, there were no malformations related to the blockade of PD-1 signaling in the offspring of 
these animals; however, immune-mediated disorders occurred in PD-1 knockout mice. Based on its 
mechanism of action, fetal exposure to pembrolizumab may increase the risk of developing immune-
mediated disorders or of altering the normal immune response.
8.2
Lactation
Risk Summary
It is not known whether KEYTRUDA is excreted in human milk. No studies have been conducted to 
assess the impact of KEYTRUDA on milk production or its presence in breast milk. Because many drugs 
are excreted in human milk, instruct women to discontinue nursing during treatment with KEYTRUDA and 
for 4 months after the final dose.
8.3
Females and Males of Reproductive Potential
Contraception

15
Based on its mechanism of action, KEYTRUDA can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant 
woman [see Warnings and Precautions (5.8) and Use in Specific Populations (8.1)]. Advise females of 
reproductive potential to use effective contraception during treatment with KEYTRUDA and for at least 
4 months following the final dose.
8.4
Pediatric Use
Safety and effectiveness of KEYTRUDA have not been established in pediatric patients.
8.5
Geriatric Use
Of the 2117 patients with melanoma or NSCLC treated with KEYTRUDA, 43% were 65 years and over. 
No overall differences in safety or efficacy were reported between elderly patients and younger patients.
8.6
Renal Impairment
Based on a population pharmacokinetic analysis, no dose adjustment is needed for patients with renal 
impairment [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.3)].
8.7
Hepatic Impairment
Based on a population pharmacokinetic analysis, no dose adjustment is needed for patients with mild 
hepatic impairment [total bilirubin (TB) less than or equal to ULN and AST greater than ULN or TB greater 
than 1 to 1.5 times ULN and any AST]. KEYTRUDA has not been studied in patients with moderate (TB 
greater than 1.5 to 3 times ULN and any AST) or severe (TB greater than 3 times ULN and any AST) 
hepatic impairment [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.3)].
10
OVERDOSAGE
There is no information on overdosage with KEYTRUDA.
11
DESCRIPTION
Pembrolizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that blocks the interaction between PD-1 and its 
ligands, PD-L1 and PD-L2. Pembrolizumab is an IgG4 kappa immunoglobulin with an approximate 
molecular weight of 149 kDa.
KEYTRUDA for injection is a sterile, preservative-free, white to off-white lyophilized powder in single-use 
vials. Each vial is reconstituted and diluted for intravenous infusion. Each 2 mL of reconstituted solution 
contains 50 mg of pembrolizumab and is formulated in L-histidine (3.1 mg), polysorbate 80 (0.4 mg), and 
sucrose (140 mg). May contain hydrochloric acid/sodium hydroxide to adjust pH to 5.5. 
KEYTRUDA injection is a sterile, preservative-free, clear to slightly opalescent, colorless to slightly yellow 
solution that requires dilution for intravenous infusion. Each vial contains 100 mg of pembrolizumab in 
4 mL of solution. Each 1 mL of solution contains 25 mg of pembrolizumab and is formulated in: L-histidine 
(1.55 mg), polysorbate 80 (0.2 mg), sucrose (70 mg), and Water for Injection, USP.
12
CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
12.1 Mechanism of Action
Binding of the PD-1 ligands, PD-L1 and PD-L2, to the PD-1 receptor found on T cells, inhibits T cell 
proliferation and cytokine production. Upregulation of PD-1 ligands occurs in some tumors and signaling 
through this pathway can contribute to inhibition of active T-cell immune surveillance of tumors. 
Pembrolizumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds to the PD-1 receptor and blocks its interaction with 
PD-L1 and PD-L2, releasing PD-1 pathway-mediated inhibition of the immune response, including the 
anti-tumor immune response. In syngeneic mouse tumor models, blocking PD-1 activity resulted in 
decreased tumor growth.
12.3 Pharmacokinetics
The pharmacokinetics of pembrolizumab was studied in 2195 patients who received doses of 1 to 
10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or 2 to 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Based on population pharmacokinetic analyses 

16
in patients with solid tumors, the geometric mean [% coefficient of variation (CV%)] for clearance, steady-
state volume of distribution, and terminal half-life were 202 mL/day (37%), 7.38 L (19%) and 27 days 
(38%), respectively.
Steady-state concentrations of pembrolizumab were reached by 19 weeks of repeated dosing with an 
every 3-week regimen and the systemic accumulation was 2.2-fold. The peak concentration (Cmax), trough 
concentration (Cmin), and area under the plasma concentration versus time curve at steady state (AUCss) 
of pembrolizumab increased dose proportionally in the dose range of 2 to 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks.
Specific Populations: The effects of various covariates on the pharmacokinetics of pembrolizumab were 
assessed in population pharmacokinetic analyses. The CL of pembrolizumab increased with increasing 
body weight; the resulting exposure differences were adequately addressed by the administration of a 
weight-based dose. The following factors had no clinically important effect on the CL of pembrolizumab: 
age (range: 15 to 94 years), gender, race, renal impairment, mild hepatic impairment, or tumor burden. 
Renal Impairment: The effect of renal impairment on the CL of pembrolizumab was evaluated by 
population pharmacokinetic analyses in patients with various solid tumors and mild (eGFR 60 to 
89 mL/min/1.73 m2; n=937), moderate (eGFR 30 to 59 mL/min/1.73 m2; n=201), or severe (eGFR 15 to 
29 mL/min/1.73 m2; n=4) renal impairment compared to patients with normal (eGFR greater than or equal 
to 90 mL/min/1.73 m2; n=1027) renal function. No clinically important differences in the CL of 
pembrolizumab were found between patients with renal impairment and patients with normal renal 
function [see Use in Specific Populations (8.6)].
Hepatic Impairment: The effect of hepatic impairment on the CL of pembrolizumab was evaluated by 
population pharmacokinetic analyses in patients with various solid tumors and mild hepatic impairment 
(TB less than or equal to ULN and AST greater than ULN or TB between 1 and 1.5 times ULN and any 
AST; n=269) compared to patients with normal hepatic function (TB and AST less than or equal to ULN; 
n=1871). No clinically important differences in the CL of pembrolizumab were found between patients with 
mild hepatic impairment and normal hepatic function. There is insufficient information to determine 
whether there are clinically important differences in the CL of pembrolizumab in patients with moderate or 
severe hepatic impairment [see Use in Specific Populations (8.7)].
13
NONCLINICAL TOXICOLOGY
13.1 Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, Impairment of Fertility
No studies have been performed to test the potential of pembrolizumab for carcinogenicity or 
genotoxicity.
Fertility studies have not been conducted with pembrolizumab. In 1-month and 6-month repeat-dose 
toxicology studies in monkeys, there were no notable effects in the male and female reproductive organs; 
however, most animals in these studies were not sexually mature.
13.2 Animal Toxicology and/or Pharmacology
In animal models, inhibition of PD-1 signaling resulted in an increased severity of some infections and 
enhanced inflammatory responses. M. tuberculosis-infected PD-1 knockout mice exhibit markedly 
decreased survival compared with wild-type controls, which correlated with increased bacterial 
proliferation and inflammatory responses in these animals. PD-1 knockout mice have also shown 
decreased survival following infection with lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV). Administration of 
pembrolizumab in chimpanzees with naturally occurring chronic hepatitis B infection resulted in two out of 
four animals with significantly increased levels of serum ALT, AST, and GGT, which persisted for at least 
1 month after discontinuation of pembrolizumab.

17
14
CLINICAL STUDIES
14.1 Melanoma
Ipilimumab-Naive Melanoma (Trial 6)
The safety and efficacy of KEYTRUDA were evaluated in Trial 6, a randomized (1:1:1), open-label, 
multicenter, active-controlled trial. Patients were randomized to receive KEYTRUDA at a dose of 
10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or 10mg/kg every 3 weeks as an intravenous infusion until disease progression 
or unacceptable toxicity or to ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks as an intravenous infusion for 4 doses 
unless discontinued earlier for disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients with disease 
progression could receive additional doses of treatment unless disease progression was symptomatic, 
was rapidly progressive, required urgent intervention, occurred with a decline in performance status, or 
was confirmed at 4 to 6 weeks with repeat imaging. Randomization was stratified by line of therapy (0 vs. 
1), ECOG PS (0 vs. 1), and PD-L1 expression (≥1% of tumor cells [positive] vs. <1% of tumor cells 
[negative]) according to an investigational use only (IUO) assay. Key eligibility criteria were unresectable 
or metastatic melanoma with progression of disease; no prior ipilimumab; and no more than one prior 
systemic treatment for metastatic melanoma. Patients with BRAF V600E mutation-positive melanoma 
were not required to have received prior BRAF inhibitor therapy. Patients with autoimmune disease; a 
medical condition that required immunosuppression; previous severe hypersensitivity to other monoclonal 
antibodies; and HIV, hepatitis B or hepatitis C infection, were ineligible. Assessment of tumor status was 
performed at 12 weeks, then every 6 weeks through Week 48, followed by every 12 weeks thereafter. 
The major efficacy outcome measures were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS; as 
assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid 
Tumors [RECIST v1.1]). Additional efficacy outcome measures were overall response rate (ORR) and 
response duration.
A total of 834 patients were randomized: 277 patients to the KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks arm, 
279 to the KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks arm, and 278 to the ipilimumab arm. The study 
population characteristics were: median age of 62 years (range: 18 to 89 years), 60% male, 98% White, 
66% had no prior systemic therapy for metastatic disease , 69% ECOG PS of 0, 80% had PD-L1 positive 
melanoma, 18% had PD-L1 negative melanoma, and 2% had unknown PD-L1 status using the IUO 
assay, 65% had M1c stage disease, 68% with normal LDH, 36% with reported BRAF mutation-positive 
melanoma, and 9% with a history of brain metastases. Among patients with BRAF mutation-positive 
melanoma, 139 (46%) were previously treated with a BRAF inhibitor. 
The study demonstrated statistically significant improvements in OS and PFS for patients randomized to 
KEYTRUDA as compared to ipilimumab (Table 7 and Figure 1). 

18
Table 7: Efficacy Results in Trial 6
KEYTRUDA
10 mg/kg every 
3 weeks
n=277
KEYTRUDA
10 mg/kg every 
2 weeks
n=279
Ipilimumab
3 mg/kg every 
3 weeks
n=278
OS
Deaths (%)
92 (33%)
85 (30%)
112 (40%)
Hazard ratio* (95% CI)
0.69 (0.52, 0.90)
0.63 (0.47, 0.83)
---
p-Value (stratified log-rank)
0.004
<0.001
---
PFS by BICR
Events (%)
157 (57%)
157 (56%)
188 (68%)
Median in months (95% CI)
4.1 (2.9, 6.9)
5.5 (3.4, 6.9)
2.8 (2.8, 2.9)
Hazard ratio* (95% CI)
0.58 (0.47, 0.72)
0.58 (0.46, 0.72)
---
p-Value (stratified log-rank)
<0.001
<0.001
---
Best overall response by BICR
ORR % (95% CI)
33% (27, 39)
34% (28, 40)
12% (8, 16)
Complete response %
6%
5%
1%
Partial response %
27%
29%
10%
*
Hazard ratio (KEYTRUDA compared to ipilimumab) based on the stratified Cox proportional hazard 
model
Among the 91 patients randomized to KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks with an objective response, 
response durations ranged from 1.4+ to 8.1+ months. Among the 94 patients randomized to KEYTRUDA 
10 mg/kg every 2 weeks with an objective response, response durations ranged from 1.4+ to 8.2 months.
Figure 1: Kaplan-Meier Curve for Overall Survival in Trial 6 
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Time in Months
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Overall Survival (%)
              Treatment arm 
   
KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks
KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks
ipilimumab 
278
242
212
188
169
157
117
51
17
0
279
266
248
233
219
212
177
67
19
0
277
266
251
238
215
202
158
71
18
0
Number at Risk
KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks:
KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks:
ipilimumab:
Ipilimumab-Refractory Melanoma (Trial 2)
The safety and efficacy of KEYTRUDA were evaluated in Trial 2, a multicenter, randomized (1:1:1), 
active-controlled trial. Patients were randomized to receive one of two doses of KEYTRUDA in a blinded 
fashion or investigator’s choice chemotherapy. The treatment arms consisted of KEYTRUDA 2 mg/kg or 
10 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks or investigator’s choice of any of the following chemotherapy 
regimens: dacarbazine 1000 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks (26%), temozolomide 200 mg/m2 orally 
once daily for 5 days every 28 days (25%), carboplatin AUC 6 intravenously plus paclitaxel 225 mg/m2
intravenously every 3 weeks for four cycles then carboplatin AUC of 5 plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 every 
3 weeks (25%), paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks (16%), or carboplatin AUC 5 or 6 
intravenously every 3 weeks (8%). Randomization was stratified by ECOG performance status (0 vs. 1), 
LDH levels (normal vs. elevated [≥110% ULN]) and BRAF V600 mutation status (wild-type [WT] or 

19
V600E). The trial included patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma with progression of 
disease; refractory to two or more doses of ipilimumab (3 mg/kg or higher) and, if BRAF V600 mutation-
positive, a BRAF or MEK inhibitor; and disease progression within 24 weeks following the last dose of 
ipilimumab. The trial excluded patients with uveal melanoma and active brain metastasis. Patients 
received KEYTRUDA until unacceptable toxicity; disease progression that was symptomatic, was rapidly 
progressive, required urgent intervention, occurred with a decline in performance status, or was 
confirmed at 4 to 6 weeks with repeat imaging; withdrawal of consent; or physician’s decision to stop 
therapy for the patient. Assessment of tumor status was performed at 12 weeks after randomization, then 
every 6 weeks through week 48, followed by every 12 weeks thereafter. Patients on chemotherapy who 
experienced progression of disease were offered KEYTRUDA. The major efficacy outcomes were 
progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by BICR per RECIST v1.1 and overall survival (OS). 
Additional efficacy outcome measures were confirmed overall response rate (ORR) as assessed by BICR 
per RECIST v1.1 and duration of response.
The treatment arms consisted of KEYTRUDA 2 mg/kg (n=180) or 10 mg/kg (n=181) every 3 weeks or 
investigator’s choice chemotherapy (n=179). Among the 540 randomized patients, the median age was 
62 years (range: 15 to 89 years), with 43% age 65 or older; 61% male; 98% White; and ECOG 
performance score was 0 (55%) and 1 (45%). Twenty-three percent of patients were BRAF V600 
mutation positive, 40% had elevated LDH at baseline, 82% had M1c disease, and 73% had two or more 
prior therapies for advanced or metastatic disease. 
The study demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in PFS for patients randomized to 
KEYTRUDA as compared to control arm (Table 8). There was no statistically significant difference 
between KEYTRUDA 2 mg/kg and chemotherapy or between KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg and chemotherapy 
in the interim OS analysis with 220 deaths (59% of required events for the final analysis). 

20
Table 8: Efficacy Results in Trial 2
KEYTRUDA
2 mg/kg every 
3 weeks
n=180
KEYTRUDA
10 mg/kg every 
3 weeks
n=181
Chemotherapy
n=179
Progression-Free Survival
Number of Events, n (%)
129 (72%)
126 (70%)
155 (87%)
Progression, n (%)
105 (58%)
107 (59%)
134 (75%)
Death, n (%)
24 (13%)
19 (10%)
21 (12%)
Median in months (95% CI)
2.9 (2.8, 3.8)
2.9 (2.8, 4.7)
2.7 (2.5, 2.8)
P Value (stratified log-rank)
<0.001
<0.001
---
Hazard ratio* (95% CI)
0.57 (0.45, 0.73)
0.50 (0.39, 0.64)
---
Objective Response Rate
ORR, n% (95% CI)
21% (15, 28)
25% (19, 32)
4% (2, 9)
Complete response %
2%
3%
0%
Partial response %
19%
23%
4%
*
Hazard ratio (KEYTRUDA compared to chemotherapy) based on the stratified Cox proportional hazard 
model
Figure 2: Kaplan-Meier Curve for Progression-Free Survival in Trial 2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Time in Months
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Progression-Free Survival (%)
              Treatment arm         
KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks
KEYTRUDA 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks
Chemotherapy
179
128
43
22
15
4
2
1
180
153
74
53
26
9
4
2
181
158
82
55
39
15
5
1
Number at Risk
Chemotherapy:
KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg:
KEYTRUDA 2 mg/kg:
Among the 38 patients randomized to KEYTRUDA 2 mg/kg with an objective response, response 
durations ranged from 1.3+ to 11.5+ months. Among the 46 patients randomized to KEYTRUDA 
10 mg/kg with an objective response, response durations ranged from 1.1+ to 11.1+ months.
14.2 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
The efficacy of KEYTRUDA was investigated in a sub-group of a cohort of 280 patients enrolled in a 
multicenter, open-label multi-cohort, activity-estimating study (Trial 1). The cohort consisted of patients 
with metastatic NSCLC that had progressed following platinum-containing chemotherapy, and if 
appropriate, targeted therapy for ALK or EGFR mutations and any evidence of PD-L1 expression by a 
clinical trial immunohistochemistry assay. Patients with autoimmune disease; a medical condition that 
required immunosuppression; or who had received more than 30 Gy of thoracic radiation within the prior 
26 weeks were ineligible.
A prospectively defined sub-group was retrospectively analyzed using an analytically validated test for 
PD-L1 expression tumor proportion score (TPS). This retrospectively identified sub-group of 61 patients 
accounts for 22% of the 280 patients in the cohort. Patients included in this sub-group had a PD-L1 

21
expression TPS of greater than or equal to 50% tumor cells as determined by the PD-L1 IHC 22C3 
pharmDx Kit. Patients received KEYTRUDA 10 mg/kg every 2 (n=27) or 3 (n=34) weeks until 
unacceptable toxicity or disease progression that was symptomatic, was rapidly progressive, required 
urgent intervention, occurred with a decline in performance status, or was confirmed at 4 to 6 weeks with 
repeat imaging. Assessment of tumor status was performed every 9 weeks. The major efficacy outcome 
measures were ORR according to RECIST 1.1 as assessed by BICR and duration of response.
Among the 61 patients with a TPS greater than or equal to 50%, the baseline characteristics were: 
median age 60 years (34% age 65 or older); 61% male; 79% White; and 34% and 64% with an ECOG PS
0 and 1, respectively. Disease characteristics were squamous (21%) and non-squamous (75%); M1 
(98%); brain metastases (11%); one (26%), two (30%), or three or more (44%) prior therapies; and the 
incidence of genomic aberrations was EGFR (10%) or ALK (0%).
Efficacy results are summarized in Table 9. The ORR and duration of response were similar regardless of 
schedule (every 2 weeks or every 3 weeks) and thus the data below are pooled.
Table 9: Efficacy Results
Endpoint
n=61
Overall Response Rate
ORR %, (95% CI)
41% (29, 54)
Complete Response
0%
Partial Response
41% 
Among the 25 responding patients, 21 (84%) patients had ongoing responses at the final analysis of 
ORR; 11 (44%) patients had ongoing responses of 6 months or longer.
In a separate subgroup of 25 patients with limited follow-up with PD-L1 expression TPS greater than or 
equal to 50% receiving KEYTRUDA at a dose of 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks in Trial 1, activity was also 
observed.
16
HOW SUPPLIED/STORAGE AND HANDLING
KEYTRUDA for injection (lyophilized powder): carton containing one 50 mg single-use vial (NDC 0006-
3029-02).
Store vials under refrigeration at 2°C to 8°C (36°F to 46°F).
KEYTRUDA injection (solution): carton containing one 100 mg/4 mL (25 mg/mL), single-use vial 
(NDC 0006-3026-02)
Store vials under refrigeration at 2°C to 8°C (36°F to 46°F) in original carton to protect from light. Do not 
freeze. Do not shake.
17
PATIENT COUNSELING INFORMATION
Advise the patient to read the FDA-approved patient labeling (Medication Guide).

Inform patients of the risk of immune-mediated adverse reactions that may require corticosteroid 
treatment and interruption or discontinuation of KEYTRUDA, including: 

Pneumonitis: Advise patients to contact their healthcare provider immediately for new or 
worsening cough, chest pain, or shortness of breath [see Warnings and Precautions (5.1)].

Colitis: Advise patients to contact their healthcare provider immediately for diarrhea or severe 
abdominal pain [see Warnings and Precautions (5.2)]. 

Hepatitis: Advise patients to contact their healthcare provider immediately for jaundice, severe 
nausea or vomiting, or easy bruising or bleeding [see Warnings and Precautions (5.3)].

22

Hypophysitis: Advise patients to contact their healthcare provider immediately for persistent or 
unusual headache, extreme weakness, dizziness or fainting, or vision changes [see Warnings 
and Precautions (5.4)]. 

Hyperthyroidism and Hypothyroidism: Advise patients to contact their healthcare provider 
immediately for signs or symptoms of hyperthyroidism and hypothyroidism [see Warnings and 
Precautions (5.4)]. 

Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Advise patients to contact their healthcare provider immediately for 
signs or symptoms of type 1 diabetes [see Warnings and Precautions (5.4)].

Nephritis: Advise patients to contact their healthcare provider immediately for signs or symptoms 
of nephritis [see Warnings and Precautions (5.5)].

Advise patients to contact their healthcare provider immediately for signs or symptoms of infusion-
related reactions [see Warnings and Precautions (5.7)]. 

Advise patients of the importance of keeping scheduled appointments for blood work or other 
laboratory tests [see Warnings and Precautions (5.3, 5.4, 5.5)].

Advise women that KEYTRUDA can cause fetal harm. Instruct women of reproductive potential to 
use highly effective contraception during and for 4 months after the last dose of KEYTRUDA [see 
Warnings and Precautions (5.8) and Use in Specific Populations (8.1, 8.3)].

Advise nursing mothers not to breastfeed while taking KEYTRUDA and for 4 months after the final 
dose [see Use in Specific Populations (8.2)].
U.S. License No. 0002
For KEYTRUDA for injection, at:
Schering-Plough (Brinny) Co.,
County Cork, Ireland
For KEYTRUDA injection, at:
MSD Ireland (Carlow)
County Carlow, Ireland
For patent information: www.merck.com/product/patent/home.html
The trademarks depicted herein are owned by their respective companies.
Copyright © 2014-2015 Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc.
All rights reserved.
uspi-mk3475-iv-1512r004

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
 Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 131 of 160 
 
Appendix 7.  RECIST 1.1 Guidelines 
 

New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours:
Revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1)
E.A. Eisenhauera,*, P. Therasseb, J. Bogaertsc, L.H. Schwartzd, D. Sargente, R. Fordf,
J. Danceyg, S. Arbuckh, S. Gwytheri, M. Mooneyg, L. Rubinsteing, L. Shankarg, L. Doddg,
R. Kaplanj, D. Lacombec, J. Verweijk
aNational Cancer Institute of Canada – Clinical Trials Group, 10 Stuart Street, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada
bGlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Rixensart, Belgium
cEuropean Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Data Centre, Brussels, Belgium
dMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
eMayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
fRadPharm, Princeton, NJ, USA
gDivision of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
hSchering-Plough, Kenilworth, NJ, USA
iEast Surrey Hospital, Redhill, Surrey, UK
jNational Cancer Research Network, Leeds, UK
kErasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
A R T I C L E
I N F O
Article history:
Received 17 October 2008
Accepted 29 October 2008
Keywords:
Response criteria
Solid tumours
Guidelines
A B S T R A C T
Background: Assessment of the change in tumour burden is an important feature of the
clinical evaluation of cancer therapeutics: both tumour shrinkage (objective response)
and disease progression are useful endpoints in clinical trials. Since RECIST was published
in 2000, many investigators, cooperative groups, industry and government authorities have
adopted these criteria in the assessment of treatment outcomes. However, a number of
questions and issues have arisen which have led to the development of a revised RECIST
guideline (version 1.1). Evidence for changes, summarised in separate papers in this special
issue, has come from assessment of a large data warehouse (>6500 patients), simulation
studies and literature reviews.
Highlights of revised RECIST 1.1: Major changes include: Number of lesions to be assessed: based
on evidence from numerous trial databases merged into a data warehouse for analysis pur-
poses, the number of lesions required to assess tumour burden for response determination
has been reduced from a maximum of 10 to a maximum of ﬁve total (and from ﬁve to two
per organ, maximum). Assessment of pathological lymph nodes is now incorporated: nodes
with a short axis of P15 mm are considered measurable and assessable as target lesions.
The short axis measurement should be included in the sum of lesions in calculation of
tumour response. Nodes that shrink to <10 mm short axis are considered normal. Conﬁrma-
tion of response is required for trials with response primary endpoint but is no longer
required in randomised studies since the control arm serves as appropriate means of inter-
pretation of data. Disease progression is clariﬁed in several aspects: in addition to the previ-
ous deﬁnition of progression in target disease of 20% increase in sum, a 5 mm absolute
increase is now required as well to guard against over calling PD when the total sum is very
0959-8049/$ - see front matter  2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026
* Corresponding author: Tel.: +1 613 533 6430; fax: +1 613 533 2411.
E-mail address: eeisenhauer@ctg.queensu.ca (E.A. Eisenhauer).
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7
available at www.sciencedirect.com
journal homepage: www.ejconline.com

small. Furthermore, there is guidance offered on what constitutes ‘unequivocal progres-
sion’ of non-measurable/non-target disease, a source of confusion in the original RECIST
guideline. Finally, a section on detection of new lesions, including the interpretation of
FDG-PET scan assessment is included. Imaging guidance: the revised RECIST includes a
new imaging appendix with updated recommendations on the optimal anatomical assess-
ment of lesions.
Future work: A key question considered by the RECIST Working Group in developing RECIST
1.1 was whether it was appropriate to move from anatomic unidimensional assessment of
tumour burden to either volumetric anatomical assessment or to functional assessment
with PET or MRI. It was concluded that, at present, there is not sufﬁcient standardisation
or evidence to abandon anatomical assessment of tumour burden. The only exception to
this is in the use of FDG-PET imaging as an adjunct to determination of progression. As
is detailed in the ﬁnal paper in this special issue, the use of these promising newer
approaches requires appropriate clinical validation studies.
 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1.
Background
1.1.
History of RECIST criteria
Assessment of the change in tumour burden is an important
feature of the clinical evaluation of cancer therapeutics. Both
tumour shrinkage (objective response) and time to the devel-
opment of disease progression are important endpoints in
cancer clinical trials. The use of tumour regression as the
endpoint for phase II trials screening new agents for evi-
dence of anti-tumour effect is supported by years of evi-
dence suggesting that, for many solid tumours, agents
which produce tumour shrinkage in a proportion of patients
have a reasonable (albeit imperfect) chance of subsequently
demonstrating an improvement in overall survival or other
time to event measures in randomised phase III studies (re-
viewed in [1–4]). At the current time objective response car-
ries with it a body of evidence greater than for any other
biomarker supporting its utility as a measure of promising
treatment effect in phase II screening trials. Furthermore,
at both the phase II and phase III stage of drug development,
clinical trials in advanced disease settings are increasingly
utilising time to progression (or progression-free survival)
as an endpoint upon which efﬁcacy conclusions are drawn,
which is also based on anatomical measurement of tumour
size.
However, both of these tumour endpoints, objective re-
sponse and time to disease progression, are useful only if
based on widely accepted and readily applied standard crite-
ria based on anatomical tumour burden. In 1981 the World
Health Organisation (WHO) ﬁrst published tumour response
criteria, mainly for use in trials where tumour response was
the primary endpoint. The WHO criteria introduced the con-
cept of an overall assessment of tumour burden by summing
the products of bidimensional lesion measurements and
determined response to therapy by evaluation of change from
baseline while on treatment.5 However, in the decades that
followed their publication, cooperative groups and pharma-
ceutical companies that used the WHO criteria often ‘modi-
ﬁed’ them to accommodate new technologies or to address
areas that were unclear in the original document. This led
to confusion in interpretation of trial results6 and in fact,
the application of varying response criteria was shown to lead
to very different conclusions about the efﬁcacy of the same
regimen.7 In response to these problems, an International
Working Party was formed in the mid 1990s to standardise
and simplify response criteria. New criteria, known as RECIST
(Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours), were pub-
lished in 2000.8 Key features of the original RECIST include
deﬁnitions of minimum size of measurable lesions, instruc-
tions on how many lesions to follow (up to 10; a maximum
ﬁve per organ site), and the use of unidimensional, rather
than bidimensional, measures for overall evaluation of tu-
mour burden. These criteria have subsequently been widely
adopted by academic institutions, cooperative groups, and
industry for trials where the primary endpoints are objective
response or progression. In addition, regulatory authorities
accept
RECIST
as
an
appropriate
guideline
for
these
assessments.
1.2.
Why update RECIST?
Since RECIST was published in 2000, many investigators have
conﬁrmed in prospective analyses the validity of substituting
unidimensional for bidimensional (and even three-dimen-
sional)-based criteria (reviewed in [9]). With rare exceptions
(e.g. mesothelioma), the use of unidimensional criteria seems
to perform well in solid tumour phase II studies.
However, a number of questions and issues have arisen
which merit answers and further clarity. Amongst these
are whether fewer than 10 lesions can be assessed without
affecting the overall assigned response for patients (or the
conclusion about activity in trials); how to apply RECIST in
randomised phase III trials where progression, not response,
is the primary endpoint particularly if not all patients have
measurable disease; whether or how to utilise newer imag-
ing technologies such as FDG-PET and MRI; how to handle
assessment of lymph nodes; whether response conﬁrmation
is truly needed; and, not least, the applicability of RECIST in
trials of targeted non-cytotoxic drugs. This revision of the
RECIST guidelines includes updates that touch on all these
points.
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7
229

1.3.
Process of RECIST 1.1 development
The RECIST Working Group, consisting of clinicians with
expertise in early drug development from academic research
organisations, government and industry, together with imag-
ing specialists and statisticians, has met regularly to set the
agenda for an update to RECIST, determine the evidence
needed to justify the various changes made, and to review
emerging evidence. A critical aspect of the revision process
was to create a database of prospectively documented solid
tumour measurement data obtained from industry and aca-
demic group trials. This database, assembled at the EORTC
Data Centre under the leadership of Jan Bogaerts and Patrick
Therasse (co-authors of this guideline), consists of >6500 pa-
tients with >18,000 target lesions and was utilised to investi-
gate the impact of a variety of questions (e.g. number of
target lesions required, the need for response conﬁrmation,
and lymph node measurement rules) on response and pro-
gression-free survival outcomes. The results of this work,
which after evaluation by the RECIST Working Group led to
most of the changes in this revised guideline, are reported
in detail in a separate paper in this special issue.10 Larry Sch-
wartz and Robert Ford (also co-authors of this guideline) also
provided key databases from which inferences have been
made that inform these revisions.11
The publication of this revised guideline is believed to be
timely since it incorporates changes to simplify, optimise
and standardise the assessment of tumour burden in clinical
trials. A summary of key changes is found in Appendix I. Be-
cause the fundamental approach to assessment remains
grounded in the anatomical, rather than functional, assess-
ment of disease, we have elected to name this version RECIST
1.1, rather than 2.0.
1.4.
What about volumetric or functional assessment?
This raises the question, frequently posed, about whether it is
‘time’ to move from anatomic unidimensional assessment of
tumour burden to either volumetric anatomical assessment
or to functional assessment (e.g. dynamic contrast enhanced
MRI or CT or (18)F-ﬂuorodeoxyglucose positron emission
tomographic (FDG-PET) techniques assessing tumour metab-
olism). As can be seen, the Working Group and particularly
those involved in imaging research, did not believe that there
is at present sufﬁcient standardisation and widespread avail-
ability to recommend adoption of these alternative assess-
ment methods. The only exception to this is in the use of
FDG-PET imaging as an adjunct to determination of progres-
sion, as described later in this guideline. As detailed in paper
in this special issue12, we believe that the use of these prom-
ising newer approaches (which could either add to or substitute
for anatomical assessment as described in RECIST) requires
appropriate and rigorous clinical validation studies. This pa-
per by Sargent et al. illustrates the type of data that will be
needed to be able to deﬁne ‘endpoints’ for these modalities
and how to determine where and when such criteria/modal-
ities can be used to improve the reliability with which truly
active new agents are identiﬁed and truly inactive new agents
are discarded in comparison to RECIST criteria in phase II
screening trials. The RECIST Working Group looks forward
to such data emerging in the next few years to allow the
appropriate changes to the next iteration of the RECIST
criteria.
2.
Purpose of this guideline
This guideline describes a standard approach to solid tumour
measurement and deﬁnitions for objective assessment of
change in tumour size for use in adult and paediatric cancer
clinical trials. It is expected these criteria will be useful in all
trials where objective response is the primary study endpoint,
as well as in trials where assessment of stable disease, tu-
mour progression or time to progression analyses are under-
taken, since all of these outcome measures are based on an
assessment of anatomical tumour burden and its change on
study. There are no assumptions in this paper about the pro-
portion of patients meeting the criteria for any of these end-
points which will signal that an agent or treatment regimen is
active: those deﬁnitions are dependent on type of cancer in
which a trial is being undertaken and the speciﬁc agent(s) un-
der study. Protocols must include appropriate statistical sec-
tions which deﬁne the efﬁcacy parameters upon which the
trial sample size and decision criteria are based. In addition
to providing deﬁnitions and criteria for assessment of tumour
response,
this
guideline
also
makes
recommendations
regarding standard reporting of the results of trials that utilise
tumour response as an endpoint.
While these guidelines may be applied in malignant brain
tumour studies, there are also separate criteria published for
response assessment in that setting.13 This guideline is not in-
tended for use for studies of malignant lymphoma since
international guidelines for response assessment in lym-
phoma are published separately.14
Finally, many oncologists in their daily clinical practice fol-
low their patients’ malignant disease by means of repeated
imaging studies and make decisions about continued therapy
on the basis of both objective and symptomatic criteria. It is
not intended that these RECIST guidelines play a role in that
decision making, except if determined appropriate by the
treating oncologist.
3.
Measurability of tumour at baseline
3.1.
Deﬁnitions
At baseline, tumour lesions/lymph nodes will be categorised
measurable or non-measurable as follows:
3.1.1.
Measurable
Tumour lesions: Must be accurately measured in at least one
dimension (longest diameter in the plane of measurement is
to be recorded) with a minimum size of:
• 10 mm by CT scan (CT scan slice thickness no greater than
5 mm; see Appendix II on imaging guidance).
• 10 mm caliper measurement by clinical exam (lesions
which cannot be accurately measured with calipers should
be recorded as non-measurable).
• 20 mm by chest X-ray.
230
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7

Malignant lymph nodes: To be considered pathologically en-
larged and measurable, a lymph node must be P15 mm in
short axis when assessed by CT scan (CT scan slice thickness
recommended to be no greater than 5 mm). At baseline and in
follow-up, only the short axis will be measured and followed
(see Schwartz et al. in this Special Issue15). See also notes be-
low on ‘Baseline documentation of target and non-target le-
sions’ for information on lymph node measurement.
3.1.2.
Non-measurable
All other lesions, including small lesions (longest diameter
<10 mm or pathological lymph nodes with P10 to <15 mm
short axis) as well as truly non-measurable lesions. Lesions
considered truly non-measurable include: leptomeningeal dis-
ease, ascites, pleural or pericardial effusion, inﬂammatory
breast disease, lymphangitic involvement of skin or lung,
abdominal masses/abdominal organomegaly identiﬁed by
physical exam that is not measurable by reproducible imaging
techniques.
3.1.3.
Special considerations regarding lesion measurability
Bone lesions, cystic lesions, and lesions previously treated
with local therapy require particular comment:
Bone lesions:.
• Bone scan, PET scan or plain ﬁlms are not considered ade-
quate imaging techniques to measure bone lesions. How-
ever,
these
techniques
can
be
used
to
conﬁrm
the
presence or disappearance of bone lesions.
• Lytic bone lesions or mixed lytic-blastic lesions, with identi-
ﬁable soft tissue components, that can be evaluated by cross
sectional imaging techniques such as CT or MRI can be con-
sidered as measurable lesions if the soft tissue component
meets the deﬁnition of measurability described above.
• Blastic bone lesions are non-measurable.
Cystic lesions:.
• Lesions that meet the criteria for radiographically deﬁned
simple cysts should not be considered as malignant lesions
(neither measurable nor non-measurable) since they are, by
deﬁnition, simple cysts.
• ‘Cystic lesions’ thought to represent cystic metastases can
be considered as measurable lesions, if they meet the deﬁ-
nition of measurability described above. However, if non-
cystic lesions are present in the same patient, these are pre-
ferred for selection as target lesions.
Lesions with prior local treatment:.
• Tumour lesions situated in a previously irradiated area, or
in an area subjected to other loco-regional therapy, are usu-
ally not considered measurable unless there has been dem-
onstrated progression in the lesion. Study protocols should
detail the conditions under which such lesions would be
considered measurable.
3.2.
Speciﬁcations by methods of measurements
3.2.1.
Measurement of lesions
All measurements should be recorded in metric notation,
using calipers if clinically assessed. All baseline evaluations
should be performed as close as possible to the treatment
start and never more than 4 weeks before the beginning of
the treatment.
3.2.2.
Method of assessment
The same method of assessment and the same technique
should be used to characterise each identiﬁed and reported
lesion at baseline and during follow-up. Imaging based evalu-
ation should always be done rather than clinical examination
unless the lesion(s) being followed cannot be imaged but are
assessable by clinical exam.
Clinical lesions: Clinical lesions will only be considered mea-
surable when they are superﬁcial and P10 mm diameter as
assessed using calipers (e.g. skin nodules). For the case of skin
lesions, documentation by colour photography including a ru-
ler to estimate the size of the lesion is suggested. As noted
above, when lesions can be evaluated by both clinical exam
and imaging, imaging evaluation should be undertaken since
it is more objective and may also be reviewed at the end of the
study.
Chest X-ray: Chest CT is preferred over chest X-ray, particu-
larly when progression is an important endpoint, since CT is
more sensitive than X-ray, particularly in identifying new le-
sions. However, lesions on chest X-ray may be considered
measurable if they are clearly deﬁned and surrounded by aer-
ated lung. See Appendix II for more details.
CT, MRI: CT is the best currently available and reproducible
method to measure lesions selected for response assessment.
This guideline has deﬁned measurability of lesions on CT
scan based on the assumption that CT slice thickness is
5 mm or less. As is described in Appendix II, when CT scans
have slice thickness greater than 5 mm, the minimum size
for a measurable lesion should be twice the slice thickness.
MRI is also acceptable in certain situations (e.g. for body
scans). More details concerning the use of both CT and MRI
for assessment of objective tumour response evaluation are
provided in Appendix II.
Ultrasound: Ultrasound is not useful in assessment of lesion
size and should not be used as a method of measurement.
Ultrasound examinations cannot be reproduced in their en-
tirety for independent review at a later date and, because
they are operator dependent, it cannot be guaranteed that
the same technique and measurements will be taken from
one assessment to the next (described in greater detail in
Appendix II). If new lesions are identiﬁed by ultrasound in
the course of the study, conﬁrmation by CT or MRI is ad-
vised. If there is concern about radiation exposure at CT,
MRI may be used instead of CT in selected instances.
Endoscopy, laparoscopy: The utilisation of these techniques for
objective tumour evaluation is not advised. However, they
can be useful to conﬁrm complete pathological response
when biopsies are obtained or to determine relapse in trials
where recurrence following complete response or surgical
resection is an endpoint.
Tumour markers: Tumour markers alone cannot be used to as-
sess objective tumour response. If markers are initially above
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7
231

the upper normal limit, however, they must normalise for a
patient to be considered in complete response. Because
tumour markers are disease speciﬁc, instructions for their
measurement should be incorporated into protocols on a
disease speciﬁc basis. Speciﬁc guidelines for both CA-125
response (in recurrent ovarian cancer) and PSA response (in
recurrent prostate cancer), have been published.16–18 In addi-
tion, the Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup has developed CA125
progression criteria which are to be integrated with objective
tumour assessment for use in ﬁrst-line trials in ovarian
cancer.19
Cytology, histology: These techniques can be used to differenti-
ate between PR and CR in rare cases if required by protocol
(for example, residual lesions in tumour types such as germ
cell tumours, where known residual benign tumours can re-
main). When effusions are known to be a potential adverse
effect of treatment (e.g. with certain taxane compounds or
angiogenesis inhibitors), the cytological conﬁrmation of the
neoplastic origin of any effusion that appears or worsens dur-
ing treatment can be considered if the measurable tumour
has met criteria for response or stable disease in order to dif-
ferentiate between response (or stable disease) and progres-
sive disease.
4.
Tumour response evaluation
4.1.
Assessment of overall tumour burden and
measurable disease
To assess objective response or future progression, it is nec-
essary to estimate the overall tumour burden at baseline and
use this as a comparator for subsequent measurements.
Only patients with measurable disease at baseline should
be included in protocols where objective tumour response
is the primary endpoint. Measurable disease is deﬁned by
the presence of at least one measurable lesion (as detailed
above in Section 3). In studies where the primary endpoint
is tumour progression (either time to progression or propor-
tion with progression at a ﬁxed date), the protocol must
specify if entry is restricted to those with measurable disease
or whether patients having non-measurable disease only are
also eligible.
4.2.
Baseline documentation of ‘target’ and ‘non-target’
lesions
When more than one measurable lesion is present at baseline
all lesions up to a maximum of ﬁve lesions total (and a max-
imum of two lesions per organ) representative of all involved
organs should be identiﬁed as target lesions and will be re-
corded and measured at baseline (this means in instances
where patients have only one or two organ sites involved a
maximum of two and four lesions respectively will be re-
corded). For evidence to support the selection of only ﬁve tar-
get lesions, see analyses on a large prospective database in
the article by Bogaerts et al.10.
Target lesions should be selected on the basis of their size
(lesions with the longest diameter), be representative of all in-
volved organs, but in addition should be those that lend
themselves to reproducible repeated measurements. It may be
the case that, on occasion, the largest lesion does not lend it-
self to reproducible measurement in which circumstance the
next largest lesion which can be measured reproducibly
should be selected. To illustrate this point see the example
in Fig. 3 of Appendix II.
Lymph nodes merit special mention since they are normal
anatomical structures which may be visible by imaging even
if not involved by tumour. As noted in Section 3, pathological
nodes which are deﬁned as measurable and may be identi-
ﬁed as target lesions must meet the criterion of a short axis
of P15 mm by CT scan. Only the short axis of these nodes
will contribute to the baseline sum. The short axis of the
node is the diameter normally used by radiologists to judge
if a node is involved by solid tumour. Nodal size is normally
reported as two dimensions in the plane in which the image
is obtained (for CT scan this is almost always the axial plane;
for MRI the plane of acquisition may be axial, saggital or
coronal). The smaller of these measures is the short axis.
For example, an abdominal node which is reported as being
20 mm · 30 mm has a short axis of 20 mm and qualiﬁes as a
malignant, measurable node. In this example, 20 mm should
be recorded as the node measurement (See also the example
in Fig. 4 in Appendix II). All other pathological nodes (those
with short axis P10 mm but <15 mm) should be considered
non-target lesions. Nodes that have a short axis <10 mm
are considered non-pathological and should not be recorded
or followed.
A sum of the diameters (longest for non-nodal lesions, short
axis for nodal lesions) for all target lesions will be calculated
and reported as the baseline sum diameters. If lymph nodes
are to be included in the sum, then as noted above, only the
short axis is added into the sum. The baseline sum diameters
will be used as reference to further characterise any objective
tumour regression in the measurable dimension of the
disease.
All other lesions (or sites of disease) including pathological
lymph nodes should be identiﬁed as non-target lesions and
should also be recorded at baseline. Measurements are not re-
quired and these lesions should be followed as ‘present’, ‘ab-
sent’, or in rare cases ‘unequivocal progression’ (more details
to follow). In addition, it is possible to record multiple non-
target lesions involving the same organ as a single item on
the case record form (e.g. ‘multiple enlarged pelvic lymph
nodes’ or ‘multiple liver metastases’).
4.3.
Response criteria
This section provides the deﬁnitions of the criteria used to
determine objective tumour response for target lesions.
4.3.1.
Evaluation of target lesions
Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all target lesions.
Any pathological lymph nodes (whether target or
non-target) must have reduction in short axis to
<10 mm.
Partial Response (PR): At least a 30% decrease in the sum of
diameters of target lesions, taking as reference the
baseline sum diameters.
232
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7

Progressive Disease (PD): At least a 20% increase in the sum
of diameters of target lesions, taking as reference
the smallest sum on study (this includes the baseline
sum if that is the smallest on study). In addition to
the relative increase of 20%, the sum must also dem-
onstrate an absolute increase of at least 5 mm. (Note:
the appearance of one or more new lesions is also
considered progression).
Stable Disease (SD): Neither sufﬁcient shrinkage to qualify for
PR nor sufﬁcient increase to qualify for PD, taking as
reference the smallest sum diameters while on study.
4.3.2.
Special notes on the assessment of target lesions
Lymph nodes. Lymph nodes identiﬁed as target lesions should
always have the actual short axis measurement recorded (mea-
sured in the same anatomical plane as the baseline examina-
tion), even if the nodes regress to below 10 mm on study. This
means that when lymph nodes are included as target lesions,
the ‘sum’ of lesions may not be zero even if complete response
criteria are met, since a normal lymph node is deﬁned as having
a short axis of <10 mm. Case report forms or other data collec-
tion methods may therefore be designed to have target nodal le-
sions recorded in a separate section where, in order to qualify
for CR, each node must achieve a short axis <10 mm. For PR,
SD and PD, the actual short axis measurement of the nodes is
to be included in the sum of target lesions.
Target lesions that become ‘too small to measure’. While on
study, all lesions (nodal and non-nodal) recorded at baseline
should have their actual measurements recorded at each sub-
sequent evaluation, even when very small (e.g. 2 mm). How-
ever, sometimes lesions or lymph nodes which are recorded
as target lesions at baseline become so faint on CT scan that
the radiologist may not feel comfortable assigning an exact
measure and may report them as being ‘too small to measure’.
When this occurs it is important that a value be recorded on
the case report form. If it is the opinion of the radiologist that
the lesion has likely disappeared, the measurement should be
recorded as 0 mm. If the lesion is believed to be present and is
faintly seen but too small to measure, a default value of 5 mm
should be assigned (Note: It is less likely that this rule will be
used for lymph nodes since they usually have a deﬁnable size
when normal and are frequently surrounded by fat such as in
the retroperitoneum; however, if a lymph node is believed to
be present and is faintly seen but too small to measure, a de-
fault value of 5 mm should be assigned in this circumstance as
well). This default value is derived from the 5 mm CT slice
thickness (but should not be changed with varying CT slice
thickness). The measurement of these lesions is potentially
non-reproducible, therefore providing this default value will
prevent false responses or progressions based upon measure-
ment error. To reiterate, however, if the radiologist is able to
provide an actual measure, that should be recorded, even if
it is below 5 mm.
Lesions that split or coalesce on treatment. As noted in Appen-
dix II, when non-nodal lesions ‘fragment’, the longest diame-
ters of the fragmented portions should be added together to
calculate the target lesion sum. Similarly, as lesions coalesce,
a plane between them may be maintained that would aid in
obtaining maximal diameter measurements of each individ-
ual lesion. If the lesions have truly coalesced such that they
are no longer separable, the vector of the longest diameter
in this instance should be the maximal longest diameter for
the ‘coalesced lesion’.
4.3.3.
Evaluation of non-target lesions
Thissection provides the deﬁnitionsofthe criteriausedtodeter-
mine the tumour response for the group of non-target lesions.
While some non-target lesions may actually be measurable,
they need not be measured and instead should be assessed only
qualitatively at the time points speciﬁed in the protocol.
Complete Response (CR): Disappearance of all non-target le-
sions and normalisation of tumour marker level. All
lymph nodes must be non-pathological in size
(<10 mm short axis).
Non-CR/Non-PD: Persistence of one or more non-target le-
sion(s) and/or maintenance of tumour marker level
above the normal limits.
Progressive Disease (PD): Unequivocal progression (see com-
ments below) of existing non-target lesions. (Note:
the appearance of one or more new lesions is also
considered progression).
4.3.4.
Special notes on assessment of progression of non-
target disease
The concept of progression of non-target disease requires
additional explanation as follows:
When the patient also has measurable disease. In this setting,
to achieve ‘unequivocal progression’ on the basis of the
non-target disease, there must be an overall level of substan-
tial worsening in non-target disease such that, even in pres-
ence of SD or PR in target disease, the overall tumour
burden has increased sufﬁciently to merit discontinuation
of therapy (see examples in Appendix II and further details
below). A modest ‘increase’ in the size of one or more non-tar-
get lesions is usually not sufﬁcient to quality for unequivocal
progression status. The designation of overall progression so-
lely on the basis of change in non-target disease in the face of
SD or PR of target disease will therefore be extremely rare.
When the patient has only non-measurable disease.This circum-
stance arises in some phase III trials when it is not a criterion of
study entry to have measurable disease. The same general con-
cepts apply here as noted above, however, in this instance there
is no measurable disease assessment to factor into the inter-
pretation of an increase in non-measurable disease burden.
Because worsening in non-target disease cannot be easily
quantiﬁed (by deﬁnition: if all lesions are truly non-measur-
able) a useful test that can be applied when assessing patients
for unequivocal progression is to consider if the increase in
overall disease burden based on the change in non-measurable
disease is comparable in magnitude to the increase that would
berequiredtodeclarePDformeasurabledisease: i.e.anincrease
in tumour burden representing an additional 73% increase in
‘volume’ (which is equivalent to a 20% increase diameter in a
measurable lesion). Examples include an increase in a pleural
effusion from ‘trace’ to ‘large’, an increase in lymphangitic
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7
233

disease from localised to widespread, or may be described in
protocols as ‘sufﬁcient to require a change in therapy’. Some
illustrative examples are shown in Figs. 5 and 6 in Appendix II.
If ‘unequivocal progression’ is seen, the patient should be con-
sidered to have had overall PD at that point. While it would be
ideal to have objective criteria to apply to non-measurable dis-
ease, the very nature of that disease makes it impossible to do
so, therefore the increase must be substantial.
4.3.5.
New lesions
The appearance of new malignant lesions denotes disease
progression; therefore, some comments on detection of new
lesions are important. There are no speciﬁc criteria for the
identiﬁcation of new radiographic lesions; however, the ﬁnd-
ing of a new lesion should be unequivocal: i.e. not attributable
to differences in scanning technique, change in imaging
modality or ﬁndings thought to represent something other
than tumour (for example, some ‘new’ bone lesions may be
simply healing or ﬂare of pre-existing lesions). This is partic-
ularly important when the patient’s baseline lesions show
partial or complete response. For example, necrosis of a liver
lesion may be reported on a CT scan report as a ‘new’ cystic
lesion, which it is not.
A lesion identiﬁed on a follow-up study in an anatomical
location that was not scanned at baseline is considered a new
lesion andwill indicate diseaseprogression. An example of this
is the patient who has visceral disease at baseline and while on
study has a CTor MRI brain ordered which reveals metastases.
The patient’s brain metastases are considered to be evidence of
PD even if he/she did not have brain imaging at baseline.
If a new lesion is equivocal, for example because of its
small size, continued therapy and follow-up evaluation will
clarify if it represents truly new disease. If repeat scans con-
ﬁrm there is deﬁnitely a new lesion, then progression should
be declared using the date of the initial scan.
While FDG-PET response assessments need additional
study, it is sometimes reasonable to incorporate the use of
FDG-PET scanning to complement CT scanning in assessment
of progression (particularly possible ‘new’ disease). New le-
sions on the basis of FDG-PET imaging can be identiﬁed
according to the following algorithm:
a. Negative FDG-PET at baseline, with a positivel FDG-PET
at follow-up is a sign of PD based on a new lesion.
b. No FDG-PET at baseline and a positive FDG-PET at fol-
low-up:
If the positive FDG-PET at follow-up corresponds to a
new site of disease conﬁrmed by CT, this is PD.
If the positive FDG-PET at follow-up is not conﬁrmed as
a new site of disease on CT, additional follow-up CT
scans are needed to determine if there is truly progres-
sion occurring at that site (if so, the date of PD will be
the date of the initial abnormal FDG-PET scan).
If the positive FDG-PET at follow-up corresponds to a
pre-existing site of disease on CT that is not progress-
ing on the basis of the anatomic images, this is not PD.
4.4.
Evaluation of best overall response
The best overall response is the best response recorded from
the start of the study treatment until the end of treatment
taking into account any requirement for conﬁrmation. On oc-
casion a response may not be documented until after the end
of therapy so protocols should be clear if post-treatment
assessments are to be considered in determination of best
overall response. Protocols must specify how any new therapy
introduced before progression will affect best response desig-
nation. The patient’s best overall response assignment will
depend on the ﬁndings of both target and non-target disease
and will also take into consideration the appearance of new
lesions. Furthermore, depending on the nature of the study
and the protocol requirements, it may also require conﬁrma-
tory measurement (see Section 4.6). Speciﬁcally, in non-ran-
domised trials where response is the primary endpoint,
conﬁrmation of PR or CR is needed to deem either one the
‘best overall response’. This is described further below.
4.4.1.
Time point response
It is assumed that at each protocol speciﬁed time point, a re-
sponse assessment occurs. Table 1 on the next page provides
a summary of the overall response status calculation at each
time point for patients who have measurable disease at
baseline.
When patients have non-measurable (therefore non-tar-
get) disease only, Table 2 is to be used.
4.4.2.
Missing assessments and inevaluable designation
When no imaging/measurement is done at all at a particular
time point, the patient is not evaluable (NE) at that time point.
If only a subset of lesion measurements are made at an
assessment, usually the case is also considered NE at that
time point, unless a convincing argument can be made that
the contribution of the individual missing lesion(s) would
not change the assigned time point response. This would be
most likely to happen in the case of PD. For example, if a pa-
tient had a baseline sum of 50 mm with three measured le-
sions and at follow-up only two lesions were assessed, but
those gave a sum of 80 mm, the patient will have achieved
PD status, regardless of the contribution of the missing lesion.
4.4.3.
Best overall response: all time points
The best overall response is determined once all the data for the
patient is known.
Best response determination in trials where conﬁrmation of com-
plete or partial response IS NOT required: Best response in these
trials is deﬁned as the best response across all time points (for
example, a patient who has SD at ﬁrst assessment, PR at sec-
ond assessment, and PD on last assessment has a best overall
response of PR). When SD is believed to be best response, it
must also meet the protocol speciﬁed minimum time from
baseline. If the minimum time is not met when SD is other-
wise the best time point response, the patient’s best response
depends on the subsequent assessments. For example, a pa-
tient who has SD at ﬁrst assessment, PD at second and does
not meet minimum duration for SD, will have a best response
of PD. The same patient lost to follow-up after the ﬁrst SD
assessment would be considered inevaluable.
l A ‘positive’ FDG-PET scan lesion means one which is FDG avid
with an uptake greater than twice that of the surrounding tissue
on the attenuation corrected image.
234
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7

Best response determination in trials where conﬁrmation of com-
plete or partial response IS required: Complete or partial re-
sponses may be claimed only if the criteria for each are met
at a subsequent time point as speciﬁed in the protocol (gener-
ally 4 weeks later). In this circumstance, the best overall re-
sponse can be interpreted as in Table 3.
4.4.4.
Special notes on response assessment
When nodal disease is included in the sum of target lesions
and the nodes decrease to ‘normal’ size (<10 mm), they may
still have a measurement reported on scans. This measure-
ment should be recorded even though the nodes are normal
in order not to overstate progression should it be based on
increase in size of the nodes. As noted earlier, this means that
patients with CR may not have a total sum of ‘zero’ on the
case report form (CRF).
In trials where conﬁrmation of response is required, re-
peated ‘NE’ time point assessments may complicate best re-
sponse determination. The analysis plan for the trial must
address how missing data/assessments will be addressed in
determination of response and progression. For example, in
most trials it is reasonable to consider a patient with time
point responses of PR-NE-PR as a conﬁrmed response.
Patients with a global deterioration of health status requir-
ing discontinuation of treatment without objective evidence
of disease progression at that time should be reported as
‘symptomatic deterioration’. Every effort should be made to
document objective progression even after discontinuation
of treatment. Symptomatic deterioration is not a descriptor
of an objective response: it is a reason for stopping study ther-
apy. The objective response status of such patients is to be
determined by evaluation of target and non-target disease
as shown in Tables 1–3.
Conditions that deﬁne ‘early progression, early death and
inevaluability’ are study speciﬁc and should be clearly de-
scribed in each protocol (depending on treatment duration,
treatment periodicity).
In some circumstances it may be difﬁcult to distinguish
residual disease from normal tissue. When the evaluation of
complete response depends upon this determination, it is
recommended that the residual lesion be investigated (ﬁne
Table 3 – Best overall response when conﬁrmation of CR and PR required.
Overall response
Overall response
BEST overall response
First time point
Subsequent time point
CR
CR
CR
CR
PR
SD, PD or PRa
CR
SD
SD provided minimum criteria for SD duration met, otherwise, PD
CR
PD
SD provided minimum criteria for SD duration met, otherwise, PD
CR
NE
SD provided minimum criteria for SD duration met, otherwise NE
PR
CR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
SD
SD
PR
PD
SD provided minimum criteria for SD duration met, otherwise, PD
PR
NE
SD provided minimum criteria for SD duration met, otherwise NE
NE
NE
NE
CR = complete response, PR = partial response, SD = stable disease, PD = progressive disease, and NE = inevaluable.
a If a CR is truly met at ﬁrst time point, then any disease seen at a subsequent time point, even disease meeting PR criteria relative to baseline,
makes the disease PD at that point (since disease must have reappeared after CR). Best response would depend on whether minimum duration
for SD was met. However, sometimes ‘CR’ may be claimed when subsequent scans suggest small lesions were likely still present and in fact the
patient had PR, not CR at the ﬁrst time point. Under these circumstances, the original CR should be changed to PR and the best response is PR.
Table 1 – Time point response: patients with target (+/–
non-target) disease.
Target lesions
Non-target lesions
New
lesions
Overall
response
CR
CR
No
CR
CR
Non-CR/non-PD
No
PR
CR
Not evaluated
No
PR
PR
Non-PD or
not all evaluated
No
PR
SD
Non-PD or
not all evaluated
No
SD
Not all
evaluated
Non-PD
No
NE
PD
Any
Yes or No
PD
Any
PD
Yes or No
PD
Any
Any
Yes
PD
CR = complete response, PR = partial response, SD = stable disease,
PD = progressive disease, and NE = inevaluable.
Table 2 – Time point response: patients with non-target
disease only.
Non-target lesions
New lesions
Overall response
CR
No
CR
Non-CR/non-PD
No
Non-CR/non-PDa
Not all evaluated
No
NE
Unequivocal PD
Yes or No
PD
Any
Yes
PD
CR = complete
response,
PD = progressive
disease,
and
NE = inevaluable.
a ‘Non-CR/non-PD’ is preferred over ‘stable disease’ for non-target
disease since SD is increasingly used as endpoint for assessment
of efﬁcacy in some trials so to assign this category when no
lesions can be measured is not advised.
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7
235

needle aspirate/biopsy) before assigning a status of complete
response. FDG-PET may be used to upgrade a response to a CR
in a manner similar to a biopsy in cases where a residual
radiographic abnormality is thought to represent ﬁbrosis or
scarring. The use of FDG-PET in this circumstance should be
prospectively described in the protocol and supported by dis-
ease speciﬁc medical literature for the indication. However, it
must be acknowledged that both approaches may lead to
false positive CR due to limitations of FDG-PETand biopsy res-
olution/sensitivity.
For equivocal ﬁndings of progression (e.g. very small and
uncertain new lesions; cystic changes or necrosis in existing
lesions), treatment may continue until the next scheduled
assessment. If at the next scheduled assessment, progression
is conﬁrmed, the date of progression should be the earlier
date when progression was suspected.
4.5.
Frequency of tumour re-evaluation
Frequency
of
tumour
re-evaluation
while
on
treatment
should be protocol speciﬁc and adapted to the type and sche-
dule of treatment. However, in the context of phase II studies
where the beneﬁcial effect of therapy is not known, follow-up
every 6–8 weeks (timed to coincide with the end of a cycle) is
reasonable. Smaller or greater time intervals than these could
be justiﬁed in speciﬁc regimens or circumstances. The proto-
col should specify which organ sites are to be evaluated at
baseline (usually those most likely to be involved with meta-
static disease for the tumour type under study) and how often
evaluations are repeated. Normally, all target and non-target
sites are evaluated at each assessment. In selected circum-
stances certain non-target organs may be evaluated less fre-
quently. For example, bone scans may need to be repeated
only when complete response is identiﬁed in target disease
or when progression in bone is suspected.
After the end of the treatment, the need for repetitive tu-
mour evaluations depends on whether the trial has as a goal
the response rate or the time to an event (progression/death).
If ‘time to an event’ (e.g. time to progression, disease-free
survival, progression-free survival) is the main endpoint of
the study, then routine scheduled re-evaluation of protocol
speciﬁed sites of disease is warranted. In randomised com-
parative trials in particular, the scheduled assessments
should be performed as identiﬁed on a calendar schedule
(for example: every 6–8 weeks on treatment or every 3–4
months after treatment) and should not be affected by delays
in therapy, drug holidays or any other events that might lead
to imbalance in a treatment arm in the timing of disease
assessment.
4.6.
Conﬁrmatory measurement/duration of response
4.6.1.
Conﬁrmation
In non-randomised trials where response is the primary end-
point, conﬁrmation of PR and CR is required to ensure re-
sponses identiﬁed are not the result of measurement error.
This will also permit appropriate interpretation of results in
the context of historical data where response has traditionally
required conﬁrmation in such trials (see the paper by Bogaerts
et al. in this Special Issue10). However, in all other circum-
stances, i.e. in randomised trials (phase II or III) or studies
where stable disease or progression are the primary endpoints,
conﬁrmation ofresponseis notrequiredsince itwillnotaddva-
lue to theinterpretationoftrial results.However, eliminationof
the requirement for response conﬁrmation may increase the
importance of central review to protect against bias, in partic-
ular in studies which are not blinded.
In the case of SD, measurements must have met the SD
criteria at least once after study entry at a minimum interval
(in general not less than 6–8 weeks) that is deﬁned in the
study protocol.
4.6.2.
Duration of overall response
The duration of overall response is measured from the time
measurement criteria are ﬁrst met for CR/PR (whichever is ﬁrst
recorded) until the ﬁrst date that recurrent or progressive dis-
ease is objectively documented (taking as reference for progres-
sive disease the smallest measurements recorded on study).
The duration of overall complete response is measured
from the time measurement criteria are ﬁrst met for CR until
the ﬁrst date that recurrent disease is objectively documented.
4.6.3.
Duration of stable disease
Stable disease is measured from the start of the treatment (in
randomised trials, from date of randomisation) until the crite-
ria for progression are met, taking as reference the smallest
sum on study (if the baseline sum is the smallest, this is the
reference for calculation of PD).
The clinical relevance of the duration of stable disease var-
ies in different studies and diseases. If the proportion of pa-
tients achieving stable disease for a minimum period of time
is an endpoint of importance in a particular trial, the protocol
should specify the minimal time interval required between
two measurements for determination of stable disease.
Note: The duration of response and stable disease as well as
theprogression-free survivalareinﬂuenced by thefrequencyof
follow-up after baseline evaluation. It is not in the scope of this
guideline to deﬁne a standard follow-up frequency. The fre-
quency should take into account many parameters including
disease types and stages, treatment periodicity and standard
practice. However, these limitations of the precision of the
measured endpoint should be taken into account if compari-
sons between trials are to be made.
4.7.
Progression-free survival/proportion progression-free
4.7.1.
Phase II trials
This guideline is focused primarily on the use of objective re-
sponse endpoints for phase II trials. In some circumstances, ‘re-
sponse rate’ may not be the optimal method to assess the
potential anticancer activity of new agents/regimens. In such
cases ‘progression-free survival’ (PFS) or the ‘proportion pro-
gression-free’ at landmark time points, might be considered
appropriate alternatives to provide an initial signal of biologic
effect of new agents. It is clear, however, that in an uncontrolled
trial, these measures are subject to criticism since an appar-
ently promising observation may be related to biological factors
such as patient selectionand not theimpactof theintervention.
Thus, phase II screening trials utilising these endpoints are best
designed with a randomised control. Exceptions may exist
236
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7

where the behaviour patterns of certain cancers are so consis-
tent (and usually consistently poor), that a non-randomised
trial is justiﬁable (see for example van Glabbeke et al.20). How-
ever, in these cases it will be essential to document with care
the basis for estimating the expected PFS or proportion progres-
sion-free in the absence of a treatment effect.
4.7.2.
Phase III trials
Phase III trials in advanced cancers are increasingly designed
to evaluate progression-free survival or time to progression as
the primary outcome of interest. Assessment of progression
is relatively straightforward if the protocol requires all pa-
tients to have measurable disease. However, restricting entry
to this subset of patients is subject to criticism: it may result
in a trial where the results are less likely to be generalisable if,
in the disease under study, a substantial proportion of pa-
tients would be excluded. Moreover, the restriction to entry
will slow recruitment to the study. Increasingly, therefore, tri-
als allow entry of both patients with measurable disease as
well as those with non-measurable disease only. In this cir-
cumstance, care must be taken to explicitly describe the ﬁnd-
ings which would qualify for progressive disease for those
patients without measurable lesions. Furthermore, in this set-
ting, protocols must indicate if the maximum number of re-
corded target lesions for those patients with measurable
disease may be relaxed from ﬁve to three (based on the data
found in Bogaerts et al.10 and Moskowitz et al.11). As found in
the ‘special notes on assessment of progression’, these guide-
lines offer recommendations for assessment of progression
in this setting. Furthermore, if available, validated tumour mar-
ker measures of progression (as has been proposed for ovarian
cancer) may be useful to integrate into the deﬁnition of pro-
gression. Centralised blinded review of imaging studies or of
source imaging reports to verify ‘unequivocal progression’
may be needed if important drug development or drug ap-
proval decisions are to be based on the study outcome. Finally,
as noted earlier, because the date of progression is subject to
ascertainment bias, timing of investigations in study arms
should be the same. The article by Dancey et al. in this special
issue21 provides a more detailed discussion of the assessment
of progression in randomised trials.
4.8.
Independent review of response and progression
For trials where objective response (CR + PR) is the primary end-
point, and in particular where key drug development deci-
sions are based on the observation of a minimum number of
responders, it is recommended that all claimed responses be
reviewed by an expert(s) independent of the study. If the study
is a randomised trial, ideally reviewers should be blinded to
treatment assignment. Simultaneous review of the patients’
ﬁles and radiological images is the best approach.
Independent review of progression presents some more
complex issues: for example, there are statistical problems
with the use of central-review-based progression time in
place of investigator-based progression time due to the poten-
tial introduction of informative censoring when the former
precedes the latter. An overview of these factors and other
lessons learned from independent review is provided in an
article by Ford et al. in this special issue.22
4.9.
Reporting best response results
4.9.1.
Phase II trials
When response is the primary endpoint, and thus all patients
must have measurable disease to enter the trial, all patients
included in the study must be accounted for in the report of
the results, even if there are major protocol treatment devia-
tions or if they are not evaluable. Each patient will be assigned
one of the following categories:
1. Complete response
2. Partial response
3. Stable disease
4. Progression
5. Inevaluable for response: specify reasons (for example: early
death, malignant disease; early death, toxicity; tumour
assessments not repeated/incomplete; other (specify)).
Normally, all eligible patients should be included in the
denominator for the calculation of the response rate for phase
II trials (in some protocols it will be appropriate to include all
treated patients). It is generally preferred that 95% two-sided
conﬁdence limits are given for the calculated response rate.
Trial conclusions should be based on the response rate for
all eligible (or all treated) patients and should not be based
on a selected ‘evaluable’ subset.
4.9.2.
Phase III trials
Response evaluation in phase III trials may be an indicator
of the relative anti-tumour activity of the treatments eval-
uated and is almost always a secondary endpoint. Ob-
served differences in response rate may not predict the
clinically relevant therapeutic beneﬁt for the population
studied. If objective response is selected as a primary end-
point for a phase III study (only in circumstances where a
direct relationship between objective tumour response and
a clinically relevant therapeutic beneﬁt can be unambigu-
ously demonstrated for the population studied), the same
criteria as those applying to phase II trials should be used
and all patients entered should have at least one measur-
able lesion.
In those many cases where response is a secondary end-
point and not all trial patients have measurable disease, the
method for reporting overall best response rates must be
pre-speciﬁed in the protocol. In practice, response rate may
be reported using either an ‘intent to treat’ analysis (all ran-
domised patients in the denominator) or an analysis where
only the subset of patients with measurable disease at
baseline are included. The protocol should clearly specify
how response results will be reported, including any subset
analyses that are planned.
The original version of RECIST suggested that in phase III
trials one could write protocols using a ‘relaxed’ interpreta-
tion of the RECIST guidelines (for example, reducing the num-
ber of lesions measured) but this should no longer be done
since these revised guidelines have been amended in such a
way that it is clear how these criteria should be applied for
all trials in which anatomical assessment of tumour response
or progression are endpoints.
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7
237

Appendix I. Summary of major changes RECIST 1.0 to RECIST 1.1
RECIST 1.0
RECIST 1.1
Rationale
Reference in special issue
(if applicable)
Minimum size measurable
lesions
CT: 10 mm spiral
CT 10 mm; delete reference to
spiral scan
Most scans used have 5 mm or less slice
thickness Clearer to give instruction based on
slice interval if it is greater than 5 mm
20 mm non-spiral
Clinical: 20 mm
Clinical: 10 mm (must be
measurable with calipers)
Caliper measurement will make this reliable
Lymph node: not mentioned
CT:
Since nodes are normal structure need to deﬁne
pathological enlargement. Short axis is most
sensitive
Schwartz et al.15
P15 mm short axis for target
P10–<15 mm for non-target
<10 mm is non-pathological
Special considerations on
lesion measurability
–
Notes included on bone
lesions, cystic lesions
Clarify frequently asked questions
Overall tumour burden
10 lesions (5 per organ)
5 lesions (2 per organ)
Data warehouse analysis shows no loss of
information if lesion number reduced from 10 to
5. A maximum of 2 lesions per organ yields
sufﬁcient representation per disease site
Bogaerts et al.10
Response criteria target
disease
CR lymph node not mentioned
CR lymph nodes must be
<10 mm short axis
In keeping with normal size of nodes
Schwartz et al.15
PD 20% increase over smallest sum on
study or new lesions
PD 20% increase over smallest
sum on study (including
baseline if that is smallest) and
at least 5 mm increase or new
lesions
Clariﬁcation that if baseline measurement is
smaller than any on study measurement, it is
reference against which PD is assessed
5 mm absolute increase to guard against over
calling PD when total sum is very small and 20%
increase is within measurement error
Response criteria non-target
disease
‘unequivocal progression’ considered as PD
More detailed description of
‘unequivocal progression’ to
indicate that it should not
normally trump target disease
status. It must be
representative of overall
disease status change, not a
single lesion increase
Confusion with RECIST 1.0 where some were
considering PD if ‘increase’ in any non-target
lesion, even when target disease is stable or
responding
New lesions
–
New section on New lesions
To provide guidance on when a lesion is
considered new (and thus PD)
Overall response
Table integrated target and non-target
lesions
Two tables: one integrating
target and non-target and the
other of non-target only
To account for the fact that RECIST criteria are
now being used in trials where PFS is the
endpoint and not all patients have measurable
(target) disease at baseline
Dancey et al.21
238
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7

RECIST 1.0
RECIST 1.1
Rationale
Reference in special issue
(if applicable)
Special notes:
Frequently asked questions on these topics
How to assess and measure
lymph nodes
CR in face of residual tissue
Discussion of ‘equivocal’
progression
Conﬁrmatory measure
For CR and PR: criteria
must be met again 4
weeks after initial
documentation
Retain this requirement ONLY
for
non-randomised trials with
primary endpoint of response
Data warehouse shows that response rates
rise when conﬁrmation is eliminated, but
the only circumstance where this is
important is in trials where there is no
concurrent comparative control and where
this measure is the primary endpoint
Bogaerts et al.10
Progression-free survival
General comments only
More speciﬁc comments on
use of PFS (or proportion
progression-free) as
phase II endpoint
Increasing use of PFS in phase III trials
requires guidance on assessment of PD in
patients with non-measurable disease
Dancey et al.21
Greater detail on PFS
assessment in phase III trials
Reporting of response
results
9 categories suggested for
reporting phase II results
Divided into phase II and phase
III
Simpliﬁes reporting and clariﬁes how to
report phase II and III data consistently
9 categories collapsed into 5
In phase III, guidance given
about reporting response
Response in phase III
trials
More relaxed guidelines
possible if protocol speciﬁed
This section removed and
referenced in section
above: no need to have
different criteria for phase II
and III
Simpliﬁcation of response assessment by
reducing number of lesions and eliminating
need for conﬁrmation in randomised
studies where response is not the primary
endpoint makes separate ‘rules’
unnecessary
Imaging appendix
Appendix I
Appendix II: updated with
detailed guidance on
use of MRI, PET/CT
Evolving use of newer modalities addressed.
Enhanced guidance in response to frequent
questions and from radiology review
experience
Other practical guidance
included
New appendices
Appendix I: comparison of
RECIST 1.0 and 1.1
Appendix III: frequently asked
questions
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7
239

Conﬂict of interest statement
None declared.
Acknowledgements
The RECIST Working Group would like to thank the following
organisations which made data bases available to us in order
to perform the analyses which informed decisions about
changes to this version of the criteria: Amgen; AstraZeneca;
Breast Cancer International Research Group (BCIRG); Bristol-
Myers
Squibb; European
Organisation for
Research and
Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Breast Cancer Group and Gas-
trointestinal
Group;
Erasmus
University
Medical
Center,
Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Genentech; Pﬁzer; RadPharm;
Roche; SanoﬁAventis.
We would also like to thank the following individuals from
academic, government, and pharmaceutical organisations for
providing helpful comments on an earlierdraft of these revised
guidelines: Ohad Amit, Phil Murphy, Teri Crofts and Janet Be-
gun, GlaxoSmithKline, USA; Laurence H. Baker, Southwest
Oncology Group, USA; Karla Ballman, Mayo Clinic, USA;
Charles Baum, Darrel Cohen, and Mary Ashford Collier, Pﬁzer,
USA; Gary J. Becker, American Board of Radiology, Tucson,
USA; Jean-Yves Blay, University Claude Pertrand, Lyon France;
Renzo Canetta, Bristol-Myers Squibb, USA; David Chang, Am-
gen Inc., USA; Sandra Chica, Perceptive Informations Inc. (PAR-
EXEL),
USA;
Martin
Edelman,
University
of
Maryland
Greenbaum Cancer Centre, USA; Gwendolyn Fyfe, Genentech,
USA; Bruce Giantonio, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group,
USA; Gary Gordon, Abbott Pharmaceuticals, USA; Ronald Gott-
lieb, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, USA; Simon Kao, University
of Iowa College of Medicine, USA; Wasaburo Koizumi, Kitasato
University, Japan; Alessandro Riva, Novartis Pharmaceuticals,
USA; Wayne Rackhoff, Ortho Biotech Oncology Research and
Development, USA; Nagahiro Saijo, President Japanese Society
of Medical Oncology, Japan; Mitchell Schnall American College
of Radiology Imaging Network, USA; Yoshik Shimamura, PAR-
EXEL International Inc., Japan; Rajeshwari Sridhara, Centre
for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administra-
tion, USA; Andrew Stone, Alan Barge, AstraZeneca, United
Kingdom; Orhan Suleiman, Centre for Drug Evaluation and Re-
search, Food and Drug Administration, USA; Daniel C. Sullivan,
Duke University Medical Centre, USA; Masakazu Toi, Kyoto
University, Japan; Cindy Welsh, Centre for Drug Evaluation
and Research, Food and Drug Administration, USA.
Finally, the RECIST Working Group would like to thank indi-
vidualswho were not permanent members of the group (which
are all acknowledged as co-authors) but who attended working
group meetings from time to time and made contributions to
the total process over the past 7 years: Richard Pazdur, Food
and Drug Administration, USA; Francesco Pignatti, European
Medicines Agency, London, UK.
Appendix II.
Speciﬁcations for standard
anatomical radiological imaging
These protocols for image acquisition of computed tomogra-
phy (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are recom-
mendations intended for patients on clinical trials where
RECIST assessment will be performed. Standardisation of
imaging requirements and image acquisition parameters is
ideal to allow for optimal comparability of subjects within a
study and results between studies. These recommendations
are designed to balance optimised image acquisition proto-
cols with techniques that should be feasible to perform glob-
ally at imaging facilities in all types of radiology practices.
These guidelines are not applicable to functional imaging
techniques or volumetric assessment of tumour size.
Scanner quality control is highly recommended and should
follow
standard
manufacturer
and
facility
maintenance
schedules using commercial phantoms. It is likely that for RE-
CIST unidimensional measurements this will be adequate to
produce reproducible measurements. Imaging quality control
for CT includes an analysis of image noise and uniformity and
CT number as well as spatial resolution. The frequency of
quality control analysis is also variable and should focus on
clinically relevant scanning parameters. Dose analysis is al-
ways important and the use of imaging should follow the
ALARA principle, ‘As Low As Reasonably Achievable’, which
refers to making every reasonable effort to maintain radiation
exposures as far below the dose limits as possible.
Speciﬁc.notes
Chest X-ray measurement of lesions surrounded by pulmon-
ary
parenchyma
is
feasible,
but
not
preferable
as
the
measurement represents a summation of densities. Further-
more, there is poor identiﬁcation of new lesions within the
chest on X-ray as compared with CT. Therefore, measure-
ments of pulmonary parenchymal lesions as well as medias-
tinal disease are optimally performed with CT of the chest.
MRI of the chest should only be performed in extenuating cir-
cumstances. Even if IV contrast cannot be administered (for
example, in the situation of allergy to contrast), a non-con-
trast CT of the chest is still preferred over MRI or chest X-ray.
CT scans: CT scans of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis should
be contiguous throughout all the anatomic region of interest.
As a general rule, the minimum size of a measurable lesion at
baseline should be no less than double the slice thickness and
also have a minimum size of 10 mm (see below for minimum
size when scanners have a slice thickness more than 5 mm).
While the precise physics of lesion size and partial volume
averaging is complex, lesions smaller than 10 mm may be dif-
ﬁcult to accurately and reproducibly measure. While this rule
is applicable to baseline scans, as lesions potentially decrease
in size at follow-up CT studies, they should still be measured.
Lesions which are reported as ‘too small to measure’ should
be assigned a default measurement of 5 mm if they are still
visible.
The most critical CT image acquisition parameters for opti-
mal tumour evaluation using RECIST are anatomic coverage,
contrast administration, slice thickness, and reconstruction interval.
a. Anatomic coverage: Optimal anatomic coverage for most
solid tumours is the chest, abdomen and pelvis. Cover-
age should encompass all areas of known predilection
for metastases in the disease under evaluation and
240
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7

should additionally investigate areas that may be
involved based on signs and symptoms of individual
patients. Because a lesion later identiﬁed in a body part
not scanned at baseline would be considered as a new
lesion representing disease progression, careful consid-
eration should begiven to the extent of imaging coverage
at baseline and at subsequent follow-up time points.
This will enable better consistency not only of tumour
measurements but also identiﬁcation of new disease.
b. IV contrast administration: Optimal visualisation and
measurement of metastases in solid tumours requires
consistent administration (dose and rate) of IV contrast
as well as timing of scanning. Typically, most abdomi-
nal imaging is performed during the portal venous
phase and (optimally) about the same time frame after
injection on each examination (see Fig. 1 for impact of
different phase of IV contrast on lesion measurement).
Most solid tumours may be scanned with a single
phase after administration of contrast. While triphasic
CT scans are sometimes performed on other types of
vascular tumours to improve lesion conspicuity, for
consistency and uniformity, we would recommend tri-
phasic
CT
for
hepatocellular
and
neuroendocrine
tumours for which this scanning protocol is generally
standard of care, and the improved temporal resolution
of the triphasic scan will enhance the radiologists’ abil-
ity to consistently and reproducibly measure these
lesions. The precise dose and rate of IV contrast is
dependent upon the CT scanning equipment, CT acqui-
sition protocol, the type of contrast used, the available
venous
access
and
the
medical
condition
of
the
patient. Therefore, the method of administration of
intravenous contrast agents is variable. Rather than
try to institute rigid rules regarding methods for
administering contrast agents and the volume injected,
it is appropriate to suggest that an adequate volume of
a suitable contrast agent should be given so that the
metastases are demonstrated to best effect and a con-
sistent method is used on subsequent examinations for
any given patient (ideally, this would be speciﬁed in
the protocol or for an institution). It is very important
that the same technique be used at baseline and on fol-
low-up examinations for a given patient. This will
greatly enhance the reproducibility of the tumour mea-
surements. If prior to enrolment it is known a patient is
not able to undergo CT scans with IV contrast due to
allergy
or
renal
insufﬁciency,
the
decision
as
to
whether a non-contrast CT or MRI (with or without IV
contrast) should be used to evaluate the subject at
baseline and follow-up should be guided by the tumour
type under investigation and the anatomic location of
the disease. For patients who develop contraindica-
tions to contrast after baseline contrast CT is done,
the decision as to whether non-contrast CT or MRI
(enhanced or non-enhanced) should be performed
should also be based on the tumour type, anatomic
location of the disease and should be optimised to
allow for comparison to the prior studies if possible.
Each case should be discussed with the radiologist to
determine if substitution of these other approaches is
possible and, if not, the patient should be considered
not evaluable from that point forward. Care must be
taken in measurement of target lesions on a different
modality and interpretation of non-target disease or
new lesions, since the same lesion may appear to have
a different size using a new modality (see Fig. 2 for a
comparison of CT and MRI of the same lesion). Oral
contrast is recommended to help visualise and differ-
entiate structures in the abdomen.
c. Slice thickness and reconstruction interval: RECIST measure-
ments may be performed at most clinically obtained
slice thicknesses. It is recommended that CT scans be
performed at 5 mm contiguous slice thickness or less
and indeed this guideline presumes a minimum 5 mm
thickness in recommendations for measurable lesion
deﬁnition. Indeed, variations in slice thickness can have
an impact on lesion measurement and on detection of
new lesions. However, consideration should also be
given for minimising radiation exposure. With these
parameters, a minimum 10 mm lesion is considered
measurable at baseline. Occasionally, institutions may
perform medically acceptable scans at slice thicknesses
greater than 5 mm. If this occurs, the minimum size of
measurable lesions at baseline should be twice the slice
Fig. 1 – Difference in measurement/visualisation with different phases of IV contrast administration. Hypervascular
metastases imaged in the arterial phase (left) and the portal venous phase (right). Note that the number of lesions visible
differs greatly between the two phases of contrast administration as does any potential lesion measurement. Consistent CT
scan acquisition, including phase of contrast administration, is important for optimal and reproducible tumour
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7
241

thickness of the baseline scans. Most contemporary CT
scanners are multidetector which have many imaging
options for these acquisition parameters.23 The equip-
ment vendor and scanning manual should be reviewed
if there are any speciﬁc system questions.
d. Alternative contrast agents: There are a number of other,
new contrast agents, some organ speciﬁc.24 They may
be used as part of patient care for instance, in liver
lesion assessment, or lymph node characterisation25,
but should not as yet be used in clinical trials.
FDG-PET has gained acceptance as a valuable tool for
detecting, staging and restaging several malignancies. Criteria
for incorporating (or substituting) FDG-PET into anatomical
assessment of tumour response in phase II trials are not yet
available, though much research is ongoing. Nevertheless,
FDG-PET is being used in many drug development trials both
as a tool to assess therapeutic efﬁcacy and also in assessment
of progression. If FDG-PET scans are included in a protocol, by
consensus, an FDG uptake period of 60 min prior to imaging
has been decided as the most appropriate for imaging of pa-
tients with malignancy.26 Whole-body acquisition is impor-
tant since this allows for sampling of all areas of interest
and can assess if new lesions have appeared thus determining
the possibility of interval progression of disease. Images from
the base of the skull to the level of the mid-thigh should be ob-
tained 60 min post injection. PET camera speciﬁcations are
variable and manufacturer speciﬁc, so every attempt should
be made to use the same scanner, or the same model scanner,
for serial scans on the same patient. Whole-body acquisitions
can be performed in either 2- or 3-dimensional mode with
attenuation correction, but the method chosen should be con-
sistent across all patients and serial scans in the clinical trial.
PET/CT scans: Combined modality scanning such as with
PET–CT is increasingly used in clinical care, and is a modal-
ity/technology that is in rapid evolution; therefore, the recom-
mendations in this paper may change rather quickly with
time. At present, low dose or attenuation correction CT por-
tions of a combined PET–CT are of limited use in anatomically
based efﬁcacy assessments and it is therefore suggested that
they should not be substituted for dedicated diagnostic con-
trast enhanced CT scans for anatomically based RECIST mea-
surements. However, if a site can document that the CT
performed as part of a PET–CT is of identical diagnostic qual-
ity to a diagnostic CT (with IV and oral contrast) then the CT
portion of the PET–CT can be used for RECIST measurements.
Note, however, that the PET portion of the CT introduces addi-
tional data which may bias an investigator if it is not routinely
or serially performed.
Ultrasound examinations should not be used in clinical trials
to measure tumour regression or progression of lesions be-
cause the examination is necessarily subjective and operator
dependent. The reasons for this are several: Entire examina-
tions cannot be reproduced for independent review at a later
date, and it must be assumed, whether or not it is the case,
that the hard-copy ﬁlms available represent a true and accu-
rate reﬂection of events. Furthermore, if, for example, the
only measurable lesion is in the para-aortic region of the
abdomen and if gas in the bowel overlies the lesion, the lesion
will not be detected because the ultrasound beam cannot
penetrate the gas. Accordingly, the disease staging (or restag-
ing for treatment evaluation) for this patient will not be
accurate.
While evaluation of lesions by physical examination is also
of limited reproducibility, it is permitted when lesions are
superﬁcial, at least 10 mm size, and can be assessed using
calipers. In general, it is preferred if patients on clinical trials
have at least one lesion that is measurable by CT. Other skin
or palpable lesions may be measured on physical examina-
tion and be considered target lesions.
Use of MRI remains a complex issue. MRI has excellent
contrast, spatial and temporal resolution; however, there
are many image acquisition variables involved in MRI, which
greatly impact image quality, lesion conspicuity and mea-
surement. Furthermore, the availability of MRI is variable
globally. As with CT, if an MRI is performed, the technical
speciﬁcations of the scanning sequences used should be
optimised for the evaluation of the type and site of disease.
Furthermore, as with CT, the modality used at follow-up
should be the same as was used at baseline and the lesions
should be measured/assessed on the same pulse sequence.
Generally, axial imaging of the abdomen and pelvis with T1
and T2 weighted imaging along with gadolinium enhanced
imaging should be performed. The ﬁeld of view, matrix,
number of excitations, phase encode steps, use of fat sup-
pression and fast sequences should be optimised for the spe-
Fig. 2 – CT versus MRI of same lesions showing apparent ‘progression’ due only to differing method of measurement.
242
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7

ciﬁc body part being imaged as well as the scanner utilised. It
is beyond the scope of this document or appendix to pre-
scribe speciﬁc MRI pulse sequence parameters for all scan-
ners, body parts and diseases. Ideally, the same type of
scanner should be used and the image acquisition protocol
should be followed as closely as possible to prior scans. Body
scans should be performed with breath-hold scanning tech-
niques if possible.
Selection of target lesions: In general, the largest lesions rep-
resentative of involved organs (up to a maximum of two per
organ and ﬁve total) are selected to follow as target lesions.
However, in some cases, the largest lesions may not be easily
measured and are not suitable for follow-up because of their
conﬁguration. In these cases, identiﬁcation of the largest most
reproducible lesions is advised. Fig. 3 provides an illustrative
example where the largest lesion is not the most reproducible
and another lesion is better to select and follow:
Measurement of lesions
The longest diameter of selected lesions should be measured
in the plane in which the images were acquired. For body CT,
this is the axial plane. In the event isotropic reconstructions
are performed, measurements can be made on these recon-
structed images; however, it should be cautioned that not
all radiology sites are capable of producing isotropic recon-
structions. This could lead to the undesirable situation of
measurements in the axial plane at one assessment point
and in a different plane at a subsequent assessment. There
are some tumours, for instance paraspinal lesions, which
are better measured in the coronal or sagittal plane. It would
be acceptable to measure these lesions in these planes if the
reconstructions in those planes were isotropic or the images
were acquired with MRI in those planes. Using the same plane
of evaluation, the maximal diameter of each target lesion
should always be measured at subsequent follow-up time
points even if this results in measuring the lesion at a differ-
ent slice level or in a different orientation or vector compared
with the baseline study. Software tools that calculate the
maximal diameter for a perimeter of a tumour may be em-
ployed and may even reduce variability.
The only exception to the longest diameter rule is lymph
node measurement. Because malignant nodes are identiﬁed
by the length of their short axis, this is the guide used to
determine not only whether they are pathological but is also
the dimension measured for adding into the sum of target le-
sions. Fig. 4 illustrates this point: the large arrow identiﬁes a
malignant node: the shorter perpendicular axis is P15 mm
and will be recorded. Close by (small arrow) there is a normal
node: note here the long axis is greater than 10 mm but the
short axis is well below 10 mm. This node should be consid-
ered non-pathological.
If a lesion disappears and reappears at a subsequent time
point it should continue to be measured. However, the pa-
tient’s response at the point in time when the lesion reap-
pears will depend upon the status of his/her other lesions.
For example, if the patient’s tumour had reached a CR status
and the lesion reappeared, then the patient would be consid-
ered PD at the time of reappearance. In contrast, if the tumour
status was a PR or SD and one lesion which had disappeared
then reappears, its maximal diameter should be added to the
sum of the remaining lesions for a calculated response: in
other words, the reappearance of an apparently ‘disappeared’
single lesion amongst many which remain is not in itself en-
Fig. 3 – Largest lesion may not be most reproducible: most reproducible should be selected as target. In this example, the
primary gastric lesion (circled at baseline and at follow-up in the top two images) may be able to be measured with thin
section volumetric CT with the same degree of gastric distention at baseline and follow-up. However, this is potentially
challenging to reproduce in a multicentre trial and if attempted should be done with careful imaging input and analysis. The
most reproducible lesion is a lymph node (circled at baseline and at follow-up in the bottom two images).
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7
243

ough to qualify for PD: that requires the sum of all lesions to
meet the PD criteria. The rationale for such a categorisation is
based upon the realisation that most lesions do not actually
‘disappear’ but are not visualised because they are beyond
the resolving power of the imaging modality employed.
The identiﬁcation of the precise boundary deﬁnition of a
lesion may be difﬁcult especially when the lesion is embed-
ded in an organ with a similar contrast such as the liver, pan-
creas, kidney, adrenal or spleen. Additionally, peritumoural
oedema may surround a lesion and may be difﬁcult to distin-
guish on certain modalities between this oedema and actual
tumour. In fact, pathologically, the presence of tumour cells
within the oedema region is variable. Therefore, it is most
critical that the measurements be obtained in a reproducible
manner from baseline and all subsequent follow-up time-
points. This is also a strong reason to consistently utilise
the same imaging modality.
When lesions ‘fragment’, the individual lesion diameters
should be added together to calculate the target lesion
sum. Similarly, as lesions coalesce, a plane between them
may be maintained that would aid in obtaining maximal
diameter measurements of each individual lesion. If the le-
sions have truly coalesced such that they are no longer sep-
arable, the vector of the longest diameter in this instance
should be the maximal longest diameter for the ‘merged
lesion’.
Progression of non-target lesions
To achieve ‘unequivocal progression’ there must be an overall
level of substantial worsening in non-target disease that is of
a magnitude that, even in the presence of SD or PR in target
disease, the treating physician would feel it important to
change therapy. Examples of unequivocal progression are
shown in Figs. 5 and 6.
Fig. 5 – Example of unequivocal progression in non-target lesions in liver.
Fig. 6 – Example of unequivocal progression in non-target lesion (nodes).
Fig. 4 – Lymph node assessment: large arrow illustrates a
pathological node with the short axis shown as a solid line
which should be measured and followed. Small arrow illus-
trates a non-pathological node which has a short axis
<10 mm.
244
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7

Appendix III. Frequently asked questions
Question
Answer
What should be done if several unique lesions at
baseline become conﬂuent at a follow-up
evaluation?
Measure the longest diameter of the conﬂuent mass and record to add into the sum of
the longest diameters
How large does a new lesion have to be to count
as progression? Does any small subcentimetre
lesion qualify, or should the lesion be at least
measurable?
New lesions do not need to meet ‘measurability criteria’ to be considered valid. If it is
clear on previous images (with the same technique) that a lesion was absent then its
deﬁnitive appearance implies progression. If there is any doubt (because of the
techniques or conditions) then it is suggested that treatment continue until next
scheduled assessment when, generally, all should be clear. Either it gets bigger and the
date of progression is the date of the ﬁrst suspicion, or it disappears and one may then
consider it an artefact with the support of the radiologists
How should one lesion be measured if on
subsequent exams it is split into two?
Measure the longest diameter of each lesion and add this into the sum
Does the deﬁnition of progression depend on
the status of all target lesions or only one?
As per the RECIST 1.1 guideline, progression requires a 20% increase in the sum of
diameters of all target lesions AND a minimum absolute increase of 5 mm in the sum
Are RECIST criteria accepted by regulatory
agencies?
Many cooperative groups and members of pharma were involved in preparing RECIST
1.0 and have adopted them. The FDA was consulted in their development and supports
their use, though they don’t require it. The European and Canadian regulatory
authorities also participated and the RECIST criteria are now integrated in the European
note for guidance for the development of anticancer agents. Many pharmaceutical
companies are also using them. RECIST 1.1 was similarly widely distributed before
publication
What is the criterion for a measurable lesion if
the CT slice thickness is >5 mm?
RECIST 1.1 recommends that CT scans have a maximum slice thickness of 5 mm and the
minimum size for a measurable lesion is twice that: 10 mm (even if slice thickness is
<5 mm). If scanners with slice thickness >5 mm are used, the minimum lesion size must
have a longest diameter twice the actual slice thickness
What should we record when target lesions
become so small they are below the 10 mm
‘measurable’ size?
Target lesion measurability is deﬁned at baseline. Thereafter, actual measurements,
even if <10 mm, should be recorded. If lesions become very small, some radiologists
indicate they are ‘too small to measure’. This guideline advises that when this occurs, if
the lesion is actually still present, a default measurement of 5 mm should be applied. If
in fact the radiologist believes the lesion has gone, a default measurement of 0 mm
should be recorded
If a patient has several lesions which have
decreased in size to meet PR criteria and one
has actually disappeared, does that patient have
PD if the ‘disappeared’ lesion reappears?
Unless the sum meets the PD criteria, the reappearance of a lesion in the setting of PR (or
SD) is not PD. The lesion should simply be added into the sum.
If the patients had had a CR, clearly reappearance of an absent lesion would qualify for
PD
When measuring the longest diameter of target
lesions in response to treatment, is the same
axis that was used initially used subsequently,
even if there is a shape change to the lesion that
may have produced a new longest diameter?
The longest diameter of the lesion should always be measured even if the actual axis is
different from the one used to measure the lesion initially (or at different time point
during follow-up)
The only exception to this is lymph nodes: as per RECIST 1.1 the short axis should
always be followed and as in the case of target lesions, the vector of the short axis may
change on follow-up
Target lesions have been selected at baseline
and followed but then one of these target
lesions then becomes non-evaluable (i.e.
different technique used)
What may be done in such cases is one of the following:
What is the effect this has on the other target
lesions and the overall response?
(a) If the patient is still being treated, call the centre to be sure that future evaluations are
done with the baseline technique so at least SOME courses are fully evaluable
(b) If that is not possible, check if there IS a baseline exam by the same technique which
was used to follow patients...in which case if you retrieve the baseline measures from
that technique you retrieve the lesion evaluability
(c) If neither (a) nor (b) is possible then it is a judgement call about whether you delete
the lesion from all forms or consider the impact of the lesion overall is so important that
its being non-evaluable makes the overall response interpretation inevaluable without
it. Such a decision should be discussed in a review panel
It is NOT recommended that the lesion be included in baseline sums and then excluded
from follow-up sums since this biases in favour of a response
(continued on next page)
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7
245

R E F E R E N C E S
1. Paesmans M, Sculier JP, Libert P, et al. Response to
chemotherapy has predictive value for further survival of
patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: 10 years
experience of the European Lung Cancer Working Party. Eur J
Cancer 1997;33:2326–32.
2. Buyse M, Thirion P, Carlson RW, et al. Relation between tumor
response to ﬁrst-line chemotherapy and survival in advanced
colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Meta-analysis group in
Cancer. Lancet 2000;356:373–8.
3. Gofﬁn J, Baral S, Tu D, et al. Objective responses in patients
with malignant melanoma or renal cell cancer in early
clinical studies do not predict regulatory approval. Clin Cancer
Res 2005;15:5928–34.
4. El-Maraghi RH, Eisenhauer EA. Review of phase II trial designs
used in studies of molecular targeted agents: outcomes and
predictors of success in phase III. J Clin Oncol 2008;10:1346–54.
5. Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, Winkler A. Reporting
results of cancer treatment. Cancer 1981;47:207–14.
6. Tonkin K, Tritchler D, Tannock I. Criteria of tumor response
used in clinical trials of chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol
1985;3:870–5.
7. Baar J, Tannock I. Analyzing the same data in two ways: a
demonstration model to illustrate the reporting and
misreporting of clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 1989;7:969–78.
8. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al. New guidelines
to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors (RECIST
Guidelines). J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:205–16.
9. Therasse P, Eisenhauer EA, Verweij J. RECIST revisited: a
review of validation studies on tumour assessment. Eur J
Cancer 2006;42:1031–9.
10. Bogaerts J, Ford R, Sargent D, et al. Individual patient
data analysis to assess modiﬁcations to the RECIST criteria.
Eur J Cancer 2009;45:248–60.
11. Moskowitz CS, Jia X, Schwartz LH, Go¨nen M. A simulation
study to evaluate the impact of the number of lesions
measured on response assessment. Eur J Cancer
2009;45:300–10.
12. Sargent D, Rubinstein L, Schwartz L, et al. Validation of novel
imaging methodologies for use as cancer clinical trials
end-points. Eur J Cancer 2009;45:290–9.
Appendix III – continued
Question
Answer
What if a single non-target lesion cannot be reviewed, for
whatever reason; does this negate the overall assessment?
Sometimes the major contribution of a single non-target lesion may be in
the setting of CR having otherwise been achieved: failure to examine one
non-target in that setting will leave you unable to claim CR. It is also
possible that the non-target lesion has undergone such substantial
progression that it would override the target disease and render patient
PD. However, this is very unlikely, especially if the rest of the measurable
disease is stable or responding
A patient has a 32% decrease in sum cycle 2, a 28% decrease cycle
4 and a 33% decrease cycle 6. Does conﬁrmation of PR have to
take place in sequential scans or is a case like this conﬁrmed PR?
It is not infrequent that tumour shrinkage hovers around the 30% mark.
In this case, most would consider PR to have been conﬁrmed looking at
this overall case. Had there been two or three non-PR observations
between the two time point PR responses, the most conservative
approach would be to consider this case SD
In the setting of a breast cancer neoadjuvant study, would
mammography not be used to assess lesions? Is CT preferred in
this setting?
Neither CT nor mammography are optimal in this setting. MRI is the
preferred modality to follow breast lesions in a neoadjuvant setting
A patient has a lesion measurable by clinical exam and by CT
scan. Which should be followed?
CT scan. Always follow by imaging if that option exists since it can be
reviewed and veriﬁed
A lesion which was solid at baseline has become necrotic in the
centre. How should this be measured?
The longest diameter of the entire lesion should be followed. Eventually,
necrotic lesions which are responding to treatment decrease in size. In
reporting the results of trials, you may wish to report on this
phenomenon if it is seen frequently since some agents (e.g. angiogenesis
inhibitors) may produce this effect
If I am going to use MRI to follow disease, what is minimum size
for measurability?
MRI may be substituted for contrast enhanced CT for some sites, but not
lung. The minimum size for measurability is the same as for CT (10 mm)
as long as the scans are performed with slice thickness of 5 mm and no
gap. In the event the MRI is performed with thicker slices, the size of a
measurable lesion at baseline should be two times the slice thickness. In
the event there are inter-slice gaps, this also needs to be considered in
determining the size of measurable lesions at baseline
Can PET–CT be used with RECIST?
At present, the low dose or attenuation correction CT portion of a
combined PET–CT is not always of optimal diagnostic CT quality for use
with RECIST measurements. However, if your site has documented that
the CT performed as part of a PET–CT is of the same diagnostic quality as
a diagnostic CT (with IV and oral contrast) then the PET–CT can be used
for RECIST measurements. Note, however, that the PET portion of the CT
introduces additional data which may bias an investigator if it is not
routinely or serially performed
246
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7

13. Macdonald DR, Cascino TL, Schold Jr SC, Cairncross JG.
Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial
malignant glioma. J Clin Oncol 1990;8:1277–80.
14. Cheson BD, Pﬁstner B, Juweid ME, et al. Revised response
criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2007;10:579–86.
15. Schwartz LH, Bogaerts J, Ford R, et al. Evaluation of lymph
nodes with RECIST 1.1. Eur J Cancer 2009;45:261–7.
16. Rustin GJ, Quinn M, Thigpen T, et al. Re: New guidelines to
evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors (ovarian
cancer). J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:487–8.
17. Bubley GJ, Carducci M, Dahut W, et al. Eligibility and response
guidelines for phase II clinical trials in androgen-independent
prostate cancer: recommendations from the Prostate-Speciﬁc
Antigen Working Group. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:3461–7.
18. Scher H, Halabi S, Tannock I, et al. Design and end points of
clinical trials for patients with progressive prostate cancer
and castrate levels of testosterone: recommendations of the
Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group. J Clin Oncol
2008;26:1148–59.
19. Vergote I, Rustin GJ, Eisenhauer EA, et al. Re: new guidelines
to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors [ovarian
cancer]. Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup. J Natl Cancer Inst
2000;92:1534–5.
20. Van Glabbeke M, Verweij J, Judson I, Nielsen OS. EORTC Soft
Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group: Progression-free rate as the
principal end-point for phase II trials in soft-tissue sarcomas.
Eur J Cancer 2002;38:543–9.
21. Dancey JE, Dodd LE, Ford R, et al. Recommendations for the
assessment of progression in randomised cancer treatment
trials. Eur J Cancer 2009;45:281–9.
22. Ford R, Schwartz L, Dancey J, et al. Lessons learned
from independent central review. Eur J Cancer 2009;45:
268–74.
23. Catalano C, Francone M, Ascarelli A, Mangia M, Iacucci I,
Passariello R. Optimizing radiation dose and image quality.
Eur Radiol 2007;17(Suppl 6):F26–32.
24. Low RN. Abdominal MRI advances in the detection of liver
tumours and characterization. Lancet Oncol 2007;8(6):525–35.
25. Barrett T, Choyke PL, Kobayashi H. Imaging of the lymphatic
system: new horizons. Contrast Media Mol Imaging
2006;1(6):230–45.
26. Shankar LK, Hoffman JM, Bacharach S, et al. National
Cancer Institute. Consensus recommendations for the use
of 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response
in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials.
J Nucl Med 2006;47(6):1059–66.
E U R O P E A N J O U R N A L O F C A N C E R 4 5 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 2 2 8 –2 4 7
247

Product: ACP-196 (acalabrutinib) 
Date: 17 May 2016 
Protocol: ACE-ST-208 
 
 
Acerta Pharma 
Confidential 
Page 152 of 160 
 
Appendix 8.  irRECIST Guidelines 
 

ADAPTATION OF THE  
IMMUNE-RELATED RESPONSE 
CRITERIA: irRECIST
Oliver Bohnsack, PAREXEL 
Katarina Ludajic, PAREXEL 
Axel Hoos, GSK
ESMO 2014 ABSTRACT 4958

RECIST 1.1 has its 
shortcomings for targeted 
immunotherapy in oncology. 
Using RECIST 1.1 in 
immunotherapy trials  
would lead to declaration  
of progressive disease  
(PD) too early, when the 
treatment effect is not yet 
fully evident. RECIST also 
neglects the importance  
of the ‘flare effect’ -  
pseudo-progression  
effect within the so-called 
flare time window. 
Immune related Response 
Criteria (irRC) based on  
WHO criteria were published 
with an aim to provide better 
assessment of the effect  
of immunotherapeutic 
agents. With this poster we 
introduce irRECIST based on 
RECIST 1.1, irRC and Nishino 
et al., 2013 findings. Our aim 
is to define criteria that 
better capture antitumor 
activity and reduce irRC 
criteria ambiguity. 
Consistent implementation 
of irRECIST by both 
investigators and blinded 
independent readers  
will help reduce site: 
central discordance.
AIM
2
Original irRC, Including WHO  
Criteria References
irRECIST  
Modifications and Clarifications
Rationale for Modification
At the baseline tumor assessment, the 
sum of the products of the two largest  
perpendicular diameters (SPD) of all 
index lesions (five lesions per organ, 
up to 10 visceral lesions and five 
cutaneous index lesions) is calculated.
1. 0 Baseline: Measurable Lesion  
Definitions and Target Lesion 
Selection
Follow the definitions from RECIST 1.1. 
Measurable lesions must be 
accurately measured in at least one 
dimension with a minimum size of:
î 10 mm in the longest diameter by 
CT or MRI scan (or no less than 
double the slice thickness) for non-
nodal lesions and ≥15 mm in short 
axis for nodal lesions
î 10 mm caliper measurement by  
clinical exam
î 20 mm by chest X-ray
Up to 5 target lesions may be selected  
at baseline. Lesions will be measured  
unidimensionally. The minimum target 
lesion size at baseline in irRECIST is 
aligned with RECIST 1.1, as outlined in 
Nishino et al., 2013. 
WHO 5.1.2
Unmeasurable Disease
There are many forms of 
unmeasurable disease, and only a few 
are mentioned as examples:
Lymphangitic pulmonary metastases.
Skin involvement in breast cancer.
Abdominal masses that can be 
palpated but not measured.
1.1. Baseline: Non-measurable  
Lesion Definitions  
Follow the definitions from RECIST 1.1 
 Non-target lesions will include:
î0HDVXUDEOHOHVLRQVQRWVHOHFWHGDV
target lesions
î$OOVLWHVRIQRQPHDVXUDEOHGLVHDVH
such as neoplastic masses that are too 
small to measure because their longest 
uninterrupted diameter is < 10 mm (or 
< two times the axial slice thickness), 
ie. the longest per-pendicular 
diameter is  ≥10 and < 15 mm.
î2WKHUW\SHVRIOHVLRQVWKDWDUH
confidently felt to represent 
neoplastic tissue, but are difficult to 
measure in a reproducible manner. 
These include bone metastases, 
leptomeningeal metastases, 
malignant ascites, pleural or 
pericardial effusions, ascites, 
inflammatory breast disease, 
lymphangitis cutis/pulmonis, cystic 
lesions, ill-defined abdominal 
masses, skin lesions, etc.
Although irRC does not specifically 
define non-target lesions, irRC is 
derived from WHO criteria and 
indicates accordance with the same 
for the purposes of definitions of  
non-target lesions. Further 
clarifications in alignment with  
RECIST 1.1 are provided.
Not specified.
1.2 Baseline: Target and Non-Target 
Lymph Node Lesion Definitions
Follow the definitions from RECIST 1.1
No change in definition of target  
and non-target lymph nodes from  
RECIST 1.1.
Not specified.
1.3 Baseline: Non-Target  
Lesion Selection
All lesions or sites of disease not  
recorded as target lesions should  
be recorded as non-target lesions  
at baseline. There is no limit to the 
number of non-target lesions that  
can be recorded at baseline.
In alignment with RECIST 1.1, all  
malignant lesions have to be selected 
at baseline. The excess of measurable 
lesions and all true non-measurable 
lesions will be selected as non-target 
lesions at baseline and followed at 
subsequent timepoints.
 Not specified.
1.4 Baseline: Bone Lesions
Follow the definitions from RECIST 1.1.
Regardless of the imaging modality 
blastic bone lesions will not be select-
ed as target lesions. Lytic or mixed 
lytic-blastic lesions with a measurable 
soft tissue component ≥10 mm can be 
selected as target lesions.
Bone lesions are to be handled the 
same as in RECIST 1.1.
Not specified.
1.5 Baseline: Brain Lesions detected 
on brain scans can be considered as 
both target or non-target lesions.
Brain lesions can be selected as target 
or non-target lesions at baseline,  
depending on the protocol definition, 
indication, and study design.

The adaptations from  
irRC and WHO criteria,  
as applicable in 
immunotherapy clinical 
studies, are documented in 
the “irRECIST Modifications 
and Clarifications” column  
in a comparative table 
format within our Blinded 
Independent Central  
Review (BICR) Charter. 
The modifications we 
introduce represent 
adaptations of published 
criteria based on radiology 
practice and clinical trial 
experience, and they provide 
more objective and 
reproducible response 
assessments for 
investigators and for  
the central independent 
image review.
METHODS
3
Original irRC, Including WHO  
Criteria References
irRECIST  
Modifications and Clarifications
Rationale for Modification
Not specified.
1.6 Baseline: Cystic and Necrotic 
Lesions as Target Lesions
Lesions that are partially cystic or 
necrotic can be selected as target 
lesions. The longest diameter of such 
a lesion will be added to the Total 
Measured Tumor Burden (TMTB) of  
all target lesions at baseline. If other 
lesions with a non-liquid/non-necrotic 
component are present, those should 
be preferred. 
RECIST 1.1 does not integrate viability 
of tumor tissue into the assessment, 
and that is carried over into irRECIST.
Not specified.
1.7 Baseline: Lesions With Prior  
Local Treatment
During target lesion selection the 
radiologist will consider information 
on the anatomical sites of previous 
intervention (e.g. previous irradiation, 
RF-ablation, TACE, surgery, etc.). 
Lesions undergoing prior intervention 
will not be selected as target lesions 
unless there has been a demon-
stration of progress in the lesion.
In order to minimize site vs. central 
discrepancy information about prior 
intervention needs to be available  
to both the investigators and 
independent reviewers. 
Not specified.
1.8 Baseline: No Disease at Baseline 
If a patient has no measurable and  
no non-measurable disease at  
baseline the radiologist will assign  
‘No Disease’ (irND) as the overall  
tumor assessment for any available 
follow-up timepoints unless new  
measurable lesions are identified and 
contribute to the TMTB.
irND is a valid assessment in studies 
with adjuvant setting where the  
protocol and study design allow to  
include patients with no visible  
disease. This had not been addressed 
at all in any prior immune-response 
related criteria but needs to be  
included to also allow for these  
patients to be assessed accurately.
At each subsequent tumor 
assessment, the SPD of the index 
lesions and of new, measurable 
lesions (≥5×5 mm; up to 5 new  
lesions per organ: 5 new cutaneous 
lesions and 10 visceral lesions) are 
added together to provide the total 
tumor burden:
SPDindex lesions + SPDnew measured lesion
2.0 Follow-up: Recording of  
Target and New Measureable  
Lesion Measurements
The longest diameters of non-nodal 
target and new non-nodal measurable 
lesions, and short axes of nodal target 
and new nodal measurable lesions will 
be recorded. Together they determine 
the Total Measured Tumor Burden 
(TMTB) at follow-up.
In alignment with Nishino et al., 2013,  
unidimensional measurements are 
used. Measurements of all measured 
lesions (baseline-selected target  
lesions and new measurble lesions) 
are combined into TMTB at follow-up.
2.1 Follow-up: Definition of  
Measurable New Lesions
In order to be selected as new mea-
surable lesions (≤ 2 lesions per organ, 
≤ 5 lesions total, per timepoint), new 
lesions must meet criteria as defined 
for baseline target lesion selection  
and meet the same minimum size  
requirements of 10 mm in long  
diameter and minimum 15 mm in 
short axis for new measurable lymph 
nodes. New measurable lesions shall 
be prioritized according to size, and 
the largest lesions shall be selected  
as new measured lesions. 
Proposed selection of up to 5 new 
measurable lesions of at least 10 mm  
each verus 10 new measurable lesions 
as suggested in the irRC criteria is due 
to the following: 5 new measurable 
lesions add up at least 50 mm to the 
TMTB. Since PD is determined by  
at least a 20% increase in TMTB 
compared to nadir, this would mean 
that for irPD assessment the nadir 
TMTB had to be 25 cm, or 10 cm for  
2 lesions in one organ, which is a 
significant tumor burden already for 
any cancer patient. That is why 
measuring up to 5 new lesions in total 
is sufficient and will not obstruct an 
irPD assessment. Measuring more 
than 5 new lesons is not needed.
Larger lesions must be preferred as  
new measurable over smaller lesions, 
because there will be a greater impact  
of the TMTB %-increase by these 
larger lesions for irPD, to support  
a most conservative approach.

4
irRECIST criteria are based 
on irRC criteria adapted for 
unidimensional measure-
ments, as outlined in Nishino 
et al., 2013. To further align 
the criteria with RECIST 1.1 
we outline the approach for 
the assessment of baseline-
selected non-target lesions 
and new non-measurable 
lesions, and discuss the 
impact of those lesions  
on the overall tumor 
response assessment. 
Guidelines for the evaluation 
of patients with non-target 
disease only and patients in 
adjuvant setting is provided.
RESULTS
Original irRC, Including WHO  
Criteria References
irRECIST  
Modifications and Clarifications
Rationale for Modification
Non-index lesions at follow-up 
timepoints contribute to defining irCR 
(complete disappearance required).
2.2 Follow-up: Non-Target 
 Lesion Assessment 
The RECIST 1.1 definitions for  
the assessment of non-target  
lesions apply.
The response of non-target lesions 
primarily contributes to the overall 
response assessments of irCR and 
irNon-CR/Non-PD (irNN). Non-target 
lesions do not affect irPR and irSD 
assessments. Only a massive and 
unequivocal worsening of non-target 
lesions alone, even without progress  
in the TMTB is indicative of irPD. 
Non-target lesions have a subordinate 
function. In the event that non-target 
lesions massively progress one cannot 
ignore such worsening and in these 
rare cases irPD based only on  
non-target lesions will be a valid 
assessment option. 
New, non-measurable lesions at 
follow-up timepoints do not define 
progression, they only preclude irCR.
2.3 Follow-up: New Non-Measurable 
Lesions Definition and Assessment
All new lesions not selected as new 
measurable lesions are considered  
new non-measurable lesions and are 
followed qualitatively. Only a massive  
and unequivocal progression of new 
non-measurable lesions leads to an 
overall assessment of irPD for the 
timepoint. Persisting new non-
measurable lesions prevent irCR.
When new non-measurable lesions 
substantially worsen in these rare 
cases irPD based only on new  
non-measurable lesions will be  
an assessment option. 
irRC Overall Tumor Assessments
irCR, complete disappearance of all  
lesions (whether measurable or not,  
and no new lesions) 
î  Confirmation by a repeat, 
consecutive assessment no  
less than 4 weeks from the date  
first documented 
irPR, decrease in tumor burden ≥50% 
relative to baseline
î Confirmed by a consecutive 
assessment at least 4 weeks after 
first documentation 
irSD, not meeting criteria for irCR or 
irPR, in absence of irPD 
irPD, increase in tumor burden ≥25% 
relative to nadir (minimum recorded  
tumor burden)
î Confirmation by a repeat, 
consecutive assessment no  
less than 4 weeks from the date  
first documented
2.4 irRC Overall Tumor Assessments
irCR, complete disappearance of  
all measurable and non-measurable 
lesions. Lymph nodes must decrease 
to < 10 mm in short axis. Confirmation 
of response is not mandatory. 
irPR, decrease of ≥ 30% in TMTB  
relative to baseline, non-target lesions 
are irNN, and no unequivocal progres-
sion of new non-measurable lesions. 
irSD, failure to meet criteria for irCR 
or irPR in the absence of irPD.
irNN, no target disease was identified 
at baseline and at follow-up the  
patient fails to meet criteria for  
irCR or irPD.
irPD, minimum 20% increase and  
minimum 5 mm absolute increase in  
TMTB compared to nadir, or irPD for 
non-target or new non-measurable  
lesions. Confirmation of progression is 
recommended minimum 4 weeks after 
the first irPD assessment. 
irNE, used in exceptional cases where  
insufficient data exists. 
irND, in adjuvant setting when no  
disease is detected.
The irRECIST overall tumor  
assessment is based on TMTB of  
measured target and new lesions, 
non-target lesion assessment and  
new non-measurable lesions. 
The thresholds for irPR and irPD  
assessment are aligned with  
RECIST 1.1, and confirmation of  
response is not required.
An irPD confirmation scan may be  
recommended for patients with a  
minimal TMTB %-increase over  
20% and especially during the flare 
time-window of the first 12 weeks  
of treatment, depending on the  
compound efficacy expectations, to 
account for expected delayed response.

5
irRECIST criteria as outlined here introduce the needed clarifications and adjustments to irRC 
criteria and Nishino et al., 2013 publication to allow for treatment evaluations that better meet both 
investigators’ and patients’ needs and with that better reflect sponsors’ demands for more reliable 
and reproducible study data in targeted immunotherapy in oncology studies. The main adaptation of 
the existing immune-response criteira lies in the assessment of all detected lesions. Unequivocal 
and substantial increase of non-target and new non-measurable lesions prevents irCR and may also 
lead to irPD. Reduction of the tumor burden in patients in an adjuvant setting may lead to irPR and 
such patients may therefore be enrolled in studies with response endpoints.
Clinical relevance of these adaptations needs to be confirmed.
CONCLUSIONS

6 
1.  TMTB: Baseline-selected target lesions and new measurable 
lesions should NOT be assessed separately. Measurements of 
those lesions should be combined into the Total Measured 
Tumor Burden (TMTB), and one combined assessment provided.
2.  New Measurable Lesions: According to irRC a measurable new 
lesion has to be at least 5 mm x 5 mm to be selected as an 
index lesion. For bidimensional measurements this threshold 
was acceptable. In irRECIST, criteria for unidimensional lesion 
measurment apply to both target and new measurable lesions: 
a minimum 10 mm in the longest diameter for non-nodal 
lesions, and a minimum 15 mm in short axis for lymph nodes. 
Smaller lesions contribute to the non-target or new non-
measurable tumor burden, but do not get measured.
3.  irPR if no Target Lesions: If new measurable lesions appear  
in patients with no target lesions at baseline, irPD will be 
assessed. That irPD timepoint will be considered a new 
baseline, and all subsequent timepoints will be compared  
to it for response assessment. irPR is possible if the TMTB  
of new measurable lesions decreases by ≥ 30% compared  
to the first irPD documentation. 
4.  irPR in Adjuvant Studies: irRECIST can be used in the adjuvant 
setting, in patients with no visible disease on CT/MRI scans. 
The appearance of new measurable lesion(s) automatically 
leads to an increase in TMTB by 100% and leads to irPD. These 
patients can achieve a response if the TMTB decreases at 
follow-up, as a sign of delayed response.  
 
Considering 3 and 4, sponsors may consider enrolling patients 
with no measurable disease and/or patients with no visible disease 
at all in studies with response related endpoints. 
 
 
 
 
5.  Non-Target Lesions: In alignment with RECIST 1.1, baseline 
selected non-target lesions can never convert to measurable 
lesions, not even if they increase in size at subsequent 
timepoints and become measurable. Only true new lesions  
can be measured and contribute to the TMTB.
6.  Example: A patient has multiple lung metastases, all smaller 
than 10 mm and selected as non-target lesions at baseline.  
If, at a subsequent timepoint some of these non-target lesions 
increase and become > 10 mm, and one new lesion >10 mm 
appears, only the new measurable lesion will contribute to  
the TMTB, and not the baseline selected non-target lesion  
that increased in size. Otherwise such an increase would  
make persisting non-target lesions switch into the new 
measurable lesion category which would be inaccurate,  
as the lesion existed at baseline.
7.  irPD Based on Non-Target Lesions: Unlike irRC that neglect 
non-target lesions for the assessment of irPD, in irRECIST a 
substantial and unequivocal increase of non-target lesions is 
indicative of progression. 
8.  irPD Based on New Non-Measurable Lesions: According to 
irRC, a patient with multiple new lesions of 9 mm would be 
considered non-PD, whereas a patient with just one new lesion 
of 10 mm may be assessed as irPD if the TMTB of such a 
patient increases ≥ 20% compared to nadir. According to 
irRECIST, the reviewer may assign irPD for the patient with 
multiple new lesions of 9 mm if they are considered to be a 
sign of unequivocal, massive worsening (see 2.3)
9.  irPD Confirmation: Progression confirmation no less than  
4 weeks after the initial irPD assessment is recommended 
especially in case of marginal disease growth and if the  
first irPD assessment is within the compound-specific  
tumor flare window.
SUMMARY AND ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE

 7
1)  JD Wolchok, A Hoos, O Bohnsack, et.al., Guidelines for the Evaluation of Immune Therapy  
Activity in Solid Tumors: Immune-Related Response Criteria, Clin Cancer Res 2009;15(23) 
December 1, 2009
2)  Nishino M et al. Developing a common language for tumor response to immunotherapy:  
immune-related response criteria using unidimensional measurements. Clin Cancer Res. 2013 
Jul 15;19(14):3936-43
3)  Therasse P, Arbuck SG, et al.: New Guidelines to Evaluate the Response to Treatment in Solid 
Tumors. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2000 92(3):205-216]
4)  Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al.: New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: 
revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). In: Eur. J. Cancer. 45, Nr. 2, Januar 2009, S. 228–47.
5)  Therasse P, Eisenhauer EA, Verweij J: RECIST revisited: a review of validation studies on tumour 
assessment. In: Eur. J. Cancer. 42, Nr. 8, Mai 2006, S. 1031–9.
6)  WHO handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment. Geneva (Switzerland): World Health 
Organization Offset Publication No. 48; 1979.
Oliver.Bohnsack@PAREXEL.com
PAREXEL International 
195 West Street 
Waltham, MA 02451 USA 
+ 1 781 487 9900 
www.PAREXEL.com
REFERENCES
CONTACT INFO

WHEREVER YOUR 
JOURNEY TAKES YOU, 
WE’RE CLOSE BY.
CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
195 West Street 
Waltham, MA 02451 
USA 
+1 781 487 9900
Offices across Europe, Asia and the Americas
www.PAREXEL.com
© 2014 PAREXEL International Corporation. All rights reserved.