Sandrine Aspeslagh1, Margarida Matias2, Virginia Palomar3, Laurent Dercle4, Emilie Lanoy5, Jean-Charles Soria6, Sophie Postel-Vinay7. 1. Gustave Roussy, Département D'Innovation Thérapeutique et Essais Précoces, Villejuif, France. 2. Gustave Roussy, Département de Médecine Oncologique, Villejuif, France. 3. Gustave Roussy, Département de Cancérologie Cervico-faciale, Villejuif, France. 4. Gustave Roussy, Département D'Imagerie Médicale, Villejuif, France; Gustave Roussy, UMR1015, Villejuif, France. 5. Gustave Roussy, Service de Biostatistique et D'Epidémiologie, Villejuif, France; INSERM U981, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, F-94805, France. 6. Gustave Roussy, Département D'Innovation Thérapeutique et Essais Précoces, Villejuif, France; INSERM U981, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, F-94805, France. 7. Gustave Roussy, Département D'Innovation Thérapeutique et Essais Précoces, Villejuif, France; INSERM U981, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, F-94805, France. Electronic address: sophie.postel-vinay@gustaveroussy.fr.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The advent of anti-programmed death receptor-1/ligand-1 antibodies (anti-PD(L)1) is profoundly changing the therapeutic strategy of oncology. As anti-PD(L)1 modulate tumour microenvironment, it might impact sensitivity to conventional cancer therapy (CCT). Therefore, we explored whether sensitivity to CCT was different before and after anti-PD(L)1 therapy. METHODS: Patients who started anti-PD(L)1 treatment at Gustave Roussy Cancer Centre between February 2012 and December 2015, and who received at least one line of CCT immediately before and immediately after anti-PD(L)1, were eligible. We analysed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR) of the CCT line immediately before (PFSpre/ORRpre) and after (PFSpost/ORRpost) anti-PD(L)1. PFS and ORR were compared using Wilcoxon signed rank and McNemar tests in a paired data subset for patients having received identical class of CCT pre and post anti-PD(L)1 therapy. RESULTS: Among 118 eligible patients, 65% received anti-PD1 and 35% anti-PD-L1 agents. Median PFSpre versus PFSpost was 4.7 versus 3.5 months (p = 0.011), respectively; it was 5.7 versus 6.8 months (NS) for patients who derived clinical benefit from immunotherapy and 3.9 versus 3.0 months (p = 0.012) for patients who were primary resistant to anti-PD(L)1 therapy. Subgroup analysis did not reveal any significant difference in PFS or ORR before versus after anti-PD(L)1 therapy according to CCT class or to its ability to induce immunogenic cell death. CONCLUSION: Patients who derive benefit from immune therapies tend to have better PFS on conventional therapies after having received the anti-PD(L)1 agent. Further studies on larger data sets are warranted to confirm these findings.
INTRODUCTION: The advent of anti-programmed death receptor-1/ligand-1 antibodies (anti-PD(L)1) is profoundly changing the therapeutic strategy of oncology. As anti-PD(L)1 modulate tumour microenvironment, it might impact sensitivity to conventional cancer therapy (CCT). Therefore, we explored whether sensitivity to CCT was different before and after anti-PD(L)1 therapy. METHODS:Patients who started anti-PD(L)1 treatment at Gustave Roussy Cancer Centre between February 2012 and December 2015, and who received at least one line of CCT immediately before and immediately after anti-PD(L)1, were eligible. We analysed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR) of the CCT line immediately before (PFSpre/ORRpre) and after (PFSpost/ORRpost) anti-PD(L)1. PFS and ORR were compared using Wilcoxon signed rank and McNemar tests in a paired data subset for patients having received identical class of CCT pre and post anti-PD(L)1 therapy. RESULTS: Among 118 eligible patients, 65% received anti-PD1 and 35% anti-PD-L1 agents. Median PFSpre versus PFSpost was 4.7 versus 3.5 months (p = 0.011), respectively; it was 5.7 versus 6.8 months (NS) for patients who derived clinical benefit from immunotherapy and 3.9 versus 3.0 months (p = 0.012) for patients who were primary resistant to anti-PD(L)1 therapy. Subgroup analysis did not reveal any significant difference in PFS or ORR before versus after anti-PD(L)1 therapy according to CCT class or to its ability to induce immunogenic cell death. CONCLUSION:Patients who derive benefit from immune therapies tend to have better PFS on conventional therapies after having received the anti-PD(L)1 agent. Further studies on larger data sets are warranted to confirm these findings.
Authors: Lionel A Kankeu Fonkoua; Sakti Chakrabarti; Mohamad B Sonbol; Pashtoon M Kasi; Jason S Starr; Alex J Liu; Wendy K Nevala; Rachel L Maus; Melanie C Bois; Henry C Pitot; Chandrikha Chandrasekharan; Helen J Ross; Tsung-Teh Wu; Rondell P Graham; Jose C Villasboas; Matthias Weiss; Nathan R Foster; Svetomir N Markovic; Haidong Dong; Harry H Yoon Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2021-03-26 Impact factor: 7.316