Ioannis A Voutsadakis1,2. 1. Algoma District Cancer Program, Sault Area Hospital, 750 Great Northern Road, Sault Ste Marie, ON, P6B 0A8, Canada. ivoutsadakis@yahoo.com. 2. Section of Internal Medicine, Division of Clinical Sciences, Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Sudbury, ON, Canada. ivoutsadakis@yahoo.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The recent development of effective immunotherapies with immune checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of cancer has rekindled the interest for the immune system and its activation for an anti-cancer response. At the same time, it has become evident that not all types of cancers respond equally to these treatments, and even within the same tumor type only a subset of patients derive clinical benefit. Biomarkers predictive of response to immunotherapy have been sought and in certain occasions incorporated in the indication for treatment. These include expression of PD-L1 and defects in DNA mismatch repair (MMR). OBJECTIVE: Tumor mutation burden (TMB) has been associated with response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. The current investigation examines TMB as a biomarker of response to immunotherapy in breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Publicly available data from the breast cancer study of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the METABRIC study were analyzed. Parameters examined included the TMB and specific mutations that may impact on TMB. In addition, correlations with breast cancer sub-types were investigated. RESULTS: The percentage of breast cancers with high TMB (more than 192 mutations per sample) was low (3.5-4.6%) in luminal and triple-negative cancers and higher (14.1%) in the HER2-positive subset. Almost all cancers with high TMB had defects in MMR proteins or the replicative polymerases POLE and POLD1. CONCLUSIONS: Small sub-sets of breast cancers with high TMB exist and may present an opportunity for effective immunotherapeutic targeting.
BACKGROUND: The recent development of effective immunotherapies with immune checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of cancer has rekindled the interest for the immune system and its activation for an anti-cancer response. At the same time, it has become evident that not all types of cancers respond equally to these treatments, and even within the same tumor type only a subset of patients derive clinical benefit. Biomarkers predictive of response to immunotherapy have been sought and in certain occasions incorporated in the indication for treatment. These include expression of PD-L1 and defects in DNA mismatch repair (MMR). OBJECTIVE: Tumor mutation burden (TMB) has been associated with response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. The current investigation examines TMB as a biomarker of response to immunotherapy in breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Publicly available data from the breast cancer study of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the METABRIC study were analyzed. Parameters examined included the TMB and specific mutations that may impact on TMB. In addition, correlations with breast cancer sub-types were investigated. RESULTS: The percentage of breast cancers with high TMB (more than 192 mutations per sample) was low (3.5-4.6%) in luminal and triple-negative cancers and higher (14.1%) in the HER2-positive subset. Almost all cancers with high TMB had defects in MMR proteins or the replicative polymerases POLE and POLD1. CONCLUSIONS: Small sub-sets of breast cancers with high TMB exist and may present an opportunity for effective immunotherapeutic targeting.
Authors: Alexandra Snyder; Vladimir Makarov; Taha Merghoub; Jianda Yuan; Jedd D Wolchok; Timothy A Chan; Jesse M Zaretsky; Alexis Desrichard; Logan A Walsh; Michael A Postow; Phillip Wong; Teresa S Ho; Travis J Hollmann; Cameron Bruggeman; Kasthuri Kannan; Yanyun Li; Ceyhan Elipenahli; Cailian Liu; Christopher T Harbison; Lisu Wang; Antoni Ribas Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-11-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Aaron M Goodman; Shumei Kato; Lyudmila Bazhenova; Sandip P Patel; Garrett M Frampton; Vincent Miller; Philip J Stephens; Gregory A Daniels; Razelle Kurzrock Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2017-08-23 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Eliezer M Van Allen; Diana Miao; Bastian Schilling; Sachet A Shukla; Christian Blank; Lisa Zimmer; Antje Sucker; Uwe Hillen; Marnix H Geukes Foppen; Simone M Goldinger; Jochen Utikal; Jessica C Hassel; Benjamin Weide; Katharina C Kaehler; Carmen Loquai; Peter Mohr; Ralf Gutzmer; Reinhard Dummer; Stacey Gabriel; Catherine J Wu; Dirk Schadendorf; Levi A Garraway Journal: Science Date: 2015-09-10 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Dung T Le; Jennifer N Uram; Hao Wang; Bjarne R Bartlett; Holly Kemberling; Aleksandra D Eyring; Andrew D Skora; Brandon S Luber; Nilofer S Azad; Dan Laheru; Barbara Biedrzycki; Ross C Donehower; Atif Zaheer; George A Fisher; Todd S Crocenzi; James J Lee; Steven M Duffy; Richard M Goldberg; Albert de la Chapelle; Minori Koshiji; Feriyl Bhaijee; Thomas Huebner; Ralph H Hruban; Laura D Wood; Nathan Cuka; Drew M Pardoll; Nickolas Papadopoulos; Kenneth W Kinzler; Shibin Zhou; Toby C Cornish; Janis M Taube; Robert A Anders; James R Eshleman; Bert Vogelstein; Luis A Diaz Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-05-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael J Overman; Sara Lonardi; Ka Yeung Mark Wong; Heinz-Josef Lenz; Fabio Gelsomino; Massimo Aglietta; Michael A Morse; Eric Van Cutsem; Ray McDermott; Andrew Hill; Michael B Sawyer; Alain Hendlisz; Bart Neyns; Magali Svrcek; Rebecca A Moss; Jean-Marie Ledeine; Z Alexander Cao; Shital Kamble; Scott Kopetz; Thierry André Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-01-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Naiyer A Rizvi; Matthew D Hellmann; Alexandra Snyder; Pia Kvistborg; Vladimir Makarov; Jonathan J Havel; William Lee; Jianda Yuan; Phillip Wong; Teresa S Ho; Martin L Miller; Natasha Rekhtman; Andre L Moreira; Fawzia Ibrahim; Cameron Bruggeman; Billel Gasmi; Roberta Zappasodi; Yuka Maeda; Chris Sander; Edward B Garon; Taha Merghoub; Jedd D Wolchok; Ton N Schumacher; Timothy A Chan Journal: Science Date: 2015-03-12 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Leandro M Colli; Mitchell J Machiela; Timothy A Myers; Lea Jessop; Kai Yu; Stephen J Chanock Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2016-05-18 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Lauren G Aoude; Vanessa F Bonazzi; Sandra Brosda; Kalpana Patel; Lambros T Koufariotis; Harald Oey; Katia Nones; Scott Wood; John V Pearson; James M Lonie; Melissa Arneil; Victoria Atkinson; B Mark Smithers; Nicola Waddell; Andrew P Barbour Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-10-19 Impact factor: 4.379