| Literature DB >> 32365882 |
Giovanni Rossi1,2, Alessandro Russo3, Marco Tagliamento1, Alessandro Tuzi4, Olga Nigro4, Giacomo Vallome1, Claudio Sini5, Massimiliano Grassi1, Maria Giovanna Dal Bello1, Simona Coco1, Luca Longo1, Lodovica Zullo1, Enrica Teresa Tanda6, Chiara Dellepiane1, Paolo Pronzato1, Carlo Genova1.
Abstract
In recent years, the evolution of treatments has made it possible to significantly improve the outcomes of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In particular, while molecular targeted therapies are effective in specific patient sub-groups, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have greatly influenced the outcomes of a large proportion of NSCLC patients. While nivolumab activity was initially assessed irrespective of predictive biomarkers, subsequent pivotal studies involving other PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in pre-treated advanced NSCLC (atezolizumab within the OAK study and pembrolizumab in the Keynote 010 study) reported the first correlations between clinical outcomes and PD-L1 expression. However, PD-L1 could not be sufficient on its own to select patients who may benefit from immunotherapy. Many studies have tried to discover more precise markers that are derived from tumor tissue or from peripheral blood. This review aims to analyze any characteristics of the immunogram that could be used as a predictive biomarker for response to ICIs. Furthermore, we describe the most important genetic alteration that might predict the activity of immunotherapy.Entities:
Keywords: NSCLC; PD-L1; POLE; PTEN inactivation; STK11; T-Cell clonality; biomarker; immune checkpoint inhibitor; tumor mutational burden
Year: 2020 PMID: 32365882 PMCID: PMC7281184 DOI: 10.3390/cancers12051125
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Characteristics of main studies with efficacy evaluation according to PD-L1 expression in the advanced setting.
| Study | Population ( | Treatment | Method | Cut-Off(s) | Main Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Borghaei H, 2015 (CheckMate-057) [ | 455 previously treated advanced non-squamous NSCLC evaluable for PD-L1 | Nivolumab (vs. docetaxel) | IHC 28-8 | TPS ≥ 1%, 5%, 10% | Association with longer OS, PFS, ORR, DOR at all cut-offs (secondary endpoints) |
| Herbst R, 2016 (KEYNOTE-010) [ | 1034 previously treated NSCLC with PD-L1 at least ≥ 1% | Pembrolizumab (vs. docetaxel) | IHC 22C3 | TPS ≥ 1%, 50% | Association with longer OS at all cut-offs and longer PFS only at 50% cut-off (primary endpoints) |
| Rittmeyer A, 2016 (OAK) [ | 850 previously treated NSCLC evaluated for PD-L1 expression | Atezolizumab (vs. docetaxel) | IHC SP142 | TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 | Association with longer OS at all cut-offs (coprimary endpoint) |
| Brahmer J, 2015 (CheckMate-017) [ | 225 previously treated squamous-cell lung cancer evaluable for PD-L1 | Nivolumab (vs. docetaxel) | IHC 28-8 | TPS ≥ 1%, 5%, 10% | Association with longer OS, PFS at all cutoffs but no ORR (secondary endpoints) |
| Reck M, 2018 (KEYNOTE-024) [ | 305 untreated NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥ 50% | Pembrolizumab (vs. platinum-based CT) | IHC 22C3 | TPS ≥ 50% | Association with longer OS (primary endpoints) |
| Gandhi L, 2018 (KEYNOTE-189) [ | 616 untreated non-squamous NSCLC | Pembrolizumab/platinum/pemetrexed (vs. platinum/pemetrexed) | IHC 22C3 | TPS ≥ 1% | Association with longer OS and PFS regardless of PD-L1 (exploratory endpoints) |
| Paz-Ares L, 2018 (KEYNOTE-407) [ | 559 untreated squamous-cell lung cancer | Pembrolizumab/ | IHC 22C3 | TPS ≥ 1% | Association with longer OS and PFS regardless of PD-L1 (exploratory endpoints) |
| Socinski M, 2018 (IMPOWER-150) [ | 692 untreated non-squamous NSCLC evaluated for PD-L1 expression | Atezolizumab/carboplatin/paclitaxel/bevacizumab (vs. carboplatin/paclitaxel/bevacizumab) | IHC SP142 | TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 | Association with longer PFS at all cut-offs (secondary endpoint) |
NSCLC: non-small cell lung cancer; IHC: immunohistochemistry; TPS: tumor proportion score; OS: overall survival; PFS: progression-free survival; ORR: objective response rate; DOR: duration or response; TC/IC: tumor cells or tumor-infiltrating immune cell.
Studies and meta-analyses evaluating tissue TMB in advanced NSCLC patients treated with ICIs.
| Study | Population ( | Treatment | Method(s) | Cut-Off | Main Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rizvi et al. [ | 16 = discovery cohort 18 = validation cohort | Pembrolizumab | WES | Median observed TMB value (209 non-synchronous mutations) | High TMS was associated with longer PFS, both in discovery and validation cohort ( |
| Rizvi et al. [ | 240 | Anti-PD-1 alone or in combination with anti-CTLA-4 | Targeted NGS (MSK-IMPACT) | Median observed TMB value (7.4 SNVs/Mb) | High TMB was associated with durable clinical benefit independently from PD-L1 expression. |
| Carbone et al. (CHECKMATE 026) [ | 312 | Nivolumab vs. platinum-based chemotherapy | WES | Low: 0–99 mutations | PFS and ORR were significantly higher with nivolumab in the subgroup of patients with high TMB. |
| Legrand et al. [ | 342 | Atezolizumab | FoundationOne CDx assay WES | 16 mutations/Mb | High TMB was associated with improved ORR and DoR. |
| Herbst et al. [ | 1046 (793 from KEYNOTE-042 and 253 from KEYNOTE-010) | Pembrolizumab vs. chemotherapy | WES | 175 mutations/exome | high TMB was associated with improved response and survival with immunotherapy but not with chemotherapy. |
| Hellmann et al. (CHECKMATE 227) [ | 299 | Ipilimumab-nivolumab vs. chemotherapy | FoundationOne CDx assay WES | 10 mutations/Mb | In the population of patients with high TMB, ipilimumab-nivolumab was associated with improved PFS over chemotherapy. However, ipilimumab-nivolumab was associated with improved OS over chemotherapy irrespective of TMB. |
| Paz-Ares et al. [ | 675 (70 from KEYNOTE-021; 293 from KEYNOTE-189; 312 from KEYNOTE-407) | Platinum-based chemotherapy with or without pembrolizumab | WES | 175 mutations/exome | The benefit from addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy in terms of PFS, OS, and ORR was independent from TMB. |
Abbreviations: CTLA-4, Cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4; DoR, duration of response; NGS, next generation sequencing; OS, overall survival; PD-1, programmed death protein 1; ORR, objective response rate; PFS, progression-free survival; TMB, tumor mutational burden; WES, whole exon sequencing.
Studies evaluating ctDNA dynamics in advanced NSCLC patients treated with ICIs.
| Study | Population ( | Treatment | Method(s) | Definition of Molecular Response | Main Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anagnostou V, 2019 [ | Metastatic NSCLC (24) | ICIs * | TEC-Seq | Dramatic reduction in ctDNA to undetectable levels | Molecular response was associated with longer PFS ( |
| Stage I-III NSCLC (14) | Neo-adjuvant nivolumab | Molecular response was associated with major or partial pathological response | |||
| ALCINA [ | NSCLC (10), UM (3), MSI-high CRC (2) | PD-1 inhibitors | ddPCR, bi-PAP, NGS | ctDNA levels undetectable at 8 weeks | ctDNA detection at week 8 significant prognostic factor for PFS ( |
| Giroux Leprieur E, 2018 [ | Stage IIIB/IV NSCLC (15) | Nivolumab | NGS | 30% decrease of ctDNA levels at the first tumor evaluation | 9% increase of ctDNA |
| Goldberg SB, 2018 [ | Metastatic NSCLC (28) | Pembrolizumab | NGS | >50% decrease in VAF from baseline | ctDNA response was associated with longer time on treatment ( |
| Iijima Y, 2017 [ | Advanced NSCLC (14) | Nivolumab | NGS | Decreased VAF at 2 weeks | Decreased VAF at 2 weeks correlated with tumor response |
| Li L, 2019 [ | Stage III/IV NSCLC (12) | Pembrolizumab | NGS | - | Maximum somatic allele frequency (MSAF) changes correlated with tumor response |
| Passiglia F, 2019 [ | Stage IV NSCLC (45) | Nivolumab | qPCR | 20% increase of cfDNA at 6 weeks used for molecular progression | cfDNA increase >20% at 6 weeks associated with worse OS ( |
* PD-1 inhibitors as single agent (21) or in combination with CTLA-4 inhibitor (1), LAG3 inhibitor (1) or chemotherapy (3). Abbreviations: TEC-Seq, Targeted Error Corrected sequencing; ctDNA, circulating tumor DNA; UM, uveal melanoma; MSI, microsatellite instability; CRC colorectal cancer; ddPCR, droplet-digital polymerase chain reaction; bi-PAP, bidirectional pyrophosphorolysis activated polymerization; NGS, next generation sequencing; AUC, area under the curve; ROC, Receiver Operating Characteristic; VAF, variant allele frequency; qPCR, quantitative polymerase chain reaction; cfDNA, cell free DNA; TTP, time to progression.