Literature DB >> 34508005

Pharmacodynamic measures within tumors expose differential activity of PD(L)-1 antibody therapeutics.

Dhiraj Kumar1, Akhilesh Mishra1,2, Ala Lisok1, Rakeeb Kureshi2, Sagar Shelake1, Donika Plyku1, Rupashree Sen3,4, Michele Doucet3,4, Ravindra A De Silva1, Ronnie C Mease1, Patrick M Forde3,4, Elizabeth M Jaffee3,4, Prashant Desai5, Sudipto Ganguly3,4, Edward Gabrielson3,4,6, Dhananjay Vaidya7, Jamie B Spangler2,3,4, Sridhar Nimmagadda8,3,4,9,10.   

Abstract

Macromolecules such as monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are likely to experience poor tumor penetration because of their large size, and thus low drug exposure of target cells within a tumor could contribute to suboptimal responses. Given the challenge of inadequate quantitative tools to assess mAb activity within tumors, we hypothesized that measurement of accessible target levels in tumors could elucidate the pharmacologic activity of a mAb and could be used to compare the activity of different mAbs. Using positron emission tomography (PET), we measured the pharmacodynamics of immune checkpoint protein programmed-death ligand 1 (PD-L1) to evaluate pharmacologic effects of mAbs targeting PD-L1 and its receptor programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1). For PD-L1 quantification, we first developed a small peptide-based fluorine-18-labeled PET imaging agent, [18F]DK222, which provided high-contrast images in preclinical models. We then quantified accessible PD-L1 levels in the tumor bed during treatment with anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 mAbs. Applying mixed-effects models to these data, we found subtle differences in the pharmacodynamic effects of two anti-PD-1 mAbs (nivolumab and pembrolizumab). In contrast, we observed starkly divergent target engagement with anti-PD-L1 mAbs (atezolizumab, avelumab, and durvalumab) that were administered at equivalent doses, correlating with differential effects on tumor growth. Thus, we show that measuring PD-L1 pharmacodynamics informs mechanistic understanding of therapeutic mAbs targeting PD-L1 and PD-1. These findings demonstrate the value of quantifying target pharmacodynamics to elucidate the pharmacologic activity of mAbs, independent of mAb biophysical properties and inclusive of all physiological variables, which are highly heterogeneous within and across tumors and patients.

Entities:  

Keywords:  PET; drug disposition; immune checkpoint therapy; pharmacodynamics; pharmacokinetics

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34508005      PMCID: PMC8449349          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2107982118

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   12.779


  42 in total

Review 1.  Translational PET imaging research.

Authors:  Richard J Hargreaves; Eugenii A Rabiner
Journal:  Neurobiol Dis       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 5.996

Review 2.  Clinical Pharmacology Considerations for the Development of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Authors:  Jennifer Sheng; Shivani Srivastava; Kinjal Sanghavi; Zheng Lu; Brian J Schmidt; Akintunde Bello; Manish Gupta
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 3.126

3.  Trends in clinical development for PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors.

Authors:  Jia Xin Yu; Jeffrey P Hodge; Cristina Oliva; Svetoslav T Neftelinov; Vanessa M Hubbard-Lucey; Jun Tang
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 84.694

4.  Improved 18F labeling of peptides with a fluoride-aluminum-chelate complex.

Authors:  William J McBride; Christopher A D'Souza; Robert M Sharkey; Habibe Karacay; Edmund A Rossi; Chien-Hsing Chang; David M Goldenberg
Journal:  Bioconjug Chem       Date:  2010-07-21       Impact factor: 4.774

Review 5.  Barriers to drug delivery in solid tumors.

Authors:  R K Jain
Journal:  Sci Am       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 2.142

6.  Immuno-oncology Trial Endpoints: Capturing Clinically Meaningful Activity.

Authors:  Valsamo Anagnostou; Mark Yarchoan; Aaron R Hansen; Hao Wang; Franco Verde; Elad Sharon; Deborah Collyar; Laura Q M Chow; Patrick M Forde
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 12.531

7.  A humanized antibody for imaging immune checkpoint ligand PD-L1 expression in tumors.

Authors:  Samit Chatterjee; Wojciech G Lesniak; Matthew Gabrielson; Ala Lisok; Bryan Wharram; Polina Sysa-Shah; Babak Behnam Azad; Martin G Pomper; Sridhar Nimmagadda
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2016-03-01

8.  Distinct PD-L1 binding characteristics of therapeutic monoclonal antibody durvalumab.

Authors:  Shuguang Tan; Kefang Liu; Yan Chai; Catherine W-H Zhang; Shan Gao; George F Gao; Jianxun Qi
Journal:  Protein Cell       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 14.870

9.  Whole body PD-1 and PD-L1 positron emission tomography in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  A N Niemeijer; D Leung; M C Huisman; I Bahce; O S Hoekstra; G A M S van Dongen; R Boellaard; S Du; W Hayes; R Smith; A D Windhorst; N H Hendrikse; A Poot; D J Vugts; E Thunnissen; P Morin; D Lipovsek; D J Donnelly; S J Bonacorsi; L M Velasquez; T D de Gruijl; E F Smit; A J de Langen
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2018-11-07       Impact factor: 14.919

10.  Development of [18F]FPy-WL12 as a PD-L1 Specific PET Imaging Peptide.

Authors:  Wojciech G Lesniak; Ronnie C Mease; Samit Chatterjee; Dhiraj Kumar; Ala Lisok; Bryan Wharram; Venkateswara Rao Kalagadda; Leisha A Emens; Martin G Pomper; Sridhar Nimmagadda
Journal:  Mol Imaging       Date:  2019 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 4.488

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Checkpoint Inhibition in Bladder Cancer: Clinical Expectations, Current Evidence, and Proposal of Future Strategies Based on a Tumor-Specific Immunobiological Approach.

Authors:  Mariangela Mancini; Marialaura Righetto; Elfriede Noessner
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 6.639

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.