scholarly journals Response to anti-PD1 immunotherapy in patients with metastatic cutaneous sarcoma: case reports and literature review

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aline Cristini Vieira ◽  
Thais Baccili Cury Megid ◽  
Raissa Melo ◽  
David Muniz ◽  
Alessandra Corte Real Salgues ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Case Reports ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Surgical Excision ◽  
Predictive Biomarker ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Blockade ◽  
Targeted Agents ◽  
Mutational Burden ◽  
Metastatic Setting ◽  
Tumor Mutational Burden

Abstract Dermal sarcomas represent a group or rare malignancies of mesenchymal origin. Although surgical excision with wide margins can be curative, in the advanced/metastatic setting, treatment options are limited and the benefit from anthracycline-based chemotherapy or targeted agents is usually short-lived. Tumor mutational burden and PD-L1 expression scores can be used as predictive biomarker for response to immunotherapy in some metastatic cancers. The role of immune-checkpoint blockade for sarcoma patients remains investigational. Here we present three cases of dermal sarcomas with high TMB and PD-L1 expression and responses to anti-PD1 agents in two of them.

scholarly journals Tumor mutational burden assessment in non-small-cell lung cancer samples: results from the TMB2 harmonization project comparing three NGS panels

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. e001904
Author(s):  
Javier Ramos-Paradas ◽  
Susana Hernández-Prieto ◽  
David Lora ◽  
Elena Sanchez ◽  
Aranzazu Rosado ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Predictive Biomarker ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Mutational Burden ◽  
Reproducibility Study ◽  
Tumor Mutational Burden

BackgroundTumor mutational burden (TMB) is a recently proposed predictive biomarker for immunotherapy in solid tumors, including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Available assays for TMB determination differ in horizontal coverage, gene content and algorithms, leading to discrepancies in results, impacting patient selection. A harmonization study of TMB assessment with available assays in a cohort of patients with NSCLC is urgently needed.MethodsWe evaluated the TMB assessment obtained with two marketed next generation sequencing panels: TruSight Oncology 500 (TSO500) and Oncomine Tumor Mutation Load (OTML) versus a reference assay (Foundation One, FO) in 96 NSCLC samples. Additionally, we studied the level of agreement among the three methods with respect to PD-L1 expression in tumors, checked the level of different immune infiltrates versus TMB, and performed an inter-laboratory reproducibility study. Finally, adjusted cut-off values were determined.ResultsBoth panels showed strong agreement with FO, with concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) of 0.933 (95% CI 0.908 to 0.959) for TSO500 and 0.881 (95% CI 0.840 to 0.922) for OTML. The corresponding CCCs were 0.951 (TSO500-FO) and 0.919 (OTML-FO) in tumors with <1% of cells expressing PD-L1 (PD-L1<1%; N=55), and 0.861 (TSO500-FO) and 0.722 (OTML-FO) in tumors with PD-L1≥1% (N=41). Inter-laboratory reproducibility analyses showed higher reproducibility with TSO500. No significant differences were found in terms of immune infiltration versus TMB. Adjusted cut-off values corresponding to 10 muts/Mb with FO needed to be lowered to 7.847 muts/Mb (TSO500) and 8.380 muts/Mb (OTML) to ensure a sensitivity >88%. With these cut-offs, the positive predictive value was 78.57% (95% CI 67.82 to 89.32) and the negative predictive value was 87.50% (95% CI 77.25 to 97.75) for TSO500, while for OTML they were 73.33% (95% CI 62.14 to 84.52) and 86.11% (95% CI 74.81 to 97.41), respectively.ConclusionsBoth panels exhibited robust analytical performances for TMB assessment, with stronger concordances in patients with negative PD-L1 expression. TSO500 showed a higher inter-laboratory reproducibility. The cut-offs for each assay were lowered to optimal overlap with FO.

scholarly journals Wedding of Molecular Alterations and Immune Checkpoint Blockade: Genomics as a Matchmaker

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Fountzilas ◽  
Razelle Kurzrock ◽  
Henry Hiep Vo ◽  
Apostolia-Maria Tsimberidou
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Mechanisms ◽  
Cell Receptor ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Blockade ◽  
Checkpoint Blockade ◽  
Beta Catenin ◽  
Molecular Alterations ◽  
Receptor Repertoire ◽  
Repair Deficiency ◽  
Tumor Mutational Burden

Abstract The development of checkpoint blockade immunotherapy has transformed the medical oncology armamentarium. But, despite its favorable impact on clinical outcomes, immunotherapy benefits only a subset of patients, and a substantial proportion of these individuals eventually manifest resistance. Serious immune-related adverse events and hyper-progression have also been reported. It is therefore essential to understand the molecular mechanisms and identify the drivers of therapeutic response and resistance. In this review, we provide an overview of the current and emerging clinically relevant genomic biomarkers implicated in checkpoint blockade outcome. U.S. Food and Drug Administration–approved molecular biomarkers of immunotherapy response include mismatch repair deficiency/microsatellite instability and tumor mutational burden ≥10 mutations/megabase. Investigational genomic-associated biomarkers for immunotherapy response include alterations of the following genes/associated pathways: chromatin remodeling (ARID1A, PBRM1, SMARCA4, SMARCB1, BAP1), major histocompatibility complex, specific (e.g., ultraviolet, APOBEC) mutational signatures, T-cell receptor repertoire, PDL1, POLE/POLD1, and neo-antigens produced by the mutanome; those potentially associated with resistance include β2-microglobulin, EGFR, Keap1, JAK1/JAK2/interferon-gamma signaling, MDM2, PTEN, STK11, and Wnt/Beta-catenin pathway alterations. Prospective clinical trials are needed to assess the role of a composite of these biomarkers in order to optimize the implementation of precision immunotherapy in patient care.

scholarly journals Immunotherapy in Adrenocortical Carcinoma: Predictors of Response, Efficacy, Safety, and Mechanisms of Resistance

Biomedicines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 304
Author(s):  
Marta Araujo-Castro ◽  
Eider Pascual-Corrales ◽  
Javier Molina-Cerrillo ◽  
Teresa Alonso-Gordoa
Keyword(s):  
Adrenocortical Carcinoma ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Mechanisms Of Resistance ◽  
Response Efficacy ◽  
Predictors Of Response ◽  
Primary Endpoints ◽  
Tumor Mutational Burden

Adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is a rare endocrine malignancy with limited treatment options in the advanced stages. Immunotherapy offers hope for altering the orthodox management of cancer, and its role in advanced ACC has been investigated in different studies. With the aim clarifying the role of immunotherapy in ACC we performed a comprehensive review about this topic focusing on the predictors of response, efficacy, safety, and the mechanisms of resistance. Five clinical trials with four immune checkpoint inhibitors (pembrolizumab, avelumab, nivolumab, and ipilimumab) have investigated the role of immunotherapy in advanced ACC. Despite, the different primary endpoints used in these studies, the reported rates of overall response rate and progression free survival were generally poor. Three main potential markers of response to immunotherapy in ACC have been described: Expression of PD-1 and PD-L1, microsatellite instability and tumor mutational burden. However, none of them has been validated in prospective studies. Several mechanisms of ACC immunoevasion may be responsible of immunotherapy failure, and a greater knowledge of these mechanisms might lead to the development of new strategies to overcome the immunotherapy resistance. In conclusion, although currently the role of immunotherapy is limited, the identification of immunological markers of response and the implementation of strategies to avoid immunotherapy resistance could improve the efficacy of this therapy.

Tumor Mutational Burden and PD-L1 Expression in Hematologic Malignancies

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 15-17
Author(s):  
Sean D Thomas ◽  
Ah-Reum Jeong ◽  
Patrick J Sakowski ◽  
Ethan S Sokol ◽  
Razelle Kurzrock ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Tumor Cells ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Hematologic Malignancies ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Blockade ◽  
Checkpoint Blockade ◽  
Private Company ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Mutational Burden ◽  
Tumor Mutational Burden

Introduction: The activity of immune checkpoint blockade including anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein-4 and anti-programmed cell death protein-1 monoclonal antibodies in hematologic malignancies is limited outside of classical Hodgkin lymphoma and primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma. Tumor mutational burden (TMB), programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression, and microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) are well-established biomarkers predicting response to checkpoint blockade in solid malignancies. In addition, tumors with high TMB, defined as ≥10 mutations/megabase (mut/Mb), and/or MSI-H are Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved tissue agnostic biomarkers for treatment with pembrolizumab. The frequencies of high TMB, MSI-H, and expression pattern of PD-L1 across specific hematologic malignancies are undefined. Methods: Patients with hematologic malignancies who had next generation sequencing (NGS) performed by Foundation One Heme were identified. TMB and MSI were measured by NGS. TMB was classified as high if ≥10 mut/Mb and low if &lt;10 mut/Mb. When available, PD-L1 expression on tumor cells by immunohistochemistry (IHC) was also collected. PD-L1 IHC was performed with either Ventana (SP142) PD-L1 antibody or Dako (22C3) PD-L1 antibody. Scores were classified as high (≥ 50%), low (1-49%), and negative (&lt;1%) based on the percent of tumor cells staining positive for PD-L1. Pathology reports were retrospectively re-reviewed to determine the diagnosis. Results: A total of 390 patients with hematologic malignancies with NGS were identified. Forty eight of the 390 samples (12%) had a high TMB (Table 1). Twenty five of 45 (56%) patients with DLBCL had a high TMB (Table 2). The TMB was low in all myeloid malignancies tested. None of the 302 samples tested were MSI-H. PD-L1 IHC was performed on 86 samples. Eleven (13%) had high expression, 26 (30%) had low expression, and 49 (57%) had no expression of PD-L1 on the tumor cells (Table 1). The majority of samples with PD-L1 expression were mature lymphomas (81%). TMB and PD-L1 score had a significant linear relationship (R = 0.22,p= 0.04, 95% CI 0.01 - 0.41) (Figure 1). Conclusion: This study provides detailed characteristics of TMB, MSI status, and PD-L1 expression for hematologic malignancies. Notably, a subset of lymphomas had high TMB and/or PD-L1 expression. Biomarker driven studies of checkpoint blockade in hematologic malignancies with high TMB and/or PD-L1 expression are warranted. Disclosures Sokol: Foundation Medicine:Current Employment;Roche:Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.Kurzrock:Medimmune:Research Funding;Foundation Medicine:Research Funding;Konica Minolta:Research Funding;IDbyDNA:Current equity holder in private company;Pfizer:Consultancy, Research Funding;Sequenom:Research Funding;Bicara Therapeutics, Inc.:Consultancy;Incyte:Research Funding;Takeda:Research Funding;TopAlliance:Research Funding;Boehringer Ingelheim:Research Funding;CureMatch Inc:Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Grifols:Research Funding;Guardant:Research Funding;X Biotech:Consultancy;Neomed:Consultancy;Actuate Therapeutics:Consultancy;Roche:Consultancy;Merck Serono:Research Funding;Genentech:Research Funding;Debiopharm:Research Funding;CureMetrix:Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;OmniSeq:Research Funding;TD2/Volastra:Consultancy;Turning Point Therapeutics:Consultancy.Goodman:EUSA Pharma:Consultancy;Seattle Genetics:Consultancy.

scholarly journals CURRENT THERAPEUTIC OPTIONS FOR CORONAVIRUS DISEASE-2019 – A PHARMACOLOGICAL REVIEW

2020 ◽  
pp. 42-50
Author(s):  
SASMI MB ◽  
MARIA JOSE ◽  
PRAVEENLAL KUTTICHIRA
Keyword(s):  
Case Reports ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Therapeutic Options ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Global Public Health ◽  
Medical Subject Headings ◽  
Published Evidence

Objectives: Coronavirus pandemic is currently a global public health emergency. With expanding knowledge of the virus and the disease, new therapeutic targets are emerging widely. There is limited evidence about the use of different treatment options in coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). This review aims to summarize the available evidence regarding therapeutic options in treating coronavirus infection. Methods: We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane library using pre-specified Medical Subject Headings terms about the role of therapeutic options in COVID-19 patients. Results: The majority of the published evidence is either case reports or small observational studies. Antimalarial like hydroxychloroquine reported equivocal results with five studies got positive results and five without any added benefit compared with standard of care. Lopinavir/ ritonavir monotherapy does not show any significant role except in combination with other antiviral drugs but encouraging results are emerging with remdesivir. Studies with favipiravir are inconclusive with some exhibit benefit and others not. Limited case series have shown that tocilizumab and convalescent plasma to be useful as adjuvant therapy in critically ill patients. Conclusion: There is currently no strong evidence for the efficacy of different therapeutic agents in the treatment of COVID-19. More data from ongoing and future trials will add more insight into the role of various drugs.

scholarly journals From Tumor Mutational Burden to Blood T Cell Receptor: Looking for the Best Predictive Biomarker in Lung Cancer Treated with Immunotherapy

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 2974
Author(s):  
Andrea Sesma ◽  
Julián Pardo ◽  
Mara Cruellas ◽  
Eva M. Gálvez ◽  
Marta Gascón ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
T Cell ◽  
T Cell Receptor ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Predictive Biomarker ◽  
Cell Receptor ◽  
Mutational Burden ◽  
Tcr Repertoire ◽  
Tumor Mutational Burden ◽  
Tumor Immunogenicity

Despite therapeutic advances, lung cancer (LC) is one of the leading causes of cancer morbidity and mortality worldwide. Recently, the treatment of advanced LC has experienced important changes in survival benefit due to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, overall response rates (ORR) remain low in unselected patients and a large proportion of patients undergo disease progression in the first weeks of treatment. Therefore, there is a need of biomarkers to identify patients who will benefit from ICIs. The programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression has been the first biomarker developed. However, its use as a robust predictive biomarker has been limited due to the variability of techniques used, with different antibodies and thresholds. In this context, tumor mutational burden (TMB) has emerged as an additional powerful biomarker based on the observation of successful response to ICIs in solid tumors with high TMB. TMB can be defined as the total number of nonsynonymous mutations per DNA megabases being a mechanism generating neoantigens conditioning the tumor immunogenicity and response to ICIs. However, the latest data provide conflicting results regarding its role as a biomarker. Moreover, considering the results of the recent data, the use of peripheral blood T cell receptor (TCR) repertoire could be a new predictive biomarker. This review summarises recent findings describing the clinical utility of TMB and TCRβ (TCRB) and concludes that immune, neontigen, and checkpoint targeted variables are required in combination for accurately identifying patients who most likely will benefit of ICIs.

scholarly journals Tumor mutational burden as a predictive biomarker for checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Lee ◽  
Robert M. Samstein ◽  
Cristina Valero ◽  
Timothy A. Chan ◽  
Luc G.T. Morris
Keyword(s):  
Checkpoint Inhibitor ◽  
Predictive Biomarker ◽  
Mutational Burden ◽  
Tumor Mutational Burden

Pembrolizumab (P) in patients (pts) with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with high tumor mutational burden (HTMB): Results from the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) Study.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1014-1014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ajjai Shivaram Alva ◽  
Pam K. Mangat ◽  
Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer ◽  
Susan Halabi ◽  
Ricardo H. Alvarez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Checkpoint Inhibitor ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Predictive Biomarker ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Tumor Mutational Burden ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
Anti Tumor Activity

1014 Background: TAPUR is a phase II basket study evaluating the anti-tumor activity of commercially available targeted agents in pts with advanced cancers with specific genomic alterations. P is an immune checkpoint inhibitor and HTMB is an emerging predictive biomarker for checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Results in a cohort of MBC pts with HTMB treated with P are reported. Methods: Eligible pts had advanced cancer, no standard treatment options, ECOG PS 0-1, measurable disease and acceptable organ function. Genomic testing was performed using commercially available tests selected by sites. Pts matched to P had HTMB defined as ≥9 mutations/megabase (Muts/Mb) by a FoundationOne test (n=20) or approved by the TAPUR Molecular Tumor Board for other tests (n=8). A Simon two-stage design was used to test a null rate of 15% vs. 35% (power = 0.85; α = 0.10). If ≥2 of 10 pts in stage 1 have disease control (DC) (objective response (OR) or stable disease at 16 weeks (wks) (SD16+)), an additional 18 pts are enrolled. If ≥7 of 28 pts have DC, the drug is considered worthy of further study. Secondary endpoints are progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. Results: Twenty-eight female MBC pts were enrolled from October 2016 to July 2018. Pts received P at 2 mg/kg (n=8) or 200 mg (n=20) IV over 30 minutes, every 3 wks. HTMB ranged from 9 to 37 Muts/Mb. Demographics and outcomes are summarized in Table (N=28). No relationship was observed between #Muts/Mb and PFS or OS. Two grade 3 AEs (weight loss and hypoalbuminemia) and 1 grade 2 SAE (urinary tract infection) were reported as at least possibly related to P. Conclusions: P demonstrated anti-tumor activity in heavily pre-treated MBC pts with HTMB . Additional study of P is warranted in MBC pts with HTMB. Clinical trial information: NCT02693535. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document