From mice to humans: Developments in cancer immunoediting

Cancer immunoediting explains the dual role by which the immune system can both suppress and/or promote tumor growth. Although cancer immunoediting was first demonstrated using mouse models of cancer, strong evidence that it occurs in human cancers is now accumulating. In particular, the importance of CD8+ T cells in cancer immunoediting has been shown, and more broadly in those tumors with an adaptive immune resistance phenotype. This Review describes the characteristics of the adaptive immune resistance tumor microenvironment and discusses data obtained in mouse and human settings. The role of other immune cells and factors influencing the effector function of tumor-specific CD8+ T cells is covered. We also discuss the temporal occurrence of cancer immunoediting in metastases and whether it differs from immunoediting in the primary tumor of origin

Trial watch: Chemotherapy with immunogenic cell death inducers

The long-established notion that apoptosis would be immunologically silent, and hence it would go unnoticed by the immune system, if not tolerogenic, and hence it would actively suppress immune responses, has recently been revisited. In some instances, indeed, cancer cells undergo apoptosis while emitting a spatiotemporally-defined combination of signals that renders them capable of eliciting a long-term protective antitumor immune response. Importantly, only a few anticancer agents can stimulate such an immunogenic cell death. These include cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and oxaliplatin, which are currently approved by FDA for the treatment of multiple hematologic and solid malignancies, as well as mitoxantrone, which is being used in cancer therapy and against multiple sclerosis. In this Trial Watch, we will review and discuss the progress of recent (initiated after January 2008) clinical trials evaluating the off-label use of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, oxaliplatin and mitoxantrone

Trial Watch: Adoptive cell transfer immunotherapy

During the last two decades, several approaches for the activation of the immune system against cancer have been developed. These include rather unselective maneuvers such as the systemic administration of immunostimulatory agents (e.g., interleukin-2) as well as targeted interventions, encompassing highly specific monoclonal antibodies, vaccines and cell-based therapies. Among the latter, adoptive cell transfer (ACT) involves the selection of autologous lymphocytes with antitumor activity, their expansion/activation ex vivo, and their reinfusion into the patient, often in the context of lymphodepleting regimens (to minimize endogenous immunosuppression). Such autologous cells can be isolated from tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes or generated by manipulating circulating lymphocytes for the expression of tumor-specific T-cell receptors. In addition, autologous lymphocytes can be genetically engineered to prolong their in vivo persistence, to boost antitumor responses and/or to minimize side effects. ACT has recently been shown to be associated with a consistent rate of durable regressions in melanoma and renal cell carcinoma patients and holds great promises in several other oncological settings. In this Trial Watch, we will briefly review the scientific rationale behind ACT and discuss the progress of recent clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of adoptive cell transfer as an anticancer therapy

The Great Debate at \u27Immunotherapy Bridge\u27, Naples, December 5, 2019.

As part of the 2019 Immunotherapy Bridge congress (December 4-5, Naples, Italy), the Great Debate session featured counterpoint views from leading experts on six topical issues in immunotherapy today. These were the use of chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy in solid tumors, whether the Immunoscore should be more widely used in clinical practice, whether antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity is important in the mode of action of anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 antibodies, whether the brain is immunologically unique or just another organ, the role of microbiome versus nutrition in affecting responses to immunotherapy, and whether chemotherapy is immunostimulatory or immunosuppressive. Discussion of these important topics are summarized in this report

Tumor-Infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in early breast cancer patients: high CD3+ , CD8+ , and Immunoscore are associated with a pathological complete response

BACKGROUND : Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes are associated with a better prognosis in early triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). These cells can be enumerated in situ by the “Immunoscore Clinical Research” (ISCR). The original Immunoscore® is a prognostic tool that categorizes the densities of CD3+ and CD8+ cells in both the invasive margin (IM) and center of the tumor (CT) in localized colon cancer, yielding a five-tiered classification (0–4). We evaluated the prognostic potential of ISCR and pathological complete response (pCR) following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). METHODS : The cohort included 53 TNBC, 32 luminal BC, and 18 HER2-positive BC patients undergoing NACT. Pre-treatment tumor biopsies were immune-stained for CD3+ and CD8+ T-cell markers. Quantitative analysis of these cells in different tumor locations was performed using computer-assisted image analysis. RESULTS : The pCR rate was 44%. Univariate analysis showed that primary tumor size, estrogen-receptor negative, progesteronereceptor negative, luminal vs. HER2-positive vs. TNBC, high Ki-67, high densities (cells/mm2 ) of CD3 CT, CD8+ CT, CD3+ IM, and CD8+ IM cells were associated with a high pCR. ISCR was associated with pCR following NACT. A multivariate model consisting of ISCR and the significant variables from the univariate analysis showed a significant trend for ISCR; however, the low sample size did not provide enough power for the model to be included in this study. CONCLUSIONS : These results revealed a significant prognostic role for the spatial distributions of the CD3+ , and CD8+ lymphocytes, as well as the ISCR in relation to pCR following NACT.Medical Oncology Centre of Rosebankhttps://www.mdpi.com/journal/cancersdm2022Immunolog

Future perspectives in melanoma research. Meeting report from the "Melanoma Research: a bridge Naples-USA. Naples, December 6th-7 th2010"

Progress in understanding the molecular basis of melanoma has made possible the identification of molecular targets with important implications in clinical practice. In fact, new therapeutic approaches are emerging from basic science and it will be important to implement their rapid translation into clinical practice by active clinical investigation

Perspectives in immunotherapy: meeting report from the Immunotherapy Bridge (29-30 November, 2017, Naples, Italy)

Immunotherapy represents the third important wave in the history of the systemic treatment of cancer after chemotherapy and targeted therapy and is now established as a potent and effective treatment option across several cancer types. The clinical success of anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen (CTLA)-4, first, and anti-programmed death (PD)-1/PD-ligand (L)1 agents in melanoma and other cancers a few years later, has encouraged increasing focus on the development of other immunotherapies (e.g. monoclonal antibodies with other immune targets, adoptive cell transfer, and vaccines), with over 3000 immuno-oncology trials ongoing, involving hundreds of research institutes across the globe. The potential use of these different immunotherapeutic options in various combinations with one another and with other treatment modalities is an area of particular promise. The third Immunotherapy Bridge meeting (29-30 November, 2017, Naples, Italy) focused on recent advances in immunotherapy across various cancer types and is summarised in this report

Defining the Critical Hurdles in Cancer Immunotherapy

ABSTRACT: Scientific discoveries that provide strong evidence of antitumor effects in preclinical models often encounter significant delays before being tested in patients with cancer. While some of these delays have a scientific basis, others do not. We need to do better. Innovative strategies need to move into early stage clinical trials as quickly as it is safe, and if successful, these therapies should efficiently obtain regulatory approval and widespread clinical application. In late 2009 and 2010 the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC), convened an "Immunotherapy Summit" with representatives from immunotherapy organizations representing Europe, Japan, China and North America to discuss collaborations to improve development and delivery of cancer immunotherapy. One of the concepts raised by SITC and defined as critical by all parties was the need to identify hurdles that impede effective translation of cancer immunotherapy. With consensus on these hurdles, international working groups could be developed to make recommendations vetted by the participating organizations. These recommendations could then be considered by regulatory bodies, governmental and private funding agencies, pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions to facilitate changes necessary to accelerate clinical translation of novel immune-based cancer therapies. The critical hurdles identified by representatives of the collaborating organizations, now organized as the World Immunotherapy Council, are presented and discussed in this report. Some of the identified hurdles impede all investigators, others hinder investigators only in certain regions or institutions or are more relevant to specific types of immunotherapy or first-in-humans studies. Each of these hurdles can significantly delay clinical translation of promising advances in immunotherapy yet be overcome to improve outcomes of patients with cancer

Defining the critical hurdles in cancer immunotherapy

Scientific discoveries that provide strong evidence of antitumor effects in preclinical models often encounter significant delays before being tested in patients with cancer. While some of these delays have a scientific basis, others do not. We need to do better. Innovative strategies need to move into early stage clinical trials as quickly as it is safe, and if successful, these therapies should efficiently obtain regulatory approval and widespread clinical application. In late 2009 and 2010 the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC), convened an "Immunotherapy Summit" with representatives from immunotherapy organizations representing Europe, Japan, China and North America to discuss collaborations to improve development and delivery of cancer immunotherapy. One of the concepts raised by SITC and defined as critical by all parties was the need to identify hurdles that impede effective translation of cancer immunotherapy. With consensus on these hurdles, international working groups could be developed to make recommendations vetted by the participating organizations. These recommendations could then be considered by regulatory bodies, governmental and private funding agencies, pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions to facilitate changes necessary to accelerate clinical translation of novel immune-based cancer therapies. The critical hurdles identified by representatives of the collaborating organizations, now organized as the World Immunotherapy Council, are presented and discussed in this report. Some of the identified hurdles impede all investigators; others hinder investigators only in certain regions or institutions or are more relevant to specific types of immunotherapy or first-in-humans studies. Each of these hurdles can significantly delay clinical translation of promising advances in immunotherapy yet if overcome, have the potential to improve outcomes of patients with cancer