Sources of inter-individual variability leading to significant changes in anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 efficacy identified in mouse tumor models using a QSP framework

While anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 [anti-PD-(L)1] monotherapies are effective treatments for many types of cancer, high variability in patient responses is observed in clinical trials. Understanding the sources of response variability can help prospectively identify potential responsive patient populations. Preclinical data may offer insights to this point and, in combination with modeling, may be predictive of sources of variability and their impact on efficacy. Herein, a quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) model of anti-PD-(L)1 was developed to account for the known pharmacokinetic properties of anti-PD-(L)1 antibodies, their impact on CD8+ T cell activation and influx into the tumor microenvironment, and subsequent anti-tumor effects in CT26 tumor syngeneic mouse model. The QSP model was sufficient to describe the variability inherent in the anti-tumor responses post anti-PD-(L)1 treatments. Local sensitivity analysis identified tumor cell proliferation rate, PD-1 expression on CD8+ T cells, PD-L1 expression on tumor cells, and the binding affinity of PD-1:PD-L1 as strong influencers of tumor growth. It also suggested that treatment-mediated tumor growth inhibition is sensitive to T cell properties including the CD8+ T cell proliferation half-life, CD8+ T cell half-life, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL)-mediated tumor cell killing rate, and maximum rate of CD8+ T cell influx into the tumor microenvironment. Each of these parameters alone could not predict anti-PD-(L)1 treatment response but they could shift an individual mouse’s treatment response when perturbed. The presented preclinical QSP modeling framework provides a path to incorporate potential sources of response variability in human translation modeling of anti-PD-(L)1

The Cinderella syndrome:why do malaria-infected cells burst at midnight?

An interesting quirk of many malaria infections is that all parasites within a host-millions of them-progress through their cell cycle synchronously. This surprising coordination has long been recognized, yet there is little understanding of what controls it or why it has evolved. Interestingly, the conventional explanation for coordinated development in other parasite species does not seem to apply here. We argue that for malaria parasites, a critical question has yet to be answered: is the coordination due to parasites bursting at the same time or at a particular time? We explicitly delineate these fundamentally different scenarios, possible underlying mechanistic explanations and evolutionary drivers, and discuss the existing corroborating data and key evidence needed to solve this evolutionary mystery. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Image5_Sources of inter-individual variability leading to significant changes in anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 efficacy identified in mouse tumor models using a QSP framework.PNG

While anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 [anti-PD-(L)1] monotherapies are effective treatments for many types of cancer, high variability in patient responses is observed in clinical trials. Understanding the sources of response variability can help prospectively identify potential responsive patient populations. Preclinical data may offer insights to this point and, in combination with modeling, may be predictive of sources of variability and their impact on efficacy. Herein, a quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) model of anti-PD-(L)1 was developed to account for the known pharmacokinetic properties of anti-PD-(L)1 antibodies, their impact on CD8+ T cell activation and influx into the tumor microenvironment, and subsequent anti-tumor effects in CT26 tumor syngeneic mouse model. The QSP model was sufficient to describe the variability inherent in the anti-tumor responses post anti-PD-(L)1 treatments. Local sensitivity analysis identified tumor cell proliferation rate, PD-1 expression on CD8+ T cells, PD-L1 expression on tumor cells, and the binding affinity of PD-1:PD-L1 as strong influencers of tumor growth. It also suggested that treatment-mediated tumor growth inhibition is sensitive to T cell properties including the CD8+ T cell proliferation half-life, CD8+ T cell half-life, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL)-mediated tumor cell killing rate, and maximum rate of CD8+ T cell influx into the tumor microenvironment. Each of these parameters alone could not predict anti-PD-(L)1 treatment response but they could shift an individual mouse’s treatment response when perturbed. The presented preclinical QSP modeling framework provides a path to incorporate potential sources of response variability in human translation modeling of anti-PD-(L)1.</p

Image1_Sources of inter-individual variability leading to significant changes in anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 efficacy identified in mouse tumor models using a QSP framework.PNG

While anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 [anti-PD-(L)1] monotherapies are effective treatments for many types of cancer, high variability in patient responses is observed in clinical trials. Understanding the sources of response variability can help prospectively identify potential responsive patient populations. Preclinical data may offer insights to this point and, in combination with modeling, may be predictive of sources of variability and their impact on efficacy. Herein, a quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) model of anti-PD-(L)1 was developed to account for the known pharmacokinetic properties of anti-PD-(L)1 antibodies, their impact on CD8+ T cell activation and influx into the tumor microenvironment, and subsequent anti-tumor effects in CT26 tumor syngeneic mouse model. The QSP model was sufficient to describe the variability inherent in the anti-tumor responses post anti-PD-(L)1 treatments. Local sensitivity analysis identified tumor cell proliferation rate, PD-1 expression on CD8+ T cells, PD-L1 expression on tumor cells, and the binding affinity of PD-1:PD-L1 as strong influencers of tumor growth. It also suggested that treatment-mediated tumor growth inhibition is sensitive to T cell properties including the CD8+ T cell proliferation half-life, CD8+ T cell half-life, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL)-mediated tumor cell killing rate, and maximum rate of CD8+ T cell influx into the tumor microenvironment. Each of these parameters alone could not predict anti-PD-(L)1 treatment response but they could shift an individual mouse’s treatment response when perturbed. The presented preclinical QSP modeling framework provides a path to incorporate potential sources of response variability in human translation modeling of anti-PD-(L)1.</p

Image7_Sources of inter-individual variability leading to significant changes in anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 efficacy identified in mouse tumor models using a QSP framework.JPEG

While anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 [anti-PD-(L)1] monotherapies are effective treatments for many types of cancer, high variability in patient responses is observed in clinical trials. Understanding the sources of response variability can help prospectively identify potential responsive patient populations. Preclinical data may offer insights to this point and, in combination with modeling, may be predictive of sources of variability and their impact on efficacy. Herein, a quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) model of anti-PD-(L)1 was developed to account for the known pharmacokinetic properties of anti-PD-(L)1 antibodies, their impact on CD8+ T cell activation and influx into the tumor microenvironment, and subsequent anti-tumor effects in CT26 tumor syngeneic mouse model. The QSP model was sufficient to describe the variability inherent in the anti-tumor responses post anti-PD-(L)1 treatments. Local sensitivity analysis identified tumor cell proliferation rate, PD-1 expression on CD8+ T cells, PD-L1 expression on tumor cells, and the binding affinity of PD-1:PD-L1 as strong influencers of tumor growth. It also suggested that treatment-mediated tumor growth inhibition is sensitive to T cell properties including the CD8+ T cell proliferation half-life, CD8+ T cell half-life, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL)-mediated tumor cell killing rate, and maximum rate of CD8+ T cell influx into the tumor microenvironment. Each of these parameters alone could not predict anti-PD-(L)1 treatment response but they could shift an individual mouse’s treatment response when perturbed. The presented preclinical QSP modeling framework provides a path to incorporate potential sources of response variability in human translation modeling of anti-PD-(L)1.</p

Image4_Sources of inter-individual variability leading to significant changes in anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 efficacy identified in mouse tumor models using a QSP framework.png

While anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 [anti-PD-(L)1] monotherapies are effective treatments for many types of cancer, high variability in patient responses is observed in clinical trials. Understanding the sources of response variability can help prospectively identify potential responsive patient populations. Preclinical data may offer insights to this point and, in combination with modeling, may be predictive of sources of variability and their impact on efficacy. Herein, a quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) model of anti-PD-(L)1 was developed to account for the known pharmacokinetic properties of anti-PD-(L)1 antibodies, their impact on CD8+ T cell activation and influx into the tumor microenvironment, and subsequent anti-tumor effects in CT26 tumor syngeneic mouse model. The QSP model was sufficient to describe the variability inherent in the anti-tumor responses post anti-PD-(L)1 treatments. Local sensitivity analysis identified tumor cell proliferation rate, PD-1 expression on CD8+ T cells, PD-L1 expression on tumor cells, and the binding affinity of PD-1:PD-L1 as strong influencers of tumor growth. It also suggested that treatment-mediated tumor growth inhibition is sensitive to T cell properties including the CD8+ T cell proliferation half-life, CD8+ T cell half-life, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL)-mediated tumor cell killing rate, and maximum rate of CD8+ T cell influx into the tumor microenvironment. Each of these parameters alone could not predict anti-PD-(L)1 treatment response but they could shift an individual mouse’s treatment response when perturbed. The presented preclinical QSP modeling framework provides a path to incorporate potential sources of response variability in human translation modeling of anti-PD-(L)1.</p

Image2_Sources of inter-individual variability leading to significant changes in anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 efficacy identified in mouse tumor models using a QSP framework.PNG

While anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 [anti-PD-(L)1] monotherapies are effective treatments for many types of cancer, high variability in patient responses is observed in clinical trials. Understanding the sources of response variability can help prospectively identify potential responsive patient populations. Preclinical data may offer insights to this point and, in combination with modeling, may be predictive of sources of variability and their impact on efficacy. Herein, a quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) model of anti-PD-(L)1 was developed to account for the known pharmacokinetic properties of anti-PD-(L)1 antibodies, their impact on CD8+ T cell activation and influx into the tumor microenvironment, and subsequent anti-tumor effects in CT26 tumor syngeneic mouse model. The QSP model was sufficient to describe the variability inherent in the anti-tumor responses post anti-PD-(L)1 treatments. Local sensitivity analysis identified tumor cell proliferation rate, PD-1 expression on CD8+ T cells, PD-L1 expression on tumor cells, and the binding affinity of PD-1:PD-L1 as strong influencers of tumor growth. It also suggested that treatment-mediated tumor growth inhibition is sensitive to T cell properties including the CD8+ T cell proliferation half-life, CD8+ T cell half-life, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL)-mediated tumor cell killing rate, and maximum rate of CD8+ T cell influx into the tumor microenvironment. Each of these parameters alone could not predict anti-PD-(L)1 treatment response but they could shift an individual mouse’s treatment response when perturbed. The presented preclinical QSP modeling framework provides a path to incorporate potential sources of response variability in human translation modeling of anti-PD-(L)1.</p

DataSheet1_Sources of inter-individual variability leading to significant changes in anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 efficacy identified in mouse tumor models using a QSP framework.pdf

While anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 [anti-PD-(L)1] monotherapies are effective treatments for many types of cancer, high variability in patient responses is observed in clinical trials. Understanding the sources of response variability can help prospectively identify potential responsive patient populations. Preclinical data may offer insights to this point and, in combination with modeling, may be predictive of sources of variability and their impact on efficacy. Herein, a quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) model of anti-PD-(L)1 was developed to account for the known pharmacokinetic properties of anti-PD-(L)1 antibodies, their impact on CD8+ T cell activation and influx into the tumor microenvironment, and subsequent anti-tumor effects in CT26 tumor syngeneic mouse model. The QSP model was sufficient to describe the variability inherent in the anti-tumor responses post anti-PD-(L)1 treatments. Local sensitivity analysis identified tumor cell proliferation rate, PD-1 expression on CD8+ T cells, PD-L1 expression on tumor cells, and the binding affinity of PD-1:PD-L1 as strong influencers of tumor growth. It also suggested that treatment-mediated tumor growth inhibition is sensitive to T cell properties including the CD8+ T cell proliferation half-life, CD8+ T cell half-life, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL)-mediated tumor cell killing rate, and maximum rate of CD8+ T cell influx into the tumor microenvironment. Each of these parameters alone could not predict anti-PD-(L)1 treatment response but they could shift an individual mouse’s treatment response when perturbed. The presented preclinical QSP modeling framework provides a path to incorporate potential sources of response variability in human translation modeling of anti-PD-(L)1.</p

Image6_Sources of inter-individual variability leading to significant changes in anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 efficacy identified in mouse tumor models using a QSP framework.JPEG

While anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 [anti-PD-(L)1] monotherapies are effective treatments for many types of cancer, high variability in patient responses is observed in clinical trials. Understanding the sources of response variability can help prospectively identify potential responsive patient populations. Preclinical data may offer insights to this point and, in combination with modeling, may be predictive of sources of variability and their impact on efficacy. Herein, a quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) model of anti-PD-(L)1 was developed to account for the known pharmacokinetic properties of anti-PD-(L)1 antibodies, their impact on CD8+ T cell activation and influx into the tumor microenvironment, and subsequent anti-tumor effects in CT26 tumor syngeneic mouse model. The QSP model was sufficient to describe the variability inherent in the anti-tumor responses post anti-PD-(L)1 treatments. Local sensitivity analysis identified tumor cell proliferation rate, PD-1 expression on CD8+ T cells, PD-L1 expression on tumor cells, and the binding affinity of PD-1:PD-L1 as strong influencers of tumor growth. It also suggested that treatment-mediated tumor growth inhibition is sensitive to T cell properties including the CD8+ T cell proliferation half-life, CD8+ T cell half-life, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL)-mediated tumor cell killing rate, and maximum rate of CD8+ T cell influx into the tumor microenvironment. Each of these parameters alone could not predict anti-PD-(L)1 treatment response but they could shift an individual mouse’s treatment response when perturbed. The presented preclinical QSP modeling framework provides a path to incorporate potential sources of response variability in human translation modeling of anti-PD-(L)1.</p