Blockade of novel immune checkpoints and new therapeutic combinations to boost antitumor immunity

Immunotherapy has emerged as a promising strategy for boosting antitumoral immunity. Blockade of immune checkpoints (ICs), which regulate the activity of cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) and natural killer (NK) cells has proven clinical benefits. Antibodies targeting CTLA-4, PD-1, and PD-L1 are IC-blockade drugs approved for the treatment of various solid and hematological malignancies. However, a large subset of patients does not respond to current anti-IC immunotherapy. An integrative understanding of tumor-immune infiltrate, and IC expression and function in immune cell populations is fundamental to the design of effective therapies. The simultaneous blockade of newly identified ICs, as well as of previously described ICs, could improve antitumor response. We review the potential for novel combinatory blockade strategies as antitumoral therapy, and their effects on immune cells expressing the targeted ICs. Preclinical evidence and clinical trials involving the blockade of the various ICs are reported. We finally discuss the rationale of IC co-blockade strategy with respect to its downstream signaling in order to improve effective antitumoral immunity and prevent an increased risk of immune-related adverse events (irAEs)

SWI/SNF Complex Alterations in Tumors with Rhabdoid Features: Novel Therapeutic Approaches and Opportunities for Adoptive Cell Therapy

The SWItch/Sucrose Non-Fermentable (SWI/SNF) chromatin-remodeling complex is one of the most remarkably altered epigenetic regulators in cancer. Pathogenic mutations in genes encoding SWI/SNF-related proteins have been recently described in many solid tumors, including rare and aggressive malignancies with rhabdoid features with no standard therapies in advanced or metastatic settings. In recent years, clinical trials with targeted drugs aimed at restoring its function have shown discouraging results. However, preclinical data have found an association between these epigenetic alterations and response to immune therapy. Thus, the rationale for immunotherapy strategies in SWI/SNF complex alteration-related tumors is strong. Here, we review the SWI/SNF complex and how its dysfunction drives the oncogenesis of rhabdoid tumors and the proposed strategies to revert this alteration and promising novel therapeutic approaches, including immune checkpoint inhibition and adoptive cell therapy

Phase I trial of viral vector based personalized vaccination elicits robust neoantigen specific antitumor T cell responses

Purpose: Personalized vaccines targeting multiple neoantigens (nAgs) are a promising strategy for eliciting a diversified antitumor T cell response to overcome tumor heterogeneity. NOUS-PEV is a vector based personalized vaccine, expressing 60 nAgs and consists of priming with a non-human Great Ape Adenoviral vector (GAd20) followed by boosts with Modified Vaccinia Ankara (MVA). Here, we report data of a phase Ib trial of NOUS-PEV in combination with pembrolizumab in treatment naïve metastatic melanoma patients (NCT04990479). Experimental Design: The feasibility of this approach was demonstrated by producing, releasing and administering to six patients 11 out of 12 vaccines within 8 weeks from biopsy collection to GAd20 administration. Results: The regimen was safe, with no treatment-related serious adverse events observed and mild vaccine-related reactions. Vaccine immunogenicity was demonstrated in all evaluable patients receiving the prime/boost regimen, with detection of robust neoantigen specific immune responses to multiple neoantigens comprising both CD4 and CD8 T cells. Expansion and diversification of vaccine-induced TCR clonotypes was observed in the post-treatment biopsies of patients with clinical response providing evidence of tumor infiltration by vaccine-induced neoantigen-specific T cell. Conclusions: These findings indicate the ability of NOUS-PEV to amplify and broaden the repertoire of tumor reactive T cells to empower a diverse, potent and durable antitumor immune response. Finally, a gene signature indicative for reduced presence of activated T cells together with very poor expression of the antigen processing machinery (APM) genes has been identified in pre-treatment biopsies as a potential biomarker of resistance to the treatment

Adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib for patients with resected BRAF-mutated melanoma: DESCRIBE-AD real-world retrospective observational study

BRAF and MEK inhibitor, dabrafenib plus trametinib, adjuvant therapy is effective for high-risk resected melanoma patients with BRAF-V600 mutations. However, real-world evidence is limited. We aimed to determine the feasibility of this therapy in routine clinical practice. DESCRIBE-AD, a retrospective observational study, collected real-world data from 25 hospitals in Spain. Histologically confirmed and resected BRAF-mutated melanoma patients aged & GE;18 years who were previously treated with dabrafenib plus trametinib adjuvant therapy, were included. The primary objectives were treatment discontinuation rate and time to discontinuation. The secondary objectives included safety and efficacy. From October 2020 to March 2021, 65 patients were included. Dabrafenib and trametinib discontinuation rate due to treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade was 9%. Other reasons for discontinuation included patients' decisions (6%), physician decisions (6%), unrelated adverse events (3%), disease progression (5%), and others (5%). The median time to treatment discontinuation was 9 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 5-11]. G3-4 TRAEs occurred in 21.5% of patients, the most common being pyrexia (3%), asthenia (3%), and diarrhoea (3%). Unscheduled hospitalisations and clinical tests occurred in 6 and 22% of patients, respectively. After 20-month median follow-up (95% CI, 18-22), 9% of patients had exitus due to disease progression, with a 12-month relapse-free survival and overall survival rates of 95.3% and 100%, respectively. Dabrafenib and trametinib adjuvant therapy proved effective for melanoma patients in a real-world setting, with a manageable toxicity profile. Toxicity frequencies were low leading to low incidence of unscheduled medical visits, tests, and treatment discontinuations

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium ) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the fi eld understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field

Prognostic markers and tumour growth kinetics in melanoma patients progressing on vemurafenib

The BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib is an effective drug in patients with BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma, but resistance occurs after a median of 6 months. The anti-CTLA4-antibody, ipilimumab, is a standard first-line and second-line treatment option in Europe, with a median time to response of 2-3 months, but some patients show rapid clinical deterioration before that. The aim of this analysis was to identify prognostic markers for survival after failure of vemurafenib treatment to identify patients who have a sufficient life expectancy to respond to new immunotherapy treatments. We retrospectively analysed 101 consecutive unselected patients treated with vemurafenib for metastatic melanoma at a single institution. The association between clinical parameters and death within 3 months after cessation of vemurafenib (n=69) was assessed by binary logistic and Cox regression. Of the patients, 45% died within 3 months of progression on vemurafenib. Elevated baseline serum lactate dehydrogenase, absence of normalization of serum lactate dehydrogenase on vemurafenib therapy, performance status of at least 2 at progression and time from primary tumour to metastatic disease less than 5 years were identified as poor prognostic markers. In an exploratory tumour growth kinetics analysis (n=16), we found that following cessation of vemurafenib, approximately a third each showed a stable, decelerated or accelerated rate of tumour growth. Patients with these poor prognostic markers are unlikely to have sufficient life expectancy to complete ipilimumab treatment after failure with vemurafenib. Consideration needs to be given to the elective use of immunotherapy before patients become resistant to vemurafenib. This requires prospective randomized evaluation. Our tumour growth kinetics analysis requires confirmation; however, it may suggest that intermittent vemurafenib treatment should be investigated in clinical trials

Prognostic score for patients with advanced melanoma treated with ipilimumab

Immunotherapies like the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 inhibitor ipilimumab show durable clinical benefit in patients with advanced melanoma. Reliable prognostic markers and risk scores in the era of immunotherapy are still lacking.; We collected characteristics and outcomes on 134 patients with metastatic melanoma treated with ipilimumab between 2011 and 2014 at a single centre. Cox regression including multivariable fractional polynomials was used to identify independent markers for overall survival (OS). Internal model validation was done using bootstrap procedures.; After a median follow-up of 16.1 months the median OS was 7.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.5-9.8). Nineteen of 134 patients (14.2%) had tumour remissions, 16 partial and 3 complete; 75% had progressive disease. We identified three independent adverse factors for OS: elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.03, 95% CI 1.02-1.04), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status >0 (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.10-3.30), and number of organs involved (NOI) (HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.22-1.86). To build an easy-to-apply risk score, we dichotomized LDH (>upper limit of normal) and NOI (>2) to built 3 prognostic groups: favourable (no adverse factors, N = 17), intermediate (1 adverse factor, N = 38), and poor prognosis (≥2 adverse factors, N = 73). Respective 12 and 18-month OS for the risk groups were: 85% and 73% (favourable), 41% and 29% (intermediate), and 12% and 6% (poor) (p < 0.001).; We propose a simple prognostic score for survival in patients with advanced melanoma treated with ipilimumab using readily available clinical parameters