Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in the immunotherapy era

The clinical success of cancer immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has refocused attention on tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) across cancer types. The outcome of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy in cancer patients has been linked to the quality and magnitude of T cell, NK cell, and more recently, B cell responses within the tumor microenvironment. State-of-the-art single-cell analysis of TIL gene expression profiles and clonality has revealed a remarkable degree of cellular heterogeneity and distinct patterns of immune activation and exhaustion. Many of these states are conserved across tumor types, in line with the broad responses observed clinically. Despite this homology, not all cancer types with similar TIL landscapes respond similarly to immunotherapy, highlighting the complexity of the underlying tumor-immune interactions. This observation is further confounded by the strong prognostic benefit of TILs observed for tumor types that have so far respond poorly to immunotherapy. Thus, while a holistic view of lymphocyte infiltration and dysfunction on a single-cell level is emerging, the search for response and prognostic biomarkers is just beginning. Within this review, we discuss recent advances in the understanding of TIL biology, their prognostic benefit, and their predictive value for therapy

Antigen-specific active immunotherapy for ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND: This is the second update of the review first published in the Cochrane Library (2010, Issue 2) and later updated (2014, Issue 9).Despite advances in chemotherapy, the prognosis of ovarian cancer remains poor. Antigen-specific active immunotherapy aims to induce tumour antigen-specific anti-tumour immune responses as an alternative treatment for ovarian cancer. OBJECTIVES: Primary objective• To assess the clinical efficacy of antigen-specific active immunotherapy for the treatment of ovarian cancer as evaluated by tumour response measured by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) and/or cancer antigen (CA)-125 levels, response to post-immunotherapy treatment, and survival differences◦ In addition, we recorded the numbers of observed antigen-specific humoral and cellular responsesSecondary objective• To establish which combinations of immunotherapeutic strategies with tumour antigens provide the best immunological and clinical results SEARCH METHODS: For the previous version of this review, we performed a systematic search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2009, Issue 3), in the Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE and Embase databases, and clinicaltrials.gov (1966 to July 2009). We also conducted handsearches of the proceedings of relevant annual meetings (1996 to July 2009).For the first update of this review, we extended the searches to October 2013, and for this update, we extended the searches to July 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), as well as non-randomised studies (NRSs), that included participants with epithelial ovarian cancer, irrespective of disease stage, who were treated with antigen-specific active immunotherapy, irrespective of type of vaccine, antigen used, adjuvant used, route of vaccination, treatment schedule, and reported clinical or immunological outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviews authors independently extracted the data. We evaluated the risk of bias for RCTs according to standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane, and for NRSs by using a selection of quality domains deemed best applicable to the NRS. MAIN RESULTS: We included 67 studies (representing 3632 women with epithelial ovarian cancer). The most striking observations of this review address the lack of uniformity in conduct and reporting of early-phase immunotherapy studies. Response definitions show substantial variation between trials, which makes comparison of trial results unreliable. Information on adverse events is frequently limited. Furthermore, reports of both RCTs and NRSs frequently lack the relevant information necessary for risk of bias assessment. Therefore, we cannot rule out serious biases in most of the included trials. However, selection, attrition, and selective reporting biases are likely to have affected the studies included in this review. GRADE ratings were high only for survival; for other primary outcomes, GRADE ratings were very low.The largest body of evidence is currently available for CA-125-targeted antibody therapy (17 studies, 2347 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Non-randomised studies of CA-125-targeted antibody therapy suggest improved survival among humoral and/or cellular responders, with only moderate adverse events. However, four large randomised placebo-controlled trials did not show any clinical benefit, despite induction of immune responses in approximately 60% of participants. Time to relapse with CA-125 monoclonal antibody versus placebo, respectively, ranged from 10.3 to 18.9 months versus 10.3 to 13 months (six RCTs, 1882 participants; high-certainty evidence). Only one RCT provided data on overall survival, reporting rates of 80% in both treatment and placebo groups (three RCTs, 1062 participants; high-certainty evidence). Other small studies targeting many different tumour antigens have presented promising immunological results. As these strategies have not yet been tested in RCTs, no reliable inferences about clinical efficacy can be made. Given the promising immunological results and the limited side effects and toxicity reported, exploration of clinical efficacy in large well-designed RCTs may be worthwhile. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that despite promising immunological responses, no clinically effective antigen-specific active immunotherapy is yet available for ovarian cancer. Results should be interpreted cautiously, as review authors found a significant dearth of relevant information for assessment of risk of bias in both RCTs and NRSs

Expression of CD39 Identifies Activated Intratumoral CD8+T Cells in Mismatch Repair Deficient Endometrial Cancer

Identification of human cancer-reactive CD8+ T cells is crucial for the stratification of patients for immunotherapy and determination of immune-therapeutic effects. To date, these T cells have been identified mainly based on cell surface expression of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or co-expression of CD103 and CD39. A small subset of CD103- CD39+ CD8+ T cells is also present in tumors, but little is known about these T cells. Here, we report that CD103- CD39+ CD8+ T cells from mismatch repair-deficient endometrial tumors are activated and characterized predominantly by expression of TNFRSF9. In vitro, transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-beta) drives the disappearance of this subset, likely through the conversion of CD103- CD39+ cells to a CD103+ phenotype. On the transcriptomic level, T cell activation and induction of CD39 was associated with a number of tissue residence and TGF-beta responsive transcription factors. Altogether, our data suggest CD39+ CD103- CD8+ tumor-infiltrating T cells are recently activated and likely rapidly differentiate towards tissue residence upon exposure to TGF-beta in the tumor micro-environment, explaining their relative paucity in human tumors

FOXL2 and TERT promoter mutation detection in circulating tumor DNA of adult granulosa cell tumors as biomarker for disease monitoring

OBJECTIVE: Adult granulosa cell tumors (aGCTs) represent a rare, hormonally active subtype of ovarian cancer that has a tendency to relapse late and repeatedly. Current serum hormone markers are inaccurate in reflecting tumor burden in a subset of aGCT patients, indicating the need for a novel biomarker. We investigated the presence of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) harboring a FOXL2 or TERT promoter mutation in serial plasma samples of aGCT patients to determine its clinical value for monitoring disease. METHODS: In a national multicenter study, plasma samples (n = 110) were prospectively collected from 21 patients with primary (n = 3) or recurrent (n = 18) aGCT harboring a FOXL2 402C > G and/or TERT (C228T or C250T) promoter mutation. Circulating cell-free DNA was extracted and assessed for ctDNA containing one of either mutations using droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). Fractional abundance of FOXL2 mutant and TERT mutant ctDNA was correlated with clinical parameters. RESULTS: FOXL2 mutant ctDNA was found in plasma of 11 out of 14 patients (78.6%) with aGCT with a confirmed FOXL2 mutation. TERT C228T or TERT C250T mutant ctDNA was detected in plasma of 4 of 10 (40%) and 1 of 2 patients, respectively. Both FOXL2 mutant ctDNA and TERT promoter mutant ctDNA levels correlated with disease progression and treatment response in the majority of patients. CONCLUSIONS: FOXL2 mutant ctDNA was present in the majority of aGCT patients and TERT promoter mutant ctDNA has been identified in a smaller subset of patients. Both FOXL2 and TERT mutant ctDNA detection may have clinical value in disease monitoring

First-in-Human Phase I Clinical Trial of an SFV-Based RNA Replicon Cancer Vaccine against HPV-Induced Cancers

A first-in-human phase I trial of Vvax001, an alphavirus-based therapeutic cancer vaccine against human papillomavirus (HPV)-induced cancers was performed assessing immunological activity, safety, and tolerability. Vvax001 consists of replication-incompetent Semliki Forest virus replicon particles encoding HPV16-derived antigens E6 and E7. Twelve participants with a history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia were included. Four cohorts of three participants were treated per dose level, ranging from 5 × 105 to 2.5 × 108 infectious particles per immunization. The participants received three immunizations with a 3-week interval. For immune monitoring, blood was drawn before immunization and 1 week after the second and third immunization. Immunization with Vvax001 was safe and well tolerated, with only mild injection site reactions, and resulted in both CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses against E6 and E7 antigens. Even the lowest dose of 5 × 105 infectious particles elicited E6/E7-specific interferon (IFN)-γ responses in all three participants in this cohort. Overall, immunization resulted in positive vaccine-induced immune responses in 12 of 12 participants in one or more assays performed. In conclusion, Vvax001 was safe and induced immune responses in all participants. These data strongly support further clinical evaluation of Vvax001 as a therapeutic vaccine in patients with HPV-related malignancies

Antigen-specific active immunotherapy for ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND: This is the second update of the review first published in the Cochrane Library (2010, Issue 2) and later updated (2014, Issue 9).Despite advances in chemotherapy, the prognosis of ovarian cancer remains poor. Antigen-specific active immunotherapy aims to induce tumour antigen-specific anti-tumour immune responses as an alternative treatment for ovarian cancer. OBJECTIVES: Primary objective• To assess the clinical efficacy of antigen-specific active immunotherapy for the treatment of ovarian cancer as evaluated by tumour response measured by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) and/or cancer antigen (CA)-125 levels, response to post-immunotherapy treatment, and survival differences◦ In addition, we recorded the numbers of observed antigen-specific humoral and cellular responsesSecondary objective• To establish which combinations of immunotherapeutic strategies with tumour antigens provide the best immunological and clinical results SEARCH METHODS: For the previous version of this review, we performed a systematic search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2009, Issue 3), in the Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE and Embase databases, and clinicaltrials.gov (1966 to July 2009). We also conducted handsearches of the proceedings of relevant annual meetings (1996 to July 2009).For the first update of this review, we extended the searches to October 2013, and for this update, we extended the searches to July 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), as well as non-randomised studies (NRSs), that included participants with epithelial ovarian cancer, irrespective of disease stage, who were treated with antigen-specific active immunotherapy, irrespective of type of vaccine, antigen used, adjuvant used, route of vaccination, treatment schedule, and reported clinical or immunological outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviews authors independently extracted the data. We evaluated the risk of bias for RCTs according to standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane, and for NRSs by using a selection of quality domains deemed best applicable to the NRS. MAIN RESULTS: We included 67 studies (representing 3632 women with epithelial ovarian cancer). The most striking observations of this review address the lack of uniformity in conduct and reporting of early-phase immunotherapy studies. Response definitions show substantial variation between trials, which makes comparison of trial results unreliable. Information on adverse events is frequently limited. Furthermore, reports of both RCTs and NRSs frequently lack the relevant information necessary for risk of bias assessment. Therefore, we cannot rule out serious biases in most of the included trials. However, selection, attrition, and selective reporting biases are likely to have affected the studies included in this review. GRADE ratings were high only for survival; for other primary outcomes, GRADE ratings were very low.The largest body of evidence is currently available for CA-125-targeted antibody therapy (17 studies, 2347 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Non-randomised studies of CA-125-targeted antibody therapy suggest improved survival among humoral and/or cellular responders, with only moderate adverse events. However, four large randomised placebo-controlled trials did not show any clinical benefit, despite induction of immune responses in approximately 60% of participants. Time to relapse with CA-125 monoclonal antibody versus placebo, respectively, ranged from 10.3 to 18.9 months versus 10.3 to 13 months (six RCTs, 1882 participants; high-certainty evidence). Only one RCT provided data on overall survival, reporting rates of 80% in both treatment and placebo groups (three RCTs, 1062 participants; high-certainty evidence). Other small studies targeting many different tumour antigens have presented promising immunological results. As these strategies have not yet been tested in RCTs, no reliable inferences about clinical efficacy can be made. Given the promising immunological results and the limited side effects and toxicity reported, exploration of clinical efficacy in large well-designed RCTs may be worthwhile. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that despite promising immunological responses, no clinically effective antigen-specific active immunotherapy is yet available for ovarian cancer. Results should be interpreted cautiously, as review authors found a significant dearth of relevant information for assessment of risk of bias in both RCTs and NRSs