The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer consensus statement on immunotherapy for the treatment of hematologic malignancies: multiple myeloma, lymphoma, and acute leukemia

Increasing knowledge concerning the biology of hematologic malignancies as well as the role of the immune system in the control of these diseases has led to the development and approval of immunotherapies that are resulting in impressive clinical responses. Therefore, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a hematologic malignancy Cancer Immunotherapy Guidelines panel consisting of physicians, nurses, patient advocates, and patients to develop consensus recommendations for the clinical application of immunotherapy for patients with multiple myeloma, lymphoma, and acute leukemia. These recommendations were developed following the previously established process based on the Institute of Medicine’s clinical practice guidelines. In doing so, a systematic literature search was performed for high-impact studies from 2004 to 2014 and was supplemented with further literature as identified by the panel. The consensus panel met in December of 2014 with the goal to generate consensus recommendations for the clinical use of immunotherapy in patients with hematologic malignancies. During this meeting, consensus panel voting along with discussion were used to rate and review the strength of the supporting evidence from the literature search. These consensus recommendations focus on issues related to patient selection, toxicity management, clinical endpoints, and the sequencing or combination of therapies. Overall, immunotherapy is rapidly emerging as an effective therapeutic strategy for the management of hematologic malignances. Evidence-based consensus recommendations for its clinical application are provided and will be updated as the field evolves

31st Annual Meeting and Associated Programs of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC 2016) : part two

Background The immunological escape of tumors represents one of the main ob- stacles to the treatment of malignancies. The blockade of PD-1 or CTLA-4 receptors represented a milestone in the history of immunotherapy. However, immune checkpoint inhibitors seem to be effective in specific cohorts of patients. It has been proposed that their efficacy relies on the presence of an immunological response. Thus, we hypothesized that disruption of the PD-L1/PD-1 axis would synergize with our oncolytic vaccine platform PeptiCRAd. Methods We used murine B16OVA in vivo tumor models and flow cytometry analysis to investigate the immunological background. Results First, we found that high-burden B16OVA tumors were refractory to combination immunotherapy. However, with a more aggressive schedule, tumors with a lower burden were more susceptible to the combination of PeptiCRAd and PD-L1 blockade. The therapy signifi- cantly increased the median survival of mice (Fig. 7). Interestingly, the reduced growth of contralaterally injected B16F10 cells sug- gested the presence of a long lasting immunological memory also against non-targeted antigens. Concerning the functional state of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), we found that all the immune therapies would enhance the percentage of activated (PD-1pos TIM- 3neg) T lymphocytes and reduce the amount of exhausted (PD-1pos TIM-3pos) cells compared to placebo. As expected, we found that PeptiCRAd monotherapy could increase the number of antigen spe- cific CD8+ T cells compared to other treatments. However, only the combination with PD-L1 blockade could significantly increase the ra- tio between activated and exhausted pentamer positive cells (p= 0.0058), suggesting that by disrupting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis we could decrease the amount of dysfunctional antigen specific T cells. We ob- served that the anatomical location deeply influenced the state of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes. In fact, TIM-3 expression was in- creased by 2 fold on TILs compared to splenic and lymphoid T cells. In the CD8+ compartment, the expression of PD-1 on the surface seemed to be restricted to the tumor micro-environment, while CD4 + T cells had a high expression of PD-1 also in lymphoid organs. Interestingly, we found that the levels of PD-1 were significantly higher on CD8+ T cells than on CD4+ T cells into the tumor micro- environment (p < 0.0001). Conclusions In conclusion, we demonstrated that the efficacy of immune check- point inhibitors might be strongly enhanced by their combination with cancer vaccines. PeptiCRAd was able to increase the number of antigen-specific T cells and PD-L1 blockade prevented their exhaus- tion, resulting in long-lasting immunological memory and increased median survival

A Randomized Phase 2 Study Comparing 2 Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Schedules for Medically Inoperable Patients With Stage I Peripheral Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: NRG Oncology RTOG 0915 (NCCTG N0927)

PurposeTo compare 2 stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) schedules for medically inoperable early-stage lung cancer to determine which produces the lowest rate of grade ≥3 protocol-specified adverse events (psAEs) at 1 year.Methods and materialsPatients with biopsy-proven peripheral (≥2 cm from the central bronchial tree) T1 or T2, N0 (clinically node negative by positron emission tomography), M0 tumors were eligible. Patients were randomized to receive either 34 Gy in 1 fraction (arm 1) or 48 Gy in 4 consecutive daily fractions (arm 2). Rigorous central accreditation and quality assurance confirmed treatment per protocol guidelines. This study was designed to detect a psAEs rate &gt;17% at a 10% significance level (1-sided) and 90% power. Secondary endpoints included rates of primary tumor control (PC), overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) at 1 year. Designating the better of the 2 regimens was based on prespecified rules of psAEs and PC for each arm.ResultsNinety-four patients were accrued between September 2009 and March 2011. The median follow-up time was 30.2 months. Of 84 analyzable patients, 39 were in arm 1 and 45 in arm 2. Patient and tumor characteristics were balanced between arms. Four (10.3%) patients on arm 1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.9%-24.2%) and 6 (13.3%) patients on arm 2 (95% CI 5.1%-26.8%) experienced psAEs. The 2-year OS rate was 61.3% (95% CI 44.2%-74.6%) for arm 1 patients and 77.7% (95% CI 62.5%-87.3%) for arm 2. The 2-year DFS was 56.4% (95% CI 39.6%-70.2%) for arm 1 and 71.1% (95% CI 55.5%-82.1%) for arm 2. The 1-year PC rate was 97.0% (95% CI 84.2%-99.9%) for arm 1 and 92.7% (95% CI 80.1%-98.5%) for arm 2.Conclusions34 Gy in 1 fraction met the prespecified criteria and, of the 2 schedules, warrants further clinical research

A Randomized Phase 2 Study Comparing 2 Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Schedules for Medically Inoperable Patients With Stage I Peripheral Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: NRG Oncology RTOG 0915 (NCCTG N0927)

PurposeTo compare 2 stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) schedules for medically inoperable early-stage lung cancer to determine which produces the lowest rate of grade ≥3 protocol-specified adverse events (psAEs) at 1 year.Methods and materialsPatients with biopsy-proven peripheral (≥2 cm from the central bronchial tree) T1 or T2, N0 (clinically node negative by positron emission tomography), M0 tumors were eligible. Patients were randomized to receive either 34 Gy in 1 fraction (arm 1) or 48 Gy in 4 consecutive daily fractions (arm 2). Rigorous central accreditation and quality assurance confirmed treatment per protocol guidelines. This study was designed to detect a psAEs rate &gt;17% at a 10% significance level (1-sided) and 90% power. Secondary endpoints included rates of primary tumor control (PC), overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) at 1 year. Designating the better of the 2 regimens was based on prespecified rules of psAEs and PC for each arm.ResultsNinety-four patients were accrued between September 2009 and March 2011. The median follow-up time was 30.2 months. Of 84 analyzable patients, 39 were in arm 1 and 45 in arm 2. Patient and tumor characteristics were balanced between arms. Four (10.3%) patients on arm 1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.9%-24.2%) and 6 (13.3%) patients on arm 2 (95% CI 5.1%-26.8%) experienced psAEs. The 2-year OS rate was 61.3% (95% CI 44.2%-74.6%) for arm 1 patients and 77.7% (95% CI 62.5%-87.3%) for arm 2. The 2-year DFS was 56.4% (95% CI 39.6%-70.2%) for arm 1 and 71.1% (95% CI 55.5%-82.1%) for arm 2. The 1-year PC rate was 97.0% (95% CI 84.2%-99.9%) for arm 1 and 92.7% (95% CI 80.1%-98.5%) for arm 2.Conclusions34 Gy in 1 fraction met the prespecified criteria and, of the 2 schedules, warrants further clinical research