Contribution of tumour and immune cells to PD-L1 expression as a predictive biomarker in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: exploratory analysis from KEYNOTE-119

Pembrolizumab; Triple‐negative breast cancerPembrolizumab; Cáncer de mama triple negativoPembrolizumab; Càncer de mama triple negatiuThe efficacy of pembrolizumab monotherapy versus chemotherapy increased with increasing programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, as quantified by combined positive score (CPS; PD-L1 expression on both tumour cells and immune cells) in patients with previously treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) in the phase 3 KEYNOTE-119 study. This exploratory analysis was conducted to determine whether the expression of PD-L1 on tumour cells contributes to the predictive value of PD-L1 CPS in mTNBC. PD-L1 expression in tumour samples was assessed using PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx and quantified using both CPS and tumour proportion score (TPS; PD-L1 expression on tumour cells alone). Calculated immune cell density (CID) was defined as CPS minus TPS. The ability of each scoring method (CPS, TPS, and CID) to predict clinical outcomes with pembrolizumab was evaluated. With pembrolizumab, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.69 (95% CI = 0.58–0.80) for CPS, 0.55 (95% CI = 0.46–0.64) for TPS, and 0.67 (95% CI = 0.56–0.77) for CID. After correction for cutoff prevalence, CPS performed as well as, if not better than, CID with respect to predicting objective response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Data from this exploratory analysis suggest that, although PD-L1 expression on immune cells alone is predictive of response to programmed death 1 blockade in mTNBC, adding tumour PD-L1 expression assessment (i.e. CPS, which combines immune cell and tumour cell PD-L1 expression) may improve prediction. PD-L1 CPS thus remains an effective and broadly applicable uniform scoring system for enriching response to programmed death 1 blockade with pembrolizumab in mTNBC as well as other tumour types

A first-in-human study of the anti-LAG-3 antibody favezelimab plus pembrolizumab in previously treated, advanced microsatellite stable colorectal cancer

Advanced; Colorectal cancerAvanzado; Cáncer colorrectalAvançat; Càncer colorrectalBackground Treatment options are limited for participants with microsatellite stable (MSS) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that progressed after two or more prior therapies. Studies have shown that blockade of both lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) can improve antitumor activity. Here, we evaluate the antitumor activity of the LAG-3 antibody favezelimab alone or in combination with pembrolizumab in participants with MSS mCRC. Patients and methods Eligible participants with MSS PD-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) treatment-naive mCRC that progressed on two or more prior therapies received 800 mg favezelimab, 800 mg favezelimab plus 200 mg pembrolizumab, or 800 mg favezelimab/200 mg pembrolizumab co-formulation, every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was safety, the secondary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), and exploratory endpoints included duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results At the data cut-off date of 23 October 2020, a total of 20 participants received favezelimab alone, 89 received favezelimab plus pembrolizumab (including as favezelimab/pembrolizumab co-formulation); 48 had PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) ≥1 tumors. At this interim analysis median follow-up was 5.8 months with favezelimab and 6.2 with favezelimab plus pembrolizumab. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were 65% with favezelimab and 65.2% with favezelimab plus pembrolizumab. Grade ≥3 TRAEs were 15% with favezelimab and 20% with favezelimab plus pembrolizumab. No grade 5 TRAEs occurred. Common TRAEs (≥15%) included fatigue (20.0%), nausea (15.0%) with favezelimab, and fatigue (16.9%) with favezelimab plus pembrolizumab. Confirmed ORR was 6.3% with favezelimab plus pembrolizumab, with median duration of response of 10.6 months (range 5.6-12.7 months), median OS of 8.3 months (95% confidence interval 5.5-12.9 months), and median PFS of 2.1 months (1.9-2.2 months). In an exploratory analysis of PD-L1 CPS ≥1 tumors, the confirmed ORR was 11.1%, median OS was 12.7 months (4.5 to not reached), and median PFS was 2.2 months (1.8-4.2 months) with favezelimab plus pembrolizumab. Conclusions Favezelimab with or without pembrolizumab had a manageable safety profile, with no treatment-related deaths. Promising antitumor activity was observed with combination therapy, particularly in participants with PD-L1 CPS ≥1 tumors.This work was supported by Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (no grant number)

Efficacy of Margetuximab vs Trastuzumab in Patients With Pretreated ERBB2-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial

Advanced Breast Cancer; Efficacy; MargetuximabCáncer de mama avanzado; Eficacia; MargetuximabCàncer de mama avançat; Eficàcia; MargetuximabImportance ERRB2 (formerly HER2)–positive advanced breast cancer (ABC) remains typically incurable with optimal treatment undefined in later lines of therapy. The chimeric antibody margetuximab shares ERBB2 specificity with trastuzumab but incorporates an engineered Fc region to increase immune activation. Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of margetuximab vs trastuzumab, each with chemotherapy, in patients with pretreated ERBB2-positive ABC. Design, Setting, and Participants The SOPHIA phase 3 randomized open-label trial of margetuximab plus chemotherapy vs trastuzumab plus chemotherapy enrolled 536 patients from August 26, 2015, to October 10, 2018, at 166 sites in 17 countries. Eligible patients had disease progression on 2 or more prior anti-ERBB2 therapies and 1 to 3 lines of therapy for metastatic disease. Data were analyzed from February 2019 to October 2019. Interventions Investigators selected chemotherapy before 1:1 randomization to margetuximab, 15 mg/kg, or trastuzumab, 6 mg/kg (loading dose, 8 mg/kg), each in 3-week cycles. Stratification factors were metastatic sites (≤2, >2), lines of therapy (≤2, >2), and chemotherapy choice. Main Outcomes and Measures Sequential primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) by central blinded analysis and overall survival (OS). All α was allocated to PFS, followed by OS. Secondary end points were investigator-assessed PFS and objective response rate by central blinded analysis. Results A total of 536 patients were randomized to receive margetuximab (n = 266) or trastuzumab (n = 270). The median age was 56 (27-86) years; 266 (100%) women were in the margetuximab group, while 267 (98.9%) women were in the trastuzumab group. Groups were balanced. All but 1 patient had received prior pertuzumab, and 489 (91.2%) had received prior ado-trastuzumab emtansine. Margetuximab improved primary PFS over trastuzumab with 24% relative risk reduction (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59-0.98; P = .03; median, 5.8 [95% CI, 5.5-7.0] months vs 4.9 [95% CI, 4.2-5.6] months; October 10, 2018). After the second planned interim analysis of 270 deaths, median OS was 21.6 months with margetuximab vs 19.8 months with trastuzumab (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.69-1.13; P = .33; September 10, 2019), and investigator-assessed PFS showed 29% relative risk reduction favoring margetuximab (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58-0.86; P < .001; median, 5.7 vs 4.4 months; September 10, 2019). Margetuximab improved objective response rate over trastuzumab: 22% vs 16% (P = .06; October 10, 2018), and 25% vs 14% (P < .001; September 10, 2019). Incidence of infusion-related reactions, mostly in cycle 1, was higher with margetuximab (35 [13.3%] vs 9 [3.4%]); otherwise, safety was comparable. Conclusions and Relevance In this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, margetuximab plus chemotherapy had acceptable safety and a statistically significant improvement in PFS compared with trastuzumab plus chemotherapy in ERBB2-positive ABC after progression on 2 or more prior anti-ERBB2 therapies. Final OS analysis is expected in 2021.This study was supported by MacroGenics, Inc

Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Microsatellite Instability-High Gastric Cancer

Purpose Microsatellite instability (MSI) status may affect the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in gastric cancer. In this study, the clinical characteristics of MSI-high (MSI-H) gastric cancer and the predictive value of MSI-H for adjuvant chemotherapy in large cohorts of gastric cancer patients were evaluated. Materials and Methods This study consisted of two cohorts. Cohort 1 included gastric cancer patients who received curative resection with pathologic stage IB-IIIC. Cohort 2 included patients with MSI-H gastric cancer who received curative resection with pathologic stage II/III. MSI was examined using two mononucleotide markers and three dinucleotide markers. Results Of 359 patients (cohort 1), 41 patients (11.4%) had MSI-H. MSI-H tumors were more frequently identified in older patients (p < 0.001), other histology than poorly cohesive, signet ring cell type (p=0.005), intestinal type (p=0.028), lower third tumor location (p=0.005), and absent perineural invasion (p=0.027). MSI-H status has a tendency of better disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in multivariable analyses (hazard ratio [HR], 0.4; p=0.059 and HR, 0.4; p=0.063, respectively). In the analysis of 162 MSI-H patients (cohort 2), adjuvant chemotherapy showed a significant benefit with respect to longer DFS and OS (p=0.047 and p=0.043, respectively). In multivariable analysis, adjuvant chemotherapy improved DFS (HR, 0.4; p=0.040). Conclusion MSI-H gastric cancer had distinct clinicopathologic findings. Even in MSI-H gastric cancer of retrospective cohort, adjuvant chemotherapy could show a survival benefit, which was in contrast to previous prospective studies and should be investigated in a further prospective trial.

Prognostic Value of p53 and bcl-2 Expression in Patients Treated with Breast Conservative Therapy

Prognostic value of p53 and bcl-2 expression on treatment outcome in breast cancer patients has been extensively evaluated, but the results were inconclusive. We evaluated the prognostic significance of these molecular markers in patients treated with breast conserving surgery and radiotherapy. One hundred patients whose immunostaining of p53 and bcl-2 expression was available among 125 patients who underwent radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery and axillary lymph node dissection were enrolled into this study. Eighty-seven patients also received adjuvant chemotherapy and/or hormonal therapy. Conventional clinicopathologic variables and treatment-related factors were also considered. The 5-yr loco-regional relapse-free and distant metastasis-free survival rates were 91.7% and 90.9%, respectively. On univariate analysis, age, T stage and the absence of bcl-2 & estrogen receptor (ER) expression were associated with loco-regional relapse-free survival. When incorporating these variables into Cox proportional hazard model, only bcl-2(-)/ER(-) phenotype was an adverse prognostic factor (P=0.018). As for the distant metastasis-free survival, age, T stage, and p53 expression were significant on univariate analysis. However, p53 expression was the only prognosticator on multivariate analysis (P=0.009). A bcl-2(-)/ER(-) phenotype and p53 expression are useful molecular markers predicting loco-regional relapse-free and distant metastasis-free survival, respectively, in patients treated with breast conserving surgery and radiotherapy

Olaparib for metastatic breast cancer in patients with a germline BRCA mutation

BACKGROUND Olaparib is an oral poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor that has promising antitumor activity in patients with metastatic breast cancer and a germline BRCA mutation. METHODS We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial in which olaparib monotherapy was compared with standard therapy in patients with a germline BRCA mutation and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer who had received no more than two previous chemotherapy regimens for metastatic disease. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 2: 1 ratio, to receive olaparib tablets (300 mg twice daily) or standard therapy with single-agent chemotherapy of the physician's choice (capecitabine, eribulin, or vinorelbine in 21-day cycles). The primary end point was progression-free survival, which was assessed by blinded independent central review and was analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS Of the 302 patients who underwent randomization, 205 were assigned to receive olaparib and 97 were assigned to receive standard therapy. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the olaparib group than in the standardtherapy group (7.0 months vs. 4.2 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.43 to 0.80; P<0.001). The response rate was 59.9% in the olaparib group and 28.8% in the standard-therapy group. The rate of grade 3 or higher adverse events was 36.6% in the olaparib group and 50.5% in the standard-therapy group, and the rate of treatment discontinuation due to toxic effects was 4.9% and 7.7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer and a germline BRCA mutation, olaparib monotherapy provided a significant benefit over standard therapy; median progression-free survival was 2.8 months longer and the risk of disease progression or death was 42% lower with olaparib monotherapy than with standard therapy. (Funded by AstraZeneca; OlympiAD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02000622.

Correction to: Development of a Novel Orthotopic Gastric Cancer Mouse Model

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article

Predictors of prolonged benefit from palbociclib plus fulvestrant in women with endocrine-resistant hormone receptor–positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative metastatic breast cancer in PALOMA-3

Abstract Background The addition of palbociclib to fulvestrant improved clinical outcomes over placebo-fulvestrant in endocrine-pretreated metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients in PALOMA-3. Here, we examined factors predictive of long-term benefit. Methods Premenopausal-peri/postmenopausal patients with endocrine-resistant, hormone receptor–positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative MBC were randomised 2:1 to fulvestrant (500 mg) and either palbociclib (125 mg/d; 3/1 schedule; n = 347) or placebo (n = 174). Baseline characteristics, mutation status and HR expression levels were compared in patients with and without prolonged benefit (treatment duration ≥18 months). Results By August 2016, 100 patients (29%) on palbociclib-fulvestrant and 26 (15%) on placebo-fulvestrant demonstrated prolonged benefit, with long-term responders in both arms sharing common clinical characteristics. They usually had less disease burden at baseline versus those treated Conclusions This exploratory analysis demonstrates that some patients with endocrine-resistant MBC derive significant and prolonged benefit when treated with palbociclib-fulvestrant, with fewer patients experiencing similar efficacy with placebo-fulvestrant. The current analysis did not identify specific molecular or clinical factors prognostic of long-term benefit with palbociclib-fulvestrant ( ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01942135 )

TDP1 and TOP1 Modulation in Olaparib-Resistant Cancer Determines the Efficacy of Subsequent Chemotherapy

The aim of this study was to elucidate the carryover effect of olaparib to subsequent chemotherapy and its underlying mechanisms. We generated olaparib-resistant SNU-484, SNU-601, SNU-668, and KATO-III gastric cancer cell lines and confirmed their resistance by cell viability and colony forming assays. Notably, olaparib-resistant cell lines displayed cross-resistance to cisplatin except for KATO-III. Inversely, olaparib-resistant SNU-484, SNU-668, and KATO-III were more sensitive to irinotecan than their parental cells. However, sensitivity to paclitaxel remained unaltered. There were compensatory changes in the ATM/ATR axis and p-Chk1/2 protein expression. ERCC1 was also induced in olaparib-resistant SNU-484, SNU-601, and SNU-668, which showed cross-resistance to cisplatin. Olaparib-resistant cells showed tyrosyl-DNA phosphodiesterase 1 (TDP1) downregulation with higher topoisomerase 1 (TOP1) activity, which is a target of irinotecan. These changes of TOP1 and TDP1 in olaparib-resistant cells was confirmed as the underlying mechanism for increased irinotecan sensitivity through manipulated gene expression of TOP1 and TDP1 by specific plasmid transfection and siRNA. The patient-derived xenograft model established from the patient who acquired resistance to olaparib with BRCA2 mutation showed increased sensitivity in irinotecan. In conclusion, the carryover effects of olaparib to improve antitumor effect of subsequent irinotecan were demonstrated. These effects should be considered when determining the subsequent therapy with olaparib.

A Case Report of Breast Cancer with Extensive Pulmonary Lymphovascular Tumor Emboli

We describe a patient with breast cancer who relapsed with an extensive pulmonary lymphovascular tumor embolism. A 38-year-old female, who previously received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and curative resection of breast cancer, underwent adjuvant chemotherapy and was referred to the emergency room because of sudden-onset pleuritic chest pain lasting for 10 days. Despite a trial of empirical antibiotics, the chest pain and the extent of consolidative lung lesion on chest radiographs rapidly aggravated. We performed an open lung biopsy to confirm the etiology. The histopathological review revealed a hemorrhagic infarction caused by lymphovascular tumor emboli from a metastatic breast carcinoma. Palliative first-line chemotherapy was administered, consisting of ixabepilone and capecitabine, and the lung lesion improved markedly