Explore the vast range of titles available.

Outcomes are poor for patients with previously treated, advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody atezolizumab is clinically active against cancer, including NSCLC, especially cancers expressing PD-L1 on tumour cells, tumour-infiltrating immune cells, or both. We assessed efficacy and safety of atezolizumab versus docetaxel in previously treated NSCLC, analysed by PD-L1 expression levels on tumour cells and tumour-infiltrating immune cells and in the intention-to-treat population. In this open-label, phase 2 randomised controlled trial, patients with NSCLC who progressed on post-platinum chemotherapy were recruited in 61 academic medical centres and community oncology practices across 13 countries in Europe and North America. Key inclusion criteria were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1), and adequate haematological and end-organ function. Patients were stratified by PD-L1 tumour-infiltrating immune cell status, histology, and previous lines of therapy, and randomly assigned (1:1) by permuted block randomisation (with a block size of four) using an interactive voice or web system to receive intravenous atezolizumab 1200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks. Baseline PD-L1 expression was scored by immunohistochemistry in tumour cells (as percentage of PD-L1-expressing tumour cells TC3≥50%, TC2≥5% and <50%, TC1≥1% and <5%, and TC0<1%) and tumour-infiltrating immune cells (as percentage of tumour area: IC3≥10%, IC2≥5% and <10%, IC1≥1% and <5%, and IC0<1%). The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population and PD-L1 subgroups at 173 deaths. Biomarkers were assessed in an exploratory analysis. We assessed safety in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01903993. Patients were enrolled between Aug 5, 2013, and March 31, 2014. 144 patients were randomly allocated to the atezolizumab group, and 143 to the docetaxel group. 142 patients received at least one dose of atezolizumab and 135 received docetaxel. Overall survival in the intention-to-treat population was 12·6 months (95% CI 9·7–16·4) for atezolizumab versus 9·7 months (8·6–12·0) for docetaxel (hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·53–0·99]; p=0·04). Increasing improvement in overall survival was associated with increasing PD-L1 expression (TC3 or IC3 HR 0·49 [0·22–1·07; p=0·068], TC2/3 or IC2/3 HR 0·54 [0·33–0·89; p=0·014], TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 HR 0·59 [0·40–0·85; p=0·005], TC0 and IC0 HR 1·04 [0·62–1·75; p=0·871]). In our exploratory analysis, patients with pre-existing immunity, defined by high T-effector–interferon-γ-associated gene expression, had improved overall survival with atezolizumab. 11 (8%) patients in the atezolizumab group discontinued because of adverse events versus 30 (22%) patients in the docetaxel group. 16 (11%) patients in the atezolizumab group versus 52 (39%) patients in the docetaxel group had treatment-related grade 3–4 adverse events, and one (<1%) patient in the atezolizumab group versus three (2%) patients in the docetaxel group died from a treatment-related adverse event. Atezolizumab significantly improved survival compared with docetaxel in patients with previously treated NSCLC. Improvement correlated with PD-L1 immunohistochemistry expression on tumour cells and tumour-infiltrating immune cells, suggesting that PD-L1 expression is predictive for atezolizumab benefit. Atezolizumab was well tolerated, with a safety profile distinct from chemotherapy. F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech Inc.

Atezolizumab is a humanised antiprogrammed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibody that inhibits PD-L1 and programmed death-1 (PD-1) and PD-L1 and B7-1 interactions, reinvigorating anticancer immunity. We assessed its efficacy and safety versus docetaxel in previously treated patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial (OAK) in 194 academic or community oncology centres in 31 countries. We enrolled patients who had squamous or non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, were 18 years or older, had measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients had received one to two previous cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens (one or more platinum based combination therapies) for stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer. Patients with a history of autoimmune disease and those who had received previous treatments with docetaxel, CD137 agonists, anti-CTLA4, or therapies targeting the PD-L1 and PD-1 pathway were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenously receive either atezolizumab 1200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks by permuted block randomisation (block size of eight) via an interactive voice or web response system. Coprimary endpoints were overall survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and PD-L1-expression population TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 (≥1% PD-L1 on tumour cells or tumour-infiltrating immune cells). The primary efficacy analysis was done in the first 850 of 1225 enrolled patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02008227. Between March 11, 2014, and April 29, 2015, 1225 patients were recruited. In the primary population, 425 patients were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab and 425 patients were assigned to receive docetaxel. Overall survival was significantly longer with atezolizumab in the ITT and PD-L1-expression populations. In the ITT population, overall survival was improved with atezolizumab compared with docetaxel (median overall survival was 13·8 months [95% CI 11·8–15·7] vs 9·6 months [8·6–11·2]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·62–0·87], p=0·0003). Overall survival in the TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 population was improved with atezolizumab (n=241) compared with docetaxel (n=222; median overall survival was 15·7 months [95% CI 12·6–18·0] with atezolizumab vs 10·3 months [8·8–12·0] with docetaxel; HR 0·74 [95% CI 0·58–0·93]; p=0·0102). Patients in the PD-L1 low or undetectable subgroup (TC0 and IC0) also had improved survival with atezolizumab (median overall survival 12·6 months vs 8·9 months; HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·59–0·96]). Overall survival improvement was similar in patients with squamous (HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·54–0·98]; n=112 in the atezolizumab group and n=110 in the docetaxel group) or non-squamous (0·73 [0·60–0·89]; n=313 and n=315) histology. Fewer patients had treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events with atezolizumab (90 [15%] of 609 patients) versus docetaxel (247 [43%] of 578 patients). One treatment-related death from a respiratory tract infection was reported in the docetaxel group. To our knowledge, OAK is the first randomised phase 3 study to report results of a PD-L1-targeted therapy, with atezolizumab treatment resulting in a clinically relevant improvement of overall survival versus docetaxel in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer, regardless of PD-L1 expression or histology, with a favourable safety profile. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Genentech, Inc.

Tumours respond differently to immunotherapies compared with chemotherapeutic drugs, raising questions about the assessment of changes in tumour burden—a mainstay of evaluation of cancer therapeutics that provides key information about objective response and disease progression. A consensus guideline—iRECIST—was developed by the RECIST working group for the use of modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST version 1.1) in cancer immunotherapy trials, to ensure consistent design and data collection, facilitate the ongoing collection of trial data, and ultimate validation of the guideline. This guideline describes a standard approach to solid tumour measurements and definitions for objective change in tumour size for use in trials in which an immunotherapy is used. Additionally, it defines the minimum datapoints required from future trials and those currently in development to facilitate the compilation of a data warehouse to use to later validate iRECIST. An unprecedented number of trials have been done, initiated, or are planned to test new immune modulators for cancer therapy using a variety of modified response criteria. This guideline will allow consistent conduct, interpretation, and analysis of trials of immunotherapies.

The utility of deep neural nets has been demonstrated for mapping hematoxylin-and-eosin (H&E) stained image features to expression of individual genes. However, these models have not been employed to discover clinically relevant spatial biomarkers. Here we develop MOSBY ( M ulti- Omic translation of whole slide images for S patial B iomarker discover Y ) that leverages contrastive self-supervised pretraining to extract improved H&E whole slide images features, learns a mapping between image and bulk omic profiles (RNA, DNA, and protein), and utilizes tile-level information to discover spatial biomarkers. We validate MOSBY gene and gene set predictions with spatial transcriptomic and serially-sectioned CD8 IHC image data. We demonstrate that MOSBY-inferred colocalization features have survival-predictive power orthogonal to gene expression, and enable concordance indices highly competitive with survival-trained multimodal networks. We identify and validate (1) an ER stress-associated colocalization feature as a chemotherapy-specific risk factor in lung adenocarcinoma, and (2) the colocalization of T effector cell vs cysteine signatures as a negative prognostic factor in multiple cancer indications. The discovery of clinically relevant biologically interpretable spatial biomarkers showcases the utility of the model in unraveling novel insights in cancer biology as well as informing clinical decision-making.

Baseline patient characteristics and prognostic factors are important considerations in oncology when evaluating the impact of immunogenicity on pharmacokinetics (PK) and efficacy. Here, we assessed the impact of anti‐drug antibodies (ADA) on the PK of the immune checkpoint inhibitor atezolizumab (an anti–PD‐L1 monoclonal antibody). We evaluated data from ≈ 4500 patients from 12 clinical trials across different tumor types, treatment settings, and dosing regimens. In our dataset, ~ 30% of patients (range, 13–54%) developed treatment‐emergent ADA, and in vitro neutralizing antibodies (NAb) were seen in ~ 50% of ADA‐positive (+) patients. Pooled time course data showed a trend toward lower atezolizumab exposure in ADA+ patients, which was more pronounced in ADA+/NAb+ patients. However, the atezolizumab concentration distributions overlapped, and drug concentrations exceeded 6 µg/ml, the target concentration required for receptor saturation, in greater than 95% of patients. Patients had sufficient exposure regardless of ADA status. The dose selected to allow for dosing over effects from ADA resulted in a flat exposure‐response relationship. Analysis of study results by ADA titer showed that exposure and overall survival were not affected in a clinically meaningful way. High tumor burden, low albumin, and high CRP at baseline showed the greatest association with ADA development but not with subsequent NAb development. These imbalanced factors at baseline can confound analysis of ADA impact. ADA increases atezolizumab clearance minimally (9%), and its impact on exposure based on the totality of the clinical pharmacology assessment does not appear to be clinically meaningful.

The phase 3 IMpower150 trial in treatment-naïve patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) demonstrates significantly longer progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with first-line atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1)-bevacizumab (anti-VEGF)-carboplatin-paclitaxel (ABCP) than with bevacizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel (BCP). We characterise four molecular NSCLC subtypes identified by unsupervised clustering of transcriptomes of 564 pre-treatment primary tumour samples from IMpower150 using non-negative matrix factorization (NMF1-4). Each subtype has distinct tumour PD-L1 expression levels, epithelial characteristics, immune composition, and treatment outcomes. Both NMF2 (enriched in tumour proliferation signal, macrophages, and monocytes) and NMF4 (enriched in B cells and T cells) have elevated tumour PD-L1 expression. Of these two, only NMF4 demonstrates PFS and OS benefits with ABCP versus either BCP or atezolizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel (ACP). Patients with NMF1 (enriched in basal and squamous-like cells) have improved outcomes on ABCP compared with ACP or BCP; those with NMF3 (enriched in adenocarcinoma signatures) show similar outcomes among treatments. These insights could help inform individualised first-line treatment for metastatic NSCLC. Standard first line therapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer is immunotherapy but responses vary and consistent predictive biomarkers are lacking. Here, using RNA-sequencing data from a large clinical trial in NSCLC patients, the authors define four molecular subsets with distinct tumour-intrinsic and -extrinsic features with differing outcomes to immunotherapy combinations.

Overall survival (OS) is the most significant endpoint for evaluation of treatment benefit with checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) in cancer. We evaluated serum C-reactive protein (CRP) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) trials with atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) as an early OS surrogate. Serum from patients enrolled in randomized Phase II (n = 240) and Phase III (n = 701) trials of NSCLC patients (POPLAR, OAK) who progressed on prior-platinum chemotherapy, were analyzed for CRP levels over time. Patients were grouped by changes in CRP levels post-treatment as either increased (≥ 1.5 fold), decreased (≤ 1.5 fold) or unchanged (within +1.5 fold) relative to pre-treatment levels to assess association with progression free survival (PFS) and OS. Decrease in serum CRP levels at 6 weeks relative to pre-treatment were observed in patients with RECIST1.1 based complete or partial responses (CR/PR) to atezolizumab whereas patients with disease progression (PD) demonstrated an increase in CRP levels in the Phase II POPLAR study, and confirmed in the Phase III OAK study. Decrease in serum CRP as early as six weeks post treatment predicted improved PFS and OS, even in patients who were determined as stable disease (SD) in their first scan. This effect was not observed in the chemotherapy arms. Modulation of serum CRP correlates with clinical outcome post-atezolizumab treatment. This routine lab test may provide utility in informing OS signals as early as 6 weeks post-initiation of therapy with CPIs in NSCLC.

BackgroundThere is strong evidence that immunotherapy-mediated tumor rejection can be driven by tumor-specific CD8+ T cells reinvigorated to recognize neoantigens derived from tumor somatic mutations. Thus, the frequencies or characteristics of tumor-reactive, mutation-specific CD8+ T cells could be used as biomarkers of an anti-tumor response. However, such neoantigen-specific T cells are difficult to reliably identify due to their low frequency in peripheral blood and wide range of potential epitope specificities.MethodsPeripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) from 14 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients were collected pre- and post-treatment with the anti-PD-L1 antibody atezolizumab. Using whole exome sequencing and RNA sequencing we identified tumor neoantigens that are predicted to bind to major histocompatibility complex class I (MHC-I) and utilized mass cytometry, together with cellular ‘barcoding’, to profile immune cells from patients with objective response to therapy (n = 8) and those with progressive disease (n = 6). In parallel, a highly-multiplexed combinatorial tetramer staining was used to screen antigen-specific CD8+ T cells in peripheral blood for 782 candidate tumor neoantigens and 71 known viral-derived control peptide epitopes across all patient samples.ResultsNo significant treatment- or response associated phenotypic difference were measured in bulk CD8+ T cells. Multiplexed peptide-MHC multimer staining detected 20 different neoantigen-specific T cell populations, as well as T cells specific for viral control antigens. Not only were neoantigen-specific T cells more frequently detected in responding patients, their phenotypes were also almost entirely distinct. Neoantigen-specific T cells from responder patients typically showed a differentiated effector phenotype, most like Cytomegalovirus (CMV) and some types of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-specific CD8+ T cells. In contrast, more memory-like phenotypic profiles were observed for neoantigen-specific CD8+ T cells from patients with progressive disease.ConclusionThis study demonstrates that neoantigen-specific T cells can be detected in peripheral blood in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients during anti-PD-L1 therapy. Patients with an objective response had an enrichment of neoantigen-reactive T cells and these cells showed a phenotype that differed from patients without a response. These findings suggest the ex vivo identification, characterization, and longitudinal follow-up of rare tumor-specific differentiated effector neoantigen-specific T cells may be useful in predicting response to checkpoint blockade.Trial registrationPOPLAR trial NCT01903993.

Antibody therapeutics can be associated with unwanted immune responses resulting in the development of anti‐drug antibodies (ADA). Optimal methods to evaluate the potential effects of ADA on clinical outcomes in oncology are not well established. In this study, we assessed efficacy and safety, based on ADA status, in patients from over 10 clinical trials that evaluated the immune checkpoint inhibitor atezolizumab as a single agent or as combination therapy for several types of advanced cancers. ADA can only be observed post randomization, and imbalances in baseline prognostic factors can confound the interpretation of ADA impact. We applied methodology to account for the confounding effects of baseline clinical characteristics and survivorship bias on efficacy. Adjusted meta‐analyses revealed that despite numerical differences in overall survival and progression‐free survival between ADA‐positive and ADA‐negative patients from some studies, ADA‐positive patients from studies with an overall treatment effect derived benefit from atezolizumab, compared with their adjusted controls. Based on large, pooled populations from atezolizumab monotherapy or combination studies, unadjusted descriptive analyses did not identify a clear relationship between ADA status and frequency or severity of adverse events. Data also suggested that any ADA impact is not driven by neutralizing activity. Collectively, this exploratory analysis suggests that the potential for ADA development should not impact treatment decisions with atezolizumab.

The objectives of the study were to use tumor size data from 10 phase II/III atezolizumab studies across five solid tumor types to estimate tumor growth inhibition (TGI) metrics and assess the impact of TGI metrics and baseline prognostic factors on overall survival (OS) for each tumor type. TGI metrics were estimated from biexponential models and posttreatment longitudinal data of 6699 patients. TGI‐OS full models were built using parametric survival regression by including all significant baseline covariates from the Cox univariate analysis followed by a backward elimination step. The model performance was evaluated for each trial by 1000 simulations of the OS distributions and hazard ratios (HR) of the atezolizumab‐containing arms versus the respective controls. The tumor growth rate estimate was the most significant predictor of OS across all tumor types. Several baseline prognostic factors, such as inflammatory status (C‐reactive protein, albumin, and/or neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio), tumor burden (sum of longest diameters, number of metastatic sites, and/or presence of liver metastases), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and lactate dehydrogenase were also highly significant across multiple studies in the final multivariate models. TGI‐OS models adequately described the OS distribution. The model‐predicted HRs indicated good model performance across the 10 studies, with observed HRs within the 95% prediction intervals for all study arms versus controls. Multivariate TGI‐OS models developed for different solid tumor types were able to predict treatment effect with various atezolizumab monotherapy or combination regimens and could be used to support design and analysis of future studies.