Search

Cell-free DNA fragments are shed into the bloodstream by tumor cells. The analysis of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), commonly known as liquid biopsy, can be exploited for a variety of clinical applications. ctDNA is being used to genotype solid cancers non-invasively, to track tumor dynamics and to detect the emergence of drug resistance. In a few settings, liquid biopsies have already entered clinical practice. For example, ctDNA is used to guide treatment in a subset of lung cancers. In this review, we discuss how recent improvements in the sensitivity and accuracy of ctDNA analyses have led to unprecedented advances in this research field. We further consider what is required for the routine deployment of liquid biopsies in the clinical diagnostic space. We pinpoint technical hurdles that liquid biopsies have yet to overcome, including preanalytical and analytical challenges. We foresee how liquid biopsies will transform clinical practice: by complementing (or replacing) imaging to monitor treatment response and by detecting minimal residual disease after surgery with curative intent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Preclinical evidence suggests that MEK inhibition promotes accumulation and survival of intratumoral tumor-specific T cells and can synergize with immune checkpoint inhibition. We investigated the safety and clinical activity of combining a MEK inhibitor, cobimetinib, and a programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor, atezolizumab, in patients with solid tumors. Patients and methods This phase I/Ib study treated PD-L1/PD-1-naive patients with solid tumors in a dose-escalation stage and then in multiple, indication-specific dose-expansion cohorts. In most patients, cobimetinib was dosed once daily orally for 21 days on, 7 days off. Atezolizumab was dosed at 800 mg intravenously every 2 weeks. The primary objectives were safety and tolerability. Secondary end points included objective response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Results Between 27 December 2013 and 9 May 2016, 152 patients were enrolled. As of 4 September 2017, 150 patients received ≥1 dose of atezolizumab, including 14 in the dose-escalation cohorts and 136 in the dose-expansion cohorts. Patients had metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC; n  = 84), melanoma (n  = 22), non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC; n  = 28), and other solid tumors (n  = 16). The most common all-grade treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (67%), rash (48%), and fatigue (40%), similar to those with single-agent cobimetinib and atezolizumab. One (<1%) treatment-related grade 5 AE occurred (sepsis). Forty-five (30%) and 23 patients (15%) had AEs that led to discontinuation of cobimetinib and atezolizumab, respectively. Confirmed responses were observed in 7 of 84 patients (8%) with mCRC (6 responders were microsatellite low/stable, 1 was microsatellite instable), 9 of 22 patients (41%) with melanoma, and 5 of 28 patients (18%) with NSCLC. Clinical activity was independent of KRAS/BRAF status across diseases. Conclusions Atezolizumab plus cobimetinib had manageable safety and clinical activity irrespective of KRAS/BRAF status. Although potential synergistic activity was seen in mCRC, this was not confirmed in a subsequent phase III study. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01988896 (the investigators in the NCT01988896 study are listed in the supplementary Appendix , available at Annals of Oncology online). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) agents have become the standard of care for platinum-refractory recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and are currently being evaluated in various disease settings. However, despite the gain in overall survival seen in some of the clinical trials, the majority of patients display primary resistance and do not benefit from these agents. Taking into consideration the potentially severe immune-related toxicities and their high cost, the search for predictive biomarkers of response is crucial. Besides Programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression, other biomarkers such as immune infiltration, tumor mutational burden or immune-gene expression profiling have been explored, but none of them has been validated in this disease. Among these, the microbiota has recently garnered tremendous interest since it has proven to influence the efficacy of PD-1 blockade in some tumor types. With the accumulating evidence on the effect of the microbiota in HNSCC tumorigenesis and progression, the study of its potential role as a predictive immune biomarker is warranted. This review examines the available evidence on emerging immune predictive biomarkers of response to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in HNSCC, introducing the microbiota and its potential use as a predictive immune biomarker in this disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Methodology for the Development of Innovative Cancer Therapies task force considered aspects of the design and conduct of early studies of combinations of immunotherapy agents during their 2018 meeting. The task force defined the relevant data to justify combination clinical trials, which includes a robust hypothesis for the combination, pre-clinical data with evidence of efficacy and an understanding of the pharmacodynamics effects of each agent, and ideally evidence of single agent activity. Evaluation of pharmacodynamic biomarkers is critical in early phase combination trials, and should be incorporated into trial objectives and go/no-go decisions. The task force also identified the need to develop assessment tools and end points that capture the unique patterns of tumour responses to immunotherapy, including pseudoprogression and hyperprogression. At least one additional tumour measurement before baseline and an early CT scan (at 4 weeks for example) would help define the incidence of hyperprogression, although a common definition is needed. Finally, the task force highlighted substantial redundancy and inefficiency in the combination immunotherapy space, and recommended the adoption of innovative trial designs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While next generation sequencing has enhanced our understanding of the biological basis of malignancy, current knowledge on global practices for sequencing cancer samples is limited. To address this deficiency, we developed a survey to provide a snapshot of current sequencing activities globally, identify barriers to data sharing and use this information to develop sustainable solutions for the cancer research community. Methods: A multi-item survey was conducted assessing demographics, clinical data collection, genomic platforms, privacy/ethics concerns, funding sources and data sharing barriers for sequencing initiatives globally. Additionally, respondents were asked as to provide the primary intent of their initiative (clinical diagnostic, research or combination). Results: Of 107 initiatives invited to participate, 59 responded (response rate = 55%). Whole exome sequencing (P = 0.03) and whole genome sequencing (P = 0.01) were utilized less frequently in clinical diagnostic than in research initiatives. Procedures to identify cancer-specific variants were heterogeneous, with bioinformatics pipelines employing different mutation calling/variant annotation algorithms. Measurement of treatment efficacy varied amongst initiatives, with time on treatment (57%) and RECIST (53%) being the most common; however, other parameters were also employed. Whilst 72% of initiatives indicated data sharing, its scope varied, with a number of restrictions in place (e.g. transfer of raw data). The largest perceived barriers to data harmonization were the lack of financial support (P < 0.01) and bioinformatics concerns (e.g. lack of interoperability) (P = 0.02). Capturing clinical data was more likely to be perceived as a barrier to data sharing by larger initiatives than by smaller initiatives (P = 0.01). Conclusions: These results identify the main barriers, as perceived by the cancer sequencing community, to effective sharing of cancer genomic and clinical data. They highlight the need for greater harmonization of technical, ethical and data capture processes in cancer sample sequencing worldwide, in order to support effective and responsible data sharing for the benefit of patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]