Search

Background: dNLR at the baseline (B), defined by neutrophils/[leucocytes-neutrophils], correlates with immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) outcomes in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). However, dNLR is dynamic under therapy and its longitudinal assessment may provide data predicting efficacy. We sought to examine the impact of dNLR dynamics on ICI efficacy and understand its biological significance., Patients and Methods: aNSCLC patients receiving ICI at 17 EU/US centres were included [Feb/13-Jun/18]. As chemotherapy-only group was evaluated (NCT02105168). dNLR was determined at (B) and at cycle2 (C2) [dNLR≤3 = low]. B+C2 dNLR were combined in one score: good = low (B+C2), poor = high (B+C2), intermediate = other situations. In 57 patients, we prospectively explored the immunophenotype of circulating neutrophils, particularly the CD15+CD244-CD16 low cells (immature) by flow cytometry., Results: About 1485 patients treatment with ICI were analysed. In ICI-treated patients, high dNLR (B) (~1/3rd) associated with worse progression-free (PFS)/overall survival (OS) (HR 1.56/HR 2.02, P < 0.0001) but not with chemotherapy alone (N = 173). High dNLR at C2 was associated with worse PFS/OS (HR 1.64/HR 2.15, P < 0.0001). When dNLR at both time points were considered together, those with persistently high dNLR (23%) had poor survival (mOS = 5 months (mo)), compared with high dNLR at one time point (22%; mOS = 9.2mo) and persistently low dNLR (55%; mOS = 18.6mo) (P < 0.0001). The dNLR impact remained significant after PD-L1 adjustment. By cytometry, high rate of immature neutrophils (B) (30/57) correlated with poor PFS/OS (P = 0.04; P = 0.0007), with a 12-week death rate of 49%., Conclusion: The dNLR (B) and its dynamics (C2) under ICI associate with ICI outcomes in aNSCLC. Persistently high dNLR (B+C2) correlated with early ICI failure. Immature neutrophils may be a key subpopulation on ICI resistance., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement LM: Sponsored Research: Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim. Consulting, advisory role: Roche Diagnostics, Takeda, Roche. Lectures and educational activities: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Tecnofarma, Roche. Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche. Mentorship program with key opinion leaders: funded by AstraZeneca. IP has served as a consultant for AstraZeneca, Pfizer and BluePrint Medicines. EA: Travel expenses: Mundipharma. Lectures and educational activities: Sanofi Genzymes. DS, HR, JR, SP, SC, FB, FT, MLR, PS, JG, AJP, MC, MN, CR, APM, LC and WPhad nothing to disclose. LH: none related to the current article, outside of the current article: research funding Roche Genentech, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca (all institution), advisory board: Boehringer, BMS, Eli Lilly, Roche Genentech, Pfizer, Takeda, MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amgen (all institution), speaker: MSD, travel/conference reimbursement: Roche Genentech (self); mentorship program with key opinion leaders: funded by AstraZeneca; fees for educational webinars: Quadia (self), interview sessions funded by Roche Genentech (institution), local PI of clinical trials: AstraZeneca, Novartis, BMS, MSD/Merck, GSK, Takeda, Blueprint Medicines, Roche Genentech, Janssen Cilag. EN: none related to the current article, outside of the current article: research support from Roche and Pfizer; advisory boards from Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Lilly, Roche, Pfizer, Takeda, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amgen and AstraZeneca. PM: Principal/subinvestigator of Clinical Trials for Abbvie, Adaptimmune, Aduro Biotech, Agios Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Argen-X Bvba, Arno Therapeutics, Astex Pharmaceuticals, Astra Zeneca Ab, Aveo, Basilea Pharmaceutica International Ltd, Bayer Healthcare Ag, Bbb Technologies Bv, Beigene, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ca, Celgene Corporation, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co, Clovis Oncology, Cullinan-Apollo, Daiichi Sankyo, Debiopharm, Eisai, Eisai Limited, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, Forma Tharapeutics, Gamamabs, Genentech, Glaxosmithkline, H3 Biomedicine, Hoffmann La Roche Ag, Imcheck Therapeutics, Innate Pharma, Institut De Recherche Pierre Fabre, Iris Servier, Janssen Cilag, Janssen Research Foundation, Kyowa Kirin Pharm. Dev, Lilly France, Loxo Oncology, Lytix Biopharma As, Medimmune, Menarini Ricerche, Merck Sharp & Dohme Chibret, Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Merus, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Molecular Partners Ag, Nanobiotix, Nektar Therapeutics, Novartis Pharma, Octimet Oncology Nv, Oncoethix, Oncopeptides, Orion Pharma, Ose Pharma, Pfizer, Pharma Mar, Pierre Fabre, Medicament, Roche, Sanofi Aventis, Sotio A.S, Syros Pharmaceuticals, Taiho Pharma, Tesaro, Xencor Research Grants from Astrazeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen Cilag, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi Non-financial support (drug supplied) from Astrazeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boringher Ingelheim, Medimmune, Merck, NH TherAGuiX, Pfizer, Roche. CAV: Personal fees from Roche, AbbVie, MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Astra Zeneca, Takeda and Ipsen. PB: Speaker bureau: AstraZeneca, BMS, Roche, MSD. Honoraria: Beigene. SN: Speaker Bureau/Advisor: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer, Beigene, MSD, Roche, Takeda, Pfizer. MDH receives research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb; has been a compensated consultant for Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, Nektar, Syndax, Mirati, Shattuck Labs, Immunai, Blueprint Medicines, Achilles and Arcus; received travel support/honoraria from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Bristol-Myers Squibb; has options from Shattuck Labs, Immunai and Arcus; has a patent filed by his institution related to the use of tumour mutation burden to predict response to immunotherapy (PCT/US2015/062,208), which has received licensing fees from PGDx. GZ: Grants and personal fees from BMS, non-financial support from MSD, personal fees from Borhinger, non-financial support from Roche, personal fees from Astra-Zeneca, non-financial support from Abbvie, outside the submitted work. MM: Grants and personal fees from BMS, personal fees and non-financial support from MSD, personal fees and non-financial support from BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM, personal fees, non-financial support and other from ASTRA ZENENCA, personal fees, non-financial support and other from ROCHE, personal fees from KYOWA KYRIN, personal fees from PIERRE FABRE, outside the submitted work. LPA: Honoraria (self): Adacap, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Incyte, Ipsen, Merck, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Pharmamar, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Sysmex, Takeda; Leadership role: Altum sequencing; Research grant/Funding (self): AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Pfizer; Officer/Board of Directors Genómica. AMD: Consulting, advisory role or lectures: Roche, Eli Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Astra Zeneca, Pfizer, BMS, Amgen, Novartis, MSD, Takeda, Pharmamar. Research support: Amgen, Abbvie, BMS. DP: Consulting, advisory role or lectures: AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer; Ingelheim, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, prIME Oncology, Peer. CME, Roche. Honoraria: AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene. Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, prIME Oncology, Peer CME, Roche. Clinical trials research: AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Medimmune, Sanofi-Aventis, Taiho Pharma, Novocure, Daiichi Sankyo. Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca, Roche, Novartis, prIME Oncology, Pfizer. NC: Sponsored Research at Gustave Roussy Cancer Center BMS fondation, GSK, Sanofi, advisory role and lectures: AstraZeneca. These are outside the scope of this work. GL: Research support Merck serono, BMS, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Blueprint medicines. KA: Consultant for Astrazeneca and Iovance Biotherapeutics. Her institution has received non-monetary research support from Takeda and Novartis on her behalf. BB: Sponsored Research at Gustave Roussy Cancer Center Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Blueprint Medicines, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, GSK, Ignyta, IPSEN, Merck KGaA, MSD, Nektar, Onxeo, Pfizer, Pharma Mar, Sanofi, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Takeda, Tiziana Pharma., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) comprise a distinct spectrum of auto-inflammatory manifestations triggered due to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Current data on the association of irAEs with outcomes in NSCLC treated with nivolumab are limited., Methods and Objectives: We pooled data from 531 metastatic NSCLC patients from five centers treated with nivolumab after failing platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary objective was to investigate the relationship between irAEs with clinical benefit to nivolumab as well as to elucidate patterns of irAE-related ICI discontinuations and their impact on survival., Results: 33.0% (173/531) of patients treated with nivolumab were noted to have an irAE. Patients with irAEs had a significantly longer median PFS [6.1 vs. 3.1 months, HR 0.68 95% CI (0.55-0.85); p = 0.001] and OS [14.9 vs. 7.4 months, HR 0.66 95% CI (0.52-0.82); p < 0.001)] compared to those without irAEs. In multivariate analysis, the presence of irAEs showed a significantly better PFS [HR 0.69, 95% CI (0.55-0.87); p = 0.002] and a trend for better OS [HR 0.62, 95% CI (0.55-1.03); p = 0.057]. Patients with permanent ICI discontinuation secondary to index irAE had a significantly shorter median PFS [2.3 vs. 6.6 months, HR 1.74 95% CI (1.06-2.80); p = 0.02] and median OS [3.6 vs. 17.6 months; HR 2.61 95% CI (1.61-4.21); p < 0.001] compared to those that did not have permanent ICI discontinuation., Conclusions: Our pooled exploratory analysis demonstrates improved clinical benefit to nivolumab in NSCLC patients experiencing irAEs. We also observed negative impact of irAE-related treatment discontinuation on survival in this group of patients.

Background: Accessible biomarkers are needed for immunotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We previously described a multivariate risk prediction model, the iSEND, which categorises advanced NSCLC patients treated with nivolumab into Good, Intermediate or Poor groups. This model was developed by using only clinical and analytical variables (sex, ECOG-performance status, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio [NLR] and post-treatment delta NLR)., Methods: An international database of 439 patients who received post-platinum PD-1/L1 monotherapies was collected for validation. Performance of the iSEND to different PD-L1 groups was compared by using time-dependent positive predictive value (PPV) for their mortality events., Results: Median follow-up was 18.2 months (95% CI: 15.9-19.6). The overall survival of the iSEND Good (HR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.22-0.43, p < 0.0001) was superior to the iSEND Poor. Time-dependent PPV for mortality of iSEND Poor was superior to PD-L1 = 0% group at 12 (75 vs. 53%, p = 0.01) and 18 months (85 vs. 46%, p = 0.03). However, female gender did not independently associate with better outcome in the validation cohort., Conclusion: The iSEND model is associated with the outcome of post-platinum PD-1/L1 monotherapy in advanced NSCLC patients. The iSEND Poor demonstrated a superior performance to PD-L1 = 0% in negative prognostication. Prospective investigation and modelling with other significant parameters in a larger cohort are warranted.

Introduction: Presently, programmed death ligand 1 is the most commonly used biomarker to predict response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in NSCLC. Owing to its several limitations, there is continuous search for more precise and reliable markers. Frameshift mutations by insertion or deletion (fsindels) are suggested to induce more immunogenic tumor-specific neoantigens, conferring better response to ICIs. Positive correlation of fsindels with ICI response has been studied in melanoma and renal cell carcinoma. We investigated the implication of fsindels in the clinical outcomes and immune landscape of patients with NSCLC treated with ICIs., Methods: We utilized The Cancer Genome Atlas data set to analyze tumor mutational burden, neoantigen burden, and immune landscape in relation to fsindel status. In addition, utilizing the clinical data from 122 patients treated with ICIs, we evaluated the influence of fsindels on disease response rates and survival outcomes., Results: A positive correlation between fsindel burden and tumor mutational burden and activated CD4/CD8 T-cell infiltration was shown. Presence of fsindels was also associated with significant prolongation of progression-free survival in patients treated with ICIs (median 6.2 versus 2.7 months [p = 0.01]). In addition, significant differences in the overall response rates (26% versus 12% [p = 0.04]) and disease control rates (68% versus 48% [p = 0.02]) were observed in patients with fsindels., Conclusion: Our findings suggest that fsindels may have a predictive role for ICI response in NSCLC., (Copyright © 2019 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Tissue tumor mutational burden (TMB) has emerged as a potential biomarker predicting response to anti-programmed cell death-1 protein receptor (PD-1)/programmed cell death-1 protein ligand (PD-L1) therapy, but few studies have explored using circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) TMB in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Materials and Methods: A total of 136 patients with NSCLC with ctDNA testing were retrospectively evaluated from a single institution, along with a validation cohort from a second institution. ctDNA TMB was derived using the number of detected mutations over the DNA sequencing length., Results: Higher ctDNA TMB was significantly correlated with smoking history ( p  < .05, chi-squared test). Among patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors ( n  = 20), higher ctDNA TMB was significantly correlated with shorter progressive free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS; 45 vs. 355 days; hazard ratio [HR], 5.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-24.6; p  < .01, and OS 106 days vs. not reached; HR, 6.0; 95% CI, 1.3-27.1; p  < .01, respectively). In a small independent validation cohort ( n  = 12), there was a nonsignificant numerical difference for higher ctDNA TMB predicting shorter OS but not PFS. ctDNA TMB was not correlated with RECIST tumor burden estimation in the subset of patients treated with immune checkpoint blockade., Conclusion: The findings indicate that higher ctDNA TMB, at the current commercial sequencing length, reflects worse clinical outcomes., Implications for Practice: Biomarkers to identify patients who will respond to immune checkpoint blockade are critical. Tissue tumor mutational burden (TMB) has emerged as a viable biomarker to predict response to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy, but few studies have explored the meaning and potential clinical significance of noninvasive, blood-based TMB. Here, we investigated circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) TMB and present data demonstrating that current ctDNA TMB may reflect tumor burden and that ctDNA panels with a greater number of mutations may be necessary to more accurately reflect tissue TMB., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2019.)

There is a rising need for optimal biomarkers to better tailor treatments for patients with cancer in the era of immunotherapy. In addition to programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) and tumor mutation burden (TMB), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte (NLR) is regaining interest as a biomarker in immunotherapy for its availability, accessibility, and reproducibility. High NLR, according to different thresholds, is consistently reported to correlate with poor prognosis in different treatments in several cancers. Yet, most data come from retrospective analysis, and proof of mechanism and principle evaluations are limited. Prospective studies or adequately sized retrospective analyses of prospectively collected data are required to best assess its role in clinical practice. Moreover, effective myeloid or neutrophil modulators in tumor microenvironment can potentially contribute as a new therapeutic strategy. This perspective will summarize our current knowledge and will discuss where we stand now and propose future directions., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: The survival of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene mutations has improved substantially in the last decade with the development of targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Osimertinib, a third-generation TKI that is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of patients who develop EGFR T790M mutations, has recently shown improved clinical outcomes compared with gefitinib and erlotinib for treatment-naive patients., Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of osimertinib for the first-line treatment of patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC., Design, Setting, and Participants: For this cost-effectiveness analysis, we extracted individual patient data from the FLAURA randomized clinical trial and used findings of our earlier meta-analysis to develop a decision-analytic model and determine the cost-effectiveness of osimertinib (AZD9291) compared with first- and second-generation EGFR-TKIs over a 10-year time horizon. All direct costs were based on US and Brazilian payer perspectives., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome of this study was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained by using osimertinib compared with first- or second-generation EGFR-TKIs in previously untreated EGFR-mutated NSCLC., Results: In the base case using the data as reported in the FLAURA trial, the incremental QALY for osimertinib was 0.594 compared with the first- and second-generation EGFR-TKIs. In the United States, the osimertinib ICERs were $226 527 vs erlotinib, $231 123 vs gefitinib, and $219 874 vs afatinib. In Brazil, the ICERs were $162 329, $180 804, and $175 432, respectively. The overall survival (95% CI) reported in the FLAURA trial (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.45-0.88) had the strongest association with the ICER (ranging from $84 342 to $859 771). Osimertinib price adjustments to the FLAURA trial data improved cost-effectiveness. For example, a discount of 10% on osimertinib acquisition cost was associated with a 20% decreased ICER compared with the base case ICER, and a discount of 20% on osimertinib acquisition cost was associated with a 40% decreased ICER compared with the base case ICER., Conclusions and Relevance: At current costs, by World Health Organization cost-effectiveness threshold criteria, osimertinib is not cost-effective for first-line therapy of EGFR-mutated NSCLC in either the United States or Brazil.

Introduction: Despite significant improvement of clinical outcomes of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with immunotherapy, our knowledge of optimal biomarkers is still limited., Patients and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 159 advanced NSCLC patients in our institution treated with nivolumab after disease progression during platinum-based chemotherapy. We correlated several variables with progression-free survival (PFS) to develop the immunotherapy, Sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and Delta NLR (iSEND) model. We categorized patients into iSEND good, intermediate, and poor risk groups and evaluated their clinical outcomes. Performance of iSEND at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months was evaluated according to receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and internally validated using bootstrapping. The association of iSEND risk groups with clinical benefit was evaluated using logistic regression., Results: Median follow-up was 11.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.4-13.1). There were 50 deaths and 43 with disease progression without death. PFS rates at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months were 78.4%, 63.7%, 55.3%, and 52.2% in iSEND good; 79.4%, 44.3%, 25.9%, and 19.2% in iSEND intermediate; and 65%, 25.9%, 22.8%, and 17.8% in iSEND poor. Time-dependent area under ROC curves of iSEND for PFS at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months were 0.718, 0.74, 0.746, and 0.774. The iSEND poor group was significantly associated with progressive disease at 12 ± 2 weeks (odds ratio, 9.59; 95% CI, 3.8-26.9; P < .0001)., Conclusion: The iSEND model is an algorithmic model that can characterize clinical outcomes of advanced NSCLC patients receiving nivolumab into good, intermediate, or poor risk groups and might be useful as a predictive model if validated independently., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We describe a rare case of severe autoimmune haemolytic anaemia (AIHA) in the setting of underlying chronic lymphocytic leukaemia receiving intravenous immunoglobulin, history of warm IgG autoantibody and treatment with nivolumab for advanced non-small cell lung cancer. In this report, we describe AIHA as a potential serious immune-related adverse event from immune checkpoint inhibitors, discuss other potential contributing factors and review previously described cases of AIHA in patients receiving programmed death 1 (PD-1) inhibitors. In the era of immunotherapy, we hope to add literature to raise awareness of potential immune-related sequelae such as AIHA. We aim to highlight the importance of close monitoring for prompt identification and management of potentially fatal AIHA and immune-related adverse events of PD-1 inhibitors by holding immunotherapy and treating with high-dose steroids, particularly in subgroups which may be at increased risk., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© BMJ Publishing Group Ltd (unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

An antibody simultaneously targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), two major tumor growth-driving machineries, may provide a novel effective strategy for optimizing tumor targeting and maximizing potential clinical benefits. Human domain antibodies selected against VEGF and EGFR were formatted into a fully human dual-targeting IgG (DT-IgG) to directly target both antigens in a single molecule. We evaluated the efficacy of DT-IgG in comparison with bevacizumab and cetuximab alone and in combination in the lung cancer cell line A549 (low EGFR expression and KRAS mutant) and the head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) cell line Tu212 (high EGFR expression and KRAS wild type) in vitro and in vivo. DT-IgG suppressed Tu212 and A549 cell growth, inhibited EGFR activation and induced apoptosis as effectively as cetuximab, and neutralized VEGF as effectively as bevacizumab. DT-IgG induced EGFR-dependent VEGF internalization, constituting a novel antiangiogenesis mechanism. In xenograft models with lung and head and neck cancer cell lines, DT-IgG displayed efficacy equivalent to bevacizumab in diminishing tumor growth despite its short serum half-life (36 hr in rats) and both agents may constitute preferable alternatives to cetuximab in KRAS-mutant tumors. Immunofluorescence staining revealed that localization of DT-IgG was similar to that of cetuximab, largely associated with EGFR+tumor cells. Our proof of principle study suggests a DT-IgG against EGFR and VEGF as an alternative therapeutic strategy with potentially enhanced clinical benefit., (Copyright © 2011 UICC.)