Development and validation of an integrative pan-solid tumor predictor of PD-1/PD-L1 blockade benefit.
Journal
Communications medicine
ISSN: 2730-664X
Titre abrégé: Commun Med (Lond)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9918250414506676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 Feb 2023
07 Feb 2023
Historique:
received:
25
01
2022
accepted:
12
01
2023
entrez:
7
2
2023
pubmed:
8
2
2023
medline:
8
2
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Anti-PD-1 and PD-L1 (collectively PD-[L]1) therapies are approved for many advanced solid tumors. Biomarkers beyond PD-L1 immunohistochemistry, microsatellite instability, and tumor mutation burden (TMB) may improve benefit prediction. Using treatment data and genomic and transcriptomic tumor tissue profiling from an observational trial (NCT03061305), we developed Immunotherapy Response Score (IRS), a pan-tumor predictive model of PD-(L)1 benefit. IRS real-world progression free survival (rwPFS) and overall survival (OS) prediction was validated in an independent cohort of trial patients. Here, by Cox modeling, we develop IRS-which combines TMB with CD274, PDCD1, ADAM12 and TOP2A quantitative expression-to predict pembrolizumab rwPFS (648 patients; 26 tumor types; IRS-High or -Low groups). In the 248 patient validation cohort (248 patients; 24 tumor types; non-pembrolizumab PD-[L]1 monotherapy treatment), median rwPFS and OS are significantly longer in IRS-High vs. IRS-Low patients (rwPFS adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.52, p = 0.003; OS aHR 0.49, p = 0.005); TMB alone does not significantly predict PD-(L)1 rwPFS nor OS. In 146 patients treated with systemic therapy prior to pembrolizumab monotherapy, pembrolizumab rwPFS is only significantly longer than immediately preceding therapy rwPFS in IRS-High patients (interaction test p = 0.001). In propensity matched lung cancer patients treated with first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy or pembrolizumab+chemotherapy, monotherapy rwPFS is significantly shorter in IRS-Low patients, but is not significantly different in IRS-High patients. Across 24,463 molecularly-evaluable trial patients, 7.6% of patients outside of monotherapy PD-(L)1 approved tumor types are IRS-High/TMB-Low. The validated, predictive, pan-tumor IRS model can expand PD-(L)1 monotherapy benefit outside currently approved indications. Therapies activating the immune system (checkpoint inhibitors) have revolutionized the treatment of patients with advanced cancer, however new molecular tests may better identify patients who could benefit. Using treatment data and clinical molecular test results, we report the development and validation of Immunotherapy Response Score (IRS) to predict checkpoint inhibitor benefit. Across patients with more than 20 advanced cancer types, IRS better predicted checkpoint inhibitor benefit than currently available tests. Data from >20,000 patients showed that IRS identifies ~8% of patients with advanced cancer who may dramatically benefit from checkpoint inhibitors but would not receive them today based on currently available tests. Our approach may help clinicians to decide which patients should receive checkpoint inhibitors to treat their disease.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Anti-PD-1 and PD-L1 (collectively PD-[L]1) therapies are approved for many advanced solid tumors. Biomarkers beyond PD-L1 immunohistochemistry, microsatellite instability, and tumor mutation burden (TMB) may improve benefit prediction.
METHODS
METHODS
Using treatment data and genomic and transcriptomic tumor tissue profiling from an observational trial (NCT03061305), we developed Immunotherapy Response Score (IRS), a pan-tumor predictive model of PD-(L)1 benefit. IRS real-world progression free survival (rwPFS) and overall survival (OS) prediction was validated in an independent cohort of trial patients.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Here, by Cox modeling, we develop IRS-which combines TMB with CD274, PDCD1, ADAM12 and TOP2A quantitative expression-to predict pembrolizumab rwPFS (648 patients; 26 tumor types; IRS-High or -Low groups). In the 248 patient validation cohort (248 patients; 24 tumor types; non-pembrolizumab PD-[L]1 monotherapy treatment), median rwPFS and OS are significantly longer in IRS-High vs. IRS-Low patients (rwPFS adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.52, p = 0.003; OS aHR 0.49, p = 0.005); TMB alone does not significantly predict PD-(L)1 rwPFS nor OS. In 146 patients treated with systemic therapy prior to pembrolizumab monotherapy, pembrolizumab rwPFS is only significantly longer than immediately preceding therapy rwPFS in IRS-High patients (interaction test p = 0.001). In propensity matched lung cancer patients treated with first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy or pembrolizumab+chemotherapy, monotherapy rwPFS is significantly shorter in IRS-Low patients, but is not significantly different in IRS-High patients. Across 24,463 molecularly-evaluable trial patients, 7.6% of patients outside of monotherapy PD-(L)1 approved tumor types are IRS-High/TMB-Low.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The validated, predictive, pan-tumor IRS model can expand PD-(L)1 monotherapy benefit outside currently approved indications.
Therapies activating the immune system (checkpoint inhibitors) have revolutionized the treatment of patients with advanced cancer, however new molecular tests may better identify patients who could benefit. Using treatment data and clinical molecular test results, we report the development and validation of Immunotherapy Response Score (IRS) to predict checkpoint inhibitor benefit. Across patients with more than 20 advanced cancer types, IRS better predicted checkpoint inhibitor benefit than currently available tests. Data from >20,000 patients showed that IRS identifies ~8% of patients with advanced cancer who may dramatically benefit from checkpoint inhibitors but would not receive them today based on currently available tests. Our approach may help clinicians to decide which patients should receive checkpoint inhibitors to treat their disease.
Autres résumés
Type: plain-language-summary
(eng)
Therapies activating the immune system (checkpoint inhibitors) have revolutionized the treatment of patients with advanced cancer, however new molecular tests may better identify patients who could benefit. Using treatment data and clinical molecular test results, we report the development and validation of Immunotherapy Response Score (IRS) to predict checkpoint inhibitor benefit. Across patients with more than 20 advanced cancer types, IRS better predicted checkpoint inhibitor benefit than currently available tests. Data from >20,000 patients showed that IRS identifies ~8% of patients with advanced cancer who may dramatically benefit from checkpoint inhibitors but would not receive them today based on currently available tests. Our approach may help clinicians to decide which patients should receive checkpoint inhibitors to treat their disease.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36750617
doi: 10.1038/s43856-023-00243-7
pii: 10.1038/s43856-023-00243-7
pmc: PMC9905474
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
14Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2021 Jun;18(6):345-362
pubmed: 33580222
Cell. 2018 Oct 4;175(2):313-326
pubmed: 30290139
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2016 Nov;140(11):1259-1266
pubmed: 27788043
Nature. 2017 Jan 18;541(7637):321-330
pubmed: 28102259
Science. 2018 Feb 16;359(6377):801-806
pubmed: 29301960
J Clin Invest. 2017 Aug 1;127(8):2930-2940
pubmed: 28650338
Cancer Discov. 2018 Jul;8(7):822-835
pubmed: 29773717
Nat Med. 2021 Dec;27(12):2200-2211
pubmed: 34893775
Science. 2015 Apr 3;348(6230):124-8
pubmed: 25765070
Science. 2015 Oct 9;350(6257):207-211
pubmed: 26359337
J Clin Oncol. 2019 Feb 1;37(4):318-327
pubmed: 30557521
J Mol Diagn. 2021 Nov;23(11):1515-1533
pubmed: 34454112
Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2021 Oct;18(10):625-644
pubmed: 34168333
J Thorac Oncol. 2017 Feb;12(2):208-222
pubmed: 27913228
Cell. 2021 Feb 4;184(3):596-614.e14
pubmed: 33508232
Lancet Oncol. 2020 Oct;21(10):1353-1365
pubmed: 32919526
J Thorac Oncol. 2021 Oct;16(10):1647-1662
pubmed: 34246791
Nat Commun. 2021 Jun 25;12(1):3969
pubmed: 34172722
Sci Transl Med. 2012 Mar 28;4(127):127ra37
pubmed: 22461641
Cancer J. 2018 Jan/Feb;24(1):41-46
pubmed: 29360727
Clin Cancer Res. 2022 May 13;28(10):2050-2060
pubmed: 35247908
Mod Pathol. 2022 Jan;35(Suppl 1):66-74
pubmed: 34608245
Clin Cancer Res. 2022 Apr 14;28(8):1680-1689
pubmed: 34965943
JCO Precis Oncol. 2021 Aug 19;5:
pubmed: 34476329
J Thorac Oncol. 2020 Sep;15(9):1409-1424
pubmed: 32522712
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2021 Jul;163:103374
pubmed: 34087341
Eur J Cancer. 2021 Nov;157:108-113
pubmed: 34500370
PLoS One. 2018 Nov 8;13(11):e0206370
pubmed: 30408065
Int J Clin Oncol. 2020 May;25(5):790-800
pubmed: 31900651
Clin Cancer Res. 2021 Sep 1;27(17):4685-4689
pubmed: 34083238
N Engl J Med. 2020 Oct 1;383(14):1328-1339
pubmed: 32997907
Nat Commun. 2021 Sep 23;12(1):5606
pubmed: 34556668
Nature. 2014 Nov 27;515(7528):563-7
pubmed: 25428504
J Thorac Oncol. 2017 May;12(5):e45
pubmed: 28434512
J Thorac Oncol. 2018 Mar;13(3):291-294
pubmed: 29472051
J Clin Oncol. 2018 Mar 1;36(7):631-632
pubmed: 29337637
Nat Med. 2018 May;24(5):556-562
pubmed: 29736026
N Engl J Med. 2018 May 31;378(22):2093-2104
pubmed: 29658845
Science. 2016 Mar 25;351(6280):1463-9
pubmed: 26940869
Science. 2018 Oct 12;362(6411):
pubmed: 30309915
Cancer Discov. 2021 Apr;11(4):838-857
pubmed: 33811120
Eur Urol. 2020 Apr;77(4):548-556
pubmed: 31959546
Nat Commun. 2020 May 1;11(1):2135
pubmed: 32358509
N Engl J Med. 2021 Mar 25;384(12):1168-1170
pubmed: 33761214
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2021 Nov 29;113(12):1634-1647
pubmed: 33823006
Lancet Oncol. 2020 Nov;21(11):1399-1401
pubmed: 33098760
Cancer Discov. 2022 Mar 1;12(3):654-669
pubmed: 34876409
Eur Urol. 2019 Mar;75(3):445-447
pubmed: 30558899
Ann Oncol. 2021 Dec;32(12):1626-1636
pubmed: 34606929
J Clin Oncol. 2018 Mar 1;36(7):633-641
pubmed: 29337640
Cancer Cell. 2022 Aug 8;40(8):879-894.e16
pubmed: 35944503
Clin Cancer Res. 2021 May 1;27(9):2494-2504
pubmed: 33547200
Clin Cancer Res. 2022 Jan 15;28(2):368-377
pubmed: 35045958
Nat Cancer. 2021 Oct;2(10):1018-1038
pubmed: 35121884
Science. 2018 Mar 23;359(6382):1350-1355
pubmed: 29567705
NPJ Precis Oncol. 2022 Jun 23;6(1):44
pubmed: 35739333
Eur Urol. 2019 Mar;75(3):435-444
pubmed: 30274701
JAMA Oncol. 2019 Aug 01;5(8):1195-1204
pubmed: 31318407
JAMA Oncol. 2017 Aug 01;3(8):1051-1058
pubmed: 28278348
Cancer Cell. 2018 May 14;33(5):853-861.e4
pubmed: 29731394
Br J Cancer. 2020 Nov;123(10):1535-1542
pubmed: 32868898
JAMA Oncol. 2019 Nov 1;5(11):1631-1633
pubmed: 31486842
JAMA. 2019 Apr 9;321(14):1391-1399
pubmed: 30964529
Nat Cancer. 2020 Jan;1(1):99-111
pubmed: 32984843
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2021 Nov 29;113(12):1613-1614
pubmed: 34097056
Nat Genet. 2019 Feb;51(2):202-206
pubmed: 30643254
JAMA Oncol. 2019 Nov 01;5(11):1614-1618
pubmed: 31436822
JAMA Oncol. 2022 Aug 1;8(8):1160-1168
pubmed: 35708671
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2016 Aug 23;140(11):1243-1249
pubmed: 27552095