Near future of tumor immunology: Anticipating resistance mechanisms to immunotherapies, a big challenge for clinical trials

Methods behind oncolytic virus-based DC vaccines in cancer: Toward a multiphase combined treatment strategy for Glioblastoma (GBM) patients

Glioblastoma (GBM) remains an orphan cancer disease with poor outcome. Novel treatment strategies are needed. Immunotherapy has several modes of action. The addition of active specific immunotherapy with dendritic cell vaccines resulted in improved overall survival of patients. Integration of DC vaccination within the first-line combined treatment became a challenge, and immunogenic cell death immunotherapy during chemotherapy was introduced. We used a retrospective analysis using real world data to evaluate the complex combined treatment, which included individualized multimodal immunotherapy during and after standard of care, and which required adaptations during treatment, and found a further improvement of overall survival. We also discuss the use of real world data as evidence. Novel strategies to move the field of individualized multimodal immunotherapy forward for GBM patients are reviewed.

The Application of Evidence-Based Medicine in Individualized Medicine

The fundamental aim of healthcare is to improve overall health of the population by providing state-of-the-art healthcare for individuals at an affordable cost. The foundation for this system is largely referred to as "evidence-based medicine". Too often, evidence-based medicine is based solely on so-called "best research evidence", collected through randomized controlled trials while disregarding clinical expertise and patient expectations. As healthcare gravitates towards personalized and individualized medicine, such external clinical (research) evidence can inform, but never replace, individual clinical expertise. This applies in particular to orphan diseases, for which clinical trials are methodologically particularly problematic, and evidence derived from them is often questionable. Evidence-based medicine constitutes a complex process to allow doctors and patients to select the best possible solutions for each individual based on rapidly developing new therapeutic directions. This requires a revisit of the foundations of evidence-based medicine. A proposition as to how to manage evidence-based data in individualized immune-oncology is presented here.

Evidence-Based Medicine in Oncology: Commercial Versus Patient Benefit

At times of personalized and individualized medicine the concept of randomized- controlled clinical trials (RCTs) is being questioned. This review article explains principles of evidence-based medicine in oncology and shows an example of how evidence can be generated independently from RCTs. Personalized medicine involves molecular analysis of tumor properties and targeted therapy with small molecule inhibitors. Individualized medicine involves the whole patient (tumor and host) in the context of immunotherapy. The example is called Individualized Multimodal Immunotherapy (IMI). It is based on the individuality of immunological tumor-host interactions and on the concept of immunogenic tumor cell death (ICD) induced by an oncolytic virus. The evidence is generated by systematic data collection and analysis. The outcome is then shared with the scientific and medical community. The priority of big pharma studies is commercial benefit. Methods used to achieve this are described and have damaged the image of RCT studies in general. A critical discussion is recommended between all partners of the medical health system with regard to the conduct of RCTs by big pharma companies. Several clinics and institutions in Europe try to become more independent from pharma industry and to develop their own modern cancer therapeutics. Medical associations should include references to such studies from personalized and individualized medicine in their guidelines.

Position paper: new insights into the immunobiology and dynamics of tumor-host interactions require adaptations of clinical studies

INTRODUCTION

Prospective double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are considered standard for the proof of the efficacy of oncologic therapies. Molecular methods have provided new insights into tumor biology and led to the development of targeted therapies. Due to the increasing complexity of molecular tumor characteristics and of the individuality of specific anti-tumor immune reactivity, RCTs are unfortunately only of limited use.

AREAS COVERED

The historical methods of drug research and approval and the related practices of reimbursement by statutory and private health insurance companies are being questioned. New, innovative methods for the documentation of evidence in personalized medicine will be addressed. Possible perspectives and new approaches are discussed, in particular with regard to glioblastoma.

EXPERT OPINION

Highly specialized translational oncology groups like the IOZK can contribute to medical progress and quick transfer 'from bench to bedside.' Their contribution should be acknowledged and taken into account more strongly in the development of guidelines and the reimbursement of therapy costs. Methodological plurality should be encouraged.

Single-Cell Analysis of Circulating Tumor Cells: How Far Have We Come in the -Omics Era?

Tumor cells detach from the primary tumor or metastatic sites and enter the peripheral blood, often causing metastasis. These cells, named Circulating Tumor Cells (CTCs), display the same spatial and temporal heterogeneity as the primary tumor. Since CTCs are involved in tumor progression, they represent a privileged window to disclose mechanisms of metastases, while -omic analyses at the single-cell level allow dissection of the complex relationships between the tumor subpopulations and the surrounding normal tissue. However, in addition to reporting the proof of concept that we can query CTCs to reveal tumor evolution throughout the continuum of treatment for early detection of resistance to therapy, the scientific literature has also been highlighting the disadvantages of CTCs, which hampers a routine use of this approach in clinical practice. To date, an increasing number of CTC technologies, as well as -omics methods, have been employed, mostly lacking strong comparative analyses. The rarity of CTCs also represents a major challenge, because there is no consensus regarding the minimal criteria necessary and sufficient to define an event as CTC; moreover, we cannot often compare data from of one study with that of another. Finally, the availability of an individual tumor profile undermines the traditional histology-based treatment. Applying molecular data for patient benefit implies a collective effort by biologists, bioengineers, and clinicians, to create tools to interpret molecular data and manage precision medicine in every single patient. Herein, we focus on the most recent findings in CTC −omics to learn how far we have come.

Current approaches to immunotherapy in noncolorectal gastrointestinal malignancies

Noncolorectal gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies are among the most frequently diagnosed cancers. Despite the undeniable progress in systemic treatments in recent decades, further improvements using cytotoxic chemotherapy seem unlikely. In this setting, recent discoveries regarding the mechanism underlying immune evasion have prompted the study of molecules capable of inducing strong antitumor responses. Thus, according to early data, immunotherapy is a very promising tool for the treatment of patients with GI malignancies. Noncolorectal GI cancers are a major public health problem worldwide. Traditional treatment options, such as chemotherapy, surgery, radiation therapy, monoclonal antibodies and antiangiogenic agents, have been the backbone of treatment for various stages of GI cancers, but overall mortality remains a major problem. Thus, there is a substantial unmet need for new drugs and therapies to further improve the outcomes of treatment for noncolorectal GI malignancies. "Next-generation" immunotherapy is emerging as an effective and promising treatment option in several types of cancers. Therefore, encouraged by this recent success, many clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors and other strategies in treating noncolorectal GI malignancies are ongoing. This review will summarize the current clinical progress of modern immunotherapy in the field of noncolorectal GI tumors.

Patent trend and competitive analysis of cancer immunotherapy in the United States

Immunotherapy has brought high hopes for cancer treatment, and attracted tremendous resources from the biopharmaceutical community. Here we analyze cancer immunotherapy-related patents granted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office in the past decade (2006-2016). A total of 2,229 patents were identified in 13 subfields. The growth of patent number in this field has outpaced the background rate, with cytokine-related therapies, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and natural killer cell therapies growing the most rapidly. The top 15 assignees possess 27.6% (616) of the patents. Amgen is the largest patent holder, followed by Novartis, and then by Chugai Seiyaku. The top assignees have focused on different subfields, and collaborated with each other for technology development. Our competitive analysis reveals that Novartis, Chugai Seiyaku, and Abbvie lead in both patent number and average quality of patents. Meanwhile, Immunomedics owns a high-quality though relatively small patent portfolio in single-chain variable fragment technology, which is not the focus of the abovementioned forerunners. Overall, our analysis illustrates an ecosystem where industry giants and smaller-size players each occupies a niche. Selection and succession are expected to continue for years in this young ecosystem.