Subgroup analysis of Japanese patients in a Phase 3 study of atezolizumab in advanced triple-negative breast cancer (IMpassion130)

PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of unresectable locally advanced or metastatic triple negative breast cancer: a meta-analysis on their efficacy and safety

BACKGROUND

Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) represents a particularly aggressive and clinically challenging subtype of breast cancer, characterized by its invasive nature and generally poor prognosis. Treatment options for unresectable TNBC are limited. In recent years, the advent of PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors has offered a promising new treatment option for unresectable TNBC. The role of PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in unresectable TNBC management remains a subject of debate. This article aims to synthesize evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) through a meta-analysis (MA) to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the efficacy and safety profile of ICIs in the treatment of unresectable TNBC.

METHOD

We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov for the eligible RCTs which compared the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 ICIs and chemotherapy alone. The outcomes analyzed included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and treatment-related adverse effects (AEs).

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 11 trials. Therapy with PD-L1 inhibitors was superior to chemotherapy in terms of OS in both the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and the PD-L1-positive population. (ITT: HR: = 0.90 [0.81, 0.99], P = 0.04, I2 = 48%; PD-L1 + : HR = 0.82 [0.70, 0.95], P = 0.01, I2 = 64%); In terms of PFS, treatment with PD-L1 inhibitors prolonged PFS in both the ITT and PD-L1-positive populations compared with chemotherapy (ITT: HR: = 0.85 [0.77, 0.93], P = 0.0006, I2 = 46%; PD-L1 + : HR = 0.72 [0.62, 0.83], P < 0.00001, I2 = 70%, Fig. 5); Compared with chemotherapy alone, treatment with PD-1 inhibitors prolonged OS in both the PD-L1-positive and ITT populations. (ITT: HR = 0.87 [0.78, 0.96], P = 0.007, I2 = 71%; CPS ≥ 1: HR = 0.81 [0.71, 0.92], P = 0.001, I2 = 39%); In terms of PFS, therapy with PD-1 inhibitors improved PFS in both the ITT population and the PD-L1-positive population compared with chemotherapy. (ITT: HR = 0.79 [0.70, 0.90], P = 0.0004, I2 = 0%; CPS ≥ 1: HR = 0.71 [0.61, 0.83], P < 0.0001, I2 = 0%; CPS ≥ 10: HR = 0.67 [0.53, 0.84], P = 0.0008, I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

Both PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors can offer survival benefits to TNBC patients, with the primary beneficiaries being those who are PD-L1-positive. However, immunotherapy can also lead to an increase in treatment-related adverse events. Therefore, it is essential to conduct a risk assessment for each patient before starting treatment to prevent the occurrence of serious adverse reactions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This systematic review study has been filed with PROSPERO (Registration number: CRD42024571775).

Results from the randomized KEYNOTE-355 study of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy for Asian patients with advanced TNBC

In the phase 3 KEYNOTE-355 study (NCT02819518), pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus placebo plus chemotherapy among patients with previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 10 tumors. We analyzed outcomes for the subgroup of patients enrolled in Asia in KEYNOTE-355. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo (2:1 randomization) every 3 weeks for 35 cycles plus investigator's choice chemotherapy. Primary endpoints were PFS per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 and OS. Among patients enrolled in Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Malaysia and Taiwan (pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy, n = 113; placebo plus chemotherapy, n = 47), 117 (73.1%) had PD-L1 CPS ≥ 1 and 56 (35.0%) had PD-L1 CPS ≥ 10. Median time from randomization to data cutoff (June 15, 2021) was 43.8 (range, 36.8‒53.2) months (intent-to-treat [ITT] population). Hazard ratios (HRs [95% CI]) for PFS in the CPS ≥ 10, CPS ≥ 1, and ITT populations were 0.48 (0.24‒0.98), 0.58 (0.37‒0.91), and 0.66 (0.44‒0.99), respectively. Corresponding HRs (95% CI) for OS were 0.54 (0.28‒1.04), 0.62 (0.40‒0.97), and 0.57 (0.39‒0.84). Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 77.9% versus 78.7% of patients with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy. No grade 5 AEs occurred. Clinically meaningful improvement in PFS and OS with manageable toxicity were observed with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients enrolled in Asia with previously untreated, inoperable or metastatic TNBC.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02819518.

Role of tumor cell pyroptosis in anti-tumor immunotherapy

Peripheral tumor-specific CD8+ T cells often fail to infiltrate into tumor parenchyma due to the immunosuppression of tumor microenvironment (TME). Meanwhile, a significant portion of tumor-specific CD8+ T cells infiltrated into TME are functionally exhausted. Despite the enormous success of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immune-checkpoint blockade (ICB) treatment in a wide variety of cancer types, the majority of patients do not respond to this treatment largely due to the failure to efficiently drive tumor-specific CD8+ T cell infiltration and reverse their exhaustion states. Nowadays, tumor cell pyroptosis, a unique cell death executed by pore-forming gasdermin (GSDM) family proteins dependent or independent on inflammatory caspase activation, has been shown to robustly promote immune-killing of tumor cells by enhancing tumor immunogenicity and altering the inflammatory state in the TME, which would be beneficial in overcoming the shortages of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 ICB therapy. Therefore, in this review we summarize the current progresses of tumor cell pyroptosis in enhancing immune function and modulating TME, which synergizes anti-PD-1/PD-L1 ICB treatment to achieve better anti-tumor effect. We also enumerate several strategies to better amply the efficiency of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 ICB therapy by inducing tumor cell pyroptosis.

Recent Developments in Combination Immunotherapy with Other Therapies and Nanoparticle-Based Therapy for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC)

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), lacking specific receptors found in other breast cancer subtypes, poses significant treatment challenges due to limited therapeutic options. Therefore, it is necessary to develop novel treatment approaches for TNBC. In the last few decades, many attempts have been reported for alternative tools for TNBC treatment: immunotherapy, radiotherapy, targeted therapy, combination therapy, and nanotechnology-based therapy. Among them, combination therapy and nanotechnology-based therapy show the most promise for TNBC treatment. This review outlines recent advancements in these areas, highlighting the efficacy of combination therapy (immunotherapy paired with chemotherapy, targeted therapy, or radiotherapy) in both preclinical and clinical stages and nanotechnology-based therapies utilizing various nanoparticles loaded with anticancer agents, nucleic acids, immunotherapeutics, or CRISPRs in preclinical stages for TNBC treatment.

PD-1/PD-L1 Inhibitor - Related Adverse Events and Their Management in Breast Cancer

As the positive results of multiple clinical trials were released, the Programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and Programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors emerge as the focus of integrative breast cancer treatment. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors are often used as a sequential agent to be combined with other agents such as chemotherapeutic agents, targeted agents, and radiation therapy. As multiple therapies are administered simultaneously or in sequence, they are prone to a variety of adverse effects on patients while achieving efficacy. It is a challenge for clinicians to maintaining the balance between immune-related adverse effects(irAEs) and treatment efficacy. Previous literatures have paid lots of attention on the adverse effects caused by immunosuppressive agents themselves, while there is a dearth of the research on the management of adverse immune effects during the combination of immunotherapy with other treatments. In this review, we discuss the overall incidence of irAEs caused by PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in combination with various types of treatments in breast cancer, including chemotherapy, CTLA-4 inhibitors, targeted therapy, and radiotherapy, and systematically summarizes the clinical management to each organ-related adverse immune reaction. It is important to emphasize that in the event of irAEs such as neurological, hematologic, and cardiac toxicity, there is no alternative treatment but to terminate immunotherapy. Thus, seeking more effective strategy of irAEs' management is imminent and clinicians are urged to raise the awareness of the management of adverse immune reactions.

Disproportionality Analysis of Stomatitis Associated with Anticancer Drugs Using the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report Database

INTRODUCTION

Anticancer drug-induced stomatitis can affect a patient's quality of life and the continuation of drug treatment. Although there have been reports of the occurrence of stomatitis associated with anticancer agents in clinical trials, few Japanese participants have been enrolled in clinical trials and have not been sufficiently investigated. In addition, there has been little attention on research on anticancer drugs associated with stomatitis by patient stratification with different carcinogenic sites. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the disproportionality associated with stomatitis for various types of anticancer drugs in different types of cancer patients using the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report (JADER) database.

METHODS

The aim of this study was to identify the disproportionality of stomatitis by analyzing the type of anticancer drug and cancer patients using the Japanese Pharmacovigilance Database. Data obtained from spontaneous reports of adverse events with more than 10 stomatitis outbreaks reported in the JADER database between April 2004 and March 2023 were analyzed. The safety signal for an adverse event was defined as the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of the reported odds ratio of >1.

RESULTS

There were 6,178 reports of drugs associated with stomatitis. Among these, 41 drugs were suggested to be associated with stomatitis, and 41 drugs were detected as signals. These drugs were classified based on their efficacy: antipyrimidines (six drugs), folate metabolism antagonists (three drugs), alkylating agents (four drugs), platinum (three drugs), topoisomerase inhibitors (three drugs), microtubule inhibitors (three drugs), mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors (two drugs), kinase inhibitors (seven drugs), anti-growth factor antibodies (five drugs) immune checkpoint inhibitors (one drug), and others (four drugs).

CONCLUSION

The drugs that may be associated with stomatitis were cell cycle-dependent drugs, epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and mTOR inhibitors. Moreover, this study suggested that anti-growth factor antibodies and immune checkpoint inhibitors may be associated with stomatitis development.

Development and Validation of Blood-Based Predictive Biomarkers for Response to PD-1/PD-L1 Checkpoint Inhibitors: Evidence of a Universal Systemic Core of 3D Immunogenetic Profiling across Multiple Oncological Indications

BACKGROUND

Unprecedented advantages in cancer treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remain limited to only a subset of patients. Systemic analyses of the regulatory 3D genome architecture linked to individual epigenetic and immunogenetic controls associated with tumour immune evasion mechanisms and immune checkpoint pathways reveal a highly prevalent molecular profile predictive of response to PD-1/PD-L1 ICIs. A clinical blood test based on a set of eight (8) 3D genomic biomarkers has been developed and validated on the basis of an observational trial to predict response to ICI therapy.

METHODS

The predictive eight biomarker set is derived from prospective observational clinical trials, representing 280 treatments with Pembrolizumab, Atezolizumab, Durvalumab, Nivolumab, and Avelumab in a broad range of indications: melanoma, lung, hepatocellular, renal, breast, bladder, colon, head and neck, bone, brain, lymphoma, prostate, vulvar, and cervical cancers.

RESULTS

The 3D genomic eight biomarker panel for response to immune checkpoint therapy achieved a high accuracy of 85%, sensitivity of 93%, and specificity of 82%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that a 3D genomic approach can be used to develop a predictive clinical assay for response to PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibition in cancer patients.

Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in Japanese patients with triple-negative breast cancer: Results from KEYNOTE-355

Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer with tumor programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) ≥10 in the global, phase 3, randomized controlled trial KEYNOTE-355. We report results for patients enrolled in Japan. Patients were randomized 2:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo Q3W for 35 cycles plus chemotherapy (nab-paclitaxel, paclitaxel, or gemcitabine-carboplatin). Primary endpoints were PFS per RECIST version 1.1 by blinded independent central review and OS in patients with PD-L1 CPS ≥10, PD-L1 CPS ≥1, and the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. No alpha was assigned to this exploratory analysis. Eighty-seven patients were randomized in Japan (pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy, n = 61; placebo plus chemotherapy, n = 26), 66 (76%) had PD-L1 CPS ≥1, and 28 (32%) had PD-L1 CPS ≥10. Median time from randomization to data cutoff (June 15, 2021) was 44.7 (range, 37.2-52.9) months in the ITT population. Hazard ratios (HRs; 95% CI) for OS were 0.36 (0.14-0.89), 0.52 (0.30-0.91), and 0.46 (0.28-0.77) in the PD-L1 CPS ≥10, PD-L1 CPS ≥1, and ITT populations, respectively. HRs (95% CI) for PFS were 0.52 (0.20-1.34), 0.61 (0.35-1.06), and 0.64 (0.39-1.05). Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 85% of patients in each group (no grade 5 events). Consistent with the global population, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy tended to show improvements in OS and PFS with manageable toxicity versus placebo plus chemotherapy in Japanese patients and supports this combination in this setting.

Design of a protease-activated PD-L1 inhibitor

Immune checkpoint inhibitors that bind to the cell surface receptor PD-L1 are effective anti-cancer agents but suffer from immune-related adverse events as PD-L1 is expressed on both healthy and cancer cells. To mitigate toxicity, researchers are testing prodrugs that have low affinity for checkpoint targets until activated with proteases enriched in the tumor microenvironment. Here, we engineer a prodrug form of a PD-L1 inhibitor. The inhibitor is a soluble PD-1 mimetic that was previously engineered to have high affinity for PD-L1. In the basal state, the binding surface of the PD-1 mimetic is masked by fusing it to a soluble variant of its natural ligand, PD-L1. Proteolytic cleavage of the linker that connects the mask to the inhibitor activates the molecule. To optimize the mask so that it effectively blocks binding to PD-L1 but releases upon cleavage, we tested a set of mutants with varied affinity for the inhibitor. The top-performing mask reduces the affinity of the prodrug for PD-L1 120-fold, and binding is nearly fully recovered upon cleavage. In a cell-based assay measuring inhibition of the PD-1:PD-L1 interaction on the surface of cells, the IC50s of the masked inhibitors were up to 40-fold higher than their protease-treated counterparts. The changes in activity we observe upon protease treatment are comparable to systems currently tested in the clinic and provide evidence that natural binding partners are an excellent starting point for creating a prodrug.

Ferroptosis and tumor immunotherapy: A promising combination therapy for tumors

Low response rate and treatment resistance are frequent problems in the immunotherapy of tumors, resulting in the unsatisfactory therapeutic effects. Ferroptosis is a form of cell death characterized by the accumulation of lipid peroxides. In recent years, it has been found that ferroptosis may be related to the treatment of cancer. Various immune cells (including macrophages and CD8⁺ T cells) can induce ferroptosis of tumor cells, and synergistically enhance the anti-tumor immune effects. However, the mechanisms are different for each cell types. DAMP released in vitro by cancer cells undergoing ferroptosis lead to the maturation of dendritic cells, cross-induction of CD8⁺ T cells, IFN-γ production and M1 macrophage production. Thus, it activates the adaptability of the tumor microenvironment and forms positive feedback of the immune response. It suggests that induction of ferroptosis may contribute to reducing resistance of cancer immunotherapy and has great potential in cancer therapy. Further research into the link between ferroptosis and tumor immunotherapy may offer hope for those cancers that are difficult to treat. In this review, we focus on the role of ferroptosis in tumor immunotherapy, explore the role of ferroptosis in various immune cells, and discuss potential applications of ferroptosis in tumor immunotherapy.

LncRNA TINCR impairs the efficacy of immunotherapy against breast cancer by recruiting DNMT1 and downregulating MiR-199a-5p via the STAT1-TINCR-USP20-PD-L1 axis

Although programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors have achieved some therapeutic success in breast cancer, their efficacy is limited by low therapeutic response rates, which is closely related to the immune escape of breast cancer cells. Tissue differentiation inducing non-protein coding RNA (TINCR), a long non-coding RNA, as an oncogenic gene associated with the progression of various malignant tumors, including breast cancer; however, the role of TINCR in tumor immunity, especially in breast cancer, remains unclear. We confirmed that TINCR upregulated PD-L1 expression in vivo and in vitro, and promoted the progression of breast cancer. Next, we revealed that TINCR knockdown can significantly improve the therapeutic effect of PD-L1 inhibitors in breast cancer in vivo. Mechanistically, TINCR recruits DNMT1 to promote the methylation of miR-199a-5p loci and inhibit its transcription. Furthermore, in the cytoplasm, TINCR potentially acts as a molecular sponge of miR-199a-5p and upregulates the stability of USP20 mRNA through a competing endogenous RNA (ceRNA) regulatory mechanism, thus promoting PD-L1 expression by decreasing its ubiquitination level. IFN-γ stimulation activates STAT1 by phosphorylation, which migrates into the nucleus to promote TINCR transcription. This is the first study to describe the regulatory role of TINCR in breast cancer tumor immunity, broadening the current paradigm of the functional diversity of TINCR in tumor biology. In addition, our study provides new research directions and potential therapeutic targets for PD-L1 inhibitors in breast cancer.

Efficacy and Safety of Atezolizumab Monotherapy or Combined Therapy with Chemotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Triple-negative Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

Several successful attempts have been recorded with PD-L1 blockade via atezolizumab monotherapy or combination therapy with chemotherapy in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). Due to the lack of a large-scale study, we present a meta-analysis aimed at evaluating the safety and efficacy of this promising strategy in patients with mTNBC.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted using electronic databases to identify eligible RCTs. Twelve studies, including 2479 mTBNC patients treated with atezolizumab monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy, were included up to January 2022. The PRISMA checklist protocol and the I2 statistic were applied for quality assessment and heterogeneity tests of the selected trials, respectively. Fixed and random-effects models were estimated based on the heterogeneity tests, and statistical analysis was performed using CMA.

RESULTS

Our pooled findings demonstrated that the median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 16.526 and 5.814 months in mTNBC patients, respectively. Furthermore, when comparing efficacy indicators between PD-L1-positive and PD-L1-negative groups, mTNBC patients with PD-L1 had better OS, PFS, and ORR than PD-L1-negative patients. Also, the immune-related adverse event incident for alopecia was higher (51.9%) than other complications across atezolizumab therapy.

CONCLUSION

Moreover, the pooled analysis indicated that the overall rate of lung metastasis following atezolizumab therapy was 42.8%, which was higher than the rates of metastasis in bone (26.9%), brain (5.4%), and lymph node (6.5%). Atezolizumab showed a manageable safety profile and had promising and durable anti-tumor efficacy in TMBC patients. Higher PD-L1 expression may be closely correlated with better clinical efficacy.

Adjuvant atezolizumab in Japanese patients with resected stage IB-IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (IMpower010)

The global phase 3 IMpower010 study evaluated adjuvant atezolizumab versus best supportive care (BSC) following platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with resected stage IB-IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, we report a subgroup analysis in patients enrolled in Japan. Eligible patients had complete resection of histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IB (tumors ≥4 cm)-IIIA NSCLC. Upon completing 1-4 cycles of adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive atezolizumab (fixed dose of 1200 mg every 21 days; 16 cycles or 1 year) or BSC. The primary endpoint of the global IMpower010 study was investigator-assessed disease-free survival, tested hierarchically first in patients with stage II-IIIA NSCLC whose tumors expressed programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) on ≥1% of tumor cells, then in all randomized patients with stage II-IIIA NSCLC, and finally in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (stage IB-IIIA NSCLC). Safety was evaluated in all patients who received atezolizumab or BSC. The study comprised 149 enrolled patients in three populations: ITT (n = 117; atezolizumab, n = 59; BSC, n = 58), all-randomized stage II-IIIA (n = 113; atezolizumab, n = 56; BSC, n = 57), and PD-L1 tumor cells ≥1% stage II-IIIA (n = 74; atezolizumab, n = 41; BSC, n = 33). At the data cutoff date (January 21, 2021), a trend toward disease-free survival improvement with atezolizumab vs BSC was observed in the PD-L1 tumor cells ≥1% stage II-IIIA (unstratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-1.08), all-randomized stage II-IIIA (unstratified HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.35-1.11), and ITT (unstratified HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.34-1.10) populations. Atezolizumab-related grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 16% of patients; no treatment-related grade 5 events occurred. Adjuvant atezolizumab showed disease-free survival improvement and a tolerable toxicity profile in Japanese patients in IMpower010, consistent with the global study results.

Combined atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel in the treatment of triple negative breast cancer: a meta-analysis on their efficacy and safety

Background

Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is clinically aggressive breast cancer with a poor prognosis. Approximately 20% of TNBC has been found to express programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), making it a potential therapeutic target. As a PD-L1 inhibitor, atezolizumab is a recently approved immunotherapeutic drug for TNBC, this meta-analysis (MA) was aimed to review the randomized controlled trial studies (RCTs) of combined atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel in the treatment of TNBC and synthesize the evidence-based results on its effectiveness and safety.

Method

We searched PubMed, Embase, EBSCOhost and ClinicalTrials.gov for the eligible RCTs which compared the efficacy and safety of combined atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel with nab-paclitaxel alone. The outcomes analyzed included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and treatment-related adverse effects (AEs).

Results

A total of six RCTs were included in this MA. For efficacy, although OS was not significantly prolonged with combined atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel (HR 0.90, 95% CI [0.79, 1.01], p=0.08), this combination therapy significantly improved PFS (HR 0.72, 95% CI [0.59, 0.87], p=0.0006) and ORR (RR 1.25, 95% CI [0.79, 1.01] p<0.00001). For safety, any AEs, haematological, gastrointestinal, and liver AEs showed no statistically significant differences between the atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel combination group and nab-paclitaxel alone group. However, serious AEs, high grade, dermatological, pulmonary, endocrine, and neurological AEs were significantly lower with nab-paclitaxel alone compared to atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel combined (p-value range from <0.00001 to 0,02).

Conclusion

Atezolizumab combined with nab-paclitaxel was associated with improved outcomes in the treatment of TNBC; however, this combination resulted in more toxicity compared to nab-paclitaxel alone. While nab-paclitaxel alone produced chemotherapy-related AEs, the combination of atezolizumab with nab-paclitaxel produced AEs, especially immune-related AEs such as haematological, pulmonary, endocrine, and neurological AEs.

Trial registration

This research work of systematic review has been registered on PROSPERO (Registration number: CRD42022297952).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-10225-y.

Consistent expression of PD-L1 in tumor microenvironment with peripheral PD-1/PD-L1 in circulating T lymphocytes of operable breast cancer: a diagnostic test

Background

The expression of PD-L1 in the immune microenvironment can guide the application of immunosuppressants. In order to monitor the immune status of the body, repeated biopsies have to be taken. Our research aims to find new and convenient means to evaluate this indicator.

Methods

Eighty-three cases of newly diagnosed operable breast cancer without receiving preoperative treatment, were recruited from Beijing Shijitan Hospital between November 2018 and November 2019. The expression of PD-1/PD-L1 on circulating T lymphocytes was detected by flow cytometry and the expression of PD-L1 on immune cells in tumor microenvironment was detected by immunohistochemistry.

Results

The median percentage of positive PD-1 and PD-L1 expression on circulating T lymphocytes was 15.2% and 0.7%, respectively. The peripheral PD-1 had no relationship with clinicopathological characteristics, but the peripheral PD-L1 expression had a correlation with lymph node metastasis (p = 0.005) and Her-2 expression (p = 0.034) (p < 0.05). The positive rate of PD-L1 expression was 32.9% in tumor microenvironment. PD-L1 expression in tumor microenvironment had a significant correlation with PD-1/PD-L1 expression on circulating T lymphocytes, the correlation coefficients being 0.24 (p < 0.05) and 0.26 (p < 0.05), respectively. To predict the PD-L1 expression in tumor microenvironment, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.65 and 0.66 for peripheral PD-1 and PD-L1, respectively. High level of peripheral PD-1/PD-L1 expression was associated with the odds ratios of 5.42 and 4.76 for positive PD-L1 expression in tumor microenvironment.

Conclusion

Peripheral PD-1/PD-L1 expression had a significant consistency with PD-L1 expression in tumor microenvironment and could act as an alternative choice of tissue detection, for the patients intolerable of biopsy.

Modern Immunotherapy in the Treatment of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Simple Summary

This review summarizes reports from the latest clinical trials assessing the safety and clinical effectiveness of new biological drugs stimulating the immune system to fight cancer. The aim of this study is to show the enormous therapeutic potential of monoclonal antibodies in the treatment of cancer, in particular triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Introduction of these innovative drugs to the standard clinical cancer therapies, including TNBC, allows for an increase in the response rate to the applied treatment, and consequently extending the lives of patients suffering from cancer. We hope to draw attention to the extremely difficult-to-treat TNBC, as well as the importance of the development of clinical trials evaluating drugs modulating the immune system in TNBC therapy.

Abstract

Triple-Negative Breast Cancer is a subtype of breast cancer characterized by the lack of expression of estrogen receptors, progesterone receptors, as well as human epidermal growth factor receptor 2. This cancer accounts for 15–20% of all breast cancers and is especially common in patients under 40 years of age, as well as with the occurring BRCA1 mutation. Its poor prognosis is reflected in the statistical life expectancy of 8–15 months after diagnosis of metastatic TNBC. So far, the lack of targeted therapy has narrowed therapeutic possibilities to classic chemotherapy. The idea behind the use of humanized monoclonal antibodies, as inhibitors of immunosuppressive checkpoints used by the tumor to escape from immune system control, is to reduce immunotolerance and direct an intensified anti-tumor immune response. An abundance of recent studies has provided numerous pieces of evidence about the safety and clinical benefits of immunotherapy using humanized monoclonal antibodies in the fight against many types of cancer, including TNBC. In particular, phase three clinical trials, such as the IMpassion 130, the KEYNOTE-355 and the KEYNOTE-522 resulted in the approval of immunotherapeutic agents, such as atezolizumab and pembrolizumab by the US Food and Drug Administration in TNBC therapy. This review aims to present the huge potential of immunotherapy using monoclonal antibodies directed against immunosuppressive checkpoints—such as atezolizumab, avelumab, durvalumab, pembrolizumab, nivolumab, cemiplimab, tremelimumab, ipilimumab—in the fight against difficult to treat TNBCs as monotherapy as well as in more advanced combination strategies.

Subgroup analysis of Japanese patients in a phase III randomized, controlled study of neoadjuvant atezolizumab or placebo, combined with nab-paclitaxel and anthracycline-based chemotherapy in early triple-negative breast cancer (IMpassion031)

Background

In the global phase III IMpassion031 study, neoadjuvant atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel/anthracycline-based chemotherapy improved pathological complete response in patients with early stage triple-negative breast cancer. Here, we report primary analysis results from a subgroup of Japanese patients.

Methods

Patients with histologically documented, previously untreated, stage cT2–cT4, cN0–cN3, cM0 triple-negative breast cancer were randomized 1:1 to receive intravenous atezolizumab 840 mg or placebo every 2 weeks in combination with chemotherapy consisting of nab-paclitaxel intravenous 125 mg/m² once a week, followed by doxorubicin intravenous 60 mg/m² and cyclophosphamide intravenous 600 mg/m² every 2 weeks. Patients then underwent surgery. Pathological complete response (ypT0/is ypN0) in the intention-to-treat and PD-L1-positive (≥1% PD-L1-expressing tumor-infiltrating immune cells) populations were co-primary endpoints.

Results

This subanalysis (data cutoff: 3 April 2020) included 36 patients from Japan (intention-to-treat; atezolizumab arm, n = 17; placebo arm, n = 19). Pathological complete response occurred in 41% (n = 7; 95% confidence interval, 18–67) of patients in the atezolizumab arm and 37% (n = 7; 95% confidence interval, 16–62) in the placebo arm. In the PD-L1-positive population, pathological complete response occurred in 50% (n = 5; 95% confidence interval, 19–81) of patients in the atezolizumab arm and 45% (n = 5; 95% confidence interval, 17–77) in the placebo arm. Treatment-related grade 3–4 adverse events occurred in 71% and 68% of patients in the respective arms.

Conclusion

Atezolizumab added to neoadjuvant chemotherapy numerically improved pathological complete response versus placebo in this small exploratory analysis of Japanese patients with early stage triple-negative breast cancer, a trend directionally consistent with the global study results. No new safety signals were identified.

State of affairs regarding targeted pharmacological therapy of cancers metastasized to the brain

In 1999 a visionary short article by The Wall Street Journal writers Robert Langreth and Michael Waldholz popularized the new term "personalized medicine," that is to say, the targeting of drugs to each unique genetic profile. From today's perspective, targeted approaches have clearly found the widest use in the antineoplastic domain. The current review was initiated to review the progress that has been made regarding the treatment of patients with advanced cancer and brain metastases. PubMed was searched for the terms brain metastasis, brain metastases, or metastatic brain in the Title/Abstract. Selection was limited to randomized controlled trial (RCT) and publication date January 2010 to February 2022. Following visual review, 51 papers on metastatic lung cancer, 12 on metastatic breast cancer, and 9 on malignant melanoma were retained and underwent full analysis. Information was extracted from the papers giving specific numbers for intracranial response rate and/or overall survival. Since most pharmacological trials on advanced cancers excluded patients with brain metastases and since hardly any information on adjuvant radiotherapy and radiosurgery is available from the pharmacological trials, precise assessment of the effect of targeted medication for the subgroups with brain metastases is difficult. Some quantitative information regarding the success of targeted pharmacological therapy is only available for patients with breast and lung cancer and melanoma. Overall, targeted approaches approximately doubled the lifespan in the subgroups of brain metastases from tumors with targetable surface receptors such as anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) fusion receptor in non-small cell lung cancer or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer. For these types, overall survival in the situation of brain metastases is now more than a year. For receptor-negative lung cancer and melanoma, introduction of immune checkpoint blockers brought a substantial advance, although overall survival for melanoma metastasized to the brain appears to remain in the range of 6 to 9 months. The outlook for small cell lung cancer metastasized to the brain apparently remains poor. The introduction of targeted therapy roughly doubled survival times of advanced cancers including those metastasized to the brain, but so far, targeted therapy does not differ essentially from chemotherapy, therefore also facing tumors developing escape mechanisms. With the improved perspective of patients suffering from brain metastases, it becomes important to further optimize treatment of this specific patient group within the framework of randomized trials.

An Overview of the Treatment Efficacy and Side Effect Profile of Pharmacological Therapies in Asian Patients with Breast Cancer

Breast cancer (BC) among Asians accounts for ~ 40% of the global BC burden. Differences in BC risk, presentation, tumor biology, and response to treatment exist between Asian and non-Asian patients; however, Asian patients are often under-represented in clinical trials. This narrative review summarizes the efficacy and safety of pharmacological therapies for BC in Asian populations, with a focus on outcomes in Asian versus non-Asian patients treated with chemotherapy, hormone therapy, anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 targeted therapies, cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors, mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, bone-targeted therapies, poly-ADP ribose polymerase, phosphoinositide 3-kinase, and checkpoint inhibitors. While most therapies have demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety in Asian and non-Asian patients with BC, differences that are largely attributed to pharmacogenetic variations between populations exist. Pharmacogenetic differences may contribute to a reduced clinical benefit of tamoxifen, whereas improved clinical outcomes have been reported with tyrosine kinase inhibitors and CDK4/6 inhibitors in Asian versus non-Asian patients with BC. In particular, Asian patients have an increased incidence of hematological toxicities, including neutropenia, although adverse events can be effectively managed using dose adjustments. Recent trials with CDK4/6 inhibitors have increased efforts to include Asians within study subsets. Future clinical trials enrolling higher numbers of Asian patients, and an increased understanding of differences in patient and tumor genetics between Asians and non-Asians, have the potential to incrementally improve the management of BC in Asian patients.

The application of immune checkpoint blockade in breast cancer and the emerging role of nanoparticle

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in the female population with a high mortality rate. Despite the satisfying depth of studies evaluating the contributory role of immune checkpoints in this malignancy, few articles have reviewed the pros and cons of immune checkpoint blockades (ICBs). In the current review, we provide an overview of immune-related inhibitory molecules and also discuss the original data obtained from international research laboratories on the aberrant expression of T and non-T cell-associated immune checkpoints in breast cancer. Then, we especially focus on recent studies that utilized ICBs as the treatment strategy in breast cancer and provide their efficiency reports. As there are always costs and benefits, we discuss the limitations and challenges toward ICB therapy such as adverse events and drug resistance. In the last section, we allocate an overview of the recent data concerning the application of nanoparticle systems for cancer immunotherapy and propose that nano-based ICB approaches may overcome the challenges related to ICB therapy in breast cancer. In conclusion, it seems it is time for nanoscience to more rapidly move forward into clinical trials and illuminates the breast cancer treatment area with its potent features for the target delivery of ICBs.

Hallmarks of response, resistance, and toxicity to immune checkpoint blockade

Unprecedented advances have been made in cancer treatment with the use of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB). However, responses are limited to a subset of patients, and immune-related adverse events (irAEs) can be problematic, requiring treatment discontinuation. Iterative insights into factors intrinsic and extrinsic to the host that impact ICB response and toxicity are critically needed. Our understanding of the impact of host-intrinsic factors (such as the host genome, epigenome, and immunity) has evolved substantially over the past decade, with greater insights on these factors and on tumor and immune co-evolution. Additionally, we are beginning to understand the impact of acute and cumulative exposures-both internal and external to the host (i.e., the exposome)-on host physiology and response to treatment. Together these represent the current day hallmarks of response, resistance, and toxicity to ICB. Opportunities built on these hallmarks are duly warranted.

Adverse events associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is one of the most prevalent cancers with a high rate of mortality. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown promising results in breast cancer treatment. However, the incidences of adverse events (AEs) and immune-related AEs (irAEs) due to ICIs have not been investigated comprehensively. We aimed to determine any-grade and grade 3-5 AEs and irAEs of ICIs compared to the control group which were other conventional therapies in adults with breast cancer.

METHODS

We included controlled clinical trials that involved ICIs in adults with breast cancer to assess AEs and irAEs of ICIs. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Clinical-Trials.gov, and metaRegister of Controlled Trials up to March 12, 2021. Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) was used for quality assessment.

RESULTS

Nine studies, including 4687 participants met our inclusion criteria. Rash and infusion reaction were the two most frequent irAEs of any-grade and grade 3-5. Among irAEs, hyperthyroidism had the most prominent difference between the two groups in favor of ICIs followed by hypothyroidism and adrenal insufficiency. Among grade 3-5 and any-grade non-immune AEs, increased aspartate aminotransferase (RR = 1.91; 95% CI, 1.11-3.28) and cough (RR = 1.32; 95%CI, 1.11-1.57) had the highest RRs in favor of ICIs, respectively. The frequencies of overall any-grade and grade 3-5 irAEs were higher in the ICI group.

CONCLUSION

The results showed that all the AEs and irAEs of all the categories were more prevalent with ICIs.

Treatment-Related Serious Adverse Events of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review

Background

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICI) have been progressively used in cancer treatment and produced unique toxicity profiles. This systematic review aims to comprehend the patterns and occurrence of treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) based on ICI.

Methods

PICOS/PRISMA methods were used to identify published English-language on PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus from 2015 to 2020. Published clinical trials on ICI monotherapy, combined ICIs, and ICI plus other treatment with tabulated data on grade≥3 trAEs were included. Odds ratio (OR), χ² tests were used to analyze for effect size and associations.

Results

This review included 145 clinical trials involving 21786 patients. Grade 3-5 trAEs were more common with ICI when they were plused with other treatments compared with ICI monotherapy(54.3% versus 17.7%, 46.1%, p<0.05). Grade 3-5 trAEs were also more common with CTLA-4 mAbs compared with anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 (34.2% versus 15.1%, 13.6%, p<0.05). Hyperthyroidism (OR 3.8, 95%CI 1.7–8.6), nausea (OR 3.7, 95%CI 2.5–5.3), diarrhea (OR 2.7, 95%CI 2.2–3.2), colitis (OR 3.4, 95%CI 2.7–4.3), ALT increase (OR 4.9, 95%CI 3.9–6.1), AST increase (OR 3.8, 95%CI 3.0–4.9), pruritus (OR 2.4, 95%CI 1.5–3.9), rash (OR 2.8, 95%CI 2.1–3.8), fatigue (OR 2.8, 95%CI 2.2–3.7), decreased appetite (OR 2.4, 95%CI 1.5–3.8), and hypophysitis (OR 2.0, 95%CI 1.2–3.3) were more frequent with combined ICIs. Diarrhea (OR 8.1, 95%CI 6.4–10.3), colitis (OR 12.2, 95%CI 8.7–17.1), ALT increase (OR 5.1, 95%CI 3.5–7.4), AST increase (OR 4.2, 95%CI 2.8–6.3), pruritus (OR 4.1, 95%CI 2.0–8.4), rash (OR 4.4, 95%CI 2.9–6.8), hypophysitis (OR 12.1, 95%CI 6.3–23.4) were more common with CTLA-4 mAbs; whereas pneumonitis (OR 4.7, 95% CI 2.1–10.3) were more frequent with PD-1 mAbs.

Conclusions

Different immune checkpoint inhibitors are associated with different treatment-related adverse events profiles. A comprehensive data in this systematic review will provide comprehensive information for clinicians.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors: review of the existing evidence and challenges in breast cancer

Cancer initiation and progression are associated with immune system responses. Tumor cells use various tricks to scape of immune system, such as activating immune checkpoint pathways that induce immunosuppressive functions. Among the different immune checkpoint receptors, CTLA-4 and PD-1/PD-L1 are prominent therapeutic targets in different cancers. Although the US FDA has approved some immune checkpoint inhibitors for several cancers, concerning breast cancer still different clinical trials are looking for optimizing efficacy and decreasing immune-related adverse events. This review will discuss the existing body of knowledge with regard to cross-talk between immune system and tumor cells and then explore immune checkpoint-related signaling pathways in the context of breast tumors. Finally, we highlight the application of different immune checkpoint blockers in breast cancer patients.

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Atezolizumab Plus Nab-Paclitaxel for Advanced PD-L1 Positive Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in Japan

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Atezolizumab is an anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody that shows good safety and efficacy for patients with PD-L1-positive triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). The cost of atezolizumab therapy is expensive, and its economic burden is an important problem. In this study, we evaluated the cost effectiveness of atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel therapy (AnP) compared with nab-paclitaxel monotherapy (nP) for PD-L1-positive TNBC under Japanese medical conditions and environments using a Markov model.

METHODS

The medical information was collected from data published by the IMpassion130 trial. A Markov model was established to simulate the number of patients in each disease state after AnP or nP therapy during each time period. As indices for cost effectiveness, total cost, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was used to assess the uncertainty of the model using 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations with difference parameters.

RESULTS

The QALYs for AnP treatment were longer than for nP treatment (1.12 vs 0.82 QALYs), but the total cost of AnP treatment was more expensive than that of nP treatment (¥11,070,143 vs ¥2,056,164). The ICER values comparing AnP treatment with nP treatment were ¥30,208,143/QALY. The ICER/QALY was more expensive than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) of ¥15,000,000 per QALY. To achieve a 50% cost-effective probability with a WTP threshold, the price of the atezolizumab should be reduced by 55.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

AnP was not cost effective compared to nP for PD-L1-positive inoperable TNBC under the Japanese condition.

Quantitative systems pharmacology model predictions for efficacy of atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel in triple-negative breast cancer

Background

Immune checkpoint blockade therapy has clearly shown clinical activity in patients with triple-negative breast cancer, but less than half of the patients benefit from the treatments. While a number of ongoing clinical trials are investigating different combinations of checkpoint inhibitors and chemotherapeutic agents, predictive biomarkers that identify patients most likely to benefit remains one of the major challenges. Here we present a modular quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) platform for immuno-oncology that incorporates detailed mechanisms of immune–cancer cell interactions to make efficacy predictions and identify predictive biomarkers for treatments using atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel.

Methods

A QSP model was developed based on published data of triple-negative breast cancer. With the model, we generated a virtual patient cohort to conduct in silico virtual clinical trials and make retrospective analyses of the pivotal IMpassion130 trial that led to the accelerated approval of atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel for patients with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) positive triple-negative breast cancer. Available data from clinical trials were used for model calibration and validation.

Results

With the calibrated virtual patient cohort based on clinical data from the placebo comparator arm of the IMpassion130 trial, we made efficacy predictions and identified potential predictive biomarkers for the experimental arm of the trial using the proposed QSP model. The model predictions are consistent with clinically reported efficacy endpoints and correlated immune biomarkers. We further performed a series of virtual clinical trials to compare different doses and schedules of the two drugs for simulated therapeutic optimization.

Conclusions

This study provides a QSP platform, which can be used to generate virtual patient cohorts and conduct virtual clinical trials. Our findings demonstrate its potential for making efficacy predictions for immunotherapies and chemotherapies, identifying predictive biomarkers, and guiding future clinical trial designs.

Atezolizumab (in Combination with Nab-Paclitaxel): A Review in Advanced Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Atezolizumab (Tecentriq^®), an immune checkpoint inhibitor against programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), is the first immunotherapy agent to be approved (for use in combination with nab-paclitaxel) in the USA, the EU (as first-line) and Japan for the treatment of advanced triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Approval was based on the results of the phase III IMpassion130 trial in patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic TNBC, in which atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) when compared to placebo plus nab-paclitaxel in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and the PD-L1+ subgroup. Statistically significant overall survival (OS) benefits were not seen in two interim analyses and final OS data are awaited. The tolerability and safety profile of atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel was consistent with those of each individual drug. The most common treatment-related adverse events included neutropenia, peripheral neuropathy and reduced neutrophil count. Adverse events of special interest occurred with higher frequency in patients who received atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel than placebo plus nab-paclitaxel, and were mostly immune-related (e.g. immune-related rash, hypothyroidism and hepatitis). Health-related quality of life was not significantly impacted by the addition of atezolizumab to nab-paclitaxel therapy. Thus, atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel is a useful immunochemotherapy option for patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic TNBC, including those whose tumours have PD-L1 expression ≥ 1%.

Pembrolizumab and atezolizumab in triple-negative breast cancer

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is defined by a lack of expression of both estrogen (ER) and progesterone (PgR) receptors as well as human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and is associated with poor prognosis. Moreover, the systemic treatment options are limited. However, the TNBC is more likely than other breast cancer subtypes to benefit from immune checkpoint blockade therapy due to its higher immunogenicity, higher enrichment by tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), and higher levels of programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Thus far, atezolizumab was approved in combination with nab-paclitaxel for patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic TNBC whose tumours express PD-L1. Currently, it seems that PD-L1-positive subgroup will potentially benefit the most from the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment. Moreover, it seems that better results are seen when an ICI is given as first-line treatment than when an ICI is given in later lines of treatment for advanced TNBC/metastatic TNBC. Recently, pembrolizumab has demonstrated promising results in early-stage TNBC what can lead in near future to its approval in (neo)adjuvant setting. This review summarizes the development and highlights recent advances of the atezolizumab and pembrolizumab in early and advanced/metastatic TNBC.

Current advances in the diagnosis and personalized treatment of breast cancer: lessons from tumor biology

Breast cancer treatment has advanced enormously in the last decade. Most of this is due to advances reached in the knowledge regarding tumor biology, mainly in the field of diagnosis and treatment. This review brings information about how the genomics-based information contributed to advances in breast cancer diagnosis and prognosis perspective, as well as presents how tumor biology discoveries fostered the main therapeutic approaches available to treat such patients, based on a personalized point of view.