Identification of immunologic biomarkers associated with clinical response after immune-based therapy for cancer

Analyses of Pretherapy Peripheral Immunoscore and Response to Vaccine Therapy

Tumor immunoscore analyses, especially for primary colorectal cancer and melanoma lesions, provide valuable prognostic information. Metastatic lesions of many carcinoma types, however, are often not easily accessible. We hypothesized that immune cells in peripheral blood may differ among individual patients with metastatic disease, which, in turn, may influence their response to immunotherapy. We thus analyzed immune cell subsets within peripheral blood mononuclear cells to determine if a "peripheral immunoscore" could have any prognostic significance for patients before receiving immunotherapy. Patients with metastatic breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel ± PANVAC vaccine. In another trial, prostate cancer patients with metastatic bone lesions were randomly assigned to receive a bone-seeking radionuclide ± PROSTVAC vaccine. Predefined analyses of "classic" immune cell types (CD4, CD8, natural killer cells, regulatory T cells, myeloid-derived suppressor cells, and ratios) revealed no differences in progression-free survival (PFS) for either arm in both trials. Predefined analyses of refined immune cell subsets for which a biologic function had been previously reported also showed no significant prognostic value in PFS for patients receiving either docetaxel or radionuclide alone; however, in patients receiving these agents in combination with vaccine, the peripheral immunoscore of refined subsets revealed statistically significant differences in PFS (P < 0.001) for breast cancer patients receiving docetaxel plus vaccine, and in prostate cancer patients receiving radionuclide plus vaccine (P = 0.004). Larger randomized studies will be required to validate these findings. These studies, however, provide the rationale for the evaluation of refined immune cell subsets to help determine which patients may benefit most from immunotherapy. Cancer Immunol Res; 4(9); 755-65. ©2016 AACR.

Clinically feasible approaches to potentiating cancer cell-based immunotherapies

The immune system exerts both tumor-destructive and tumor-protective functions. Mature dendritic cells (DCs), classically activated macrophages (M1), granulocytes, B lymphocytes, aβ and ɣδ T lymphocytes, natural killer T (NKT) cells, and natural killer (NK) cells may be implicated in antitumor immunoprotection. Conversely, tolerogenic DCs, alternatively activated macrophages (M2), myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs), and regulatory T (Tregs) and B cells (Bregs) are capable of suppressing antitumor immune responses. Anti-cancer vaccination is a useful strategy to elicit antitumor immune responses, while overcoming immunosuppressive mechanisms. Whole tumor cells or lysates derived thereof hold more promise as cancer vaccines than individual tumor-associated antigens (TAAs), because vaccinal cells can elicit immune responses to multiple TAAs. Cancer cell-based vaccines can be autologous, allogeneic or xenogeneic. Clinical use of xenogeneic vaccines is advantageous in that they can be most effective in breaking the preexisting immune tolerance to TAAs. To potentiate immunotherapy, vaccinations can be combined with other modalities that target different immune pathways. These modalities include 1) genetic or chemical modification of cell-based vaccines; 2) cross-priming TAAs to T cells by engaging dendritic cells; 3) T-cell adoptive therapy; 4) stimulation of cytotoxic inflammation by non-specific immunomodulators, toll-like receptor (TLR) agonists, cytokines, chemokines or hormones; 5) reduction of immunosuppression and/or stimulation of antitumor effector cells using antibodies, small molecules; and 6) various cytoreductive modalities. The authors envisage that combined immunotherapeutic strategies will allow for substantial improvements in clinical outcomes in the near future.

Downregulation of myeloma-induced ICOS-L and regulatory T cell generation by lenalidomide and dexamethasone therapy

Multiple myeloma (MM) produces significant cellular and humoral immune defects. We have previously reported that MM induces CD4(+)CD25(+)FoxP3(+) cells (TRegs), via tumour expression of the immune checkpoint regulator, ICOS-L. We sought to define what impact the immunomodulatory drug lenalidomide, alone or with dexamethasone, has on TReg cell generation. Lenalidomide pre-treatment of MM cell lines reduced TReg generation and the concomitant TReg:TEff (CD4(+)CD25(+)FoxP3(-): effector T cells) ratio, as a consequence of reduced ICOSL transcription. Dexamethasone did not affect surface ICOS-L expression but did induce TReg cell apoptosis without impacting on TEff cell survival. Combined lenalidomide and dexamethasone significantly reduced both TReg induction and the TReg:TEff cell ratio. In vivo, serial analysis of the TReg:TEff ratio in MM patients on lenalidomide-dexamethasone therapy revealed a progressive reduction towards age-matched control values, though not complete correction. Our data demonstrate for the first time immune synergism to explain the observed immune-modulation associated with lenalidomide-dexamethasone therapy.

Recommendations from the iSBTc-SITC/FDA/NCI Workshop on Immunotherapy Biomarkers

PURPOSE

To facilitate development of innovative immunotherapy approaches, especially for treatment concepts exploiting the potential benefits of personalized therapy, there is a need to develop and validate tools to identify patients who can benefit from immunotherapy. Despite substantial effort, we do not yet know which parameters of antitumor immunity to measure and which assays are optimal for those measurements.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

The iSBTc-SITC (International Society for Biological Therapy of Cancer-Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer), FDA (Food and Drug Administration), and NCI (National Cancer Institute) partnered to address these issues for immunotherapy of cancer. Here, we review the major challenges, give examples of approaches and solutions, and present our recommendations.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Although specific immune parameters and assays are not yet validated, we recommend following standardized (accurate, precise, and reproducible) protocols and use of functional assays for the primary immunologic readouts of a trial; consideration of central laboratories for immune monitoring of large, multi-institutional trials; and standardized testing of several phenotypic and functional potential potency assays specific to any cellular product. When reporting results, the full QA (quality assessment)/QC (quality control) should be conducted and selected examples of truly representative raw data and assay performance characteristics should be included. Finally, to promote broader analysis of multiple aspects of immunity, and gather data on variability, we recommend that in addition to cells and serum, RNA and DNA samples be banked (under standardized conditions) for later testing. We also recommend that sufficient blood be drawn to allow for planned testing of the primary hypothesis being addressed in the trial, and that additional baseline and posttreatment blood is banked for testing novel hypotheses (or generating new hypotheses) that arise in the field.

Cellular and vaccine therapeutic approaches for gliomas

Despite new additions to the standard of care therapy for high grade primary malignant brain tumors, the prognosis for patients with this disease is still poor. A small contingent of clinical researchers are focusing their efforts on testing the safety, feasibility and efficacy of experimental active and passive immunotherapy approaches for gliomas and are primarily conducting Phase I and II clinical trials. Few trials have advanced to the Phase III arena. Here we provide an overview of the cellular therapies and vaccine trials currently open for patient accrual obtained from a search of http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. The search was refined with terms that would identify the Phase I, II and III immunotherapy trials open for adult glioma patient accrual in the United States. From the list, those that are currently open for patient accrual are discussed in this review. A variety of adoptive immunotherapy trials using ex vivo activated effector cell preparations, cell-based and non-cell-based vaccines, and several combination passive and active immunotherapy approaches are discussed.