Influence of Genomic Landscape on Cancer Immunotherapy for Newly Diagnosed Ovarian Cancer: Biomarker Analyses from the IMagyn050 Randomized Clinical Trial

Immunomic longitudinal profiling of the NeoPembrOv trial identifies drivers of immunoresistance in high-grade ovarian carcinoma

PD-1/PD-L1 blockade has so far shown limited survival benefit for high-grade ovarian carcinomas. By using paired samples from the NeoPembrOv randomized phase II trial (NCT03275506), for which primary outcomes are published, and by combining RNA-seq and multiplexed immunofluorescence staining, we explore the impact of NeoAdjuvant ChemoTherapy (NACT) ± Pembrolizumab (P) on the tumor environment, and identify parameters that correlated with response to immunotherapy as a pre-planned exploratory analysis. Indeed, i) combination therapy results in a significant increase in intraepithelial CD8+PD-1+ T cells, ii) combining endothelial and monocyte gene signatures with the CD8B/FOXP3 expression ratio is predictive of response to NACT + P with an area under the curve of 0.93 (95% CI 0.85-1.00) and iii) high CD8B/FOXP3 and high CD8B/ENTPD1 ratios are significantly associated with positive response to NACT + P, while KDR and VEGFR2 expression are associated with resistance. These results indicate that targeting regulatory T cells and endothelial cells, especially VEGFR2+ endothelial cells, could overcome immune resistance of ovarian cancers.

PARP inhibition with rucaparib alone followed by combination with atezolizumab: Phase Ib COUPLET clinical study in advanced gynaecological and triple-negative breast cancers

BACKGROUND

Combining PARP inhibitors (PARPis) with immune checkpoint inhibitors may improve clinical outcomes in selected cancers. We evaluated rucaparib and atezolizumab in advanced gynaecological or triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).

METHODS

After identifying the recommended dose, patients with PARPi-naive BRCA-mutated or homologous recombination-deficient/loss-of-heterozygosity-high platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer or TNBC received rucaparib plus atezolizumab. Tumour biopsies were collected pre-treatment, during single-agent rucaparib run-in, and after starting combination therapy.

RESULTS

The most common adverse events with rucaparib 600 mg twice daily and atezolizumab 1200 mg on Day 1 every 3 weeks were gastrointestinal effects, fatigue, liver enzyme elevations, and anaemia. Responding patients typically had BRCA-mutated tumours and higher pre-treatment tumour levels of PD-L1 and CD8 + T cells. Markers of DNA damage repair decreased during rucaparib run-in and combination treatment in responders, but typically increased in non-responders. Apoptosis signature expression showed the reverse. CD8 + T-cell activity and STING pathway activation increased during rucaparib run-in, increasing further with atezolizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

In this small study, rucaparib plus atezolizumab demonstrated acceptable safety and activity in BRCA-mutated tumours. Increasing anti-tumour immunity and inflammation might be a key mechanism of action for clinical benefit from the combination, potentially guiding more targeted development of such regimens.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03101280).

The association of histopathologic features after neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy with clinical outcome: Sub-analyses from the randomized double-blinded, placebo-controlled, Phase III IMagyn050/GOG3015/ENGOT-ov39 study

OBJECTIVE

Histopathologic characteristics after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) may correlate with outcome. This study evaluates histopathologic features after immunotherapy and NACT/bevacizumab, and associated clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Evaluable tissue from IMagyn050/GOG3015/ENGOT-ov39 patients from prespecified anatomic sites from interval cytoreductive surgery (ICS) after NACT/bevacizumab plus atezolizumab/placebo underwent central histopathologic scoring and analyzed with clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

The predefined population had 243 evaluable NACT patients, with 48.1% tumors being PD-L1-positive. No statistically significant differences in PFS (16.9 months vs. 19.2 months, p = 0.21) or OS (41.5 months vs. 45.1 months, p = 0.67) between treatment arms were seen. Substantial residual tumor (RT) (3+) was identified in 26% atezolizumab vs. 24% placebo arms (p = 0.94). Most showed no (1+) necrosis (82% vs. 96%, respectively, p = 0.69), moderate (2+) to severe (3+) fibrosis (71% vs. 75%, respectively, p = 0.82), and extensive (2+) inflammation (53% vs. 47% respectively, p = 0.48). No significant histopathologic differences were identified by tissue site or by arm. Multivariate analyses showed increased risk for progression with moderate and substantial RT (13.6 mon vs. 21.1 mon, hazard ratio 2.0, p < 0.01; 13.6 mon vs. 21.1 mon, HR 1.9, p < 0.01, respectively); but decreased risk for death with extensive inflammation (46.9 mon vs. 36.3 mon, HR 0.65, p = 0.02). Inflammation also correlated with greater likelihood of response to NACT/bevacizumab plus immunotherapy (odds ratio 2.9, p < 0.01). Modeling showed inflammation as a consistent but modest predictor for OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Detailed histologic assessment of ICS specimens appear to identify characteristics, such as inflammation and residual tumor, that may provide insight to certain clinical outcomes. Future work potentially leveraging emerging tools may provide further insight into outcomes.

Homologous recombination proficient subtypes of high-grade serous ovarian cancer: treatment options for a poor prognosis group

Approximately 50% of tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinomas (HGSCs) have functional homologous recombination-mediated (HR) DNA repair, so-called HR-proficient tumors, which are often associated with primary platinum resistance (relapse within six months after completion of first-line therapy), minimal benefit from poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, and shorter survival. HR-proficient tumors comprise multiple molecular subtypes including cases with CCNE1 amplification, AKT2 amplification or CDK12 alteration, and are often characterized as "cold" tumors with fewer infiltrating lymphocytes and decreased expression of PD-1/PD-L1. Several new treatment approaches aim to manipulate these negative prognostic features and render HR-proficient tumors more susceptible to treatment. Alterations in multiple different molecules and pathways in the DNA damage response are driving new drug development to target HR-proficient cancer cells, such as inhibitors of the CDK or P13K/AKT pathways, as well as ATR inhibitors. Treatment combinations with chemotherapy or PARP inhibitors and agents targeting DNA replication stress have shown promising preclinical and clinical results. New approaches in immunotherapy are also being explored, including vaccines or antibody drug conjugates. Many approaches are still in the early stages of development and further clinical trials will determine their clinical relevance. There is a need to include HR-proficient tumors in ovarian cancer trials and to analyze them in a more targeted manner to provide further evidence for their specific therapy, as this will be crucial in improving the overall prognosis of HGSC and ovarian cancer in general.

The importance of protein domain mutations in cancer therapy

Cancer is a complex disease that is caused by multiple genetic factors. Researchers have been studying protein domain mutations to understand how they affect the progression and treatment of cancer. These mutations can significantly impact the development and spread of cancer by changing the protein structure, function, and signalling pathways. As a result, there is a growing interest in how these mutations can be used as prognostic indicators for cancer prognosis. Recent studies have shown that protein domain mutations can provide valuable information about the severity of the disease and the patient's response to treatment. They may also be used to predict the response and resistance to targeted therapy in cancer treatment. The clinical implications of protein domain mutations in cancer are significant, and they are regarded as essential biomarkers in oncology. However, additional techniques and approaches are required to characterize changes in protein domains and predict their functional effects. Machine learning and other computational tools offer promising solutions to this challenge, enabling the prediction of the impact of mutations on protein structure and function. Such predictions can aid in the clinical interpretation of genetic information. Furthermore, the development of genome editing tools like CRISPR/Cas9 has made it possible to validate the functional significance of mutants more efficiently and accurately. In conclusion, protein domain mutations hold great promise as prognostic and predictive biomarkers in cancer. Overall, considerable research is still needed to better define genetic and molecular heterogeneity and to resolve the challenges that remain, so that their full potential can be realized.

Intragenic Rearrangement Burden Associates with Immune Cell Infiltration and Response to Immune Checkpoint Blockade in Cancer

Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) can induce durable cancer remission. However, only a small subset of patients gains benefits. While tumor mutation burden (TMB) differentiates responders from nonresponders in some cases, it is a weak predictor in tumor types with low mutation rates. Thus, there is an unmet need to discover a new class of genetic aberrations that predict ICB responses in these tumor types. Here, we report analyses of pan-cancer whole genomes which revealed that intragenic rearrangement (IGR) burden is significantly associated with immune infiltration in breast, ovarian, esophageal, and endometrial cancers, particularly with increased M1 macrophage and CD8+ T-cell signatures. Multivariate regression against spatially counted tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancers suggested that IGR burden is a more influential covariate than other genetic aberrations in these cancers. In the MEDI4736 trial evaluating durvalumab in esophageal adenocarcinoma, IGR burden correlated with patient benefits. In the IMVigor210 trial evaluating atezolizumab in urothelial carcinoma, IGR burden increased with platinum exposure and predicted patient benefit among TMB-low, platinum-exposed tumors. Altogether, we have demonstrated that IGR burden correlates with T-cell inflammation and predicts ICB benefit in TMB-low, IGR-dominant tumors, and in platinum-exposed tumors.

Efficacy and safety of second-line therapy by S-1 combined with sintilimab and anlotinib in pancreatic cancer patients with liver metastasis: a single-arm, phase II clinical trial

Background

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma carries a grim prognosis, and there are few recognized effective second-line treatment strategies. We attempted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combination of S-1, sintilimab, and anlotinib as a second-line treatment in pancreatic cancer patients with liver metastasis.

Methods

Pancreatic cancer patients with liver metastases were recruited. S-1 was administered orally at 25 mg/m2 bid, anlotinib was administered orally at 12 mg qd from day 1 to day 14, and sintilimab was administered intravenously at 200 mg on day 1. This method was repeated every 21 days, and the therapeutic effect was evaluated every 3 cycles. The primary outcome was the objective response rate (ORR).

Results

Overall, 23 patients were enrolled in this study of whom 19 patients had objective efficacy evaluation. The ORR was 10.5% (95% CI 0.4%-25.7%) in the evaluable population. The progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.53 (95% CI 2.50-7.50) months, and the overall survival (mOS) was 8.53 (95% CI 4.97-14.20) months. Grade 3 adverse events were 26.1%, and no grade 4 or above adverse events occurred. High-throughput sequencing was performed on the tumor tissues of 16 patients; patients with HRD-H (n = 10) had shorter PFS than those with HRD-L (n = 6) (2.43 vs. 5.45 months; P = 0.043), but there was no significant difference in OS between the two groups (4.43 vs. 9.35 months; P = 0.11).

Conclusions

This study suggests the advantage of S-1 combined with sintilimab and anlotinib in extending OS as a second-line therapy in pancreatic cancer patients with liver metastasis. Clinical Trial Registration: ChiCTR2000030659.

Ovarian cancer treatment and natural killer cell-based immunotherapy

Background

Ovarian cancer (OC) is one of the malignant tumors that poses a serious threat to women's health. Natural killer (NK) cells are an integral part of the immune system and have the ability to kill tumor cells directly or participate indirectly in the anti-tumor immune response. In recent years, NK cell-based immunotherapy for OC has shown remarkable potential. However, its mechanisms and effects remain unclear when compared to standard treatment.

Methods

To explore the value of NK cell-based immunotherapy in the treatment of OC, we conducted a literature review. In comparison to standard treatment, our focus was primarily on the current anti-tumor mechanisms, the clinical effect of NK cells against OC, factors affecting the structure and function of NK cells, and strategies to enhance the effectiveness of NK cells.

Results

We found that NK cells exert their therapeutic effects in OC through mechanisms such as antibody-dependent cell cytotoxicity, perforin release, and granule enzyme secretion. They also secrete IFN-γ and TNF-α or engage in Fas/FasL and TRAIL/TRAILR pathways, mediating the death of OC cells. In clinical trials, the majority of patients experienced disease stability with mild side effects after receiving NK cell-based immunotherapy, but there is still a lack of high-quality research evidence regarding its clinical effectiveness. OC and prior experience with standard treatments have an effect on NK cells, and it may be considered to maximize NK cell effects through the modulation of the tumor microenvironment or combination with other therapies.

Conclusions

In this review, we have summarized the current evidence of NK cell applications in the treatment of OC. Furthermore, factors and strategies that influence and enhance the role of NK cell immunotherapy are discussed.

New Achievements from Molecular Biology and Treatment Options for Refractory/Relapsed Ovarian Cancer-A Systematic Review

Ovarian cancer (OC) has a high rate of mortality and is the fifth most common cause of death in females all over the world. The etiology is still unclear. Numerous factors such as smoking, obesity, and unhealthy diet may affect the risk of OC. Having a family history of breast and OC is one of the main risks for developing OC. Mutations of BRCA1/2 are associated with OC risk as well. The histopathological classification of OC reveals the four most common types: serous, clear cell, endometrioid, and mucinous; these are epithelial OC types, and other types are rare. Furthermore, OC can be subdivided into types I and II. Type I tumors are most probably caused by atypical proliferative tumors. Type II tumors include high-grade carcinoma of the serous type, carcinosarcoma, and carcinoma, which are not differentiated and generally originate from tubal intraepithelial carcinoma of the serous type. Typically, type I tumors are present in early stages, usually with good prognosis. Type II tumors are classified as high-grade tumors and are most often diagnosed at advanced FIGO stages with poor prognosis. High-grade serous OC accounts for 90% of serous OC. Tumor heterogeneity aggravates OC treatment. The standard care for primary epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is cytoreductive surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy can be used in certain cases followed by cytoreductive surgery. The main prognostic factor is complete tumor resection. However, about 70% of patients relapse. Resistance to chemotherapeutic agents remains a major challenge in EOC treatment, in which many different factors are involved. In recent years, the examination of molecular parameters and their prognostic impact has become increasingly relevant in EOC, and furthermore, the use of immunotherapy has expanded the therapeutic range. As the clinical need is greatest for relapsed patients, this systematic review will focus on recent advances in molecular biology with prognostic and predictive markers and treatment options for recurrent/refractory OC. Inclusion criteria for the review: potential prospective or predictive biomarkers in preclinical or clinical use in relapsed and refractory OC, prognostic impact, clinical and preclinical trials, and immunotherapy. Exclusion criteria for the review: primary OC, no full text or abstract available, not the topic mentioned above, and text not available in English. Risk of bias: the included studies were evaluated descriptively for the topics mentioned above, and data were not compared with each other. The objective is to highlight the molecular mechanisms of the most promising targeted agents under clinical investigation to demonstrate their potential relevance in recurrent/refractory OC.

Concurrent RB1 loss and BRCA-deficiency predicts enhanced immunological response and long-term survival in tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma

Background

Somatic loss of the tumour suppressor RB1 is a common event in tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC), which frequently co-occurs with alterations in homologous recombination DNA repair genes including BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA). We examined whether tumour expression of RB1 was associated with survival across ovarian cancer histotypes (HGSC, endometrioid (ENOC), clear cell (CCOC), mucinous (MOC), low-grade serous carcinoma (LGSC)), and how co-occurrence of germline BRCA pathogenic variants and RB1 loss influences long-term survival in a large series of HGSC.

Patients and methods

RB1 protein expression patterns were classified by immunohistochemistry in epithelial ovarian carcinomas of 7436 patients from 20 studies participating in the Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium and assessed for associations with overall survival (OS), accounting for patient age at diagnosis and FIGO stage. We examined RB1 expression and germline BRCA status in a subset of 1134 HGSC, and related genotype to survival, tumour infiltrating CD8+ lymphocyte counts and transcriptomic subtypes. Using CRISPR-Cas9, we deleted RB1 in HGSC cell lines with and without BRCA1 mutations to model co-loss with treatment response. We also performed genomic analyses on 126 primary HGSC to explore the molecular characteristics of concurrent homologous recombination deficiency and RB1 loss.

Results

RB1 protein loss was most frequent in HGSC (16.4%) and was highly correlated with RB1 mRNA expression. RB1 loss was associated with longer OS in HGSC (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.83, P = 6.8 ×10-7), but with poorer prognosis in ENOC (HR 2.17, 95% CI 1.17-4.03, P = 0.0140). Germline BRCA mutations and RB1 loss co-occurred in HGSC (P < 0.0001). Patients with both RB1 loss and germline BRCA mutations had a superior OS (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.25-0.58, P = 5.2 ×10-6) compared to patients with either alteration alone, and their median OS was three times longer than non-carriers whose tumours retained RB1 expression (9.3 years vs. 3.1 years). Enhanced sensitivity to cisplatin (P < 0.01) and paclitaxel (P < 0.05) was seen in BRCA1 mutated cell lines with RB1 knockout. Among 126 patients with whole-genome and transcriptome sequence data, combined RB1 loss and genomic evidence of homologous recombination deficiency was correlated with transcriptional markers of enhanced interferon response, cell cycle deregulation, and reduced epithelial-mesenchymal transition in primary HGSC. CD8+ lymphocytes were most prevalent in BRCA-deficient HGSC with co-loss of RB1.

Conclusions

Co-occurrence of RB1 loss and BRCA mutation was associated with exceptionally long survival in patients with HGSC, potentially due to better treatment response and immune stimulation.

Biological function, regulatory mechanism, and clinical application of mannose in cancer

Studies examining the regulatory roles and clinical applications of monosaccharides other than glucose in cancer have been neglected. Mannose, a common type of monosaccharide found in human body fluids and tissues, primarily functions in protein glycosylation rather than carbohydrate metabolism. Recent research has demonstrated direct anticancer effects of mannose in vitro and in vivo. Simply supplementing cell culture medium or drinking water with mannose achieved these effects. Moreover, mannose enhances the effectiveness of current cancer treatments including chemotherapy, radiotherapy, targeted therapy, and immune therapy. Besides the advancements in basic research on the anticancer effects of mannose, recent studies have reported its application as a biomarker for cancer or in the delivery of anticancer drugs using mannose-modified drug delivery systems. This review discusses the progress made in understanding the regulatory roles of mannose in cancer progression, the mechanisms underlying its anticancer effects, and its current application in cancer diagnosis and treatment.

Overall survival and patient-reported outcome results from the placebo-controlled randomized phase III IMagyn050/GOG 3015/ENGOT-OV39 trial of atezolizumab for newly diagnosed stage III/IV ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact on overall survival (OS) and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of combining atezolizumab with standard therapy for newly diagnosed stage III/IV ovarian cancer.

METHODS

The placebo-controlled double-blind randomized phase III IMagyn050/GOG 3015/ENGOT-OV39 trial (NCT03038100) assigned eligible patients to 3-weekly atezolizumab 1200 mg or placebo for 22 cycles with platinum-based chemotherapy and bevacizumab. Coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival (already reported) and OS in the PD-L1-positive and intent-to-treat (ITT) populations, tested hierarchically. Prespecified PRO analyses focused on disease-related abdominal pain and bloating symptoms (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-OV28), functioning, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (QLQ-C30).

RESULTS

After 38 months' median follow-up, the OS hazard ratio in the PD-L1-positive population was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.66-1.06; p = 0.13); median OS was not estimable with atezolizumab versus 49.2 months with placebo. The hazard ratio for OS in the ITT population was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.78-1.09; median 50.5 versus 46.6 months, respectively). At week 9, similar proportions of patients in both arms of the neoadjuvant cohort showed ≥10-point improvement from baseline in abdominal pain and bloating, functioning, and HRQoL. In the primary surgery cohort, similar proportions of patients in each arm had improved, stable, or worsened physical and role function and HRQoL from baseline over time. Neither cohort showed differences between arms in treatment-related symptoms or overall side-effect bother.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporation of atezolizumab into standard therapy for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer does not significantly improve efficacy or impose additional treatment burden for patients.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov registration: NCT03038100.

The Search for Genomic Biomarkers of Response to Immunotherapy in Ovarian Cancer

Immune checkpoint blockade has been ineffective in ovarian cancer, and there is an ongoing effort to identify biomarkers of therapeutic benefit. Despite promising preclinical data, a substudy of the IMagyn050 trial found that patients with homologous recombination deficient tumors did not have improved progression-free survival with the addition of the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab. See related article by Landen et al., p. 1698.