The global landscape of neoadjuvant and adjuvant anti-PD-1/PD-L1 clinical trials

Neoadjuvant immunotherapy based on PD-1/L1 inhibitors for gastrointestinal tumors: a review of the rationale and clinical advances

The landscape of current tumor treatment has been revolutionized by the advent of immunotherapy based on PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Leveraging its capacity to mobilize systemic antitumor immunity, which is primarily mediated by T cells, there is growing exploration and expansion of its potential value in various stages of clinical tumor treatment. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy induces a robust immune response against tumors prior to surgery, effectively facilitating tumor volume reduction, early eradication or suppression of tumor cell activity, and control of potential metastatic spread, to improve curative surgical resection rates, and prevent tumor recurrence. This review delineates the theoretical basis of neoadjuvant immunotherapy from preclinical research evidence, discusses specific challenges in clinical application, and provides a comprehensive overview of clinical research progress in neoadjuvant immunotherapy for gastrointestinal tumors. These findings suggest that neoadjuvant immunotherapy has the potential to ameliorate immunosuppressive states and enhance cytotoxic T cell function while preserving lymphatic drainage in the preoperative period. However, further investigations are needed on specific treatment regimens, suitable patient populations, and measurable endpoints. Despite numerous studies demonstrating the promising efficacy and manageable adverse events of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in gastrointestinal tumors, the availability of high-quality randomized controlled trials is limited, which highlights the necessity for further research.

Efficacy and Safety of Anti-Programmed Cell Death Protein 1/Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Antibodies Plus Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for NSCLC in the People's Republic of China: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

The available approved anticancer drugs for Chinese patients are relatively limited because of China's low participation rate in international clinical trials. Therefore, a focus on approved anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) drugs in China is needed. This study aims to assess the heterogeneity of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies manufactured in China (domestic PD-1/PD-L1) and overseas (imported PD-1/PD-L1) when combined with chemotherapy as the first-line treatment of NSCLC.

Methods

A systematic search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library of publications up to July 13, 2023. Meta-analysis was applied to compare the efficacy and safety profile between anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies plus chemotherapy (PD-1/PD-L1+Chemo) and chemotherapy alone using STATA software. Pooled hazard ratios for progression-free survival and overall survival, odds ratios for objective response rate, and incidence rate of grade greater than or equal to three treatment-related adverse events with 95% confidence intervals were calculated in the domestic group and imported group by a random-effects model, and the heterogeneity between the two estimates was assessed.

Results

There were 14 eligible clinical studies with a total of 3951 patients involved in this analysis, including eight studies of domestic PD-1/PD-L1+Chemo and six studies of imported PD-1/PD-L1+Chemo. The study revealed that there was no significant difference between domestic and imported PD-1/PD-L1+Chemo in overall survival (p = 0.80), progression-free survival (p = 0.53), and incidence rate of grade greater than or equal to three treatment-related adverse events (p = 0.10). Nevertheless, the objective response rate of imported PD-1/PD-L1+Chemo was significantly higher than that of domestic PD-1/PD-L1+Chemo (p = 0.03).

Conclusions

Domestic anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies plus chemotherapy were found to have comparable efficacy and safety to those combined with imported anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies based on current evidence.

Outcome differences by sex in oncology clinical trials

Identifying sex differences in outcomes and toxicity between males and females in oncology clinical trials is important and has also been mandated by National Institutes of Health policies. Here we analyze the Trialtrove database, finding that, strikingly, only 472/89,221 oncology clinical trials (0.5%) had curated post-treatment sex comparisons. Among 288 trials with comparisons of survival, outcome, or response, 16% report males having statistically significant better survival outcome or response, while 42% reported significantly better survival outcome or response for females. The strongest differences are in trials of EGFR inhibitors in lung cancer and rituximab in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (both favoring females). Among 44 trials with side effect comparisons, more trials report significantly lesser side effects in males (N = 22) than in females (N = 13). Thus, while statistical comparisons between sexes in oncology trials are rarely reported, important differences in outcome and toxicity exist. These considerable outcome and toxicity differences highlight the need for reporting sex differences more thoroughly going forward.

A systematic analysis of the landscape of synthetic lethality-driven precision oncology

BACKGROUND

Synthetic lethality (SL) denotes a genetic interaction between two genes whose co-inactivation is detrimental to cells. Because more than 25 years have passed since SL was proposed as a promising way to selectively target cancer vulnerabilities, it is timely to comprehensively assess its impact so far and discuss its future.

METHODS

We systematically analyzed the literature and clinical trial data from the PubMed and Trialtrove databases to portray the preclinical and clinical landscape of SL oncology.

FINDINGS

We identified 235 preclinically validated SL pairs and found 1,207 pertinent clinical trials, and the number keeps increasing over time. About one-third of these SL clinical trials go beyond the typically studied DNA damage response (DDR) pathway, testifying to the recently broadening scope of SL applications in clinical oncology. We find that SL oncology trials have a greater success rate than non-SL-based trials. However, about 75% of the preclinically validated SL interactions have not yet been tested in clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Dissecting the recent efforts harnessing SL to identify predictive biomarkers, novel therapeutic targets, and effective combination therapy, our systematic analysis reinforces the hope that SL may serve as a key driver of precision oncology going forward.

FUNDING

Funded by the Samsung Research Funding & Incubation Center of Samsung Electronics, the Institute of Information & Communications Technology Planning & Evaluation (IITP) grant funded by the Republic of Korea government (MSIT), the Kwanjeong Educational Foundation, the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Cancer Institute (NCI), and Center for Cancer Research (CCR).

Neoadjuvant Durvalumab Alone or Combined with Novel Immuno-Oncology Agents in Resectable Lung Cancer: The Phase II NeoCOAST Platform Trial

Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy improves pathologic complete response rate and event-free survival in patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) versus chemotherapy alone. NeoCOAST was the first randomized, multidrug platform trial to examine novel neoadjuvant immuno-oncology combinations for patients with resectable NSCLC, using major pathologic response (MPR) rate as the primary endpoint. Eighty-three patients received a single cycle of treatment: 26 received durvalumab (anti-PD-L1) monotherapy, 21 received durvalumab plus oleclumab (anti-CD73), 20 received durvalumab plus monalizumab (anti-NKG2A), and 16 received durvalumab plus danvatirsen (anti-STAT3 antisense oligonucleotide). MPR rates were higher for patients in the combination arms versus durvalumab alone. Safety profiles for the combinations were similar to those of durvalumab alone. Multiplatform immune profiling suggested that improved MPR rates in the durvalumab plus oleclumab and durvalumab plus monalizumab arms were associated with enhanced effector immune infiltration of tumors, interferon responses and markers of tertiary lymphoid structure formation, and systemic functional immune cell activation.

SIGNIFICANCE

A neoadjuvant platform trial can rapidly generate clinical and translational data using candidate surrogate endpoints like MPR. In NeoCOAST, patients with resectable NSCLC had improved MPR rates after durvalumab plus oleclumab or monalizumab versus durvalumab alone and tumoral transcriptomic signatures indicative of augmented immune cell activation and function. See related commentary by Cooper and Yu, p. 2306. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 2293.

Supramolecular Biomaterials for Cancer Immunotherapy

Cancer immunotherapy has achieved tremendous successful clinical results and obtained historic victories in tumor treatments. However, great limitations associated with feeble immune responses and serious adverse effects still cannot be neglected due to the complicated multifactorial etiology and pathologic microenvironment in tumors. The rapid development of nanomedical science and material science has facilitated the advanced progress of engineering biomaterials to tackle critical issues. The supramolecular biomaterials with flexible and modular structures have exhibited unparalleled advantages of high cargo-loading efficiency, excellent biocompatibility, and diversiform immunomodulatory activity, thereby providing a powerful weapon for cancer immunotherapy. In past decades, supramolecular biomaterials were extensively explored as versatile delivery platforms for immunotherapeutic agents or designed to interact with the key moleculars in immune system in a precise and controllable manner. In this review, we focused on the crucial role of supramolecular biomaterials in the modulation of pivotal steps during tumor immunotherapy, including antigen delivery and presentation, T lymphocyte activation, tumor-associated macrophage elimination and repolarization, and myeloid-derived suppressor cell depletion. Based on extensive research, we explored the current limitations and development prospects of supramolecular biomaterials in cancer immunotherapy.

Clinical development of mRNA therapies against solid tumors

The mRNA-based therapeutics have become the hot spot of biopharmaceutical industries in recent years. The landscape of this area is expanding from infectious disease to cancer, which needs to be summarized to provide data supports for industries and research institutions. Based on the Trialtrove database, a total of 108 clinical trials from 1999 to 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. We have demonstrated that the clinical development of mRNA therapies against solid tumors is still at an early stage. There are evolutions in delivery systems from the dendritic cell to the lipid-based platform and in encoding strategies from the fixed tumor antigens to the personalized neoantigens. The adjuvant or maintenance therapy and the combination treatment with checkpoint inhibitors are becoming the major clinical development orientation.

[A 2022 inventory in oncology news]

The Cancer Bulletin continues its tradition. At the beginning of 2023, the members of the editorial committee would like to share with you their analyses of the highlights of 2022. The objective remains to highlight what will change our practices and lead to different diagnostic or therapeutic options. Our synthesis will therefore focus on published data. They have been analyzed and placed in the more general context of the management of each type of cancer to deduce the practical consequences for our patients. This synthesis exercise will concern almost all tumor pathologies, most often on the therapeutic level, and will, however, exclude the evolution of techniques, whether they are diagnostic or used for the follow-up of our patients. The final objective is to allow you to have a thoughtful, didactic and practical reading. Our goal is to provide our readers with the rational bases that can lead to a different approach for treatments in 2023.

Characterization of Oncology Clinical Trials Using Germline Genetic Data

IMPORTANCE

The recent successes of poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and belzutifan support germline genetic data as an exciting, accessible source for biomarkers in cancer treatment. This study hypothesizes, however, that most oncology clinical trials using germline data largely prioritize BRCA1/2 as biomarkers and PARP inhibitors as therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize past and ongoing oncology trials that use germline data.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cross-sectional study of oncology trials used the Informa Trialtrove database to evaluate trial attributes. Trials using germline information (including the terms germline, hereditary, or inherited in the title, treatment plan, interventions, end points, objectives, results, or notes) and conducted globally between December 1, 1990, and April 4, 2022 (data freeze date), were included.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Trials by cancer type, phase, participants, sponsor type, end points, outcomes, and locations were described. Associated biomarkers and mechanisms of action for studied therapeutic interventions were counted. How germline data in trial inclusion and exclusion criteria are associated with end points, outcomes, and enrollment were also examined.

RESULTS

A total of 887 of 84 297 (1.1%) oncology clinical trials in the Trialtrove database that use germline data were identified. Most trials were conducted in cancer types where PARP inhibitors are already approved. A total of 74.8% (672) of trials were performed in the phase 2 setting or above. Trials were primarily sponsored by industry (523 trials [59.0%]), academia (382 trials [43.1%]), and the government (274 trials [30.9%]), where trials may have multiple sponsor types. Among 343 trials using germline data with outcomes in Trialtrove, 180 (52.5%) reported meeting primary end points. Although BRCA1/2 are the most frequent biomarkers seen (BRCA1, 224 trials [25.3%]; BRCA2, 228 trials [25.7%]), trials also examine pharmacogenomic variants and germline mediators of somatic biomarkers. PARP inhibitors or immunotherapy were tested in 69.9% of trials; PARP inhibition was the most frequently studied mechanism (367 trials [41.4%]). An overwhelming number of trials using germline data were conducted in the US, Canada, and Europe vs other countries, mirroring disparities in cancer genetics data. Germline data in inclusion and exclusion criteria are associated with altered end point, outcomes, and enrollment compared with oncology trials with no germline data use. Examples of inclusion and exclusion criteria regarding germline data that may unintentionally exclude patients were identified.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that for germline biomarkers to gain clinical relevance, trials must expand biomarkers, therapies, and populations under study.

[Progress and Application of Bayesian Approach in the Early Research and Development of New Anticancer Drugs]

Bayesian statistics is an approach for learning from evidences as it accumulates, combining prior distribution with current information on a quantity of interest, in which posterior distribution and inferences are being updated each time new data become available using Bayes' Theorem. Though frequentist approach has dominated medical studies, Bayesian approach has been more and more widely recognized by its flexibility and efficiency. Research and development (R&D) on anti-cancer new drugs have been so hot globally in recent years in spite of relatively high failure rate. It is the common demand of pharmaceutical enterprises and researchers to identify the optimal dose, regime and right population in the early-phase R&D stage more accurately and efficiently, especially when the following three major changes have been observed. The R&D on anticancer drugs have transformed from chemical drugs to biological products, from monotherapy to combination therapy, and the study design has also gradually changed from traditional way to innovative and adaptive mode. This also raises a number of subsequent challenges on decision-making of early R&D, such as inability to determine MTD, flexibility to deal with delayed toxicity, delayed response and dose-response changing relationships. It is because of the above emerging changes and challenges that the Bayesian approach is getting more and more attention from the industry. At least, Bayesian approach has more information for decision-making, which could potentially help enterprises achieve higher efficiency, shorter period and lower investment. This study also expounds the application of Bayesian statistics in the early R&D on anticancer new drugs, and compares and analyzes its idea and application scenarios with frequentist statistics, aiming to provide macroscopic and systematic reference for all related stakeholders.
.

Availability and Affordability of Oncology Drugs in 2012-2021 in China and the United States

Objective

To systematically summarize the landscape and characteristics of all approved new anticancer drugs for the last 10 years in China and the United States (US) to further inform the trend, current state, and existing gap in the availability and affordability of cancer medicine between the two countries.

Methods

Mainly based on the Pharmcube database, a list and detailed information of anticancer drugs approved in China and the United States were acquired. The annual number, time lag, and basic characteristics, including drug type, mechanism, enterprise type, indication population, drug target, and cancer type of approved drugs were compared.

Results

Eighty-seven and 118 new anticancer drugs were approved in China and the US, respectively, showing a stable trend in the US, while a significant increase was observed after 2016 in China. Of the 42 cancer medicines launched in both countries, the US took precedence, and the median time lag markedly decreased, from 6.53 years in 2012 to 0.88 years in 2020. A total of 14.4% of drugs were applicable to children in the US, while only 2.3% were applicable in China, and there was no difference in drug type and enterprise. Thirty-one and 43 targets were explored, with respect to 27 and 36 cancer types in China and the US, respectively, during the period. In addition, the expenditure of drugs on PD-1 and PD-L1 in China was generally lower than that in America.

Conclusion

The availability of new anticancer drugs has increased dramatically in the past decade, particularly in China. Compared with the US, the launch of new anticancer drugs in China lags behind, but the time lag has been shortened significantly, and better affordability is observed in immune drugs. More attention should be given to differentiated innovation, and unmet medical needs in special populations like childhood tumors, which are important directions of new drug R&D in China.