Immunotherapy for breast cancer: past, present, and future

Immunotherapy has shown promise in many solid tumors including melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer with an evolving role in breast cancer. Immunotherapy encompasses a wide range of therapies including immune checkpoint inhibition, monoclonal antibodies, bispecific antibodies, vaccinations, antibody-drug conjugates, and identifying other emerging interventions targeting the tumor microenvironment. Increasing efficacy of these treatments in breast cancer patients requires identification of better biomarkers to guide patient selection; recognizing when to initiate these therapies in multi-modality treatment plans; establishing novel assays to monitor immune-mediated responses; and creating combined systemic therapy options incorporating conventional treatments such as chemotherapy and endocrine therapy. This review will focus on the current role and future directions of many of these immunotherapies in breast cancer, as well as highlighting clinical trials that are investigating several of these active issues.

Stereotactic radiosurgery of early melanoma brain metastases after initiation of anti-CTLA-4 treatment is associated with improved intracranial control

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies suggest that radiation can boost antitumor immune response by stimulating release of tumor-specific antigens. However, the optimal timing between radiotherapy and immune checkpoint blockade to achieve potentially synergistic benefits is unclear.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Multi-institutional retrospective analysis was conducted of ninety-nine metastatic melanoma patients from 2007 to 2014 treated with ipilimumab who later received stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for new brain metastases that developed after starting immunotherapy. All patients had complete blood count acquired before SRS. Primary outcomes were intracranial disease control and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 15.5months. In the MD Anderson cohort, patients who received SRS after 5.5months (n=20) of their last dose of ipilimumab had significantly worse intracranial control than patients who received SRS within 5.5months (n=51) (median 3.63 vs. 8.09months; hazard ratio [HR] 2.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-4.16, p=0.041). OS was not different between the two arms. The improvement in intracranial control was confirmed in an independent validation cohort of 28 patients treated at Yale-New Haven Hospital. Circulating absolute lymphocyte count before SRS predicted for treatment response as those with baseline counts >1000/µL had reduced risk of intracranial recurrence compared with those with ≤1000/µL (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.0.23-0.94, p=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

In this multi-institutional study, patients who received SRS for new brain metastases within 5.5months after ipilimumab therapy had better intracranial disease control than those who received SRS later. Moreover, higher circulating lymphocyte count was associated with improved intracranial disease control.

Recent advances in understanding antitumor immunity

The term "antitumor immunity" refers to innate and adaptive immune responses which lead to tumor control. Turning the immune system into a destructive force against tumors has been achieved in a broad range of human cancers with the use of non-specific immunotherapies, vaccines, adoptive-cell therapy, and, more recently with significant success, through blockade of immune checkpoints. Nevertheless, the efficacy of these approaches is not universal, and tools to identify long-term responders and primarily refractory patients are warranted. In this article, we review recent advances in understanding the complex mechanisms of antitumor immunity and how these developments can be used to address open questions in a setting of growing clinical indications for the use of immunotherapy.

Immunodynamics: a cancer immunotherapy trials network review of immune monitoring in immuno-oncology clinical trials

The efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 targeted therapies in addition to anti-CTLA-4 solidifies immunotherapy as a modality to add to the anticancer arsenal. Despite raising the bar of clinical efficacy, immunologically targeted agents raise new challenges to conventional drug development paradigms by highlighting the limited relevance of assessing standard pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD). Specifically, systemic and intratumoral immune effects have not consistently correlated with standard relationships between systemic dose, toxicity, and efficacy for cytotoxic therapies. Hence, PK and PD paradigms remain inadequate to guide the selection of doses and schedules, both starting and recommended Phase 2 for immunotherapies. The promise of harnessing the immune response against cancer must also be considered in light of unique and potentially serious toxicities. Refining immune endpoints to better inform clinical trial design represents a high priority challenge. The Cancer Immunotherapy Trials Network investigators review the immunodynamic effects of specific classes of immunotherapeutic agents to focus immune assessment modalities and sites, both systemic and importantly intratumoral, which are critical to the success of the rapidly growing field of immuno-oncology.

Targeting immune checkpoints in melanoma: an update

Different treatment modalities encompassed under the term 'immunotherapy' have led to major breakthroughs in the treatment of melanoma. Immune checkpoint-blocking antibodies targeting CTLA-4 and PD-1 result in significant activity and prolonged survival in patients with advanced melanoma and are currently available for clinical use. Studies addressing novel immune checkpoint blocking antibodies, combined approaches and predictive/prognostic biomarkers are expected to broaden the applicability and efficacy of this approach. In this article, we will review clinically meaningful aspects of immune checkpoint blockade, promising strategies under development and the challenges faced in a continuous search to improve the outcomes of patients affected by this disease.

Immune biomarkers: the promises and pitfalls of personalized medicine

Substantial progress in molecular immunology, coupled with an increasing focus on translational research and an enthusiasm for personalized medicine, has resulted in a rapid expansion in the field of immune biomarkers in recent years. In this Science and Society article, we provide a conceptual overview of the field and discuss the progress that has been made so far, as well as the future potential in the context of the scientific, logistical, financial, legal and ethical framework within which this research is being carried out and translated into clinical use.

Immune checkpoint blockade

Since the development and approval of Ipilimumab, the first immune checkpoint inhibitor licensed for the treatment of metastatic melanoma, clinicians have gained a better understanding of the mode of action, management of toxicities, and assessment of response to this class of drugs. Several antibodies are now in development, aimed at blocking novel immune checkpoint molecules, such as PD-1 and it's corresponding ligand PD-L1. This article summarizes the mechanism of action, preclinical development, and subsequent clinical studies of immune checkpoint antibodies in melanoma.

Checkpoint modulation in melanoma: an update on ipilimumab and future directions

Ipilimumab, an anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 antibody, was the first therapy demonstrated to improve overall survival in melanoma. Since ipilimumab's approval by the FDA in 2011, a wealth of data has amassed, helping clinicians to optimize its use. We have learned how to mitigate the adverse effects of ipilimumab, identified its effects in melanoma subpopulations such as those with brain metastases, uveal melanoma, and mucosal melanoma, discovered potential biomarkers of activity, and investigated its use in combination with other therapeutic modalities. These discoveries have paved the way for rapid development of second-generation immunomodulatory antibodies such as inhibitors of the programmed cell death 1 receptor axis. These new agents hold promise as monotherapy, but perhaps the greatest allure lies in the possibility of combining these agents in synergistic multidrug regimens.

Markers for anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) therapy in melanoma

Therapeutic strategies that block Cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) enhance antitumor immunity and prolong the lives of patients with metastatic melanoma. However, only a subset of patients benefit, and responses are often delayed due to heterogeneous response kinetics. Ongoing monitoring of the immunologic effects of therapy and correlating these immunologic changes with patient outcomes continue to be important goals to better identify possible mechanisms of clinical activity of these agents. This chapter introduces the major areas of investigation in monitoring patients treated with CTLA-4 blockade and provides specific details of our experience performing selected assays.

Immune modulation in cancer with antibodies

Ipilimumab is the prototypical immunomodulatory antibody, approved by the FDA in 2011 for advanced melanoma on the basis of survival benefit. Since that time, we have made significant strides in optimizing this therapy: we have characterized the spectrum of immune-related adverse events and learned how to mitigate them with treatment algorithms, discovered potential biomarkers of activity, and identified the potential synergy between checkpoint modulation and other therapeutic modalities. Recent phase I trials have established the efficacy and safety of next-generation checkpoint agents, including PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors, across multiple tumor types. Much work lies ahead in developing these next-generation checkpoint agents, testing them in combination, and determining how to integrate them into the treatment paradigms of various tumor types.

The delicate balance of melanoma immunotherapy

The strategy of immune modulation for the treatment of cancer is being refined with the introduction of multiple new therapeutic agents into the clinic. Melanoma is a disease where many of these agents have demonstrated efficacy. The mechanisms of action of these agents exploit the counter-regulatory mechanisms of the immune response. However, these agents are also associated with immune-related adverse events (IRAEs), which represent tissue-specific inflammatory responses. These IRAEs highlight the delicate balance of immunologic homeostasis and, with some interventions, may occur more frequently in patients who sustain a therapeutic response. This review will discuss melanoma immunogenicity and immunotherapy. Furthermore, the spectrum and distinction between a reversible immune adverse event and autoimmunity will be highlighted.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced melanoma

BACKGROUND

In patients with melanoma, ipilimumab (an antibody against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 [CTLA-4]) prolongs overall survival, and nivolumab (an antibody against the programmed death 1 [PD-1] receptor) produced durable tumor regression in a phase 1 trial. On the basis of their distinct immunologic mechanisms of action and supportive preclinical data, we conducted a phase 1 trial of nivolumab combined with ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma.

METHODS

We administered intravenous doses of nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients every 3 weeks for 4 doses, followed by nivolumab alone every 3 weeks for 4 doses (concurrent regimen). The combined treatment was subsequently administered every 12 weeks for up to 8 doses. In a sequenced regimen, patients previously treated with ipilimumab received nivolumab every 2 weeks for up to 48 doses.

RESULTS

A total of 53 patients received concurrent therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab, and 33 received sequenced treatment. The objective-response rate (according to modified World Health Organization criteria) for all patients in the concurrent-regimen group was 40%. Evidence of clinical activity (conventional, unconfirmed, or immune-related response or stable disease for ≥24 weeks) was observed in 65% of patients. At the maximum doses that were associated with an acceptable level of adverse events (nivolumab at a dose of 1 mg per kilogram of body weight and ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram), 53% of patients had an objective response, all with tumor reduction of 80% or more. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to therapy occurred in 53% of patients in the concurrent-regimen group but were qualitatively similar to previous experience with monotherapy and were generally reversible. Among patients in the sequenced-regimen group, 18% had grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to therapy and the objective-response rate was 20%.

CONCLUSIONS

Concurrent therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab had a manageable safety profile and provided clinical activity that appears to be distinct from that in published data on monotherapy, with rapid and deep tumor regression in a substantial proportion of patients. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01024231.).