Immunologic Gene Signature Analysis Correlates Myeloid Cells and M2 Macrophages with Time to Trabectedin Failure in Sarcoma Patients

B7-H3 is widely expressed in soft tissue sarcomas

PURPOSE

Targeted therapy development in soft tissue sarcoma (STS) has been burdened by the heterogeneity of this group of rare tumors. B7 homolog 3 protein (B7-H3) is a molecule in the same family as programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). It has limited expression in noncancerous tissues and is overexpressed in many cancers, making it an attractive target for cancer therapy, and clinical trials targeting B7-H3 are actively underway. While available data demonstrate high expression levels of B7-H3 in individual sarcoma subtypes, its expression patterns across STS subtypes are not well described. The purpose of this study was to characterize the expression patterns of B7-H3 in STS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective analysis evaluated STS tumor specimens from patients with a variety of different subtypes. Specimens were evaluated by immunohistochemistry (IHC) for expression and staining pattern of B7-H3 both in tumors and in associated vasculature.

RESULTS

Specimens from 153 sarcoma patients included 15 different STS subtypes. B7-H3 was broadly expressed in 97% of samples (95% CI 0.93-0.99) and 69.2% demonstrated high levels of B7-H3 expression (95% CI 0.61-0.76). No significant association between B7-H3 positivity or expression level and prior treatment(s), tumor size, tumor grade, or patient age. B7-H3 positivity in vessels was found in 94.7% (145/153) of samples. In tumors that had been previously assessed for PD-L1 and PD-1, there was no correlation between B7-H3 positivity or expression and the positivity or expression level of PD-L1 or PD-1.

CONCLUSION

These data show high levels of B7-H3 positivity across soft tissue sarcoma subtypes, suggesting its feasibility as a therapeutic target for future sarcoma treatments. Future clinical trials are needed to evaluate whether targeting B7-H3 can provide clinical benefit to help patients with sarcoma.

Immunotherapy and Radiotherapy Combinations for Sarcoma

Sarcomas are a heterogeneous group of bone and soft tissue tumors. Survival outcomes for advanced (unresectable or metastatic) disease remain poor, so therapeutic improvements are needed. Radiotherapy plays an integral role in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment of localized disease as well as in the treatment of metastatic disease. Combining radiotherapy with immunotherapy to potentiate immunotherapy has been used in a variety of cancers other than sarcoma, and there is opportunity to further investigate combining immunotherapy with radiotherapy to try to improve outcomes in sarcoma. In this review, we describe the diversity of the tumor immune microenvironments for sarcomas and describe the immunomodulatory effects of radiotherapy. We discuss studies on the timing of radiotherapy relative to immunotherapy and studies on the radiotherapy dose and fractionation regimen to be used in combination with immunotherapy. We describe the impact of radiotherapy on the tumor immune microenvironment. We review completed and ongoing clinical trials combining radiotherapy with immunotherapy for sarcoma and propose future directions for studies combining immunotherapy with radiotherapy in the treatment of sarcoma.

The Role of Macrophages in Sarcoma Tumor Microenvironment and Treatment

Sarcomas are a heterogeneous group of malignant mesenchymal tumors, including soft tissue and bone sarcomas. Macrophages in the tumor microenvironment, involved in immunosuppression and leading to tumor development, are called tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs). TAMs are very important in modulating the microenvironment of sarcomas by expressing specific markers and secreting factors that influence immune and tumor cells. They are involved in many signaling pathways, such as p-STAT3/p-Erk1/2, PI3K/Akt, JAK/MAPK, and JAK/STAT3. TAMs also significantly impact the clinical outcomes of patients suffering from sarcomas and are mainly related to poor overall survival rates among bone and soft tissue sarcomas, for example, chondrosarcoma, osteosarcoma, liposarcoma, synovial sarcoma, and undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma. This review summarizes the current knowledge on TAMs in sarcomas, focusing on specific markers on sarcoma cells, cell-cell interactions, and the possibly involved molecular pathways. Furthermore, we discuss the clinical significance of macrophages in sarcomas as a potential target for new therapies, presenting clinical relevance, possible new treatment options, and ongoing clinical trials using TAMs in sarcoma treatment.

Combinations of Chemotherapy and PD-1/PD-L1 Inhibitors in Sarcoma

OPINION STATEMENT

While no PD-1 inhibitor has been FDA approved for use in sarcoma or proven efficacious in a randomized trial, the use of single agent PD-1 inhibitors is standard-of-care and recommended by the NCCN guidelines in certain specific subtypes and situations. Even while the role of immunotherapy is still being defined in sarcoma, there is rising interest in combinations of PD-1 inhibitors with standard-of-care treatments, especially chemotherapy. Recently, several early phase trials have suggested potential benefits for chemotherapy in combination with PD-1 inhibitors. Although some physicians are already combining PD-1 inhibitors and chemotherapy for sarcoma off-label in the community, we believe more data is necessary. We support further evaluation of these combinations in well-designed clinical trials.

A Phase 1/2 Trial Combining Avelumab and Trabectedin for Advanced Liposarcoma and Leiomyosarcoma

PURPOSE

Leiomyosarcoma (LMS) and liposarcoma (LPS) frequently express PD-L1 but are generally resistant to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition (ICI). Trabectedin is FDA-approved for LMS and LPS. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of trabectedin with anti-PD-L1 antibody avelumab in patients with advanced LMS and LPS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A single-arm, open-label, Phase 1/2 study tested avelumab with trabectedin for advanced LMS and LPS. The phase I portion evaluated safety and feasibility of trabectedin (1, 1.2 and 1.5 mg/m2) with avelumab at standard dosing. Primary endpoint of the phase II portion was objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1. Correlative studies included T-cell receptor sequencing (TCRseq), multiplex immunohistochemistry, and tumor gene expression.

RESULTS

33 patients were evaluable; 24 with LMS (6 uterine and 18 non-uterine) and 11 with LPS. In Phase 1, dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed in 2 of 6 patients at both trabectedin 1.2 and 1.5 mg/m2. The recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) was 1.0 mg/m2 trabectedin and 800 mg avelumab. Of 23 patients evaluable at RP2D, three (13%) had partial response (PR), ten (43%) had stable disease (SD) as best response. 6-month PFS was 52%; median PFS was 8.3 months. Patients with PR had higher Simpson Clonality score on TCRseq from peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) versus those with SD (0.182 vs 0.067, p = 0.02) or PD (0.182 vs 0.064, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the trial did not meet the primary ORR endpoint, PFS compared favorably to prior studies of trabectedin warranting further investigation.