Immune Cell Abundance and T-cell Receptor Landscapes Suggest New Patient Stratification Strategies in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is a molecularly and spatially heterogeneous disease frequently characterized by impairment of immunosurveillance mechanisms. Despite recent success with immunotherapy treatment, disease progression still occurs quickly after treatment in the majority of cases, suggesting the need to improve patient selection strategies. In the quest for biomarkers that may help inform response to checkpoint blockade, we characterized the tumor microenvironment (TME) of 162 HNSCC primary tumors of diverse etiologic and spatial origin, through gene expression and IHC profiling of relevant immune proteins, T-cell receptor (TCR) repertoire analysis, and whole-exome sequencing. We identified five HNSCC TME categories based on immune/stromal composition: (i) cytotoxic, (ii) plasma cell rich, (iii) dendritic cell rich, (iv) macrophage rich, and (v) immune-excluded. Remarkably, the cytotoxic and plasma cell rich subgroups exhibited a phenotype similar to tertiary lymphoid structures (TLS), which have been previously linked to immunotherapy response. We also found an increased richness of the TCR repertoire in these two subgroups and in never smokers. Mutational patterns evidencing APOBEC activity were enriched in the plasma cell high subgroup. Furthermore, specific signal propagation patterns within the Ras/ERK and PI3K/AKT pathways associated with distinct immune phenotypes. While traditionally CD8/CD3 T-cell infiltration and immune checkpoint expression (e.g., PD-L1) have been used in the patient selection process for checkpoint blockade treatment, we suggest that additional biomarkers, such as TCR productive clonality, smoking history, and TLS index, may have the ability to pull out potential responders to benefit from immunotherapeutic agents.

SIGNIFICANCE

Here we present our findings on the genomic and immune landscape of primary disease in a cohort of 162 patients with HNSCC, benefitting from detailed molecular and clinical characterization. By employing whole-exome sequencing and gene expression analysis of relevant immune markers, TCR profiling, and staining of relevant proteins involved in immune response, we highlight how distinct etiologies, cell intrinsic, and environmental factors combine to shape the landscape of HNSCC primary disease.

Phase Ia/b, Open-Label, Multicenter Study of AZD4635 (an Adenosine A2A Receptor Antagonist) as Monotherapy or Combined with Durvalumab, in Patients with Solid Tumors

PURPOSE

To evaluate AZD4635, an adenosine A2A receptor antagonist, as monotherapy or in combination with durvalumab in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In phase Ia (dose escalation), patients had relapsed/refractory solid tumors; in phase Ib (dose expansion), patients had checkpoint inhibitor-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) or colorectal carcinoma, non-small cell lung cancer with prior anti-PD-1/PD-L1 exposure, or other solid tumors (checkpoint-naïve or prior anti-PD-1/PD-L1 exposure). Patients received AZD4635 monotherapy (75-200 mg once daily or 125 mg twice daily) or in combination with durvalumab (AZD4635 75 or 100 mg once daily). The primary objective was safety; secondary objectives included antitumor activity and pharmacokinetics; exploratory objectives included evaluation of an adenosine gene signature in patients with mCRPC.

RESULTS

As of September 8, 2020, 250 patients were treated (AZD4635, n = 161; AZD4635+durvalumab, n = 89). In phase Ia, DLTs were observed with monotherapy (125 mg twice daily; n = 2) and with combination treatment (75 mg; n = 1) in patients receiving nanosuspension. The most common treatment-related adverse events included nausea, fatigue, vomiting, decreased appetite, dizziness, and diarrhea. The RP2D of the AZD4635 capsule formulation was 75 mg once daily, as monotherapy or in combination with durvalumab. The pharmacokinetic profile was dose-proportional, and exposure was adequate to cover target with 100 mg nanosuspension or 75 mg capsule once daily. In patients with mCRPC receiving monotherapy or combination treatment, tumor responses (2/39 and 6/37, respectively) and prostate-specific antigen responses (3/60 and 10/45, respectively) were observed. High versus low blood-based adenosine signature was associated with median progression-free survival of 21 weeks versus 8.7 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

AZD4635 monotherapy or combination therapy was well tolerated. Objective responses support additional phase II combination studies in patients with mCRPC.