Peripheral T cell expansion predicts tumour infiltration and clinical response.

Despite the resounding clinical success in cancer treatment of antibodies that block the interaction of PD1 with its ligand PDL11, the mechanisms involved remain unknown. A major limitation to understanding the origin and fate of T cells in tumour immunity is the lack of quantitative information on the distribution of individual clonotypes of T cells in patients with cancer. Here, by performing deep single-cell sequencing of RNA and T cell receptors in patients with different types of cancer, we survey the profiles of various populations of T cells and T cell receptors in tumours, normal adjacent tissue, and peripheral blood. We find clear evidence of clonotypic expansion of effector-like T cells not only within the tumour but also in normal adjacent tissue. Patients with gene signatures of such clonotypic expansion respond best to anti-PDL1 therapy. Notably, expanded clonotypes found in the tumour and normal adjacent tissue can also typically be detected in peripheral blood, which suggests a convenient approach to patient identification. Analyses of our data together with several external datasets suggest that intratumoural T cells, especially in responsive patients, are replenished with fresh, non-exhausted replacement cells from sites outside the tumour, suggesting continued activity of the cancer immunity cycle in these patients, the acceleration of which may be associated with clinical response.

Differential regulation of PD-L1 expression by immune and tumor cells in NSCLC and the response to treatment with atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1).

Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression on tumor cells (TCs) by immunohistochemistry is rapidly gaining importance as a diagnostic for the selection or stratification of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) most likely to respond to single-agent checkpoint inhibitors. However, at least two distinct patterns of PD-L1 expression have been observed with potential biological and clinical relevance in NSCLC: expression on TC or on tumor-infiltrating immune cells (ICs). We investigated the molecular and cellular characteristics associated with PD-L1 expression in these distinct cell compartments in 4,549 cases of NSCLC. PD-L1 expression on IC was more prevalent and likely reflected IFN-γ-induced adaptive regulation accompanied by increased tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and effector T cells. High PD-L1 expression on TC, however, reflected an epigenetic dysregulation of the PD-L1 gene and was associated with a distinct histology described by poor immune infiltration, sclerotic/desmoplastic stroma, and mesenchymal molecular features. Importantly, durable clinical responses to atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) were observed in patients with tumors expressing high PD-L1 levels on either TC alone [40% objective response rate (ORR)] or IC alone (22% ORR). Thus, PD-L1 expression on TC or IC can independently attenuate anticancer immunity and emphasizes the functional importance of IC in regulating the antitumor T cell response.

Atezolizumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (OAK): a phase 3, open-label, multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Atezolizumab is a humanised antiprogrammed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibody that inhibits PD-L1 and programmed death-1 (PD-1) and PD-L1 and B7-1 interactions, reinvigorating anticancer immunity. We assessed its efficacy and safety versus docetaxel in previously treated patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial (OAK) in 194 academic or community oncology centres in 31 countries. We enrolled patients who had squamous or non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, were 18 years or older, had measurable disease per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients had received one to two previous cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens (one or more platinum based combination therapies) for stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer. Patients with a history of autoimmune disease and those who had received previous treatments with docetaxel, CD137 agonists, anti-CTLA4, or therapies targeting the PD-L1 and PD-1 pathway were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenously receive either atezolizumab 1200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks by permuted block randomisation (block size of eight) via an interactive voice or web response system. Coprimary endpoints were overall survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and PD-L1-expression population TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 (≥1% PD-L1 on tumour cells or tumour-infiltrating immune cells). The primary efficacy analysis was done in the first 850 of 1225 enrolled patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02008227. FINDINGS: Between March 11, 2014, and April 29, 2015, 1225 patients were recruited. In the primary population, 425 patients were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab and 425 patients were assigned to receive docetaxel. Overall survival was significantly longer with atezolizumab in the ITT and PD-L1-expression populations. In the ITT population, overall survival was improved with atezolizumab compared with docetaxel (median overall survival was 13·8 months [95% CI 11·8-15·7] vs 9·6 months [8·6-11·2]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·62-0·87], p=0·0003). Overall survival in the TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 population was improved with atezolizumab (n=241) compared with docetaxel (n=222; median overall survival was 15·7 months [95% CI 12·6-18·0] with atezolizumab vs 10·3 months [8·8-12·0] with docetaxel; HR 0·74 [95% CI 0·58-0·93]; p=0·0102). Patients in the PD-L1 low or undetectable subgroup (TC0 and IC0) also had improved survival with atezolizumab (median overall survival 12·6 months vs 8·9 months; HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·59-0·96]). Overall survival improvement was similar in patients with squamous (HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·54-0·98]; n=112 in the atezolizumab group and n=110 in the docetaxel group) or non-squamous (0·73 [0·60-0·89]; n=313 and n=315) histology. Fewer patients had treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events with atezolizumab (90 [15%] of 609 patients) versus docetaxel (247 [43%] of 578 patients). One treatment-related death from a respiratory tract infection was reported in the docetaxel group. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, OAK is the first randomised phase 3 study to report results of a PD-L1-targeted therapy, with atezolizumab treatment resulting in a clinically relevant improvement of overall survival versus docetaxel in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer, regardless of PD-L1 expression or histology, with a favourable safety profile. FUNDING: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Genentech, Inc.

iRECIST: guidelines for response criteria for use in trials testing immunotherapeutics.

Tumours respond differently to immunotherapies compared with chemotherapeutic drugs, raising questions about the assessment of changes in tumour burden-a mainstay of evaluation of cancer therapeutics that provides key information about objective response and disease progression. A consensus guideline-iRECIST-was developed by the RECIST working group for the use of modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST version 1.1) in cancer immunotherapy trials, to ensure consistent design and data collection, facilitate the ongoing collection of trial data, and ultimate validation of the guideline. This guideline describes a standard approach to solid tumour measurements and definitions for objective change in tumour size for use in trials in which an immunotherapy is used. Additionally, it defines the minimum datapoints required from future trials and those currently in development to facilitate the compilation of a data warehouse to use to later validate iRECIST. An unprecedented number of trials have been done, initiated, or are planned to test new immune modulators for cancer therapy using a variety of modified response criteria. This guideline will allow consistent conduct, interpretation, and analysis of trials of immunotherapies.

Atezolizumab versus docetaxel for patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (POPLAR): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes are poor for patients with previously treated, advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody atezolizumab is clinically active against cancer, including NSCLC, especially cancers expressing PD-L1 on tumour cells, tumour-infiltrating immune cells, or both. We assessed efficacy and safety of atezolizumab versus docetaxel in previously treated NSCLC, analysed by PD-L1 expression levels on tumour cells and tumour-infiltrating immune cells and in the intention-to-treat population. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 2 randomised controlled trial, patients with NSCLC who progressed on post-platinum chemotherapy were recruited in 61 academic medical centres and community oncology practices across 13 countries in Europe and North America. Key inclusion criteria were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1), and adequate haematological and end-organ function. Patients were stratified by PD-L1 tumour-infiltrating immune cell status, histology, and previous lines of therapy, and randomly assigned (1:1) by permuted block randomisation (with a block size of four) using an interactive voice or web system to receive intravenous atezolizumab 1200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) once every 3 weeks. Baseline PD-L1 expression was scored by immunohistochemistry in tumour cells (as percentage of PD-L1-expressing tumour cells TC3≥50%, TC2≥5% and <50%, TC1≥1% and <5%, and TC0<1%) and tumour-infiltrating immune cells (as percentage of tumour area: IC3≥10%, IC2≥5% and <10%, IC1≥1% and <5%, and IC0<1%). The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population and PD-L1 subgroups at 173 deaths. Biomarkers were assessed in an exploratory analysis. We assessed safety in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01903993. FINDINGS: Patients were enrolled between Aug 5, 2013, and March 31, 2014. 144 patients were randomly allocated to the atezolizumab group, and 143 to the docetaxel group. 142 patients received at least one dose of atezolizumab and 135 received docetaxel. Overall survival in the intention-to-treat population was 12·6 months (95% CI 9·7-16·4) for atezolizumab versus 9·7 months (8·6-12·0) for docetaxel (hazard ratio [HR] 0·73 [95% CI 0·53-0·99]; p=0·04). Increasing improvement in overall survival was associated with increasing PD-L1 expression (TC3 or IC3 HR 0·49 [0·22-1·07; p=0·068], TC2/3 or IC2/3 HR 0·54 [0·33-0·89; p=0·014], TC1/2/3 or IC1/2/3 HR 0·59 [0·40-0·85; p=0·005], TC0 and IC0 HR 1·04 [0·62-1·75; p=0·871]). In our exploratory analysis, patients with pre-existing immunity, defined by high T-effector-interferon-γ-associated gene expression, had improved overall survival with atezolizumab. 11 (8%) patients in the atezolizumab group discontinued because of adverse events versus 30 (22%) patients in the docetaxel group. 16 (11%) patients in the atezolizumab group versus 52 (39%) patients in the docetaxel group had treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events, and one (<1%) patient in the atezolizumab group versus three (2%) patients in the docetaxel group died from a treatment-related adverse event. INTERPRETATION: Atezolizumab significantly improved survival compared with docetaxel in patients with previously treated NSCLC. Improvement correlated with PD-L1 immunohistochemistry expression on tumour cells and tumour-infiltrating immune cells, suggesting that PD-L1 expression is predictive for atezolizumab benefit. Atezolizumab was well tolerated, with a safety profile distinct from chemotherapy. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech Inc.

CONTACT-01: A Randomized Phase III Trial of Atezolizumab + Cabozantinib Versus Docetaxel for Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer After a Checkpoint Inhibitor and Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Although checkpoint inhibitors have improved first-line treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a therapeutic need remains for patients whose disease does not respond or who experience disease progression after anti-PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy. CONTACT-01 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04471428) evaluated atezolizumab plus cabozantinib versus docetaxel in patients with metastatic NSCLC who developed disease progression after concurrent or sequential treatment with anti-PD-L1/PD-1 and platinum-containing chemotherapy. METHODS: This multicenter, open-label, phase III trial randomly assigned patients 1:1 to atezolizumab 1,200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks (q3w) plus cabozantinib 40 mg orally once daily or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: One hundred eighty-six patients were assigned atezolizumab plus cabozantinib, and 180 docetaxel. Minimum OS follow-up was 10.9 months. Median OS was 10.7 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 12.3) with atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 10.5 months (95% CI, 8.6 to 13.0) with docetaxel (stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.88 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.16]; P = .3668). Median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI, 4.1 to 5.6) and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.1 to 4.4), respectively (stratified HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.92]). Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 71 (38.4%) patients receiving atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 58 (34.7%) receiving docetaxel. Grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 73 (39.5%) patients receiving atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 58 (34.7%) receiving docetaxel. Grade 5 AEs occurred in 14 (7.6%) and 10 (6.0%) patients in the atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and docetaxel arms, respectively (treatment-related in four [2.2%] and one [0.6%], respectively). CONCLUSION: Atezolizumab plus cabozantinib after disease progression following anti-PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy and platinum-containing chemotherapy for metastatic NSCLC did not improve OS compared with docetaxel. Safety was consistent with known profiles of these agents.

Multistate Pharmacometric Model to Define the Impact of Second-Line Immunotherapies on the Survival Outcome of the IMpower131 Study.

Overall survival is defined as the time since randomization into the clinical trial to event of death or censor (end of trial or follow-up), and is considered to be the most reliable cancer end point. However, the introduction of second-line treatment after disease progression could influence survival and be considered a confounding factor. The aim of the current study was to set up a multistate model framework, using data from the IMpower131 study, to investigate the influence of second-line immunotherapies on overall survival analysis. The model adequately described the transitions between different states in patients with advanced squamous non-small cell lung cancer treated with or without atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin, and characterized the survival data. High PD-L1 expression at baseline was associated with a decreased hazard of progression, while the presence of liver metastasis at baseline was indicative of a high risk of disease progression after initial response. The hazard of death after progression was lower for participants who had longer treatment response, i.e., longer time to progression. The simulations based on the final multistate model showed that the addition of atezolizumab to the nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin regimen had significant improvement in the patients' survival (hazard ratio = 0.75, 95% prediction interval: 0.61-0.90 favoring the atezolizumab + nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin arm). The developed modeling approach can be applied to other cancer types and therapies to provide a better understanding of efficacy of drug and characterizing different states, and investigate the benefit of primary therapy in survival while accounting for the switch to alternative treatment in the case of disease progression.

Circulating Tumor DNA Monitoring on Chemo-immunotherapy for Risk Stratification in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Chemoimmunotherapy (chemoIO) is a prevalent first-line treatment for advanced driver-negative non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with maintenance therapy given after induction. However, there is significant clinical variability in the duration, dosing, and timing of maintenance therapy after induction chemoIO. We used circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) monitoring to inform outcomes in patients with advanced NSCLC receiving chemoIO. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: This retrospective study included 221 patients from a phase III trial of atezolizumab+carboplatin+nab-paclitaxel versus carboplatin+nab-paclitaxel in squamous NSCLC (IMpower131). ctDNA monitoring used the FoundationOne Tracker involving comprehensive genomic profiling of pretreatment tumor tissue, variant selection using an algorithm to exclude nontumor variants, and multiplex PCR of up to 16 variants to detect and quantify ctDNA. RESULTS: ctDNA was detected (ctDNA+) in 96% of pretreatment samples (median, 93 mean tumor molecules/mL), and similar ctDNA dynamics were noted across treatment arms during chemoIO. ctDNA decrease from baseline to C4D1 was associated with improved outcomes across multiple cutoffs for patients treated with chemoIO. When including patients with missing plasma or ctDNA- at baseline, patients with ctDNA- at C4D1 (clearance), had more favorable progression-free survival (median 8.8 vs. 3.5 months; HR, 0.32;0.20-0.52) and OS (median not reached vs. 8.9 months; HR, 0.22; 0.12-0.39) from C4D1 than ctDNA+ patients. CONCLUSIONS: ctDNA monitoring during induction chemoIO can inform treatment outcomes in patients with advanced NSCLC. Importantly, monitoring remains feasible and informative for patients missing baseline ctDNA. ctDNA testing during induction chemoIO identifies patients at higher risk for disease progression and may inform patient selection for novel personalized maintenance or second-line treatment strategies.

Comparison of SP263 and 22C3 immunohistochemistry PD-L1 assays for clinical efficacy of adjuvant atezolizumab in non-small cell lung cancer: results from the randomized phase III IMpower010 trial.

BACKGROUND: Tumor samples from the phase III IMpower010 study were used to compare two programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry assays (VENTANA SP263 and Dako 22C3) for identification of PD-L1 patient subgroups (negative, positive, low, and high expression) and their predictive value for adjuvant atezolizumab compared with best supportive care (BSC) in resectable early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: PD-L1 expression was assessed by the SP263 assay, which measured the percentage of tumor cells with any membranous PD-L1 staining, and the 22C3 assay, which scored the percentage of viable tumor cells showing partial or complete membranous PD-L1 staining. RESULTS: When examining the concordance at the PD-L1-positive threshold (SP263: tumor cell (TC)≥1%; 22C3: tumor proportion score (TPS)≥1%), the results were concordant between assays for 83% of the samples. Similarly, at the PD-L1-high cut-off (SP263: TC≥50%; 22C3: TPS≥50%), the results were concordant between assays for 92% of samples. The disease-free survival benefit of atezolizumab over BSC was comparable between assays for PD-L1-positive (TC≥1% by SP263: HR, 0.58 (95% CI: 0.40 to 0.85) vs TPS≥1% by 22C3: HR, 0.65 (95% CI: 0.45 to 0.95)) and PD-L1-high (TC≥50% by SP263: HR, 0.27 (95% CI: 0.14 to 0.53) vs TPS≥50% by 22C3: HR, 0.31 (95% CI: 0.16 to 0.60)) subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The SP263 and 22C3 assays showed high concordance and a comparable clinical predictive value of atezolizumab at validated PD-L1 thresholds, suggesting that both assays can identify patients with early-stage NSCLC most likely to experience benefit from adjuvant atezolizumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02486718.

Tumor Growth Inhibition-Overall Survival (TGI-OS) Model for Subgroup Analysis Based on Post-Randomization Factors: Application for Anti-drug Antibody (ADA) Subgroup Analysis of Atezolizumab in the IMpower150 Study.

Longitudinal changes of tumor size or tumor-associated biomarkers have been receiving growing attention as early markers of treatment benefits. Tumor growth inhibition-overall survival (TGI-OS) models represent mathematical frameworks used to establish a link from tumor size trajectory to survival outcome with the aim of predicting survival benefit with tumor data from a small number of subjects with a short follow-up time. In the present study, we applied the TGI-OS model to assess treatment benefit in the IMpower150 study for patients who exhibited development of anti-drug antibodies (ADA). Direct comparison between subgroups of the active arm [ADA positive (ADA +) and negative (ADA -) groups] to the entire control group is not appropriate, due to potential imbalances of baseline prognostic factors between ADA + and ADA - patients. Thus, the TGI-OS modeling framework was employed to adjust for differences in prognostic factors between the ADA subgroups to more accurately estimate the treatment benefits. After adjustment, the TGI-OS model predicted comparable hazard ratios (HRs) of OS between ADA + and ADA - subgroups, suggesting that the development of ADA does not have a clinically significant impact on the treatment benefit of atezolizumab.

Evaluation of atezolizumab immunogenicity: Efficacy and safety (Part 2).

Antibody therapeutics can be associated with unwanted immune responses resulting in the development of anti-drug antibodies (ADA). Optimal methods to evaluate the potential effects of ADA on clinical outcomes in oncology are not well established. In this study, we assessed efficacy and safety, based on ADA status, in patients from over 10 clinical trials that evaluated the immune checkpoint inhibitor atezolizumab as a single agent or as combination therapy for several types of advanced cancers. ADA can only be observed post randomization, and imbalances in baseline prognostic factors can confound the interpretation of ADA impact. We applied methodology to account for the confounding effects of baseline clinical characteristics and survivorship bias on efficacy. Adjusted meta-analyses revealed that despite numerical differences in overall survival and progression-free survival between ADA-positive and ADA-negative patients from some studies, ADA-positive patients from studies with an overall treatment effect derived benefit from atezolizumab, compared with their adjusted controls. Based on large, pooled populations from atezolizumab monotherapy or combination studies, unadjusted descriptive analyses did not identify a clear relationship between ADA status and frequency or severity of adverse events. Data also suggested that any ADA impact is not driven by neutralizing activity. Collectively, this exploratory analysis suggests that the potential for ADA development should not impact treatment decisions with atezolizumab.

Evaluation of atezolizumab immunogenicity: Clinical pharmacology (part 1).

Baseline patient characteristics and prognostic factors are important considerations in oncology when evaluating the impact of immunogenicity on pharmacokinetics (PK) and efficacy. Here, we assessed the impact of anti-drug antibodies (ADA) on the PK of the immune checkpoint inhibitor atezolizumab (an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody). We evaluated data from ≈ 4500 patients from 12 clinical trials across different tumor types, treatment settings, and dosing regimens. In our dataset, ~ 30% of patients (range, 13-54%) developed treatment-emergent ADA, and in vitro neutralizing antibodies (NAb) were seen in ~ 50% of ADA-positive (+) patients. Pooled time course data showed a trend toward lower atezolizumab exposure in ADA+ patients, which was more pronounced in ADA+/NAb+ patients. However, the atezolizumab concentration distributions overlapped, and drug concentrations exceeded 6 µg/ml, the target concentration required for receptor saturation, in greater than 95% of patients. Patients had sufficient exposure regardless of ADA status. The dose selected to allow for dosing over effects from ADA resulted in a flat exposure-response relationship. Analysis of study results by ADA titer showed that exposure and overall survival were not affected in a clinically meaningful way. High tumor burden, low albumin, and high CRP at baseline showed the greatest association with ADA development but not with subsequent NAb development. These imbalanced factors at baseline can confound analysis of ADA impact. ADA increases atezolizumab clearance minimally (9%), and its impact on exposure based on the totality of the clinical pharmacology assessment does not appear to be clinically meaningful.

Comparison of SP142 and 22C3 Immunohistochemistry PD-L1 Assays for Clinical Efficacy of Atezolizumab in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Results From the Randomized OAK Trial.

BACKGROUND: This phase III OAK trial (NCT02008227) subgroup analysis (data cutoff, January 9, 2019) evaluated the predictive value of 2 PD-L1 IHC tests (VENTANA SP142 and Dako 22C3) for benefit from atezolizumab versus docetaxel by programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status in patients with previously treated metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. METHODS: PD-L1 expression was assessed prospectively with SP142 on tumor cells (TC) and tumor-infiltrating immune cells (IC) and retrospectively with 22C3 using a tumor proportion score (TPS) based on TC membrane staining. Efficacy was assessed in the 22C3 biomarker-evaluable population (22C3-BEP) (n = 577; 47.1% of SP142-intention-to-treat population) and non-22C3-BEP (n = 648) in PD-L1 subgroups (high, low, and negative) and according to selection by 1 or both assays. RESULTS: In the 22C3-BEP, overall survival benefits with atezolizumab versus docetaxel were observed across PD-L1 subgroups; benefits were greatest in SP142-defined PD-L1-high (TC3 or IC3: hazard ratio [HR], 0.39 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.25-0.63]) and 22C3-defined PD-L1-high (TPS ≥ 50%: HR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.38-0.82]) and low (TPS, 1% to < 50%: HR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.37-0.82]) groups. Progression-free survival improved with increasing PD-L1 expression for both assays. SP142 and 22C3 assays identified overlapping and unique patient populations in PD-L1-high, positive, and negative subgroups. Overall survival and progression-free survival benefits favored atezolizumab over docetaxel in double PD-L1-positive and negative groups; patients with both SP142- and 22C3-positive tumors derived the greatest benefit. CONCLUSIONS: Despite different scoring algorithms and differing sensitivity levels, the SP142 and 22C3 assays similarly predicted atezolizumab benefit at validated PD-L1 thresholds in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

Intratumoral plasma cells predict outcomes to PD-L1 blockade in non-small cell lung cancer.

Inhibitors of the programmed cell death-1 (PD-1/PD-L1) signaling axis are approved to treat non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, based on their significant overall survival (OS) benefit. Using transcriptomic analysis of 891 NSCLC tumors from patients treated with either the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab or chemotherapy from two large randomized clinical trials, we find a significant B cell association with extended OS with PD-L1 blockade, independent of CD8+ T cell signals. We then derive gene signatures corresponding to the dominant B cell subsets present in NSCLC from single-cell RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) data. Importantly, we find increased plasma cell signatures to be predictive of OS in patients treated with atezolizumab, but not chemotherapy. B and plasma cells are also associated with the presence of tertiary lymphoid structures and organized lymphoid aggregates. Our results suggest an important contribution of B and plasma cells to the efficacy of PD-L1 blockade in NSCLC.

C-reactive protein reduction post treatment is associated with improved survival in atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) treated non-small cell lung cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Overall survival (OS) is the most significant endpoint for evaluation of treatment benefit with checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) in cancer. We evaluated serum C-reactive protein (CRP) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) trials with atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) as an early OS surrogate. METHODS: Serum from patients enrolled in randomized Phase II (n = 240) and Phase III (n = 701) trials of NSCLC patients (POPLAR, OAK) who progressed on prior-platinum chemotherapy, were analyzed for CRP levels over time. Patients were grouped by changes in CRP levels post-treatment as either increased (≥ 1.5 fold), decreased (≤ 1.5 fold) or unchanged (within +1.5 fold) relative to pre-treatment levels to assess association with progression free survival (PFS) and OS. RESULTS: Decrease in serum CRP levels at 6 weeks relative to pre-treatment were observed in patients with RECIST1.1 based complete or partial responses (CR/PR) to atezolizumab whereas patients with disease progression (PD) demonstrated an increase in CRP levels in the Phase II POPLAR study, and confirmed in the Phase III OAK study. Decrease in serum CRP as early as six weeks post treatment predicted improved PFS and OS, even in patients who were determined as stable disease (SD) in their first scan. This effect was not observed in the chemotherapy arms. CONCLUSION: Modulation of serum CRP correlates with clinical outcome post-atezolizumab treatment. This routine lab test may provide utility in informing OS signals as early as 6 weeks post-initiation of therapy with CPIs in NSCLC.

Time-dependent population PK models of single-agent atezolizumab in patients with cancer.

PURPOSE: The time-varying clearance (CL) of the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab was assessed on a population of 1519 cancer patients (primarily with non-small-cell lung cancer or metastatic urothelial carcinoma) from three clinical studies. METHODS: The first step was to identify the baseline covariates affecting atezolizumab CL without including time-varying components (stationary covariate model). Two time-varying models were then investigated: (1) a model allowing baseline covariates to vary over time (time-varying covariate model), (2) a model with empirical time-varying Emax CL function. RESULTS: The final stationary covariate model included main effects of body weight, albumin levels, tumor size, anti-drug antibodies (ADA) and gender on atezolizumab CL. Both time-varying models resulted in a clear improvement of the data fit and visual predictive checks over the stationary model. The time-varying covariate model provided the best fit of the data. In this model, the main driver for change in CL over time was variations in albumin level with an increase in serum albumin (improvement in a patient's status) mirroring a decrease in CL. Time-varying ADAs had a small impact (9% increase in CL). None of the covariates impacted atezolizumab CL by more than ± 30% from median. The estimated maximum decrease in CL with time was 22% with the Emax model. CONCLUSION: The overall impact of covariates on atezolizumab CL did not warrant any change in atezolizumab dosing recommendations. The results support the hypothesis that variation in atezolizumab CL over time is associated with patients' disease status, as shown with other checkpoint inhibitors.

Prediction of overall survival in patients across solid tumors following atezolizumab treatments: A tumor growth inhibition-overall survival modeling framework.

The objectives of the study were to use tumor size data from 10 phase II/III atezolizumab studies across five solid tumor types to estimate tumor growth inhibition (TGI) metrics and assess the impact of TGI metrics and baseline prognostic factors on overall survival (OS) for each tumor type. TGI metrics were estimated from biexponential models and posttreatment longitudinal data of 6699 patients. TGI-OS full models were built using parametric survival regression by including all significant baseline covariates from the Cox univariate analysis followed by a backward elimination step. The model performance was evaluated for each trial by 1000 simulations of the OS distributions and hazard ratios (HR) of the atezolizumab-containing arms versus the respective controls. The tumor growth rate estimate was the most significant predictor of OS across all tumor types. Several baseline prognostic factors, such as inflammatory status (C-reactive protein, albumin, and/or neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio), tumor burden (sum of longest diameters, number of metastatic sites, and/or presence of liver metastases), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and lactate dehydrogenase were also highly significant across multiple studies in the final multivariate models. TGI-OS models adequately described the OS distribution. The model-predicted HRs indicated good model performance across the 10 studies, with observed HRs within the 95% prediction intervals for all study arms versus controls. Multivariate TGI-OS models developed for different solid tumor types were able to predict treatment effect with various atezolizumab monotherapy or combination regimens and could be used to support design and analysis of future studies.

ctDNA Predicts Overall Survival in Patients With NSCLC Treated With PD-L1 Blockade or With Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Identification of predictors for overall survival (OS) allows timely detection of clinical efficacy signals and therefore facilitates treatment decisions. We assessed the association between circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) metrics and the primary end point of OS in a subset of previously treated patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer, who underwent atezolizumab or docetaxel treatment in the open-label randomized phase III OAK trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Plasma from 94 patients at baseline and at subsequent cycles of therapy every 3 weeks was analyzed retrospectively for ctDNA. ctDNA was measured by allele frequency and mutant molecules per milliliter (MMPM). Concordance between various per-sample metrics and clinical outcome were assessed using C index. RESULTS: Of all the ctDNA metrics tested, the association of median MMPM at 6 weeks with OS in patients treated with atezolizumab or docetaxel had a C index > 0.7. The OS hazard ratios relative to high ctDNA above median MMPM within each arm were 0.28 (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.75) for atezolizumab and 0.19 (95% CI, 0.08 to 0.48) for docetaxel. For patients who had ctDNA median MMPM levels of < 4.79, the median survival time was more than 17 months in docetaxel-treated patients and the median survival time was not reached in the atezolizumab-treated patients. CONCLUSION: ctDNA MMPM levels measured at 6 weeks post-treatment are associated with OS in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Our results suggest that ctDNA has the potential for a noninvasive early liquid biopsy predictor for OS that warrants further studies to demonstrate its utility in clinical development.

Fast progression in non-small cell lung cancer: results from the randomized phase III OAK study evaluating second-line atezolizumab versus docetaxel.

BACKGROUND: Treatment-induced accelerated tumor growth is a progression pattern reported with immune checkpoint inhibitors that has never been evaluated in randomized phase III studies because it requires two pretreatment scans. This study aimed to develop clinically relevant and applicable criteria for fast progression (FP), incorporating tumor growth kinetics and early death from disease progression to analyze data from the randomized phase III OAK study. METHODS: The OAK study evaluated the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab versus docetaxel as second-line or third-line treatment for stage IIIb/IV non-small cell lung cancer. FP rates and associated baseline factors were analyzed. FP was defined as either a ≥50% increase in the sum of largest diameters (SLDs) within 6 weeks of treatment initiation or death due to cancer progression within 12 weeks (absent post-baseline scan). RESULTS: Forty-two of 421 patients (10%) receiving atezolizumab and 37 of 402 (9%) receiving docetaxel had FP. Twenty patients with FP (48%) receiving atezolizumab versus 12 (30%) receiving docetaxel had a ≥50% SLD increase within 6 weeks. FP was significantly associated with an ECOG (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) performance status of 1 (vs 0), ≥3 metastatic sites at baseline, and failure of preceding first-line treatment within 6 months, but not with epidermal growth factor receptor mutation, programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 or tumor mutational burden. Overall survival in patients with FP and a ≥50% SLD increase at week 6 was similar with atezolizumab and docetaxel (unstratified HR 0.89 (95% CI 0.41 to 1.92)). CONCLUSIONS: FP rates were similar with atezolizumab and docetaxel in the OAK study, suggesting that FP may not be unique to checkpoint inhibitors, although the underlying mechanisms may differ from those of chemotherapy. Applying the FP criteria to other phase III checkpoint inhibitor trials may further elucidate the risk factors for FP. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02008227.