Genomic Features of Response to Combination Immunotherapy in Patients with Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Combination immune checkpoint blockade has demonstrated promising benefit in lung cancer, but predictors of response to combination therapy are unknown. Using whole-exome sequencing to examine non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with PD-1 plus CTLA-4 blockade, we found that high tumor mutation burden (TMB) predicted improved objective response, durable benefit, and progression-free survival. TMB was independent of PD-L1 expression and the strongest feature associated with efficacy in multivariable analysis. The low response rate in TMB low NSCLCs demonstrates that combination immunotherapy does not overcome the negative predictive impact of low TMB. This study demonstrates the association between TMB and benefit to combination immunotherapy in NSCLC. TMB should be incorporated in future trials examining PD-(L)1 with CTLA-4 blockade in NSCLC.

Contribution of systemic and somatic factors to clinical response and resistance to PD-L1 blockade in urothelial cancer: An exploratory multi-omic analysis.

BACKGROUND: Inhibition of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) with atezolizumab can induce durable clinical benefit (DCB) in patients with metastatic urothelial cancers, including complete remissions in patients with chemotherapy refractory disease. Although mutation load and PD-L1 immune cell (IC) staining have been associated with response, they lack sufficient sensitivity and specificity for clinical use. Thus, there is a need to evaluate the peripheral blood immune environment and to conduct detailed analyses of mutation load, predicted neoantigens, and immune cellular infiltration in tumors to enhance our understanding of the biologic underpinnings of response and resistance. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The goals of this study were to (1) evaluate the association of mutation load and predicted neoantigen load with therapeutic benefit and (2) determine whether intratumoral and peripheral blood T cell receptor (TCR) clonality inform clinical outcomes in urothelial carcinoma treated with atezolizumab. We hypothesized that an elevated mutation load in combination with T cell clonal dominance among intratumoral lymphocytes prior to treatment or among peripheral T cells after treatment would be associated with effective tumor control upon treatment with anti-PD-L1 therapy. We performed whole exome sequencing (WES), RNA sequencing (RNA-seq), and T cell receptor sequencing (TCR-seq) of pretreatment tumor samples as well as TCR-seq of matched, serially collected peripheral blood, collected before and after treatment with atezolizumab. These parameters were assessed for correlation with DCB (defined as progression-free survival [PFS] >6 months), PFS, and overall survival (OS), both alone and in the context of clinical and intratumoral parameters known to be predictive of survival in this disease state. Patients with DCB displayed a higher proportion of tumor-infiltrating T lymphocytes (TIL) (n = 24, Mann-Whitney p = 0.047). Pretreatment peripheral blood TCR clonality below the median was associated with improved PFS (n = 29, log-rank p = 0.048) and OS (n = 29, log-rank p = 0.011). Patients with DCB also demonstrated more substantial expansion of tumor-associated TCR clones in the peripheral blood 3 weeks after starting treatment (n = 22, Mann-Whitney p = 0.022). The combination of high pretreatment peripheral blood TCR clonality with elevated PD-L1 IC staining in tumor tissue was strongly associated with poor clinical outcomes (n = 10, hazard ratio (HR) (mean) = 89.88, HR (median) = 23.41, 95% CI [2.43, 506.94], p(HR > 1) = 0.0014). Marked variations in mutation loads were seen with different somatic variant calling methodologies, which, in turn, impacted associations with clinical outcomes. Missense mutation load, predicted neoantigen load, and expressed neoantigen load did not demonstrate significant association with DCB (n = 25, Mann-Whitney p = 0.22, n = 25, Mann-Whitney p = 0.55, and n = 25, Mann-Whitney p = 0.29, respectively). Instead, we found evidence of time-varying effects of somatic mutation load on PFS in this cohort (n = 25, p = 0.044). A limitation of our study is its small sample size (n = 29), a subset of the patients treated on IMvigor 210 (NCT02108652). Given the number of exploratory analyses performed, we intend for these results to be hypothesis-generating. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the complex nature of immune response to checkpoint blockade and the compelling need for greater interrogation and data integration of both host and tumor factors. Incorporating these variables in prospective studies will facilitate identification and treatment of resistant patients.

Somatic Mutations and Neoepitope Homology in Melanomas Treated with CTLA-4 Blockade.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are promising treatments for patients with a variety of malignancies. Toward understanding the determinants of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors, it was previously demonstrated that the presence of somatic mutations is associated with benefit from checkpoint inhibition. A hypothesis was posited that neoantigen homology to pathogens may in part explain the link between somatic mutations and response. To further examine this hypothesis, we reanalyzed cancer exome data obtained from our previously published study of 64 melanoma patients treated with CTLA-4 blockade and a new dataset of RNA-Seq data from 24 of these patients. We found that the ability to accurately predict patient benefit did not increase as the analysis narrowed from somatic mutation burden, to inclusion of only those mutations predicted to be MHC class I neoantigens, to only including those neoantigens that were expressed or that had homology to pathogens. The only association between somatic mutation burden and response was found when examining samples obtained prior to treatment. Neoantigen and expressed neoantigen burden were also associated with response, but neither was more predictive than somatic mutation burden. Neither the previously described tetrapeptide signature nor an updated method to evaluate neoepitope homology to pathogens was more predictive than mutation burden. Cancer Immunol Res; 5(1); 84-91. ©2016 AACR.