Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The Promises and Challenges of Tumor Mutation Burden as an Immunotherapy Biomarker: A Perspective from the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Pathology Committee.
Sholl, Lynette M; Hirsch, Fred R; Hwang, David; Botling, Johan; Lopez-Rios, Fernando; Bubendorf, Lukas; Mino-Kenudson, Mari; Roden, Anja C; Beasley, Mary Beth; Borczuk, Alain; Brambilla, Elisabeth; Chen, Gang; Chou, Teh-Ying; Chung, Jin-Haeng; Cooper, Wendy A; Dacic, Sanja; Lantuejoul, Sylvie; Jain, Deepali; Lin, Dongmei; Minami, Yuko; Moreira, Andre; Nicholson, Andrew G; Noguchi, Masayuki; Papotti, Mauro; Pelosi, Giuseppe; Poleri, Claudia; Rekhtman, Natasha; Tsao, Ming-Sound; Thunnissen, Erik; Travis, William; Yatabe, Yasushi; Yoshida, Akihiko; Daigneault, Jillian B; Zehir, Ahmet; Peters, Solange; Wistuba, Ignacio I; Kerr, Keith M; Longshore, John W.
Afiliação
  • Sholl LM; Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: lmsholl@bwh.harvard.edu.
  • Hirsch FR; Center for Thoracic Oncology, The Tisch Cancer Institute, New York, New York; Icahn School of Medicine, Mount Sinai Health System, New York, New York.
  • Hwang D; Department of Laboratory Medicine & Molecular Diagnostics, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
  • Botling J; Department of Immunology Genetics and Pathology, Science for Life Laboratory, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
  • Lopez-Rios F; Pathology-Laboratorio de Dianas Terapeuticas, HM Hospitales, Spain.
  • Bubendorf L; Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
  • Mino-Kenudson M; Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
  • Roden AC; Department of Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
  • Beasley MB; Icahn School of Medicine, Mount Sinai Health System, New York, New York.
  • Borczuk A; Department of Pathology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.
  • Brambilla E; Université Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France.
  • Chen G; Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
  • Chou TY; Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
  • Chung JH; Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul, South Korea.
  • Cooper WA; Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, Australia.
  • Dacic S; Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
  • Lantuejoul S; Université Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France; Centre Léon Bérard Unicancer, Lyon, France.
  • Jain D; All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
  • Lin D; Department of Pathology, Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
  • Minami Y; Ibarakihigashi National Hospital, Tokai, Japan.
  • Moreira A; Department of Pathology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.
  • Nicholson AG; Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom.
  • Noguchi M; University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan.
  • Papotti M; Department of Oncology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
  • Pelosi G; University of Milan, Milan Italy; Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico MultiMedica, Milan Italy.
  • Poleri C; Oggice of Pathology Consultants, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
  • Rekhtman N; Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
  • Tsao MS; Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
  • Thunnissen E; Department of Pathology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
  • Travis W; Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
  • Yatabe Y; National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
  • Yoshida A; National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
  • Daigneault JB; International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, Aurora, Connecticut.
  • Zehir A; Oggice of Pathology Consultants, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
  • Peters S; Oncology Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne University, Lausanne, Switzerland.
  • Wistuba II; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
  • Kerr KM; Department of Pathology, Aberdffn Royal Infirmary, Aberdffn, United Kingdom.
  • Longshore JW; Carolinas Pathology Group, Atrium Health, Charlotte, North Carolina.
J Thorac Oncol ; 15(9): 1409-1424, 2020 09.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32522712
ABSTRACT
Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapies have revolutionized the management of patients with NSCLC and have led to unprecedented improvements in response rates and survival in a subset of patients with this fatal disease. However, the available therapies work only for a minority of patients, are associated with substantial societal cost, and may lead to considerable immune-related adverse events. Therefore, patient selection must be optimized through the use of relevant biomarkers. Programmed death-ligand 1 protein expression by immunohistochemistry is widely used today for the selection of programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor therapy in patients with NSCLC; however, this approach lacks robust sensitivity and specificity for predicting response. Tumor mutation burden (TMB), or the number of somatic mutations derived from next-generation sequencing techniques, has been widely explored as an alternative or complementary biomarker for response to ICIs. In theory, a higher TMB increases the probability of tumor neoantigen production and therefore, the likelihood of immune recognition and tumor cell killing. Although TMB alone is a simplistic surrogate of this complex interplay, it is a quantitative variable that can be relatively readily measured using currently available sequencing techniques. A large number of clinical trials and retrospective analyses, employing both tumor and blood-based sequencing tools, have evaluated the performance of TMB as a predictive biomarker, and in many cases reveal a correlation between high TMB and ICI response rates and progression-free survival. Many challenges remain before the implementation of TMB as a biomarker in clinical practice. These include the following (1) identification of therapies whose response is best informed by TMB status; (2) robust definition of a predictive TMB cut point; (3) acceptable sequencing panel size and design; and (4) the need for robust technical and informatic rigor to generate precise and accurate TMB measurements across different laboratories. Finally, effective prediction of response to ICI therapy will likely require integration of TMB with a host of other potential biomarkers, including tumor genomic driver alterations, tumor-immune milieu, and other features of the host immune system. This perspective piece will review the current clinical evidence for TMB as a biomarker and address the technical sequencing considerations and ongoing challenges in the use of TMB in routine practice.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Temas: Geral / Tipos_de_cancer / Pulmao Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas / Neoplasias Pulmonares Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Thorac Oncol Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Temas: Geral / Tipos_de_cancer / Pulmao Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas / Neoplasias Pulmonares Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Thorac Oncol Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article