ABSTRACT
Cancer vaccines strive to induce robust, antigen-targeted, T-cell-mediated immune responses but have struggled to produce meaningful regression in solid tumors. An autologous cell vaccine, SQZ-PBMC-HPV, was developed by SQZ Biotechnologies using microfluidic squeezing technology to load PBMCs with HPV16 E6 and E7 antigens in HLA-A*02+ patients. The SQZ-PBMC-HPV-101 Phase 1 trial (NCT04084951) enrolled patients with incurable HPV16+ cancers. Here, we present a post hoc analysis of the relationship between Posttreatment CD8+ T cell infiltration and patient outcomes. SQZ-PBMC-HPV was administered as monotherapy every 3 weeks. Tumor samples were collected pre-dose and post-dose 4 weeks after treatment start. Biomarkers including CD8, MHC-I, E6, E7, GZMB, and Ki67 were evaluated by immunohistochemistry, immunofluorescence, and RNA in situ hybridization, and were correlated with clinical response, survival, and drug product composition. Eighteen patients had paired pre- and post-dose biopsies. Six (33%) had an increase in CD8+ T cell density in tumor parenchyma between screening and C2D8. Patients with increased CD8+ T cell density had improved disease control rate (66.7% vs 16.7%) and median overall survival (606.5 days vs 170.0 days, p = 0.0078). Drug product was significantly enriched for higher T cells and lower monocytes in the increased CD8+ T cell density group. In patients with incurable HPV16+ solid tumors treated with SQZ-PBMC-HPV, an increase in CD8+ T cell density within the tumor parenchyma was associated with superior disease control rate and overall survival. The product composition for patients with increased CD8+ T cell density was enriched for T cells.
Subject(s)
CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes , Human papillomavirus 16 , Papillomavirus Infections , Humans , CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes/immunology , Female , Human papillomavirus 16/immunology , Papillomavirus Infections/complications , Papillomavirus Infections/immunology , Papillomavirus Infections/virology , Middle Aged , Male , Papillomavirus E7 Proteins/immunology , Lymphocytes, Tumor-Infiltrating/immunology , Aged , Oncogene Proteins, Viral/immunology , Cancer Vaccines/therapeutic use , Cancer Vaccines/administration & dosage , Cancer Vaccines/immunology , Neoplasms/immunology , Neoplasms/pathology , Neoplasms/mortality , Adult , Leukocytes, Mononuclear/immunology , Repressor ProteinsABSTRACT
Inhibition of histone lysine acetyltransferases (KATs) KAT6A and KAT6B has shown antitumor activity in estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer preclinical models. PF-07248144 is a selective catalytic inhibitor of KAT6A and KAT6B. In the present study, we report the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics, efficacy and biomarker results from the first-in-human, phase 1 dose escalation and dose expansion study (n = 107) of PF-07248144 monotherapy and fulvestrant combination in heavily pretreated ER+ human epidermal growth factor receptor-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). The primary objectives of assessing the safety and tolerability and determining the recommended dose for expansion of PF-07248144, as monotherapy and in combination with fulvestrant, were met. Secondary endpoints included characterization of PK and evaluation of antitumor activity, including objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). Common treatment-related adverse events (any grade; grades 3-4) included dysgeusia (83.2%, 0%), neutropenia (59.8%, 35.5%) and anemia (48.6%, 13.1%). Exposure was approximately dose proportional. Antitumor activity was observed as monotherapy. For the PF-07248144-fulvestrant combination (n = 43), the ORR (95% confidence interval (CI)) was 30.2% (95% CI = 17.2-46.1%) and the median PFS was 10.7 (5.3-not evaluable) months. PF-07248144 demonstrated a tolerable safety profile and durable antitumor activity in heavily pretreated ER+HER2- mBC. These findings establish KAT6A and KAT6B as druggable cancer targets, provide clinical proof of concept and reveal a potential avenue to treat mBC. clinicaltrial.gov registration: NCT04606446 .
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Fulvestrant , Histone Acetyltransferases , Receptor, ErbB-2 , Receptors, Estrogen , Humans , Female , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Histone Acetyltransferases/antagonists & inhibitors , Histone Acetyltransferases/genetics , Histone Acetyltransferases/metabolism , Middle Aged , Receptor, ErbB-2/metabolism , Receptor, ErbB-2/genetics , Receptors, Estrogen/metabolism , Fulvestrant/therapeutic use , Fulvestrant/administration & dosage , Aged , Adult , Neoplasm Metastasis , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Strategies are needed to better identify patients that will benefit from immunotherapy alone or who may require additional therapies like chemotherapy or radiotherapy to overcome resistance. Here we employ single-cell transcriptomics and spatial proteomics to profile triple negative breast cancer biopsies taken at baseline, after one cycle of pembrolizumab, and after a second cycle of pembrolizumab given with radiotherapy. Non-responders lack immune infiltrate before and after therapy and exhibit minimal therapy-induced immune changes. Responding tumors form two groups that are distinguishable by a classifier prior to therapy, with one showing high major histocompatibility complex expression, evidence of tertiary lymphoid structures, and displaying anti-tumor immunity before treatment. The other responder group resembles non-responders at baseline and mounts a maximal immune response, characterized by cytotoxic T cell and antigen presenting myeloid cell interactions, only after combination therapy, which is mirrored in a murine model of triple negative breast cancer.
Subject(s)
Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms , Humans , Animals , Mice , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Combined Modality Therapy , ImmunotherapyABSTRACT
Importance: Adding fulvestrant to anastrozole (A+F) improved survival in postmenopausal women with advanced estrogen receptor (ER)-positive/ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-negative breast cancer. However, the combination has not been tested in early-stage disease. Objective: To determine whether neoadjuvant fulvestrant or A+F increases the rate of pathologic complete response or ypT1-2N0/N1mic/Ki67 2.7% or less residual disease (referred to as endocrine-sensitive disease) over anastrozole alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: A phase 3 randomized clinical trial assessing differences in clinical and correlative outcomes between each of the fulvestrant-containing arms and the anastrozole arm. Postmenopausal women with clinical stage II to III, ER-rich (Allred score 6-8 or >66%)/ERBB2-negative breast cancer were included. All analyses were based on data frozen on March 2, 2023. Interventions: Patients received anastrozole, fulvestrant, or a combination for 6 months preoperatively. Tumor Ki67 was assessed at week 4 and optionally at week 12, and if greater than 10% at either time point, the patient switched to neoadjuvant chemotherapy or immediate surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the endocrine-sensitive disease rate (ESDR). A secondary outcome was the percentage change in Ki67 after 4 weeks of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) (week 4 Ki67 suppression). Results: Between February 2014 and November 2018, 1362 female patients (mean [SD] age, 65.0 [8.2] years) were enrolled. Among the 1298 evaluable patients, ESDRs were 18.7% (95% CI, 15.1%-22.7%), 22.8% (95% CI, 18.9%-27.1%), and 20.5% (95% CI, 16.8%-24.6%) with anastrozole, fulvestrant, and A+F, respectively. Compared to anastrozole, neither fulvestrant-containing regimen significantly improved ESDR or week 4 Ki67 suppression. The rate of week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10% was 25.1%, 24.2%, and 15.7% with anastrozole, fulvestrant, and A+F, respectively. Pathologic complete response/residual cancer burden class I occurred in 8 of 167 patients and 17 of 167 patients, respectively (15.0%; 95% CI, 9.9%-21.3%), after switching to neoadjuvant chemotherapy due to week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10%. PAM50 subtyping derived from RNA sequencing of baseline biopsies available for 753 patients (58%) identified 394 luminal A, 304 luminal B, and 55 nonluminal tumors. A+F led to a greater week 4 Ki67 suppression than anastrozole alone in luminal B tumors (median [IQR], -90.4% [-95.2 to -81.9%] vs -76.7% [-89.0 to -55.6%]; P < .001), but not luminal A tumors. Thirty-six nonluminal tumors (65.5%) had a week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10%. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, neither fulvestrant nor A+F significantly improved the 6-month ESDR over anastrozole in ER-rich/ERBB2-negative breast cancer. Aromatase inhibition remains the standard-of-care NET. Differential NET response by PAM50 subtype in exploratory analyses warrants further investigation. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01953588.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms , Aged , Female , Humans , Anastrozole/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Fulvestrant , Ki-67 Antigen , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Nitriles/adverse effects , Postmenopause , Receptor, ErbB-2 , Receptors, Estrogen , Triazoles/adverse effects , Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Middle AgedABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The OlympiA randomized phase III trial compared 1 year of olaparib (OL) or placebo (PL) as adjuvant therapy in patients with germline BRCA1/2, high-risk human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer after completing (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy ([N]ACT), surgery, and radiotherapy. The patient-reported outcome primary hypothesis was that OL-treated patients may experience greater fatigue during treatment. METHODS: Data were collected before random assignment, and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. The primary end point was fatigue, measured with the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue scale. Secondary end points, assessed with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire, Core 30 item, included nausea and vomiting (NV), diarrhea, and multiple functional domains. Scores were compared between treatment groups using mixed model for repeated measures. Two-sided P values <.05 were statistically significant for the primary end point. All secondary end points were descriptive. RESULTS: One thousand five hundred and thirty-eight patients (NACT: 746, ACT: 792) contributed to the analysis. Fatigue severity was statistically significantly greater for OL versus PL, but not clinically meaningfully different by prespecified criteria (≥3 points) at 6 months (diff OL v PL: NACT: -1.3 [95% CI, -2.4 to -0.2]; P = .022; ACT: -1.3 [95% CI, -2.3 to -0.2]; P = .017) and 12 months (NACT: -1.6 [95% CI, -2.8 to -0.3]; P = .017; ACT: -1.3 [95% CI, -2.4 to -0.2]; P = .025). There were no significant differences in fatigue severity between treatment groups at 18 and 24 months. NV severity was worse in patients treated with OL compared with PL at 6 months (NACT: 6.0 [95% CI, 4.1 to 8.0]; ACT: 5.3 [95% CI, 3.4 to 7.2]) and 12 months (NACT: 6.4 [95% CI, 4.4 to 8.3]; ACT: 4.5 [95% CI, 2.8 to 6.1]). During treatment, there were some clinically meaningful differences between groups for other symptoms but not for function subscales or global health status. CONCLUSION: Treatment-emergent symptoms from OL were limited, generally resolving after treatment ended. OL- and PL-treated patients had similar functional scores, slowly improving during the 24 months after (N)ACT and there was no clinically meaningful persistence of fatigue severity in OL-treated patients.