Clinical and molecular correlates of PD-L1 expression in patients with lung adenocarcinomas.

BACKGROUND: Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression is the only FDA-approved biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with lung adenocarcinoma, but sensitivity is modest. Understanding the impact of molecular phenotype, clinical characteristics, and tumor features on PD-L1 expression is largely unknown and may improve prediction of response to ICI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We evaluated patients with lung adenocarcinoma for whom PD-L1 testing and targeted next-generation sequencing (using MSK-IMPACT) was performed on the same tissue sample. Clinical and molecular features were compared across PD-L1 subgroups to examine how molecular phenotype associated with tumor PD-L1 expression. In patients treated with anti-PD-(L)1 blockade, we assessed how these interactions impacted efficacy. RESULTS: A total of 1586 patients with lung adenocarcinoma had paired PD-L1 testing and targeted next-generation sequencing. PD-L1 negativity was more common in primary compared to metastatic samples (P < 0.001). The distribution of PD-L1 expression (lymph nodes enriched for PD-L1 high; bones predominantly PD-L1 negative) and predictiveness of PD-L1 expression on ICI response varied by organ. Mutations in KRAS, TP53, and MET significantly associated with PD-L1 high expression (each P < 0.001, Q < 0.001) and EGFR and STK11 mutations associated with PD-L1 negativity (P < 0.001, Q = 0.01; P = 0.001, Q < 0.001, respectively). WNT pathway alterations also associated with PD-L1 negativity (P = 0.005). EGFR and STK11 mutants abrogated the predictive value of PD-L1 expression on ICI response. CONCLUSION: PD-L1 expression and association with ICI response vary across tissue sample sites. Specific molecular features are associated with differential expression of PD-L1 and may impact the predictive capacity of PD-L1 for response to ICIs.

Clinical activity of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) blockade in never, light, and heavy smokers with non-small-cell lung cancer and PD-L1 expression ≥50.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are standard therapies for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50%. Tumor mutation burden (TMB) also predicts response to ICIs but is often not available in real time for decision making in the first-line setting. Smoking exposure can be a proxy for TMB in NSCLC. The impact of smoking status on efficacy of PD-1 blockade in NSCLC patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥50% has not been well defined. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To investigate the relationship between smoking and activity of ICIs in NSCLC, we retrospectively studied 315 patients with NSCLC and PD-L1 TPS ≥50% at five USA academic medical centers. Objective response rates (ORRs), progression-free survival (PFS), and duration of response (DOR) were compared between never (<100 lifetime cigarettes), light (≤10 pack-years), and heavy (>10 pack-years) smokers. A subset of patients underwent next-generation sequencing to estimate TMB. RESULTS: We identified 36 (11%) never, 42 (13%) light, and 237 (75%) heavy smokers with NSCLC and PD-L1 TPS ≥50% treated with ICIs. Objective responses were observed in 27%, 40%, and 40% of never, light, and heavy smokers, respectively (P = 0.180 never versus heavy; P = 1.000 light versus heavy). Median PFS and median DOR were numerically shorter in never and light smokers compared with heavy smokers (PFS 3.0 versus 4.0 versus 5.4 months; median DOR 6.9 versus 10.8 versus 17.8 months), but were not statistically different [PFS: hazard ratio (HR) 1.37, P = 0.135 and HR 1.24, P = 0.272; DOR: HR 1.92, P = 0.217 and HR 1.79, P = 0.141]. CONCLUSIONS: PD-(L)1 inhibitors are associated with antitumor activity in NSCLC with PD-L1 TPS ≥50% regardless of smoking status. Nevertheless, there is a signal of potentially decreased durability among never and light smokers that should be further evaluated. Distinct immunobiologic features may affect initial response versus durability of antitumor immunity to programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) blockade.

Pathologic features of response to neoadjuvant anti-PD-1 in resected non-small-cell lung carcinoma: a proposal for quantitative immune-related pathologic response criteria (irPRC).

Background: Neoadjuvant anti-PD-1 may improve outcomes for patients with resectable NSCLC and provides a critical window for examining pathologic features associated with response. Resections showing major pathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy, defined as ≤10% residual viable tumor (RVT), may predict improved long-term patient outcome. However, %RVT calculations were developed in the context of chemotherapy (%cRVT). An immune-related %RVT (%irRVT) has yet to be developed. Patients and methods: The first trial of neoadjuvant anti-PD-1 (nivolumab, NCT02259621) was just reported. We analyzed hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides from the post-treatment resection specimens of the 20 patients with non-small-cell lung carcinoma who underwent definitive surgery. Pretreatment tumor biopsies and preresection radiographic 'tumor' measurements were also assessed. Results: We found that the regression bed (the area of immune-mediated tumor clearance) accounts for the previously noted discrepancy between CT imaging and pathologic assessment of residual tumor. The regression bed is characterized by (i) immune activation-dense tumor infiltrating lymphocytes with macrophages and tertiary lymphoid structures; (ii) massive tumor cell death-cholesterol clefts; and (iii) tissue repair-neovascularization and proliferative fibrosis (each feature enriched in major pathologic responders versus nonresponders, P < 0.05). This distinct constellation of histologic findings was not identified in any pretreatment specimens. Histopathologic features of the regression bed were used to develop 'Immune-Related Pathologic Response Criteria' (irPRC), and these criteria were shown to be reproducible amongst pathologists. Specifically, %irRVT had improved interobserver consistency compared with %cRVT [median per-case %RVT variability 5% (0%-29%) versus 10% (0%-58%), P = 0.007] and a twofold decrease in median standard deviation across pathologists within a sample (4.6 versus 2.2, P = 0.002). Conclusions: irPRC may be used to standardize pathologic assessment of immunotherapeutic efficacy. Long-term follow-up is needed to determine irPRC reliability as a surrogate for recurrence-free and overall survival.

New Insights on Diagnostic Reproducibility of Biphasic Mesotheliomas: A Multi-Institutional Evaluation by the International Mesothelioma Panel From the MESOPATH Reference Center.

INTRODUCTION: The 2015 WHO classification of tumors categorized malignant mesothelioma into epithelioid, biphasic (BMM), and sarcomatoid (SMM) for prognostic relevance and treatment decisions. The survival of BMM is suspected to correlate with the amount of the sarcomatoid component. The criteria for a sarcomatoid component and the interobserver variability between pathologists for identifying this component are not well described. In ambiguous cases, a "transitional" (TMM) subtype has been proposed but was not accepted as a specific subtype in the 2015 WHO classification. The aims of this study were to evaluate the interobserver agreement in the diagnosis of BMM, to determine the nature and the significance of TMM subtype, and to relate the percentage of sarcomatoid component with survival. The value of staining for BRCA-1-associated protein (BAP1) and CDKN2A(p16) fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) were also assessed with respect to each of the tumoral components. METHODS: The study was conducted by the International Mesothelioma Panel supported by the French National Cancer Institute, the network of rare cancer (EURACAN) and in collaboration with the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC). The patient cases include a random group of 42 surgical biopsy samples diagnosed as BMM with evaluation of SMM component by the French Panel of MESOPATH experts was selected from the total series of 971 BMM cases collected from 1998 to 2016. Fourteen international pathologists with expertise in mesothelioma reviewed digitally scanned slides (hematoxylin and eosin - stained and pan-cytokeratin) without knowledge of prior diagnosis or outcome. Cases with at least 7 of 14 pathologists recognizing TMM features were selected as a TMM group. Demographic, clinical, histopathologic, treatment, and follow-up data were retrieved from the MESOBANK database. BAP1 (clone C-4) loss and CDKN2A(p16) homozygous deletion (HD) were assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and FISH, respectively. Kappa statistics were applied for interobserver agreement and multivariate analysis with Cox regression adjusted for age and gender was performed for survival analysis. RESULTS: The 14 panelists recorded a total of 544 diagnoses. The interobserver correlation was moderate (weighted Kappa = 0.45). Of the cases originally classified as BMM by MESOPATH, the reviewers agreed in 71% of cases (385 of 544 opinions), with cases classified as pure epithelioid in 17% (93 of 544), and pure sarcomatoid in 12% (66 of 544 opinions). Diagnosis of BMM was made on morphology or IHC alone in 23% of the cases and with additional assessment of IHC in 77% (402 of 544). The median overall survival (OS) of the 42 BMM cases was 8 months. The OS for BMM was significantly different from SMM and epithelioid malignant mesothelioma (p < 0.0001). In BMM, a sarcomatoid component of less than 80% correlated with a better survival (p = 0.02). There was a significant difference in survival between BMM with TMM showing a median survival at 6 months compared to 12 months for those without TMM (p < 0.0001). BAP1 loss was observed in 50% (21 of 42) of the total cases and in both components in 26%. We also compared the TMM group to that of more aggressive patterns of epithelioid subtypes of mesothelioma (solid and pleomorphic of our large MESOPATH cohort). The curve of transitional type was persistently close to the OS curve of the sarcomatoid component. The group of sarcomatoid, transitional, and pleomorphic mesothelioma were very close to each other. We then considered the contribution of BAP1 immunostaining and loss of CDKN2A(p16) by FISH. BAP1 loss was observed in 50% (21 of 41) of the total cases and in both component in 27% of the cases (11 of 41). There was no significant difference in BAP1 loss between the TMM and non-TMM groups. HD CDKN2A(p16) was detected in 74% of the total cases with no significant difference between the TMM and non-TMM groups. In multivariate analysis, TMM morphology was an indicator of poor prognosis with a hazard ratio = 3.2; 95% confidence interval: 1.6 - 8.0; and p = 0.003 even when compared to the presence of HD CDKN2A(p16) on sarcomatoid component (hazard ratio = 4.5; 95% confidence interval: 1.2 - 16.3, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The interobserver concordance among the international mesothelioma and French mesothelioma panel suggests clinical utility for an updated definition of biphasic mesothelioma that allows better stratification of patients into risk groups for treatment decisions, systemic anticancer therapy, or selection for surgery or palliation. We also have shown the usefulness of FISH detection of CDKN2A(p16) HD compared to BAP1 loss on the spindle cell component for the separation in ambiguous cases between benign florid stromal reaction from true sarcomatoid component of biphasic mesothelioma. Taken together our results further validate the concept of transitional pattern as a poor prognostic indicator.