Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance in patients with resected or ablated high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma (IMbrave050): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: No adjuvant treatment has been established for patients who remain at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after curative-intent resection or ablation. We aimed to assess the efficacy of adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance in patients with high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: In the global, open-label, phase 3 IMbrave050 study, adult patients with high-risk surgically resected or ablated hepatocellular carcinoma were recruited from 134 hospitals and medical centres in 26 countries in four WHO regions (European region, region of the Americas, South-East Asia region, and Western Pacific region). Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio via an interactive voice-web response system using permuted blocks, using a block size of 4, to receive intravenous 1200 mg atezolizumab plus 15 mg/kg bevacizumab every 3 weeks for 17 cycles (12 months) or to active surveillance. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival by independent review facility assessment in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04102098. FINDINGS: The intention-to-treat population included 668 patients randomly assigned between Dec 31, 2019, and Nov 25, 2021, to either atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (n=334) or to active surveillance (n=334). At the prespecified interim analysis (Oct 21, 2022), median duration of follow-up was 17·4 months (IQR 13·9-22·1). Adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was associated with significantly improved recurrence-free survival (median, not evaluable [NE]; [95% CI 22·1-NE]) compared with active surveillance (median, NE [21·4-NE]; hazard ratio, 0·72 [adjusted 95% CI 0·53-0·98]; p=0·012). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 136 (41%) of 332 patients who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 44 (13%) of 330 patients in the active surveillance group. Grade 5 adverse events occurred in six patients (2%, two of which were treatment related) in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group, and one patient (<1%) in the active surveillance group. Both atezolizumab and bevacizumab were discontinued because of adverse events in 29 patients (9%) who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. INTERPRETATION: Among patients at high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence following curative-intent resection or ablation, recurrence-free survival was improved in those who received atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus active surveillance. To our knowledge, IMbrave050 is the first phase 3 study of adjuvant treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma to report positive results. However, longer follow-up for both recurrence-free and overall survival is needed to assess the benefit-risk profile more fully. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.

Atezolizumab Plus PEGPH20 Versus Chemotherapy in Advanced Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma and Gastric Cancer: MORPHEUS Phase Ib/II Umbrella Randomized Study Platform.

BACKGROUND: The MORPHEUS platform comprises multiple open-label, randomized, phase Ib/II trials designed to identify early efficacy and safety signals of treatment combinations across cancers. Atezolizumab (anti-programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 [PD-L1]) was evaluated in combination with PEGylated recombinant human hyaluronidase (PEGPH20). METHODS: In 2 randomized MORPHEUS trials, eligible patients with advanced, previously treated pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) or gastric cancer (GC) received atezolizumab plus PEGPH20, or control treatment (mFOLFOX6 or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel [MORPHEUS-PDAC]; ramucirumab plus paclitaxel [MORPHEUS-GC]). Primary endpoints were objective response rates (ORR) per RECIST 1.1 and safety. RESULTS: In MORPHEUS-PDAC, ORRs with atezolizumab plus PEGPH20 (n = 66) were 6.1% (95% CI, 1.68%-14.80%) vs. 2.4% (95% CI, 0.06%-12.57%) with chemotherapy (n = 42). In the respective arms, 65.2% and 61.9% had grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs); 4.5% and 2.4% had grade 5 AEs. In MORPHEUS-GC, confirmed ORRs with atezolizumab plus PEGPH20 (n = 13) were 0% (95% CI, 0%-24.7%) vs. 16.7% (95% CI, 2.1%-48.4%) with control (n = 12). Grade 3/4 AEs occurred in 30.8% and 75.0% of patients, respectively; no grade 5 AEs occurred. CONCLUSION: Atezolizumab plus PEGPH20 showed limited clinical activity in patients with PDAC and none in patients with GC. The safety of atezolizumab plus PEGPH20 was consistent with each agent's known safety profile. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03193190 and NCT03281369).

Brief Report: Safety and Antitumor Activity of Alectinib Plus Atezolizumab From a Phase 1b Study in Advanced ALK-Positive NSCLC.

Introduction: Alectinib is a preferred first-line treatment option for advanced ALK-positive NSCLC. Combination regimens of alectinib with immune checkpoint inhibitors are being evaluated for synergistic effects. Methods: Adults with treatment-naive, stage IIIB/IV, or recurrent ALK-positive NSCLC were enrolled into a two-stage phase 1b study. Patients received alectinib 600 mg (twice daily during cycle 1 and throughout each 21-d cycle thereafter) plus atezolizumab 1200 mg (d8 of cycle 1 and then d1 of each 21-d cycle). Primary objectives were to evaluate safety and tolerability of alectinib plus atezolizumab. Secondary objectives included assessments of antitumor activity. Results: In total, 21 patients received more than or equal to 1 dose of alectinib or atezolizumab. As no dose-limiting toxicities were observed in stage 1 (n = 7), the starting dose and schedule were continued into stage 2 (n = 14). Median duration of follow-up was 29 months (range: 1-39). Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 57% of the patients, most often rash (19%). No grade 4 or 5 treatment-related adverse events were reported. Confirmed objective response rate was 86% (18 of 21; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 64-97). Median progression-free survival was not estimable (NE) (95% CI: 13 mo-NE), neither was median overall survival (95% CI: 33 mo-NE). Conclusions: The combination of alectinib and atezolizumab is feasible, but increased toxicity was found compared with the individual agents. With small sample sizes and relatively short follow-up, definitive conclusions regarding antitumor activity cannot be made.

Epigenetic promoter alterations in GI tumour immune-editing and resistance to immune checkpoint inhibition.

OBJECTIVES: Epigenomic alterations in cancer interact with the immune microenvironment to dictate tumour evolution and therapeutic response. We aimed to study the regulation of the tumour immune microenvironment through epigenetic alternate promoter use in gastric cancer and to expand our findings to other gastrointestinal tumours. DESIGN: Alternate promoter burden (APB) was quantified using a novel bioinformatic algorithm (proActiv) to infer promoter activity from short-read RNA sequencing and samples categorised into APBhigh, APBint and APBlow. Single-cell RNA sequencing was performed to analyse the intratumour immune microenvironment. A humanised mouse cancer in vivo model was used to explore dynamic temporal interactions between tumour kinetics, alternate promoter usage and the human immune system. Multiple cohorts of gastrointestinal tumours treated with immunotherapy were assessed for correlation between APB and treatment outcomes. RESULTS: APBhigh gastric cancer tumours expressed decreased levels of T-cell cytolytic activity and exhibited signatures of immune depletion. Single-cell RNAsequencing analysis confirmed distinct immunological populations and lower T-cell proportions in APBhigh tumours. Functional in vivo studies using 'humanised mice' harbouring an active human immune system revealed distinct temporal relationships between APB and tumour growth, with APBhigh tumours having almost no human T-cell infiltration. Analysis of immunotherapy-treated patients with GI cancer confirmed resistance of APBhigh tumours to immune checkpoint inhibition. APBhigh gastric cancer exhibited significantly poorer progression-free survival compared with APBlow (median 55 days vs 121 days, HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.93, p=0.032). CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate an association between alternate promoter use and the tumour microenvironment, leading to immune evasion and immunotherapy resistance.

Safety and Clinical Activity of Atezolizumab Plus Ipilimumab in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Results From a Phase 1b Trial.

BACKGROUND: This phase 1b study investigated safety and activity of combined checkpoint inhibition (CPI) with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody atezolizumab plus cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitor ipilimumab in NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had previously treated locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or melanoma. A standard 3+3 dose escalation investigated atezolizumab (600-1200 mg IV every 3 weeks) plus ipilimumab starting at 1 mg/kg, administered as a single dose or 4 doses, administered every 3 weeks. The expansion stage included a cohort previously treated with atezolizumab. Patients were monitored for safety and tolerability; response was evaluated every 6 weeks. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were enrolled, 4 with melanoma and 23 with NSCLC; here, we focus on data for the NSCLC population. Three of 23 patients (13.0%) received prior CPI. No dose-limiting toxicities were reported during dose escalation; dose expansion occurred with atezolizumab 1200 mg plus 1 cycle of ipilimumab 1 mg/kg. Most common treatment-emergent adverse events were dyspnea (39%) and cough (35%); treatment-related Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 11 patients (48%), most frequently pneumonitis (17%) and amylase or lipase elevation (9% each). Six of 23 NSCLC patients (26%) achieved confirmed responses, 5 of whom (25%) were CPI naive. Median duration of response was 23.0 (95% CI, 3.2-36.9) months overall and 36.9 (95% CI, 2.9-36.9) months in CPI-naive patients. CONCLUSION: Preliminary efficacy of atezolizumab plus ipilimumab was observed in metastatic NSCLC. The combination had manageable toxicity, with a safety profile consistent with those of the individual agents.

Phase Ib Study of Atezolizumab Plus Interferon-α with or without Bevacizumab in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma and Other Solid Tumors.

This Phase Ib study combined programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitor, atezolizumab, with other immunomodulatory agents in locally advanced and metastatic solid tumors. Arms B-D evaluated atezolizumab plus interferon-α, with/without vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor, bevacizumab, in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and other solid tumors. Arm B predominantly recruited patients with previously treated RCC or melanoma to receive atezolizumab plus interferon α-2b. Arm C investigated atezolizumab plus polyethylene glycol (PEG)-interferon α-2a in previously treated RCC. Arm D evaluated atezolizumab plus PEG-interferon α-2a and bevacizumab. Primary objectives were safety and tolerability; secondary objectives included clinical activity. Combination therapy was well tolerated, with safety profiles consistent with known risks of individual agents. The most frequent treatment-related toxicities were fatigue, chills, and pyrexia. The objective response rate (ORR) in arm B was 20.0% overall and 17.8% in patients with previously treated checkpoint inhibitor-naive RCC (n = 45). No responses were reported in arm C. The highest ORR in arm D was 46.7% in patients with treatment-naive RCC (n = 15). Data showed preliminary clinical activity and acceptable tolerability of atezolizumab plus interferon α-2b in patients with previously treated checkpoint inhibitor-naive RCC and of atezolizumab plus PEG-interferon α-2a and bevacizumab in patients with treatment-naive RCC.

Defining tumor resistance to PD-1 pathway blockade: recommendations from the first meeting of the SITC Immunotherapy Resistance Taskforce.

As the field of cancer immunotherapy continues to advance at a fast pace, treatment approaches and drug development are evolving rapidly to maximize patient benefit. New agents are commonly evaluated for activity in patients who had previously received a programmed death receptor 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor as standard of care or in an investigational study. However, because of the kinetics and patterns of response to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade, and the lack of consistency in the clinical definitions of resistance to therapy, the design of clinical trials of new agents and interpretation of results remains an important challenge. To address this unmet need, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer convened a multistakeholder taskforce-consisting of experts in cancer immunotherapy from academia, industry, and government-to generate consensus clinical definitions for resistance to PD-(L)1 inhibitors in three distinct scenarios: primary resistance, secondary resistance, and progression after treatment discontinuation. The taskforce generated consensus on several key issues such as the timeframes that delineate each type of resistance, the necessity for confirmatory scans, and identified caveats for each specific resistance classification. The goal of this effort is to provide guidance for clinical trial design and to support analyses of emerging molecular and cellular data surrounding mechanisms of resistance.

Phase 1 study of epacadostat in combination with atezolizumab for patients with previously treated advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer.

Epacadostat is a potent and highly selective inhibitor of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1). Here we report results from the open-label, dose-escalation, Phase 1b ECHO-110 study evaluating epacadostat plus atezolizumab in patients with previously treated Stage IIIB/IV nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Eligible patients had received ≥1 prior line of platinum-based chemotherapy (≥2 cycles) and no prior checkpoint/IDO inhibitors treatment. Oral epacadostat (25, 50, 75, 100, 200 or 300 mg) was administered twice daily (BID) with intravenous atezolizumab 1,200 mg every 3 weeks (Q3W). Primary endpoints were safety, tolerability and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Twenty-nine patients received ≥1 dose of treatment. The maximum tolerated dose of epacadostat was not reached. Two patients had DLTs: one patient with Grade 3 dehydration and hypotension (epacadostat 200 mg BID); one patient with Grade 3 hyponatremia and Grade 4 autoimmune encephalitis (epacadostat 300 mg BID). Twenty-three patients (79%) had treatment-related adverse events (AEs); seven patients (24%) experienced Grade 3/4 events; five patients (17%) discontinued treatment due to treatment-related AEs. No fatal treatment-related AEs occurred. One patient achieved a partial response (objective response rate, 3%), which was maintained for 8.3 months; eight patients had stable disease. Baseline tumoral programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and IDO expression were low among patients with evaluable samples (1 of 23 expressed PD-L1; 5 of 17 expressed IDO). Epacadostat pharmacokinetics was comparable to historical controls. Epacadostat, at doses up to 300 mg BID, combined with atezolizumab 1,200 mg Q3W was well tolerated in patients with previously treated NSCLC, although clinical activity was limited.

Atezolizumab plus cobimetinib and vemurafenib in BRAF-mutated melanoma patients.

Melanoma treatment has progressed in the past decade with the development and approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting programmed death 1 (PD-1) or its ligand (PD-L1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4, as well as small molecule inhibitors of BRAF and/or MEK for the subgroup of patients with BRAFV600 mutations1-9. BRAF/MEK-targeted therapies have effects on the tumor microenvironment that support their combination with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors10-20. This phase Ib study (ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01656642 ) evaluated the safety and anti-tumor activity of combining atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) with vemurafenib (BRAF inhibitor), or cobimetinib (MEK inhibitor) + vemurafenib, in patients with BRAFV600-mutated metastatic melanoma. Triple combination therapy with atezolizumab + cobimetinib + vemurafenib, after a 28-d run-in period with cobimetinib + vemurafenib, had substantial but manageable toxicity. Exploratory biomarker data show that the cobimetinib + vemurafenib run-in was associated with an increase in proliferating CD4+ T-helper cells but not with an increase in T-regulatory cells, as observed in the vemurafenib-only run-in period. The confirmed objective response rate was 71.8% (95% confidence interval 55.1-85.0). The estimated median duration of response was 17.4 months (95% confidence interval 10.6-25.3) with ongoing response in 39.3% of patients after 29.9 months of follow-up. Further investigation in a phase III trial is underway.

Shuffling the deck with CTLA-4 therapy: Deep sequencing of rearranged TCRB genes demonstrates T cell repertoire remodeling in cancer patients.

CTLA-4 inhibition produces durable T cell-driven antitumor responses, but understanding which patients achieve a long-term benefit remains unclear. Deep sequencing of rearranged T cell receptor ß (TCRß) genes can monitor the effects of CTLA-4 inhibition and potentially identify patients with long-term survival.

A Blueprint to Advance Colorectal Cancer Immunotherapies.

Immunotherapy is rapidly becoming a standard of care for many cancers. However, colorectal cancer had been generally resistant to immunotherapy, despite features in common with sensitive tumors. Observations of substantial clinical activity for checkpoint blockade in colorectal cancers with defective mismatch repair (microsatellite instability-high tumors) have reignited interest in the search for immunotherapies that could be extended to the larger microsatellite stable (MSS) population. The Cancer Research Institute and Fight Colorectal Cancer convened a group of scientists, clinicians, advocates, and industry experts in colorectal cancer and immunotherapy to compile ongoing research efforts, identify gaps in translational and clinical research, and provide a blueprint to advance immunotherapy. We identified lack of a T-cell inflamed phenotype (due to inadequate T-cell infiltration, inadequate T-cell activation, or T-cell suppression) as a broad potential explanation for failure of checkpoint blockade in MSS. The specific cellular and molecular underpinnings for these various mechanisms are unclear. Whether biomarkers with prognostic value, such as the immunoscores and IFN signatures, would also predict benefit for immunotherapies in MSS colon cancer is unknown, but if so, these and other biomarkers for measuring the potential for an immune response in patients with colorectal cancer will need to be incorporated into clinical guidelines. We have proposed a framework for research to identify immunologic factors that may be modulated to improve immunotherapy for colorectal cancer patients, with the goal that the biomarkers and treatment strategies identified will become part of the routine management of colorectal cancer. Cancer Immunol Res; 5(11); 942-9. ©2017 AACR.

New Cancer Immunotherapy Agents in Development: a report from an associated program of the 31stAnnual Meeting of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer, 2016.

This report is a summary of 'New Cancer Immunotherapy Agents in Development' program, which took place in association with the 31st Annual Meeting of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC), on November 9, 2016 in National Harbor, Maryland. Presenters gave brief overviews of emerging clinical and pre-clinical immune-based agents and combinations, before participating in an extended panel discussion with multidisciplinary leaders, including members of the FDA, leading academic institutions and industrial drug developers, to consider topics relevant to the future of cancer immunotherapy.

GM-CSF and ipilimumab therapy in metastatic melanoma: Clinical outcomes and immunologic responses.

We conducted a phase II clinical trial of anti-CTLA-4 antibody (ipilimumab) and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in 22 patients with metastatic melanoma and determined clinical outcomes and immunologic responses. The treatment consisted of a 3-mo induction with ipilimumab at 10 mg/kg administered every 3 weeks for four doses in combination with GM-CSF at 125 µg/m2 for 14 d beginning on the day of the ipilimumab infusion and then GM-CSF for 3 mo on the same schedule without ipilimumab. This was followed by maintenance therapy with the combination every 3 mo for up to 2 y or until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Blood samples for determination of immune subsets were obtained before treatment, at week 3 (end of cycle 1) and at week 6 (end of cycle 2). Blood samples were also obtained from seven subjects who were cancer-free. The immune response disease control (irDC) rate at 24 weeks was 41% and the overall response rate (ORR) was 32%. The median progression free-survival (PFS) was 3.5 mo and the median overall survival (OS) was 21.1 mo. 41% of the patients experienced Grade 3 to 4 adverse events. We conclude that this combination is safe and the results suggest the combination may be more effective than ipilimumab monotherapy. Further, the results suggest that lower levels of CD4+ effector T cells but higher levels of CD8+ T cells expressing PD-1 at pre-treatment could be a potential biomarker for disease control in patients who receive immunotherapy with ipilimumab and GM-CSF. Further trials of this combination are warranted.

Meta-analysis of published efficacy and safety data for docetaxel in second-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: To gain a better understanding of the impact of dose and other prognostic factors on safety and efficacy of docetaxel in second-line non-small-cell lung cancer patients. METHODS: A model-based meta-analysis (MBMA) of a published docetaxel monotherapy data in 6085 second-line non-small-cell lung cancer patients from 46 trials was conducted. RESULTS: The logit of grade 3/4 neutropenia incidence was a linear function of dose, with a 5% increase in the odds of neutropenia per mg/m(2) increase in dose [odds ratio (OR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-1.06], and a Japanese study effect (OR 17.1, 95% CI 6.05-48.4). The logit of overall response rate (ORR) was a linear function of cumulative dose (0.4% increase in the odds of response per mg/m(2) increase; OR 1.004, 95% CI 1.001-1.008) and median population age (OR 1.08 per year, 95% CI 1.02-1.15). A Japanese study effect was identified for overall survival (OS) in addition to prognostic factors identified by a previous meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: This current MBMA identified docetaxel dose-response relationships for both neutropenia and ORR, an effect of age on ORR, and Japanese study effects on both neutropenia and OS.

PD-L1 inhibition with MPDL3280A for solid tumors.

Cancer immunotherapy has become a popular anticancer approach, with the goal of stimulating immune responses against tumor cells. Recent evidence has demonstrated that the use of monoclonal antibodies targeting the programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1)/programmed death-1 (PD-1) checkpoint pathway can result in well-tolerated clinical responses in a wide variety of tumor types. This review summarizes the safety, clinical activity and biomarker data for the anti-PD-L1 antibody, MPDL3280A, from a phase Ia multicenter, dose-escalation and -expansion trial. The data to date suggest that MPDL3280A is most effective in patients with pre-existing immunity suppressed by PD-L1 and reinvigorated upon antibody treatment.

Improved survival with T cell clonotype stability after anti-CTLA-4 treatment in cancer patients.

Cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) blockade can promote antitumor T cell immunity and clinical responses. The mechanism by which anti-CTLA-4 antibodies induces antitumor responses is controversial. To determine the effects of CTLA-4 blockade on the T cell repertoire, we used next-generation deep sequencing to measure the frequency of individual rearranged T cell receptor ß (TCRß) genes, thereby characterizing the diversity of rearrangements, known as T cell clonotypes. CTLA-4 blockade in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and metastatic melanoma resulted in both expansion and loss of T cell clonotypes, consistent with a global turnover of the T cell repertoire. Overall, this treatment increased TCR diversity as reflected in the number of unique TCR clonotypes. The repertoire of clonotypes continued to evolve over subsequent months of treatment. Whereas the number of clonotypes that increased with treatment was not associated with clinical outcome, improved overall survival was associated with maintenance of high-frequency clones at baseline. In contrast, the highest-frequency clonotypes fell with treatment in patients with short overall survival. Stably maintained clonotypes included T cells having high-avidity TCR such as virus-reactive T cells. Together, these results suggest that CTLA-4 blockade induces T cell repertoire evolution and diversification. Moreover, improved clinical outcomes are associated with less clonotype loss, consistent with the maintenance of high-frequency TCR clonotypes during treatment. These clones may represent the presence of preexisting high-avidity T cells that may be relevant in the antitumor response.

Is there a role for immune checkpoint blockade with ipilimumab in prostate cancer?

Treatment for advanced prostate cancer has and will continue to grow increasingly complex, owing to the introduction of multiple new therapeutic approaches with the potential to substantially improve outcomes for this disease. Agents that modulate the patient's immune system to fight prostate cancer - immunotherapeutics - are among the most exciting of these new approaches. The addition of antigen-specific immunotherapy to the treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) has paved the way for additional research that seeks to augment the activity of the immune system itself. The monoclonal antibody ipilimumab, approved in over 40 countries to treat advanced melanoma and currently under phase 2 and 3 investigation in prostate cancer, is thought to act by augmenting immune responses to tumors through blockade of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4, an inhibitory immune checkpoint molecule. Ipilimumab has been studied in seven phase 1 and 2 clinical trials that evaluated various doses, schedules, and combinations across the spectrum of patients with advanced prostate cancer. The CRPC studies of ipilimumab to date suggest that the agent is active in prostate cancer as monotherapy or in combination with radiotherapy, docetaxel, or other immunotherapeutics, and that the adverse event profile is as expected given the safety data in advanced melanoma. The ongoing phase 3 program will further characterize the risk/benefit profile of ipilimumab in chemotherapy-naïve and -pretreated CRPC.

Plasmid IL-12 electroporation in melanoma.

Intratumoral gene electroporation uses electric charges to facilitate entry of plasmid DNA into cells in a reproducible and highly efficient manner, especially to accessible sites such as cutaneous and subcutaneous melanomas. Effective for locally treated disease, electroporation of plasmid DNA encoding interleukin-12 can also induce responses in untreated distant disease, suggesting that adaptive immune responses are being elicited that can target melanoma-associated antigens. In vivo electroporation with immunomodulatory cytokine DNA is a promising approach that can trigger systemic anti-tumor immune responses without the systemic toxicity associated with intravenous cytokine delivery and potentially offer complete long-term tumor regression.

Unmasking the immune recognition of prostate cancer with CTLA4 blockade.

Although cancer cells can be immunogenic, tumour progression is associated with the evasion of immunosurveillance, the promotion of tumour tolerance and even the production of pro-tumorigenic factors by immune cells. Cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA4) represents a crucial immune checkpoint, the blockade of which can potentiate anti-tumour immunity. CTLA4-blocking antibodies are now an established therapeutic approach for malignant melanoma, and clinical trials with CTLA4-specific antibodies in prostate cancer have also shown clinical activity. This treatment may provide insights into the targets that the immune system recognizes to drive tumour regression, and could potentially improve both outcome and toxicity for patients with prostate cancer.

Immunotherapy for prostate cancer: biology and therapeutic approaches.

Although prostate cancer was not historically considered to be a particularly immune-responsive cancer, recent clinical trials have demonstrated that immunotherapy for prostate cancer can lead to improvements in overall survival (OS). These studies include randomized controlled trials with sipuleucel-T and another with PROSTVAC-VF, both of which rely on stimulating the immune system to target prostate proteins. This review discusses the most promising developments over the past year in immune-based therapy for prostate cancer and the opportunities that lie ahead. Recent randomized immunotherapy trials in prostate cancer have demonstrated improvements in OS but without the concomitant improvements in progression-free survival. This uncoupling of survival from clinical response poses challenges to clinical management, because conventional measures of objective response cannot be used to identify patients benefiting from treatment. There is a significant need to identify immunologic or clinical surrogates for survival so that clinical benefit can be assessed in a timely manner. Immunotherapy is now an established treatment approach for prostate cancer, with multiple clinical trials demonstrating improvements in OS. Significant challenges to this modality remain, including determining best clinical setting for immunotherapy, identifying patients who benefit, and defining relevant clinical and immunologic end points. Nevertheless, the broader availability of novel immunotherapies will provide opportunities not only to target different components of the immune system but also to combine immunotherapies with other treatments for improved clinical efficacy.