Epigenetic remodeling to improve the efficacy of immunotherapy in human glioblastoma: pre-clinical evidence for development of new immunotherapy approaches.

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a highly aggressive primary brain tumor, that is refractory to standard treatment and to immunotherapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Noteworthy, melanoma brain metastases (MM-BM), that share the same niche as GBM, frequently respond to current ICI therapies. Epigenetic modifications regulate GBM cellular proliferation, invasion, and prognosis and may negatively regulate the cross-talk between malignant cells and immune cells in the tumor milieu, likely contributing to limit the efficacy of ICI therapy of GBM. Thus, manipulating the tumor epigenome can be considered a therapeutic opportunity in GBM. METHODS: Microarray transcriptional and methylation profiles, followed by gene set enrichment and IPA analyses, were performed to study the differences in the constitutive expression profiles of GBM vs MM-BM cells, compared to the extracranial MM cells and to investigate the modulatory effects of the DNA hypomethylating agent (DHA) guadecitabine among the different tumor cells. The prognostic relevance of DHA-modulated genes was tested by Cox analysis in a TCGA GBM patients' cohort. RESULTS: The most striking differences between GBM and MM-BM cells were found to be the enrichment of biological processes associated with tumor growth, invasion, and extravasation with the inhibition of MHC class II antigen processing/presentation in GBM cells. Treatment with guadecitabine reduced these biological differences, shaping GBM cells towards a more immunogenic phenotype. Indeed, in GBM cells, promoter hypomethylation by guadecitabine led to the up-regulation of genes mainly associated with activation, proliferation, and migration of T and B cells and with MHC class II antigen processing/presentation. Among DHA-modulated genes in GBM, 7.6% showed a significant prognostic relevance. Moreover, a large set of immune-related upstream-regulators (URs) were commonly modulated by DHA in GBM, MM-BM, and MM cells: DHA-activated URs enriched for biological processes mainly involved in the regulation of cytokines and chemokines production, inflammatory response, and in Type I/II/III IFN-mediated signaling; conversely, DHA-inhibited URs were involved in metabolic and proliferative pathways. CONCLUSIONS: Epigenetic remodeling by guadecitabine represents a promising strategy to increase the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy of GBM, supporting the rationale to develop new epigenetic-based immunotherapeutic approaches for the treatment of this still highly deadly disease.

Immunotherapy in melanoma: Can we predict response to treatment with circulating biomarkers?

Melanoma is the most aggressive form of skin cancer, representing approximately 4% of all cutaneous neoplasms and accounting for up to 80% of deaths. Advanced stages of melanoma involve metastatic processes and are associated with high mortality and morbidity, mainly due to the rapid dissemination and heterogeneous responses to current therapies, including immunotherapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are currently used in the treatment of metastatic melanoma (MM) and despite being linked to an increase in patient survival, a high percentage of them still do not benefit from it. Accordingly, the number of therapeutic regimens for MM patients using ICIs either alone or in combination with other therapies has increased, together with the need for reliable biomarkers that can both predict and monitor response to ICIs. In this context, circulating biomarkers, such as DNA, RNA, proteins, and cells, have emerged due to their ability to reflect disease status. Moreover, blood tests are minimally invasive and provide an attractive option to detect biomarkers, avoiding stressful medical procedures. This systematic review aims to evaluate the possibility of a non-invasive biomarker signature that can guide therapeutic decisions. The studies reported here offer valuable insight into how circulating biomarkers can have a role in personalized treatments for melanoma patients receiving ICIs therapy, emphasizing the need for rigorous clinical trials to confirm findings and establish standardized procedures.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in melanoma patients with asymptomatic brain metastases: 7-year outcomes and quality of life from the multicenter phase III NIBIT-M2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The primary analysis of the phase III NIBIT-M2 study showed a 41% 4-year overall survival (OS) of melanoma patients with asymptomatic brain metastases treated with ipilimumab plus nivolumab. METHODS: Here, we report the 7-year efficacy outcomes and the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) analyses of the NIBIT-M2 study. RESULTS: As of May 1, 2023, at a median follow-up of 67 months (mo), the median OS was 8.5 (95% CI: 6.6-10.3), 8.2 (95% CI: 2.1-14.3) and 29.2 (95% CI: 0-69.9) mo for the fotemustine (F) Arm A, ipilimumab plus fotemustine Arm B, and ipilimumab plus nivolumab Arm C, respectively. The 7-year OS rate was 10.0% (95% CI: 0-22.5) in Arm A, 10.3% (95% CI: 0-22.6) in Arm B, and 42.8% (95% CI: 23.4-62.2) in Arm C. HRQoL was preserved in all treatment arms. Most functional scales evaluated from baseline to W12 were preserved, with a lower mean score decrease for EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 and an increase for EORTC QLQ-Brain neoplasm (BN20) in patients receiving ipilimumab plus nivolumab. CONCLUSIONS: With the longest follow-up available to date in melanoma patients with asymptomatic brain metastases, the NIBIT-M2 study continues to show persistent therapeutic efficacy of I ipilimumab plus nivolumab while preserving HRQoL.

Guadecitabine plus ipilimumab in unresectable melanoma: five-year follow-up and integrated multi-omic analysis in the phase 1b NIBIT-M4 trial.

Association with hypomethylating agents is a promising strategy to improve the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors-based therapy. The NIBIT-M4 was a phase Ib, dose-escalation trial in patients with advanced melanoma of the hypomethylating agent guadecitabine combined with the anti-CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab that followed a traditional 3 + 3 design (NCT02608437). Patients received guadecitabine 30, 45 or 60 mg/m2/day subcutaneously on days 1 to 5 every 3 weeks starting on week 0 for a total of four cycles, and ipilimumab 3 mg/kg intravenously starting on day 1 of week 1 every 3 weeks for a total of four cycles. Primary outcomes of safety, tolerability, and maximum tolerated dose of treatment were previously reported. Here we report the 5-year clinical outcome for the secondary endpoints of overall survival, progression free survival, and duration of response, and an exploratory integrated multi-omics analysis on pre- and on-treatment tumor biopsies. With a minimum follow-up of 45 months, the 5-year overall survival rate was 28.9% and the median duration of response was 20.6 months. Re-expression of immuno-modulatory endogenous retroviruses and of other repetitive elements, and a mechanistic signature of guadecitabine are associated with response. Integration of a genetic immunoediting index with an adaptive immunity signature stratifies patients/lesions into four distinct subsets and discriminates 5-year overall survival and progression free survival. These results suggest that coupling genetic immunoediting with activation of adaptive immunity is a relevant requisite for achieving long term clinical benefit by epigenetic immunomodulation in advanced melanoma patients.

Immunotherapy of mesothelioma: the evolving change of a long-standing therapeutic dream.

Pleural mesothelioma (PM) is an aggressive and rare disease, characterized by a very poor prognosis. For almost two decades, the world standard treatment regimen for unresectable PM has consisted of a platinum-based drug plus pemetrexed, leading to an overall survival of approximately 12 months. The dramatic therapeutic scenario of PM has recently changed with the entry into the clinic of immune checkpoint inhibition, which has proven to be an effective approach to improve the survival of PM patients. The aim of the present review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the most promising immunotherapeutic-based strategies currently under investigation for advanced PM.

Landscape of immune-related signatures induced by targeting of different epigenetic regulators in melanoma: implications for immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Improvement of efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) remains a major clinical goal. Association of ICB with immunomodulatory epigenetic drugs is an option. However, epigenetic inhibitors show a heterogeneous landscape of activities. Analysis of transcriptional programs induced in neoplastic cells by distinct classes of epigenetic drugs may foster identification of the most promising agents. METHODS: Melanoma cell lines, characterized for mutational and differentiation profile, were treated with inhibitors of DNA methyltransferases (guadecitabine), histone deacetylases (givinostat), BET proteins (JQ1 and OTX-015), and enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (GSK126). Modulatory effects of epigenetic drugs were evaluated at the gene and protein levels. Master molecules explaining changes in gene expression were identified by Upstream Regulator (UR) analysis. Gene set enrichment and IPA were used respectively to test modulation of guadecitabine-specific gene and UR signatures in baseline and on-treatment tumor biopsies from melanoma patients in the Phase Ib NIBIT-M4 Guadecitabine + Ipilimumab Trial. Prognostic significance of drug-specific immune-related genes was tested with Timer 2.0 in TCGA tumor datasets. RESULTS: Epigenetic drugs induced different profiles of gene expression in melanoma cell lines. Immune-related genes were frequently upregulated by guadecitabine, irrespective of the mutational and differentiation profiles of the melanoma cell lines, to a lesser extent by givinostat, but mostly downregulated by JQ1 and OTX-015. GSK126 was the least active drug. Quantitative western blot analysis confirmed drug-specific modulatory profiles. Most of the guadecitabine-specific signature genes were upregulated in on-treatment NIBIT-M4 tumor biopsies, but not in on-treatment lesions of patients treated only with ipilimumab. A guadecitabine-specific UR signature, containing activated molecules of the TLR, NF-kB, and IFN innate immunity pathways, was induced in drug-treated melanoma, mesothelioma and hepatocarcinoma cell lines and in a human melanoma xenograft model. Activation of guadecitabine-specific UR signature molecules in on-treatment tumor biopsies discriminated responding from non-responding NIBIT-M4 patients. Sixty-five % of the immune-related genes upregulated by guadecitabine were prognostically significant and conferred a reduced risk in the TCGA cutaneous melanoma dataset. CONCLUSIONS: The DNMT inhibitor guadecitabine emerged as the most promising immunomodulatory agent among those tested, supporting the rationale for usage of this class of epigenetic drugs in combinatorial immunotherapy approaches.

A novel microRNA signature for the detection of melanoma by liquid biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma is the deadliest form of skin cancer and metastatic disease is associated with a significant survival rate drop. There is an urgent need for consistent tumor biomarkers to scale precision medicine and reduce cancer mortality. Here, we aimed to identify a melanoma-specific circulating microRNA signature and assess its value as a diagnostic tool. METHODS: The study consisted of a discovery phase and two validation phases. Circulating plasma extracellular vesicles (pEV) associated microRNA profiles were obtained from a discovery cohort of metastatic melanoma patients and normal subjects as controls. A pEV-microRNA signature was obtained using a LASSO penalized logistic regression model. The pEV-microRNA signature was subsequently validated both in a publicly available dataset and in an independent internal cohort. RESULTS: We identified and validated in three independent cohorts a panel of melanoma-specific circulating microRNAs that showed high accuracy in differentiating melanoma patients from healthy subjects with an area under the curve (AUC) of 1.00, 0.94 and 0.75 respectively. Investigation of the function of the pEV-microRNA signature evidenced their possible immune suppressive role in melanoma patients. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that a blood test based on circulating microRNAs can non-invasively detect melanoma, offering a novel diagnostic tool for improving standard care. Moreover, we revealed an immune suppressive role for melanoma pEV-microRNAs.

The pleiotropic roles of circular and long noncoding RNAs in cutaneous melanoma.

Cutaneous melanoma (CM) is a very aggressive disease, often characterized by unresponsiveness to conventional therapies and high mortality rates worldwide. The identification of the activating BRAFV600 mutations in approximately 50% of CM patients has recently fueled the development of novel small-molecule inhibitors that specifically target BRAFV600 -mutant CM. In addition, a major progress in CM treatment has been made by monoclonal antibodies that regulate the immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, although target-based therapies and immunotherapeutic strategies have yielded promising results, CM treatment remains a major challenge. In the last decade, accumulating evidence points to the aberrant expression of different types of noncoding RNAs (ncRNAs) in CM. While studies on microRNAs have grown exponentially leading to significant insights on CM biology, the role of circular RNAs (circRNAs) and long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) in this tumor is less understood, and much remains to be discovered. Here, we summarize and critically review the available evidence on the molecular functions of circRNAs and lncRNAs in BRAFV600 -mutant CM and CM immunogenicity, providing recent updates on their functional role in targeted therapy and immunotherapy resistance. In addition, we also include an evaluation of several algorithms and databases for prediction and validation of circRNA and lncRNA functional interactions.

Epigenetic Immune Remodeling of Mesothelioma Cells: A New Strategy to Improve the Efficacy of Immunotherapy.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive malignancy with a severe prognosis, and with a long-standing need for more effective therapeutic approaches. However, treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors is becoming an increasingly effective strategy for MPM patients. In this scenario, epigenetic modifications may negatively regulate the interplay between immune and malignant cells within the tumor microenvironment, thus contributing to the highly immunosuppressive contexture of MPM that may limit the efficacy of immunotherapy. Aiming to further improve prospectively the clinical efficacy of immunotherapeutic approaches in MPM, we investigated the immunomodulatory potential of different classes of epigenetic drugs (i.e., DNA hypomethylating agent (DHA) guadecitabine, histone deacetylase inhibitors VPA and SAHA, or EZH2 inhibitors EPZ-6438) in epithelioid, biphasic, and sarcomatoid MPM cell lines, by cytofluorimetric and real-time PCR analyses. We also characterized the effects of the DHA, guadecitabine, on the gene expression profiles (GEP) of the investigated MPM cell lines by the nCounter platform. Among investigated drugs, exposure of MPM cells to guadecitabine, either alone or in combination with VPA, SAHA and EPZ-6438 demonstrated to be the main driver of the induction/upregulation of immune molecules functionally crucial in host-tumor interaction (i.e., HLA class I, ICAM-1 and cancer testis antigens) in all three MPM subtypes investigated. Additionally, GEP demonstrated that treatment with guadecitabine led to the activation of genes involved in several immune-related functional classes mainly in the sarcomatoid subtype. Furthermore, among investigated MPM subtypes, DHA-induced CDH1 expression that contributes to restoring the epithelial phenotype was highest in sarcomatoid cells. Altogether, our results contribute to providing the rationale to develop new epigenetically-based immunotherapeutic approaches for MPM patients, potentially tailored to the specific histologic subtypes.

COVID and Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Since the past year, the fast spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has represented a global health threat, especially for cancer patients, that has required an urgent reorganization of clinical activities. Here, we will critically revise the profound impact that the pandemic has generated in lung cancer patients, as well the most significant challenges that oncologists have to face to maintain the highest possible standards in the management of lung cancer patients in the pandemic era. RECENT FINDINGS: Evidences suggested a higher susceptibility and mortality of lung cancer patients due to COVID-19. The hard management of this patient population has been also due to the potential cross interference of anti-tumor drugs on SARS-Cov-2 infection and to the differential diagnosis between COVID-19 pneumonitis and drug-related pneumonitis. COVID-19 pandemic has generated a profound reshaping of oncological activities and the development of recommendations by the oncology scientific community to prioritize anti-tumor treatments for lung cancer patients.

A vision of immuno-oncology: the Siena think tank of the Italian network for tumor biotherapy (NIBIT) foundation.

BACKGROUND: The yearly Think Tank Meeting of the Italian Network for Tumor Biotherapy (NIBIT) Foundation, brings together in Siena, Tuscany (Italy), experts in immuno-oncology to review the learnings from current immunotherapy treatments, and to propose new pre-clinical and clinical investigations in selected research areas. MAIN: While immunotherapies in non-small cell lung cancer and melanoma led to practice changing therapies, the same therapies had only modest benefit for patients with other malignancies, such as mesothelioma and glioblastoma. One way to improve on current immunotherapies is to alter the sequence of each combination agent. Matching the immunotherapy to the host's immune response may thus improve the activity of the current treatments. A second approach is to combine current immunotherapies with novel agents targeting complementary mechanisms. Identifying the appropriate novel agents may require different approaches than the traditional laboratory-based discovery work. For example, artificial intelligence-based research may help focusing the search for innovative and most promising combination partners. CONCLUSION: Novel immunotherapies are needed in cancer patients with resistance to or relapse after current immunotherapeutic drugs. Such new treatments may include targeted agents or monoclonal antibodies to overcome the immune-suppressive tumor microenvironment. The mode of combining the novel treatments, including vaccines, needs to be matched to the patient's immune status for achieving the maximum benefit. In this scenario, specific attention should be also paid nowadays to the immune intersection between COVID-19 and cancer.

Primary Analysis and 4-Year Follow-Up of the Phase III NIBIT-M2 Trial in Melanoma Patients With Brain Metastases.

PURPOSE: Phase II trials have shown encouraging activity with ipilimumab plus fotemustine and ipilimumab plus nivolumab in melanoma brain metastases. We report the primary analysis and 4-year follow-up of the NIBIT-M2 study, the first phase III trial comparing these regimens with fotemustine in patients with melanoma with brain metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase III study recruited patients 18 years of age and older with BRAF wild-type or mutant melanoma, and active, untreated, asymptomatic brain metastases from nine centers, randomized (1:1:1) to fotemustine, ipilimumab plus fotemustine, or ipilimumab plus nivolumab. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: From January, 2013 to September, 2018, 27, 26, and 27 patients received fotemustine, ipilimumab plus fotemustine, and ipilimumab plus nivolumab. Median OS was 8.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 4.8-12.2] in the fotemustine arm, 8.2 months (95% CI, 2.2-14.3) in the ipilimumab plus fotemustine arm (HR vs. fotemustine, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.59-1.99; P = 0.78), and 29.2 months (95% CI, 0-65.1) in the ipilimumab plus nivolumab arm (HR vs. fotemustine, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.22-0.87; P = 0.017). Four-year survival rate was significantly higher for ipilimumab plus nivolumab than fotemustine [(41.0%; 95% CI, 20.6-61.4) vs. 10.9% (95% CI, 0-24.4; P = 0.015)], and was 10.3% (95% CI, 0-22.6) for ipilimumab plus fotemustine. In the fotemustine, ipilimumab plus fotemustine, and ipilimumab plus nivolumab arms, respectively, 11 (48%), 18 (69%), and eight (30%) patients had treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events, without treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with fotemustine, ipilimumab plus nivolumab significantly improved overall and long-term survival of patients with melanoma with asymptomatic brain metastases.

Tremelimumab plus durvalumab retreatment and 4-year outcomes in patients with mesothelioma: a follow-up of the open label, non-randomised, phase 2 NIBIT-MESO-1 study.

BACKGROUND: The NIBIT-MESO-1 study demonstrated the efficacy and safety of tremelimumab combined with durvalumab in patient with unresectable mesothelioma followed up for a median of 52 months [IQR 49-53]. Here, we report 4-year survival and outcomes after retreatment, and the role of tumour mutational burden (TMB) in identifying patients who might have a better outcome in response to combined therapy. METHODS: NIBIT-MESO-1 was an open-label, non-randomised, phase 2 trial of patients with unresectable pleural or peritoneal mesothelioma who received intravenous tremelimumab (1 mg/kg bodyweight) and durvalumab (20 mg/kg bodyweight) every 4 weeks for four doses, followed by maintenance intravenous durvalumab at the same dose and schedule for nine doses. In this follow-up study, patients with disease progression following initial clinical benefit-ie, a partial repsonse or stable disease-were eligible for retreatment and with the same doses and schedules for tremelimumab and durvalumab as used in the NIBIT-MESO-1 trial. The primary endpoint, immune-related objective response rate, was evaluated per immune-related modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) or immune-related RECIST 1.1 criteria for patients with pleural or peritoneal malignant mesothelioma, respectively. Key secondary endpoints were overall survival and safety, and TMB was also evaluated post hoc in patients who had tumour tissue available before treatment. The intention-to-treat population was used for analysis of all efficacy endpoints. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02588131. FINDINGS: 40 patients were enrolled in the NIBIT-MESO-1 study between Oct 30, 2015, and Oct 12, 2016. At data cut-off, April 30, 2020, five (13%) of 40 patients were alive, and 35 (88%) patients had died of progressive disease. At a median follow-up of 52 months (IQR 49-53), median overall survival was 16·5 months (95% CI 13·7-19·2). Survival was 20% (eight of 40 patients) at 36 months and 15% (six of 40 patients) and 48 months. 17 (43%) of 40 patients met the criteria for enrolment in the retreatment study and were retreated with at least one dose of tremelimumab and durvalumab. No immune-related objective responses were observed in the 17 retreated patients. Seven (41%) of 17 patients achieved immune-related stable disease. From the start of retreatment to a median follow-up of 24 months (22·0-25·0), median overall survival was 12·5 months (95% CI 0·0-25·8), and survival at 12 months was 52·9%, at 18 months was 35·3%, and at 24 months was 23·5%. There were no grade 3-4 immune-related adverse events in the retreatment cohort. In a post-hoc analysis of 28 patients for whom tumour tissue before treatment was available, patients with a TMB higher than the median value of 8·3 mutations per Mb had a higher median overall survival compared with patients with TMB below the median value, but this difference was non-significant. Moreover, when patients were additionally stratified for ICI retreatment (n=13), there was a significant difference in survival between those with a TMB higher than the median of 8·3 mutations per Mb and those with TMB lower than the median in the retreated cohort (41·3 months vs 17·4 months; p=0·02). INTERPRETATION: Tremelimumab combined with durvalumab was associated with long-term survival in patients with mesothelioma. Retreatment was safe and resulted in clinically meaningful outcomes, thus suggesting its potential application in the clinical practice of mesothalioma patients. FUNDING: NIBIT Foundation, Fondazione AIRC, AstraZeneca.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Cancer Therapy in the COVID-19 Era.

The potential immune intersection between COVID-19 disease and cancer therapy raises important practical clinical questions and highlights multiple scientific gaps to be filled. Among available therapeutic approaches to be considered, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) seem to require major attention as they may act at the crossroads between cancer treatment and COVID-19 disease, due to their profound immunomodulatory activity. On the basis of available literature evidence, we suggest guidance to consider for treating physicians, and propose areas of clinical and preclinical investigation. Comprehensively, although with the necessary caution, ICI therapy seems to remain a suitable therapeutic option for patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Loss of Spry1 reduces growth of BRAFV600-mutant cutaneous melanoma and improves response to targeted therapy.

Mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway activation is a central step in BRAFV600-mutant cutaneous melanoma (CM) pathogenesis. In the last years, Spry1 has been frequently described as an upstream regulator of MAPK signaling pathway. However, its specific role in BRAFV600-mutant CM is still poorly defined. Here, we report that Spry1 knockdown (Spry1KO) in three BRAFV600-mutant CM cell lines markedly induced cell cycle arrest and apoptosis, repressed cell proliferation in vitro, and impaired tumor growth in vivo. Furthermore, our findings indicated that Spry1KO reduced the expression of several markers of epithelial-mesenchymal transition, such as MMP-2 both in vitro and in vivo. These effects were associated with a sustained and deleterious phosphorylation of ERK1/2. In addition, p38 activation along with an increase in basal ROS levels were found in Spry1KO clones compared to parental CM cell lines, suggesting that BRAFV600-mutant CM may restrain the activity of Spry1 to avoid oncogenic stress and to enable tumor growth. Consistent with this hypothesis, treatment with the BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) vemurafenib down-regulated Spry1 levels in parental CM cell lines, indicating that Spry1 expression is sustained by the MAPK/ERK signaling pathway in a positive feedback loop that safeguards cells from the potentially toxic effects of ERK1/2 hyperactivation. Disruption of this feedback loop rendered Spry1KO cells more susceptible to apoptosis and markedly improved response to BRAFi both in vitro and in vivo, as a consequence of the detrimental effect of ERK1/2 hyperactivation observed upon Spry1 abrogation. Therefore, targeting Spry1 might offer a treatment strategy for BRAFV600-mutant CM by inducing the toxic effects of ERK-mediated signaling.

Circulating Levels of PD-L1 in Mesothelioma Patients from the NIBIT-MESO-1 Study: Correlation with Survival.

Targeting of the programmed cell death protein (PD)-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) axis has shown a significant clinical impact in several tumor types. Accordingly, our phase II NIBIT-MESO-1 study demonstrated an improved clinical efficacy in mesothelioma patients treated with the anti-PD-L1 durvalumab combined with the anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen (CTLA)-4 tremelimumab, as compared to tremelimumab alone. Due to the promising therapeutic activity of immune check-point inhibitors (ICIs) in mesothelioma patients, the identification of biomarkers predictive of response to treatment is of crucial relevance. The prognostic role of soluble PD-L1 (sPD-L1) proposed in cancer patients prompted us to investigate this protein in sera from mesothelioma patients (n = 40) enrolled in the NIBIT-MESO-1 study. A significant (p < 0.001) increase in sPD-L1 levels was detected in patients after the first cycle and during therapy vs. baseline. A longer overall survival (OS) was observed in patients with sPD-L1 concentrations below (at baseline, d1C2, d1C5 (p < 0.01)) or FC values above (p < 0.05 at d1C2, d1C3, d1C5) their statistically calculated optimal cut-offs. On the basis of these initial results, the specific role of CTLA-4-, PD-L1-, or PD-1-targeting on sPD-L1 release was then investigated in sera from 81 additional ICI-treated solid cancer patients. Results showed a significant (p < 0.001) increase of sPD-L1 levels during therapy compared to baseline only in anti-PD-L1-treated patients, supporting the specific involvement of PD-L1 targeting in the release of its soluble form. Our findings suggest that sPD-L1 represents a predictive biomarker of clinical response to anti-PD-L1 cancer immunotherapy.

Immunotherapy of brain metastases: breaking a "dogma".

Until very few years ago, the oncology community dogmatically excluded any clinical potential for immunotherapy in controlling brain metastases. Therefore, despite the significant therapeutic efficacy of monoclonal antibodies to immune check-point(s) across a wide range of tumor types, patients with brain disease were invariably excluded from clinical trials with these agents. Recent insights on the immune landscape of the central nervous system, as well as of the brain tumor microenvironment, are shedding light on the immune-biology of brain metastases.Interestingly, retrospective analyses, case series, and initial prospective clinical trials have recently investigated the role of different immune check-point inhibitors in brain metastases, reporting a significant clinical activity also in this subset of patients. These findings, and their swift translation in the daily practice, are driving fundamental changes in the clinical management of patients with brain metastases, and raise important neuroradiologic challenges. Along this line, neuro-oncology undoubtedly represents an additional area of active investigation and of growing interest to support medical oncologists in the evaluation of clinical responses of brain metastases to ICI treatment, and in the management of neurologic immune-related adverse events.Aim of this review is to summarize the most recent findings on brain metastases immunobiology, on the evolving scenario of clinical efficacy of ICI therapy in patients with brain metastases, as well as on the increasing relevance of neuroradiology in this therapeutic setting.

Guadecitabine Plus Ipilimumab in Unresectable Melanoma: The NIBIT-M4 Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: The immunomodulatory activity of DNA hypomethylating agents (DHAs) suggests they may improve the effectiveness of cancer immunotherapies. The phase Ib NIBIT-M4 trial tested this hypothesis using the next-generation DHA guadecitabine combined with ipilimumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with unresectable stage III/IV melanoma received escalating doses of guadecitabine 30, 45, or 60 mg/m2/day subcutaneously on days 1 to 5 every 3 weeks, and ipilimumab 3 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks, starting 1 week after guadecitabine, for four cycles. Primary endpoints were safety, tolerability, and MTD of treatment; secondary were immune-related (ir) disease control rate (DCR) and objective response rate (ORR); and exploratory were changes in methylome, transcriptome, and immune contextures in sequential tumor biopsies, and pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were treated; 84% had grade 3/4 adverse events, and neither dose-limiting toxicities per protocol nor overlapping toxicities were observed. Ir-DCR and ir-ORR were 42% and 26%, respectively. Median CpG site methylation of tumor samples (n = 8) at week 4 (74.5%) and week 12 (75.5%) was significantly (P < 0.05) lower than at baseline (80.3%), with a median of 2,454 (week 4) and 4,131 (week 12) differentially expressed genes. Among the 136 pathways significantly (P < 0.05; Z score >2 or ←2) modulated by treatment, the most frequently activated were immune-related. Tumor immune contexture analysis (n = 11) demonstrated upregulation of HLA class I on melanoma cells, an increase in CD8+, PD-1+ T cells and in CD20+ B cells in posttreatment tumor cores. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of guadecitabine combined with ipilimumab is safe and tolerable in advanced melanoma and has promising immunomodulatory and antitumor activity.