LBA3 Treatment with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) versus ipilimumab for advanced melanoma: Results from a multicenter, randomized phase III trial

CRISPR-Cas9 applications in T cells and adoptive T cell therapies

T cell immunity is central to contemporary cancer and autoimmune therapies, encompassing immune checkpoint blockade and adoptive T cell therapies. Their diverse characteristics can be reprogrammed by different immune challenges dependent on antigen stimulation levels, metabolic conditions, and the degree of inflammation. T cell-based therapeutic strategies are gaining widespread adoption in oncology and treating inflammatory conditions. Emerging researches reveal that clustered regularly interspaced palindromic repeats-associated protein 9 (CRISPR-Cas9) genome editing has enabled T cells to be more adaptable to specific microenvironments, opening the door to advanced T cell therapies in preclinical and clinical trials. CRISPR-Cas9 can edit both primary T cells and engineered T cells, including CAR-T and TCR-T, in vivo and in vitro to regulate T cell differentiation and activation states. This review first provides a comprehensive summary of the role of CRISPR-Cas9 in T cells and its applications in preclinical and clinical studies for T cell-based therapies. We also explore the application of CRISPR screen high-throughput technology in editing T cells and anticipate the current limitations of CRISPR-Cas9, including off-target effects and delivery challenges, and envisioned improvements in related technologies for disease screening, diagnosis, and treatment.

Adoptive cell transfer therapy with ex vivo primed peripheral lymphocytes in combination with anti-PDL1 therapy effectively inhibits triple-negative breast cancer growth and metastasis

BACKGROUND

Adoptive cell transfer cancer immunotherapy holds promise for treating disseminated disease, yet generating sufficient numbers of lymphocytes with anti-cancer activity against diverse specificities remains a major challenge. We recently developed a novel procedure (ALECSAT) for selecting, expanding and maturating polyclonal lymphocytes from peripheral blood with the capacity to target malignant cells.

METHODS

Immunodeficient mice were challenged with triple-negative breast cancer cell lines or patient-derived xenografts (PDX) and treated with allogeneic or autologous ALECSAT cells with and without anti-PDL1 therapy to assess the capacity of ALECSAT cells to inhibit primary tumor growth and metastasis.

RESULTS

ALECSAT mono therapy inhibited metastasis, but did not inhibit primary tumor growth or prolong survival of tumor-bearing mice. In contrast, combined ALECSAT and anti-PDL1 therapy significantly inhibited primary tumor growth, nearly completely blocked metastasis, and prolonged survival of tumor-bearing mice.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined ALECSAT and anti-PDL1 therapy results in favorable anti-cancer responses in both cell line-derived xenograft and autologous PDX models of advanced triple-negative breast cancer.

Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, version 3.0

Since the first approval for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of cutaneous melanoma more than a decade ago, immunotherapy has completely transformed the treatment landscape of this chemotherapy-resistant disease. Combination regimens including ICIs directed against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) with anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) agents or, more recently, anti-lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) agents, have gained regulatory approvals for the treatment of metastatic cutaneous melanoma, with long-term follow-up data suggesting the possibility of cure for some patients with advanced disease. In the resectable setting, adjuvant ICIs prolong recurrence-free survival, and neoadjuvant strategies are an active area of investigation. Other immunotherapy strategies, such as oncolytic virotherapy for injectable cutaneous melanoma and bispecific T-cell engager therapy for HLA-A*02:01 genotype-positive uveal melanoma, are also available to patients. Despite the remarkable efficacy of these regimens for many patients with cutaneous melanoma, traditional immunotherapy biomarkers (ie, programmed death-ligand 1 expression, tumor mutational burden, T-cell infiltrate and/or microsatellite stability) have failed to reliably predict response. Furthermore, ICIs are associated with unique toxicity profiles, particularly for the highly active combination of anti-PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4 agents. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a panel of experts to develop this clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, including rare subtypes of the disease (eg, uveal, mucosal), with the goal of improving patient care by providing guidance to the oncology community. Drawing from published data and clinical experience, the Expert Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for healthcare professionals using immunotherapy to treat melanoma, with topics including therapy selection in the advanced and perioperative settings, intratumoral immunotherapy, when to use immunotherapy for patients with BRAFV600-mutated disease, management of patients with brain metastases, evaluation of treatment response, special patient populations, patient education, quality of life, and survivorship, among others.

The Landscape of Adoptive Cellular Therapies in Ovarian Cancer

Ovarian cancers are typically poorly immunogenic and have demonstrated disappointing responses to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. Adoptive cellular therapy (ACT) offers an alternative method of harnessing the immune system that has shown promise, especially with the success of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy in haematologic malignancies. So far, ACT has led to modest results in the treatment of solid organ malignancies. This review explores the possibility of ACT as an effective alternative or additional treatment to current standards of care in ovarian cancer. We will highlight the potential of ACTs, such as CAR-T, T-cell receptor therapy (TCR-T), tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and cell-based vaccines, whilst also discussing their challenges. We will present clinical studies for these approaches in the treatment of immunologically 'cold' ovarian cancer and consider the rationale for future research.

MDM2 Inhibition Enhances Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Efficacy by Increasing IL15 and MHC Class II Production

The treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) leads to impressive response rates but primary and secondary resistance to ICI reduces progression-free survival. Novel strategies that interfere with resistance mechanisms are key to further improve patient outcome during ICI therapy. P53 is often inactivated by mouse-double-minute-2 (MDM2), which may decrease immunogenicity of melanoma cells. We analyzed primary patient-derived melanoma cell lines, performed bulk sequencing analysis of patient-derived melanoma samples, and used melanoma mouse models to investigate the role of MDM2-inhibition for enhanced ICI therapy. We found increased expression of IL15 and MHC-II in murine melanoma cells upon p53 induction by MDM2-inhibition. MDM2-inhibitor induced MHC-II and IL15-production, which was p53 dependent as Tp53 knockdown blocked the effect. Lack of IL15-receptor in hematopoietic cells or IL15 neutralization reduced the MDM2-inhibition/p53-induction-mediated antitumor immunity. P53 induction by MDM2-inhibition caused anti-melanoma immune memory as T cells isolated from MDM2-inhibitor-treated melanoma-bearing mice exhibited anti-melanoma activity in secondary melanoma-bearing mice. In patient-derived melanoma cells p53 induction by MDM2-inhibition increased IL15 and MHC-II. IL15 and CIITA expressions were associated with a more favorable prognosis in patients bearing WT but not TP53-mutated melanoma.

IMPLICATIONS

MDM2-inhibition represents a novel strategy to enhance IL15 and MHC-II-production, which disrupts the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. On the basis of our findings, a clinical trial combining MDM2-inhibition with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy for metastatic melanoma is planned.

Immunotherapy for Metastatic Triple Negative Breast Cancer: Current Paradigm and Future Approaches

OPINION STATEMENT

In approximately 15-20% of the patients diagnosed with breast cancer, it comprises the triple negative (TN) subtype, which until recently lacked targets for specific treatments and is known for its aggressive clinical behavior in patients with metastatic disease. TNBC is considered the most immunogenic breast cancer subtype due to higher levels of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), tumor mutational burden and PD-L1 expression, providing a rationale for immunotherapy. The addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy as first-line treatment resulted in significantly improved PFS and OS for PD-L1 positive mTNBC, leading to FDA approval. However, response rate of ICB in unselected patients is low. Ongoing (pre)clinical trials aim to further optimize ICB efficacy and widen its application beyond PD-L1 positive breast tumors. Novel immunomodulatory approaches to induce a more inflamed tumor microenvironment include dual checkpoint blockade, bispecific antibodies, immunocytokines, adoptive cell therapies, oncolytic viruses, and cancer vaccines. Preclinical data for these novel strategies seems promising, but solid clinical data to further support its application for mTNBC is awaited. Biomarkers capturing the degree of immunogenicity such as but not limited to TILs, CD8 T cell levels, and IFNg signatures could support deciding which therapeutic strategy is most appropriate for which patient. Given 1) the accumulating therapy options for patients with metastatic disease and 2) the heterogeneity of mTNBC from inflamed to immune-desert tumors, the challenge is to work towards immunomodulatory strategies for specific subgroups of patients with TNBC to enable personalized (immuno)therapy for patients with metastatic disease.

Highlights into historical and current immune interventions for cancer

Immunotherapy is an additional pillar when combined with traditional standards of care such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery for cancer patients. It has revolutionized cancer treatment and rejuvenated the field of tumor immunology. Several types of immunotherapies, including adoptive cellular therapy (ACT) and checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs), can induce durable clinical responses. However, their efficacies vary, and only subsets of cancer patients benefit from their use. In this review, we address three goals: to provide insight into the history of these approaches, broaden our understanding of immune interventions, and discuss current and future approaches. We highlight how cancer immunotherapy has evolved and discuss how personalization of immune intervention may address present limitations. Cancer immunotherapy is considered a recent medical achievement and in 2013 was selected as the "Breakthrough of the Year" by Science. While the breadth of immunotherapeutics has been rapidly expanding, to include the use of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy, immunotherapy dates back over 3000 years. The expansive history of immunotherapy, and related observations, have resulted in several approved immune therapeutics beyond the recent emphasis on CAR-T and ICI therapies. In addition to other classical forms of immune intervention, including human papillomavirus (HPV), hepatitis B, and the Mycobacterium bovis Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) tuberculosis vaccines, immunotherapies have had a broad and durable impact on cancer therapy and prevention. One classic example of immunotherapy was identified in 1976 with the use of intravesical administration of BCG in patients with bladder cancer; resulting in a 70 % eradication rate and is now standard of care. However, a greater impact from the use of immunotherapy is documented by the prevention of HPV infections that are responsible for 98 % of cervical cancer cases. In 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that 341,831 women died from cervical cancer [1]. However, administration of a single dose of a bivalent HPV vaccine was shown to be 97.5 % effective in preventing HPV infections. These vaccines not only prevent cervical squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma, but also oropharyngeal, anal, vulvar, vaginal, and penile squamous cell carcinomas. The breadth, response and durability of these vaccines can be contrasted with CAR-T-cell therapies, which have significant barriers to their widespread use including logistics, manufacturing limitations, toxicity concerns, financial burden and lasting remissions observed in only 30 to 40 % of responding patients. Another, recent immunotherapy focus are ICIs. ICIs are a class of antibodies that can increase the immune responses against cancer cells in patients. However, ICIs are only effective against tumors with a high mutational burden and are associated with a broad spectrum of toxicities requiring interruption of administration and/or administration corticosteroids; both of which limit immune therapy. In summary, immune therapeutics have a broad impact worldwide, utilizing numerous mechanisms of action and when considered in their totality are more effective against a broader range of tumors than initially considered. These new cancer interventions have tremendous potential notability when multiple mechanisms of immune intervention are combined as well as with standard of care modalities.

Treatment of Recurrent Melanoma Following Adjuvant Therapy

In the era of effective therapies in melanoma, notably the widespread use of two types of adjuvant treatments: anti-PD-1 immunotherapies and therapies targeting the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway, for BRAF-mutant patients, an important question arises about how to treat these patients in case of recurrent melanoma following adjuvant therapy. Prospective data are lacking in this area and might be difficult to obtain due to the constant progress being made in the field. Therefore, we reviewed available data suggesting that the initial adjuvant treatment received and the following events provide information about the biology of the disease and the probability of response to following systemic treatments. Thus, in case of relapse during or just after adjuvant anti-PD-1, immune resistance is probable, an anti-PD-1 monotherapy rechallenge has a low likelihood of clinical benefit, and escalation with a combination of immunotherapies should be given priority. In case of relapse during treatment with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors, there may be a risk of lower efficacy of immunotherapy than in naïve patients since this relapse attests not only to a resistance to BRAF-MEK inhibition, but also the introduction of immunotherapy to rescue a progression on targeted therapy. In case of relapse long after adjuvant treatment cessation, whatever the treatment received, no conclusion can be drawn about the efficacy of these drugs, and these patients can be treated like naïve patients. Thus, a combination of anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA4 is probably the best solution, and the following line can be BRAF-MEK inhibitors in BRAF-mutated patients. Finally, in case of recurrent melanoma following adjuvant therapy, given the promising upcoming strategies, inclusion in a clinical trial should be offered as frequently as possible.

Immunotherapy in Melanoma: Recent Advances and Future Directions

The use of immunotherapy in the treatment of advanced and high-risk melanoma has led to a striking improvement in outcomes. Although the incidence of melanoma has continued to rise, median survival has improved from approximately 6 months to nearly 6 years for patients with advanced inoperable stage IV disease. Recent understanding of the tumor microenvironment and its interplay with the immune system has led to the explosive development of novel immunotherapy treatments. Since the approval of the therapeutic cytokines interleukin-2 and interferon alfa-2 in the 1990s, the development of novel immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), oncolytic virus therapy, and modulators of the tumor microenvironment have given way to a new era in melanoma treatment. Monoclonal antibodies directed at programmed cell death protein 1 receptor (PD-1) and its ligand (PDL-1), cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), and lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) have provided robust activation of the adaptive immune system, restoring immune surveillance leading to host tumor recognition and destruction. Multiple other immunomodulatory therapeutics are under investigation to overcome resistance to ICI therapy, including the toll-like receptor-9 (TLR-9) and 7/8 (TLR-7/8) agonists, stimulator of interferon genes (STING) agonists, and fecal microbiota transplantation. In this review, we focus on the recent advances in immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma and provide an update on novel therapies currently under investigation.

Mechanisms of resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors in melanoma: What we have to overcome?

Marching into the second decade after the approval of ipilimumab, it is clear that immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have dramatically improved the prognosis of melanoma. Although the current edge is already high, with a 4-year OS% of 77.9% for adjuvant nivolumab and a 6.5-year OS% of 49% for nivolumab/ipilimumab combination in the metastatic setting, a high proportion of patients with advanced melanoma have no benefit from immunotherapy, or experience an early disease relapse/progression in the first few months of treatment, surviving much less. Reasonably, the primary and acquired resistance to ICIs has entered into the focus of clinical research with positive (e.g., nivolumab and relatlimab combination) and negative feedbacks (e.g., nivolumab with pegylated-IL2, pembrolizumab with T-VEC, nivolumab with epacadostat, and combinatorial triplets of BRAF/MEK inhibitors with immunotherapy). Many intrinsic (intracellular or intra-tumoral) but also extrinsic (systematic) events are considered to be involved in the development of this resistance to ICIs: i) melanoma cell immunogenicity (e.g., tumor mutational burden, antigen-processing machinery and immunogenic cell death, neoantigen affinity and heterogeneity, genomic instability, melanoma dedifferentiation and phenotypic plasticity), ii) immune cell trafficking, T-cell priming, and cell death evasion, iii) melanoma neovascularization, cellular TME components(e.g., T_regs, CAFs) and extracellular matrix modulation, iv) metabolic antagonism in the TME(highly glycolytic status, upregulated CD39/CD73/adenosine pathway, iDO-dependent tryptophan catabolism), v) T-cell exhaustion and negative immune checkpoints, and vi) gut microbiota. In the present overview, we discuss how these parameters compromise the efficacy of ICIs, with an emphasis on the lessons learned by the latest melanoma studies; and in parallel, we describe the main ongoing approaches to overcome the resistance to immunotherapy. Summarizing this information will improve the understanding of how these complicated dynamics contribute to immune escape and will help to develop more effective strategies on how anti-tumor immunity can surpass existing barriers of ICI-refractory melanoma.

Immunotherapy in Melanoma: Highlights for the General Practitioner

Melanoma is the most aggressive skin cancer, and surgery is the standard of care for localised disease. However, a risk of local and distant relapse exists despite tumour removal, particularly with thick or ulcerated tumours or lymph node involvement. Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting PD-1, PD-L-1 or CTLA-4 demonstrated improved relapse-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival against placebo after surgery for stage-III and high-risk stage-II melanoma. In unresectable localised and metastatic tumours, the double immunotherapy with ICIs (anti-PD-1+ anti-CTLA-4) allows for long-term survival in more than 50% of the patients. Novel immunotherapies (anti-LAG-3 ICI, adoptive cell therapy, intra-tumoural immunotherapy, cancer vaccines) and new combinations are in development to overcome resistance and improve patients' survival. Therapeutic decisions for each patient should be discussed in a specialised multidisciplinary team.

Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes for treatment of solid tumors: It takes two to tango?

Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), frontline soldiers of the adaptive immune system, are recruited into the tumor site to fight against tumors. However, their small number and reduced activity limit their ability to overcome the tumor. Enhancement of TILs number and activity against tumors has been of interest for a long time. A lack of knowledge about the tumor microenvironment (TME) has limited success in primary TIL therapies. Although the advent of engineered T cells has revolutionized the immunotherapy methods of hematologic cancers, the heterogeneity of solid tumors warrants the application of TILs with a wide range of specificity. Recent advances in understanding TME, immune exhaustion, and immune checkpoints have paved the way for TIL therapy regimens. Nowadays, TIL therapy has regained attention as a safe personalized immunotherapy, and currently, several clinical trials are evaluating the efficacy of TIL therapy in patients who have failed conventional immunotherapies. Gaining favorable outcomes following TIL therapy of patients with metastatic melanoma, cervical cancer, ovarian cancer, and breast cancer has raised hope in patients with refractory solid tumors, too. Nevertheless, TIL therapy procedures face several challenges, such as high cost, timely expansion, and technical challenges in selecting and activating the cells. Herein, we reviewed the recent advances in the TIL therapy of solid tumors and discussed the challenges and perspectives.