Evaluation of atezolizumab immunogenicity: Efficacy and safety (Part 2)

IQ Survey Results on Current Industry Practices: Part 2-Quantitative Evaluations of Immunogenicity Assessment

All biotherapeutics have the potential to induce an immunogenic response and generate anti-drug antibodies (ADAs), especially when administered as multiple doses over prolonged periods. However, a clinically meaningful effect of ADAs can be difficult to identify to communicate the impact of immunogenicity on drug exposure, safety and efficacy outcomes in product labels in a way that is useful for health care providers. The immunogenicity working Group, IQ Consortium (Clinical Pharmacology Leadership Group) has conducted a survey to understand the current practices in analyzing immunogenicity data generated during clinical development and its impact on pharmacokinetics, clinically relevant pharmacodynamic biomarkers, safety, and efficacy outcome measures. Information was collected for 93 drugs, spanning multiple drug classes and over the different phases of clinical development, including post-approval. The predominant drug classes reported included monoclonal antibodies or Fc-fusion proteins, endogenous protein replacement therapies, bispecific antibodies, and antibody-drug conjugates. The extent of quantitative evaluation varied and was influenced by several factors, including descriptive analyses, statistical approaches, and modeling. In addition to understanding current practices, this survey also highlights areas for future exploration in analyzing clinical relevance of ADAs which can facilitate the use for regulatory submissions and product labels.

Interplay between pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity of therapeutic proteins: stepwise development of a bidirectional joint pharmacokinetics-anti-drug antibodies model

The aim of the analysis was to develop a phenomenological longitudinal population pharmacokinetics (PK)-anti-drug antibodies (ADA) model to enable an informed and quantitative framework for assessment of ADA influence. Data used were from seven clinical studies of avelumab across drug development phases in patients with several tumor types. ADA as covariate in a population PK model, and Markov models of ADA status (ADA+ or ADA-) were investigated. Finally, a joint PK-ADA model was developed. In the population PK models that evaluated ADA as a covariate, the clearance increase attributable to ADA+ status was 8.5% (time-varying ADA) to 19.9% (time-invariant ADA with inter-occasion variability in clearance). With a discrete-time Markov model (DTMM), tumor type was identified as a significant covariate on the probability of ADA- to ADA+ transition. When ADA time course predicted by the DTMM model was implemented as a covariate in the population PK model, an increase in avelumab clearance of 11-41% was estimated depending on tumor type. With a continuous-time Markov model (CTMM), in addition to tumor type, baseline ADA status was identified to significantly influence the ADA- to ADA+ transition rate constant. The joint PK-CTMM model estimated the maximal increase in CL due to ADA as 15% and a decrease in ADA- to ADA+ transition rate of up to 37% with increasing avelumab concentration, with 50% of the maximum decrease occurring at 349 µg/mL. The present work established a framework for the assessment of interactions between PK and immunogenicity for therapeutic proteins.

A single point mutation on FLT3L-Fc protein increases the risk of immunogenicity

Introduction

As a crucial asset for human health and modern medicine, an increasing number of biotherapeutics are entering the clinic. However, due to their complexity, these drugs have a higher potential to be immunogenic, leading to the generation of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs). Clinically significant ADAs have an impact on pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), effectiveness, and/or safety. Thus, it is crucial to understand, manage and minimize the immunogenicity potential during drug development, ideally starting from the molecule design stage.

Methods

In this study, we utilized various immunogenicity risk assessment methods, including in silico prediction, dendritic cell internalization, MHC-associated peptide proteomics, in vitro HLA peptide binding, and in vitro T cell proliferation, to assess the immunogenicity risk of FLT3L-Fc variants.

Results

We identified a single point mutation in the human FLT3L-Fc protein that introduced highly immunogenic T cell epitopes, leading to the induction of T cell responses and thereby increasing the immunogenicity risk in clinical settings. Consequently, the variant with this point mutation was removed from further consideration as a clinical candidate.

Discussion

This finding underscores the necessity for careful evaluation of mutations during the engineering of protein therapeutics. The integration of multiple immunogenicity risk assessment tools offers critical insights for informed decision-making in candidate sequence design and therapeutic lead selection.

Immunogenicity dynamics and covariate effects after satralizumab administration predicted with a hidden Markov model

Immunogenicity is the propensity of a therapeutic protein to generate an immune response to itself. While reporting of antidrug antibodies (ADAs) is increasing, model-based analysis of such data is seldom performed. Model-based characterization of factors affecting the emergence and dissipation of ADAs may inform drug development and/or improve understanding in clinical practice. This analysis aimed to predict ADA dynamics, including the potential influence of individual covariates, following subcutaneous satralizumab administration. Satralizumab is a humanized IgG2 monoclonal recycling IL-6 receptor antagonist antibody approved for treating neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD). Longitudinal pharmacokinetic (PK) and ADA data from 154 NMOSD patients in two pivotal Phase 3 studies (NCT02028884, NCT02073279) and PK data from one Phase 1 study (SA-001JP) in 72 healthy volunteers were available for this analysis. An existing population PK model was adapted to derive steady-state concentration without ADA for each patient. A mixed hidden Markov model (mHMM) was developed whereby three different states were identified: one absorbing Markov state for non-ADA developer, and two dynamic and inter-connected Markov states-transient ADA negative and positive. Satralizumab exposure and body mass index impacted transition probabilities and, therefore, the likelihood of developing ADAs. In conclusion, the mHMM model was able to describe the time course of ADA development and identify patterns of ADA development in NMOSD patients following treatment with satralizumab, which may allow for the formulation of strategies to reduce the emergence or limit the impact of ADA in the clinical setting.

Immunogenicity of Atezolizumab: Influence of Testing Method and Sampling Frequency on Reported Anti-drug Antibody Incidence Rates

Measurement of anti-drug antibodies (ADA) to assess the incidence of ADA in a clinical trial is a critical step in immunogenicity assessment during the development of a protein therapeutic. We developed novel graphical approaches to illustrate clinical trial ADA data for the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab (Tecentriq) that included a systematic analysis of the impact of the timing of ADA sampling and ADA assay drug tolerance on reported ADA incidence. We found that approaches used across the industry for ADA incidence analysis provide a limited view of immunogenicity in oncology studies, where ADA detection may be confounded by both drug dosage and patient attrition. Moreover, these approaches can miss important temporal information about the immune response. Our results demonstrated that the methodology of ADA assessment for the atezolizumab program was specifically designed to capture most ADA responses to ensure accurate reporting of ADA incidence. We further showed that the use of sparse sampling and/or ADA test methods with insufficient drug tolerance may result in a significant underreporting of ADA incidence. We conclude that the comparison of ADA incidence between different drugs can be highly misleading and that a test method with appropriate sensitivity in the presence of the drug and a clinical sampling scheme that is aligned with ADA responses to a drug is required to accurately report ADA incidence.

Real-World Pharmacokinetics, Effectiveness, and Safety of Atezolizumab in Patients With Unresectable Advanced or Recurrent NSCLC: An Exploratory Study of J-TAIL

Introduction

This study validated real-world pharmacokinetic (PK) data using an established population PK (PopPK) model for atezolizumab in Japanese patients with NSCLC and explored the relationship between PK parameters, effectiveness, and adverse events (AEs) for the 1200 mg once every three weeks regimen.

Methods

A subgroup of 262 of 1039 patients from J-TAIL consented to this exploratory research for PK evaluation of atezolizumab monotherapy for unresectable advanced/recurrent NSCLC (August 2018 to October 2019; 197 institutions). We evaluated plasma concentrations before the start of the third cycle of atezolizumab infusion classified into quartiles 1 to 4, their association with effectiveness, and the association between atezolizumab maximum plasma concentrations (Cmax) calculated using the existing PopPK model and AEs of special interest (AESIs).

Results

Overall, 175 of 262 patients were included; baseline characteristics were similar to those of patients enrolled in J-TAIL (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 2, 12.0%; age ≥ 75 y, 28.9%; atezolizumab as more than or equal to third-line treatment, 57.5%). Atezolizumab plasma concentrations were similar to previously reported data among Japanese/non-Japanese patients. The overall survival was significantly shorter in patients with lower atezolizumab plasma concentrations in Q1 versus Q2 to Q4, although progression-free survival remained the same. The PK data adequately fit the PopPK model, with the frequency of AESIs increasing as the calculated Cmax at cycle 1 increased.

Conclusions

In real-world Japanese patients with unresectable advanced/recurrent NSCLC, PKs were similar to previous reports. Certain patient populations had shorter overall survival, and atezolizumab plasma concentrations in cycle 3 were lower in this population. Elevated Cmax at cycle 1 may be associated with an increased frequency of AESIs.

Polymer-based antibody mimetics (iBodies) target human PD-L1 and function as a potent immune checkpoint blocker

Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) using monoclonal antibodies against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) is the treatment of choice for cancer immunotherapy. However, low tissue permeability, immunogenicity, immune-related adverse effects, and high cost could be possibly improved using alternative approaches. On the other hand, synthetic low-molecular-weight (LMW) PD-1/PD-L1 blockers have failed to progress beyond in vitro studies, mostly due to low binding affinity or poor pharmacological characteristics resulting from their limited solubility and/or stability. Here, we report the development of polymer-based anti-human PD-L1 antibody mimetics (α-hPD-L1 iBodies) by attaching the macrocyclic peptide WL12 to a N-(2-hydroxypropyl)methacrylamide copolymer. We characterized the binding properties of iBodies using surface plasmon resonance, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, flow cytometry, confocal microscopy, and a cellular ICB model. We found that the α-hPD-L1 iBodies specifically target human PD-L1 (hPD-L1) and block the PD-1/PD-L1 interaction in vitro, comparable to the atezolizumab, durvalumab, and avelumab licensed monoclonal antibodies targeting PD-L1. Our findings suggest that iBodies can be used as experimental tools to target hPD-L1 and could serve as a platform to potentiate the therapeutic effect of hPD-L1-targeting small molecules by improving their affinity and pharmacokinetic properties.

Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Tiragolumab in First-in-Human Study in Patients with Mixed Solid Tumors (GO30103)

Tiragolumab is a first-in-class, fully human IgG1/kappa anti-TIGIT monoclonal antibody that blocks the binding of TIGIT to CD155 (the poliovirus receptor). We summarize the pharmacokinetics (PK) data from the phase 1a/1b GO30103 study of Q3W (every 3 weeks) sequential dosing of tiragolumab (2, 8, 30, 100, 400, 600, or 1200 mg) followed by atezolizumab (1200 mg), Q4W (every 4 weeks) sequential dosing (tiragolumab 840 mg followed by atezolizumab 1680 mg), and Q4W co-infusion (tiragolumab 840 mg plus atezolizumab 1680 mg). Serum samples were collected at multiple time points following tiragolumab and atezolizumab intravenous infusion in patients with solid tumors for PK and immunogenicity assessment. The serum PK profile of tiragolumab appeared to be biphasic, with a rapid distribution phase followed by a slower elimination phase when administered alone or in combination with atezolizumab. In phase 1a, across doses of tiragolumab ranging from 2 to 1200 mg (cycle 1), the geometric mean (GM), coefficient of variation (CV%), serum tiragolumab Cmax ranged from 0.682 to 270 µg/mL (18.6% to 36.5%) and Cmin ranged from 0.0125 to 75.3 µg/mL (0.0% to 24.2%). The GM systemic exposure (area under the plasma drug concentration-time curve, AUC0-21) ranged from 310 to 2670 µg day/mL (20.5% to 27.0%); interindividual variability in AUC0-21 ranged from 20.5% to 43.9%. Tiragolumab exposure increased in an approximately dose-proportional manner when administered alone or with atezolizumab at doses ≥100 mg. Postbaseline, 4/207 patients (1.9%) were positive for treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies (ADA) against tiragolumab, each at a single time point. Tiragolumab combined with atezolizumab demonstrated desirable PK properties, with no drug-drug interactions or immunogenicity liability. There were no meaningful differences in tiragolumab or atezolizumab exposure between the Q4W co-infusion and sequential dosing cohorts. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02794571 (date of registration June 6, 2016).

Immunogenicity of avelumab in patients with metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma or advanced urothelial carcinoma

Like other monoclonal antibodies, immune checkpoint inhibitors may be immunogenic in some patients, potentially affecting pharmacokinetics (PKs) and clinical outcomes. In post hoc analyses, we characterized antidrug antibody (ADA) development with avelumab monotherapy in patients with metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma (mMCC) from the JAVELIN Merkel 200 trial (first-line [1L; N = 116] and second-line or later [≥2L; N = 88] cohorts) or with advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) from the JAVELIN Bladder 100 (1L maintenance [N = 350]) and JAVELIN Solid Tumor (≥2L [N = 249]) trials. Treatment-emergent ADAs developed in a numerically higher proportion of patients with aUC (1L maintenance, 19.1%; ≥2L, 18.1%) versus mMCC (1L, 8.2%; ≥2L, 8.9%); incidences within tumor types were similar by line of therapy. In PK analyses, numerically lower avelumab trough concentration and higher baseline clearance were observed in treatment-emergent ADA+ versus ADA- subgroups; however, differences were not clinically relevant. Numerical differences in overall survival, progression-free survival, or objective response rate by ADA status were observed; however, no clinically meaningful trends were identified. Proportions of patients with treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; any grade or grade 3/4), serious TEAEs, TEAEs leading to treatment discontinuation, or infusion-related reactions were similar, with overlapping 80% confidence intervals between ADA subgroups. Efficacy and safety observations were similar in subgroups defined by early development of ADA+ status during treatment. In conclusion, no meaningful differences in PKs, efficacy, and safety were observed between subgroups of avelumab-treated patients with different ADA status. Overall, these data suggest that ADAs are not relevant for treatment decisions with avelumab.

Antibody Drug Clearance: An Underexplored Marker of Outcomes with Checkpoint Inhibitors

Immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy has dramatically changed the clinical landscape for several cancers, and ICI use continues to expand across many cancer types. Low baseline clearance (CL) and/or a large reduction of CL during treatment correlates with better clinical response and longer survival. Similar phenomena have also been reported with other monoclonal antibodies (mAb) in cancer and other diseases, highlighting a characteristic of mAb clinical pharmacology that is potentially shared among various mAbs and diseases. Though tempting to attribute poor outcomes to low drug exposure and arguably low target engagement due to high CL, such speculation is not supported by the relatively flat exposure-response relationship of most ICIs, where a higher dose or exposure is not likely to provide additional benefit. Instead, an elevated and/or increasing CL could be a surrogate marker of the inherent resistant phenotype that cannot be reversed by maximizing drug exposure. The mechanisms connecting ICI clearance, therapeutic efficacy, and resistance are unclear and likely to be multifactorial. Therefore, to explore the potential of ICI CL as an early marker for efficacy, this review highlights the similarities and differences of CL characteristics and CL-response relationships for all FDA-approved ICIs, and we compare and contrast these to selected non-ICI mAbs. We also discuss underlying mechanisms that potentially link mAb CL with efficacy and highlight existing knowledge gaps and future directions where more clinical and preclinical investigations are warranted to clearly understand the value of baseline and/or time-varying CL in predicting response to ICI-based therapeutics.

Treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies related to PD-1, PD-L1, or CTLA-4 inhibitors across tumor types: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Increased understanding of how the immune system regulates tumor growth has innovated the use of immunotherapeutics to treat various cancers. The impact of such therapies, including programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors, on the production of antidrug antibodies (ADAs) and their impact on outcomes, is poorly understood. This study aims to evaluate the clinical trial evidence on ADA incidence associated with PD-1, PD-L1, and CTLA-4 inhibitors in the treatment of cancer and to assess associations between treatment administered, ADA incidence, and treatment outcomes.

METHODS

Embase®, Medline®, and EBM Reviews were searched via the OVID® platform on February 15, 2022. Conference proceedings, clinical trial registries, and global regulatory and reimbursement body websites were also searched. Eligible publications included clinical trials enrolling patients receiving cancer treatment with either PD-1, PD-L1, or CTLA-4 reporting outcomes including incidence or prevalence of ADAs and the impact of immunogenicity on treatment safety and efficacy. Reference lists of eligible publications were also searched. The review was conducted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and evidence quality assessment was conducted using the appropriate Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tool.

RESULTS

After screening 4160 records and reviewing 97 full publications, a total of 34 publications reporting on 68 trials were included. A further 41 relevant clinical trials were identified on ClinicalTrials.gov and a further 32 from searches of packaging inserts. In total, 141 relevant trials covering 15 different checkpoint inhibitors and 16 different tumor types were included. Across the included trials, atezolizumab was associated with the highest incidence of ADAs (29.6% of 639 patients), followed by nivolumab (11.2% of 2,085 patients). Combination checkpoint inhibitor treatment appeared to increase the rate of ADAs versus monotherapy. Only 17 trials reported on the impact of ADAs on treatment outcomes with mixed results for the impact of ADAs on treatment efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics.

CONCLUSIONS

Checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of cancer are immunogenic, with the incidence of treatment-emergent ADAs varying between individual therapies. It remains unclear what impact ADAs have on treatment outcomes.

Adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma

Immune-oncology-based regimens have shown efficacy in advanced HCC and have been implemented as standard of care as first-line therapy. Their efficacy, including high response rates, and safety justify their evaluation in earlier disease stages. Following negative results for adjuvant sorafenib in the global STORM trial in 2015, 4 global phase 3 trials, featuring different immune checkpoint inhibitor combinations, entered in parallel the race in the adjuvant setting. The IMbrave050 trial, comparing adjuvant atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab to active surveillance following curative-intent resection or ablation, was the first to report, fast-tracking the results of the first interim analysis and demonstrating an improvement in recurrence-free survival. The trial has provoked a discussion on the horizon of expectations from adjuvant treatment and the clinical relevance of efficacy endpoints. Moreover, major pathological responses reported from early phase 2 data in the neoadjuvant setting provide a strong rationale for the evaluation of these concepts in phase 3 trials. In this review, we summarize current evidence and outline future directions for systemic therapies in early-stage HCC.

Current state and challenges of emerging biomarkers for immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma (Review)

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most prevalent form of primary liver cancer. According to the American Cancer Society, among patients diagnosed with advanced liver cancer, HCC has the sixth-highest incident rate, resulting in a poor prognosis. Surgery, radiofrequency ablation, transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, radiation, chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy are the current treatment options available. Immunotherapy, which has emerged as an innovative treatment strategy over the past decade, is serving a vital role in the treatment of advanced liver cancer. Since only a small number of individuals can benefit from immunotherapy, biomarkers are required to help clinicians identify the target populations for this precision medicine. These biomarkers, such as PD-1/PD-L1, tumor mutational burden and circulating tumor DNA, can be used to investigate interactions between immune checkpoint inhibitors and tumors. The present review summarizes information on the currently available biomarkers used for immunotherapy and the challenges that are present.

Cobimetinib Alone and Plus Venetoclax With/Without Atezolizumab in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

INTRODUCTION

Mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway mutations are present in >50% of patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) multiple myeloma (MM). MEK inhibitors show limited single-agent activity in R/R MM; combination with B-cell lymphoma-2 (BCL-2) and programmed death-ligand 1 inhibition may improve efficacy. This phase Ib/II trial (NCT03312530) evaluated safety and efficacy of cobimetinib (cobi) alone and in combination with venetoclax (ven) with/without atezolizumab (atezo) in patients with R/R MM.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-nine patients were randomized 1:2:2 to cobi 60 mg/day on days 1-21 (n = 6), cobi 40 mg/day on days 1-21 + ven 800 mg/day on days 1-28 with/without atezo 840 mg on days 1 and 15 of 28-day cycles (cobi-ven, n = 22; cobi-ven-atezo, n = 21). Safety run-in cohorts evaluated cobi-ven and cobi-ven-atezo dose levels.

RESULTS

Any-grade common adverse events (AEs) with cobi, cobi-ven, and cobi-ven-atezo, respectively, included diarrhea (33.3%, 81.8%, 90.5%) and nausea (16.7%, 50.0%, 66.7%); common grade ≥3 AEs included anemia (0%, 22.7%, 23.8%), neutropenia (0%, 13.6%, 38.1%), and thrombocytopenia (0%, 18.2%, 23.8%). The overall response rate for all-comers was 0% (cobi), 27.3% (cobi-ven), and 28.6% (cobi-ven-atezo), and 0%, 50.0%, and 100%, respectively, in patients with t(11;14)+. Biomarker analysis demonstrated non-t(11;14) patient selection with NRAS/KRAS/BRAF mutation or high BCL-2/BCL-2-L1 ratio (>52% of the study population) could enrich for responders to the cobi-ven combination.

CONCLUSIONS

Cobi-ven and cobi-ven-atezo demonstrated manageable safety with moderate activity in all-comers, and higher activity in patients with t(11;14)+ MM, supporting a biomarker-driven approach for ven in MM.

Non-Invasive Biomarkers for Immunotherapy in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Current Knowledge and Future Perspectives

Simple Summary

The search for non-invasive biomarkers is a hot topic in modern oncology, since a tissue biopsy has significant limitations in terms of cost and invasiveness. The treatment perspectives have been significantly improved after the approval of immunotherapy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma; therefore, the quick identification of responders is crucial to define the best therapeutic strategy. In this review, the current knowledge on the available non-invasive biomarkers of the response to immunotherapy is described.

Abstract

The treatment perspectives of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have deeply changed after the introduction of immunotherapy. The results in responders show improved survival compared with Sorafenib, but only one-third of patients achieve a significant benefit from treatment. As the tumor microenvironment exerts a central role in shaping the response to immunotherapy, the future goal of HCC treatment should be to identify a proxy of the hepatic tissue condition that is easy to use in clinical practice. Therefore, the search for biomarkers that are accurate in predicting prognosis will be the hot topic in the therapeutic management of HCC in the near future. Understanding the mechanisms of resistance to immunotherapy may expand the patient population that will benefit from it, and help researchers to find new combination regimens to improve patients’ outcomes. In this review, we describe the current knowledge on the prognostic non-invasive biomarkers related to treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors, focusing on serological markers and gut microbiota.

Extension of the Alternative IV Dosing Regimens of Atezolizumab into Combination Settings through Modeling and Simulation

Atezolizumab is approved as an intravenous infusion for use as a single agent and in combination with other therapies in a number of indications.1 The objectives of this publication are to characterize atezolizumab pharmacokinetics (PK) across indications with available clinical data from one Phase I and eight Phase III studies, to determine the exposure-response (ER) relationships in the combination settings across a variety of tumor types, and to provide the clinical safety to support the extension of the 840 mg q2w, 1200 mg q3w, and 1680 mg q4w IV dosing regimens across various indications in the combination settings. Across all clinical studies, atezolizumab PK remained in the dose linear range and were similar across tumor types when used in combination therapy or as a monotherapy. In the combination studies, efficacy was independent of exposures tested and there was no significant increase in adverse events with increasing atezolizumab exposure (flat ER). The safety profile of atezolizumab in the individual combination studies was generally consistent with the established safety profile of atezolizumab, the combination partners, and the disease under study. The similar atezolizumab PK across monotherapy and combination therapy setting as well as the flat ER in new tumor types and combination therapies support the use of the three atezolizumab dosing regimens to be used interchangeably in the combination setting. Atezolizumab is now approved with three interchangeable dosing regimens of 840 mg q2w, 1200 mg q3w, and 1680 mg q4w for single-agent and combination therapy use in the US and EU. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Tumor Growth Inhibition-Overall Survival (TGI-OS) Model for Subgroup Analysis Based on Post-Randomization Factors: Application for Anti-drug Antibody (ADA) Subgroup Analysis of Atezolizumab in the IMpower150 Study

Longitudinal changes of tumor size or tumor-associated biomarkers have been receiving growing attention as early markers of treatment benefits. Tumor growth inhibition-overall survival (TGI-OS) models represent mathematical frameworks used to establish a link from tumor size trajectory to survival outcome with the aim of predicting survival benefit with tumor data from a small number of subjects with a short follow-up time. In the present study, we applied the TGI-OS model to assess treatment benefit in the IMpower150 study for patients who exhibited development of anti-drug antibodies (ADA). Direct comparison between subgroups of the active arm [ADA positive (ADA +) and negative (ADA -) groups] to the entire control group is not appropriate, due to potential imbalances of baseline prognostic factors between ADA + and ADA - patients. Thus, the TGI-OS modeling framework was employed to adjust for differences in prognostic factors between the ADA subgroups to more accurately estimate the treatment benefits. After adjustment, the TGI-OS model predicted comparable hazard ratios (HRs) of OS between ADA + and ADA - subgroups, suggesting that the development of ADA does not have a clinically significant impact on the treatment benefit of atezolizumab.

Allelic Variation in HLA-DRB1 is Associated with Development ofAnti-Drug Antibodies in Cancer Patients Treated with Atezolizumab that are Neutralizing in Vitro

The treatment of diseases with biologic agents can result in the formation of anti-drug antibodies (ADA). Although drivers for ADA formation are unknown, a role for antigen presentation is likely, and variation in human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genes has been shown to be associated with occurrence of ADA for several biologics. Here, we performed an HLA-wide association study in 1,982 patients treated with the anti-PD-L1 antibody atezolizumab across 8 clinical trials. On average, 29.8% of patients were ADA positive (N=591, range of 13.5% - 38.4% per study), and 14.6% of patients were positive for ADA that were neutralizing in vitro (NAb, N=278, range of 6.4% - 21.9% per study). In a meta-analysis of logistic regression coefficients, we found statistically significant associations between HLA class II alleles and ADA status. The top-associated alleles were HLA-DRB1*01:01 in a comparison of ADA-positive versus ADA-negative patients (p=3.4*10^-5 , odds ratio=1.96, 95% confidence interval=1.64-2.28), and HLA-DQA1*01:01 when comparing NAb-positive with ADA-negative patients (p=2.8 x 10^-7 , OR=2.31, 95% CI=1.98-2.66). Both alleles occur together on a common HLA haplotype, and analyses considering only NAb-negative, ADA-positive patients did no yield significant results, suggesting that the genetic association is mainly driven by NAb status. In conclusion, our study showed that HLA class II genotype is associated with the risk of developing ADA, and specifically NAb, in patients treated with atezolizumab, but the effect estimates suggest that immunogenetic factors are not sufficient as clinically meaningful predictors.