A Review of Scheduling Strategies for Radiotherapy and Immune Checkpoint Inhibition in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy across the globe and, despite advances in treatment strategies, survival rates remain low. Rectal cancer (RC) accounts for most of these cases, and traditional management strategies for advanced disease include total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) with chemoradiotherapy followed by curative surgery. Unfortunately, approximately 10-15% of patients have no response to treatment or have recurrence at a short interval following radiotherapy. The introduction of immunotherapy in the form of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) in metastatic colorectal cancer has improved clinical outcomes, yet most patients with RC present with microsatellite stable disease, which lacks the immune-rich microenvironment where ICB is most effective. There is evidence that combining radiotherapy with ICB can unlock the mechanisms that drive resistance in patients; however, the sequencing of these therapies is still debated. This review offers a comprehensive overview of clinical trials and preclinical models that use radiotherapy-immunotherapy combinations in RC in an attempt to extrapolate the ideal sequencing of the two treatment modalities. The results highlight the dearth of evidence to answer the question of whether ICB should be given before, during, or after radiotherapy, yet it is suggested that improving the relevance of our preclinical models will provide a platform with higher translational value and will lead to appropriate clinical trial designs.

Microsatellite Stable Colorectal Cancer With an Immunogenic Phenotype: Challenges in Diagnosis and Treatment

BACKGROUND

Patients with deficient microsatellite mismatch repair (dMMR) colorectal cancer (CRC) may respond to immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI), whereas patients with microsatellite-stable (MSS) CRC have not demonstrated response. However, a proportion of MSS tumors display histomorphologic features characteristic of dMMR tumors consistent with an increased antigenicity. Therefore, a subset of patients with CRC not currently receiving ICI treatment may derive benefit from ICI therapy. We review tumors in which the histologic features suggestive of dMMR were in disagreement with the DNA mismatch repair proteins obtained by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Possible causes of such disagreement are discussed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three patients with CRC suggestive of histomorphologic immunogenicity underwent evaluation by IHC staining for mismatch repair (MMR) status, next-generation sequencing assays, and/or polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS

Findings compatible with an immunogenic response were similarly observed in all patients. Case 1 highlighted the limiting factors inherent to IHC staining for MMR status: a biopsy initially interpreted as MSS was subsequently interpreted as being dMMR. Case 2 examined the challenges in reconciling histologic characteristics traditionally associated with dMMR CRCs but ultimately determined to be MSS. Case 3 examined the microsatellite instability of CRC resulting from MLH1-methylation and/or MSH6 mutation.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated the challenges in establishing MMR status when confronted with conflicting results from histology, IHC, polymerase chain reaction, and next-generation sequencing. Given that dMMR status has been shown to be a biomarker for ICI responsiveness, the importance of accurate identification is critical.

Targeting Immune-Related Biological Processes in Solid Tumors: We do Need Biomarkers

Immunotherapy has become the standard-of-care in many solid tumors. Despite the significant recent achievements in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer, several issues related to patients’ selection for immunotherapy remain unsolved. Multiple lines of evidence suggest that, in this setting, the vision of a single biomarker is somewhat naïve and imprecise, given that immunotherapy does not follow the rules that we have experienced in the past for targeted therapies. On the other hand, additional immune-related biomarkers that are reliable in real-life clinical practice remain to be identified. Recently, the immune-checkpoint blockade has been approved in the US irrespective of the tumor site of origin. Further histology-agnostic approvals, coupled with with tumor-specific companion diagnostics and guidelines, are expected in this field. In addition, immune-related biomarkers can also have a significant prognostic value. In this review, we provide an overview of the role of these biomarkers and their characterization in the management of lung cancer, melanoma, colorectal cancer, gastric cancer, head and neck cancer, renal cell carcinoma, urothelial cancers, and breast cancer.

Patients Selection for Immunotherapy in Solid Tumors: Overcome the Naïve Vision of a Single Biomarker

Immunotherapy, and in particular immune-checkpoints blockade therapy (ICB), represents a new pillar in cancer therapy. Antibodies targeting Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte Antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and Programmed Death 1 (PD-1)/Programmed Death Ligand-1 (PD-L1) demonstrated a relevant clinical value in a large number of solid tumors, leading to an improvement of progression free survival and overall survival in comparison to standard chemotherapy. However, across different solid malignancies, the immune-checkpoints inhibitors efficacy is limited to a relative small number of patients and, for this reason, the identification of positive or negative predictive biomarkers represents an urgent need. Despite the expression of PD-L1 was largely investigated in various malignancies, (i.e., melanoma, head and neck malignancies, urothelial and renal carcinoma, metastatic colorectal cancer, and pancreatic cancer) as a biomarker for ICB treatment-patients selection, it showed an important, but still imperfect, role as positive predictor of response only in nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Importantly, other tumor and/or microenvironments related characteristics are currently under clinical evaluation, in combination or in substitution of PD–L1 expression. In particular, tumor-infiltrating immune cells, gene expression analysis, mismatch- repair deficiency, and tumor mutational landscape may play a central role in predicting clinical benefits of CTLA-4 and/or PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors. In this review, we will focus on the clinical evaluation of emerging biomarkers and how these may improve the naïve vision of a single- feature patients-based selection.