Recognizing Prognostic and Predictive Biomarkers in the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs)

Peripheral blood inflammatory biomarkers neutrophil/ lymphocyte ratio, platelet/lymphocyte ratio and systemic immune-inflammation index/albumin ratio predict prognosis and efficacy in non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving immunotherapy and opioids

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to assess the value of pretreatment peripheral blood neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet/lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and systemic immune-inflammation index/albumin ratio (SII/ALB) for predicting immunotherapy prognosis and efficacy in Non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) treated with Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and opioids.

METHODS

A total of 78 NSCLC patients received ICIs and opioids were retrospectively collected. The optimal cut-off values were determined by receiver operating characteristic curves. The univariate and multivariate analysis investigated the effects of NLR, PLR, and SII/ALB on patients prognosis.

RESULTS

NLR and PLR had predictive value of efficacy. SII/ALB > 17.79 was an independent risk factor for worse outcomes.

CONCLUSION

PLR and SII/ALB have predictive value of efficacy, but NLR was not. SII/ALB > 17.79 suggests a poor prognosis following immunotherapy in NSCLC patients receiving ICIs and opioids.

Efficacy and safety of sintilimab plus bevacizumab and CAPOX as first-line treatment for patients with RAS-mutant, microsatellite stable, metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

This research aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of combining sintilimab with bevacizumab, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine as a primary therapy for patients with RAS-mutated, microsatellite stable (MSS), and metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

METHODS

In this prospective, open-label, single-arm, phase II trial, eligible patients received up to 8 cycles of capecitabine and oxaliplatin/bevacizumab plus sintilimab, followed by maintenance therapy with capecitabine, bevacizumab, and sintilimab every three weeks until disease progression. Treatment response was evaluated every 2 cycles (6 weeks) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. The primary endpoint was ORR, while the secondary endpoints included PFS and AEs.

RESULTS

The efficacy analysis and safety analysis included 33 patients. The overall response rate was 72.7%, and the median PFS in the full analysis set was 12.9 months (95% CI: 7.5-18.3), and median OS was not reached. Patients with liver metastases demonstrated a higher ORR (20/24 [83.3%]) than those without (4/9 [44.4%], p = 0.073), and the median PFS was 14.7 for patients with liver metastases and 9.6 months for those without (HR: 1.05, 95%CI: 0.34-3.24; p = 0.932). Most immune-related AEs had grades 1-2, and immunotherapy was discontinued in 4 patients due to immune-related AEs. No treatment-related deaths occurred during the study.

CONCLUSIONS

The therapeutic regimen showed encouraging antitumor effects and a favorable safety profile in patients with RAS mutations, MSS, and mCRC, yielding durable results throughout an extended follow-up duration, irrespective of the presence of liver metastases. This research is of great significance because it addresses the limited treatment options in the field of MSS mCRC patients. By providing new treatment strategies or methods, it brings more hope and choices to patients and offers valuable new insights and research directions to the medical community.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT06206096. Registered on May 26, 2021.

The prognostic and immunological role of MCM3 in pan-cancer and validation of prognosis in a clinical lower-grade glioma cohort

Background: Previous studies have shown that MCM3 plays a key role in initiating DNA replication. However, the mechanism of MCM3 function in most cancers is still unknown. The aim of our study was to explore the expression, prognostic role, and immunological characteristics of MCM3 across cancers. Methods: We explored the expression pattern of MCM3 across cancers. We subsequently explored the prognostic value of MCM3 expression by using univariate Cox regression analysis. Spearman correlation analysis was performed to determine the correlations between MCM3 and immune-related characteristics, mismatching repair (MMR) signatures, RNA modulator genes, cancer stemness, programmed cell death (PCD) gene expression, tumour mutation burden (TMB), microsatellite instability (MSI), and neoantigen levels. The role of MCM3 in predicting the response to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapy was further evaluated in four immunotherapy cohorts. Single-cell data from CancerSEA were analysed to assess the biological functions associated with MCM3 in 14 cancers. The clinical correlation and independent prognostic significance of MCM3 were further analysed in the TCGA and CGGA lower-grade glioma (LGG) cohorts, and a prognostic nomogram was constructed. Immunohistochemistry in a clinical cohort was utilized to validate the prognostic utility of MCM3 expression in LGG. Results: MCM3 expression was upregulated in most tumours and strongly associated with patient outcomes in many cancers. Correlation analyses demonstrated that MCM3 expression was closely linked to immune cell infiltration, immune checkpoints, MMR genes, RNA modulator genes, cancer stemness, PCD genes and the TMB in most tumours. There was an obvious difference in outcomes between patients with high MCM3 expression and those with low MCM3 expression in the 4 ICB treatment cohorts. Single-cell analysis indicated that MCM3 was mainly linked to the cell cycle, DNA damage and DNA repair. The expression of MCM3 was associated with the clinical features of LGG patients and was an independent prognostic indicator. Finally, the prognostic significance of MCM3 in LGG was validated in a clinical cohort. Conclusion: Our study suggested that MCM3 can be used as a potential prognostic marker for cancers and may be associated with tumour immunity. In addition, MCM3 is a promising predictor of immunotherapy responses.

Impact of BMI on the survival outcomes of non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

ICIs have become the standard treatment for advanced NSCLC patients. Currently, PD-L1 is the most widely useful biomarker to predict ICI efficacy, but the sensitivity and specificity are limited. Therefore, the useful predictive biomarkers of ICI efficacy is urgently needed. BMI is an internationally used measure of body health. Obesity may affect ICI efficacy by changing T cell functions. This meta-analysis aimed to clarify the relationship between BMI and survival outcomes of NSCLC patients treated with ICIs.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify studies that assessed the association between BMI and survival outcomes in patients treated with ICIs. OS was the primary endpoint, and PFS was the secondary endpoint. Random-effect models or fixed-effect models were utilized to combine study effects according to the Cochran Q and I2 tests.

RESULTS

Nine studies, including 4602 NSCLC patients treated with ICIs, that met the inclusion criteria were selected for this meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in PFS (HR 0.885; 95% CI 0.777-1.009, p = 0.068) or OS (HR 0.947; 95% CI 0.789-1.137, p = 0.560) between the low BMI group and the high BMI group. However, in the subgroup analysis, compared with normal-weight patients, overweight and obese patients achieved prolonged PFS (HR 0.862; 95% CI 0.760-0.978, p = 0.021) and OS (HR 0.818; 95% CI 0.741-0.902, p<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Overweight and obese NSCLC patients tend to achieve prolonged survival time with ICI regimens. Further prospective studies are needed to strengthen the association between ICI outcomes and BMI levels.

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in Proficient Mismatch Repair (pMMR)/ Non-Microsatellite Instability-High (non-MSI-H) metastatic colorectal cancer: a study based on 39 cohorts incorporating 1723 patients

PURPOSE

This study was designed to investigate the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)-based therapy in proficient mismatch repair (pMMR)/non-microsatellite instability-high (non-MSI-H) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

METHODS

Electronic databases were screened to identify relevant trials. The primary endpoints were pooled objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR). Stratified analysis was accomplished on ICIs-based regimens, treatment lines and RAS status.

RESULTS

Totally, 1723 mCRC patients from 39 cohorts were included. The pooled ORR, DCR, 12-month overall survival (OS) rate and 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate of ICIs-based therapy in pMMR/non-MSI-H mCRC were 8.5% (95% CI: 4.4%-13.5%), 48.2% (95% CI: 37.8%-58.6%), 52.3% (95% CI: 46.4%-58.1%) and 32.8% (95% CI: 23.5%-42.7%) respectively. As a whole, no significantly differences were shown between ICIs-based and non-ICIs-based therapy for pMMR/non-MSI-H mCRC in terms of both PFS (HR = 1.0, 95% CI: 0.9-1.1, P = 0.91) and OS (HR = 1.0, 95% CI: 0.9-1.2, P = 0.51). It was worth noting that the addition of ICIs to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agent plus chemotherapy displayed excellent efficacy in pMMR/non-MSI-H mCRC (ORR = 42.4%, 95% CI: 10.0%-78.6%; DCR = 92.0%, 95% CI: 68.3%-100.0%; 12-month OS rate = 71.4%, 95% CI: 50.0%-89.1%; 6-month PFS rate = 55.2%, 95% CI: 24.8%-83.8%; and PFS (compared with non-ICIs-based therapy): HR = 0.9, 95% CI: 0.8-1.0, P = 0.02), especially served as first-line therapy (ORR = 74.2%, 95% CI: 61.4%-85.4%; DCR = 98.7%, 95% CI: 92.0%-100.0%); and without additional treatment related adverse events (TRAEs) were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

ICIs-based combination therapy, especially the addition of ICIs to first-line anti-VEGF agent plus chemotherapy, is promising in pMMR/non-MSI-H mCRC with good efficacy and controllable toxicity.

Advances in artificial intelligence to predict cancer immunotherapy efficacy

Tumor immunotherapy, particularly the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors, has yielded impressive clinical benefits. Therefore, it is critical to accurately screen individuals for immunotherapy sensitivity and forecast its efficacy. With the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in the medical field in recent years, an increasing number of studies have indicated that the efficacy of immunotherapy can be better anticipated with the help of AI technology to reach precision medicine. This article focuses on the current prediction models based on information from histopathological slides, imaging-omics, genomics, and proteomics, and reviews their research progress and applications. Furthermore, we also discuss the existing challenges encountered by AI in the field of immunotherapy, as well as the future directions that need to be improved, to provide a point of reference for the early implementation of AI-assisted diagnosis and treatment systems in the future.

Tumor immunotherapies by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); the pros and cons

The main breakthrough in tumor immunotherapy was the discovery of immune checkpoint (IC) proteins, which act as a potent suppressor of the immune system by a myriad of mechanisms. After that, scientists focused on the immune checkpoint molecules mainly. Thereby, much effort was spent to progress novel strategies for suppressing these inhibitory axes, resulting in the evolution of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Then, ICIs have become a promising approach and shaped a paradigm shift in tumor immunotherapies. CTLA-4 plays an influential role in attenuation of the induction of naïve and memory T cells by engagement with its responding ligands like B7-1 (CD80) and B7-2 (CD86). Besides, PD-1 is predominantly implicated in adjusting T cell function in peripheral tissues through its interaction with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) and PD-L2. Given their suppressive effects on anti-tumor immunity, it has firmly been documented that ICIs based therapies can be practical and rational therapeutic approaches to treat cancer patients. Nonetheless, tumor inherent or acquired resistance to ICI and some treatment-related toxicities restrict their application in the clinic. The current review will deliver a comprehensive overview of the ICI application to treat human tumors alone or in combination with other modalities to support more desired outcomes and lower toxicities in cancer patients. Video Abstract.

High Intensity Aerobic exercise training and Immune cell Mobilization in patients with lung cancer (HI AIM)—a randomized controlled trial

Background

The increasing role of exercise training in cancer care is built on evidence that exercise can reduce side effects of treatment, improve physical functioning and quality of life. We and others have shown in mouse tumor models, that exercise leads to an adrenalin-mediated increased influx of T and NK cells into the tumor, altering the tumor microenvironment (TME) and leading to reduced tumor growth. These data suggest that exercise could improve immune responses against cancer cells by increase immune cell infiltration to the tumor and potentially having an impact on disease progression. Additionally, there are data to suggest that infiltration of T and NK cells into the TME is correlates with response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients. We have therefore initiated the clinical trial HI AIM, to investigate if high intensity exercise can mobilize and increase infiltration of immune cells in the TME in patients with lung cancer.

Methods

HI AIM (NCT04263467) is a randomized controlled trial (70 patients, 1:1) for patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Patients in the treatment arm, receive an exercise-intervention consisting of supervised and group-based exercise training, comprising primarily intermediate to high intensity interval training three times per week over 6 weeks. All patients will also receive standard oncological treatments; checkpoint inhibitors, checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy or oncological surveillance. Blood samples and biopsies (ultrasound guided), harvested before, during and after the 6-week training program, will form basis for immunological measurements of an array of immune cells and markers. Primary outcome is circulating NK cells. Secondary outcome is other circulating immune cells, infiltration of immune cells in tumor, inflammatory markers, aerobic capacity measured by VO₂ max test, physical activity levels and quality of life measured by questionnaires, and clinical outcomes.

Discussion

To our knowledge, HI AIM is the first project to combine supervised and monitored exercise in patients with lung cancer, with rigorous analyses of immune and cancer cell markers over the course of the trial. Data from the trial can potentially support exercise as a tool to mobilize cells of the immune system, which in turn could potentiate the effect of immunotherapy.

Trial registration

The study was prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on February 10^th 2020, ID: NCT04263467. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04263467

Combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); a new frontier

Recently, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) therapy has become a promising therapeutic strategy with encouraging therapeutic outcomes due to their durable anti-tumor effects. Though, tumor inherent or acquired resistance to ICIs accompanied with treatment-related toxicities hamper their clinical utility. Overall, about 60-70% of patients (e.g., melanoma and lung cancer) who received ICIs show no objective response to intervention. The resistance to ICIs mainly caused by alterations in the tumor microenvironment (TME), which in turn, supports angiogenesis and also blocks immune cell antitumor activities, facilitating tumor cells' evasion from host immunosurveillance. Thereby, it has been supposed and also validated that combination therapy with ICIs and other therapeutic means, ranging from chemoradiotherapy to targeted therapies as well as cancer vaccines, can capably compromise tumor resistance to immune checkpoint blocked therapy. Herein, we have focused on the therapeutic benefits of ICIs as a groundbreaking approach in the context of tumor immunotherapy and also deliver an overview concerning the therapeutic influences of the addition of ICIs to other modalities to circumvent tumor resistance to ICIs.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors With or Without Bone-Targeted Therapy in NSCLC Patients With Bone Metastases and Prognostic Significance of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio

Introduction

Bone metastases (BMs) are a negative prognostic factor in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Although immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have dramatically changed the therapeutic landscape of NSCLC, little information is available on BMs from NSCLC treated with ICIs alone or in association with bone-targeted therapy (BTT) such as zoledronate or denosumab.

Methods

From 2014 to 2020, 111 of the 142 patients with BMs secondary to NSCLC extrapolated from the prospective multicenter Italian BM Database were eligible for analysis. Information on blood count, comorbidities, and toxicity was retrospectively collected. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) pre- and post-treatment was calculated. Survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method, with statistical significance of survival differences assessed using the log-rank test.

Results

Median age was 66 (range, 42-84) years. Performance status (PS) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) was 0-1 in 79/111 patients. The majority of patients (89.2%) had adenocarcinoma histology. At a median follow-up of 47.4 months, median progression-free (mPFS) and overall survival (mOS) was 4.9 (95%CI, 2.8-10.0) and 11.9 (95%CI, 8.2-14.4) months, respectively. Forty-six (43.4%) patients with BM NSCLC underwent first- or further-line therapy with ICIs: 28 (60.8%) received nivolumab, 9 (19.6%) pembrolizumab, and 9 (19.6%) atezolizumab. Of the 46 patients treated with ICIs, 30 (65.2%) underwent BTT: 24 (80.0%) with zoledronate and 6 (20.0%) with denosumab. The ICI-alone group had an mOS of 15.8 months [95%CI, 8.2-not evaluable (NE)] vs. 21.8 months (95%CI, 14.5-not evaluable) for the ICI plus BTT group and 7.5 (95%CI, 6.1-10.9) months for the group receiving other treatments (p < 0.001). NLR ≤5 had a positive impact on OS.

Conclusion

BTT appears to have a synergistic effect when used in combination with ICIs, improving patient survival.