OA04.03 A Randomized Phase 3 Study of Camrelizumab plus Chemotherapy as 1st Line Therapy for Advanced/Metastatic Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

A case report of thalidomide in the treatment of camrelizumab-induced reactive cutaneous capillary hyperplasia

RATIONALE

Reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation (RCCEP) is the most prevalent immune-related adverse event observed in patients undergoing camrelizumab treatment, and there is a lack of effective therapeutic strategies. Thalidomide (THD) has anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, antiangiogenic, and antitumor properties, which have led to its use in various autoimmune diseases, hematological malignancies, solid tumors, and other disorders.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 52-year-old male patient with lung cancer developed vascular moles on his face, neck, and back after 3 cycles of chemotherapy comprising pemetrexed and carboplatin combined with camrelizumab immunotherapy. The moles ranged in size (0.1-1.2 cm) and were red or red-black, appearing on the skin's surface. The patient was advised to avoid scratching or friction, continue monitoring, and apply Yunnan Baiyao powder if a papule ruptured. After the third treatment cycle, papules on the patient's face, particularly an eyelid vascular mole, ulcerated, causing significant psychological distress.

DIAGNOSIS

RCCEP induced by camrelizumab was considered.

INTERVENTIONS

The patient received 50 mg of THD in the morning and 100 mg in the evening.

OUTCOMES

The vascular nevus began to shrivel after 1 week and started disappearing after 2 weeks of THD treatment. After 3 THD treatment courses, RCCEP was alleviated without recurrence, allowing the patient to successfully complete camrelizumab treatment.

LESSONS

During treatment with camrelizumab, if a patient develops moderate or severe RCCEP, and local therapy or anti-infective therapies prove insufficient, THD may be considered as a potential treatment option to improve RCCEP symptoms.

PD-1/PD-L1 combined with LAG3 is associated with clinical activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic primary pulmonary lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma

Primary pulmonary lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma (PLELC) is an Epstein–Barr virus (EBV)-related, rare subtype of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) show durable responses in advanced NSCLC. However, their effects and predictive biomarkers in PLELC remain poorly understood. We retrospectively analyzed the data of 48 metastatic PLELC patients treated with ICI. Pretreated paraffin-embedded specimens (n = 19) were stained for PD-1, PD-L1, LAG3, TIM3, CD3, CD4, CD8, CD68, FOXP3, and cytokeratin (CK) by multiple immunohistochemistry (mIHC). Next-generation sequencing was performed for 33 PLELC samples. Among patients treated with ICI monotherapy (n = 30), the objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), median progression-free survival (mPFS), and overall survival (mOS) were 13.3%, 80.0%, 7.7 months, and 24.9 months, respectively. Patients with PD-L1 ≥1% showed a longer PFS (8.4 vs. 2.1 months, p = 0.015) relative to those with PD-L1 <1%. Among patients treated with ICI combination therapy (n = 18), ORR, DCR, mPFS, and mOS were 27.8%, 100.0%, 10.1 months, and 19.7 months, respectively. Patients with PD-L1 ≥1% showed a significantly superior OS than those with PD-L1 <1% (NA versus 11.7 months, p = 0.001). Among the 19 mIHC patients, those with high PD-1/PD-L1 and LAG3 expression showed a longer PFS (19.0 vs. 3.9 months, p = 0.003). ICI also showed promising efficacy for treating metastatic PLELC. PD-L1 may be both predictive of ICI treatment efficacy and prognostic for survival in PLELC. PD-1/PD-L1 combined with LAG3 may serve as a predictor of ICI treatment effectiveness in PLELC. Larger and prospective trials are warranted to validate both ICI activity and predictive biomarkers in PLELC.

This study was partly presented as a poster at the IASLC 20th World Conference on Lung Cancer 2019, 7–10 September 2019, Barcelona, Spain.

Correlations between objective response rate and survival-based endpoints in first-line advanced non-small cell lung Cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The study objective was to estimate the relationship between objective response and survival-based endpoints by drug class, in first-line advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature review identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of first-line aNSCLC therapies reporting overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and/or objective response rate (ORR). Trial-level and arm-level linear regression models were fit, accounting for inclusion of immunotherapy (IO)-based or chemotherapy-only RCT arms. Weighted least squares-based R² were calculated along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For the main trial-level analysis of OS vs. ORR, the surrogate threshold effect was estimated. Exploratory analyses involved further stratification by: IO monotherapy vs. chemotherapy, dual-IO therapy vs. chemotherapy, and IO + chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy.

RESULTS

From 17,040 records, 57 RCTs were included. In the main analysis, trial-level associations between OS and ORR were statistically significant in both the IO-based and chemotherapy-only strata, with R² estimates of 0.54 (95% CI: 0.26-0.81) and 0.34 (0.05-0.63), respectively. OS gains associated with a given ORR benefit were statistically significantly larger within IO vs. chemotherapy comparisons compared to chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy comparisons (p < 0.001). Exploratory analysis suggested a trend by IO type: for a given change in ORR, 'pure' IO (IO monotherapy and dual-IO) vs. chemotherapy RCTs tended to have a larger OS benefit than IO + chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy RCTs. For ORR vs. PFS, trial-level correlations were strong in the IO-based vs. chemotherapy (R² = 0.84; 0.72-0.95), and chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy strata (R² = 0.69; 0.49-0.88). For OS vs. PFS, correlations were moderate in both strata (R² = 0.49; 0.20-0.78 and R² = 0.49; 0.23-0.76).

CONCLUSION

The larger OS benefit per unit of ORR benefit in IO-based RCTs compared to chemotherapy-only RCTs provides an important addition to the established knowledge regarding the durability and depth of response in IO-based treatments.

First-line chemotherapy plus immune checkpoint inhibitors or bevacizumab in advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer without EGFR mutations or ALK fusions

Aim: To compare the efficacy and safety of first-line chemotherapy (Chemo) plus immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) or bevacizumab (Bev) in advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer without EGFR mutations or ALK fusions. Methods: A network meta-analysis was conducted to synthesize relative treatment outcomes. Results: Chemo + ICIs is superior to Chemo + Bev in both overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.88-0.96) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.90-0.97), with comparable severe adverse events. However, for patients with liver metastasis, Chemo + Bev has a 59.8% probability of providing better overall survival benefit. For specific regimens, pembrolizumab + Chemo showed an absolute advantage over other regimens. Conclusion: First-line Chemo + ICIs is superior to Chemo + Bev in advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer except for patients with liver metastasis.

Immunotherapy in the First-Line Treatment of NSCLC: Current Status and Future Directions in China

Lung cancer causes significant morbidity and mortality in China and worldwide. In China, lung cancer accounts for nearly one-fourth of all cancer deaths. Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the predominant type of lung cancer, accounting for approximately 80%–85% of all lung cancer cases. Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is revolutionizing the treatment of NSCLC. Immune checkpoint molecules, including PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4, can suppress immune responses by delivering negative signals to T cells. By interfering with these immunosuppressive axes, ICIs unleash antitumor immune responses, ultimately eliminating cancer cells. ICIs have demonstrated promising antitumor efficacy in NSCLC, and mounting evidence supports the use of ICIs in treatment-naïve patients with advanced NSCLC. A comprehensive overview of current and emerging ICIs for the first-line treatment of NSCLC in China will facilitate a better understanding of NSCLC immunotherapy using ICIs and optimize the clinical use of ICIs in previously untreated Chinese patients with NSCLC. Herein, we review the efficacy and safety of currently approved and investigational ICIs as the first-line treatment of NSCLC in China. We also discuss the challenges limiting more widespread use of ICIs and future directions in the first-line treatment of NSCLC using ICIs.

Research progress in immune checkpoint inhibitors for lung cancer in China

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have come to play an increasingly prominent role in the treatment of lung cancer, and some are recommended as a first-line treatment for late-stage non-small-cell lung cancer, either as a monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy. Accordingly, the indications of Food and Drug Administration-approved ICIs have increased. In this background, China has implemented various policies to encourage and accelerate the marketing of domestic and imported innovative antitumor drugs. Eight ICIs have been approved in China. Among these, four imported programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors have received approval for six indications, and one domestic PD-1 inhibitor has received approval for one indication for lung cancer in 2018. Numerous clinical trials of ICIs for lung cancer are underway in China. This review aims to summarize the recent advances and future directions of ICIs, including PD-1 inhibitors, PD-L1 inhibitors, cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 inhibitors, bi-specific antibodies, and a novel inhibitor of T-cell immune-receptor with Ig and immunoreceptor tyrosine-based inhibitory motif domains in immunotherapies for lung cancer in China.

Brain Metastases Status and Immunotherapy Efficacy in Advanced Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Brain metastases (BMs) indicate poor outcomes and are commonly excluded in immunotherapy clinical trials in advanced lung cancer; moreover, the effect of BM status on immunotherapy efficacy is inconsistent and inconclusive. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the influence of BM status on immunotherapy efficacy in advanced lung cancer.

Methods

Electronic databases and all major conference proceedings were searched without language restrictions according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. We extracted randomized clinical trials on lung cancer immunotherapy that had available overall survival (OS) and/or progression-free survival (PFS) data based on the BM status. All analyses were performed using random effects models.

Results

Fourteen randomized clinical trials with 9,089 patients were identified. Immunotherapy conferred a survival advantage to BM patients [OS-hazard ratio (HR), 0.72; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.58-0.90; P = 0.004; and PFS-HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52-0.87, P = 0.003]. Non-BM patients could also derive a survival benefit from immunotherapy (OS-HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.71-0.80; P <0.001; and PFS-HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.82, P <0.001). The pooled ratios of OS-HRs and PFS-HRs reported in BM patients versus non-BM patients were 0.96 (95% CI, 0.78-1.18; P = 0.72) and 0.97 (95% CI, 0.79-1.20; P = 0.78), respectively, indicating no statistically significant difference between them. Subsequent sensitivity analyses did not alter the results. Subgroup analyses according to tumor type, line of therapy, immunotherapy type, study design, and representation of BM patients reconfirmed these findings.

Conclusion

We demonstrated that BM status did not significantly influence the immunotherapy efficacy in lung cancer, suggesting that both BM and non-BM patients could obtain comparable benefits.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier (CRD42020207446).

Selection of optimal first-line immuno-related therapy based on specific pathological characteristics for patients with advanced driver-gene wild-type non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have improved survival for advanced wild-type non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a lack of direct comparisons of various first-line treatments is clouding clinical decision-making. A network meta-analysis was conducted to compare current first-line treatments and identify the optimal regimen for patients with specific characteristics.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Clinical Trials databases were searched from inception to 31 July 2020. Phase II/III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing first-line treatments including chemotherapy, anti-angiogenesis, ICIs, and their combinations for previously untreated stage IIIB/IV or recurrent driver-gene wild-type NSCLC patients were included.

Results

Twenty-six RCTs were identified and included, involving 16,977 patients and a total of 18 regimens. ICI-containing treatments led to significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) compared with ICI-free treatments (0.82, 0.72-0.93). ICI plus chemotherapy had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS; 0.70, 0.58-0.86) and marginally longer OS (0.90, 0.79-1.05) compared with ICIs alone. Ranking highest in the Bayesian network meta-analysis, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy, nivolumab plus ipilimumab and chemotherapy, had significantly superior OS than standard chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab treatments. Pembrolizumab-chemotherapy ranked first for OS, 1-year OS rate, and subgroups of non-squamous, PD-L1 ⩾1%, non-smoking, and liver metastasis; while nivolumab-ipilimumab-chemotherapy for squamous, PD-L1 <1%, brain metastasis NSCLC. Furthermore, the ICI-containing bevacizumab-free treatments, such as pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy, nivolumab and ipilimumab with or without chemotherapy, were not significantly different from atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and bevacizumab in OS.

Conclusions

A combination of ICIs with chemotherapy, rather than double ICIs, is the best first-line treatment for advanced wild-type NSCLC, with synergy that leads to better long-term survival. The panoramic view of the relative efficacy of any two regimens with different rankings provides strong evidence for selecting optimal first-line ICIs according to patients' clinical characteristics.

Camrelizumab Combined with FOLFOX4 Regimen as First-Line Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinomas: A Sub-Cohort of a Multicenter Phase Ib/II Study

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors and chemotherapy can synergistically increase efficacy in a variety of malignancies. We conducted this phase Ib/II study to assess the safety and efficacy of anti-PD-1 antibody camrelizumab in combination with FOLFOX4 for treatment-naive advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC).

METHODS

This open-label, multicenter phase Ib/II study (NCT03092895) enrolled patients with aHCC and without prior systemic treatment for treatment with camrelizumab (3 mg/kg) and FOLFOX4 every two weeks. First, six patients were enrolled, followed by an additional 28 patients after dose-limiting toxicity cases were determined to be <33% of patients. The primary endpoint was tolerability and safety of treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 34 aHCC patients were enrolled and received study treatment. No dose-limiting toxicity were observed in the first six patients enrolled. Twenty-nine (85.3%) of the total 34 patients had grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), with the most common ones being decreased neutrophil count (55.9%) and decreased white blood cell count (38.2%). No TRAEs-related deaths occurred. The objective response and disease control rate were 29.4% (95% CI, 15.1-47.5) and 79.4% (95% CI, 62.1-91.3), respectively. The median duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival was 6.9 months (range, 3.3-11.5), 7.4 months (95% CI, 3.9-9.2), and 11.7 months (95% CI, 8.2-22.0), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Camrelizumab combined with FOLFOX4 for first-line treatment of patients with aHCC showed good safety and tolerability, with promising preliminary antitumor activity.

Efficacy and Safety of First-Line Immunotherapy Combinations for Advanced NSCLC: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

A series of randomized controlled trials have investigated different first-line immunotherapy combinations, but the optimal combination strategy is yet to be established.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis by retrieving relevant literature from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and major international conferences. We included published and gray sources of randomized clinical trials comparing immunotherapy combinations with other treatments as first-line treatments for patients with advanced NSCLC. This study was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42020210501) to ensure transparency.

RESULTS

We analyzed a total of 16 studies involving 8278 patients and including 10 immunotherapy combinations. For patients without programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) selection, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy was found to be comparable with sintilimab plus chemotherapy in providing the best overall survival (OS) benefit (hazard ratio = 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-1.29). Furthermore, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab plus chemotherapy seemed to provide the best progression-free survival (hazard ratio = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.36-0.55) and the best objective response rate (OR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.12-0.42). Subgroup analysis by PD-L1 suggested that nivolumab plus ipilimumab plus chemotherapy was associated with the best OS in patients with PD-L1 less than 1% and that pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy was associated with the best OS in patients with PD-L1 greater than or equal to 1%. Pembrolizumab and sintilimab were associated with relatively fewer grade greater than or equal to 3 adverse events when compared with other immunotherapies combined with chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that antiprogrammed death-1 combinations are associated with potentially higher survival outcomes than anti-PD-L1 combinations with comparable safety profiles. Moreover, pem-chemo and nivo-ipi-chemo seem to be superior first-line immunotherapy combinations for patients with advanced NSCLC with positive and negative PD-L1 expression, respectively. Although atezo-beva-chemo treatment provided the best progression-free survival and objective response rate, the addition of chemotherapy to immunotherapy would increase the toxicity, especially when antiangiogenesis drugs are simultaneously added.

The cutting-edge progress of immune-checkpoint blockade in lung cancer

Great advances in immune checkpoint blockade have resulted in a paradigm shift in patients with lung cancer. Immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment, either as monotherapy or combination therapy, has been established as the standard of care for patients with locally advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer without EGFR/ALK alterations or extensive-stage small cell lung cancer. An increasing number of clinical trials are also ongoing to further investigate the role of ICIs in patients with early-stage lung cancer as neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. Although PD-L1 expression and tumor mutational burden have been widely studied for patient selection, both of these biomarkers are imperfect. Due to the complex cancer-immune interactions among tumor cells, the tumor microenvironment and host immunity, collaborative efforts are needed to establish a multidimensional immunogram to integrate complementary predictive biomarkers for personalized immunotherapy. Furthermore, as a result of the wide use of ICIs, managing acquired resistance to ICI treatment remains an inevitable challenge. A deeper understanding of the underlying biological mechanisms of acquired resistance to ICIs is helpful to overcome these obstacles. In this review, we describe the cutting-edge progress made in patients with lung cancer, the optimal duration of ICI treatment, ICIs in some special populations, the unique response patterns during ICI treatment, the emerging predictive biomarkers, and our understanding of primary and acquired resistance mechanisms to ICI treatment.

Efficacy and Biomarker Analysis of Camrelizumab in Combination with Apatinib in Patients with Advanced Nonsquamous NSCLC Previously Treated with Chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Our preclinical work suggests that appropriate angiogenesis inhibition could potentiate PD-1/PD-L1 blockade via alleviating hypoxia, increasing infiltration of CD8⁺ T cells and reducing recruitment of tumor-associated macrophages. We hereby conducted a clinical trial to evaluate this combination in pretreated patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study included phase Ib apatinib dose-escalation and phase II expansion cohorts. Patients received apatinib at doses of 250-500 mg orally once daily, in combination with camrelizumab 200 mg intravenously every 2 weeks.

RESULTS

From March 2017 to October 2018, 105 chemotherapy-pretreated patients with nonsquamous NSCLC were enrolled and received apatinib 250 mg (recommended phase II dose) and camrelizumab. Among them, one (1.0%) complete response, 28 (26.7%) partial responses, and 48 (45.7%) stable diseases were observed. In the efficacy-evaluable population (n = 94), objective response rate (ORR) was 30.9% [95% confidence interval (CI), 21.7-41.2]. The median progression-free survival was 5.7 months (95% CI, 4.5-8.8) and overall survival was 15.5 months (95% CI, 10.9-24.5). Efficacy of combination therapy was evident across all PD-L1 and tumor mutation burden subgroups, and appeared to be improved in patients with STK11/KEAP1 mutation (mutant vs. wild-type, ORR: 42.9% vs. 28.1%; 1-year survival rate: 85.1% vs. 53.1%). No unexpected adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined apatinib and camrelizumab showed encouraging antitumor activity and acceptable toxicity in chemotherapy-pretreated patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. Patients with STK11/KEAP1 mutation might derive more benefits from this combination. We will validate these results in an ongoing phase III trial (NCT04203485).

A Partial Response of Pulmonary Pleomorphic Carcinoma to Camrelizumab (PD1 Monoclonal Antibody) Monotherapy: A Case Report

We report a case of a 68-year-old man diagnosed with pulmonary pleomorphic carcinoma who showed partial response after a single treatment with camrelizumab (PD1 monoclonal antibody). The patient's tumor was positive for programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and progressed rapidly after a course of chemotherapy. Fortunately, the tumors dramatically shrank after one cycle of camrelizumab, an anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) antibody developed by Chinese Hengrui Medicine. In conclusion, camrelizumab may be a good treatment option, especially in tumors that express PD-L1.

The Safety and Efficacy of Camrelizumab and Its Combination With Apatinib in Various Solid Cancers

Background: Camrelizumab (SHR1210) is a high-affinity, humanized immunoglobulin programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibody. It was developed by Jiangsu Hengrui Medicine Co. Ltd. and has been approved for relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma patients and hepatocellular carcinoma patients in China. Apatinib is an orally administered vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 (VEGFR-2) tyrosine kinase inhibitor and has been approved for advanced gastric adenocarcinoma or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma in China. Camrelizumab alone and its combination with apatinib have been used in the treatment of various solid cancers.

Methods: We searched Embase, PubMed, and other databases with the keyword “camrelizumab” or “SHR1210,” and evaluated the safety and efficacy data of the involved studies. Adverse events (AEs) mentioned in at least two studies were summarized, including any grade and grade ≥3 treatment-related AEs. Meanwhile, efficacy data were collected, such as overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), duration of response, 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate, median PFS time, 12-month overall survival rate, and median overall survival time.

Results: The major AEs of camrelizumab alone were reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation, fatigue, aspartate aminotransferase increase, proteinuria, pruritus, and alanine transaminase increase. The ORR and DCR were 20.2% (95% CI: 15.1–26.6%, p = 0.000, I² = 70.360) and 45.8% (95% CI: 39.0–52.7%, p = 0.256, I² = 58.661), respectively. In the three studies of combination therapy, two studies were combined with apatinib and one combined with chemotherapy. For these studies, common AEs were hypertension, platelet count decrease, nausea, proteinuria, aspartate aminotransferase increase, and white blood cell count decrease. The pooled ORR, DCR, and 6-month PFS rate were 41.8% (95% CI: 29.7–54.9%, p = 0.220, I² = 86.265), 82.4% (95% CI: 75.9–87.4%, p = 0.000, I² = 55.207), and 56.2% (95% CI: 35.8–74.6%, p = 0.559, I² = 79.739), respectively.

Conclusion: Camrelizumab and its combination are tolerable and appear to be efficient in treating numerous solid cancers. The combination therapy appears to have better efficacy with durable toxicity. However, these remain to be shown in future studies. Besides, baseline lactate dehydrogenase, programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, tumor mutation burden, and the incidence of reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation may be efficacy predictors and need to be clarified in further studies.

Platinum-based chemotherapy in combination with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors: preclinical and clinical studies and mechanism of action

INTRODUCTION

Platinum chemotherapy is widely used in first-line treatment of patients with various cancers. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors have shown efficacy in several cancers, and the combination of platinum-based chemotherapy and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors has gradually become the focus of attention. Recently, the combination therapy has exhibited significant effects in preclinical models and clinical trials.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes preclinical and clinical studies of the combination therapy in various cancers, and further explores mechanisms of the treatment. Furthermore, exploration of the mechanism demonstrates that the combination therapy plays a combination role in two ways. On the one hand, the positive effects of platinum-based chemotherapy on immunomodulation can be harnessed to increase the sensitivity of tumor cells to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. On the other hand, platinum-based chemotherapy may upregulate PD-L1 expression in tumor tissue and exert a negative immunomodulatory effect, which can be counteracted by PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors through their action pathway. What's more, different types of platinum-based chemotherapy exert different immunomodulation properties.

EXPERT OPINION

This review describes a potential for the combination of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors and novel nanoparticles composed of platinum-loaded complex to yield positive effects in a wide range of doses, thus achieving higher therapeutic effects and lower side effects.

ABBREVIATIONS

Treg: regulatory T cell; MDSC: myeloid-derived suppressor cell; TAM: tumor-associated macrophage; IL: interleukin; PD-1: programmed cell death protein-1; PD-L1: programmed death-ligand-1; NSCLC: non-small cell lung cancer; SCLC: small cell lung cancer; HNSCC: head and neck squamous cell cancer; ICD: immunogenic cell death; TME: tumor microenvironment; CTLs: cytotoxic T lymphocytes; TCR: T cell receptor; MHC class 1: major histocompatibility complex class 1; DC: dendritic cell; APC: antigen-presenting cell; PD-L2: programmed death-ligand-2; STAT6: signal transducers and activators of transcription 6; PLG: poly (L-glutamic acid); mPEG: methoxy poly (ethylene glycol); LLC1: Lewis lung carcinoma 1; PI3K: phosphoinositide 3-kinase; AKT: protein kinase B; MOC1: mouse oral cancer 1; cGAS: cyclic guanosine monophosphate-adenosine monophosphate synthase; STING: stimulator of interferon genes; FDA: food and drug administration; cHL: classical Hodgkin's lymphoma; PMBCL: primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma; HCC: hepatocellular carcinoma; MCC: merkel cell carcinoma; RCC: renal cell carcinoma; ORR: overall response rate; OR: overall response; OS: overall survival; PFS: progression-free survival; vs: versus; EFGR: epidermal growth factor receptor; ALK: anaplastic lymphoma kinase; ES: extensive stage; CPS: combined positive score; DOR: duration of response; ITT: intention to treat; NMPA: national medical products administration; TKI: tyrosine kinase inhibitor; NPC: nasopharyngeal cancer; DLT: dose-limiting toxicity; MTD: maximum tolerated dose; TNBC: triple-negative breast cancer; GC: gastric cancer; GEJC: gastroesophageal junction carcinoma; DCR: disease control rate; BTC: biliary tract cancer; TTR: time to response; PR: partial response; SD: stable disease; PD: progressive disease; IC₅₀: half maximal inhibitory concentration; IFN: interferon; HLA: human leukocyte antigen; NK: natural killer cell; M6PR: mannose-6-phosphate receptor; GrzB: granzyme B; TNF: tumor necrosis factor.

The relative and absolute benefit of programmed death receptor-1 vs programmed death ligand 1 therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) and its ligand (PD-L1) inhibitors have shown promising results in treating advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Our objective was to compare the relative and absolute benefits between PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors in advanced NSCLC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched up to Dec 1, 2019, for randomized controlled trials of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors that had available overall survival (OS) data in NSCLC. Random-effects models were used to calculate the pooled estimates.

RESULTS

Twenty-three randomized controlled trials (15,797 patients) of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors were included in the analysis. PD-1 inhibitors significantly extended OS compared with standard of care therapy (difference in means, 4.80 months, 95% CI 3.41-6.18; HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.66-0.78; P < 0.01 for both). PD-L1 inhibitors also significantly improved OS compared with standard of care therapy (difference in means, 2.59 months 95% CI 1.47-3.71; HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.79-0.88; P < 0.01 for both). More importantly, PD-1 inhibitors had significantly higher OS than PD-L1 inhibitors (difference in means, P = 0.015; HR, P = 0.006). The same increased OS benefit was observed in patients with PD-L1 ≥1% (P = 0.035) and PD-L1 <1% (P = 0.007). However, OS did not differ between PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with an EGFR mutation-positive status (P = 0.724) and who were never smokers (P = 0.999).

CONCLUSIONS

PD-1 inhibitors showed superior relative and absolute OS benefits compared with PD-L1 inhibitors in the treatment of advanced NSCLC. These findings have implications for treatment selection in current clinical practice and future study design.

Pharmacodynamics of current and emerging PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer

Introduction: As of today, one of the cornerstones of NSCLC treatment is represented by Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICI) treatment in the form of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies. However, apart from currently approved, recommended and employed agents (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab), several new agents are currently under development and investigation both in monotherapy and in combinational settings.Areas covered: This paper aims to discuss both the current state of the art and the most interesting emerging PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors and their present and future role in metastatic NSCLC treatment.Expert opinion: Great scientific interest lies in combinational settings, involving both already developed FDA and EMA approved and not approved agents and anti-PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors, that will certainly provide data about pharmacodynamic and clinical properties of these associations, enhancing our understanding of ICIs and cancer immunotherapy. Moreover, new potential predictive biomarkers are much needed, especially considering the less decisive role of PD-L1 in treatment algorithms involving chemo-immune combinations and the current lack of other validated predictive biomarkers.