MicroRNA-based signatures impacting clinical course and biology of ovarian cancer: a miRNOmics study

Background

In Western countries, ovarian cancer (OC) still represents the leading cause of gynecological cancer-related deaths, despite the remarkable gains in therapeutical options. Novel biomarkers of early diagnosis, prognosis definition and prediction of treatment outcomes are of pivotal importance. Prior studies have shown the potentials of micro-ribonucleic acids (miRNAs) as biomarkers for OC and other cancers.

Methods

We focused on the prognostic and/or predictive potential of miRNAs in OC by conducting a comprehensive array profiling of miRNA expression levels in ovarian tissue samples from 17 non-neoplastic controls, and 60 tumor samples from OC patients treated at the Regina Elena National Cancer Institute (IRE). A set of 54 miRNAs with differential expression in tumor versus normal samples (T/N-deregulated) was identified in the IRE cohort and validated against data from the Cancer Genoma Atlas (TCGA) related to 563 OC patients and 8 non-neoplastic controls. The prognostic/predictive role of the selected 54 biomarkers was tested in reference to survival endpoints and platinum resistance (P-res).

Results

In the IRE cohort, downregulation of the 2 miRNA-signature including miR-99a-5p and miR-320a held a negative prognostic relevance, while upregulation of miR-224-5p was predictive of less favorable event free survival (EFS) and P-res. Data from the TCGA showed that downregulation of 5 miRNAs, i.e., miR-150, miR-30d, miR-342, miR-424, and miR-502, was associated with more favorable EFS and overall survival outcomes, while miR-200a upregulation was predictive of P-res. The 9 miRNAs globally identified were all included into a single biologic signature, which was tested in enrichment analysis using predicted/validated miRNA target genes, followed by network representation of the miRNA-mRNA interactions.

Conclusions

Specific dysregulated microRNA sets in tumor tissue showed predictive/prognostic value in OC, and resulted in a promising biological signature for this disease.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40364-021-00289-6.

KEAP1-driven co-mutations in lung adenocarcinoma unresponsive to immunotherapy despite high tumor mutational burden

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated significant overall survival (OS) benefit in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). Nevertheless, a remarkable interpatient heterogeneity characterizes immunotherapy efficacy, regardless of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and tumor mutational burden (TMB). KEAP1 mutations are associated with shorter survival in LUAD patients receiving chemotherapy. We hypothesized that the pattern of KEAP1 co-mutations and mutual exclusivity may identify LUAD patients unresponsive to immunotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

KEAP1 mutational co-occurrences and somatic interactions were studied in the whole MSKCC LUAD dataset. The impact of coexisting alterations on survival outcomes in ICI-treated LUAD patients was verified in the randomized phase II/III POPLAR/OAK trials (blood-based sequencing, bNGS cohort, N = 253). Three tissue-based sequencing studies (Rome, MSKCC and DFCI) were used for independent validation (tNGS cohort, N = 289). Immunogenomic features were analyzed using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) LUAD study.

RESULTS

On the basis of KEAP1 mutational co-occurrences, we identified four genes potentially associated with reduced efficacy of immunotherapy (KEAP1, PBRM1, SMARCA4 and STK11). Independent of the nature of co-occurring alterations, tumors with coexisting mutations (CoMut) had inferior survival as compared with single-mutant (SM) and wild-type (WT) tumors (bNGS cohort: CoMut versus SM log-rank P = 0.048, CoMut versus WT log-rank P < 0.001; tNGS cohort: CoMut versus SM log-rank P = 0.037, CoMut versus WT log-rank P = 0.006). The CoMut subset harbored higher TMB than the WT disease and the adverse significance of coexisting alterations was maintained in LUAD with high TMB. Significant immunogenomic differences were observed between the CoMut and WT groups in terms of core immune signatures, T-cell receptor repertoire, T helper cell signatures and immunomodulatory genes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that coexisting alterations in a limited set of genes characterize a subset of LUAD unresponsive to immunotherapy and with high TMB. An immune-cold microenvironment may account for the clinical course of the disease.

Immunotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer: state of the art and future perspectives

Breast cancer (BC) is a complex disease with primary or acquired incurability characteristics in a significant part of patients. Immunotherapeutical agents represent an emerging option for breast cancer treatment, including the human epidermal growth factor 2 positive (HER2+) subtype. The immune system holds the ability to spontaneously implement a defensive response against HER2+ BC cells through complex mechanisms which can be exploited to modulate this response for obtaining a clinical benefit. Initial immune system modulating strategies consisted mostly in vaccine therapies, which are still being investigated and improved. However, the entrance of trastuzumab into the scenery of HER2+ BC treatment was the real game changing event, which embodied a dominant immune-mediated mechanism. More recently, the advent of the immune checkpoint inhibitors has caused a new paradigm shift for immuno-oncology, with promising initial results also for HER2+ BC. Breast cancer has been traditionally considered poorly immunogenic, being characterized by relatively low tumor mutation burden (TMB). Nevertheless, recent evidence has revealed high tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in a considerable proportion of HER2+ BC patients. This may translate into a higher potential to elicit anti-cancer response and, therefore, wider possibilities for the use and implementation of immunotherapy in this subset of BC patients. We are herein presenting and critically discussing the most representative evidence concerning immunotherapy in HER2+ BC cancer, both singularly and in combination with therapeutic agents acting throughout HER2-block, immune checkpoint inhibition and anti-cancer vaccines. The reader will be also provided with hints concerning potential future projection of the most promising immutherapeutic agents and approaches for the disease of interest.

Abstract P4-13-07: SEQUERPLUS: A multicenter real practice observational study investigating the endocrine-based (E) therapies sequential approach in hormonal receptor positive (HR+) HER2 negative (-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC)

Background: Despite the sequential E therapy is recognized as the preferred approach for HR+/HER2- MBC, no data from clinical trials support the choice between the different sequential strategies.

Methods: In this retrospective study descriptive statistics are reported using the median (Interquartile range, IQR) or frequency. Progression Free Survival (PFS) curves were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. Analysis were performed by SPSS version 21.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).

Results: From January 2006 to December 2017, 240 patients (pts) with HR+/HER2- MBC receiving at least two consecutive E therapies as first approach were selected from 12 italian cancer centers. The median age at the time of metastasis onset was 63.5 (IQR: 55-72.5) years; 184 (76.7%) pts were in menopausal status; 38 (16%) had de novo stage IV disease and the remaining 202 (84%) had recurrent BC with a median time of 78 months (5-396 months). At the beginning of MBC diagnosis, 148 (62%) pts had a single site of distant disease, 108 (45%) of whom had bone only disease and 45 (18.8%) presented visceral involvement too. The aromatase inhibitor (AI) was chosen as I-line therapy in 146 (60.9%) pts, followed by Fulvestrant (F) in 62 (25.8%) pts; the alternative I-line options were everolimus-exemestane (Eve-Exe), tamoxifene (T), Palbociclib (P)+AI and F+AI in 13 (5.4%), 14 (5.8%), 1 (0.4%) and 4 (1.7%) pts, respectively. The most favourite II-line option resulted F for 111 (46.2%) pts while the Eve-Exe combination was chosen in 70 (29.2%) pts, AI in 30 (12.5%) pts; T, AI+F, P+F and antiprogestincwere administered in 4 (1.7%), 4 (1.7%), 19 (7.9%) and 2 (0.8%) pts, respectively. For I and II-line, the AI followed by F (40%) and F followed by Eve-Exe (18%) were the most common sequential therapeutic approaches; the several alternative options were scanty used (in less than 10%). The median Progression-Free Survival (PFS) from first and second-line E therapies resulted 15.7 (95% CI 13.3-18.1) and 10.3 months (95% CI 8.7-11.9), respectively. Among 194 pts with disease progression after second-line E therapy, 87 (44.8%) received further E therapies with a median PFS 9.4 months (95% CI 7.9-10.9). The remaining 70 (29.2%) pts was treated with palliative chemotherapy. Interestingly, the median Overall Survival (OS) was even longer for pts receiving more lines of E therapies compared to the group with earlier introduction of chemotherapy (204.3 vs 92.8; p=0.007).

Finally, in the subgroup analyses a longer PFS benefit was observed in pts with disease recurrence over 12 months from initial diagnosis (38.1 vs 30.3 months p=0.04) and limited sites of disease involvement at the time of MBC diagnosis (37.6 vs 28.3 months, p=0.03)

Conclusions: The sequential use in first and second-line setting of E therapies for HR+/HER2- MBC improves median PFS up to 32.3 months. According to real practice experience the optimal sequences could be AIs followed by F and F followed by Eve-Exe. A role for these compounds should be redefined in the light of recently introduction of CDK 4/6 inhibitors in combination with AIs or F for the first or later lines.

Citation Format: Fabi A, Giannarelli D, Botticelli A, Scagnoli S, Pellegrino A, Fabbri A, Corsi D, Magri V, Pizzuti L, Paris I, Bruni V, Pace R, Lanzetta G, Stani S, Moscetti L, Marchetti P, Piesco G, Cognetti F, Rossi V. SEQUERPLUS: A multicenter real practice observational study investigating the endocrine-based (E) therapies sequential approach in hormonal receptor positive (HR+) HER2 negative (-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-13-07.

Targeting immune response with therapeutic vaccines in premalignant lesions and cervical cancer: hope or reality from clinical studies

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is widely known as a cause of cervical cancer (CC) and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). HPVs related to cancer express two main oncogenes, i.e. E6 and E7, considered as tumorigenic genes; their integration into the host genome results in the abnormal regulation of cell cycle control. Due to their peculiarities, these oncogenes represent an excellent target for cancer immunotherapy. In this work the authors highlight the potential use of therapeutic vaccines as safe and effective pharmacological tools in cervical disease, focusing on vaccines that have reached the clinical trial phase. Many therapeutic HPV vaccines have been tested in clinical trials with promising results. Adoptive T-cell therapy showed clinical activity in a phase II trial involving advanced CC patients. A phase II randomized trial showed clinical activity of a nucleic acid-based vaccine in HPV16 or HPV18 positive CIN. Several trials involving peptide-protein-based vaccines and live-vector based vaccines demonstrated that these approaches are effective in CIN as well as in advanced CC patients. HPV therapeutic vaccines must be regarded as a therapeutic option in cervical disease. The synergic combination of HPV therapeutic vaccines with radiotherapy, chemotherapy, immunomodulators or immune checkpoint inhibitors opens a new and interesting scenario in this disease.

Optimal tolerability and high efficacy of a modified schedule of lapatinib-capecitabine in advanced breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

Diarrhea in relation to the lapatinib-capecitabine regimen is a common and debilitating side effect which may interfere with optimal treatment delivery. We performed a post hoc analysis in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive advanced breast cancer patients treated with a modified schedule in its administration, aimed primarily to evaluate grade (G) ≥ 2 diarrhea incidence and, secondarily, treatment efficacy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Treatment schedule consisted of lapatinib 1,250 mg daily for the first 10 days, then in combination with capecitabine, 2,000 mg/m(2), starting day 11 for the first cycle, and thereafter from day 8, for 14 days of a 21-day cycle, in 3 daily administrations. Lapatinib was dissolved in water, and cholestyramine was continuously given twice a day.

RESULTS

Among 38 patients treated and analyzed, the incidence of G ≥ 2 diarrhea was 13.2 %. In 28 patients diarrhea was not observed, while G1-2 diarrhea was reported in 9 (23.7 %) patients; a single episode of G3 diarrhea was observed in 1 (2.6 %) patient. Overall response rate was 34.2 %, clinical benefit 55.3 %, and median progression-free survival 10 months.

CONCLUSION

The results of the present post hoc analysis are very encouraging, both in terms of tolerability and treatment efficacy, and all data compare favorably with previous reports of "conventional" administration of the lapatinib-capecitabine regimen.

Recurrence risk in small, node-negative, early breast cancer: a multicenter retrospective analysis

PURPOSE

Recurrences and deaths are known to occur, even if less frequently, in small, node-negative breast cancer patients, and decision on adjuvant treatments remains controversial. In the present analysis, we evaluate recurrence risk in patients with pT1 a, b, c, node-negative, breast cancer, accordingly with some prognostic biological factors.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 900 node-negative patients (pT1a, b, c) surgery treated between 2000 and 2009 in four Italian oncologic centers. We defined 3 different cohorts: ER positive (ER+); Her-2 positive (Her-2+); and triple negative (TN).

RESULTS

pT1a was seen in 7.6% of patients, 37.7 % pT1b, 54.8 % pT1c. Concerning the 3 different cohorts, 58.2 % were ER+; 10.8 % were Her-2+; 8.2 % were TN. Overall, chemotherapy was given to 3.0 %, 27.2 %, 69.8 % of pT1a, b, c, respectively, and to 22.7 %, 58.8 %, 68.9 % of ER+, Her-2+, TN subgroups. At a median follow-up of 67 months, 5-year DFS was 96.3 %, 89.2 %, 89.4 % in pT1a, b, c, respectively (100 %, 93.6 %, 89.8 % in ER+; 100 %, 78.7 %, 85.0 % in Her-2+; 100 %, 76.8 %, 85.2 % in TN) (p = ns). At multivariate analysis, histologic grade and Ki-67 resulted independent prognostic factors. Overall, 5-year OS was 98 %, without differences among pT1a, b, c, or among the 3 cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, 5-year DFS was very favorable in this series of small, node-negative breast cancers, but Her-2+ and TN cohorts have a higher recurrence rate than ER+ cohort (p < 0.0001); pT1c, but also pT1b, in Her-2+ and TN subgroups, have a worse outcome, and effective chemotherapy treatment should be considered in these unfavorable subgroups.

A multicenter phase II randomized trial of docetaxel/gemcitabine versus docetaxel/capecitabine as first-line treatment for advanced breast cancer: a Gruppo Oncologico Italia Meridionale study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate two docetaxel-based regimens as first-line treatment in advanced breast cancer patients.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to docetaxel/gemcitabine (arm A: docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1, gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8) or docetaxel/capecitabine (arm B: docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1, capecitabine 1,250 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14); both chemotherapy regimens were repeated every 21 days. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the response rate.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients were enrolled (36 each in arms A and B). Responses according to intention-to-treat analysis were as follows: arm A, 41.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 25.6-57.8]; arm B, 38.9% (95% CI 23-54.8). Median progression-free survival was 10.9 months (95% CI 8.1-13.7) in arm A and 10 months (95% CI 8.8-11.2) in arm B. Overall survival was 26 months (95% CI 22.0-30.0) in arm A and 28 months (95% CI 23.4-32.6) in arm B. Both treatments were well tolerated; myelosuppression was the dose-limiting toxicity, with grade 3-4 neutropenia in 13.8 and 19.4% of the patients in arms A and B, respectively. No relevant differences in other toxicities were observed in the two arms, except for diarrhea (13.9%) and hand-foot syndrome (11.1%), which occurred only in arm B.

CONCLUSIONS

Both regimens were active and well tolerated in advanced breast cancer.

[Specificity of action of anticancer agents]

Since the first cancer chemotherapy use, efforts have been made in identifying drugs with an antitumor specific action, but cancer is a very complex situation to be cured with a single agent, and to increase drugs selective cytotoxicity new agent combinations, or innovative cellular cycle related schedule, or the use of pro-drugs have been developed. Notwithstanding some relevant improvements in results, chemotherapy remains often a palliative approach. The improved knowledge of the biology of cancer, and of molecular mechanisms and specific targets, has recently modified the approach to various tumors. In particular, the identification of a single and specific genetic alteration in some tumors such as myeloid chronic leukaemia or gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) led to the development of imatinib, a "target" drug with a multikinase inhibitor activity towards the specific genetic alteration; this unique opportunity is not applicable to other tumors, because usually tumors have multiple genetic alterations with very complex molecular pathways. The development of drugs with a multitarget action is probably the best approach to the majority of human cancers, but other possibility are the combination of multiple agents, each with known selective activity towards a specific molecular target, or the choice of a chemotherapic drug in combination with one or more molecularly targeted drugs. The knowledge of the multiple and extremely complex molecular pathways of the neoplastic cells will hopefully drive oncologic science towards a more "exact" science, with the use of "personalized" treatment in each cancer patient.

Biological progression of breast cancer and clinical implications

The classic view of tumor progression is that genetic mutation introduced in differentiated or progenitor cells causes tumors, through the acquisition of advantages for survival, and leading to phenotypic heterogeneity. Another theory (stem cell hypothesis) considers that tumor progression derives from cells within the tumor with stem cell characteristics of self-renewal and multiple differentiation potential. It is still unknown the timing of expression of various biological characteristics of breast cancer during the progression cascade, and the existence of clonal heterogeneity within primary tumor and synchronous or asynchronous distant metastases contributes to treatments failures.