Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:In the Phase III IMpassion130 study, atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel (A+nP) showed clinical benefit in advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients who were programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) + (tumor-infiltrating immune cells [IC] ≥1%) using the SP142 immunohistochemistry (IHC) assay. Here we evaluate 2 other PD-L1 assays for analytical concordance with SP142 and patient-associated clinical outcomes. METHODS:Samples from 614 patients (68.1% of intention-to-treat population) were centrally evaluated by IHC for PD-L1 status on IC (VENTANA SP142, SP263, Dako 22C3) or as a combined positive score (CPS; 22C3). RESULTS:Using SP142, SP263, and 22C3 assays, PD-L1 IC ≥ 1% prevalence was 46.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 42.5-50.4%), 74.9% (95% CI = 71.5-78.3%), and 73.1% (95% CI = 69.6-76.6%), respectively; 80.9% were 22C3 at CPS ≥1. At IC ≥ 1% (+), the analytical concordance between SP142 and SP263 and 22C3 was 69.2% and 68.7%, respectively. Almost all SP142+ cases were captured by other assays (double positive), but several SP263 + (29.6%) or 22C3 + (29.0%) cases were SP142- (single positive). A+nP clinical activity vs placebo+nP in SP263+ and 22C3+ patients (progression-free survival [PFS] hazard ratios [HRs] = 0.64-0.68; overall survival [OS] HRs = 0.75-0.79) was driven by double-positive (PFS HRs = 0.60-0.61; OS HRs = 0.71-0.75) rather than single-positive cases (PFS HRs = 0.68-0.81; OS HRs = 0.87-0.95). Concordance for harmonized cutoffs for SP263 (IC ≥ 4%) and 22C3 (CPS ≥10) to SP142 IC ≥ 1% was subpar (approximately 75%). CONCLUSIONS:22C3 and SP263 assays identified more patients as PD-L1 + (IC ≥ 1%) than SP142. No inter-assay analytical equivalency was observed. Consistent improved A+nP efficacy was captured by the SP142 PD-L1 IC ≥ 1% subgroup nested within 22C3 and SP263 PD-L1 + (IC ≥ 1%) populations.

Tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) promote metastasis and inhibit T cells, but macrophages can be polarized to kill cancer cells. Macrophage polarization could thus be a strategy for controlling cancer. We show that macrophages from metastatic pleural effusions of breast cancer patients can be polarized to kill cancer cells with monophosphoryl lipid A (MPLA) and interferon (IFN) γ. MPLA + IFNγ injected intratumorally or intraperitoneally reduces primary tumor growth and metastasis in breast cancer mouse models, suppresses metastasis, and enhances chemotherapy response in an ovarian cancer model. Both macrophages and T cells are critical for the treatment's anti-metastatic effects. MPLA + IFNγ stimulates type I IFN signaling, reprograms CD206⁺ TAMs to inducible NO synthase (iNOS)⁺ macrophages, and activates cytotoxic T cells through macrophage-secreted interleukin-12 (IL-12) and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα). MPLA and IFNγ are used individually in clinical practice and together represent a previously unexplored approach for engaging a systemic anti-tumor immune response.

In 2014, we described a method to quantify percentage of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) on hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides of breast cancer samples using light microscopy that could be performed easily by pathologists with no extra stains. The aim of detailing the method was to facilitate independent research groups replicating our prognostic findings using TIL quantity in early-stage breast cancers. A global working group of breast pathologists was convened to standardize, test reproducibility, and refine the method. A website was also established which allowed free training (www.tilsinbreastcancer.org). As a result of this work, TIL data have been collected in over 20 000 primary breast cancer samples worldwide and the robust associations with better prognoses in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and HER2+ BC have been confirmed. This has resulted in the inclusion of the TIL biomarker in several international breast cancer guidelines as well as in national criteria for routine pathology reporting. TIL therefore represents the first biological prognostic biomarker for early-stage TNBCs, and here its prognostic effect is linear, with values of 30%-50% being suggested as suitable for use in potential chemotherapy de-escalation studies. The efficacy of immune checkpoint-targeted agents in breast cancer now provides direct evidence that host immune responses can modify tumor growth in some patients. With the recent granting of accelerated approvals for the first PD-1/PD-L1 targeting agents in early and advanced TNBC, our focus has now moved to investigating the clinical utility of TIL in the setting of immune checkpoint agents, with or without PD-L1 protein assessment. Emerging data suggest that TIL quantity can help clinicians identify patients with breast cancer who benefit most from PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition. In patients with advanced TNBC and HER2+ disease a TIL cut-off of 5% or 10%, with PD-L1 expression can define 'immune-enriched' tumors and currently seems to have the most clinical relevance in this context.

BACKGROUND:Understanding the impact of the tumor immune microenvironment and BRCA1/2-related DNA repair deficiencies on the clinical activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors may help optimize both patient and treatment selection in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. In this substudy from the phase 3 IMpassion130 trial, immune biomarkers and BRCA1/2 alterations were evaluated for association with clinical benefit with atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel (A+nP) vs placebo and nP in unresectable (P+nP) locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. METHODS:Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle) and atezolizumab 840 mg every 2 weeks or placebo until progression or toxicity. Progression-free survival and overall survival were evaluated based on programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression on immune cells (IC) and tumor cells, intratumoral CD8, stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, and BRCA1/2 mutations. RESULTS:PD-L1 IC+ in either primary or metastatic tumor tissue was linked to progression-free survival and overall survival benefit with A+nP. PD-L1 IC+ low (26.9%; 243 of 902 patients) and high (13.9%; 125 of 902 patients) populations had improved outcomes that were comparable. Intratumoral CD8 and stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes positivity (sTIL+) were associated with PD-L1 IC+ status; improved outcomes were observed with A+nP vs P+nP only in CD8+ and sTIL+ patients who were also PD-L1 IC+. BRCA1/2 mutations (occurring in 14.5% [89 of 612 patients]) were not associated with PD-L1 IC status, and PD-L1 IC+ patients benefited from A+nP regardless of BRCA1/2 mutation status. CONCLUSIONS:Although A+nP was more efficacious in patients with richer tumor immune microenvironment, clinical benefit was only observed in patients whose tumors were PD-L1 IC+.

BACKGROUND:Guidelines recommend atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel (A + nP) for first-line treatment of unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer expressing programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) on tumor-infiltrating immune cells (IC), based on IMpassion130. We report the final overall survival (OS) and safety of that study as per the prespecified analysis plan. PATIENTS AND METHODS:(days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle) with atezolizumab 840 mg (A + nP) or placebo (P + nP; days 1 and 15), until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Coprimary endpoints were progression-free survival [intention-to-treat (ITT) and PD-L1 IC-positive populations] and OS (tested hierarchically in the ITT population and, if significant, in the PD-L1 IC-positive population). RESULTS:Each arm comprised 451 patients; 666 (73.8%) had died by the final OS analysis cut-off (median follow-up, 18.8 months; interquartile range, 8.9-34.7 months). Median OS in the ITT population was 21.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 19.0-23.4 months] with A + nP, and 18.7 months (95% CI, 16.9-20.8 months) with P + nP [stratified hazard ratio (HR), 0.87; 95% CI, 0.75-1.02; P = 0.077]. Exploratory analysis in the PD-L1 IC-positive population showed a median OS of 25.4 months (95% CI, 19.6-30.7 months) with A + nP (n = 185) and 17.9 months (95% CI, 13.6-20.3 months) with P + nP (n = 184; stratified HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.53-0.86). Safety outcomes were consistent with previous analyses and the known toxicity profiles of each agent. Immune-mediated adverse events of special interest were reported in 58.7% and 41.6% of patients treated with A + nP and P + nP, respectively. CONCLUSION:Although the OS benefit in the ITT population was not statistically significant, precluding formal testing, clinically meaningful OS benefit was observed with A + nP in PD-L1 IC-positive patients, consistent with prior interim analyses. This combination remained safe and tolerable with longer follow-up.

Breast cancer has historically been a disease for which immunotherapy was largely unavailable. Recently, the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) has demonstrated efficacy, including longer progression-free survival and increased overall survival in subsets of patients. Based on clinical benefit in randomized trials, ICIs in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of some patients with advanced/metastatic TNBC have been approved by the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA), expanding options for patients. Ongoing questions remain, however, about the optimal chemotherapy backbone for immunotherapy, appropriate biomarker-based selection of patients for treatment, the optimal strategy for immunotherapy treatment in earlier stage disease, and potential use in histological subtypes other than TNBC. To provide guidance to the oncology community on these and other important concerns, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts to develop a clinical practice guideline (CPG). The expert panel drew upon the published literature as well as their clinical experience to develop recommendations for healthcare professionals on these important aspects of immunotherapeutic treatment for breast cancer, including diagnostic testing, treatment planning, immune-related adverse events (irAEs), and patient quality of life (QOL) considerations. The evidence-based and consensus-based recommendations in this CPG are intended to give guidance to cancer care providers treating patients with breast cancer.

COVID-19 can be especially dangerous in vulnerable populations such as those with cancer undergoing treatment. When it is discovered in an asymptomatic patient through imaging, there is a paucity of evidence-based treatment recommendations.