Faculty Bibliography

Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies targeting PD-1/PD-L1 are now standard of care in oncology across several hematologic and solid tumor types, including triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Patients with metastatic or locally advanced TNBC with PD-L1 expression on immune cells occupying ≥1% of tumor area demonstrated survival benefit with the addition of atezolizumab to nab-paclitaxel. However, concerns regarding variability between immunohistochemical PD-L1 assay performance and inter-reader reproducibility have been raised. High tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have also been associated with response to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with breast cancer. TILs can be easily assessed on hematoxylin and eosin stained slides and have shown reliable inter-reader reproducibility. As an established prognostic factor in early stage TNBC, TILs are soon anticipated to be reported in daily practice in many pathology laboratories worldwide. Since TILs and PD-L1 are parts of an immunological spectrum in breast cancer, we propose the systematic implementation of combined PD-L1 and TIL analyses as a more comprehensive immune-oncological biomarker for patient selection for PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition-based therapy in patients with breast cancer. Although practical and regulatory considerations differ by jurisdiction, the pathology community has the responsibility to patients to implement assays that lead to optimal patient selection. We propose herewith a risk-management framework that may help mitigate the risks of suboptimal patient selection for immuno-therapeutic approaches in clinical trials and daily practice based on combined TILs/PD-L1 assessment in breast cancer. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

BACKGROUND:Immunotherapy in combination with chemotherapy has shown promising efficacy across many different tumour types. We report the prespecified second interim overall survival analysis of the phase 3 IMpassion130 study assessing the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel in patients with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. METHODS:of body surface area intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Investigators, patients, and the funder were masked to treatment assignment. Coprimary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 and overall survival, assessed in the intention-to-treat population and in patients with PD-L1 immune cell-positive tumours (tumours with ≥1% PD-L1 expression). The final progression-free survival results were previously reported at the first interim overall survival analysis. The prespecified statistical testing hierarchy meant that overall survival in the subgroup of PD-L1 immune cell-positive patients could only be formally tested if overall survival was significantly different between the treatment groups in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02425891. FINDINGS/RESULTS:Between June 23, 2015, and May 24, 2017, 902 patients were enrolled, of whom 451 were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel and 451 were assigned to receive placebo plus nab-paclitaxel (the intention-to-treat population). Six patients from each group did not receive treatment. At the second interim analysis (data cutoff Jan 2, 2019), median follow-up was 18·5 months (IQR 9·6-22·8) in the atezolizumab group and 17·5 months (8·4-22·4) in the placebo group. Median overall survival in the intention-to-treat patients was 21·0 months (95% CI 19·0-22·6) with atezolizumab and 18·7 months (16·9-20·3) with placebo (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·86, 95% CI 0·72-1·02, p=0·078). In the exploratory overall survival analysis in patients with PD-L1 immune cell-positive tumours, median overall survival was 25·0 months (95% CI 19·6-30·7) with atezolizumab versus 18·0 months (13·6-20·1) with placebo (stratified HR 0·71, 0·54-0·94]). As of Sept 3, 2018 (the date up to which updated safety data were available), the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (38 [8%] of 453 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 36 [8%] of 437 patients in the placebo group), peripheral neuropathy (25 [6%] vs 12 [3%]), decreased neutrophil count (22 [5%] vs 16 [4%]), and fatigue (17 [4%] vs 15 [3%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in two (<1%) patients in the atezolizumab group (autoimmune hepatitis related to atezolizumab [n=1] and septic shock related to nab-paclitaxel [n=1]) and one (<1%) patient in the placebo group (hepatic failure). No new treatment-related deaths have been reported since the primary clinical data cutoff date (April 17, 2018). INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:Consistent with the first interim analysis, this second interim overall survival analysis of IMpassion130 indicates no significant difference in overall survival between the treatment groups in the intention-to-treat population but suggests a clinically meaningful overall survival benefit with atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel in patients with PD-L1 immune cell-positive disease. However, this positive result could not be formally tested due to the prespecified statistical testing hierarchy. For patients with PD-L1 immune cell-positive metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel is an important therapeutic option in a disease with high unmet need. FUNDING/BACKGROUND:F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

Stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) are a potential predictive biomarker for immunotherapy response in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). To incorporate sTILs into clinical trials and diagnostics, reliable assessment is essential. In this review, we propose a new concept, namely the implementation of a risk-management framework that enables the use of sTILs as a stratification factor in clinical trials. We present the design of a biomarker risk-mitigation workflow that can be applied to any biomarker incorporation in clinical trials. We demonstrate the implementation of this concept using sTILs as an integral biomarker in a single-center phase II immunotherapy trial for metastatic TNBC (TONIC trial, NCT02499367), using this workflow to mitigate risks of suboptimal inclusion of sTILs in this specific trial. In this review, we demonstrate that a web-based scoring platform can mitigate potential risk factors when including sTILs in clinical trials, and we argue that this framework can be applied for any future biomarker-driven clinical trial setting.

Assessment of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) is increasingly recognized as an integral part of the prognostic workflow in triple-negative (TNBC) and HER2-positive breast cancer, as well as many other solid tumors. This recognition has come about thanks to standardized visual reporting guidelines, which helped to reduce inter-reader variability. Now, there are ripe opportunities to employ computational methods that extract spatio-morphologic predictive features, enabling computer-aided diagnostics. We detail the benefits of computational TILs assessment, the readiness of TILs scoring for computational assessment, and outline considerations for overcoming key barriers to clinical translation in this arena. Specifically, we discuss: 1. ensuring computational workflows closely capture visual guidelines and standards; 2. challenges and thoughts standards for assessment of algorithms including training, preanalytical, analytical, and clinical validation; 3. perspectives on how to realize the potential of machine learning models and to overcome the perceptual and practical limits of visual scoring.

Stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) are important prognostic and predictive biomarkers in triple-negative (TNBC) and HER2-positive breast cancer. Incorporating sTILs into clinical practice necessitates reproducible assessment. Previously developed standardized scoring guidelines have been widely embraced by the clinical and research communities. We evaluated sources of variability in sTIL assessment by pathologists in three previous sTIL ring studies. We identify common challenges and evaluate impact of discrepancies on outcome estimates in early TNBC using a newly-developed prognostic tool. Discordant sTIL assessment is driven by heterogeneity in lymphocyte distribution. Additional factors include: technical slide-related issues; scoring outside the tumor boundary; tumors with minimal assessable stroma; including lymphocytes associated with other structures; and including other inflammatory cells. Small variations in sTIL assessment modestly alter risk estimation in early TNBC but have the potential to affect treatment selection if cutpoints are employed. Scoring and averaging multiple areas, as well as use of reference images, improve consistency of sTIL evaluation. Moreover, to assist in avoiding the pitfalls identified in this analysis, we developed an educational resource available at www.tilsinbreastcancer.org/pitfalls.

BACKGROUND:Growing evidence suggests that the tumor immune microenvironment influences breast cancer development and prognosis. Density of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) within invasive breast cancer is correlated with response to therapy, especially in triple-negative disease. The clinical relevance and outcomes of TILs within ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) are less understood. METHODS:Our institutional database of 668 patients with pure DCIS from 2010 to 2018 was queried. TILs were evaluated by International TILs Working Group guidelines. Percentage of TILs was assessed from the densest focus (hotspot) in one high-power field of stroma touching the basement membrane. Statistical methods included cluster analyses (to define sparse versus dense TILs), logistic, and Cox regression models. RESULTS:Sixty-nine patients with DCIS and TILs were evaluated, of whom 54 (78%) were treated by breast-conserving surgery. Thirteen (19%) patients had ipsilateral recurrence. Each recurrence (n = 13) was matched to four controls (n = 56) based on date of surgery. Median follow-up was 6.7 years. TILs were defined as sparse (< 45%) or dense (≥ 45%). Dense TILs were associated with younger age (p = 0.045), larger tumor size (p < 0.001), high nuclear grade (p = 0.010), comedo histology (p = 0.033), necrosis (p = 0.027), estrogen receptor (ER) negativity (p = 0.037), and ipsilateral recurrence (p = 0.001). Nine patients with dense TILs had mean time to recurrence of 73.5 months compared with four patients with sparse TILs with mean time to recurrence of 97.9 months (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS:Dense TILs were significantly associated with age, tumor size, nuclear grade, comedo histology, necrosis, and ER status and was a significant predictor of recurrence in patients with pure DCIS.

Metaplastic breast carcinomas (MPBC) are rare, aggressive and relatively chemorefractory tumors with a high unmet need. While most are "triple negative" and lack expression of estrogen, progesterone and HER2 receptors, MPBC are associated with worse outcomes compared to conventional triple negative invasive tumors. MPBCs are genetically heterogeneous and harbor somatic mutations, most frequently in TP53, PIK3CA and PTEN, with emerging studies suggesting a role for novel targeted therapies. These tumors have also been associated with overexpression of PD-L1 and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes suggesting an endogenous immune response and therefore a rationale for treatment with immunotherapies. Here, we focus on therapeutic options for this difficult to treat breast cancer subtype and encourage physicians to consider targeted therapies/immunotherapies as part of ongoing clinical trials.

Importance/UNASSIGNED:There is tremendous interest in using immunotherapy to treat breast cancer, as evidenced by the more than 290 clinical trials ongoing at the time of this narrative review. The objective of this review is to describe the current status of immunotherapy in breast cancer, highlighting its potential in both early-stage and metastatic disease. Observations/UNASSIGNED:After searching ClinicalTrials.gov on April 24, 2018, and PubMed up to June 30, 2018, to identify breast cancer immunotherapy trials, we found that immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) is the most investigated form of immunotherapy in breast cancer. Use of ICB as monotherapy has achieved objective responses in patients with breast cancer, with higher rates seen when administered in earlier lines of therapy. For responding patients, those responses are durable. More recent data suggest clinical efficacy when ICB is given in combination with chemotherapy. Ongoing studies are evaluating combination strategies pairing ICB with additional chemotherapeutic agents, targeted therapy, vaccines, and local ablative therapies to enhance response. To date, robust predictive biomarkers for response to ICB have not been established. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:It is anticipated that combination therapy strategies will be the way forward for immunotherapy in breast cancer, with an improved understanding of tumor, microenvironment, and host factors informing treatment combination decisions. Thoughtful study design incorporating appropriate end points and correlative studies will be critical in identifying optimal strategies for enhancing the immune response against breast tumors.