Atezolizumab and nab-Paclitaxel in Advanced Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Biomarker Evaluation of the IMpassion130 Study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: 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+.
SUBMITTER: Emens LA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8328980 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundIn the phase III IMpassion130 study, atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel (A+nP) showed clinical benefit in advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer patients who were programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)+ (tumor-infiltrating immune cells [IC] ≥1%) using the SP142 immunohistochemistry assay. Here we evaluate 2 other PD-L1 assays for analytical concordance with SP142 and patient-associated clinical outcomes.MethodsSamples from 614 patients (68.1% of intention-to-treat population) were centrally evaluated by immunohistochemistry for PD-L1 status on IC (VENTANA SP142, SP263, Dako 22C3) or as a combined positive score (CPS; 22C3).ResultsUsing SP142, SP263, and 22C3 assays, PD-L1 IC ≥1% prevalence was 46.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 42.5% to 50.4%), 74.9% (95% CI = 71.5% to 78.3%), and 73.1% (95% CI = 69.6% to 76.6%), respectively; 80.9% were 22C3 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 to 0.68; overall survival [OS] HRs = 0.75 to 0.79) was driven by double-positive cases (PFS HRs = 0.60 to 0.61; OS HRs = 0.71 to 0.75) rather than single-positive cases (PFS HRs = 0.68 to 0.81; OS HRs = 0.87 to 0.95). Concordance for harmonized cutoffs for SP263 (IC ≥4%) and 22C3 (CPS ≥10) to SP142 (IC ≥1%) was subpar (approximately 75%).Conclusions22C3 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.
| S-EPMC8634452 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImmune checkpoint blockade therapy has clearly shown clinical activity in patients with triple-negative breast cancer, but less than half of the patients benefit from the treatments. While a number of ongoing clinical trials are investigating different combinations of checkpoint inhibitors and chemotherapeutic agents, predictive biomarkers that identify patients most likely to benefit remains one of the major challenges. Here we present a modular quantitative systems pharmacology (QSP) platform for immuno-oncology that incorporates detailed mechanisms of immune-cancer cell interactions to make efficacy predictions and identify predictive biomarkers for treatments using atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel.MethodsA QSP model was developed based on published data of triple-negative breast cancer. With the model, we generated a virtual patient cohort to conduct in silico virtual clinical trials and make retrospective analyses of the pivotal IMpassion130 trial that led to the accelerated approval of atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel for patients with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) positive triple-negative breast cancer. Available data from clinical trials were used for model calibration and validation.ResultsWith the calibrated virtual patient cohort based on clinical data from the placebo comparator arm of the IMpassion130 trial, we made efficacy predictions and identified potential predictive biomarkers for the experimental arm of the trial using the proposed QSP model. The model predictions are consistent with clinically reported efficacy endpoints and correlated immune biomarkers. We further performed a series of virtual clinical trials to compare different doses and schedules of the two drugs for simulated therapeutic optimization.ConclusionsThis study provides a QSP platform, which can be used to generate virtual patient cohorts and conduct virtual clinical trials. Our findings demonstrate its potential for making efficacy predictions for immunotherapies and chemotherapies, identifying predictive biomarkers, and guiding future clinical trial designs.
| S-EPMC7883871 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:The humanized monoclonal antibody atezolizumab targets programmed death-ligand 1 and has demonstrated durable single-agent activity in a subset of metastatic triple-negative breast cancers. To extend the observed activity, combinatorial approaches are being tested with standard cytotoxic chemotherapies known to induce immunogenic tumor cell death. Objective:To examine the safety, tolerability, and preliminary clinical activity of atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel in metastatic triple-negative breast cancers. Design, Setting, and Participants:This phase 1b multicohort study enrolled 33 women with stage IV or locally recurrent triple-negative breast cancers and 0 to 2 lines of prior chemotherapy in the metastatic setting from December 8, 2014, to April 30, 2017, at 11 sites in the United States. The median follow-up was 24.4 months (95% CI, 22.1-28.8 months). Interventions:Patients received concurrent intravenous atezolizumab and intravenous nab-paclitaxel (minimum 4 cycles). Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary end point was safety and tolerability. Secondary end points included best overall response rate by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1; objective response rate; duration of response; disease control rate; progression-free survival; overall survival; and biomarker analyses. Results:The 33 women had a median age of 55 years (range, 32-84 years) and received 1 or more doses of atezolizumab. All patients (100%) experienced at least 1 treatment-related adverse event, 24 patients (73%) experienced grade 3/4 adverse events, and 7 patients (21%) had grade 3/4 adverse events of special interest. No deaths were related to study treatment. The objective response rate was 39.4% (95% CI, 22.9%-57.9%), and the median duration of response was 9.1 months (95% CI, 2.0-20.9 months). The disease control rate was 51.5% (95% CI, 33.5%-69.2%). Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 5.5 months (95% CI, 5.1-7.7 months) and 14.7 months (95% CI, 10.1-not estimable), respectively. Concurrent nab-paclitaxel neither significantly changed biomarkers of the tumor immune microenvironment (programmed death-ligand 1, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, CD8) nor impaired atezolizumab systemic immune activation (expansion of proliferating CD8+ T cells, increase of CXCL10 chemokine). Conclusions and Relevance:In this phase 1b trial for metastatic triple-negative breast cancers, the combination of atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel had a manageable safety profile. Antitumor responses were observed, including in patients previously treated with a taxane. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01633970.
| S-EPMC6439843 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn this phase II clinical trial, we evaluated the efficacy of the nonanthracycline combination of carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel in early stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).Patients and methodsPatients with newly diagnosed stage II-III TNBC (n =?69) were treated with neoadjuvant carboplatin (area under the curve 6) every 28?days for four cycles plus nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m2 ) weekly for 16?weeks. Pathological complete response (pCR) and residual cancer burden (RCB) were analyzed with germline mutation status, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), TNBC molecular subtype, and GeparSixto immune signature (GSIS).ResultsSixty-seven patients were evaluable for safety and response. Fifty-three (79%) patients experienced grade 3/4 adverse events, including grade 3 anemia (43%), neutropenia (39%), leukopenia (15%), thrombocytopenia (12%), fatigue (7%), peripheral neuropathy (7%), neutropenia (16%), and leukopenia (1%). Twenty-four patients (35%) had at least one dose delay, and 50 patients (72%) required dose reduction. Sixty-three (94%) patients completed scheduled treatment. The responses were as follows: 32 of 67 patients (48%) had pCR (RCB 0), 10 of 67 (15%) had RCB I, 19 of 67 (28%) had RCB II, 5 of 67 (7%) had RCB III, and 1 of 67 (2%) progressed and had no surgery. Univariate analysis showed that immune-hot GSIS and DNA repair defect (DRD) were associated with higher pCR with odds ratios of 4.62 (p = .005) and 4.76 (p = .03), respectively, and with RCB 0/I versus RCB II/III with odds ratio 4.80 (p = .01). Immune-hot GSIS was highly correlated with DRD status (p = .03), TIL level (p < .001), and TNBC molecular subtype (p < .001). After adjusting for age, race, stage, and grade, GSIS remained associated with higher pCR and RCB class 0/I versus II/III with odds ratios 7.19 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.01-25.68; p = .002) and 8.95 (95% CI, 2.09-38.23; p = .003), respectively.ConclusionThe combination of carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel for early stage high-risk TNBC showed manageable toxicity and encouraging antitumor activity. Immune-hot GSIS is associated with higher pCR rate and RCB class 0/1. This study provides an additional rationale for using nonanthracycline platinum-based therapy for future neoadjuvant trials in early stage TNBCs. Clinical trial identification number: NCT01525966 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Platinum is an important neoadjuvant chemotherapy agent for treatment of early stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). In this study, carboplatin and nab-paclitaxel were well tolerated and highly effective in TNBC, resulting in pathological complete response of 48%. In univariate and multivariate analyses adjusting for age, race, tumor stage and grade, "immune-hot" GeparSixto immune signature (GSIS) and DNA repair defect (DRD) were associated with higher pathological complete response (pCR) and residual cancer burden class 0/1. The association of immune-hot GSIS with higher pCR holds promise for de-escalating neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with early stage TNBC. Although GSIS is not routinely used in clinic, further development of this immune signature into a clinically applicable assay is indicated.
| S-EPMC7930424 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The goal of this Phase I/II trial is to assess the safety and efficacy of administering durvalumab concurrent with weekly nab-paclitaxel and dose-dense doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (ddAC) neoadjuvant therapy for stages I-III triple-negative breast cancer. The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR:ypT0/is, ypN0). The response was correlated with PDL1 expression and stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs). Two dose levels of durvalumab (3 and 10 mg/kg) were assessed. PD-L1 was assessed using the SP263 antibody; ≥1% immune and tumor cell staining was considered positive; sTILs were calculated as the area occupied by mononuclear inflammatory cells over the total intratumoral stromal area. 59 patients were evaluable for toxicity and 55 for efficacy in the Phase II study (10 mg/kg dose). No dose-limiting toxicities were observed in Phase I. In Phase II, pCR rate was 44% (95% CI: 30-57%); 18 patients (31%) experienced grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (AE), most frequently neutropenia (n = 4) and anemia (n = 4). Immune-related grade 3/4 AEs included Guillain-Barre syndrome (n = 1), colitis (n = 2), and hyperglycemia (n = 2). Of the 50 evaluable patients for PD-L1, 31 (62%) were PD-L1 positive. pCR rates were 55% (95% CI: 0.38-0.71) and 32% (95% CI: 0.12-0.56) in the PD-L1 positive and negative groups (p = 0.15), respectively. sTIL counts were available on 52 patients and were significantly higher in the pCR group (p = 0.0167). Concomitant administration of durvalumab with sequential weekly nab-paclitaxel and ddAC neoadjuvant chemotherapy resulted in a pCR rate of 44%; pCR rates were higher in sTIL-high cancers.
| S-EPMC7870853 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Our study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel plus cisplatin (AP) with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (AG) in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We collected data from two single-arm, phase II MBC studies. In NCT01149798, seventy-three MBC patients received 125?mg/m2 nab-paclitaxel on days 1, 8 and 15 followed by 75?mg/m2 cisplatin on day 1 of a 28-day cycle. In NCT01550848, eighty-four MBC patients received 125?mg/m2 nab-paclitaxel and 800?mg/m2 gemcitabine on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The endpoints were the overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety profiles of these regimens. Among the 157 patients included, the ORR were 67.1% and 52.4% for the AP and AG arms, respectively (odds ratio [OR]?=?0.246; hazard ratio [HR]?=?1.485; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.762-2.985). After median follow-up periods of 26.3 and 23.3 months in the AP and AG arms, the median PFS were 9.8 months (95%CI, 8.1-11.6) and 8.1 months (95%CI, 6.8-9.4), respectively, while the median OS were 26.9 months (95%CI, 22.4-31.4) and 25.5 months (95%CI, 19.3-31.4), respectively. Neither PFS nor OS adjusted for the number of metastases, occurrence of liver metastasis and chemotherapeutic lines differed significantly between the two arms (PFS:HR?=?0.769; 95%CI, 0.541-1.092; p?=?0.142; OS:HR?=?0.686; 95%CI, 0.426-1.104; p?=?0.120). However, PFS was significantly better with AP than with AG in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) patients (HR?=?0.308; 95%CI, 0.129-0.732; p?=?0.008). Adverse events were more common with AP than with AG, except for edema and myalgia. Both regimens showed substantial efficacy and were tolerated well in MBC patients. mTNBC who received AP rather than AG showed longer PFS. However, adverse events were more common with AP. Thus, AP may be worth recommending to mTNBC, while AG may be a better alternative for MBC patients with other subtypes.
| S-EPMC6400896 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:The effectiveness of atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel for advanced triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) has been demonstrated. We aimed to evaluate its cost-effectiveness on advanced TNBC from the US payer perspective. Methods:A Markov model was adopted to project the disease course of newly diagnosed advanced TNBC. The clinical data were gathered from the IMpassion130 trial. Cost and health preference data were derived from the literature. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was measured, and one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed for exploring the model uncertainties. Results:Our results demonstrated that atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel augmented versus nab-paclitaxel therapy cost $104,278 and $149,465 and yielded an additional 0.371 and 0.762 of quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in in all patients with unknown PD-L1 status and subpopulation with PD-L1-positive, respectively, which led to an ICER of $281,448 and $196,073 per QALY gained. In all patients with unknown PD-L1 status, atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel treatment guiding by PD-L1 expression testing resulted in an ICER of $183,508 per QALY gained. Atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel could maintain a trend of positive incremental net health benefits and >50% probabilities of cost-effectiveness at the threshold of $200,000/QALY in more than half of subgroups with PD-L1-positive. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses revealed the results were most sensitive to the hazard ratios (HRs) of overall survival (OS) of atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel versus nab-paclitaxel treatment. Conclusion:The atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel treatment is likely to be a cost-effective option compared with chemotherapy based on nab-paclitaxel for the patients with PD-L1-positive advanced TNBC.
| S-EPMC7222249 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose: The IMpassion130 trial demonstrated the efficacy of adding atezolizumab to paclitaxel for advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). The current study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of adding atezolizumab to nab-paclitaxel for TNBC from the perspective of Chinese health sector. Methods: A partitioned survival model was implemented for patients with TNBC. The survival data were derived from IMpassion130 trial. Direct costs and utility values were collected from the Chinese Drug Bidding Database and published literatures. The primary analysis outcomes were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity analyses were performed to observe model stability. Results: In the base-case analysis, the ICER of atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel vs. nab-paclitaxel is respectively, $176,056/QALY, $118,146/QALY, and $323,077/QALY in the ITT, PD-L1(+) and PD-L1(-) group. Conclusion: Adding atezolizumab to nab-paclitaxel could improve survival time significantly in the PD-L1-positive group, but it is not a cost-effective strategy compared to nab-paclitaxel monotherapy for Chinese patients with advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in the current economic context of China.
| S-EPMC8585931 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:In the randomised Phase 3 IMpassion130 trial, atezolizumab combined with nab-paclitaxel (atezo + nab-P) in 902 patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) showed prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in both the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive subgroup compared with placebo plus nab-P (plac + nab-P). This study assessed the efficacy and safety of atezo + nab-P in the IMpassion130 Japanese subpopulation. METHODS:Eligible patients had unresectable locally advanced or metastatic TNBC previously untreated with chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Patients were randomised 1:1 to receive either atezo + nab-P or plac + nab-P. Co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed PFS and overall survival (ITT population and PD-L1-positive subgroup). These were also assessed in the Japanese subpopulation. RESULTS:There were 65 Japanese patients (34 atezo + nab-P; 31 plac + nab-P). The PD-L1-positive subgroup included 25 patients (12 atezo + nab-P; 13 plac + nab-P). Median PFS was 7.4 months (atezo + nab-P) versus 4.6 months (plac + nab-P; hazard ratio [HR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.25-0.90). In the PD-L1-positive subgroup, median PFS was 10.8 months (atezo + nab-P) versus 3.8 months (plac + nab-P; HR, 0.04; 95% CI, <0.01-0.35). Safety results in the Japanese subgroup were consistent with those in the overall population. The Japanese subgroup had a lower incidence of adverse events leading to treatment withdrawal than the overall population. More patients in the atezo + nab-P arm had neutrophil count decreases and stomatitis than patients in the plac + nab-P arm. CONCLUSIONS:Atezo + nab-P efficacy in Japanese patients was consistent with the overall IMpassion130 population. No new safety signals were observed, and tolerability was consistent with that of the overall population.
| S-EPMC6935297 | biostudies-literature
Project description:nab-Paclitaxel is approved for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer on an every-3-week schedule based on positive findings from a pivotal phase III trial in which nab-paclitaxel 260 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks was superior to solvent-based paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks for the primary endpoint of overall response rate (33 % vs 19 %; P = 0.001). Subsequently, a number of trials have examined different schedules, doses, and combinations in efforts to optimize nab-paclitaxel-based therapy for metastatic and early-stage breast cancer. The goal of this review is to evaluate the clinical experiences to date with nab-paclitaxel as a single agent or in combination with targeted agents in different treatment settings - with a focus on the feasibility of administration, adverse event profile, and standard efficacy endpoints, such as overall survival, progression-free survival, overall response rate, and pathologic complete response rate. In general, weekly dosing during the first 3 of 4 weeks appears to achieve the best clinical benefit in both the metastatic and early-stage settings. Furthermore, the data suggest that high doses of nab-paclitaxel, such as 150 mg/m(2) during first 3 of 4 weeks or 260 mg/m(2) every 2 weeks, may be more feasible and appropriate for treatment of early-stage disease compared with metastatic disease. Intense regimens of nab-paclitaxel may not be the best treatment approach for unselected patients with metastatic breast cancer, but may suit a subset of patients for whom immediate disease control is required. The growing number of nab-paclitaxel trials in breast cancer will lead to greater refinements in tailoring therapy to patients based on their individual disease and patient characteristics.
| S-EPMC4465168 | biostudies-other