Burning Rock Biotech (China)
Publishes on Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics, Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers, Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations. 231 papers and 4.7k citations.
Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.
IMPORTANCE: Tumor mutational burden (TMB), as measured by whole-exome sequencing (WES) or a cancer gene panel (CGP), is associated with immunotherapy responses. However, whether TMB estimated by circulating tumor DNA in blood (bTMB) is associated with clinical outcomes of immunotherapy remains to be explored. OBJECTIVES: To explore the optimal gene panel size and algorithm to design a CGP for TMB estimation, evaluate the panel reliability, and further validate the feasibility of bTMB as a clinical actionable biomarker for immunotherapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this cohort study, a CGP named NCC-GP150 was designed and virtually validated using The Cancer Genome Atlas database. The correlation between bTMB estimated by NCC-GP150 and tissue TMB (tTMB) measured by WES was evaluated in matched blood and tissue samples from 48 patients with advanced NSCLC. An independent cohort of 50 patients with advanced NSCLC was used to identify the utility of bTMB estimated by NCC-GP150 in distinguishing patients who would benefit from anti-programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD-1) and anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1) therapy. The study was performed from July 19, 2016, to April 20, 2018. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Assessment of the Spearman correlation coefficient between bTMB estimated by NCC-GP150 and tTMB calculated by WES. Evaluation of the association of bTMB level with progression-free survival and response to anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 therapy. RESULTS: This study used 2 independent cohorts of patients with NSCLC (cohort 1: 48 patients; mean [SD] age, 60 [13] years; 15 [31.2%] female; cohort 2: 50 patients; mean [SD] age, 58 [8] years; 15 [30.0%] female). A CGP, including 150 genes, demonstrated stable correlations with WES for TMB estimation (median r2 = 0.91; interquartile range, 0.89-0.92), especially when synonymous mutations were included (median r2 = 0.92; interquartile range, 0.91-0.93), whereas TMB estimated by the NCC-GP150 panel found higher correlations with TMB estimated by WES than most of the randomly sampled 150-gene panels. Blood TMB estimated by NCC-GP150 correlated well with the matched tTMB calculated by WES (Spearman correlation = 0.62). In the anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 treatment cohort, a bTMB of 6 or higher was associated with superior progression-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.18-0.84; log-rank P = .01) and objective response rates (bTMB ≥6: 39.3%; 95% CI, 23.9%-56.5%; bTMB <6: 9.1%; 95% CI, 1.6%-25.9%; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The findings suggest that established NCC-GP150 with an optimized gene panel size and algorithm is feasible for bTMB estimation, which may serve as a potential biomarker of clinical benefit in patients with NSCLC treated with anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 agents.
Importance: Immune checkpoint inhibitors of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and its ligand (PD-L1) have led to a paradigm shift in cancer treatment. Understanding the clinical efficacy and safety profile of these drugs is necessary for treatment strategy in clinical practice. Objective: To assess the differences between anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 regarding efficacy and safety shown in randomized clinical trials across various tumor types. Data Sources: Systematic searches of PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Embase were conducted from January 1, 2000, to March 1, 2019. In addition, abstracts and presentations from all major conference proceedings were reviewed. Study Selection: All randomized clinical trials that compared anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 with standard treatment in patients with cancer were selected as candidates. Retrospective studies, single-arm phase 1/2 studies, and trials comparing anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 with other immunotherapies were excluded. Studies of anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 therapy were screened and paired by the matching of clinical characteristics as mirror groups. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Three investigators independently extracted data from each study following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guideline. Trial names, first author, year of publication, study design, National Clinical Trial identifier number, blinding status, study phase, pathologic characteristics, number of patients, patients' age and sex distribution, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, lines of treatment, study drugs, biomarker status, follow-up time, incidence of adverse events, and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs for overall survival and progression-free survival were extracted. A random-effects model was applied for data analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Differences in OS between anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 across different cancer types were assessed. An effect size was derived from each mirror group and then pooled across all groups using a random-effects model. Results: Nineteen randomized clinical trials involving 11 379 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, anti-PD-1 exhibited superior overall survival (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.65-0.86; P < .001) and progression-free survival (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56-0.96; P = .02) compared with anti-PD-L1. No significant difference was observed in their safety profiles. Sensitivity analysis presented consistency in the overall estimates across these analyses. Consistent results were observed through frequentist and bayesian approaches with the same studies. Conclusions and Relevance: Comprehensive analysis suggests that anti-PD-1 exhibited favorable survival outcomes and a safety profile comparable to that of anti-PD-L1, which may provide a useful guide for clinicians.
Abstract Biomarkers such as programmed death receptor 1 ligand (PD-L1) expression, tumor mutational burden (TMB), and high microsatellite instability are potentially applicable to predict the efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB). However, several challenges such as defining the cut-off value, test platform uniformity, and low frequencies limit their broad clinical application. Here we identify comutations in the DNA damage response (DDR) pathways of homologous recombination repair and mismatch repair (HRR-MMR) or HRR and base excision repair (HRR-BER; defined as co-mut+) that are associated with increased TMB and neoantigen load and increased levels of immune gene expression signatures. In four public clinical cohorts, co-mut+ patients presented a higher objective response rate and a longer progression-free survival or overall survival than co-mut− patients. Overall, identification of DDR comutations in HRR-MMR or HRR-BER as predictors of response to ICB provides a potentially convenient approach for future clinical practice. Significance: Identification of comutations in specific DDR pathways as predictors of superior survival outcomes in response to immune checkpoint blockade provide a clinically convenient approach for estimation of tumor mutational burden and delivery of ICB therapy. Cancer Res; 78(22); 6486–96. ©2018 AACR.