Background: Cancer immunotherapy has changed the standard of care for a subgroup of patients with advanced disease. Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) in particular has shown improved survival compared with previous standards of care for several tumor types. Although proven to be successful in more immunogenic tumors, ICB is still largely ineffective in patients with tumors that are not infiltrated by immune cells, the so-called cold tumors.Patients and methods: This review describes the effects of different chemotherapeutic agents on the immune system and the potential value of these different types of chemotherapy as combination partners with ICB in patients with solid tumors. Both preclinical data and currently ongoing clinical trials were evaluated. In addition, we reviewed findings regarding different dosing schedules, including the effects of an induction phase and applying metronomic doses of chemotherapy.Results: Combining ICB with other treatment modalities may lead to improved immunological conditions in the tumor microenvironment and could thereby enhance the antitumor immune response, even in tumor types that are so far unresponsive to ICB monotherapy. Chemotherapy, that was originally thought to be solely immunosuppressive, can exert immunomodulatory effects which may be beneficial in combination with immunotherapy. Each chemotherapeutic drug impacts the tumor microenvironment differently, and in order to determine the most suitable combination partners for ICB it is crucial to understand these mechanisms. Conclusion:Preclinical studies demonstrate that the majority of chemotherapeutic drugs has been shown to exert immunostimulatory effects, either by inhibiting immunosuppressive cells and/or activating effector cells, or by increasing immunogenicity and increasing T-cell infiltration. However, for certain chemotherapeutic agents timing, dose and sequence of administration of chemotherapeutic agents and ICB is important. Further studies should focus on determining the optimal drug combinations, sequence effects and optimal concentration-time profiles in representative preclinical models.

IMPORTANCE Multiple immunostimulatory agonist antibodies have been clinically tested in solid tumors to evaluate the role of targeting glucocorticoid-induced tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor-related protein in anticancer treatments. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the safety and activity of the fully human glucocorticoid-induced TNF receptor-related protein agonist IgG1 monoclonal antibody BMS-986156 with or without nivolumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis global, open-label, phase 1/2a study of BMS-986156 with or without nivolumab enrolled 292 patients 18 years or older with advanced solid tumors and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less. Prior checkpoint inhibitor therapy was allowed. Monotherapy and combination dose-escalation cohorts ran concurrently to guide expansion doses beginning October 16, 2015; the study is ongoing. INTERVENTIONSThe protein agonist BMS-986156 was administered intravenously at a dose of 10, 30, 100, 240, or 800 mg every 2 weeks as monotherapy, and in the combination group 30, 100, 240, or 800 mg plus 240 mg of nivolumab every 2 weeks; same-dose cohorts were pooled for analysis. One cohort also received 480 mg of BMS-986156 plus 480 mg of nivolumab every 4 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary end points were safety, tolerability, and dose-limiting toxic effects. Additional end points included antitumor activity per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, and exploratory biomarker analyses. RESULTSWith a follow-up range of 1.4 to 101.7 weeks (follow-up ongoing), 34 patients (16 women and 18 men; median age, 56.6 years [range, 28-75 years]) received monotherapy (4 patients completedinitialtreatment),and258patients(140womenand118men;medianage,60years[range, 21-87 years]) received combination therapy (65 patients completed initial treatment). No grade 3 to 5 treatment-related adverse events occurred with BMS-986156 monotherapy; grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 24 patients (9.3%) receiving BMS-986156 plus nivolumab, with no grade 5 treatment-related adverse events. One dose-limiting toxic effect (grade 4 elevated creatine phosphokinase levels) occurred in a patient receiving 800 mg of BMS-986156 plus 240 mg of nivolumab every 2 weeks; BMS-986156 with or without nivolumab exhibited linear pharmacokinetics with dose-related increase after a single dose. Peripheral T-cell and natural killer-cell proliferation increased after administration of BMS-986156 with or without nivolumab. No consistent and significant modulation of intratumoral CD8 + T cells and FoxP3 + regulatory T cells was observed. No responses were seen with BMS-986156 alone; objective response rates ranged from 0% to 11.1% (1 of 9) across combination therapy cohorts, with a few responses observed in patients previously treated with anti-programmed death receptor (ligand) 1 therapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Based on this cohort, BMS-986156 appears to have had a manageable safety profile, and BMS-986156 plus ...

No abstract

This phase I/IIa study (NCT02737475) evaluated the safety and activity of BMS-986178, a fully human OX40 agonist IgG1 mAb, AE nivolumab and/or ipilimumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients and Methods: Patients (with non-small cell lung, renal cell, bladder, other advanced cancers) received BMS-986178 (20-320 mg) AE nivolumab (240-480 mg) and/or ipilimumab (1-3 mg/kg). The primary endpoint was safety. Additional endpoints included immunogenicity, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity per RECIST version 1.1. Results: Twenty patients received BMS-986178 monotherapy, and 145 received combination therapy in various regimens (including two patients receiving nivolumab monotherapy). With a followup of 1.1 to 103.6 weeks, the most common (≥5%) treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) included fatigue, pruritus, rash, pyrexia, diarrhea, and infusion-related reactions. Overall, grade 3-4 TRAEs occurred in one of 20 patients (5%) receiving BMS-986178 monotherapy, six of 79 (8%) receiving BMS-986178 plus nivolumab, zero of two receiving nivolumab monotherapy, six of 41 (15%) receiving BMS-986178 plus ipilimumab, and three of 23 (13%) receiving BMS-986178 plus nivolumab plus ipilimumab. No deaths occurred. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed with monotherapy, and the MTD was not reached in either the monotherapy or the combination escalation cohorts. No objective responses were seen with BMS-986178 alone; objective response rates ranged from 0% to 13% across combination therapy cohorts. Conclusions: In this study, BMS-986178 AE nivolumab and/or ipilimumab appeared to have a manageable safety profile, but no clear efficacy signal was observed above that expected for nivolumab and/or ipilimumab.

Sarcoma is a heterogeneous group of rare malignancies arising from mesenchymal tissues. Recurrence rates are high and methods for early detection by blood-based biomarkers do not exist. Hence, development of blood-based liquid biopsies as disease recurrence monitoring biomarkers would be an important step forward. Recently, it has been shown that tumor-educated platelets (TEPs) harbor specific spliced ribonucleic acid(RNA)-profiles. These RNA-repertoires are potentially applicable for cancer diagnostics. We aim to evaluate the potential of TEPs for blood-based diagnostics of sarcoma patients. Fifty-seven sarcoma patients (active disease), 38 former sarcoma patients (cancer free for ≥3 years) and 65 healthy donors were included. RNA was isolated from platelets and sequenced. Quantified read counts were processed with self-learning particle-swarm optimization-enhanced thromboSeq analysis and subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) statistics. Highly correlating spliced platelet messenger RNAs (mRNAs) of sarcoma patients were compared to controls (former sarcoma + healthy donors) to identify a quantitative sarcoma-specific signature measure, the TEP-score. ANOVA analysis identified distinctive platelet RNA expression patterns of 2647 genes (false discovery rate <0.05) in sarcoma patients as compared to controls. The self-learning algorithm reached a diagnostic accuracy of 87% (validation set only; n = 53 samples, area under the curve (AUC): 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86–1). Our data indicates that TEP RNA-based liquid biopsies may enable for sarcoma diagnostics.

No abstract

Angiosarcoma is an extremely rare and aggressive malignancy. Standard of care of localized tumors includes surgery ± radiation. Despite this multimodal treatment, >50% of the angiosarcoma patients develop local or distant recurrent disease. The role of neoadjuvant systemic therapy is still controversial and we therefore performed a systematic review of the literature to define the role of neoadjuvant systemic therapy based on available evidence. We focused on the effects of neoadjuvant systemic therapy on: 1. The success of surgical resection and 2. the long-term survival. All articles published before October 2019 on Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Cochrane library and Scopus were evaluated. Eighteen case reports and six retrospective cohort studies were included. There were no randomized controlled trials. This literature showed a beneficial role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on downsizing of the tumor resulting in an improvement of the resection margins, especially in patients with cardiac or cutaneous angiosarcoma. However, no definitive conclusions on survival can be drawn based on the available literature lacking any prospective randomized studies in this setting. We advise that neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be considered, since this could lead to less mutilating resections and a higher rate of free resection margins. An international angiosarcoma registry could help to develop guidelines for this rare disease.

Pfizer, Psioxus, Roche, and EMD Serono  Ben Markman reports reports grants, contracts, consulting fees, participation on a data safety monitoring board, advisory board, educational events, or support for attending meetings and/or travel from Merck, Amgen and Bristol Myers Squibb  Kimberley M. Heinhuis has nothing to disclose  Michael Millward reports grants, contracts, consulting fees, participation on a data safety monitoring board, advisory board, educational events, or support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda  Martijn Lolkema reports s grants, contracts, consulting fees, participation on a data safety monitoring board, advisory board, educational events, or support for attending meetings and/or travel from Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Incyte, Janssen CilagResearch.