PURPOSE DNA polymerase epsilon is critical to DNA proofreading and replication. Mutations in POLE have been associated with hypermutated tumors and antitumor response to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. We present a clinicopathologic analysis of patients with advanced cancers harboring POLE mutations, the pattern of co-occurring mutations, and their response to ICI therapy within the context of mutation pathogenicity. METHODS We conducted a retrospective analysis of next-generation sequencing data at MD Anderson Cancer Center to identify patient tumors with POLE mutations and their co-occurring mutations. The pathogenicity of each mutation was annotated using InterVar and ClinVar. Differences in therapeutic response to ICI, survival, and co-occurring mutations were reported by POLE pathogenicity status. RESULTS Four hundred fifty-eight patient tumors with POLE mutations were identified from 14,229 next-generation sequencing reports; 15.0% of POLE mutations were pathogenic, 15.9% benign, and 69.1% variant of unknown significance. Eighty-two patients received either programmed death 1 or programmed death ligand-1 inhibitors as monotherapy or in combination with cytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-4 inhibitors. Patients with pathogenic POLE mutations had improved clinical benefit rate (82.4% v 30.0%; P = .013), median progression-free survival (15.1 v 2.2 months; P < .001), overall survival (29.5 v 6.8 months; P < .001), and longer treatment duration (median 15.5 v 2.5 months; P < .001) compared to those with benign variants. Progression-free survival and overall survival remained superior when adjusting for number of co-occurring mutations (≥ 10 v < 10) and/or microsatellite instability status (proficient mismatch repair v deficient mismatch repair). The number of comutations was not associated with response to ICI (clinical benefit v progressive disease: median 13 v 11 comutations; P = .18). CONCLUSION Pathogenic POLE mutations were associated with clinical benefit to ICI therapy. Further studies are warranted to validate POLE mutation as a predictive biomarker of ICI therapy.
Patients with B-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) are at high-risk for relapse after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). We conducted a single center phase II study evaluating the feasibility of 4 cycles of blinatumomab administered every 3 months during the first year after HCT in an effort to mitigate relapse in high-risk ALL patients. Twenty-one of 23 enrolled patients received at least one cycle of blinatumomab and were included in the analysis. The median time from HCT to the first cycle of blinatumomab was 78 days (range, 44-105). Twelve patients (57%) completed all 4 treatment cycles. Neutropenia was the only grade 4 adverse event (19%). Rates of cytokine release (5% G1) and neurotoxicity (5% G2) were minimal. The cumulative incidence of acute GVHD grades 2-4 and 3-4 were 33% and 5%, respectively; two cases of mild (10%) and one case of moderate (5%) chronic GVHD were noted. With a median follow-up of 14.3 months, the 1-year overall survival, progression-free survival, and non-relapse mortality rates were 85%, 71%, and 0%, respectively. In a matched-analysis with a contemporary cohort of 57 patients, we found no significant difference between groups regarding blinatumomab's efficacy. Correlative studies of baseline and post-treatment samples identified patients with specific T-cell profiles as "responders" or "non-responders" to therapy. Responders had higher proportions of effector memory CD8 T-cell subsets. Non-responders were T-cell deficient and expressed more inhibitory checkpoint molecules, including TIM3. We found that blinatumomab post-allogeneic HCT is feasible, and its benefit is dependent on the immune milieu at time of treatment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.