Circulating and intratumoral immune determinants of response to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in patients with variant histology or sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER:
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10445571 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of variant histology comprises approximately 20% of kidney cancer diagnoses, yet the optimal therapy for these patients and the factors that impact immunotherapy response remain largely unknown. To better understand the determinants of immunotherapy response in this population, we characterized blood- and tissue-based immune markers for patients with variant histology RCC, or any RCC histology with sarcomatoid differentiation, enrolled in a phase II clinical trial of atezolizumab and bevacizumab. Baseline circulating (plasma) inflammatory cytokines were highly correlated with one another, forming an "inflammatory module" that was increased in International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium poor-risk patients and was associated with worse progression-free survival (PFS; P = 0.028). At baseline, an elevated circulating vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) level was associated with a lack of response (P = 0.03) and worse PFS (P = 0.021). However, a larger increase in on-treatment levels of circulating VEGF-A was associated with clinical benefit (P = 0.01) and improved overall survival (P = 0.0058). Among peripheral immune cell populations, an on-treatment decrease in circulating PD-L1+ T cells was associated with improved outcomes, with a reduction in CD4+PD-L1+ [HR, 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.49-0.91; P = 0.016] and CD8+PD-L1+ T cells (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39-0.87; P = 0.009) correlated with improved PFS. Within the tumor itself, a higher percentage of terminally exhausted (PD-1+ and either TIM-3+ or LAG-3+) CD8+ T cells was associated with worse PFS (P = 0.028). Overall, these findings support the value of tumor and blood-based immune assessments in determining therapeutic benefit for patients with RCC receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and provide a foundation for future biomarker studies for patients with variant histology RCC receiving immunotherapy-based combinations.
| S-EPMC10526700 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeIn this multicenter phase II trial, we evaluated atezolizumab combined with bevacizumab in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with variant histology or any RCC histology with ≥ 20% sarcomatoid differentiation.Patients and methodsEligible patients may have received previous systemic therapy, excluding prior bevacizumab or checkpoint inhibitors. Patients underwent a baseline biopsy and received atezolizumab 1,200 mg and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR) by RECIST version 1.1. Additional end points were progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, biomarkers of response as determined by programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) status, and on-therapy quality-of-life (QOL) metrics using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Kidney Symptom Index-19 and the Brief Fatigue Inventory.ResultsSixty patients received at least 1 dose of either study agent; the majority (65%) were treatment naïve. The ORR for the overall population was 33% and 50% in patients with clear cell RCC with sarcomatoid differentiation and 26% in patients with variant histology RCC. Median PFS was 8.3 months (95% CI, 5.7 to 10.9 months). PD-L1 status was available for 36 patients; 15 (42%) had ≥ 1% expression on tumor cells. ORR in PD-L1-positive patients was 60% (n = 9) v 19% (n = 4) in PD-L1-negative patients. Eight patients (13%) developed treatment-related grade 3 toxicities. There were no treatment-related grade 4-5 toxicities. QOL was maintained throughout therapy.ConclusionIn this study, atezolizumab and bevacizumab demonstrated safety and resulted in objective responses in patients with variant histology RCC or RCC with ≥ 20% sarcomatoid differentiation. This regimen warrants additional exploration in patients with rare RCC, particularly those with PD-L1-positive tumors.
| S-EPMC7051851 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid features (sRCC) have a poor prognosis and have shown limited responsiveness to inhibition of the VEGF pathway. We conducted a prespecified analysis of the randomised, phase 3 IMmotion151 trial in previously untreated patients with advanced or metastatic RCC to assess the effectiveness of atezolizumab + bevacizumab versus sunitinib in a subgroup of patients with sarcomatoid features. Patients whose tumour had any component of sarcomatoid features were included and received atezolizumab + bevacizumab (n = 68) or sunitinib (n = 74). Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the group receiving atezolizumab + bevacizumab overall (8.3 vs 5.3 mo; hazard ratio [HR] 0.52 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34-0.79) and in the subset of patients with PD-L1-positive tumours (8.6 vs 5.6 mo; HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26-0.77). More patients receiving atezolizumab + bevacizumab achieved an objective response (49% vs 14%), including complete responses (10% vs 3%), and reported greater symptom improvements versus sunitinib. Safety was consistent with the known profiles of each drug and with that reported in the overall safety-evaluable population of IMmotion151. This analysis supports enhanced activity of atezolizumab + bevacizumab in patients with sRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at patients with a specific type of kidney cancer (tumours with sarcomatoid features) that has been hard to treat. A treatment with two drugs (atezolizumab and bevacizumab) appeared to help patients live longer without the disease getting worse than another drug (sunitinib) that is often used. Patients who took the two drugs also said they were better able to carry out their everyday activities than patients who took sunitinib. The combination of these two drugs may work better in patients with this type of advanced kidney cancer.
| S-EPMC9376009 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aims: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have promising outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, there is no reliable biomarker for predicting disease progression. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) derived from peripheral blood have attracted attention in monitoring therapeutic efficacy. In this study, CTCs were serially collected from patients with HCC undergoing atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo+Bev) treatment, and changes in molecular expression and CTC numbers were analyzed to identify effective biomarkers. Approach and results: The peripheral blood samples were collected serially from 22 patients with HCC treated with Atezo+Bev, and CTCs were enriched using RosetteSep. The CD45(-)PanCK(+) cell counts were measured using flow cytometry. RNA extracted from enriched CTCs underwent targeted RNA sequencing with next-generation sequencing (NGS) and performed unsupervised hierarchical clustering analysis. Changes in CTC numbers during Atezo+Bev treatment reflected the tumor volume. NGS analysis revealed that patients with elevated transforming growth factor (TGF)-β signaling molecules had a poorer response, whereas those with elevated apoptosis signaling molecules had a favorable response (p < 0.05). In addition, compared with changes in CTC counts, changes in TGF-β signaling molecule expression in CTCs accurately and promptly predicted treatment response. Conclusions: NGS analysis of CTC-derived RNA showed that changes in TGF-β signaling molecules predict treatment response earlier than changes in CTC counts. These findings suggest that changes in the expression of TGF-β molecules in CTCs could serve as novel biomarkers for the early prediction of therapeutic response in patients with unresectable HCC undergoing Atezo+Bev therapy.
2024-07-17 | GSE261186 | GEO
Project description:AimThe objective of this study is to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis in order to evaluate the economic advantages of incorporating atezolizumab into a standard bevacizumab plus platinum regimen for the treatment of metastatic cervical cancer from the Chinese medical system perspective.MethodWe developed a partitioned survival model based on data obtained from the recently published BEATcc clinical trial and economic cost data. Our model utilized a tree-based decision analysis approach to simulate two different treatment strategies for metastatic cervical cancer: the standard bevacizumab plus platinum regimen, and the addition of atezolizumab to the standard treatment regimen. The economic assessment data included the costs of the drugs, costs related to treatment-induced adverse events. The cost-effectiveness metrics used in the analysis were quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The robustness of our model was assessed through sensitivity analysis.ResultThe total costs of the atezolizumab group were $128179.56, while the costs of chemotherapy group were $42065.89. The atezolizumab group gained 3.52 QALYs, whereas the chemotherapy group gained 2.35 QALY. The atezolizumab regimen resulted in an increase of 1.17 QALYs at an incremental cost of $86113.67. This led to an ICER of $73601.43, which exceeds the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $39855.79 in China. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated none of the parameters within a margin of ±25% result in significant alterations to the analysis findings.ConclusionAtezolizumab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy was not to be a cost-effective option for the treatment of metastatic cervical cancer compared to bevacizumab plus chemotherapy.
| S-EPMC11532157 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background & aimsThe combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab offers a novel approach to immunomodulation, showing efficacy as a primary treatment in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Concerns about graft safety and rejection have limited its exploration in the neoadjuvant setting of liver transplantation (LT). In this study, we investigate the clinical efficacy and the safety profile of pre-transplant administration of atezolizumab and bevacizumab for HCC.MethodsHerein, we performed a prospective assessment of 17 patients with HCC treated with neoadjuvant preoperative atezolizumab and bevacizumab prior to LT for HCC, obtained from December 2020 and December 2023 at seven Western transplant centers.ResultsAmong the 17 patients with HCC included in the study, 16 (94.1%) had a tumor burden outside of Milan criteria. Neoadjuvant locoregional therapies along with the administration of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (median: 5 months; discontinued at least 4 weeks prior to LT) led to an objective response rate of 94% (complete response: 59%), downstaging to within Milan criteria (82%) and a pathological response at explant examination of 88%. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events accounted for 17.6% of cases and were manageable. During the 25-month median follow-up period, two cases of mild (rejection activity index ≤4), biopsy-proven rejection were reported but no instances of severe allograft rejection or graft loss were reported. The 1-year and 3-year post-LT survival rates were 94.2% and 88.2%, respectively.ConclusionsThis study highlights the favorable oncological and survival outcomes associated with atezolizumab and bevacizumab treatment in the pre-LT setting. This immune-based combination was safe in terms of treatment-related adverse events, and absence of severe post-transplant rejection or graft loss. These preliminary results could pave the way for expanding transplant eligibility criteria in patients at more advanced HCC stages.Impact and implicationsStudies on the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab in the neoadjuvant setting prior to liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma have been limited, despite its potential to enhance anti-tumor responses and downstaging, owing to concerns about its safety profile. Among 17 patients who underwent successful liver transplantation following neoadjuvant atezolizumab/bevacizumab, 82% achieved downstaging to within Milan criteria, 94% radiological objective response and 88% pathology response, without drop-outs due to treatment-related adverse events or graft loss. The neoadjuvant combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab prior to liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma shows an encouraging safety profile and stands out as a promising pre-transplant optimization treatment, leading to improved oncological outcomes.
| S-EPMC11794155 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atez/bev) treatment has been developed for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC), changes in hepatic function during therapy have yet to be reported.AimThis retrospective clinical study aimed to elucidate early responses to Atez/Bev.MethodsFrom September 2020 to April 2021, 171 u-HCC patients undergoing Atez/Bev treatment were enrolled (BCLC stage A:B:C:D = 5:68:96:2). Of those, 75 had no prior history of systemic treatment. Relative changes in hepatic function and therapeutic response were assessed using albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) score and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), ver. 1.1, respectively.ResultsIn initial imaging examination findings, objective response rates for early tumor shrinkage and disease control after 6 weeks (ORR-6W/DCR-6W) were 10.6%/79.6%. Similar response results were observed in patients with and without a past history of systemic treatment (ORR-6W/DCR-6W = 9.7%/77.8% and 12.2%/82.9%), as well as patients in whom Atez/Bev was used as post-progression treatment following lenvatinib (ORR-6W/DCR-6W = 7.7%/79.5%), for which no known effective post-progression treatment has been established. In 111 patients who underwent a 6-week observation period, ALBI score was significantly worsened at 3 weeks after introducing Atez/Bev (-2.525 ± 0.419 vs -2.323 ± 0.445, p < .001), but then recovered at 6-weeks (-2.403 ± 0.452) as compared to 3-weeks (p = .001). During the observation period, the most common adverse events were appetite loss (all grades) (12.3%), general fatigue/hypertension (all grades) (11.1%, respectively), and urine protein (all grades) (10.5%).ConclusionAtez/Bev might have therapeutic potential not only as first but also later-line treatment of existing molecular target agents. In addition, this drug combination may have less influence on hepatic function during the early period, as the present patients showed a good initial therapeutic response.
| S-EPMC8842687 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAtezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Ate/Bev) demonstrated promising efficacy and safety in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the phase III IMbrave150 trial. However, patients with Child-Pugh B HCC were excluded in the abovementioned prospective trial. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of Ate/Bev in patients with Child-Pugh B HCC.MethodsThis multicenter retrospective study included 36 patients with Child-Pugh B advanced HCC who received Ate/Bev at four cancer referral centers between May 2020 and August 2021. Comparative analyses were performed with an independent cohort of patients with Child-Pugh A HCC from the same registry (n = 133).ResultsAll patients received Ate/Bev as first-line systemic treatment for advanced HCC. The objective response and disease control rates of patients in the Child-Pugh groups B and A were 11.1% and 58.3% and 34.6% and 76.7%, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.7-4.3) and 7.7 months (95% CI, 4.8-10.6) in the Child-Pugh B group, whereas the median PFS and OS were 9.6 months (95% CI, 5.1-14.2) and not reached (95% CI, not available) in the Child-Pugh A group, respectively. Compared to the Child-Pugh A group, grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs) were more common in the Child-Pugh B group (44.4% versus 15.8, p < 0.001), with the most frequent grade 3-4 AEs being gastrointestinal bleeding (n = 6, 16.7%), neutropenia (n = 5, 13.9%), and thrombocytopenia (n = 4, 11.1%).ConclusionsIn the Child-Pugh B subgroup of patients with advanced HCC, Ate/Bev treatment showed modest clinical activity. However, due to the increased frequency of serious AEs, careful evaluation of treatment response and AE management is required in this subgroup of patients.
| S-EPMC10495918 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9745609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectiveHepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death worldwide, especially in China. According to the 2021 Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines, sorafenib, lenvatinib, atezolizumab combined with bevacizumab, and sintilimab combined with bevacizumab are recommended as first-line treatment options for advanced HCC. This study provides a cost-effectiveness analysis of these treatments from the patient perspective.MethodsA partitioned survival model was established using the TreeAge 2019 software to evaluate the cost-effectiveness. The model includes three states, namely progression-free survival, progressive disease, and death. Clinical data were derived from three randomized controlled studies involving patients with advanced HCC who received the following treatment: sorafenib and lenvatinib (NCT01761266); atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab (NCT03434379); and sintilimab in combination with bevacizumab (NCT03794440). Cost and clinical preference data were obtained from the literature and interviews with clinicians.ResultsAll compared with sorafenib therapy, lenvatinib had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$188,625.25 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained; sintilimab plus bevacizumab had an ICER of US$75,150.32 per QALY gained; and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab had an ICER of US$144,513.71 per QALY gained. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that treatment with sorafenib achieved a 100% probability of cost-effectiveness at a threshold of US$36,600/QALY. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the results were most sensitive to the medical insurance reimbursement ratio and drug prices.ConclusionsIn this economic evaluation, therapy with lenvatinib, sintilimab plus bevacizumab, and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab generated incremental QALYs compared with sorafenib; however, these regimens were not cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$36,600 per QALY. Therefore, some patients may achieve preferred economic outcomes from these three therapies by tailoring the regimen based on individual patient factors.
| S-EPMC10064722 | biostudies-literature