Blood Tumor Mutational Burden Alone Is Not a Good Predictive Biomarker for Response to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Patients With Gastrointestinal Tumors.

IF 3.2 4区 医学 Q3 IMMUNOLOGY
James Yu, Robin Park, Ruoyu Miao, Iman Imanirad, Moazzam Shahzad, Jose M Laborde, Todd C Knepper, Christine M Walko, Richard Kim
{"title":"Blood Tumor Mutational Burden Alone Is Not a Good Predictive Biomarker for Response to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Patients With Gastrointestinal Tumors.","authors":"James Yu, Robin Park, Ruoyu Miao, Iman Imanirad, Moazzam Shahzad, Jose M Laborde, Todd C Knepper, Christine M Walko, Richard Kim","doi":"10.1097/CJI.0000000000000532","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There has been a controversy about the predictive value of tissue-TMB-H for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with limited data regarding blood-TMB (bTMB) in GI tumors. We aim to evaluate the predictive value of bTMB compared with MSI-H in GI tumors. Patients with unresectable/metastatic GI cancer, harboring either MSS with bTMB-H (≥10 mut/Mb) or dMMR/MSI-H who received ICI were included. We compared ICIs' efficacy between MSS-bTMB-H (N=45) versus MSI-H (N=50) in GI tumors. Ninety-five patients were identified with the majority having colorectal (49.5%) or esophagogastric (34.7%) cancers. MSS-bTMB-H group had more esophagogastric cancer and later-line ICI recipients, with no significant differences in other known prognostic variables. At a median follow-up of 9.4 months, MSI-H group showed superior ORR (58.0% vs. 26.7%), DCR (84.0% vs. 42.2%), DoR (not-reached vs. 7.6 mo), PFS (22.5 vs. 3.8 mo), and OS (Not-reached vs. 10.1 mo) compared with MSS-bTMB-H. Multivariable analysis showed that MSI-H was an independent favorable factor over MSS-bTMB-H for PFS (HR=0.31, CI 0.15-0.63, P=0.001) and OS (HR=0.33, CI 0.14-0.80, P=0.014). MSI-H group showed favorable outcomes compared with MSS-bTMB-16+ (ORR: 58.0% vs. 26.9%; DCR: 84.0% vs. 42.3%; PFS:22.5 vs. 4.0 mo) and MSS-bTMB-20+ (ORR: 58.0% vs. 31.6%; DCR: 84.0% vs. 42.1%; PFS:22.5 vs. 3.2 mo). There was no difference between MSS-bTMB10-15 compared with MSS-bTMB-16+ in ORR, DCR, and PFS, or between MSS-bTMB10-19 compared with MSS-bTMB20+. Regardless of bTMB cutoff at 10, 16, or 20, bTMB-H did not appear to be a predictive biomarker in MSS GI tumors in this retrospective analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":15996,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Immunotherapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Immunotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CJI.0000000000000532","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There has been a controversy about the predictive value of tissue-TMB-H for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with limited data regarding blood-TMB (bTMB) in GI tumors. We aim to evaluate the predictive value of bTMB compared with MSI-H in GI tumors. Patients with unresectable/metastatic GI cancer, harboring either MSS with bTMB-H (≥10 mut/Mb) or dMMR/MSI-H who received ICI were included. We compared ICIs' efficacy between MSS-bTMB-H (N=45) versus MSI-H (N=50) in GI tumors. Ninety-five patients were identified with the majority having colorectal (49.5%) or esophagogastric (34.7%) cancers. MSS-bTMB-H group had more esophagogastric cancer and later-line ICI recipients, with no significant differences in other known prognostic variables. At a median follow-up of 9.4 months, MSI-H group showed superior ORR (58.0% vs. 26.7%), DCR (84.0% vs. 42.2%), DoR (not-reached vs. 7.6 mo), PFS (22.5 vs. 3.8 mo), and OS (Not-reached vs. 10.1 mo) compared with MSS-bTMB-H. Multivariable analysis showed that MSI-H was an independent favorable factor over MSS-bTMB-H for PFS (HR=0.31, CI 0.15-0.63, P=0.001) and OS (HR=0.33, CI 0.14-0.80, P=0.014). MSI-H group showed favorable outcomes compared with MSS-bTMB-16+ (ORR: 58.0% vs. 26.9%; DCR: 84.0% vs. 42.3%; PFS:22.5 vs. 4.0 mo) and MSS-bTMB-20+ (ORR: 58.0% vs. 31.6%; DCR: 84.0% vs. 42.1%; PFS:22.5 vs. 3.2 mo). There was no difference between MSS-bTMB10-15 compared with MSS-bTMB-16+ in ORR, DCR, and PFS, or between MSS-bTMB10-19 compared with MSS-bTMB20+. Regardless of bTMB cutoff at 10, 16, or 20, bTMB-H did not appear to be a predictive biomarker in MSS GI tumors in this retrospective analysis.

仅凭血液肿瘤突变负荷不能很好地预测胃肠道肿瘤患者对免疫检查点抑制剂反应的生物标志物
组织TMB-H对免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)的预测价值一直存在争议,而有关消化道肿瘤血液TMB(bTMB)的数据却很有限。我们旨在评估 bTMB 与 MSI-H 相比在消化道肿瘤中的预测价值。我们纳入了接受 ICI 的不可切除/转移性消化道癌症患者,这些患者携带有 bTMB-H(≥10 突变/Mb)的 MSS 或 dMMR/MSI-H。我们比较了消化道肿瘤中MSS-bTMB-H(45例)与MSI-H(50例)的ICI疗效。结果发现,95 名患者大部分患有结直肠癌(49.5%)或食管胃癌(34.7%)。MSS-bTMB-H组食管胃癌患者较多,接受 ICI 治疗的时间也较晚,其他已知预后变量无明显差异。在中位随访9.4个月时,MSI-H组的ORR(58.0% vs. 26.7%)、DCR(84.0% vs. 42.2%)、DoR(未达到 vs. 7.6个月)、PFS(22.5 vs. 3.8个月)和OS(未达到 vs. 10.1个月)均优于MSS-bTMB-H组。多变量分析显示,与MSS-bTMB-H相比,MSI-H是PFS(HR=0.31,CI 0.15-0.63,P=0.001)和OS(HR=0.33,CI 0.14-0.80,P=0.014)的独立有利因素。与MSS-bTMB-16+(ORR:58.0% vs. 26.9%;DCR:84.0% vs. 42.3%;PFS:22.5月 vs. 4.0月)和MSS-bTMB-20+(ORR:58.0% vs. 31.6%;DCR:84.0% vs. 42.1%;PFS:22.5月 vs. 3.2月)相比,MSI-H组显示出良好的结果。在ORR、DCR和PFS方面,MSS-bTMB10-15与MSS-bTMB-16+相比没有差异,MSS-bTMB10-19与MSS-bTMB20+相比也没有差异。在这项回顾性分析中,无论 bTMB 临界值是 10、16 还是 20,bTMB-H 似乎都不是 MSS 消化道肿瘤的预测性生物标志物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Immunotherapy
Journal of Immunotherapy 医学-免疫学
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
79
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Immunotherapy features rapid publication of articles on immunomodulators, lymphokines, antibodies, cells, and cell products in cancer biology and therapy. Laboratory and preclinical studies, as well as investigative clinical reports, are presented. The journal emphasizes basic mechanisms and methods for the rapid transfer of technology from the laboratory to the clinic. JIT contains full-length articles, review articles, and short communications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信