Surgery for locoregionally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) results in 30-50% five-year overall survival. In IMCISION (NCT03003637), a non-randomized phase Ib/IIa trial, 32... Show moreSurgery for locoregionally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) results in 30-50% five-year overall survival. In IMCISION (NCT03003637), a non-randomized phase Ib/IIa trial, 32 HNSCC patients are treated with 2 doses (in weeks 1 and 3) of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) using nivolumab (NIVO MONO, n = 6, phase Ib arm A) or nivolumab plus a single dose of ipilimumab (COMBO, n = 26, 6 in phase Ib arm B, and 20 in phase IIa) prior to surgery. Primary endpoints are feasibility to resect no later than week 6 (phase Ib) and primary tumor pathological response (phase IIa). Surgery is not delayed or suspended for any patient in phase Ib, meeting the primary endpoint. Grade 3-4 immune-related adverse events are seen in 2 of 6 (33%) NIVO MONO and 10 of 26 (38%) total COMBO patients. Pathological response, defined as the %-change in primary tumor viable tumor cell percentage from baseline biopsy to on-treatment resection, is evaluable in 17/20 phase IIa patients and 29/32 total trial patients (6/6 NIVO MONO, 23/26 COMBO). We observe a major pathological response (MPR, 90-100% response) in 35% of patients after COMBO ICB, both in phase IIa (6/17) and in the whole trial (8/23), meeting the phase IIa primary endpoint threshold of 10%. NIVO MONO's MPR rate is 17% (1/6). None of the MPR patients develop recurrent HSNCC during 24.0 months median postsurgical follow-up. FDG-PET-based total lesion glycolysis identifies MPR patients prior to surgery. A baseline AID/APOBEC-associated mutational profile and an on-treatment decrease in hypoxia RNA signature are observed in MPR patients. Our data indicate that neoadjuvant COMBO ICB is feasible and encouragingly efficacious in HNSCC.Immune checkpoint blockade has become standard care for patients with recurrent metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Here the authors present the results of a non-randomized phase Ib/IIa trial, reporting safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant nivolumab monotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab prior to standard-of-care surgery in patients with HNSCC. . Show less
Multiomic profiling of several cohorts of patients treated with immune checkpoint blockade highlights the presence and potential role of B cells and tertiary lymphoid structures in promoting... Show moreMultiomic profiling of several cohorts of patients treated with immune checkpoint blockade highlights the presence and potential role of B cells and tertiary lymphoid structures in promoting therapy response.Treatment with immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has revolutionized cancer therapy. Until now, predictive biomarkers(1-10) and strategies to augment clinical response have largely focused on the T cell compartment. However, other immune subsets may also contribute to anti-tumour immunity(11-15), although these have been less well-studied in ICB treatment(16). A previously conducted neoadjuvant ICB trial in patients with melanoma showed via targeted expression profiling(17) that B cell signatures were enriched in the tumours of patients who respond to treatment versus non-responding patients. To build on this, here we performed bulk RNA sequencing and found that B cell markers were the most differentially expressed genes in the tumours of responders versus non-responders. Our findings were corroborated using a computational method (MCP-counter(18)) to estimate the immune and stromal composition in this and two other ICB-treated cohorts (patients with melanoma and renal cell carcinoma). Histological evaluation highlighted the localization of B cells within tertiary lymphoid structures. We assessed the potential functional contributions of B cells via bulk and single-cell RNA sequencing, which demonstrate clonal expansion and unique functional states of B cells in responders. Mass cytometry showed that switched memory B cells were enriched in the tumours of responders. Together, these data provide insights into the potential role of B cells and tertiary lymphoid structures in the response to ICB treatment, with implications for the development of biomarkers and therapeutic targets. Show less
Background The profound disparity in response to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) by cutaneous melanoma (CM) and uveal melanoma (UM) patients is not well understood. Therefore, we characterized... Show moreBackground The profound disparity in response to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) by cutaneous melanoma (CM) and uveal melanoma (UM) patients is not well understood. Therefore, we characterized metastases of CM and UM from the same metastatic site (liver), in order to dissect the potential underlying mechanism in differential response on ICB. Methods Tumor liver samples from CM (n=38) and UM (n=28) patients were analyzed at the genomic (whole exome sequencing), transcriptional (RNA sequencing) and protein (immunohistochemistry and GeoMx Digital Spatial Profiling) level. Results Comparison of CM and UM metastases from the same metastatic site revealed that, although originating from the same melanocyte lineage, CM and UM differed in somatic mutation profile, copy number profile, tumor mutational burden (TMB) and consequently predicted neoantigens. A higher melanin content and higher expression of the melanoma differentiation antigen MelanA was observed in liver metastases of UM patients. No difference in B2M and human leukocyte antigen-DR (HLA-DR) expression was observed. A higher expression of programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) was found in CM compared with UM liver metastases, although the majority of CM and UM liver metastases lacked PD-L1 expression. There was no difference in the extent of immune infiltration observed between CM and UM metastases, with the exception of a higher expression of CD163 (p<0.0001) in CM liver samples. While the extent of immune infiltration was similar for CM and UM metastases, the ratio of exhausted CD8 T cells to cytotoxic T cells, to total CD8 T cells and to Th1 cells, was significantly higher in UM metastases. Conclusions While TMB was different between CM and UM metastases, tumor immune infiltration was similar. The greater dependency on PD-L1 as an immune checkpoint in CM and the identification of higher exhaustion ratios in UM may both serve as explanations for the difference in response to ICB. Consequently, in order to improve current treatment for metastatic UM, reversal of T cell exhaustion beyond programmed cell death 1 blockade should be considered. Show less
