1073P - Is anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy sensitizing for conventional cancer therapies?

Date 09 October 2016
Event ESMO 2016 Congress
Session Poster display
Topics Cancer Immunology and Immunotherapy
Presenter Margarida Matias
Citation Annals of Oncology (2016) 27 (6): 359-378. 10.1093/annonc/mdw378
Authors M. Matias1, S. Aspeslagh2, V. Palomar3, E. Lanoy4, L. Dercle5, C. Even3, C. Ferte3, A. Hollebecque2, A. Marabelle2, C. Massard2, J. Soria2, S. Postel-Vinay2
  • 1Department Of Medical Oncology, Institut Gustave Roussy, 94805 Villejuif Cedex - Villejuif/FR
  • 2Drug Development Department (ditep), Institut Gustave Roussy, 94800 - Villejuif/FR
  • 3Department Of Head And Neck Cancer, Institut Gustave Roussy, 94805 Villejuif Cedex - Villejuif/FR
  • 4Department Of Biostatistics, Institut Gustave Roussy, 94805 - Villejuif/FR
  • 5Nuclear Medicine, Institut de Cancérologie Gustave Roussy, Villejuif/FR

Abstract

Background

Anti-PD1/PD-L1 immunotherapies (IT) can target tumor cells and/or tumour-infiltrating immune cells. Thereby they modify the tumour microenvironment, which can also modulate the sensitivity to conventional cancer therapies (CT). Whether exposure to IT impacts sensitivity to CT has not been evaluated yet. Here, we explored if patients (pts) presented differential responses to CT pre- and post- IT.

Methods

Gustave Roussy pts treated with IT between 02/2012 and 12/2015, and having received at least one line of CT pre- and post-IT, were eligible. Pre- and post-IT Progression Free Survival (PFS) and best response to CT were described overall and according to ST therapeutic class. In the subgroup of pts with identical pre- and post-IT therapy (paired data subset), PFS and ORR were compared using Wilcoxon Signed-Rank and McNemar tests, respectively.

Results

Among 102 included pts, 63 and 37% received anti-PD1 and anti-PD-L1, respectively. Main primary tumour types were: lung (28%), genitourinary (23%), hematologic (16%), breast and gynecologic (16%). Median nb of previous CT lines was 3 (1-11). Median PFS pre- and post-IT were 4.4 vs 3.6 months (m), respectively. When analysing all pts data by therapeutic class of CT, PFS post-IT tended to be better for anthracyclines (4.7 vs 3.1m), topoisomerase inhibitors (i.) (3 vs 2m) and antimicrotubule agents (a.) (3.7 vs 2.9m), but worse for alkylating a. (4.2 vs 5.6m) and signal transduction i. (STi.) (2.9 vs 4m). Results for the subgroup of paired data subset (n = 58) are presented in Table 1. ORRs post-IT tended to be higher for antimetabolites and antimicrotubule a. and lower for alkylating a., without reaching significance.

PFS pre- and post-IT of paired data subset (subgroup of pts who received the same pre- and post-IT therapy, n = 58)

Type of CT n mPFS pre (months) mPFS post (months) PFS Pre better (pts n) PFS Post better (pts n) p-value
Platines 9 3.8 6.7 4 5 0.441
Other alkylating a. 2 10.3 3 2 0 0.18
Antimetabolites 5 5.8 7.4 3 2 0.5
Anthracyclines 1 NE NE 0 1 0.317
Topoisomerase i. 2 1.4 3 1 1 0.655
Antimicrotubule 11 2.5 3.7 4 7 0.594
Anti-angiogenic 11 8 9.2 6 5 0.594
STi. 6 2.6 1.6 4 1 0.14
Hormonal 1 NE NE 1 0 0.317
Others 10 9 9.9 8 2 0.059
Total 58

Conclusions

PFS and ORR post-IT tend to be better for selected classes of CT.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Institut Gustave Roussy

Funding

Institut Gustave Roussy

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.