Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Immunotherapy’

Author, Editor: Tilda Barliya, PhD

Screen Shot 2021-07-19 at 7.36.50 PM

Word Cloud By Danielle Smolyar

Although melanoma accounts for only 4 percent of all dermatologic cancers, it is responsible for 80 percent of deaths from skin cancer; only 14 percent of patients with metastatic melanoma survive for five years (1). The incidence of melanoma is increasing worldwide, with a growing fraction of patients with advanced disease for which prognosis remains poor despite advances in the field (2). Treatment options are limited despite advances in immunotherapy and targeted therapy. For patients with surgically resected, thick (≥2 mm) primary melanoma with or without regional lymph node metastases, the only effective adjuvant therapy is interferon-α (IFN-α). However, because of the limited benefit upon disease-free survival and the smaller potential improvement of overall survival, the indication for IFN-α treatment remains controversial (2). A better understanding of melanoma immunosurveillance is therefore essential to enable the design of better, targeted melanoma therapies (4).

Risk factors (2):

  • Family history of melanoma, multiple benign or atypical nevi, and a previous melanoma
  • Immunosuppression
  • Sun sensitivity
  • Exposure to ultraviolet radiation

Each of these risk factors corresponds to a genetic predisposition or an environmental stressor that contributes to the genesis of melanoma and each factor is understood to various degrees at a molecular level. The Clark model of the progression of melanoma emphasizes the stepwise transformation of melanocytes to melanoma. The model depicts the proliferation of melanocytes in the process of forming nevi and the subsequent development of dysplasia, hyperplasia, invasion, and metastasis.

 

This Clark’s multi-step model, and predict that the acquisition of a BRAF mutation can be a founder event in melanocytic neoplasia. While mutations of the BRAF gene are frequent in melanomas on non-chronic sun damaged skin which are prevalent in Caucasians, acral and mucosal melanomas harbor mutations of the KIT gene as well as the amplifications of cyclin D1 or cyclin-dependent kinase 4 gene.

The choice of target antigens is key to the success of tumour vaccination or tumour immunotherapy. Melanoma candidate antigens include: (A) mutated or aberrantly expressed molecules (e.g. CDK4, MUM-1, beta-catenin) (B) cancer/testis antigens (e.g. MAGE, BAGE and GAGE) and (C) melanoma- associated antigens (MAA).

MAAs are self-antigens normally expressed during the differentiation of melanocytes and play a role in different enzymatic steps of melanogenesis. However, in transformed melanocytes (melanoma cells), MAAs are often overexpressed (4).

The main MAAs are tyrosinase, an enzyme that catalyses the production of melanin from tyrosine by oxidation, the tyrosinase-related proteins (TRP-1) and 2 (TRP-2), the glycoprotein (gp)100 (silver-gene) and MelanA/MART. It is thought that the specialized cell biology of melanin synthesis may favour the loading of MAA peptides into the antigen presentation pathway. 50% of melanoma patients have tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) recognising tyrosinase and Melan A, indicating that these antigens are important in the natural melanoma immunosurveillance. Moreover, MAAs are well characterized in mice and humans, allowing the development of tetramers to detect antigen-specific immune responses.

Tα1 Mechanism of action

Tα1, a 28 amino acid peptide of ∼3.1 kDa, is endogenously produced by the thymus gland by the cleavage of its precursor pro-Ta1.  Although the fine immunologic mechanism(s) of action of T1 have not fully been elucidated, experimental evidence points to its strong immunomodulatory properties. In particular, it was reported that Ta1 enhances T cell–mediated immune responses by several mechanisms, including increased T cell production (i.e., CD4+, CD8+, and CD3+ cells), stimulation of T cell differentiation and/or maturation, reduction of T cell apoptosis, and restoration of T cell–mediated antibody production (5).

Furthermore, it was demonstrated that T1 acts on the immune system by modulating the release of proinflammatory cytokines (i.e., interleukin-2 (IL-2), interferon-gamma (IFN-)),12–14 and through the activation of natural killer and dendritic cells.12 In addition, T1 was also demonstrated to have direct effects on cancer cells by increasing the levels of expression of different tumor antigens and of components of the major histocompatibility complex class I, as well as by reducing cancer cell growth.

Together, these experimental findings bear relevance for cancer immunotherapy and suggest that T1 can activate innate and adaptive immune responses and modulate the immunophenotype of cancer cells, improving their immunogenicity and their recognition by the immune system.

Danielli R and colleagues have very nicely outlined the use of the Thymosin a1 in the clinical setting for treating melanoma (5) titled :”Thymosin a1 in melanoma: from the clinical trial setting to the daily practice and beyond”.  A large body of available preclinical in vitro and in vivo evidence points to thymosin alpha 1 (Ta1) as a useful immunomodulatory peptide,with significant therapeutic potential in metastatic melanoma in the absence of clinically meaningful toxicity.  The results emerging frominitial trials provide support of the ability of T1 to improve the clinical outcome of advanced melanoma patients through the activation of the immune system.

Ta1 and Clinical Trials in Melanoma

A large scale, randomized, phase II study was conducted at 64 European centers between 2002 and 2006 to investigate the efficacy of Ta1 administered in combination with DTIC (Dacarbazine) or with DTIC + IFNa, versus only DTIC + IFNa, in 488 previously untreated patients with cutaneous metastatic melanoma. The study was designed to evaluate the ability of Ta1 to potentiate the therapeutic efficacy of DTIC.

Patients were randomly assigned to five treatment groups: DTIC + IFNa and 1.6 mg of Ta1; DTIC + IFNa and 3.2 mg of T1; DTIC + IFN-a and 6.4 mg of Ta1; DTIC + 3.2 mg of Ta1; and DTIC + IFNa

Results:

The clinical rate (CBR), defined as the proportion of patients with a complete response, partial response, or stable disease, was significantly higher in patients who received Ta1 + DTIC than in those who received control therapy. Results in patients who received T1 (all groups combined) compared with those who received the control treatment

  • Improved progression-free survival (hazard ratio (HR): 0.80;
  • 95%confidence interval (CI): 0.63–1.01; P = 0.06) and
  • OS (median: 9.4 vs. 6.6 months)

These outcomes suggested to addition of Thymosin a1 to the treatment resulted in the reduction in the risk of mortality and disease progression in patients with metastatic malignant melanoma, and pointed to a poor effect of IFN- in the combination. More so, the poor results of the IFN group is not surprising due to the limited therapeutic activity of IFN observed in phase III clinical trials.

This study however have some limitations as standard assessment criteria, such as RECIST and WHO indications,  conventionally applied to cytotoxic agents, do not adequately capture some patterns of response observed in the course of immunotherapy; stemming from these considerations, immune-related response criteria (irRC) were developed to measure primary and secondary endpoints in immunotherapy clinical trials.

Therefore the above study might underestimate the therapeutic efficacy of Thymosin a1 since irRC criteria were not used.

In Summary:

A large scale phase III clinical trial should be designed to further explore the therapeutic activity of Thymosine a1 in melanoma patients with defined endpoints and irRC criteria. Moreover, combination studies should explore the activity of T1 in association with other approved agents, such as ipilimumab and vemurafenib or as maintenance therapy in melanoma patients who experience clinical benefit after treatment with these agents.

Also, because of the pleiotropic immunemechanism(s) of action of T1, including the upregulation of T cell–driven immune responses against specific tumor antigens, priming of immune responses and potentiation of antitumor T cell–mediated immune responses through the activation of Toll-like receptor 9 on dendritic cells, coupling Ta1 to cancer vaccines should be an additional useful therapeutic strategy to pursue. T1 could, in fact, prove helpful in overcoming the limited immunogenicity and the short-lived persistency of adequate immunologic antitumor responses frequently reported as potential causes of failure of therapeutic vaccines.

Ref:

1. Arlo J. Miller, M.D.,., and Martin C. Mihm, Jr. Mechanisms of disease: Melanoma. N Engl J Med 2006 (6); 355:51-65.

http://www.nejm.org.rproxy.tau.ac.il/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMra052166

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra052166

2. Garbe C., Eigentler TK., Keilholz U., Hauschild A and Kirkwood JM. Systematic review of medical treatment in melanoma: current status and future prospects. Oncologist 2011;16(1):5-24.

http://theoncologist.alphamedpress.org/content/16/1/5.long

3. http://flipper.diff.org/app/items/info/1983

4.  Träger U, Sierro S, Djordjevic G, Bouzo B, Khandwala S, et al. (2012) The Immune Response to Melanoma Is Limited by Thymic Selection of Self-Antigens. PLoS ONE 7(4): e35005. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0035005.

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0035005

5. Riccardo Danielli, Ester Fonsatti, Luana Calabr` o, Anna Maria Di Giacomo, and Michele Maio. Thymosin 1 in melanoma: from the clinical trial setting to the daily practice and beyond. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1270 (2012) 8–12.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16822996

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2012.06757.x/abstract

Read Full Post »

A New Therapy for Melanoma

Reporter  Larry H Bernstein, MD

S Andrews, R Holden.  Characteristics and management of immune-related adverse effects associated with ipilimumab, a new immunotherapy for metastatic melanoma. Cancer Management and Research (Dovepress: open access) 11 Sept, 2012; 4:299-307.

This report is an immediate followup to a post on Ulcerative Colitis, a chronic inflammatory condition of the colonic mucosa that is now ready for phase 3 clinical trial with a breakthrough drug that blocks the action of “T-cell lymphokine” activity of IL-2, 4, 7, 15 and 21.  This also deals with a breakthrough immunotherapy for a common skin malignancy, melanoma, the sixth most common cancer (bearing no ontogenetic resemblance to the GI disease), that accounted for 8790 in the US in 2011. Approximately 84% of cases present with local disease (stages I and II), 8% of patients have regional disease, and only 4% show distant metastases, with 4% being unstaged. Melanomas characteristically occur after puberty.    Lesions that are by all means identical to melanoma behave as a benign pigmented mole in a child.  The melanoma is a raised pigmented lesion that when it invades deeply through the dermal layer and metastasizes, would be identify this late stage for treatment of the disease.  Stage IV disease is defined as distant skin involvement, soft tissue involvement, lung, and/or visceral sites.  Survival rates are highly dependent on the stage of metastatic disease,  with stage IV melanoma patients showing 15% survival rate at 5 years, but the survival rate drops to 3% at 5 years with brain metastasis. The therapeutic options for extensive disease or for metastatic disease have been until recently limited to entry into a clinical trial, treatment with dacarbazine or high-dose interleukin-2 was the only therapy approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with no survival benefit and greater toxicity of combination sequential therapy of dacarbazine + other  drugs.

Vemurafenib (Zelboraf®, Genentech, South San Francisco, CA) is a BRAF inhibitor that has demonstrated activity in patients with metastatic melanoma who harbor the V600E BRAF mutation. Recent interim results of a Phase III study have reported 6-month overall survival of 84% (95% confidence interval 78–89) in patients receiving vemurafenib compared with 65% in the dacarbazine arm (95% confidence interval 56–73) of the study.14 The rate of progression-free survival was also improved in the vemurafenib arm, and this agent has received approval from the FDA for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma whose tumors harbor the V600E mutation.  However, the long-term efficacy and safety of vemurafenib has yet to be determined.  Introduce Ipilimumab (Bristol Myers Squibb), the first drug approved for the treatment of melanoma by the FDA which has shown a survival benefit in a randomized Phase III study.

Mechanism of Action:  Ipilimumab is a monoclonal antibody that blocks cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4, an inhibitor of T cell activation, thereby potentiating an immune response.  It’s unique mechanism of action differentiates it from chemotherapies, in that it targets the immune system rather than directly targeting the tumor itself.  Recall that in the previous GI inflammatory case the target was T-lymphocytes 2, 4, 7, 15, and 21. So this treatment is more narrowly focused.

Most recent Pase III Trial Result:  A Phase III study of ipilimumab in treatment-naïve patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma was recently published.  This study was done using a higher, experimental dose of ipilimumab at 10 mg/kg in combination with dacarbazine compared with dacarbazine alone. The combination arm of the study showed significantly higher survival rates in patients who received dacarbazine alone at one year (47.3% versus 36.3%), 2 years (28.5% versus 17.9%), and 3 years (20.8% versus 12.2%, hazard ratio for death 0.72; P , 0.001). The study confirmed the overall survival benefit of ipilimumab and it demonstrated an acceptable safety profile.

Summary of pharmaceutical treatment options

• Dacarbazine has low toxicity, is well tolerated, minimally effective, and has limited progression-free survival

• High-dose interleukin-2 has high toxicity, is used in highly selected patients, and has limited efficacy

• Combination biochemotherapeutic regimens have not been shown to have an overall survival benefit, and have added toxicity

• Vemurafenib shows a rapid response, has improved 6-month overall survival and progression-free survival, but lacks durability

• Ipilimumab has a unique side effect profile, and has been shown to improve one-year and two-year overall survival.

Immune-related AEs with ipilimumab

The most common safety events associated with ipilimumab therapy are immune-related; a recent pooled analysis of 14 completed Phase I–III ipilimumab clinical trials showed that 64.2% of patients experienced an immune-related adverse event (AE) of any grade.20 Immune-related AEs are likely reflective of the immune-based mechanism of action of ipilimumab and may affect various organs. An overview of the rate of immune-related AEs associated with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg in the Phase III MDX010-20 registration trial is shown in Table 1 (Rates of immune-related adverse events from the MDX010-20 registration trial, which included previously treated patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma treated with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg alone, a control vaccine alone (glycoprotein 100), or a combination of both ipilimumab and glycoprotein 100).  The most common immune-related AEs included toxicities of the skin, gastrointestinal tract, endocrine system, and liver.  The majority of immune-related AEs initially manifest during induction phase; however, a minority occurs weeks to months after discontinuation of ipilimumab. Time to resolution of immune-related AEs experienced by patients varied from 4.3 to 7.7 weeks on average across all studies.

Zelboraf® (vemurafenib) package insert. South San Francisco, CA: Genentech USA Inc,; 2011.
Hodi FS, O’Day SJ, McDermott DF, et al. Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2010; 363:711–723.

Patterns of response with ipilimumab

In addition to the safety events, which may be tied to the unique mechanism of action of ipilimumab, unique clinical responses might also be reflective of the immune-related mechanism of action. (Table 2) Response patterns with ipilimumab include two standard responses that are commonly observed with other cytotoxic therapies, the first being an immediate decline in overall tumor burden with no new lesions and the second being stable disease. Stable disease in some patients on ipilimumab can be followed by a slow and steady decline in tumor burden.  However, throughout clinical development of ipilimumab, two additional, novel response patterns have been observed in patients, while still being shown to be associated with improved survival in patients. The first is a reduction in overall tumor burden in the presence of new lesions and the second is an initial increase followed by a steady decrease in tumor volume.

Patterns of response with ipilimumab

• Immediate response in baseline lesions, without the presence of new lesions

• Durable stable disease (SD), which may be followed by a slow, steady decline in total tumor burden

• Response after an increase in total tumor burden

• Response in presence of new lesions (which may have been present at baseline but were radiographically undetectable)

Notes: All patterns of response have been associated with response in patients and to improved survival.

Hoos A, Ibrahim R, Korman A, et al. Development of ipilimumab: contribution to a new paradigm for cancer immunotherapy. Semin Oncol. 2010;37(5):533–546.

Ibrahim R, Berman D, de Pril V, et al. Ipilimumab safety profile: summary of findings from completed trials in advanced melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29 Suppl:Abstract 8583.

Wolchok JD, Hoos A, O’Day S, et al. Guidelines for the evaluation of immune therapy activity in solid tumors: immune-related response criteria. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:7412–7420.

Hoos A, Eggermont AM, Janetzki S, et al. Improved endpoints for cancer immunotherapy trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102:1388–1397.

Conclusion

Ipilimumab is a novel immunotherapeutic agent approved by the FDA for unresectable and metastatic melanoma. Due to its characteristic and distinctive mechanism of action, ipilimumab elicits a number of specific immune-related AEs. Time to onset and resolution of ipilimumab-associated immune-related AEs follow a predictable temporal pattern but can vary from patient to patient.

Related articles

Read Full Post »

Author: Ritu Saxena, Ph.D.

Recently, two world renowned innovators, Steve Jobs-the CEO of Apple Inc. and Dr. Steinman-winner of 2011 Nobel prize in Physiology or medicine lost their life battle against Pancreatic cancer. Although both Jobs and Steinman suffered from the same disease, they were diagnosed with two fundamentally different forms of cancer of pancreas.

Steve lived with the disease for 8 years, a relatively long time for Pancreatic cancer patients to survive. The reason is attributed to the rare form of cancer of pancreas he suffered from-referred to as pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor. Steinman, on the other hand died due to a more common form of pancreatic cancer, the adenocarcenoma.

Neuroendocrine tumors arise from islands of hormone-producing cells (islets), that happen to be in that organ. Jobs learned in 2003 that he had an extremely rare form of this cancer, an islet-cell neuroendocrine tumor. In his email to  Apple employees in 2004, Steven Jobs wrote “I have some personal news that I need to share with you, and I wanted you to hear it directly from me,” Jobs said in the message, which he sent from his hospital bed. “I had a very rare form of pancreatic cancer called an islet cell neuroendocrine tumor, which represents about 1 percent of the total cases of pancreatic cancer diagnosed each year, and can be cured by surgical removal if diagnosed in time (mine was). I will not require any chemotherapy or radiation treatments.”

About 2,500 cases of pancreatic islet cell tumors are seen in the United States each year, according to the University of Southern California’s Center for Pancreatic and Biliary Diseases. These tumors, which are derived from neuroendocrine cells, tend to be slow growing and are treatable even after they have metastasized, said the center’s Web site.  http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/08/02/MNGMJ816F41.DTL&ao=all

The management strategy of neuroendrocrine tumors (NET) like any other disease is supposed to be curative where possible. As suggested by several researchers including Ramage et al (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15686165, ), surgery is the only curative option currently available for NETs. The updated guidelines published for the NET management state the over the past few years, there have been advances in the management of neuroendocrine tumours, which have included clearer characterisation, more specific and therapeutically relevant diagnosis, and improved treatments. However, because of the uncommon nature of the disease, there remain few randomised trials in the field, hence all evidence mentioned in the research article is considered relatively weak compared with other more common cancers. For patients who are diagnosed early enough to be candidates for surgery, the aim is to keep the patient disease- and symptom-free for as long as possible. For patients suffering from advanced-stage NETs, operative therapy is rarely curative and chemotherapy could be used on metastasized NETs. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22052063.

As reported in a story covered by CNN in 2008, there was a lot of speculation when he appeared rail-thin at the unveiling of the new iPhone. Jobs eventually said in January 2009 that doctors said he dropped so much weight because of “a hormone imbalance that has been ‘robbing’ me of the proteins my body needs to be healthy. Sophisticated blood tests have confirmed this diagnosis.” http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2008/06/13/steve-jobs-life-after-the-whipple/ This statement explains how symptoms of hormonal excess in NET patients must be controlled before surgical procedure is followed. Also, recommended management of the symptoms of hormonal hypersecretion depends on the hormone secreted. For example, glucose levels in patients with insulinomas should be stabilized with diet and/or diazoxide. Gastrin hypersecretion in patients with gastrinomas may be managed with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). http://www.neuroendocrinetumor.com/health-care-professional/net-treatment-options.jsp

Steinman, on the other hand, suffered from adenocarcenoma that arises from the pancreatic cells themselves, referred to as the “far more common form of pancreatic cancer” by Jobs. He further wrote in his memo “…(adenocarcenoma) is currently not curable and usually carries a life expectancy of around one year after diagnosis. I mention this because when one hears ‘pancreatic cancer’ (or Googles it), one immediately encounters this far more common and deadly form, which, thank God, is not what I had.”

Dr. Steinman won the 2011 Nobel Prize for Medicine or Physiology for his early-career landmark discovery about the immune system in the 1970s when he first described ‘dendritic cells’ with the help of his mentor Zanvil Cohn at Rockefeller University. Unfortunately, he died just three days before the official announcement. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=steinman-nobel-laureate-explains-discovery-dendritic-cells. He had been suffering from pancreatic cancer for four years, had been undergoing treatment using a pioneering immunotherapy based on his own research. Dendritic cells from his body were deployed to mount an assault on his cancer. His early research at Rockefeller, began as an attempt to understand the primary white cells of the immune system — the large “eating” macrophages and the exquisitely specific lymphocytes, which operate in a variety of ways to spot, apprehend and destroy infectious microorganisms and tumor cells. Steinman’s subsequent research pointed to dendritic cells as important and unique accessories in the onset of several immune responses, including clinically important situations such as rejection of graft, resistance to tumors, autoimmune diseases and infections including AIDS. http://newswire.rockefeller.edu/2011/10/03/rockefeller-university-scientist-ralph-steinman-honored-today-with-nobel-prize-for-discovery-of-dendritic-cells-dies-at-68/

The standard of care in the United States for the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer is a combination of low-dose chemotherapy given simultaneously with radiation treatments to the pancreas and surrounding tissues. Radiation treatments are designed to lower the risk of local growth of the cancer, thereby minimizing the symptoms that local progression causes (back or belly pain, nausea, loss of appetite, intestinal blockage, jaundice). http://www.medicinenet.com/pancreatic_cancer/page6.htm#advanced

Research Efforts on Pancreatic Cancer: The untimely passing of the geniuses reminds us how important research in the area of pancreatic cancer is which lead to finding new therapeutic targets that might stem reliable therapies. A recent example is the report published in Science Daily stating that the protein RGL2 might be a promising therapeutic target for pancreatic cancer. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101105101400.htm. The conclusion was derived via research published in November in the Journal of Biological Chemistry by a team led by Channing Der, PhD from UNC Lineberger Cancer Center. http://www.jbc.org/content/285/45/34729.long   For almost three decades, scientists and physicians have known that a gene called the KRAS oncogene is mutated in virtually all pancreatic cancers, making it an important target for scientists looking for a way to stop the growth of pancreatic cancer tumors. The problem is that the KRAS gene triggers cancer cell growth in numerous ways, through multiple cell signaling pathways, and scientists have had difficulty determining which one will be the most promising to block — an important first step in designing a drug for use in patients. Dr. Der said that “We are particularly optimistic about RGL2 because we know that this protein is a critical component of KRAS signaling to another class of proteins called Ral GTPases, which are essential for the growth of almost all pancreatic tumors.”

Another groundbreaking research was published in the journal Nature talks about discovering the link between a gene and the prognosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcenoma. The team found that when a gene involved in protein degradation is switched-off through chemical tags on the DNA’s surface, pancreatic cancer cells are protected from the bodies’ natural cell death processes, become more aggressive, and can rapidly spread. Their research study proposed USP9X to be a major tumour suppressor gene with prognostic and therapeutic relevance in pancreatic cancer. http://www.sanger.ac.uk/about/press/2012/120429.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/pdf/nature11114.pdf

Although, most of the research efforts are concentrated on the more common form of cancer, pancreatic adenocarcenoma, similar research efforts are needed for developing cure for the uncommon form, the one Steve Jobs suffered from, neuroendocrine cancer.

What we lost to the disease is more than the two geniuses, we lost the possibility of further innovation that might have changed the world in ways we could not imagine. The loss, though, sheds light on the importance of finding a cure for the disease and its different types. Hope the research community is able to interpret and find answers to the enigma of Pancreatic cancer and its diverse forms in which it strikes.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts