Search

Simple Summary Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive cancer with limited therapeutic options. Pemetrexed plus platinum is a standard first-line therapy, but options for second-line therapy in patients with relapsed mesothelioma remain controversial. Several drugs were recently introduced to treat relapsed MPM. We conducted a comprehensive systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of these drugs according to published randomized controlled trials. Nivolumab alone or nivolumab plus ipilimumab provided significantly longer overall survival (OS), and treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab was associated with the best OS based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). The network meta-analysis revealed that tremelimumab, vorinostat, chemotherapy (CTX), asparagine–glycine–arginine–human tumor necrosis factor plus CTX, nivolumab alone, and nivolumab plus ipilimumab all produced significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefits compared with placebo, with nivolumab plus ipilimumab ranked first for PFS according to SUCRA. Abstract Patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) have very poor prognoses, and pemetrexed plus platinum is the standard first-line therapy. However, the second-line therapy for relapsed MPM remains controversial. A comprehensive search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating various second-line regimens in patients with relapsed MPM. Indirect comparisons of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were performed using network meta-analysis. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values were used to rank the included treatments according to each outcome. Nivolumab alone or nivolumab plus ipilimumab provided significantly longer OS than placebo (hazard ratio (HR): 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.55–0.94 for nivolumab alone; HR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.31–0.92 for nivolumab plus ipilimumab). The best SUCRA ranking for OS was identified for nivolumab plus ipilimumab (SUCRA: 90.8%). Tremelimumab, vorinostat, nivolumab alone, chemotherapy (CTX), asparagine–glycine–arginine–human tumor necrosis factor plus CTX, and nivolumab plus ipilimumab all produced noticeable PFS benefits compared with placebo. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab had the best PFS ranking (SUCRA: 92.3%). Second-line treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab provided the OS and PFS outcomes for patients with relapsed MPM.

Simple Summary Hepatocellular carcinoma is a frequent and poor prognosis tumor, with most patients facing up, soon or later, to systemic therapies. So far, systemic therapies based on tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapies have been of modest benefit. The aim of this review article was to characterize the profile of efficacy and safety of immuno-oncology-based monotherapies that failed to demonstrate significant benefit, for comparison with the immuno-oncology-based combinational strategies. One of them has proven its drastic benefit in phase-3, whereas others have only shown promising data in phase-1/2, although the corresponding phase-3 results are pending. We showed that objective response rates and duration of response are important parameters for increased median overall survival and long survivals. We also pointed out that, being aware that there is an urgent unmet need for biomarkers, the pattern of safety and quality of life will guide the physician for the choice on the possible future combinations. Abstract Hepatocellular carcinoma is a poor prognosis tumor. Systemic therapies are frequently used due to frequent recurrences after surgical or radiologic treatments. Anti-angiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors have shown efficacy in monotherapy, but with very low rates of long survival and exceptional recovery. Immuno-oncology based on immune checkpoint inhibitors has revolutionized the systemic therapies since showing long survival rates without any tumor progression or recurrence for some patients in partial or complete response, and possibly for some patients in stable disease. However, the rate of responders under immuno-oncology monotherapy is too low to increase significantly the median overall survival of the treated patients. The immuno-oncology-based combinations with different types of immune checkpoint inhibitors (PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 inhibitors such as nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, ipilimumab, tremelimumab), or the association of immune checkpoint inhibitors plus anti-angiogenic agents (bevacizumab, lenvatinib, cabozantinib), have led to a breakthrough in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Indeed, the first phase-3 trial, combining atezolizumab with bevacizumab, has dramatically changed the outcome of patients. Data from several other types of combinations assessed in phase-3 trials are pending, and if positive, will drastically arm the physicians to efficiently treat the patients, and disrupt the current algorithm of hepatocellular carcinoma treatment.

Simple Summary Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) accounts for about 15% of lung cancers and it has limited therapeutic options and poor prognosis. There has been no real progress for over 30 years in the treatment of this aggressive tumor type and platinum based chemotherapy represented the cornerstone of therapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors are the first agents in the last decades to determine an improvement in outcomes of patients with extensive stage (ES) SCLC patients. In the IMpower 133 and CASPIAN studies, the addition of atezolizumab or durvalumab, respectively, to first-line chemotherapy produced a significant improvement in overall survival with an acceptable safety profile in previously untreated patients with ES-SCLC, leading to a new standard of care. This review summarizes the main results observed with checkpoint inhibitors in SCLC, discussing the critical issues related to the use of novel checkpoint inhibitors and the future research with immunotherapy agents in SCLC. Abstract Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive tumor type with limited therapeutic options and poor prognosis. Chemotherapy regimens containing platinum represent the cornerstone of treatment for patients with extensive disease, but there has been no real progress for 30 years. The evidence that SCLC is characterized by a high mutational burden led to the development of immune-checkpoint inhibitors as single agents or in combination with chemotherapy. Randomized phase III trials demonstrated that the combination of atezolizumab (IMpower-133) or durvalumab (CASPIAN) with platinum-etoposide chemotherapy improved overall survival of patients with extensive disease. Instead, the KEYNOTE-604 study demonstrated that the addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy failed to significantly improve overall survival, but it prolonged progression-free survival. The safety profile of these combinations was similar with the known safety profiles of all single agents and no new adverse events were observed. Nivolumab and pembrolizumab single agents showed anti-tumor activity and acceptable safety profile in Checkmate 032 and KEYNOTE 028/158 trials, respectively, in patients with SCLC after platinum-based therapy and at least one prior line of therapy. Future challenges are the identification predictive biomarkers of response to immunotherapy in SCLC and the definition of the role of immunotherapy in patients with limited stage SCLC, in combination with radiotherapy or with other biological agents.

Systemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has changed drastically since the introduction of the molecular targeted agent sorafenib in 2007. Although sorafenib expanded the treatment options for extrahepatic spread (EHS) and vascular invasion, making long-term survival of patients with advanced disease achievable to a certain extent, new molecular-targeted agents are being developed as alternatives to sorafenib due to shortcomings such as its low response rate and high toxicity. Every single one of the many drugs developed during the 10-year period from 2007 to 2016 was a failure. However, during the two-year period from 2017 through 2018, four drugs—regorafenib, lenvatinib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab—emerged successfully from clinical trials in quick succession and became available for clinical use. The efficacy of combination therapy with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) plus sorafenib was also first demonstrated in 2018. Recently, immune checkpoint inhibitors have been applied to HCC treatment and many phase III clinical trials are ongoing, not only on monotherapy with nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and tislelizumab, but also on combination therapy with checkpoint inhibitors, programmed death-1 (PD-1) or PD-ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody plus a molecular targeted agent (bevacizumab) or the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) antibody, tremelimumab. These combination therapies have shown higher response rates than PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy alone, suggesting a synergistic effect by combination therapy in early phases; therefore, further results are eagerly awaited.

Targeting of the programmed cell death protein (PD)-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) axis has shown a significant clinical impact in several tumor types. Accordingly, our phase II NIBIT-MESO-1 study demonstrated an improved clinical efficacy in mesothelioma patients treated with the anti-PD-L1 durvalumab combined with the anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen (CTLA)-4 tremelimumab, as compared to tremelimumab alone. Due to the promising therapeutic activity of immune check-point inhibitors (ICIs) in mesothelioma patients, the identification of biomarkers predictive of response to treatment is of crucial relevance. The prognostic role of soluble PD-L1 (sPD-L1) proposed in cancer patients prompted us to investigate this protein in sera from mesothelioma patients (n = 40) enrolled in the NIBIT-MESO-1 study. A significant (p &lt, 0.001) increase in sPD-L1 levels was detected in patients after the first cycle and during therapy vs. baseline. A longer overall survival (OS) was observed in patients with sPD-L1 concentrations below (at baseline, d1C2, d1C5 (p &lt, 0.01)) or FC values above (p &lt, 0.05 at d1C2, d1C3, d1C5) their statistically calculated optimal cut-offs. On the basis of these initial results, the specific role of CTLA-4-, PD-L1-, or PD-1-targeting on sPD-L1 release was then investigated in sera from 81 additional ICI-treated solid cancer patients. Results showed a significant (p &lt, 0.001) increase of sPD-L1 levels during therapy compared to baseline only in anti-PD-L1-treated patients, supporting the specific involvement of PD-L1 targeting in the release of its soluble form. Our findings suggest that sPD-L1 represents a predictive biomarker of clinical response to anti-PD-L1 cancer immunotherapy.

With the advent of checkpoint inhibitor treatment for various cancer types, the optimization of drug selection, pharmacokinetics and biomarker assays is an urgent and as yet unresolved dilemma for clinicians, pharmaceutical companies and researchers. Drugs which inhibit cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein-4 (CTLA-4), such as ipilimumab and tremelimumab, programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1), such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab, and programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1), such as atezolizumab, durvalumab and avelumab, each appear to have varying pharmacokinetics and clinical activity in different cancer types. Each drug differs in terms of dosing, which becomes an issue when drug comparisons are attempted. Here, we examine the various checkpoint inhibitors currently used and in development. We discuss the antibodies and their protein targets, their pharmacokinetics as measured in various tumor types, and their binding affinities to their respective antigens. We also examine the various dosing regimens for these drugs and how they differ. Finally, we examine new developments and methods to optimize delivery and efficacy in the field of checkpoint inhibitors, including non-fucosylation, prodrug formations, bispecific antibodies, and newer small molecule and peptide checkpoint inhibitors.