Search

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been introduced in breast cancer (BC) treatment and better biomarkers are needed to predict benefit. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are prognostic in BC, but knowledge is limited on CTCs in the context of ICI therapy. In this study, serial sampling of CTCs (CellSearch system) was evaluated in 82 patients with metastatic BC enrolled in two randomized trials investigating ICI plus chemotherapy. Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression on CTCs was also measured. Patients with ≥ 2 CTCs per 7.5 mL at baseline had gene expression profiles in tumor suggestive of increased T-cell activity, including increased tumor inflammation signature (TIS) in both triple-negative (P = 0.010) and hormone receptor-positive (P = 0.024) disease. Patients with luminal A BC had higher CTC levels. The association between CTC status and outcome was most apparent 4 weeks into therapy. PD-L1 expression in CTCs was observed in 6/17 CTC-positive patients and was associated with inferior survival. In conclusion, our study indicates that CTC numbers may inform on tumor immune composition, as well as prognosis. These findings suggest a potential of using CTCs as an accessible biomarker source in BC patients treated with immunotherapy., (© 2024 The Author(s). Molecular Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Federation of European Biochemical Societies.)

Background: EMIT-1 is a national, observational, single-arm trial designed to assess the value of the Prosigna, Prediction Analysis of Microarray using the 50 gene classifier (PAM50)/Risk of Recurrence (ROR), test as a routine diagnostic tool, examining its impact on adjuvant treatment decisions, clinical outcomes, side-effects and cost-effectiveness. Here we present the impact on treatment decisions., Patients and Methods: Patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative pT1-pT2 lymph node-negative early breast cancer (EBC) were included. The Prosigna test and standard histopathology assessments were carried out. Clinicians' treatment decisions were recorded before (pre-Prosigna) and after (post-Prosigna) the Prosigna test results were disclosed., Results: Of 2217 patients included, 2178 had conclusive Prosigna results. The pre-Prosigna treatment decisions were: no systemic treatment (NT) in 27% of patients, endocrine treatment alone (ET) in 38% and chemotherapy (CT) followed by ET (CT + ET) in 35%. Post-Prosigna treatment decisions were 25% NT, 51% ET and 24% CT + ET, respectively. Adjuvant treatment changed in 28% of patients, including 21% change in CT use. Among patients assigned to CT + ET pre-Prosigna, 45% were de-escalated to ET post-Prosigna. Of patients assigned to ET, 12% were escalated to CT + ET and 8% were de-escalated to NT; of those assigned to NT, 18% were escalated to ET/CT + ET. CT was more frequently recommended for patients aged ≤50 years. In the subgroup with pT1c-pT2 G2 and intermediate Ki67 (0.5-1.5× local laboratory median Ki67 score), the pre-Prosigna CT treatment decision varied widely across hospitals (3%-51%). Post-Prosigna, the variability of CT use was markedly reduced (8%-24%). The correlation between Ki67 and ROR score within this subgroup was poor (r = 0.25-0.39). The median ROR score increased by increasing histological grade, but the ROR score ranges were wide (for G1 0-79, G2 0-90, G3 16-94)., Conclusion: The Prosigna test result changed adjuvant treatment decisions in all EBC clinical risk groups, markedly decreased the CT use for patients categorized as higher clinical risk pre-Prosigna and reduced treatment decision discrepancies between hospitals., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

In the last decades, the development of high-throughput molecular assays has revolutionised cancer diagnostics, paving the way for the concept of personalised cancer medicine. This progress has been driven by the introduction of such technologies through biomarker-driven oncology trials. In this review, strengths and limitations of various state-of-the-art sequencing technologies, including gene panel sequencing (DNA and RNA), whole-exome/whole-genome sequencing and whole-transcriptome sequencing, are explored, focusing on their ability to identify clinically relevant biomarkers with diagnostic, prognostic and/or predictive impact. This includes the need to assess complex biomarkers, for example microsatellite instability, tumour mutation burden and homologous recombination deficiency, to identify patients suitable for specific therapies, including immunotherapy. Furthermore, the crucial role of biomarker analysis and multidisciplinary molecular tumour boards in selecting patients for trial inclusion is discussed in relation to various trial concepts, including drug repurposing. Recognising that today's exploratory techniques will evolve into tomorrow's routine diagnostics and clinical study inclusion assays, the importance of emerging technologies for multimodal diagnostics, such as proteomics and in vivo drug sensitivity testing, is also discussed. In addition, key regulatory aspects and the importance of patient engagement in all phases of a clinical trial are described. Finally, we propose a set of recommendations for consideration when planning a new precision cancer medicine trial., (© 2024 The Authors. Journal of Internal Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association for Publication of The Journal of Internal Medicine.)

Background: In the two European Union (EU)-funded projects, PCM4EU (Personalized Cancer Medicine for all EU citizens) and PRIME-ROSE (Precision Cancer Medicine Repurposing System Using Pragmatic Clinical Trials), we aim to facilitate implementation of precision cancer medicine (PCM) in Europe by leveraging the experience from ongoing national initiatives that have already been particularly successful., Patients and Methods: PCM4EU and PRIME-ROSE gather 17 and 24 partners, respectively, from 19 European countries. The projects are based on a network of Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP)-like clinical trials that are currently ongoing or soon to start in 11 different countries, and with more trials expected to be established soon. The main aims of both the projects are to improve implementation pathways from molecular diagnostics to treatment, and reimbursement of diagnostics and tumour-tailored therapies to provide examples of best practices for PCM in Europe., Results: PCM4EU and PRIME-ROSE were launched in January and July 2023, respectively. Educational materials, including a podcast series, are already available from the PCM4EU website (http://www.pcm4eu.eu). The first reports, including an overview of requirements for the reimbursement systems in participating countries and a guide on patient involvement, are expected to be published in 2024., Conclusion: PCM4EU and PRIME-ROSE were launched in January and July 2023, respectively. Educational materials, including a podcast series, are already available from the PCM4EU website (http://www.pcm4eu.eu). The first reports, including an overview of requirements for the reimbursement systems in participating countries and a guide on patient involvement, are expected to be published in 2024., Conclusion: European collaboration can facilitate the implementation of PCM and thereby provide affordable and equitable access to precision diagnostics and matched therapies for more patients.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown minimal clinical activity in hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer (HR + mBC). Doxorubicin and low-dose cyclophosphamide are reported to induce immune responses and counter regulatory T cells (Tregs). Here, we report the efficacy and safety of combined programmed cell death protein-1/cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 blockade concomitant with or after immunomodulatory chemotherapy for HR + mBC., Methods: Patients with HR + mBC starting first-/second- line chemotherapy (chemo) were randomized 2:3 to chemotherapy (pegylated liposomal doxorubicin 20 mg/m 2 every second week plus cyclophosphamide 50 mg by mouth/day in every other 2-week cycle) with or without concomitant ipilimumab (ipi; 1 mg/kg every sixth week) and nivolumab (nivo; 240 mg every second week). Patients in the chemo-only arm were offered cross-over to ipi/nivo without chemotherapy. Co-primary endpoints were safety in all patients starting therapy and progression-free survival (PFS) in the per-protocol (PP) population, defined as all patients evaluated for response and receiving at least two treatment cycles. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate, clinical benefit rate, Treg changes during therapy and assessment of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), mutational burden and immune gene signatures as biomarkers., Results: Eighty-two patients were randomized and received immune-chemo (N=49) or chemo-only (N=33), 16 patients continued to the ipi/nivo-only cross-over arm. Median follow-up was 41.4 months. Serious adverse events occurred in 63% in the immune-chemo arm, 39% in the chemo-only arm and 31% in the cross-over-arm. In the PP population (N=78) median PFS in the immune-chemo arm was 5.1 months, compared with 3.6 months in the chemo-only arm, with HR 0.94 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.51). Clinical benefit rates were 55% (26/47) and 48% (15/31) in the immune-chemo and chemo-only arms, respectively. In the cross-over-arm (ipi/nivo-only), objective responses were observed in 19% of patients (3/16) and clinical benefit in 25% (4/16). Treg levels in blood decreased after study chemotherapy. High-grade immune-related adverse events were associated with prolonged PFS. PD-L1 status and mutational burden were not associated with ipi/nivo benefit, whereas a numerical PFS advantage was observed for patients with a high Treg gene signature in tumor., Conclusion: The addition of ipi/nivo to chemotherapy increased toxicity without improving efficacy. Ipi/nivo administered sequentially to chemotherapy was tolerable and induced clinical responses., Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03409198., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JAK has in the last 5 years received research support from Bristol Myers Squibb, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, NanoString, and NEC OncoImmunity and has previously received advisory board/lecture honoraria from pharmaceutical companies, including Bristol Myers Squibb. CQ has received honoraria for advisory board from AstraZeneca. BG has received honoraria for advisory boards from Eli Lilly, Gilead, Daiichi Sankyo, Roche, and Pierre Fabre. LJ has received lecture honoraria from Pfizer, Novartis, and AstraZeneca. AG has received travel grants or honoraria for advisory boards from Lilly, Daiichi Sankyo, Seagen, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca. HGR has received research support from Illumina and NanoString. OCL has over the last 2 years received honoraria for work as statistical advisor for Novartis. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Intratumor heterogeneity associates with poor patient outcome. Stromal stiffening also accompanies cancer. Whether cancers demonstrate stiffness heterogeneity, and if this is linked to tumor cell heterogeneity remains unclear. We developed a method to measure the stiffness heterogeneity in human breast tumors that quantifies the stromal stiffness each cell experiences and permits visual registration with biomarkers of tumor progression. We present Spatially Transformed Inferential Force Map (STIFMap) which exploits computer vision to precisely automate atomic force microscopy (AFM) indentation combined with a trained convolutional neural network to predict stromal elasticity with micron-resolution using collagen morphological features and ground truth AFM data. We registered high-elasticity regions within human breast tumors colocalizing with markers of mechanical activation and an epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT). The findings highlight the utility of STIFMap to assess mechanical heterogeneity of human tumors across length scales from single cells to whole tissues and implicates stromal stiffness in tumor cell heterogeneity., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown efficacy against metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) but only for PD-L1 positive disease. The randomized, placebo-controlled ALICE trial ( NCT03164993 , 24 May 2017) evaluated the addition of atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) to immune-stimulating chemotherapy in mTNBC. Patients received pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) and low-dose cyclophosphamide in combination with atezolizumab (atezo-chemo; n = 40) or placebo (placebo-chemo; n = 28). Primary endpoints were descriptive assessment of progression-free survival in the per-protocol population (>3 atezolizumab and >2 PLD doses; n = 59) and safety in the full analysis set (FAS; all patients starting therapy; n = 68). Adverse events leading to drug discontinuation occurred in 18% of patients in the atezo-chemo arm (7/40) and in 7% of patients in the placebo-chemo arm (2/28). Improvement in progression-free survival was indicated in the atezo-chemo arm in the per-protocol population (median 4.3 months versus 3.5 months; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33-0.99; log-rank P = 0.047) and in the FAS (HR = 0.56; 95% CI 0.33-0.95; P = 0.033). A numerical advantage was observed for both the PD-L1 positive (n = 27; HR = 0.65; 95% CI 0.27-1.54) and PD-L1 negative subgroups (n = 31; HR = 0.57, 95% CI 0.27-1.21). The progression-free proportion after 15 months was 14.7% (5/34; 95% CI 6.4-30.1%) in the atezo-chemo arm versus 0% in the placebo-chemo arm. The addition of atezolizumab to PLD/cyclophosphamide was tolerable with an indication of clinical benefit, and the findings warrant further investigation of PD1/PD-L1 blockers in combination with immunomodulatory chemotherapy., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Functional precision medicine is a new, emerging area that can guide cancer treatment by capturing information from direct perturbations of tumor-derived, living cells, such as by drug sensitivity screening. Precision cancer medicine as currently implemented in clinical practice has been driven by genomics, and current molecular tumor boards rely extensively on genomic characterization to advise on therapeutic interventions. However, genomic biomarkers can only guide treatment decisions for a fraction of the patients. In this review we provide an overview of the current state of functional precision medicine, highlight advances for drug-sensitivity screening enabled by cell culture models, and discuss how artificial intelligence (AI) can be coupled to functional precision medicine to guide patient stratification., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests S.S.S. has received honoraria from AbbVie and AstraZeneca, and research support from BeiGene and TG Therapeutics. Å.F. has received honoraria from Bayer, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Amgen, and Pfizer. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Precision cancer medicine (PCM), frequently used for the expensive and often modestly efficacious off-label treatment with medications matched to the tumour genome of end-stage cancer, challenges healthcare resources. We compared the health effects, costs and cost-effectiveness of our MetAction PCM study with corresponding data from comparator populations given best supportive care (BSC) in two external randomised controlled trials., Methods: We designed three partitioned survival models to evaluate the healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as the main outcomes. Cost-effectiveness was calculated as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of PCM relative to BSC with an annual willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of EUR 56,384 (NOK 605,000). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty., Results: We estimated total healthcare costs (relating to next-generation sequencing (NGS) equipment and personnel wages, molecularly matched medications to the patients with an actionable tumour target and follow-up of the responding patients) and the health outcomes for the MetAction patients versus costs (relating to estimated hospital admission) and outcomes for the BSC cases. The ICERs for incremental QALYs were twice or more as high as the WTP threshold and relatively insensitive to cost decrease of the NGS procedures, while reduction of medication prices would contribute significantly towards a cost-effective PCM strategy., Conclusions: The models suggested that the high ICERs of PCM were driven by costs of the NGS diagnostics and molecularly matched medications, with a likelihood for the strategy to be cost-effective defying WTP constraints. Reducing drug expenses to half the list price would likely result in an ICER at the WTP threshold. This can be an incentive for a public-private partnership for sharing drug costs in PCM, exemplified by ongoing European initiatives., Clinicaltrials.gov, Identifier: NCT02142036.

Background: Matching treatment based on tumour molecular characteristics has revolutionized the treatment of some cancers and has given hope to many patients. Although personalized cancer care is an old concept, renewed attention has arisen due to recent advancements in cancer diagnostics including access to high-throughput sequencing of tumour tissue. Targeted therapies interfering with cancer specific pathways have been developed and approved for subgroups of patients. These drugs might just as well be efficient in other diagnostic subgroups, not investigated in pharma-led clinical studies, but their potential use on new indications is never explored due to limited number of patients., Methods: In this national, investigator-initiated, prospective, open-label, non-randomized combined basket- and umbrella-trial, patients are enrolled in multiple parallel cohorts. Each cohort is defined by the patient's tumour type, molecular profile of the tumour, and study drug. Treatment outcome in each cohort is monitored by using a Simon two-stage-like 'admissible' monitoring plan to identify evidence of clinical activity. All drugs available in IMPRESS-Norway have regulatory approval and are funded by pharmaceutical companies. Molecular diagnostics are funded by the public health care system., Discussion: Precision oncology means to stratify treatment based on specific patient characteristics and the molecular profile of the tumor. Use of targeted drugs is currently restricted to specific biomarker-defined subgroups of patients according to their market authorization. However, other cancer patients might also benefit of treatment with these drugs if the same biomarker is present. The emerging technologies in molecular diagnostics are now being implemented in Norway and it is publicly reimbursed, thus more cancer patients will have a more comprehensive genomic profiling of their tumour. Patients with actionable genomic alterations in their tumour may have the possibility to try precision cancer drugs through IMPRESS-Norway, if standard treatment is no longer an option, and the drugs are available in the study. This might benefit some patients. In addition, it is a good example of a public-private collaboration to establish a national infrastructure for precision oncology. Trial registrations EudraCT: 2020-004414-35, registered 02/19/2021; ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT04817956, registered 03/26/2021., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Purpose: In GI cancers, anaplastic lymphoma kinase ( ALK ) rearrangements are extremely less frequent than in non-small-cell lung cancer but may be important to offer personalized strategies of treatment in selected patients. Data about the activity and efficacy of ALK inhibitors (ALKi) in GI cancers are scarce., Materials and Methods: We assembled a clinical and molecular international data set of pretreated patients with metastatic or nonresectable cancers of GI primary tumor origin with documented ALK rearrangement treated with at least one line of ALKi. Measurable disease as per RECIST 1.1 was required for response analysis., Results: Primary tumor sites were distributed as follows: 5 (38%) pancreas, 3 (23%) right colon, and 1 (8%) for each one of gastric, duodenal, rectal, left colon, and biliary tract sites. Seven patients (54%) were treated with alectinib, 5 (38%) with crizotinib, and 1 (8%) with entrectinib. After disease progression, five patients (38%) received a subsequent ALKi treatment line, and at the time of data cutoff date, treatment was still ongoing in two patients. Five of 12 evaluable patients (41%) achieved a partial response to first-line ALKi, five patients (41%) had stable disease, and 2 (17%) had progressive disease. No complete responses were registered. At a median follow-up of 39.6 months (interquartile range: 19.8-59.5), the median progression-free survival was 5.0 months (95% CI, 3.68 to no response) and the median overall survival was 9.3 months (95% CI, 5.46 to no response)., Conclusion: Treatment with ALKi provides remarkable responses and clinical benefit in pretreated patients with ALK fusion-positive GI malignancies. Despite the rarity, ALK rearrangements represent an important therapeutic target in individual pretreated patients with GI solid tumors. Further work providing prospective clinical validation of this target is needed., Competing Interests: Marzia Del ReConsulting or Advisory Role: Sanofi, Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Ipsen, Roche Molecular DiagnosticsSpeakers' Bureau: Sanofi, Pfizer, Novartis, Janssen-Cilag, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Astellas Pharma, Roche, MSD Oncology Paolo MancaPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: I have a patent for a method for the identification of gene panels optimal for TMB estimation (Inst) Andrew HendifarConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Ipsen, Perthera, Celgene, AbbVie, EisaiResearch Funding: Ipsen, NGM Biopharmaceuticals (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: HalozymeOther Relationship: FibroGen Alexander DrilonHonoraria: Pfizer, Loxo/Bayer/Lilly, IASLCConsulting or Advisory Role: Ignyta, Loxo, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Blueprint Medicines, Genentech/Roche, BeiGene, Hengrui Therapeutics, Exelixis, Bayer, Tyra Biosciences, Takeda/Millennium, BerGenBio, MORE Health, Lilly, AbbVie, 14ner Oncology/Elevation Oncology, Monopteros Therapeutics, Novartis, EMD Serono/Merck, Repare Therapeutics, Melendi, Archer, Nuvalent Inc, Janssen, Amgen, Merus, Axis Pharma, Medscape, Liberum, Med Learning, PeerView, EPG Health, JNCCN/Harborside, Ology, Clinical Care Options, touchIME, Entos, Treeline, Prelude Therapeutics, Applied Pharmaceutical Science IncSpeakers' Bureau: Helsinn Therapeutics, Beigene, Remedica Ltd, TP Therapeutics, Verastem, Ignyta/Genentech/Roche, AstraZeneca, Liberum, Loxo/Bayer/Lilly, Lungevity, NIH, PER, OncLive/MJH Life Sciences, Clinical Care Options/NCCN, Lung Cancer Canada, AIOT, Chugai Pharma, Chugai Pharma, Sirio Libanes Hospital, Answers in CME, Faculty RTP, RV MoreResearch Funding: Foundation MedicinePatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Wolters Kluwer (Royalties for Pocket Oncology)Other Relationship: Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Teva, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, PharmaMar, Puma Biotechnology, Merus, Boehringer Ingelheim Guilherme HaradaSpeakers' Bureau: MSD, AstraZeneca, Pfizer Anne Hansen ReeHonoraria: MSD Oncology, BMSiResearch Funding: BMSi (Inst) Samuel KlempnerStock and Other Ownership Interests: TP Therapeutics, Nuvalent IncHonoraria: NateraConsulting or Advisory Role: Lilly, Astellas Pharma, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pieris Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Daiichi Sankyo/UCB Japan, Sanofi/Aventis, MersanaResearch Funding: Leap Therapeutics (Inst), BeiGene (Inst), Silverback Therapeutics (Inst)Other Relationship: NCCN Gunhild Mari MælandsmoPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Patent application submitted for a nine-protein/gene panel predicting response to anti VEGF therapies in combination with chemotherapy (Inst) Hege G. RussnesHonoraria: AstraZeneca (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), InCyte (Inst), Merck (Inst), Roche (Inst)Research Funding: Foundation Medicine (Inst) James M. ClearyHonoraria: Blueprint Medicines, Syros PharmaceuticalsConsulting or Advisory Role: Bristol Myers SquibbResearch Funding: Merck, Tesaro, AstraZeneca, Esperas Pharma, AbbVie (Inst), Merus (Inst), Roche/Genentech (Inst), BMS (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche, Agios, Bristol Myers Squibb Andrea Sartore-BianchiConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Bayer, Sanofi, Servier, Novartis Maria Di BartolomeoHonoraria: Lilly, MSD Oncology, Servier, BMSiConsulting or Advisory Role: Lilly, MSD OncologyResearch Funding: LillyTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche, Sanofi Filippo PietrantonioHonoraria: Servier, Bayer, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Lilly, Sanofi, MSD Oncology, AmgenConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Servier, MSD Oncology, MerckResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Astrazeneca (Inst)No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Background: Breast cancer incidence differs between non-immigrants and immigrants from low- and middle-income countries. This study investigates whether immigrants also have different subtype-specific incidences., Methods: We used national health registries in Norway and calculated subtype-specific incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for invasive breast cancer among women aged 20-75 and 20-49 years between 2005 and 2015. Immigrant groups were classified by country of birth broadly defined based on WHO regional groupings. Subtype was defined using estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) status as luminal A-like (ER+ PR+ HER2-), luminal B-like/HER2- (ER+ PR- HER2-), luminal B-like/HER2+ (ER+ PR any HER2+), HER2+ (ER-PR-HER2+) and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) (ER-PR-HER2-)., Results: Compared to non-immigrants, incidence of the luminal A-like subtype was lower in immigrants from Sub-Saharan Africa (IRR 0.43 95% CI 0.28-0.66), South East Asia (IRR 0.63 95% CI 0.51-0.79), South Asia (IRR 0.67 95% CI 0.52-0.86) and Eastern Europe (IRR 0.86 95% CI 0.76-0.99). Immigrants from South Asia had higher rates of HER2 + tumors (IRR 2.02 95% CI 1.26-3.23). The rates of TNBC tended to be similar regardless of region of birth, except that women from South East Asia had an IRR of 0.54 (95% CI 0.32-0.91)., Conclusions: Women from Eastern Europe, Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia had different subtype-specific incidences compared to women from high-income countries (including non-immigrants). These differences in tumor characteristics between immigrant groups should be taken into consideration when planning preventive or screening strategies., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Ipilimumab was the first treatment that improved survival in advanced melanoma. Efficacy and toxicity in a real-world setting may differ from clinical trials, due to more liberal eligibility criteria and less intensive monitoring. Moreover, high costs and lack of biomarkers have raised cost-benefit concerns about ipilimumab in national healthcare systems and limited its use. Here, we report the prospective, interventional study, Ipi4 (NCT02068196), which aimed to investigate the toxicity and efficacy of ipilimumab in a real-world population with advanced melanoma. This national, multicentre, phase IV trial included 151 patients. Patients received ipilimumab 3 mg/kg intravenously and were followed for at least 5 years or until death. Treatment interruption or cessation occurred in 38%, most frequently due to disease progression (19%). Treatment-associated grade 3 to 4 toxicity was observed in 28% of patients, and immune-related toxicity in 56%. The overall response rate was 9%. Median overall survival was 12.1 months (95% CI: 8.3-15.9); and progression-free survival 2.7 months (95% CI: 2.6-2.8). After 5 years, 20% of patients were alive. In a landmark analysis from 6 months, improved survival was associated with objective response (HR 0.16, P = .001) and stable disease (HR 0.49, P = .005) compared to progressive disease. Poor performance status, elevated lactate dehydrogenase and C-reactive protein were identified as biomarkers. This prospective trial represents the longest reported follow-up of a real-world melanoma population treated with ipilimumab. Results indicate safety and efficacy comparable to phase III trials and suggest that the use of ipilimumab can be based on current cost-benefit estimates., (© 2021 The Authors. International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC.)

Sentinel lymph nodes are the first nodes draining the lymph from a breast and could reveal early changes in the host immune system upon dissemination of breast cancer cells. To investigate this, we performed single-cell immune profiling of lymph nodes with and without metastatic cells. Whereas no significant changes were observed for B-cell and natural killer (NK)-cell subsets, metastatic lymph nodes had a significantly increased frequency of CD8 T cells and a skewing toward an effector/memory phenotype of CD4 and CD8 T cells, suggesting an ongoing immune response. Additionally, metastatic lymph nodes had an increased frequency of TIGIT (T-cell immunoreceptor with Ig and ITIM domains)-positive T cells with suppressed TCR signaling compared with non-metastatic nodes, indicating exhaustion of effector T cells, and an increased frequency of regulatory T cells (Tregs) with an activated phenotype. T-cell alterations correlated with the percentage of metastatic tumor cells, reflecting the presence of metastatic tumor cells driving T effector cells toward exhaustion and promoting immunosuppression by recruitment or increased differentiation toward Tregs. These results show that immune suppression occurs already in early stages of tumor progression., (© 2021 The Authors. Molecular Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Federation of European Biochemical Societies.)