Search

Combined inhibition of BRAF, MEK, and CDK4/6 is currently under evaluation in clinical trials for patients with melanoma harboring a BRAF V600 mutation. While this triple therapy has potent tumor-intrinsic effects, the impact of this combination on antitumor immunity remains unexplored. Here, using a syngeneic Braf V600E Cdkn2a -/- Pten -/- melanoma model, we demonstrated that triple therapy promoted durable tumor control through tumor-intrinsic mechanisms and promoted immunogenic cell death and T-cell infiltration. Despite this, tumors treated with triple therapy were unresponsive to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB). Flow cytometric and single-cell RNA sequencing analyses of tumor-infiltrating immune populations revealed that triple therapy markedly depleted proinflammatory macrophages and cross-priming CD103 + dendritic cells, the absence of which correlated with poor overall survival and clinical responses to ICB in patients with melanoma. Indeed, immune populations isolated from tumors of mice treated with triple therapy failed to stimulate T-cell responses ex vivo While combined BRAF, MEK, and CDK4/6 inhibition demonstrates favorable tumor-intrinsic activity, these data suggest that collateral effects on tumor-infiltrating myeloid populations may impact antitumor immunity. These findings have important implications for the design of combination strategies and clinical trials that incorporate BRAF, MEK, and CDK4/6 inhibition with immunotherapy for the treatment of patients with melanoma., (©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Despite the profound effect that checkpoint inhibitors and BRAF/MEK inhibitors have had on survival in patients with metastatic melanoma, treatment options remain limited for those who demonstrate poor response or develop resistance to these modalities. The prospect of tumor sensitization to these treatments is therefore an attractive one. Results: We describe the case of a patient who developed a sustained response to trametinib and pembrolizumab, despite prior resistance to both these therapies, after receiving treatment with a CDK4/6 inhibitor. Discussion: We further outline the preclinical data supporting a possible role for the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors in tumor sensitization to immunotherapy.

In successful cancer immunotherapy, T cell responses appear to be directed toward neoantigens created by somatic mutations; however, direct evidence that neoantigen-specific T cells cause regression of established cancer is lacking. Here, we generated T cells expressing a mutation-specific transgenic T cell receptor (TCR) to target different immunogenic mutations in cyclin-dependent kinase 4 (CDK4) that naturally occur in human melanoma. Two mutant CDK4 isoforms (R24C, R24L) similarly stimulated T cell responses in vitro and were analyzed as therapeutic targets for TCR gene therapy. In a syngeneic HLA-A2-transgenic mouse model of large established tumors, we found that both mutations differed dramatically as targets for TCR-modified T cells in vivo. While T cells expanded efficiently and produced IFN-γ in response to R24L, R24C failed to induce an effective antitumor response. Such differences in neoantigen quality might explain why cancer immunotherapy induces tumor regression in some individuals, while others do not respond, despite similar mutational load. We confirmed the validity of the in vivo model by showing that the melan-A-specific (MART-1-specific) TCR DMF5 induces rejection of tumors expressing analog, but not native, MART-1 epitopes. The described model allows identification of those neoantigens in human cancer that serve as suitable T cell targets and may help to predict clinical efficacy.