Search

Simple Summary: There is an increased interest for the investigation of immunotherapy and immune-related biomarkers in rectal cancer. We retrospectively analysed the expression of the programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) in diagnostic biopsies and resection samples from a cohort of 83 rectal cancer patients. Using three different methods for the analysis of PD-L1, we found that the expression of this biomarker was lower in resection samples than in diagnostic biopsies. Also, we observed that higher levels of PD-L1 in resection specimens were associated with better survival outcomes. The results of our study contribute to the knowledge of PD-L1 expression in rectal cancer, having the potential to inform the design of future immunotherapy trials in this setting. Immune checkpoint inhibitors and immune-related biomarkers are increasingly investigated in rectal cancer (RC). We retrospectively analysed PD-L1 expression in diagnostic biopsy and resection samples from RC patients treated at our centre between 2000 and 2020. PD-L1 immunostaining (22C3 clone) was evaluated according to tumour proportion (TPS), immune cell (ICS), and the combined positive score (CPS). Eighty-three patients were included. At diagnosis, PD-L1 expression ≥1%/≥5% was observed in 15.4%/0%, 80.7%/37.4%, and 69.2%/25.6% of patients based on TPS, ICS, and CPS, respectively. At surgery, the respective figures were 4.6%/1.5%, 60.2%/32.5%, and 50.7%/26.2%. Using the 1% cut-off and regardless of the scoring system, PD-L1 was less expressed in surgery than biopsy samples (p ≤ 0.04). In paired specimens, PD-L1-ICS reduction was especially observed following neoadjuvant long-course (chemo)radiotherapy (p = 0.03). PD-L1-ICS of ≥5% in surgical samples (HR: 0.17; p = 0.02), and a biopsy-to-surgery increase in PD-L1-ICS (HR: 0.19; p = 0.04) was predictive for longer disease-free survival, while the PD-L1-ICS of either ≥1% (HR 0.28; p = 0.04) or ≥5% (HR 0.19; p = 0.03) in surgical samples and the biopsy-to-surgery increase in PD-L1-ICS (HR: 0.20; p = 0.04) were associated with better overall survival. Our study suggests that PD-L1 expression in RC is largely reflective of immune cell infiltration, and its presence/increase in surgical samples predicts better outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A minority of phase III trials in gastrointestinal oncology are positive. We assessed the association between their outcome and the level and characteristics of preexisting evidence., Methods: EMBASE, PubMed, and proceedings from international meetings were searched for phase III gastrointestinal cancer trials (gastroesophageal, hepatocellular, biliary tract, pancreatic, small bowel, colorectal, anal, stromal, and neuroendocrine) between January 2000 and June 2020. Trials investigating anticancer drugs for advanced disease, with superiority design and standard treatments as control were eligible. The highest level of preexisting evidence was retrieved from the main study report., Results: A total of 193 phase III trials were included, and 69 (35.8%) met their primary endpoint. Positivity rates were as follows: gastroesophageal 37%, colorectal 48%, pancreatic 17.1%, hepatocellular 20%, neuroendocrine 75%, and both biliary tract and GIST 60%. No information about preexisting evidence was found for 44 trials (22.8%). For the remaining 149, preexisting evidence consisted of phase II studies in 123 cases (82.6%) and phase I studies in 26 cases (17.4%). The probability of success was 34.1%, 35.8%, and 35.7%, respectively (P = .934). No parameter from prior studies predicted the outcome of phase III trials except β < .2 (P = .048). A numerically increased success rate was observed for phase III trials preceded by positive phase II studies (41.9% vs 18.5%, P = .2)., Conclusions: There does not appear to be an association between level of prior evidence and success of phase III gastrointestinal cancer trials. These data, along with the high phase III failure rate, highlight the need to improve the drug development process in this setting., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)