Search

The extracellular matrix protein fibronectin contains a domain that is rarely found in healthy adults and is almost exclusively expressed by newly formed blood vessels in tumours, particularly in solid tumours, different types of lymphoma and some leukaemias. This domain, called the extra domain B (ED‐B), thus has broad therapeutic potential. The antibody L19 has been developed to specifically target ED‐B and has shown therapeutic potential when combined with cytokines, such as IL‐2. In this review article, we discuss the preclinical research and clinical trials that highlight the potential of ED‐B targeting for the imaging and treatment of various types of cancer. ED‐B‐centred studies also highlight how proper patient stratification is of utmost importance for the successful implementation of novel antibody‐based targeted therapies., The extracellular matrix protein fibronectin contains a domain that is rarely found in healthy adults and is almost exclusively expressed by newly formed blood vessels in tumours, the extra domain B (ED‐B). This review summarizes preclinical research and clinical trials on the potential of antibody‐based ED‐B targeting for tumour visualization and treatment.

BackgroundPoorly immunogenic tumors are hardly responsive to immunotherapies such as immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) and are, therefore, a therapeutic challenge. Combination with other immunotherapies and/or immunogenic therapies, such as radiotherapy (RT), could make these tumors more immune responsive. We have previously shown that the immunocytokine L19–IL2 combined with single-dose RT resulted in 75% tumor remission and a 20% curative abscopal effect in the T cell-inflamed C51 colon carcinoma model. This treatment schedule was associated with the upregulation of inhibitory immune checkpoint (IC) molecules on tumor-infiltrating T cells, leading to only tumor growth delay in the poorly immunogenic Lewis lung carcinoma (LLC) model.MethodsWe aimed to trigger curative therapeutic responses in three tumor models (LLC, C51 and CT26) by “pushing the accelerator” of tumor immunity with L19–IL2 and/or “releasing the brakes” with ICB, such as antibodies directed against cytotoxic T lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), programmed death 1 (PD-1) or its ligand (PD-L1), combined with single-dose RT (10 Gy or 5 Gy). Primary tumor endpoint was defined as time to reach four times the size of tumor volume at start of treatment (4T×SV). Multivariate analysis of 4T×SV was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model comparing each treatment group with controls. Causal involvement of T and natural killer (NK) cells in the anti-tumor effect was assessed by in vivo depletion of T, NK or both cell populations. Immune profiling was performed using flow cytometry on single cell suspensions from spleens, bone marrow, tumors and blood.ResultsCombining RT, anti-PD-L1 and L19–IL2 cured 38% of LLC tumors, which was both CD8+ T and NK cell dependent. LLC tumors were resistant to RT +anti-PD-L1 likely explained by the upregulation of other IC molecules and increased T regulatory cell tumor infiltration. RT+L19–IL2 outperformed RT+ICB in C51 tumors; effects were comparable in CT26 tumors. Triple combinations were not superior to RT+L19–IL2 in both these models.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that combinatorial strategies rationally designed on biological effects can turn immunotherapy-resistant tumors into immunologically responsive tumors. This hypothesis is currently being tested in the international multicentric randomized phase 2 trial: ImmunoSABR (NCT03705403).

Simple Summary Immunotherapy provides the unprecedented opportunity to prolong the survival of cancer patients and even cure patients with previously untreatable malignancies. Preclinical and clinical studies show that standard photon-based radiotherapy and immunotherapy can synergize in order to promote both local and systemic anti-tumor immunity and that there is still ample room for improvement. Charged particle radiation is thought to have greater immunogenic potential compared to photon radiotherapy due to more lethal unrepaired damage, higher ionization density and thus more complex clustered DNA lesions. In this review, several factors determining the success of radiotherapy combined with immunotherapies, such as composition of the tumor, radiotherapy scheme and schedule, radiation dose, the type of radiation, are addressed. Furthermore, the theoretical basis, first pieces of evidences and new insights supporting a favorable immunogenicity profile of charged particle radiation are examined, including a depiction of best of knowledge for the immune-related responses triggered by charged particles and prospective clinical trials. Abstract Radiotherapy (RT) has been shown to interfere with inflammatory signals and to enhance tumor immunogenicity via, e.g., immunogenic cell death, thereby potentially augmenting the therapeutic efficacy of immunotherapy. Conventional RT consists predominantly of high energy photon beams. Hypofractionated RT regimens administered, e.g., by stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), are increasingly investigated in combination with cancer immunotherapy within clinical trials. Despite intensive preclinical studies, the optimal dose per fraction and dose schemes for elaboration of RT induced immunogenic potential remain inconclusive. Compared to the scenario of combined immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) and RT, multimodal therapies utilizing other immunotherapy principles such as adoptive transfer of immune cells, vaccination strategies, targeted immune-cytokines and agonists are underrepresented in both preclinical and clinical settings. Despite the clinical success of ICI and RT combination, e.g., prolonging overall survival in locally advanced lung cancer, curative outcomes are still not achieved for most cancer entities studied. Charged particle RT (PRT) has gained interest as it may enhance tumor immunogenicity compared to conventional RT due to its unique biological and physical properties. However, whether PRT in combination with immune therapy will elicit superior antitumor effects both locally and systemically needs to be further investigated. In this review, the immunological effects of RT in the tumor microenvironment are summarized to understand their implications for immunotherapy combinations. Attention will be given to the various immunotherapeutic interventions that have been co-administered with RT so far. Furthermore, the theoretical basis and first evidences supporting a favorable immunogenicity profile of PRT will be examined.

PURPOSE: The immunocytokine L19-IL2 delivers interleukin-2 to the tumor by exploiting the selective L19-dependent binding of extradomain B of fibronectin on tumor blood vessels. In preclinical models, L19-IL2 has been shown to enhance the local and abscopal effects of radiation therapy. The clinical safety of L19-IL2 monotherapy has been established previously. In this study, the safety and tolerability of L19-IL2 after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) was assessed.METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with oligometastatic solid tumors received radical SBRT to all visible metastases. Within 1 week after SBRT, intravenous L19-IL2 using a 3 + 3 dose escalation design was administered. Safety and tolerability were analyzed as the primary endpoint using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events 4.03 scoring system, with progression-free and overall survival as secondary endpoints.RESULTS: A total of 6 patients in 2 L19-IL2 dose levels were included. The 15 million International Units (Mio IU) dose level was well tolerated with no dose-limiting toxicity. The most frequently reported adverse events were chills, noninfectious fever, fatigue, edema, erythema, pruritus, nausea/vomiting, and cough and dyspnea. Blood analysis revealed abnormalities in liver function tests, anemia, hypoalbuminemia, and hypokalemia. At the second dose level (ie, 22.5 Mio IU), which is the recommended dose for L19-IL2 monotherapy, all 3 included patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity but recovered without sequelae. We documented 2 long-term progression-free responders, both having non-small cell lung cancer as primary tumor.CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this phase 1 clinical trial, the recommended phase 2 dose for SBRT combined with L19-IL2 is 15 Mio IU. The therapeutic efficacy of this combination is currently being evaluated in the multicentric EU-funded phase 2 clinical trial, ImmunoSABR.

Background About 50% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients have metastatic disease at initial diagnosis, which limits their treatment options and, consequently, the 5-year survival rate (15%). Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), either alone or in combination with chemotherapy, have become standard of care (SOC) for most good performance status patients. However, most patients will not obtain long-term benefit and new treatment strategies are therefore needed. We previously demonstrated clinical safety of the tumour-selective immunocytokine L19-IL2, consisting of the anti-ED-B scFv L19 antibody coupled to IL2, combined with stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). Methods This investigator-initiated, multicentric, randomised controlled open-label phase II clinical trial will test the hypothesis that the combination of SABR and L19-IL2 increases progression free survival (PFS) in patients with limited metastatic NSCLC. One hundred twenty-six patients will be stratified according to their metastatic load (oligo-metastatic: ≤5 or poly-metastatic: 6 to 10) and randomised to the experimental-arm (E-arm) or the control-arm (C-arm). The C-arm will receive SOC, according to the local protocol. E-arm oligo-metastatic patients will receive SABR to all lesions followed by L19-IL2 therapy; radiotherapy for poly-metastatic patients consists of irradiation of one (symptomatic) to a maximum of 5 lesions (including ICI in both arms if this is the SOC). The accrual period will be 2.5-years, starting after the first centre is initiated and active. Primary endpoint is PFS at 1.5-years based on blinded radiological review, and secondary endpoints are overall survival, toxicity, quality of life and abscopal response. Associative biomarker studies, immune monitoring, CT-based radiomics, stool collection, iRECIST and tumour growth rate will be performed. Discussion The combination of SABR with or without ICI and the immunocytokine L19-IL2 will be tested as 1st, 2nd or 3rd line treatment in stage IV NSCLC patients in 14 centres located in 6 countries. This bimodal and trimodal treatment approach is based on the direct cytotoxic effect of radiotherapy, the tumour selective immunocytokine L19-IL2, the abscopal effect observed distant from the irradiated metastatic site(s) and the memory effect. The first results are expected end 2023. Trial registration ImmunoSABR Protocol Code: NL67629.068.18; EudraCT: 2018–002583-11; Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03705403; ISRCTN ID: ISRCTN49817477; Date of registration: 03-April-2019.

Hypoxia—a common feature of the majority of solid tumors—is a negative prognostic factor, as it is associated with invasion, metastasis and therapy resistance. To date, a variety of methods are available for the assessment of tumor hypoxia, including the use of positron emission tomography (PET). A plethora of hypoxia PET tracers, each with its own strengths and limitations, has been developed and successfully validated, thereby providing useful prognostic or predictive information. The current review focusses on [18F]-HX4, a promising next-generation hypoxia PET tracer. After a brief history of its development, we discuss and compare its characteristics with other hypoxia PET tracers and provide an update on its progression into the clinic. Lastly, we address the potential applications of assessing tumor hypoxia using [18F]-HX4, with a focus on improving patient-tailored therapies.