Display options
Share it on

J Immunother Cancer. 2021 Mar;9(3). doi: 10.1136/jitc-2020-001506.

Molecular correlates of response to nivolumab at baseline and on treatment in patients with RCC.

Journal for immunotherapy of cancer

Petra Ross-Macdonald, Alice M Walsh, Scott D Chasalow, Ron Ammar, Simon Papillon-Cavanagh, Peter M Szabo, Toni K Choueiri, Mario Sznol, Megan Wind-Rotolo

Affiliations

  1. Translational Medicine, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
  2. Department of Genitourinary Oncology, The Lank Center for Genitourinary Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
  3. Yale Cancer Center, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
  4. Translational Medicine, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, New Jersey, USA [email protected].

PMID: 33658305 PMCID: PMC7931766 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2020-001506

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab is an immune checkpoint inhibitor targeting the programmed death-1 receptor that improves survival in a subset of patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). In contrast to other tumor types that respond to immunotherapy, factors such as programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) status and tumor mutational burden show limited predictive utility in ccRCC. To address this gap, we report here the first molecular characterization of nivolumab response using paired index lesions, before and during treatment of metastatic ccRCC.

METHODS: We analyzed gene expression and T-cell receptor (TCR) clonality using lesion-paired biopsies provided in the CheckMate 009 trial and integrated the results with their PD-L1/CD4/CD8 status, genomic mutation status and serum cytokine assays. Statistical tests included linear mixed models, logistic regression models, Fisher's exact test, and Kruskal-Wallis rank-sum test.

RESULTS: We identified transcripts related to response, both at baseline and on therapy, including several that are amenable to peripheral bioassays or to therapeutic intervention. At both timepoints, response was positively associated with T-cell infiltration but not associated with TCR clonality, and some non-Responders were highly infiltrated. Lower baseline T-cell infiltration correlated with elevated transcription of Wnt/β-catenin signaling components and hypoxia-regulated genes, including the Treg chemoattractant CCL28. On treatment, analysis of the non-responding patients whose tumors were highly T-cell infiltrated suggests association of the RIG-I-MDA5 pathway in their nivolumab resistance. We also analyzed our data using previous transcriptional classifications of ccRCC and found they concordantly identified a molecular subtype that has enhanced nivolumab response but is sunitinib-resistant.

CONCLUSION: Our study describes molecular characteristics of response and resistance to nivolumab in patients with metastatic ccRCC, potentially impacting patient selection and first-line treatment decisions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01358721.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Keywords: gene expression profiling; immunotherapy; kidney neoplasms; t-lymphocytes; tumor biomarkers

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: PR-M, SDC, SP-C, PMS, RA, AMW, and MW-R were employees of Bristol Myers Squibb at the time of their contribution. TKC has served as a consultant/advisor for Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKlin

References

  1. Clin Cancer Res. 1997 Jul;3(7):1077-86 - PubMed
  2. BMC Immunol. 2015 Sep 03;16:53 - PubMed
  3. JAMA Oncol. 2017 Jul 1;3(7):913-920 - PubMed
  4. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2019 Jun;38(1-2):65-77 - PubMed
  5. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015 Apr 20;43(7):e47 - PubMed
  6. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Jan 25;(1):CD001425 - PubMed
  7. Nat Med. 2020 Jun;26(6):909-918 - PubMed
  8. Front Immunol. 2013 Dec 12;4:450 - PubMed
  9. J Exp Med. 1996 Sep 1;184(3):1101-9 - PubMed
  10. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2019 Oct;17(5):e981-e994 - PubMed
  11. J Biol Chem. 2006 Jun 2;281(22):15215-26 - PubMed
  12. Science. 2018 Feb 16;359(6377):801-806 - PubMed
  13. J Clin Invest. 2017 Aug 1;127(8):2930-2940 - PubMed
  14. Br J Cancer. 2021 Jan;124(1):237-246 - PubMed
  15. Cancer Immunol Res. 2013 Jul;1(1):32-42 - PubMed
  16. Sci Immunol. 2019 Sep 13;4(39): - PubMed
  17. Nat Commun. 2018 Aug 29;9(1):3503 - PubMed
  18. Clin Cancer Res. 2016 Nov 15;22(22):5461-5471 - PubMed
  19. Int Immunopharmacol. 2017 Oct;51:165-170 - PubMed
  20. Cancer Treat Rev. 2018 Nov;70:127-137 - PubMed
  21. Nature. 2011 Jul 13;475(7355):226-30 - PubMed
  22. Cancer Immunol Res. 2019 Feb;7(2):257-268 - PubMed
  23. Cancer Discov. 2019 Apr;9(4):510-525 - PubMed
  24. Cell Syst. 2015 Dec 23;1(6):417-425 - PubMed
  25. Front Microbiol. 2018 Jul 19;9:1621 - PubMed
  26. Cell Stem Cell. 2013 Sep 5;13(3):300-13 - PubMed
  27. Science. 2018 Oct 12;362(6411): - PubMed
  28. Immunity. 2018 Apr 17;48(4):812-830.e14 - PubMed
  29. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Oct 25;102(43):15545-50 - PubMed
  30. Clin Cancer Res. 2015 Mar 15;21(6):1329-39 - PubMed
  31. Nature. 2013 Jul 4;499(7456):43-9 - PubMed
  32. Sci Rep. 2017 Jun 6;7(1):2887 - PubMed
  33. Cell Res. 2019 Oct;29(10):846-861 - PubMed
  34. Trends Cell Biol. 2019 Jan;29(1):44-65 - PubMed
  35. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2012 Jul;61(7):1019-31 - PubMed
  36. Urol Oncol. 2016 Apr;34(4):168.e1-9 - PubMed
  37. Nat Med. 2018 Jun;24(6):749-757 - PubMed
  38. Genes Immun. 2005 Jun;6(4):319-31 - PubMed
  39. Cancer Immunol Res. 2016 Sep 2;4(9):726-33 - PubMed
  40. J Clin Oncol. 2016 Mar 10;34(8):833-42 - PubMed
  41. Immunol Rev. 2018 Jan;281(1):99-114 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support