Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY
Matt D. Galsky , Romain Banchereau , Habib Rahman Hamidi , Ning Leng , Will Harris , Peter H. O'Donnell , Edward Ernest Kadel III, Kobe Chi Yung Yuen , Dexter Jin , Hartmut Koeppen , Darren Tayama , Enrique Grande , Jose Arranz , Maria De Santis , Ian D. Davis , Eiji Kikuchi , Xiaodong Shen , Aristotelis Bamias , Sanjeev Mariathasan
Background: Tumor mutational burden (TMB), PD-L1 expression, T-effector gene expression (GE) and a fibroblast TGF-β–response signature (F-TBRS) are associated with clinical outcomes with atezo mono in mUC (Mariathasan, Nature, 2018). Here we explore the potential predictive role of these biomarkers and APOBEC mutagenesis in IMvigor130. Methods: Pts receiving first-line (1L) mUC treatment (tx) were randomized 1:1:1 to atezo + PBC, atezo mono, or placebo + PBC. Coprimary efficacy endpoints were PFS and OS. Planned exploratory biomarker analyses included PD-L1 expression, TMB (FoundationOne), and T-effector GE (RNA-seq). Results: The 851 biomarker-evaluable pts (BEP) were representative of the 1200 ITT pts. Biomarker results are shown in Table. PD-L1 IC2/3 was associated with significantly longer OS for atezo mono vs placebo + PBC and a combination of PD-L1 IC2/3, and high TMB (> 10 muts/Mb) identified a pt subset (≈ 14% of BEP) with particularly favorable outcomes with atezo mono vs placebo + PBC; similar results for PD-L1 and TMB were not seen with atezo + PBC vs placebo + PBC. APOBEC mutagenesis was associated with improved OS with atezo-containing regimens whereas high F-TBRS was associated with inferior OS with atezo mono. Conclusions: These results reinforce the potential predictive nature of biomarkers associated with response/resistance to atezo and highlight potentially distinct biology driving benefit with atezo and atezo + PBC. These findings suggest a possible biomarker-directed approach to 1L mUC tx that warrants mechanistic interrogation and prospective validation. Clinical trial information: NCT02807636.
Interim OS HR (95% CI)a; Sample size (n) | ||
---|---|---|
Atezo + PBC vs PBC | Atezo vs PBC | |
ITT | 0.83 (0.69, 1.00); n = 851 | 1.02 (0.83, 1.24); n = 719 |
BEP | 0.84 (0.67, 1.04); n = 599 | 0.91 (0.73, 1.15); n = 539 |
PD-L1 IC2/3b | 0.73 (0.47, 1.14); n = 167 | 0.59 (0.36, 0.96); n = 143 |
TMBhigh (> 10 muts/Mb) | 0.82 (0.58, 1.17); n = 248 | 0.71 (0.49, 1.03); n = 236 |
PD-L1 IC2/3 + TMBhigh | 0.88 (0.48, 1.62); n = 94 | 0.22 (0.08, 0.63); n = 77 |
APOBEChigh | 0.46 (0.26, 0.84); n = 112 | 0.42 (0.23, 0.78); n = 109 |
T-effector GE (top quartile) | 0.79 (0.51, 1.24); n = 161 | 0.58 (0.33, 1.02); n = 132 |
F-TBRShigh (top quartile) | 1.13 (0.73, 1.72); n = 155 | 1.92 (1.24, 2.99); n = 136 |
aHRs for the BEP are for descriptive purposes only. b PD-L1 expression on immune cells (IC; VENTANA SP142 IHC assay) ≥ 5%.
Disclaimer
This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org
Abstract Disclosures
2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Enrique Grande
2021 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Matt D. Galsky
2023 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Aristotelis Bamias
2023 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Matt D. Galsky