Foundation Medicine, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Real World Data Collaborations, Personalized Healthcare Data, Analytics and Imaging, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Basel, Switzerland.
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Mar 1;5(3):e225394. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.5394.
The most useful biomarkers for clinical decision-making identify patients likely to have improved outcomes with one treatment vs another.
To evaluate treatment class-specific outcomes of patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) vs taxane chemotherapy by tumor mutational burden (TMB).
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This comparative effectiveness analysis of clinical variables and outcomes used prospectively defined biomarker-stratified genomic data from a deidentified clinicogenomic database. Data included men with previously treated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) receiving ICI or single-agent taxane chemotherapy from January 2011 to April 2021 at approximately 280 US academic or community-based cancer clinics (approximately 800 sites of care). Data were analyzed from July to August 2021.
Single-agent ICI or single-agent taxanes. Treatments were assigned at discretion of physician and patient without randomization. Imbalances of known factors between treatment groups were adjusted with propensity weighting.
Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, time to next therapy (TTNT), and overall survival (OS).
A total of 741 men (median [IQR], 70 [64-76] years) with mCRPC received comprehensive genomic profiling and were treated with ICI or single-agent taxane therapy. At baseline, the median (IQR) PSA level was 79.4 (19.0-254) ng/mL, 108 men (18.8%) had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status scores of 2 or greater, and 644 men (86.9%) had received prior systemic treatments for mCRPC. A total of 45 patients (6.1%) received ICI therapy and 696 patients (93.9%) received taxane therapy. Among patients with TMB of fewer than 10 mutations per megabase (mt/Mb) receiving ICI, compared with those receiving taxanes, had worse TTNT (median [IQR], 2.4 [1.1-3.2] months vs 4.1 [2.2-6.3] months; hazard ratio [HR], 2.65; 95% CI, 1.78-3.95; P < .001). In contrast, for patients with TMB of 10 mt/Mb or greater, use of ICIs, compared with use taxanes, was associated with more favorable TTNT (median [IQR], 8.0 [3.4 to unknown] months vs 2.4 [2.4-7.3] months; HR, 0.37, 95% CI, 0.15-0.87; P = .02) and OS (median 19.9 [8.06 to unknown] months vs 4.2 [2.69 - 6.12] months; HR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.10-0.57; P = .001). Among all 741 patients, 44 (5.9%) had TMB of 10 mt/Mb or greater, 22 (3.0%) had high microsatellite instability, and 20 (2.7%) had both. Treatment interactions with TMB of 10 mt/Mb or greater (TTNT: HR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.32-0.31; P < .001; OS: HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.076-0.81; P = .02) were stronger than high microsatellite instability alone (TTNT: HR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.03-0.51; P = .004; OS: HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.13-1.12; P = .08).
In this comparative effectiveness study, ICIs were more effective than taxanes in patients with mCRPC when TMB was 10 mt/Mb or greater but not when TMB was fewer than 10 mt/Mb. The results add validity to the existing TMB cutoff of 10 mt/Mb for ICI use in later lines of therapy, and suggest that ICIs may be a viable alternative to taxane chemotherapy for patients with mCRPC with high TMB.
重要性:最有用的生物标志物可用于临床决策,以识别出接受一种治疗与另一种治疗相比更有可能获得改善结局的患者。
目的:通过肿瘤突变负担(TMB)评估接受免疫检查点抑制剂(ICI)与紫杉烷化疗的患者的治疗类别特异性结局。
设计、设置和参与者:本项比较有效性分析使用了来自一个去识别的临床基因组数据库中前瞻性定义的生物标志物分层基因组数据,对临床变量和结局进行了评估。数据包括 280 家美国学术或社区癌症诊所(约 800 个治疗点)中接受过之前治疗的转移性去势抵抗性前列腺癌(mCRPC)的男性,他们接受了 ICI 或单药紫杉烷化疗,时间为 2011 年 1 月至 2021 年 4 月。数据于 2021 年 7 月至 8 月进行了分析。
暴露:单药 ICI 或单药紫杉烷。治疗是由医生和患者根据需要选择的,没有进行随机分组。治疗组之间已知因素的不平衡通过倾向评分加权进行了调整。
主要结果和措施:前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)反应、下一次治疗时间(TTNT)和总生存期(OS)。
结果:共有 741 名 mCRPC 患者(中位数 [IQR],70 [64-76] 岁)接受了全面的基因组分析,并接受了 ICI 或单药紫杉烷治疗。在基线时,中位(IQR)PSA 水平为 79.4(19.0-254)ng/ml,108 名患者(18.8%)的东部合作肿瘤学组表现状态评分≥2,644 名患者(86.9%)接受过 mCRPC 的系统性治疗。45 名患者(6.1%)接受 ICI 治疗,696 名患者(93.9%)接受紫杉烷治疗。在 TMB 低于 10 个突变/兆碱基(mt/Mb)的患者中,与接受紫杉烷治疗的患者相比,接受 ICI 治疗的患者 TTNT 更差(中位数 [IQR],2.4 [1.1-3.2] 个月 vs 4.1 [2.2-6.3] 个月;危险比[HR],2.65;95%CI,1.78-3.95;P<0.001)。相比之下,对于 TMB 为 10 mt/Mb 或更高的患者,使用 ICI 与使用紫杉烷相比,TTNT 更有利(中位数 [IQR],8.0 [3.4 至未知] 个月 vs 2.4 [2.4-7.3] 个月;HR,0.37,95%CI,0.15-0.87;P=0.02)和 OS(中位数 19.9 [8.06 至未知] 个月 vs 4.2 [2.69-6.12] 个月;HR,0.23;95%CI,0.10-0.57;P=0.001)。在所有 741 名患者中,44 名(5.9%)患者的 TMB 为 10 mt/Mb 或更高,22 名(3.0%)患者有高微卫星不稳定性,20 名(2.7%)患者同时存在这两种情况。TMB 为 10 mt/Mb 或更高的治疗相互作用(TTNT:HR,0.10;95%CI,0.32-0.31;P<0.001;OS:HR,0.25;95%CI,0.076-0.81;P=0.02)比高微卫星不稳定性单独更强(TTNT:HR,0.12;95%CI,0.03-0.51;P=0.004;OS:HR,0.38;95%CI,0.13-1.12;P=0.08)。
结论和相关性:在这项比较有效性研究中,当 TMB 为 10 mt/Mb 或更高时,ICI 比紫杉烷化疗更有效,但当 TMB 低于 10 mt/Mb 时则不然。结果为 TMB 作为 10 mt/Mb 用于后线治疗的 ICI 应用的现有截止值增加了有效性,并表明对于 TMB 较高的 mCRPC 患者,ICI 可能是紫杉烷化疗的可行替代方案。