Despite the frequent detection of circulating tumor antigen–specific T cells, either spontaneously or following active immunization or adoptive transfer, immune-mediated cancer regression occurs only in the minority of patients. One theoretical rate-limiting step is whether effector T cells successfully migrate into metastatic tumor sites. Affymetrix gene expression profiling done on a series of metastatic melanoma biopsies revealed a major segregation of samples based on the presence or absence of T-cell-associated transcripts. The presence of lymphocytes correlated with the expression of defined chemokine genes. A subset of six chemokines (CCL2, CCL3, CCL4, CCL5, CXCL9, and CXCL10) was confirmed by protein array and/or quantitative reverse transcription-PCR to be preferentially expressed in tumors that contained T cells. Corresponding chemokine receptors were found to be up-regulated on human CD8+ effector T cells, and transwell migration assays confirmed the ability of each of these chemokines to promote migration of CD8+ effector cells in vitro. Screening by chemokine protein array identified a subset of melanoma cell lines that produced a similar broad array of chemokines. These melanoma cells more effectively recruited human CD8+ effector T cells when implanted as xenografts in nonobese diabetic/severe combined immunodeficient mice in vivo. Chemokine blockade with specific antibodies inhibited migration of CD8+ T cells. Our results suggest that lack of critical chemokines in a subset of melanoma metastases may limit the migration of activated T cells, which in turn could limit the effectiveness of antitumor immunity.
Onartuzumab plus erlotinib was associated with improved PFS and OS in the MET-positive population. These results combined with the worse outcomes observed in MET-negative patients treated with onartuzumab highlight the importance of diagnostic testing in drug development.
Purpose Studies suggest that a subset of patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) have tumors that express the androgen receptor (AR) and may benefit from an AR inhibitor. This phase II study evaluated the antitumor activity and safety of enzalutamide in patients with locally advanced or metastatic AR-positive TNBC. Patients and Methods Tumors were tested for AR with an immunohistochemistry assay optimized for breast cancer; nuclear AR staining > 0% was considered positive. Patients received enzalutamide 160 mg once per day until disease progression. The primary end point was clinical benefit rate (CBR) at 16 weeks. Secondary end points included CBR at 24 weeks, progression-free survival, and safety. End points were analyzed in all enrolled patients (the intent-to-treat [ITT] population) and in patients with one or more postbaseline assessment whose tumor expressed ≥ 10% nuclear AR (the evaluable subgroup). Results Of 118 patients enrolled, 78 were evaluable. CBR at 16 weeks was 25% (95% CI, 17% to 33%) in the ITT population and 33% (95% CI, 23% to 45%) in the evaluable subgroup. Median progression-free survival was 2.9 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 3.7 months) in the ITT population and 3.3 months (95% CI, 1.9 to 4.1 months) in the evaluable subgroup. Median overall survival was 12.7 months (95% CI, 8.5 months to not yet reached) in the ITT population and 17.6 months (95% CI, 11.6 months to not yet reached) in the evaluable subgroup. Fatigue was the only treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse event with an incidence of > 2%. Conclusion Enzalutamide demonstrated clinical activity and was well tolerated in patients with advanced AR-positive TNBC. Adverse events related to enzalutamide were consistent with its known safety profile. This study supports additional development of enzalutamide in advanced TNBC.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.