Immunohistochemistry analysis revealed that metastatic neck tumor with the clinical complete response to nivolumab showed higher PD-L1 expression with higher CD8+ TIL density, while primary lesion with progressive disease showed lower PD-L1 expression with lower CD8+ TIL density.
A retrospective analysis of UC patients progressing to frontline or later-line anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in 10 European institutions was conducted between March 2013 and September 2017.
The elevation of PD-L1 expression on TC after neoadjuvant chemotherapy was more frequently observed in patients achieving stable disease or progressive disease than in patients achieving partial response (P=0.026).
The median PD-L1 expression level among patients who experienced a response to pembrolizumab was significantly higher than among patients with stable or progressive disease (90% versus 75%, P < 0.001).
PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor treatment is more effective for advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients in a real-world setting than in clinical trials; PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor treatment is more effective for people who are over 70 than for people who are under 70.
To stratify patients, incorporation of histopathologic characteristics (percentage of extracellular mucin) and PD-L1 expression at the invasive front were used to generate a composite score, the CPM (composite PD-L1 and mucin) score, which discriminated patients who exhibited clinical benefit (complete, partial, or stable disease) from those patients with progressive disease.
Notably, combination of TC PD-L1 expression with % CD8<sup>+</sup>PD-1<sup>+</sup>TIM-3<sup>-</sup>LAG-3<sup>-</sup> TIC identified three groups of patients for which irPFS and irORR were significantly different.
Moreover, comparison to six additional ICC patients who showed a partial response, stable disease, or progressive disease after PD-1 blockade treatment alone or in combination with chemotherapy demonstrated no difference in PD-L1 expression, TMB, MSI, and MMR status from those of the two CR patients, whereas the indel frequency was significantly higher in the CR patients.
In the patient with clinical benefit, IHC analysis of tumor showed increased CD4, CD8, PD1, and PD-L1 levels compared with patients with progressive disease.
In patients treated with anti-PD-1 and PD-L1, a high baseline radiomic score (relative to the median) was associated with a higher proportion of patients who achieved an objective response at 3 months (vs those with progressive disease or stable disease; p=0·049) and a higher proportion of patients who had an objective response (vs those with progressive disease or stable disease; p=0·025) or stable disease (vs those with progressive disease; p=0·013) at 6 months.
Patients experiencing HPD within the first 6 weeks of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor treatment had significantly lower OS compared with patients with progressive disease (median OS, 3.4 months [95% CI, 2.8-7.5 months] vs 6.2 months [95% CI, 5.3-7.9 months]; hazard ratio, 2.18 [95% CI, 1.29-3.69]; P = .003).
Traditional RECIST criteria are not suited for proper assessment of response to PD-(L)1 inhibitors; and more tailored criteria (e.g. immune-related response criteria) should be employed for patients treated with PD-(L)1 inhibitors; moreover in patients with an evidence of disease progression on initial disease evaluation, treatment should not be stopped except after confirmation of progressive disease with a second evaluation at least 4 weeks later.
Upon progression on their first-line PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, these patients received a different PD-1 inhibitor (nivolumab in all cases) and all had progressive disease as their best response to the subsequent PD-1 inhibitor.