Cargando…

Validation of biomarkers to predict response to immunotherapy in cancer: Volume I — pre-analytical and analytical validation

Immunotherapies have emerged as one of the most promising approaches to treat patients with cancer. Recently, there have been many clinical successes using checkpoint receptor blockade, including T cell inhibitory receptors such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Masucci, Giuseppe V., Cesano, Alessandra, Hawtin, Rachael, Janetzki, Sylvia, Zhang, Jenny, Kirsch, Ilan, Dobbin, Kevin K., Alvarez, John, Robbins, Paul B., Selvan, Senthamil R., Streicher, Howard Z., Butterfield, Lisa H., Thurin, Magdalena
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5109744/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27895917
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40425-016-0178-1
_version_ 1782467597393985536
author Masucci, Giuseppe V.
Cesano, Alessandra
Hawtin, Rachael
Janetzki, Sylvia
Zhang, Jenny
Kirsch, Ilan
Dobbin, Kevin K.
Alvarez, John
Robbins, Paul B.
Selvan, Senthamil R.
Streicher, Howard Z.
Butterfield, Lisa H.
Thurin, Magdalena
author_facet Masucci, Giuseppe V.
Cesano, Alessandra
Hawtin, Rachael
Janetzki, Sylvia
Zhang, Jenny
Kirsch, Ilan
Dobbin, Kevin K.
Alvarez, John
Robbins, Paul B.
Selvan, Senthamil R.
Streicher, Howard Z.
Butterfield, Lisa H.
Thurin, Magdalena
author_sort Masucci, Giuseppe V.
collection PubMed
description Immunotherapies have emerged as one of the most promising approaches to treat patients with cancer. Recently, there have been many clinical successes using checkpoint receptor blockade, including T cell inhibitory receptors such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed cell death-1 (PD-1). Despite demonstrated successes in a variety of malignancies, responses only typically occur in a minority of patients in any given histology. Additionally, treatment is associated with inflammatory toxicity and high cost. Therefore, determining which patients would derive clinical benefit from immunotherapy is a compelling clinical question. Although numerous candidate biomarkers have been described, there are currently three FDA-approved assays based on PD-1 ligand expression (PD-L1) that have been clinically validated to identify patients who are more likely to benefit from a single-agent anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. Because of the complexity of the immune response and tumor biology, it is unlikely that a single biomarker will be sufficient to predict clinical outcomes in response to immune-targeted therapy. Rather, the integration of multiple tumor and immune response parameters, such as protein expression, genomics, and transcriptomics, may be necessary for accurate prediction of clinical benefit. Before a candidate biomarker and/or new technology can be used in a clinical setting, several steps are necessary to demonstrate its clinical validity. Although regulatory guidelines provide general roadmaps for the validation process, their applicability to biomarkers in the cancer immunotherapy field is somewhat limited. Thus, Working Group 1 (WG1) of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) Immune Biomarkers Task Force convened to address this need. In this two volume series, we discuss pre-analytical and analytical (Volume I) as well as clinical and regulatory (Volume II) aspects of the validation process as applied to predictive biomarkers for cancer immunotherapy. To illustrate the requirements for validation, we discuss examples of biomarker assays that have shown preliminary evidence of an association with clinical benefit from immunotherapeutic interventions. The scope includes only those assays and technologies that have established a certain level of validation for clinical use (fit-for-purpose). Recommendations to meet challenges and strategies to guide the choice of analytical and clinical validation design for specific assays are also provided. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40425-016-0178-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5109744
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51097442016-11-28 Validation of biomarkers to predict response to immunotherapy in cancer: Volume I — pre-analytical and analytical validation Masucci, Giuseppe V. Cesano, Alessandra Hawtin, Rachael Janetzki, Sylvia Zhang, Jenny Kirsch, Ilan Dobbin, Kevin K. Alvarez, John Robbins, Paul B. Selvan, Senthamil R. Streicher, Howard Z. Butterfield, Lisa H. Thurin, Magdalena J Immunother Cancer Review Immunotherapies have emerged as one of the most promising approaches to treat patients with cancer. Recently, there have been many clinical successes using checkpoint receptor blockade, including T cell inhibitory receptors such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed cell death-1 (PD-1). Despite demonstrated successes in a variety of malignancies, responses only typically occur in a minority of patients in any given histology. Additionally, treatment is associated with inflammatory toxicity and high cost. Therefore, determining which patients would derive clinical benefit from immunotherapy is a compelling clinical question. Although numerous candidate biomarkers have been described, there are currently three FDA-approved assays based on PD-1 ligand expression (PD-L1) that have been clinically validated to identify patients who are more likely to benefit from a single-agent anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. Because of the complexity of the immune response and tumor biology, it is unlikely that a single biomarker will be sufficient to predict clinical outcomes in response to immune-targeted therapy. Rather, the integration of multiple tumor and immune response parameters, such as protein expression, genomics, and transcriptomics, may be necessary for accurate prediction of clinical benefit. Before a candidate biomarker and/or new technology can be used in a clinical setting, several steps are necessary to demonstrate its clinical validity. Although regulatory guidelines provide general roadmaps for the validation process, their applicability to biomarkers in the cancer immunotherapy field is somewhat limited. Thus, Working Group 1 (WG1) of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) Immune Biomarkers Task Force convened to address this need. In this two volume series, we discuss pre-analytical and analytical (Volume I) as well as clinical and regulatory (Volume II) aspects of the validation process as applied to predictive biomarkers for cancer immunotherapy. To illustrate the requirements for validation, we discuss examples of biomarker assays that have shown preliminary evidence of an association with clinical benefit from immunotherapeutic interventions. The scope includes only those assays and technologies that have established a certain level of validation for clinical use (fit-for-purpose). Recommendations to meet challenges and strategies to guide the choice of analytical and clinical validation design for specific assays are also provided. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40425-016-0178-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-11-15 /pmc/articles/PMC5109744/ /pubmed/27895917 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40425-016-0178-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Review
Masucci, Giuseppe V.
Cesano, Alessandra
Hawtin, Rachael
Janetzki, Sylvia
Zhang, Jenny
Kirsch, Ilan
Dobbin, Kevin K.
Alvarez, John
Robbins, Paul B.
Selvan, Senthamil R.
Streicher, Howard Z.
Butterfield, Lisa H.
Thurin, Magdalena
Validation of biomarkers to predict response to immunotherapy in cancer: Volume I — pre-analytical and analytical validation
title Validation of biomarkers to predict response to immunotherapy in cancer: Volume I — pre-analytical and analytical validation
title_full Validation of biomarkers to predict response to immunotherapy in cancer: Volume I — pre-analytical and analytical validation
title_fullStr Validation of biomarkers to predict response to immunotherapy in cancer: Volume I — pre-analytical and analytical validation
title_full_unstemmed Validation of biomarkers to predict response to immunotherapy in cancer: Volume I — pre-analytical and analytical validation
title_short Validation of biomarkers to predict response to immunotherapy in cancer: Volume I — pre-analytical and analytical validation
title_sort validation of biomarkers to predict response to immunotherapy in cancer: volume i — pre-analytical and analytical validation
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5109744/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27895917
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40425-016-0178-1
work_keys_str_mv AT masuccigiuseppev validationofbiomarkerstopredictresponsetoimmunotherapyincancervolumeipreanalyticalandanalyticalvalidation
AT cesanoalessandra validationofbiomarkerstopredictresponsetoimmunotherapyincancervolumeipreanalyticalandanalyticalvalidation
AT hawtinrachael validationofbiomarkerstopredictresponsetoimmunotherapyincancervolumeipreanalyticalandanalyticalvalidation
AT janetzkisylvia validationofbiomarkerstopredictresponsetoimmunotherapyincancervolumeipreanalyticalandanalyticalvalidation
AT zhangjenny validationofbiomarkerstopredictresponsetoimmunotherapyincancervolumeipreanalyticalandanalyticalvalidation
AT kirschilan validationofbiomarkerstopredictresponsetoimmunotherapyincancervolumeipreanalyticalandanalyticalvalidation
AT dobbinkevink validationofbiomarkerstopredictresponsetoimmunotherapyincancervolumeipreanalyticalandanalyticalvalidation
AT alvarezjohn validationofbiomarkerstopredictresponsetoimmunotherapyincancervolumeipreanalyticalandanalyticalvalidation
AT robbinspaulb validationofbiomarkerstopredictresponsetoimmunotherapyincancervolumeipreanalyticalandanalyticalvalidation
AT selvansenthamilr validationofbiomarkerstopredictresponsetoimmunotherapyincancervolumeipreanalyticalandanalyticalvalidation
AT streicherhowardz validationofbiomarkerstopredictresponsetoimmunotherapyincancervolumeipreanalyticalandanalyticalvalidation
AT butterfieldlisah validationofbiomarkerstopredictresponsetoimmunotherapyincancervolumeipreanalyticalandanalyticalvalidation
AT thurinmagdalena validationofbiomarkerstopredictresponsetoimmunotherapyincancervolumeipreanalyticalandanalyticalvalidation