Predictive factors for hyperprogressive disease during nivolumab as anti-PD1 treatment in patients with advanced gastric cancer
- 150 Downloads
Hyperprogressive disease (HPD) during treatment with anti-programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 monoclonal antibodies has anecdotally been reported in some types of cancers, but is not well-characterized in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC).
Total 62 AGC patients treated with nivolumab in a single institution from September 2017 to April 2018 were enrolled in this study. Tumor responses were assessed according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1, and HPD was defined as ≥ two fold increase in tumor growth rate. Clinicopathological and molecular characteristics associated with HPD were also investigated.
Thirteen of 62 patients (21%) developed HPD after nivolumab treatment. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were significantly shorter in patients with HPD than in patients without HPD (median OS: 2.3 months vs. not reached, P < 0.001; median PFS: 0.7 months vs. 2.4 months, P < 0.001). Liver metastases (77% vs. 41%), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 1 or 2 (77% vs. 29%), and a large sum of target lesion diameters at baseline (median 104.2 mm vs. 44.9 mm) were significantly associated with HPD. Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) and C-reactive protein (CRP) level significantly increased in the first 4 weeks in only patients with HPD.
HPD was observed in AGC patients treated with nivolumab and correlated with some clinicopathological characteristics. Elevations in ANC and CRP levels upon treatment might indicate HPD.
KeywordsNivolumab PD-1 inhibitor Gastric cancer Hyperprogressive disease
Programmed death-ligand 1
Advanced gastric cancer
- ECOG PS
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status
Absolute neutrophil count
Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2
Fluorescence in situ hybridization
Combined positive score
Anti-mutL homolog 1
Anti-mutS homolog 2
Anti-postmeiotic segregation increased 2
Anti-mutS homolog 6
Tumor mutation burden
Tumor growth kinetics
Mitogen-activated protein kinase
Myeloid-derived suppressor cell
AS, YN, SM, AK, and KS designed the study, collected data, performed data analysis, and wrote manuscript. YK, HB, TD, TY, TK, and TA were involved in data interpretation and critically reviewing the manuscript. TK was involved in testing tumor tissue as well as critically reviewing the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
This study was supported by a research funding from National Cancer Center Hospital East (none apply).
Compliance with ethical standards
Ethics approval and consent to participate
All procedures followed in this study were in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki of 1964 and later versions and the Japanese Ethical Guidelines for Medical and Health Research Involving Human Subjects. Informed consent for it was obtained from all patients for their being included in the study.
Consent for publication
This is not applicable for this study.
Conflict of interest
AS has nothing to disclose. YN reports personal fees from Chugai. SM has nothing to disclose. AK reports research funding from Ono, Sumitomo Dainippon, and Taiho. YK reports consulting or advisory role for Takeda; personal fees from Bayer, Lilly, and Taiho; and research funding from Astra Zeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Incyte, Taiho, and Takeda. HB reports research funding from Astra Zeneca and Sysmex. TK reports personal fees from MSD; and research funding from Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Oncolys BioPharma, Ono, Shionogi. TD reports consulting or advisory role for Amgen, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Lilly, MSD, Sumitomo Dainippon, and Taiho; and research funding from Abbvie, Astellas, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Lilly, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Quintiles, Sumitomo Group, Takeda, and Taiho. AO reports personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai, Ono, and Taiho. TY consulting or advisory role for Chugai, Lilly, Merck Serono, and Sanofi; and research funding from Chugai, GlaxoSmithKline, MSD, Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim, Sanofi, and Sumitomo Dainippon. TK consulting or advisory role for ThermoFisher Inc; personal fees from Chugai and Roche Diagnostics; and research funding from Daiichi Sankyo. TA has nothing to disclose. KS reports consulting or advisory role for Astellas, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, Ono, Pfizer, and Takeda; personal fees from AbbVie, Novartis, and Yakult; and research funding from Chugai, Daiichi Sankyo, Lilly, MSD, Ono, Sumitomo Dainippon, and Taiho.
- 4.Wilke H, Muro K, Van Cutsem E, Oh SC, Bodoky G, Shimada Y, et al. Ramucirumab plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (RAINBOW): a double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(11):1224–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Fuchs CS, Tomasek J, Yong CJ, Dumitru F, Passalacqua R, Goswami C, et al. Ramucirumab monotherapy for previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (REGARD): an international, randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2014;383(9911):31–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Younes A, Santoro A, Shipp M, Zinzani PL, Timmerman JM, Ansell S, et al. Nivolumab for classical Hodgkin’s lymphoma after failure of both autologous stem-cell transplantation and brentuximab vedotin: a multicentre, multicohort, single-arm phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(9):1283–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Kang YK, Boku N, Satoh T, Ryu MH, Chao Y, Kato K, et al. Nivolumab in patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer refractory to, or intolerant of, at least two previous chemotherapy regimens (ONO-4538-12, ATTRACTION-2): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2017;390(10111):2461–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Shitara K, Ozguroglu M, Bang YJ, Bartolomeo MD, Mandala M, Ryu MH, et al. Pembrolizumab versus paclitaxel for previously treated, advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (KEYNOTE-061): a randomised, open-label, controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2018;392(10142):123–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Kawazoe A, Shitara K, Kuboki Y, Bando H, Kojima T, Yoshino T, et al. Clinicopathological features of 22C3 PD-L1 expression with mismatch repair, Epstein-Barr virus status, and cancer genome alterations in metastatic gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10120-018-0843-9.Google Scholar
- 21.Feng YN, Zwirtes P, Reshef R, Plautz D, Boku G, Chen N, et al Roy A, Sheng J Evaluating the occurrence of early tumor progression (ETP) in patients with gastric cancer treated with nivolumab versus placebo. In: Paper presented at the proceedings of the society for immunotherapy of cancer (SITC) 33rd annual meeting, 2018. pp. 833–4.Google Scholar
- 25.Lo Russo G, Moro M, Sommariva M, Cancila V, Boeri M, Centonze G, et al. Antibody-Fc/FcR interaction on macrophages as a mechanism for hyperprogressive disease in non-small cell lung cancer subsequent to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade. Clin Cancer Res. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-1390.Google Scholar