• HOME
  • NEWS
  • EXPLORE
    • CAREER
      • Companies
      • Jobs
    • EVENTS
    • iGEM
      • News
      • Team
    • PHOTOS
    • VIDEO
    • WIKI
  • BLOG
  • COMMUNITY
    • FACEBOOK
    • INSTAGRAM
    • TWITTER
  • CONTACT US
Wednesday, May 31, 2023
BIOENGINEER.ORG
No Result
View All Result
  • Login
  • HOME
  • NEWS
  • EXPLORE
    • CAREER
      • Companies
      • Jobs
        • Lecturer
        • PhD Studentship
        • Postdoc
        • Research Assistant
    • EVENTS
    • iGEM
      • News
      • Team
    • PHOTOS
    • VIDEO
    • WIKI
  • BLOG
  • COMMUNITY
    • FACEBOOK
    • INSTAGRAM
    • TWITTER
  • CONTACT US
  • HOME
  • NEWS
  • EXPLORE
    • CAREER
      • Companies
      • Jobs
        • Lecturer
        • PhD Studentship
        • Postdoc
        • Research Assistant
    • EVENTS
    • iGEM
      • News
      • Team
    • PHOTOS
    • VIDEO
    • WIKI
  • BLOG
  • COMMUNITY
    • FACEBOOK
    • INSTAGRAM
    • TWITTER
  • CONTACT US
No Result
View All Result
Bioengineer.org
No Result
View All Result
Home NEWS Science News

In cancer immunotherapy, one PD-L1 test to rule them all?

Bioengineer by Bioengineer
December 2, 2016
in Science News
Reading Time: 3 mins read
0
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on LinkedinShare on RedditShare on Telegram
IMAGE

Credit: University of Colorado Cancer Center

Clinical trials have proven the power of immunotherapies targeting PD-L1 or PD-1 in a range of cancers. However, these same trials show that only some patients benefit – tumors must depend on PD-L1 to be affected when medicines block its action. In response, the companies Merck, AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, and Bristol-Myers Squibb together with the diagnostic companies Ventana and Dako have developed four tests to predict which tumors do and do not express on PD-L1 and thus which tumors will respond to the therapies. An ambitious collaboration between these companies and research organizations including the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, the American Association for Cancer Research, and academic medical centers including the University of Colorado Cancer Center, results in a study published online today in the Journal of Thoracic Oncology comparing these four tests.

The study, called the "Blueprint PD-L1 IHC Assay Comparison Project," used all four tests to evaluate 38 samples of human non-small cell lung cancer. In all four tests, half of the tumors were positive for PD-L1 and 5 of the tumors were negative. However, in 14 of 38 cases (37 percent), some tests considered the sample positive while others considered it negative. The disagreement implies that the choice of test used to determine a tumor's PD-L1 dependence may influence whether or not a patient is offered anti-PD-L1 therapy.

"Immunotherapy is evolving very fast and with very encouraging results in lung cancer as well as other cancers. However, a main issue is how to select patients for these therapies. Each company is pursuing their own predictive PD-L1 assay in order to select patients. However, the PD-L1 assays are all different in terms of antibody used and cut-off values for positive/negative results," says Fred R. Hirsch MD, PhD, investigator at the University of Colorado Cancer Center and CEO of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

With support from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Hirsch brought together the four pharmaceutical companies and the two diagnostic companies with leading PD-L1 assays to explore their agreements and discrepancies.

Importantly, each test is paired with a drug – the drug pembrolizumab, developed by Merck, is prescribed based on results from the assay called 22C3; the drug nivolumab, developed by Bristol-Myers Squibb, is paired with an assay called 28-8; likewise, atezolizumab by Genentech/Roche and durvalumab by AstraZeneca are both paired with assays specific to the compound. In fact, this mimics the way in which targeted therapies generally earn FDA approval – a drug and a test determining which patients will benefit from the drug tend to be approved in tandem.

However, all four of these drugs target a tumor's ability to hide from the immune system by the expression of PD-L1, which interacts with the protein PD-1 expressed on immune cells in a way that deactivates these immune cells against tumor tissue. However, by blocking the interaction between PD-L1 and PD-1 the immune cells (T-lymphocytes) remain activated against tumor tissue. In theory, any of these four tests should be able to predict the benefit of any of these four drugs. Critically, each measures how much PD-L1 protein is expressed on the membranes of tumor cells and, based on clinical trial data, how much PD-L1 must be expressed in order for the drug to show benefit.

"Rather than black and white, this can be a grey area. It is not that some tumors express PD-L1 and others do not, but rather that tumors express PD-L1 across a gradient and at some cutoff point in that gradient, the expression becomes clinically relevant," Hirsch says.

Results show that three of the four tests tend to cluster together in their results. Also, differences in these tests meant that there was no absolute cutoff in the amount of PD-L1 that made a sample positive or negative – the different tests must be evaluated by their own scales.

Now with results in hand for the first phase of this study, the comparison will continue into a second phase by comparing these test results to patient outcomes. Basically, the goal is to determine which test allowed doctors to prescribe PD-L1 inhibitors to the patients who benefit, while avoiding the use of these drugs with patients who went on to see little or no benefit.

"This is a unique study based on a unique partnership meant to solve a very important clinical problem," Hirsch says. It might not be long before the field of anti-PD-L1 cancer immunotherapies receives a peer-reviewed recommendation for the one test that will rule them all.

###

Media Contact

Garth Sundem
[email protected]
@CUAnschutz

http://www.ucdenver.edu

############

Story Source: Materials provided by Scienmag

Share12Tweet7Share2ShareShareShare1

Related Posts

Scientist in laboratory

Biological cleanup discovered for certain “forever chemicals”

May 31, 2023
Anomalodonta and vanuxemia

The clams that fell behind, and what they can tell us about evolution and extinction

May 31, 2023

Shedding light on the complex flow dynamics within the small intestine

May 31, 2023

Genetic change increased bird flu severity during U.S. spread

May 30, 2023
Please login to join discussion

POPULAR NEWS

  • plants

    Plants remove cancer causing toxins from air

    39 shares
    Share 16 Tweet 10
  • Element creation in the lab deepens understanding of surface explosions on neutron stars

    36 shares
    Share 14 Tweet 9
  • Groundbreaking study uncovers first evidence of long-term directionality in the origination of human mutation, fundamentally challenging Neo-Darwinism

    115 shares
    Share 46 Tweet 29
  • How life and geology worked together to forge Earth’s nutrient rich crust

    35 shares
    Share 14 Tweet 9

About

We bring you the latest biotechnology news from best research centers and universities around the world. Check our website.

Follow us

Recent News

Biological cleanup discovered for certain “forever chemicals”

The clams that fell behind, and what they can tell us about evolution and extinction

Shedding light on the complex flow dynamics within the small intestine

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 50 other subscribers
  • Contact Us

Bioengineer.org © Copyright 2023 All Rights Reserved.

No Result
View All Result
  • Homepages
    • Home Page 1
    • Home Page 2
  • News
  • National
  • Business
  • Health
  • Lifestyle
  • Science

Bioengineer.org © Copyright 2023 All Rights Reserved.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In