Abstract
Purpose of Review
To critically review the existing evidence on immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in early-stage and metastatic breast cancer and discuss emerging strategies in the different breast cancer subtypes.
Recent Findings
Immunotherapy has become one of the major milestones in contemporary oncology, revolutionizing the treatment of multiple solid tumors. ICI agents combined with chemotherapy have demonstrated significant efficacy in both early-stage and metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. However, only a subgroup of patients responds to those agents and some associated toxicities, although infrequent, can be life-disabling. Emerging data from immunotherapy studies in advanced hormone receptor–positive (HR +) breast cancer as well as HER2-positive disease are arising with mixed results.
Summary
Although breast cancer has not classically been considered a hot tumor, ICIs have proven to be effective in a subset of breast cancer patients. However, much remains to be learned, and the identification of new biomarkers beyond PD-L1 expression is essential not only to improve the efficacy of ICI but also to identify patients who can avoid them, together with their toxicities and costs.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The host immune system plays a crucial role not only in tumor development but also in tumor progression [1]. In recent years, exploiting intrinsic mechanisms of the host immune system to eradicate cancer cells has achieved impressive success in some solid tumors. Any strategy based on enhancing both innate and adaptive immune responses for treating cancer is considered immunotherapy. This includes immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), cancer vaccines, antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs), oncolytic viruses, and adoptive immune cell therapies. Traditionally, breast cancer has not been considered a highly immunogenic tumor since it is characterized by a low tumor mutation burden in comparison to other tumors. Nevertheless, breast cancer is a very heterogeneous disease, with different treatment sensitivities and clinical outcomes [2].
James P. Allison and Tasuku Honjo were awarded the Nobel Prize in Medicine for their respective discoveries of ICI in 2018. Since these discoveries, ICIs have dramatically changed the treatment landscape of multiple neoplasms including lung cancer and melanoma, among others [3, 4]. Under normal conditions, the immune system uses an inhibitory checkpoint pathway to regulate the immune response against pathogens to prevent exaggerated responses, and limit tissue damage and the autoimmune activity. This mechanism is conducted by several immune checkpoint molecules like the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4). They downregulate and inhibit T cells by binding to their ligands: the programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), the programmed death-ligand 2 (PD-L2), and CD80/CD86 [5]. Tumor cells take advantage of this mechanism to create an immunosuppressive microenvironment [6]. The anti-PD-1, anti-PD-L1, and anti-CTLA-4 monoclonal antibodies circumvent this immune downregulation, providing cell-mediated antitumor activity [2].
The aim of this review is to summarize the current status of ICI in the treatment of both early-stage and metastatic breast cancer, revise predictive biomarkers of response, and analyze new potential approaches.
ICIs in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is considered the most immunogenic subtype of breast cancer with higher rates of PD-L1 expression on both tumor and immune cells, and higher tumor infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) density [7]. Moreover, whole-exome sequences of DNA breast cancer cells demonstrated that basal-like and high-grade tumors were associated with the highest rate of tumor mutational burden (TMB) [8]. For all these reasons, the majority of studies evaluating immune checkpoint blockade have been conducted in TNBC. The use of anti-PD1 and anti-PDL1 monoclonal antibodies as single agent has shown sparse response rates [9,10,11,12]. Chemotheraphy increases PD-L1 expression and promotes antitumor immunogenicity. Likewise, cell death caused by cytotoxic agents can increase the expression of neoantigens, decrease the number of immunosuppressive cells, upregulate pro-inflammatory cytokines in the tumor environment, and lead to immunogenic death [13]. Therefore, the majority of trials have focused on immune-compatible cytotoxic drugs combined with anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 antibodies. Table 1 summarizes key phase II and III trials assessing the efficacy of ICI in TNBC.
Advanced TNBC
The first trial that reported clinical benefit of ICIs in advanced TNBC was the KEYNOTE-012 trial. This phase I evaluated the safety of pembrolizumab in patients with metastatic TNBC with at least 1% of PD-L1 expression. Most patients had received ≥ 3 lines of treatment. Despite this, the trial showed promising results with an ORR of 18.5%, similar to that reported with chemotherapy in this setting [9]. From the subsequent studies evaluating ICI as single-agent, we learned that patients who benefit the most are those who receive it as first-line treatment and those whose tumors express PD-L1. However, even this population experienced little or no benefit in terms of PFS and OS [10, 20]. Low response rates observed with ICI as single-agent led research focus on the combination of chemotherapy plus immunotherapy.
The first trial that studied the combination of atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel (N = 33) reported an ORR of 39.4%, and a PFS and OS of 5.5 months and 14.7 months, respectively [26]. Based on these data, the IMpassion130 was conducted in patients with TNBC, regardless of PD-L1 status, and no prior treatment. PD-L1 expression was assessed by VENTANA SP142 PD-L1 assay on immune cells, and levels greater than or equal to 1% were considered positive. It was the first phase III trial to report positive results with ICI and chemotherapy in breast cancer, with significant improvement in both PFS and OS in patients with PD-L1-positive disease. In March 2019, atezolizumab was granted accelerated approval by the FDA for patients with advanced TNBC and PD-L1 + expression (≥ 1% by Ventana SP142), making it the first immunotherapeutic agent to be approved in this setting [22••, 23•].
In the subsequent IMpassion131 trial, the addition of atezolizumab to paclitaxel did not improve survival outcomes in the PD-L1-positive population, despite having a similar design to IMpassion131.(18) Several hypotheses have been proposed to explain the inconsistent results between IMpassion130 and IMpassion13, mostly centered around differences in the study populations and in the choice of chemotherapy partner for each study. Small differences in patient selection could have influenced the results, which is suggested by the excellent outcome observed in the placebo arm of IMpassion131 compared to the placebo arm of IMpassion130. In terms of chemotherapy partner, IMpassion131 used paclitaxel, while IMpassion130 used nab-paclitaxel. It has been proposed that these two drugs may have differential immunologic effects on the TME. Additionally, steroids are often administered as premedication for paclitaxel (but not for nab-paclitaxel), which could blunt the immune response. However, KEYNOTE-355 (described below) allowed either paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel, and no differences in outcome were seen between patients who received either regimen [22••, 23•, 24•, 25••, 27]. US approval for atezolizumab was withdrawn by Genentech in September 2021. In Europe, atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel is still approved as first-line treatment for TNBC with positive PD-L1 expression.
The phase III KEYNOTE-355 compared the efficacy of several chemotherapy agents (paclitaxel nab-paclitaxel, or gemcitabine and carboplatin) in combination with pembrolizumab or placebo as first-line treatment in patients with advanced TNBC. PD-L1 expression was tested by Dako 22C3 pharmDx assay. Patients with CPS ≥ 10 (about 38%) treated with pembrolizumab presented better PFS (9.7 vs 5.6 months, HR 0.65; p = 0.0012) and OS (23 vs 16 months, HR 0.73, p = 0.0093) compared to placebo. Following these results, the FDA fully approved pembrolizumab with chemotherapy in advanced TNBC with CPS ≥ 10. The approval does not specify the line of therapy nor the chemotherapy backbone [25••].
The phase II NEWBEAT study evaluated the addition of nivolumab to the first-line combination of paclitaxel and bevacizumab in patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. Twelve-month OS and PFS were 87.1% and 75.8%, respectively. ORR was 83.3% in patients with TNBC [28]. Several other combinations of antiangiogenics with ICI have been tested in metastatic TNBC, such as cabozantinib and nivolumab reporting small ORR [29]. The phase II ATRACTIB (NCT04408118) trial is evaluating the efficacy and safety of first-line atezolizumab plus paclitaxel and bevacizumab in patients with advanced TNBC.
Early-Stage TNBC
In the neoadjuvant setting, two early trials tested the combination of pembrolizumab and chemotherapy in high risk TNBC. The phase II I-SPY2 trial studied pembrolizumab with weekly paclitaxel and anthracyclines in early HER2-negative breast cancer (with TNBC and HR + cohorts), regardless of PD-L1 status. In the TNBC cohort, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy triplicated the estimated pCR rate with respect to the control arm [15]. The single-arm phase Ib trial KEYNOTE-173 studied pembrolizumab in combination with six different chemotherapy regimens. Interestingly, this trial showed that higher rates of PD-L1 expression and stromal TIL levels were associated with higher probability of achieving a pCR [30].
The largest trial in early TNBC is the KEYNOTE-522, which led to the first regulatory approval of an ICI in early-stage breast cancer. This phase III study assessed neoadjuvant pembrolizumab in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel followed by AC. After surgery, the patients continued blinded treatment with pembrolizumab/placebo to complete 1 year. In the first interim analysis including 602 patients, the addition of pembrolizumab significantly improved the pCR rate regardless of PD-L1 expression [16••]. The highest pCR though was observed in patients whose tumors had an increased PDL-1 positivity. Importantly, after a median follow-up of 37 months, the 3-year event-free survival (EFS) rate was 84.5% in the experimental arm vs 76.8% in the control arm (HR = 0.63, p = 0.0003). In addition, pembrolizumab improved distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) by 7.5% and showed a favorable trend in overall survival (OS) (HR 0.72 [95% CI, 0.51–1.02]). Pembrolizumab was also associated with improved EFS among patients who had residual disease, and not only among those with pCR [17•].
The IMpassion031 is another phase III trial in which patients were randomized to receive either atezolizumab or placebo with nab-paclitaxel for 12 weeks, followed by 4 cycles of AC. Although atezolizumab provided higher pCR rate in the PD-L1-positive population (69% vs. 49%), patients without PD-L1 expression also showed a higher pCR rate with atezolizumab (48% vs. 34%) [18••].
Atezolizumab was also studied in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the phase III NeoTRIP trial that compared carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel with atezolizumab/placebo in high-risk TNBC. Following surgery, 4 cycles of anthracycline-based regimen were administered as per the investigator’s choice. The addition of atezolizumab did not significantly increase the pCR rate, but [19] results from other primary endpoints like EFS are still pending. The lack of benefit in terms of pCR could be related to the decision to use anthracyclines post-operatively. Early modulation of biological pathways and immune microenvironment by anthracyclines and taxanes might be different, with anthracyclines eliciting a stronger immune-modulatory effect compared to nab-paclitaxel/carboplatin, which could be particularly evident in “immune low” tumors [31].
The phase II GeparNuevo trial investigated the addition of durvalumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Interestingly, although the pCR rate with durvalumab was not significantly increased, after 42.2 months of follow-up, the addition of durvalumab showed significant differences in invasive disease-free survival, distant disease-free survival, and OS. These results raise the hypothesis that immunotherapy in early breast cancer may develop immunological memory with a long-term protective effect [14, 32].
A systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized chemo-immunotherapy trials for early-stage TNBC confirmed a significant benefit in terms of pCR with the addition of PD-1 or PD-L1 blockade to neoadjuvant chemotherapy [33]. The evaluation of ICI as adjuvant therapy in early-stage TNBC is being assessed in the ongoing IMpassion030 (NCT03498716) trial, which is testing atezolizumab in combination with adjuvant chemotherapy. Several trials are also evaluating the use of ICI for patients with invasive residual disease following neoadjuvant treatment, including its combination with capecitabine (NCT03756298).
ICIs in Patients with gBRCA1/2 Mutated TNBC
TNBC has the highest incidence of germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA1/2) mutations, with prevalence rates of 10–15% [34]. PARP inhibitors have demonstrated antitumor efficacy in HER2-negative breast cancer harboring gBRCA1/2 mutations [35, 36]. Interestingly, PARP blockade appears to increase PD-L1 expression in TNBC cells [37], making them potentially targetable by ICI. The phase II TOPACIO trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of niraparib and pembrolizumab in patients with advanced TNBC irrespective of BRCA mutation and PD-L1 status. Among the 45 evaluable patients, ORR was 29%, with a DCR of 49%. Higher clinical effectiveness was found in patients with gBRCA1/2 mutations [38]. The phase Ib/II MEDIOLA trial tested olaparib in combination with durvalumab in patients with solid tumors, including a cohort of patients with gBRCA1/2 mutated HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. Median PFS was longer in treatment-naïve patients and in the TNBC subgroup, with a median PFS of 4.9 months and OS of 20.5 months [39]. Given the encouraging preliminary results obtained so far, several studies are assessing PARP inhibitors in combination with ICI in breast cancer (NCT02849496, NCT03801369).
ICIs in Hormone Receptor–Positive, HER2-Negative Breast Cancer
Hormone receptor–positive (ER +), HER2-negative breast is characterized by an immunologically cold nature, with lower rates of PD-L1 expression, lower TILs levels, and less genomic instability and TMB [40]. ICIs have also been tested in this subtype, with less encouraging results than those observed in TNBC. The main trials in ER + HER2-negative breast cancer are listed in Table 2.
In the phase I JAVELIN trial evaluating avelumab monotherapy in pretreated patients with all subtypes of metastatic breast cancer, the ORR was only 3%, and the response was not correlated with tumor PD-L1 expression [11]. The phase Ib KEYNOTE-028 trial tested pembrolizumab as single-agent in heavily pretreated patients with ER + HER2-negative breast cancer. The ORR was 12%, but a promising median DOR of 12 months was observed [41]. Evidence for the combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy in ER + , HER2-negative breast cancer is scarce. A randomized phase II study assessing the addition of pembrolizumab to eribulin in patients that had received endocrine therapy and up to 2 lines of chemotherapy failed to demonstrate any benefit in terms of PFS, ORR, or OS over eribulin alone in either the intention-to-treat or PD-L1 + population. A 65% of grade ≥ 3 toxicity was reported, including two treatment-related deaths in the combination group [42].
CDK4/6 inhibitors in combination with endocrine therapy have become the gold standard first-line treatment for advanced ER + , HER2-negative breast cancer. CDK4/6 inhibitors suppress retinoblastoma phosphorylation in cancer cells, which induces cell cycle arrest and inhibits cell proliferation. In addition, they inhibit immunosuppressive regulatory T cell proliferation, increase neoantigen presentation, and induce the release of proinflammatory cytokines [40]. These findings suggested that it could exist a synergic mechanism between CDK4/6 inhibitors and ICI [48,49,50]. The NEWFLAME trial evaluated the combination of abemaciclib, endocrine therapy, and nivolumab in patients with ER + HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer, but it had to prematurely stop due to safety concerns [51]. The combination of palbociclib and endocrine therapy with pembrolizumab as first-line therapy in metastatic breast cancer was tested in a phase II single-arm study. The investigational combination was well tolerated and demonstrated an ORR of 56% and PFS of 25.2 months. Grade III–IV adverse events were neutropenia (83%), leucopenia (65%), thrombocytopenia (17%), and elevated liver enzymes (17%) [52].
In the early stage, the combination of neoadjuvant palbociclib and anastrozole with nivolumab in postmenopausal patients with ER + /HER2-negative breast cancer was evaluated in the phase II Checkmate 7A8 study. The study was closed after the safety run-in phase ended, due to higher incidence of grade 3 hepatic toxicity than historical single-agent profiles [53].
Findings from the cohort of ER + /HER2-negative breast cancer from I-SPY 2 trial showed an estimated pCR of 30% in the chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab arm, which doubled the estimated pCR of 13% observed in the chemotherapy arm alone. Moreover, patients who reached pCR following pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy had a 3-year EFS of 93% at a median follow-up of 2.8 years.(14) Two large ongoing phase III studies are evaluating the role of ICI as neoadjuvant treatment in early-stage ER + breast cancer (see Table 3).
ICIs in HER2-Positive Breast Cancer
HER2-positive breast cancers are generally considered more immunogenic than ER + , HER2-negative tumors, but less immunogenic than TNBC. Immune TME has emerged not only as a potential prognostic factor in HER2-positive breast cancer but seems also to modulate the response to anti-HER2 therapies [54]. Importantly, ERBB family members seem to play an important role in evading the antitumor response by modulating the immunological landscape of the TME [55]. Differences in immunogenicity exist also among intrinsic molecular subtypes. HER2-enriched subtype has higher levels of TILs and higher expression of immune activation genes. Additionally, some HER2-targeted therapies have immunogenic properties, activating the antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity. In this context, ICIs have mainly been tested in combination with anti-HER2-directed therapy, where preclinical studies showed promising results. Nevertheless, these data have been inconsistent with the clinical evidence.
Trastuzumab has shown to induce both local and systemic immunomodulation, which have been correlated with therapeutic outcomes [56]. In addition, trastuzumab-resistant tumors exhibit an upregulated expression of PD-1/PD-L1 [57]. In the advanced setting, none of the trials evaluating the combination of trastuzumab plus durvalumab (NCT02649686) [47], or avelumab (NCT01772004) [58], observed a significant clinical benefit. The single-arm phase I/Ib PANACEA trial studied the combination of pembrolizumab plus trastuzumab in trastuzumab-resistant patients, resulting in an ORR of 15% in the PD-L1 + population, but no responses were observed in patients with PD-L1 − tumors [45]. A phase II (NCT03125928) and a phase III (NCT03199885) trials are currently assessing the combination of paclitaxel, trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and atezolizumab as first-line treatment in metastatic breast cancer. The phase II KATE2 study randomized patients to either T-DM1 plus atezolizumab or placebo irrespective PD-L1 status, as second-line treatment. No improvement in PFS was observed; however, a prespecified exploratory analysis of the PD-L1 + population showed a trend in favor of the combination (8.5 vs 4.1; HR 0.60 95% CI 0.32–1.11) [46]. The phase III KATE3 study is evaluating T-DM1 plus atezolizumab or placebo in HER2-positive and PD-L1-positive population. Other ICIs, such as pembrolizumab, are currently being studied in combination with T-DM1 (NCT03032107). There are also ongoing trials evaluating ICIs with the novel anti-HER2 agents. Trastuzumab-deruxtecan (T-DXd) is an ADC that has recently appeared in the battery of treatments for HER2-positive disease with robust and practice-changing results [59]. The combination of T-DXd with nivolumab showed synergic antitumor efficacy in mice [60, 61]. A phase I trial (NCT03523572) studied the combination in HER-2 positive and HER-2 low breast cancer. Preliminary outcomes indicate antitumor activity in both HER2-positive and HER2-low breast cancer patients (ORR of 59.4% and 37.5%, respectively). The safety profile was generally manageable with interstitial lung disease reported in 10.4% of the patients (grade 2 in 4 and grade 5 in 1 patient) [44]. The combination of tucatinib and pembrolizumab is also under study in a phase II trial (NCT04789096).
In the early stage, the combination of pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and chemotherapy is the standard neoadjuvant treatment in high-risk, HER2-positive early breast cancer. The IMpassion050 (NCT03726879) is a phase III study evaluating the efficacy and safety of pertuzumab, trastuzumab, chemotherapy, and atezolizumab. The first analysis did not show any benefit in terms of pCR in the ITT or PD-L1-positive populations, so the trial was stopped prematurely [62]. However, longer follow-up is needed for secondary endpoints, which include EFS and OS. There are several clinical trials testing the combination of ICIs, HER2-blockade, and chemotherapy in early breast cancer, such as the neoadjuvant randomized, open-label phase III APTneo study (NCT03595592), and the ASTEFANIA study (NCT04873362), which evaluates adjuvant atezolizumab/placebo plus T-DM1 in patients with residual disease following preoperative treatment (see Table 3).
Predictive Biomarkers
One of the key issues in ICI research is to find and integrate robust biomarkers to improve the efficacy of ICI by identifying which patients with breast cancer are more likely to respond to these therapies and those who will not. Most of these biomarkers have been extrapolated from other solid tumors.
PD-L1/PD-1 Expression
PD-1 is an inhibitory surface receptor mainly expressed by cytotoxic effector T cells, and also by B-cells, natural killer, activated monocytes, and dendritic cells. The ligands of PD-1 are PD-L1 and PD-L2, which can be expressed by tumor cells, but also by other cells in the TME, such as TILs, macrophages, and fibroblasts [63]. Although PD-L1 expression has shown to have good predictive value for ICI’s efficacy in metastatic TNBC [22••, 25••], several challenges have hampered the generalization of PD-L1 as a biomarker. One important issue is its determination, as each sponsor implemented a different IHC-based assay for PD-L1 evaluation using different antibodies, different quantification technics, and different cutoffs to define PD-L1 positivity. In early-stage TNBC, the benefit of ICI in combination with chemotherapy is obtained, regardless of PD-L1 expression. Nevertheless, PD-L1 expression was associated with higher rates of pCR regardless of treatment, suggesting it is a marker of immune activation and therefore a prognostic marker in this setting [16••, 18••]. Other challenges include variability and dynamic changes of PD-L1 expression among tumors, and between primary tumors and metastases.(62) This raises the question whether an archival tumor can be representative of what is happening in the current TME. An appealing and quick alternative is the detection of soluble PD-L1, since it is minimally invasive and can be repeated over the course of the disease. However, different physiological conditions such as pregnancy or autoimmune diseases can increase it [64, 65]. The utility of soluble PD-L1 as a predictive biomarker for ICI is under active investigation.
Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes
TILs have emerged as an attractive biomarker due to its easy and feasible determination. In early breast cancer, the increase in stromal TILs predicts response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in all breast cancer subtypes. Moreover, increased TIL levels are associated with a survival benefit in HER2-positive and especially TNBC, but not in luminal-HER2-negative tumors [66]. In luminal breast cancer, the value of TILs is controversial [67]; nevertheless, TILs are an established prognostic biomarker in TNBC and several international consensuses for early-stage breast cancer already recommend its systematic determination in clinical practice [68, 69].
The value of TILs as a biomarker of response to immunotherapy is under development. A retrospective analysis performed on tumor samples from the IMpassion130 trial showed that stromal TILs were associated with PD-L1 positivity. In the control arm, TILs ≥ 10% (pre-specified threshold) were not associated with a benefit in PFS or OS; however, patients with increased stromal TILs had longer PFS and OS when treated with atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel [27]. In HER2-positive breast cancer breast, the KATE2 trial showed that higher TILs levels were associated with PD-L1 positivity and in patients with higher TILs, the addition of atezolizumab to T-DM1 showed a greater benefit in PFS [46]. In the PANACEA trial, patients with higher TILs had higher ORR to pembrolizumab plus trastuzumab compared to patients with low TIL tumor samples [45]. In a recent meta-analysis, evaluating 2500 patients with 33 different tumor types and treated with immunotherapy, CD8 + TIL levels were associated with improved patient’s outcomes, regardless of ICI agent [70].
Tumor Mutational Burden
TMB is the number of mutations within the coding region of a tumor genome, and it is commonly reported as the number of non-synonymous mutations per megabase (Mut/Mb). Highly mutated tumors can produce many neoantigens, and these might increase T cell reactivity. In June 2020, the FDA approved pembrolizumab monotherapy for the treatment of previously treated patients with unresectable or metastatic TMB-high (TMB-H; ≥ 10 Mut/Mb) solid tumors, based upon the results of KEYNOTE-158 trial. In this non-randomized, multi-cohort phase II trial, patients with TMB-H tumors had an ORR of 29% vs 6% in non-TMB-H tumors [71]. However, high TMB is uncommon in breast cancer, although it is more frequently observed in invasive lobular cancer (8%). Barroso-Sousa et al. analyzed 3969 breast cancer samples by either whole-exome or gene panel sequencing, and around 5% had a TMB ≥ 10. Median TMB significantly varied according to tumor subtype (TNBC > HER2-positive > HR + /HER2-negative, p < 0.05) and tumor sample type (metastatic > primary, p = 2.2 × 10–16). In this series, anecdotal responses to ICI were noted in TMB-H tumors [72]. The TAPUR study is a phase II basket trial assessing the safety and efficacy in real-world practice of commercially available, targeted anticancer drugs in patients with advanced cancer whose tumor harbors a potentially actionable genomic variant. Data from 28 patients with high TMB (9–37 Mut/Mb) revealed a disease control rate and ORR of 37% (95% CI 21–50) and 21% (95% CI 8–41), respectively. Median PFS was 10.6 weeks [73].
Dual checkpoint inhibition with nivolumab plus ipilimumab may be a promising treatment option for patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer and high TMB, according to results of the NIMBUS trial. This phase II study (N = 30) assessed this immunotherapy doublet in patients with metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer (70% ER + disease) and high TMB (≥ 9 mutations/Mb). There were five (16.7%) confirmed ORR, meeting the study’s primary endpoint. Interestingly, the ORR among patients with a TMB of ≥ 14 Mut/Mb was 60%, with a median PFS of 9.5 months compared to 4% and 1.4 months, respectively, in the lower TMB group [74]. Approximately 10% of patients with metastatic breast cancer have high TMB and could potentially benefit from this approach; however, the optimal TMB cutoff for selecting suitable patients remains unclear.
Next-Generation Sequencing
The gain of function mutation (amplification) in CD274 gene (which encodes for PD-L1) predicted better outcomes with durvalumab in metastatic TNBC [75]. One study examined the genomic mutational landscape of more than 3000 metastatic breast cancers and found that most frequent mutations occurred in PIK3CA, FGFR1, and PTEN; however, these mutations were not associated with response to ICI. Mutations in BRAF, STK11, and MDM2 have been associated to immunotherapy response but in breast cancer, those are rare mutations (< 1%) [76]. Microsatellite instability (MSI) is a pattern of hypermutation that occurs in genomic microsatellites, and it is caused by defects in the mismatch repair system (MMR). Increased mutational load caused by MMR deficit (dMMR) or MSI-high has been shown to predict response to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 in different tumors [77]. FDA approved pembrolizumab for patients with advanced MSI-H/dMMR solid tumors, and also dostarlimab in the same setting [78, 79]. Using large breast cancer datasets, an analysis of 2195 breast cancer patients showed an association between ICI benefit and tumors with somatic mutations in the homologous recombination pathway, with improved OS (HR 0.55, p = 0.005, FDR < 0.10) [80]. The APOBEC family of zinc-coordinating enzymes converts cytosine to uracil in single-strand DNA. Dysregulated activity is a major source of mutations in various cancer types. Different mutational signatures are present in this population, with APOBEC activity being the most common dominant process. The hypermutation occurs in 5% of all breast cancers with the highest enrichment in metastatic tumors. This signature could be used as a potential ICI biomarker but there is still a lack of research in this field [72, 81, 82].
Current Challenges
Given the statistically significant improvement in pCR and EFS observed in the KEYNOTE-522 study, pembrolizumab in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy is now considered the new standard of care for patients with high-risk TNBC [17•]. However, new questions arise in this scenario. In this study, patients who achieved a pCR had excellent EFS, regardless of the use of pembrolizumab. Therefore, do those patients really need the adjuvant pembrolizumab? On the other hand, management of patients with TNBC and residual disease following KEYNOTE-522 neoadjuvant treatment is unclear. In patients with residual disease, the current standard of treatment is adjuvant capecitabine based upon the CREATE-X trial, in which significant survival benefits were observed [83]. Importantly, in the KEYNOTE-522, adjuvant capecitabine was not allowed. Nevertheless, patients with residual disease treated with adjuvant pembrolizumab had a significant EFS benefit compared to placebo. However, it remains unknown whether this EFS benefit is derived from the neoadjuvant portion or the adjuvant portion of pembrolizumab. Immunotherapy may lead to immunologic memory, and response may not tell the whole story of how these drugs work. Remarkably, in the GEPARNUEVO clinical trial, there was a similar EFS benefit observed with ICI, even though ICI was only administered in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and not continued adjuvantly (XX). Combination therapy of adjuvant pembrolizumab plus capecitabine in this setting is an appealing approach and, based upon studies on other malignancies, could be safely combined; however, there is no data to support this strategy. Similarly, in patients with gBRCA1/2-mutated TNBC and residual disease following neoadjuvant treatment, adjuvant olaparib demonstrated a significant improvement not only in DFS, but also in OS.(82) Combination of adjuvant pembrolizumab and olaparib in patients with residual disease is also unexplored. Another challenge is patients who relapse after having received an ICI-based treatment in the early setting. Those patients will probably not be sensitive to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade anymore, highlighting the need for emergent strategies beyond conventional chemotherapies and ICI [84].
Response rates have classically been used as a marker of effectiveness. However, we have learned that immunotherapy can generate a pattern of response that is maintained even after treatment cessation [85]. Future studies may need to consider not only the depth of response, but also its duration. On the other hand, most trials in metastatic breast cancer have studied the simultaneous combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy. It is possible that other schemes such as induction with chemotherapy and ulterior maintenance with immunotherapy may induce even stronger responses and delay tumor progression.
Novel Approaches
New approaches are moving toward environmental modifiers of immunity including the microbiome, and metabolic and hormonal parameters. Combination strategies do not only focus on chemotherapy, but also on other therapies like cryoablation, radiotherapy, oncolytic viruses, antibody associations, or other targeted therapies [86]. Table 3 synthetizes a selection of ongoing phase III trials that evaluate ICI and novel combinations, and Table 4 shows new treatments beyond ICI such as cancer vaccines, oncolytic viruses, cell therapies, and modulation of cytokines.
As we are moving toward a more personalized medicine, targeted therapies are object of growing interest. The PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway has shown to play an important role in endocrine resistance [97]. Emerging evidence supports its importance in creating an immunosuppressive TME [98], providing an interesting rational for combination strategies. In a phase I clinical trial, ipatasertib plus taxane and atezolizumab (NCT03800836) showed benefit in terms of ORR [99, 100]. An ongoing phase III trial will provide further results of the combination of these three agents (NCT04177108). Likewise, alterations in the mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling haven been associated with negative immunity regulation, and resistance to taxanes in cell cultures [101]. Based on this, the phase II COLET trial tested the combination of cobimetinib, taxanes (nab-paclitaxel or paclitaxel), and atezolizumab as first-line in TNBC, showing clinical benefit with an acceptable safety profile. Noteworthily, patients receiving paclitaxel experienced better ORR and PFS than those with nab-paclitaxel.
The combination of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with antibodies targeting other co-inhibitory molecules, such as anti-LAG3, anti-TIM3, and anti-TIGIT (NCT02913313; NCT03099109), or with antibodies targeting co-stimulatory molecules like OX40 (NCT03971409) or 4-1BB (NCT03364348, NCT03414658), has triggered research interest in breast cancer. The use of anti-RANKL has shown activation also of the immune system in breast cancer [102]. The combination of the PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab and the anti-CTLA4 tremelimumab was studied in metastatic breast cancer with clinical benefit in TNBC [103]. Bempegaldesleukin is a selective agonist of the βɣ-receptor complex of IL-2. Studies supported the ability of this drug to turn PD-L1-negative tumors into positive ones. It is currently being tested in combination with nivolumab in metastatic solid tumors (NCT02983045). Preliminary results from the metastatic TNBC cohort indicate an acceptable safety profile with similar disease control rates (50%) both in the PD-L1-negative and in the PD-L1-positive population.
Finally, the combination of ICI with local ablative therapies is another immunotherapy approach. Irradiating tumor lesions may boost the systemic immune response and eventually impact in distant metastatic sites, which is known as the abscopal effect. Although the bulk of the evidence is preclinical so far, several trials have evaluated the integration of radiotherapy with checkpoint inhibition in breast cancer, with contradictory results. Many trials evaluating different drugs, radiation dosing, and fractioning are ongoing (NCT04990921, NCT02730130, NCT0523369). Figure 1 illustrates some of the current challenges and novel immunotherapy approaches for breast cancer.
Conclusions
Immunotherapy is the fourth pillar of modern oncology and although the most robust evidence of its use is for TNBC, more and more data are arising on its use in other breast cancer subtypes. Ongoing clinical trials will further refine immunotherapy strategies in breast cancer. This must be accompanied by the identification and integration of robust biomarkers to improve the efficacy of immunotherapy and also to identify patients who can avoid them, and therefore, their associated toxicities and costs.
References
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
Prestwich RJ, Errington F, Hatfield P, Merrick AE, Ilett EJ, Selby PJ, et al. The Immune system - is it relevant to cancer development, progression and treatment? Clin Oncol. 2008;20(2):101–12.
Allard B, Aspeslagh S, Garaud S, Dupont FA, Solinas C, Kok M, et al. Immuno-oncology-101: overview of major concepts and translational perspectives. Semin Cancer Biol. 2018;1(52):1–11.
Michielin O, Van Akkooi ACJ, Ascierto PA, Dummer R, Keilholz U. Cutaneous melanoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2019;30(12):1884–901.
Planchard D, Popat S, Kerr K, Novello S, Smit EF, Faivre-Finn C, et al. Metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2018;29:iv192–237. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdy275.
Parry RV, Chemnitz JM, Frauwirth KA, Lanfranco AR, Braunstein I, Kobayashi SV, et al. CTLA-4 and PD-1 receptors inhibit T-cell activation by distinct mechanisms. Mol Cell Biol. 2005;25(21):9543–53.
Dong H, Strome SE, Salomao DR, Tamura H, Hirano F, Flies DB, et al. Tumor-associated B7–H1 promotes T-cell apoptosis: a potential mechanism of immune evasion. Nat Med. 2002;8(8):793–800.
Mittendorf EA, Philips AV, Meric-Bernstam F, Qiao N, Wu Y, Harrington S, et al. PD-L1 expression in triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer Immunol Res. 2014;2:361–70. https://doi.org/10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-13-0127.
de Melo Gagliato D, Buzaid AC, Perez-Garcia J, Cortes J. Immunotherapy in Breast Cancer: Current practice and clinical challenges. BioDrugs. 2020;34(5):611–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/S40259-020-00436-9.
Nanda R, Chow LQM, Dees EC, Berger R, Gupta S, Geva R, et al. Pembrolizumab in patients with advanced triple-negative breast cancer: phase Ib KEYNOTE-012 study. J Clin Oncol [Internet]. 2016 Jul 20 [cited 2022 Mar 5];34(21):2460–7. Available from: https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.sire.ub.edu/27138582/.
Adams S, Schmid P, Rugo HS, Winer EP, Loirat D, Awada A et al. Pembrolizumab monotherapy for previously treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: cohort A of the phase II KEYNOTE-086 study. Ann Oncol [Internet]. 2019 Mar 1 [cited 2022 Mar 5];30(3):397–404. Available from: http://www.annalsofoncology.org/article/S0923753419310750/fulltext.
Dirix LY, Takacs I, Jerusalem G, Nikolinakos P, Arkenau HT, Forero-Torres A et al. Avelumab, an anti-PD-L1 antibody, in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer: a phase 1b JAVELIN Solid Tumor study. Breast Cancer Res Treat [Internet]. 2018 Oct 23 [cited 2022 Mar 5];167(3):671–86. Available from: https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.sire.ub.edu/29063313/.
Emens LA, Cruz C, Eder JP, Braiteh F, Chung C, Tolaney SM et al. Long-term clinical outcomes and biomarker analyses of atezolizumab therapy for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a phase 1 study. JAMA Oncol [Internet]. 2019 Jan 1 [cited 2022 Mar 5];5(1):74–82. Available from: https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.sire.ub.edu/30242306/.
Bailly C, Thuru X, Quesnel B. Combined cytotoxic chemotherapy and immunotherapy of cancer: modern times. NAR cancer [Internet]. 2020 Mar 1 [cited 2022 Mar 2];2(1). Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34316682/.
Loibl S, Untch M, Burchardi N, Huober J, Sinn B V., Blohmer JU et al. A randomised phase II study investigating durvalumab in addition to an anthracycline taxane-based neoadjuvant therapy in early triple-negative breast cancer: clinical results and biomarker analysis of GeparNuevo study. Ann Oncol Off J Eur Soc Med Oncol [Internet]. 2019 Aug 1 [cited 2022 May 2];30(8):1279–88. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31095287/.
Nanda R, Liu MC, Yau C, Shatsky R, Pusztai L, Wallace A, et al. Effect of pembrolizumab plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy on pathologic complete response in women with early-stage breast cancer: an analysis of the ongoing phase 2 adaptively randomized I-SPY2 trial: an analysis of the ongoing phase 2 adaptively randomized I-SPY2 trial. JAMA Oncol. 2020;6:676–84. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.6650.
•• Schmid P, Cortes J, Pusztai L, McArthur H, Kümmel S, Bergh J, et al. Pembrolizumab for early triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med [Internet]. 2020 Feb 27 [cited 2022 Mar 12];382(9):810–21. Available from: https://www.nejm.org/doi/https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1910549. KEYNOTE-522 is the largest trial in early TNBC which led to the first regulatory approval of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in early-stage breast cancer.
• Schmid P, Cortes J, Dent R, Pusztai L, McArthur H, Kümmel S et al. VP7–2021: KEYNOTE-522: Phase III study of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs. placebo + chemotherapy, followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab vs. placebo for early-stage TNBC. Ann Oncol [Internet]. 2021 Sep 1 [cited 2022 Mar 12];32(9):1198–200. Available from: http://www.annalsofoncology.org/article/S0923753421020639/fulltext. Survival data of KEYNOTE-522, being positive for event-free survival, distant recurrence–free survival, and favorable trend for overall survival.
•• Mittendorf EA, Zhang H, Barrios CH, Saji S, Jung KH, Hegg R, et al. Neoadjuvant atezolizumab in combination with sequential nab-paclitaxel and anthracycline-based chemotherapy versus placebo and chemotherapy in patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (IMpassion031): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet [Internet]. 2020 Oct 10 [cited 2022 Mar 7];396(10257):1090–100. Available from: http://www.thelancet.com.sire.ub.edu/article/S014067362031953X/fulltext. IMpassion031 is a phase III trial in early TNBC with atezolizumab plus chemotherapy neoadjuvant, a higher pCR rate with atezolizumab was obtained, highlighting benefit in both the positive and negative PDL1 groups.
Gianni L, Huang CS, Egle D, Bermejo B, Zamagni C, Thill M et al. Pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant treatment with or without atezolizumab in triple negative, early high-risk and locally advanced breast cancer. NeoTRIP Michelangelo randomized study. Ann Oncol Off J Eur Soc Med Oncol [Internet]. 2022 Feb [cited 2022 Mar 12]; Available from: https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.sire.ub.edu/35182721/.
Adams S, Loi S, Toppmeyer D, Cescon DW, De Laurentiis M, Nanda R, et al. Pembrolizumab monotherapy for previously untreated, PD-L1-positive, metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: cohort B of the phase II KEYNOTE-086 study. Ann Oncol [Internet]. 2019 Mar 1 [cited 2022 Mar 5];30(3):405–11. Available from: http://www.annalsofoncology.org/article/S0923753419310762/fulltext.
Tolaney SM, Kalinsky K, Kaklamani VG, D’Adamo DR, Aktan G, Tsai ML et al. A phase Ib/II study of eribulin (ERI) plus pembrolizumab (PEMBRO) in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) (ENHANCE 1). https://doi-org.sire.ub.edu/101200/JCO20203815_suppl1015. 2020 May 25;38(15_suppl):1015–1015.
•• Schmid P, Adams S, Rugo HS, Schneeweiss A, Barrios CH, Iwata H, et al. Atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel in advanced triple-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med [Internet]. 2018 Nov 29 [cited 2022 Apr 5];379(22):2108–21. Available from: https://www-nejm-org.sire.ub.edu/doi/full/https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1809615. Phase III trial IMpassion130 tested atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel in first line in metastatic TNBC, prolonged progression-free survival among patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in both the intention-to-treat population and the PD-L1-positive subgroup.
• Emens LA, Adams S, Barrios CH, Diéras V, Iwata H, Loi S, et al. First-line atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel for unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: IMpassion130 final overall survival analysis. Ann Oncol. 2021;32(8):983–93. Overall survival analysis of IMpassion130 trial, although the OS benefit in the ITT population was not statistically significant, clinically meaningful OS benefit was observed in PD-L1 positive patients treated with atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel.
• Miles D, Gligorov J, André F, Cameron D, Schneeweiss A, Barrios C, et al. Primary results from IMpassion131, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised phase III trial of first-line paclitaxel with or without atezolizumab for unresectable locally advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2021;32(8):994–1004. Impassion131 was a negative phase III trial that evaluated first-line atezolizumab-paclitaxel in advanced TNBC, creating controversy by having a design similar to the IMpassion130 with contradictory results.
•• Cortes J, Cescon DW, Rugo HS, Nowecki Z, Im SA, Yusof MM et al. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy for previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (KEYNOTE-355): a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial. Lancet (London, England) [Internet]. 2020 Dec 5 [cited 2022 Apr 26];396(10265):1817–28. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33278935/. KEYNOTE-355 was a phase 3 trial in advanced or metastatic TNBC, prove that adding pembrolizumab to first-line chemotherapy (nab-paclitaxel; paclitaxel; or gemcitabine plus carboplatin) improvement in progression-free survival among patients with CPS of 10 or more.
Adams S, Diamond JR, Hamilton E, Pohlmann PR, Tolaney SM, Chang C-W et al. Atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel in the treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer with 2-year survival follow-up a phase 1b clinical trial supplemental content. JAMA Oncol [Internet]. 2019;5(3):334–42. Available from: https://jamanetwork.com/.
Emens LA, Molinero L, Loi S, Rugo HS, Schneeweiss A, Diéras V et al. Atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel in advanced triple-negative breast cancer: biomarker evaluation of the IMpassion130 study. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst [Internet]. 2021 Aug 2 [cited 2022 Apr 30];113(8):1005–16. Available from: https://academic.oup.com/jnci/article/113/8/1005/6125365.
Ozaki Y, Mukohara T, Tsurutani J, Takahashi M, Matsumoto K, Futamura M, et al. Abstract PD1–03: a multicenter phase II study evaluating the efficacy of nivolumab plus paclitaxel plus bevacizumab triple-combination therapy as a first-line treatment in patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: WJOG9917B NEWBEAT trial. Cancer Res [Internet]. 2020 Feb 15 [cited 2022 Apr 6];80(4_Supplement):PD1–03. Available from: https://aacrjournals-org.sire.ub.edu/cancerres/article/80/4_Supplement/PD1-03/647237/Abstract-PD1-03-A-multicenter-phase-II-study.
Barroso-Sousa R, Keenan TE, Li T, Tayob N, Trippa L, Pastorello RG, et al. Nivolumab in combination with cabozantinib for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a phase II and biomarker study. npj Breast Cancer 2021 71 [Internet]. 2021 Aug 25 [cited 2022 Apr 6];7(1):1–8. Available from: https://www-nature-com.sire.ub.edu/articles/s41523-021-00287-9.
Schmid P, Salgado R, Park YH, Muñoz-Couselo E, Kim SB, Sohn J et al. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment of high-risk, early-stage triple-negative breast cancer: results from the phase 1b open-label, multicohort KEYNOTE-173 study. Ann Oncol [Internet]. 2020 May 1 [cited 2022 Mar 7];31(5):569–81. Available from: http://www.annalsofoncology.org/article/S0923753420360324/fulltext.
Callari M, Barreca M, Dugo M, Galbardi B, Viganò L, Locatelli A, et al. Abstract PD10-09: Comparison of early modulation of biological pathways and immune microenvironment by anthracyclines- or taxane-based treatment. Cancer Res. 2022;82:PD10-09-PD10-09. https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs21-pd10-09.
Loibl S, Schneeweiss A, Huober JB, Braun M, Rey J, Blohmer JU et al. Durvalumab improves long-term outcome in TNBC: results from the phase II randomized GeparNUEVO study investigating neodjuvant durvalumab in addition to an anthracycline/taxane based neoadjuvant chemotherapy in early triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). https://doi-org.sire.ub.edu/101200/JCO20213915_suppl506. 2021 May 28;39(15_suppl):506–506.
Tarantino P, Gandini S, Trapani D, Criscitiello C, Curigliano G. Immunotherapy addition to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early triple negative breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol [Internet]. 2021 Mar 1 [cited 2022 Mar 12];159. Available from: https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.sire.ub.edu/33482345/.
Armstrong N, Ryder S, Forbes C, Ross J, Gw Quek R. A systematic review of the international prevalence of BRCA mutation in breast cancer. 2019; Available from: http://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S206949.
Robson M, Im S-A, Senkus E, Xu B, Domchek SM, Masuda N, et al. Olaparib for metastatic breast cancer in patients with a germline BRCA mutation . N Engl J Med [Internet]. 2017 Aug 10 [cited 2022 Apr 27];377(6):523–33. Available from: https://www-nejm-org.sire.ub.edu/doi/https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1706450.
Litton JK, Rugo HS, Ettl J, Hurvitz SA, Gonçalves A, Lee K-H et al. Talazoparib in patients with advanced breast cancer and a germline BRCA mutation. N Engl J Med [Internet]. 2018 Aug 23 [cited 2022 Apr 27];379(8):753–63. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30110579/.
Jiao S, Xia W, Yamaguchi H, Wei Y, Chen M-K, Hsu J-M, et al. PARP inhibitor upregulates PD-L1 expression and enhances cancer-associated immunosuppression. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23:3711–20. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-3215.
Vinayak S, Tolaney SM, Schwartzberg L, Mita M, McCann G, Tan AR, et al. Open-label clinical trial of niraparib combined with pembrolizumab for treatment of advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. JAMA Oncol [Internet]. 2019;5(8):1132–40. Available from: https://jamanetwork.com/.
Domchek SM, Postel-Vinay S, Im SA, Park YH, Delord JP, Italiano A, et al. Olaparib and durvalumab in patients with germline BRCA-mutated metastatic breast cancer (MEDIOLA): an open-label, multicentre, phase 1/2, basket study. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(9):1155–64.
Luen S, Virassamy B, Savas P, Salgado R, Loi S. The genomic landscape of breast cancer and its interaction with host immunity. Breast. 2016;1(29):241–50.
Rugo HS, Delord JP, Im SA, Ott PA, Piha-Paul SA, Bedard PL, et al. Safety and antitumor activity of pembrolizumab in patients with estrogen receptor–positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative advanced breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2018;24(12):2804–11.
Tolaney SM, Barroso-Sousa R, Keenan T, Li T, Trippa L, Vaz-Luis I et al. Effect of eribulin with or without pembrolizumab on progression-free survival for patients with hormone receptor–positive, ERBB2-negative metastatic breast cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol [Internet]. 2020 Oct 1 [cited 2022 Apr 27];6(10):1598–605. Available from: https://jamanetwork-com.sire.ub.edu/journals/jamaoncology/fullarticle/2769923.
Pérez-García JM, Llombart-Cussac A, G. Cortés M, Curigliano G, López-Miranda E, Alonso JL, et al. Pembrolizumab plus eribulin in hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative, locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer (KELLY): an open-label, multicentre, single-arm, phase II trial. Eur J Cancer [Internet]. 2021 May 1 [cited 2022 Apr 27];148:382–94. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33794440/.
Hamilton E, Shapiro CL, Petrylak D, Boni V, Martin M, Conte G Del et al. Abstract PD3–07: Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd; DS-8201) with nivolumab in patients with HER2-expressing, advanced breast cancer: a 2-part, phase 1b, multicenter, open-label study. Cancer Res [Internet]. 2021 Feb 15 [cited 2022 Apr 6];81(4_Supplement):PD3–07. Available from: https://aacrjournals-org.sire.ub.edu/cancerres/article/81/4_Supplement/PD3-07/648109/Abstract-PD3-07-Trastuzumab-deruxtecan-T-DXd-DS.
Loi S, Giobbie-Hurder A, Gombos A, Bachelot T, Hui R, Curigliano G, et al. Pembrolizumab plus trastuzumab in trastuzumab-resistant, advanced, HER2-positive breast cancer (PANACEA): a single-arm, multicentre, phase 1b–2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(3):371–82.
Emens LA, Esteva FJ, Beresford M, Saura C, De Laurentiis M, Kim SB et al. Trastuzumab emtansine plus atezolizumab versus trastuzumab emtansine plus placebo in previously treated, HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (KATE2): a phase 2, multicentre, randomised, double-blind trial. Lancet Oncol [Internet]. 2020 Oct 1 [cited 2022 Apr 6];21(10):1283–95. Available from: http://www.thelancet.com/article/S1470204520304654/fulltext.
Chia S, Bedard PL, Hilton J, Amir E, Gelmon K, Goodwin R et al. A Phase Ib trial of durvalumab in combination with trastuzumab in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (CCTG IND.229). 2019; https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0321.
Goel S, DeCristo MJ, McAllister SS, Zhao JJ. CDK4/6 inhibition in cancer: beyond cell cycle arrest. Trends Cell Biol [Internet]. 2018 Nov 1 [cited 2022 Apr 6];28(11):911. Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC6689321/.
Deng J, Wang ES, Jenkins RW, Li S, Dries R, Yates K, et al. CDK4/6 inhibition augments antitumor immunity by enhancing T-cell activation. Cancer Discov. 2018;8(2):216–33.
Tolaney SM, Jerusalem G, Salgado R, Liu X, Chen T, Zhang H et al. A phase II trial of nivolumab (NIVO) + palbociclib (PAL) + anastrozole (ANA) in postmenopausal women and men with estrogen receptor (ER)+/human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)- primary breast cancer (BC): CheckMate 7A8. https://doi-org.sire.ub.edu/101200/JCO20203815_supplTPS1105. 2020 May 25;38(15_suppl):TPS1105–TPS1105.
Masuda J, Tsurutani J, Masuda N, Tanabe Y, Iwasa T, Takahashi M et al. Abstract PS12–10: Phase II study of nivolumab in combination with abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy in patients with HR+, HER2- metastatic breast cancer: WJOG11418B NEWFLAME trial. Cancer Res [Internet]. 2021 Feb 15 [cited 2022 Apr 5];81(4_Supplement):PS12–10. Available from: https://aacrjournals-org.sire.ub.edu/cancerres/article/81/4_Supplement/PS12-10/648421/Abstract-PS12-10-Phase-II-study-of-nivolumab-in.
Yuan Y, Lee JS, Yost SE, Frankel PH, Ruel C, Egelston CA, et al. Phase I/II trial of palbociclib, pembrolizumab and letrozole in patients with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2021;1(154):11–20.
Jerusalem G, Prat A, Salgado RF, Reinisch M, Saura C, Ruiz Borrego M et al. 92MO Neoadjuvant nivolumab (NIVO) + palbociclib (PALBO) + anastrozole (ANA) for estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2−) primary breast cancer (BC): CheckMate 7A8. Ann Oncol [Internet]. 2022 May;33:S165–6. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0923753422004872.
Pernas S, Tolaney SM. Clinical trial data and emerging strategies: HER2-positive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2022 [Internet]. 2022 Apr 9 [cited 2022 Apr 28];1:1–11. Available from: https://link-springer-com.sire.ub.edu/article/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-022-06575-7.
Kumagai S, Koyama S, Nishikawa H. Antitumour immunity regulated by aberrant ERBB family signalling. Nat Rev Cancer 2021 213 [Internet]. 2021 Jan 18 [cited 2022 Apr 28];21(3):181–97. Available from: https://www-nature-com.sire.ub.edu/articles/s41568-020-00322-0.
Triulzi T, Regondi V, De Cecco L, Cappelletti MR, Di Modica M, Paolini B, et al. ARTICLE Early immune modulation by single-agent trastuzumab as a marker of trastuzumab benefit. Br J Cancer [Internet]. 2018;119:1487–94. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-018-0318-0.
Chaganty BKR, Qiu S, Gest A, Lu Y, Ivan C, Calin GA, et al. Trastuzumab upregulates PD-L1 as a potential mechanism of trastuzumab resistance through engagement of immune effector cells and stimulation of IFNγ secretion HHS Public Access. Cancer Lett. 2018;430:47–56.
Keilholz U, Mehnert JM, Bauer S, Bourgeois H, Patel MR, Gravenor D et al. Avelumab in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma: phase 1b results from the JAVELIN Solid Tumor trial. J Immunother cancer [Internet]. 2019 Jan 16 [cited 2022 Apr 6];7(1). Available from: https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.sire.ub.edu/30651126/.
Cortés J, Kim S-B, Chung W-P, Im S-A, Park YH, Hegg R et al. Trastuzumab deruxtecan versus trastuzumab emtansine for breast cancer. https://doi-org.sire.ub.edu/101056/NEJMoa2115022 [Internet]. 2022 Mar 23 [cited 2022 Apr 6];386(12):1143–54. Available from: https://www-nejm-org.sire.ub.edu/doi/full/https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2115022.
Iwata TN, Ishii C, Ishida S, Ogitani Y, Wada T, Agatsuma T. A HER2-targeting antibody-drug conjugate, trastuzumab deruxtecan (DS-8201a), enhances antitumor immunity in a mouse model. Mol Cancer Ther [Internet]. 2018 Jul 1 [cited 2022 Apr 6];17(7):1494–503. Available from: https://aacrjournals-org.sire.ub.edu/mct/article/17/7/1494/92507/A-HER2-Targeting-Antibody-Drug-Conjugate.
Andrikopoulou A, Zografos E, Liontos M, Koutsoukos K, Dimopoulos MA, Zagouri F. Trastuzumab deruxtecan (DS-8201a): the latest research and advances in breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer. 2021;21(3):e212–9.
Huober J, Barrios CH, Niikura N, Jarzab M, Chang Y-C, Huggins-Puhalla SL et al. VP6–2021: IMpassion050: A phase III study of neoadjuvant atezolizumab + pertuzumab + trastuzumab + chemotherapy (neoadj A + PH + CT) in high-risk, HER2-positive early breast cancer (EBC). Ann Oncol [Internet]. 2021 Aug 1 [cited 2022 Apr 4];32(8):1061–2. Available from: http://www.annalsofoncology.org/article/S0923753421020251/fulltext.
Stovgaard ES, Dyhl-Polk A, Roslind A, Balslev E, Nielsen D. PD-L1 expression in breast cancer: expression in subtypes and prognostic significance: a systematic review. Breast Cancer Res Treat [Internet]. 2019 Apr 30 [cited 2022 May 3];174(3):571–84. Available from: https://link-springer-com.sire.ub.edu/article/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-019-05130-1.
Bailly C, Thuru X, Quesnel B. Soluble programmed death ligand-1 (sPD-L1): a pool of circulating proteins implicated in health and diseases. Cancers (Basel) [Internet]. 2021 Jun 17 [cited 2022 Apr 30];13(12). Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34204509.
Vafaizadeh V, Barekati Z. Immuno-oncology biomarkers for personalized immunotherapy in breast cancer. Front Cell Dev Biol [Internet]. 2020 Mar 17 [cited 2022 Apr 30];8. Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC7089925/.
Denkert C, von Minckwitz G, Darb-Esfahani S, Lederer B, Heppner BI, Weber KE et al. Tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes and prognosis in different subtypes of breast cancer: a pooled analysis of 3771 patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy. Lancet Oncol [Internet]. 2018 Jan 1 [cited 2020 Aug 16];19(1):40–50. Available from: http://www.thelancet.com/article/S147020451730904X/fulltext.
Criscitiello C, Vingiani A, Maisonneuve P, Viale G, Viale G, Curigliano G. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in ER+/HER2- breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat [Internet]. 2020 Sep 1 [cited 2022 Apr 30];183(2):347–54. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32621251/.
Burstein HJ, Curigliano G, Loibl S, Dubsky P, Gnant M, Poortmans P, et al. Estimating the benefits of therapy for early-stage breast cancer: the St. Gallen International Consensus Guidelines for the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2019. Ann Oncol. 2019;30(10):1541–57.
Cardoso F, Paluch-Shimon S, Senkus E, Curigliano G, Aapro M, André F et al. Journal Pre-proof 5th ESO-ESMO international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC 5) †. Ann Oncol [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Oct 5]; Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2020.09.010.
Li F, Li C, Cai X, Xie Z, Zhou L, Cheng B et al. The association between CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and the clinical outcome of cancer immunotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. EClinicalMedicine [Internet]. 2021 Nov 1 [cited 2022 Mar 21];41. Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC8452798/.
Marabelle A, Fakih M, Lopez J, Shah M, Shapira-Frommer R, Nakagawa K et al. Association of tumour mutational burden with outcomes in patients with advanced solid tumours treated with pembrolizumab: prospective biomarker analysis of the multicohort, open-label, phase 2 KEYNOTE-158 study. Lancet Oncol [Internet]. 2020 Oct 1 [cited 2022 May 3];21(10):1353–65. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32919526/.
Barroso-Sousa R, Jain E, Cohen O, Kim D, Buendia-Buendia J, Winer E et al. Prevalence and mutational determinants of high tumor mutation burden in breast cancer. Ann Oncol Off J Eur Soc Med Oncol [Internet]. 2020 Mar 1 [cited 2022 Mar 22];31(3):387–94. Available from: https://pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.sire.ub.edu/32067680/.
Alva AS, Mangat PK, Garrett-Mayer E, Halabi S, Hansra D, Calfa CJ, et al. Pembrolizumab in patients with metastatic breast cancer with high tumor mutational burden: results from the Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) Study. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39(22):2443–51.
Barroso-Sousa R, Li T, Reddy S, Emens LA, Overmoyer B, Lange P, et al. Abstract GS2–10: Nimbus: a phase 2 trial of nivolumab plus ipilimumab for patients with hypermutated her2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Cancer Res [Internet]. 2022 Feb 15 [cited 2022 Apr 27];82(4_Supplement):GS2–10. Available from: https://aacrjournals-org.sire.ub.edu/cancerres/article/82/4_Supplement/GS2-10/680246/Abstract-GS2-10-Nimbus-A-phase-2-trial-of.
Karn T, Denkert C, Weber KE, Holtrich U, Hanusch C, Sinn BV et al. 128O PDL1/CD274 gain/amplification as a predictive marker of checkpoint blockade inhibitor efficacy in metastatic breast cancer: exploratory analysis of the SAFIR02-IMMUNO randomized phase II trial. Ann Oncol [Internet]. 2020 May 1 [cited 2022 May 5];31:S58–9. Available from: http://www.annalsofoncology.org/article/S0923753420363109/fulltext.
Sivapiragasam A, Ashok Kumar P, Sokol ES, Albacker LA, Killian JK, Ramkissoon SH, et al. Predictive biomarkers for immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Med [Internet]. 2021 Jan 1 [cited 2022 May 5];10(1):53–61. Available from: https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.sire.ub.edu/doi/full/https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3550.
Bonneville R, Krook MA, Kautto EA, Miya J, Wing MR, Chen H-Z et al. Landscape of microsatellite instability across 39 cancer types. https://doi-org.sire.ub.edu/101200/PO1700073. 2017 Oct 3;(1):1–15.
Prasad V, Kaestner V, Mailankody S. Cancer drugs approved based on biomarkers and not tumor type—FDA approval of pembrolizumab for mismatch repair-deficient solid cancers. JAMA Oncol [Internet]. 2018 Feb 1 [cited 2022 May 3];4(2):157–8. Available from: https://jamanetwork-com.sire.ub.edu/journals/jamaoncology/fullarticle/2667105.
Andre T, Berton D, Curigliano G, Ellard S, Pérez JMT, Arkenau H-T et al. Safety and efficacy of anti–PD-1 antibody dostarlimab in patients (pts) with mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) solid cancers: results from GARNET study. https://doi-org.sire.ub.edu/101200/JCO2021393_suppl9. 2021 Jan 22;39(3_suppl):9–9.
Samstein RM, Krishna C, Ma X, Pei X, Lee KW, Makarov V et al. Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 differentially affect the tumor microenvironment and response to checkpoint blockade immunotherapy. Nat cancer [Internet]. 2021 Dec 1 [cited 2022 May 5];1(12):1188. Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC8023400/.
Lefebvre C, Bachelot T, Filleron T, Pedrero M, Campone M, Soria JC et al. Mutational profile of metastatic breast cancers: a retrospective analysis. PLOS Med [Internet]. 2016 Dec 1 [cited 2022 May 5];13(12):e1002201. Available from: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002201.
Chic N, Brasó-Maristany F, Prat A. Biomarkers of immunotherapy response in breast cancer beyond PD-L1. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2021 1911 [Internet]. 2021 Oct 21 [cited 2022 May 5];191(1):39–49. Available from: https://link-springer-com.sire.ub.edu/article/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-021-06421-2.
Masuda N, Lee S-J, Ohtani S, Im Y-H, Lee E-S, Yokota I et al. Adjuvant capecitabine for breast cancer after preoperative chemotherapy. N Engl J Med [Internet]. 2017 Jun [cited 2022 Apr 6];376(22):2147–59. Available from: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1612645.
Bai R, Chen N, Li L, Du N, Bai L, Lv Z, et al. Mechanisms of cancer resistance to immunotherapy. Front Oncol [Internet]. 2020 Aug 6 [cited 2022 Apr 6];10:1290. Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC7425302/.
Borcoman E, Nandikolla A, Long G, Goel S, Le Tourneau C. Patterns of response and progression to immunotherapy. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ B. 2018;38:169–78.
Schmidt M, Heimes AS. Immunomodulating therapies in breast cancer—from prognosis to clinical practice. Cancers 2021, Vol 13, Page 4883 [Internet]. 2021 Sep 29 [cited 2022 Apr 6];13(19):4883. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/13/19/4883/htm.
Andtbacka RHI, Kaufman HL, Collichio F, Amatruda T, Senzer N, Chesney J, et al. Talimogene laherparepvec improves durable response rate in patients with advanced melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(25):2780–8.
Chaurasiya S, Fong Y. Viroimmunotherapy for breast cancer: promises, problems and future directions. Vol. 28, Cancer Gene Therapy. Springer Nature; 2021. p. 757–68.
Radosa JC, Stotz L, Müller C, Kaya AC, Solomayer EF, Radosa MP. Clinical data on immunotherapy in breast cancer. Vol. 15, Breast Care. S. Karger AG; 2020. p. 450–69.
Bou-Dargham MJ, Draughon S, Cantrell V, Khamis ZI, Sang Q-XA. Advancements in human breast cancer targeted therapy and immunotherapy. J Cancer. 2021;12:6949–63. https://doi.org/10.7150/jca.64205.
Carter ME, Koch A, Lauer UM, Hartkopf AD. Clinical trials of oncolytic viruses in breast cancer. Vol. 11, Frontiers in Oncology. Frontiers Media S.A.; 2021.
Venetis K, Invernizzi M, Sajjadi E, Curigliano G, Fusco N. Cellular immunotherapy in breast cancer: the quest for consistent biomarkers. Cancer Treat Rev. 2020;90:102089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctrv.2020.102089.
Yang YH, Liu JW, Lu C, Wei JF. CAR-T cell therapy for breast cancer: from basic research to clinical application. Vol. 18, International Journal of Biological Sciences. Ivyspring International Publisher; 2022. p. 2609–26.
Dees S, Ganesan R, Singh S, Grewal IS. Emerging CAR-T cell therapy for the treatment of triple-negative breast cancer. Vol. 19, Molecular Cancer Therapeutics. American Association for Cancer Research Inc.; 2020. p. 2409–21.
Guo ZS, Lu B, Guo Z, Giehl E, Feist M, Dai E et al. Vaccinia virus-mediated cancer immunotherapy: cancer vaccines and oncolytics. Vol. 7, J ImmunoTher Cancer. BioMed Central Ltd.; 2019.
Tarantino P, Carmagnani Pestana R, Corti C, Modi S, Bardia A, Tolaney SM, et al. Antibody-drug conjugates: smart chemotherapy delivery across tumor histologies. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:165–82. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21705.
Verret B, Cortes J, Bachelot T, Andre F, Arnedos M. Efficacy of PI3K inhibitors in advanced breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2019;30:x12–20. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdz381.
Sun P, Meng L-H. Emerging roles of class I PI3K inhibitors in modulating tumor microenvironment and immunity. Acta Pharmacol Sin [Internet]. 2020; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41401-020-00500-8.
Schmid P, Loirat D, Savas P, Espinosa E, Boni V, Italiano A, et al. Abstract CT049: Phase Ib study evaluating a triplet combination of ipatasertib (IPAT), atezolizumab (atezo), and paclitaxel (PAC) or nab-PAC as first-line (1L) therapy for locally advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Clinical Trials, vol. 79, American Association for Cancer Research; 2019, p. CT049–CT049. https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.AM2019-CT049.
Schmid P, Savas P, Espinosa E, Boni V, Italiano A, White S, Cheng K, Lam L, Robert L, Laliman V, Shah K, Sablin M-P. Abstract PS12-28: Phase 1b study evaluating a triplet combination of ipatasertib (IPAT), atezolizumab, and a taxane as first-line therapy for locally advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Cancer Res. 2021;81 (4_Supplement): PS12–28. https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.SABCS20-PS12-28.
Maloney SM, Hoover CA, Morejon-Lasso LV, Prosperi JR. Mechanisms of taxane resistance. Cancers (Basel). 2020;12:3323. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers12113323.
Gómez-Aleza C, Nguyen B, Yoldi G, Ciscar M, Barranco A, Hernández-Jiménez E, et al. Inhibition of RANK signaling in breast cancer induces an anti-tumor immune response orchestrated by CD8+ T cells. Nat Commun. 2020;11:6335. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20138-8.
Santa-Maria CA, Kato T, Park JH, Kiyotani K, Rademaker A, Shah AN, et al. A pilot study of durvalumab and tremelimumab and immunogenomic dynamics in metastatic breast cancer. Oncotarget [Internet]. 2018 Apr 10 [cited 2022 Oct 10];9(27):18985–96. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29721177/.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Monica Cejuela and Andrea C. Vethencourt performed the literature search and drafted the first manuscript, and Sonia Pernas critically revised the work.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
S.P. has served as an advisor/consultant for AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Novartis, Polyphor, Roche, and SeattleGenetics.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Ethics Approval
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Mónica Cejuela and Andrea Vethencourt equally contributed to the elaboration of this paper.
This article is part of the Topical Collection on Breast Cancer
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Cejuela, M., Vethencourt, A. & Pernas, S. Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Novel Immunotherapy Approaches for Breast Cancer. Curr Oncol Rep 24, 1801–1819 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-022-01339-4
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-022-01339-4
Keywords
- Immune checkpoint inhibitors
- Immunotherapy
- Breast cancer
- Biomarkers
- Triple-negative breast cancer
- Hormone receptor–positive breast cancer
- HER2-positive breast cancer
- PD-L1
- PD-1
- Tumor mutational burden
- Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes
- Immune response
- Immune checkpoint blockade
- Tumor subtype
- Early stage
- Metastatic breast cancer