Assessment of TMB, PD-L1, and lymphocyte to monocyte ratio as predictive potential in a phase Ib study of sintilimab in patients with advanced solid tumors

Haiping Jiang,Ning Li,Huan Wang,Zhenguang Chen,Yulong Zheng,Jiong Qian,Chenyu Mao,Xin Xu,Cheng Xiao,Xiaochen Zhang,Hui Zhou,Shuyan Wang,Weisheng Chen,Xia Yin,Jiya Sun,Bo Peng,Lisong Teng,Nong Xu
2021-01-01
American journal of cancer research
Abstract:Background: Sintilimab is a humanized monoclonal antibody against the programmed cell death 1 (PD L1). We aimed to assess the safety and activity of sintilimab monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy in advanced solid tumors. Methods: This phase Ib study included six cohorts. Cohort A-C were sintilimab monotherapy settings, and enrolled pretreated patients (2/3 L cohorts). Cohort D-F were treatment-naive patients (1 L cohorts), and received sintilimab plus different chemotherapies. The primary endpoints were safety and objective response rate (ORR). Exploratory endpoints were potential biomarkers for the prognosis after treatment, such as tumor mutation burden scores (TMB), PD-L1 and lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR). Results: The ORR was 14.6% in the 2/3 L cohorts (n=146), and 73.2% in the 1 L cohorts (n=61). The incidence of grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 55 patients (37.7%) in 2/3 L cohorts, and in 38 (62.3%) in 1 L cohorts. 157 patients had available TMB scores, and in 2/3 L cohorts, patients in the high TMB groups (TMB >= 10) showed a longer progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) than those in the low TMB groups (TMB<10). No significant differences in PFS and OS were observed across different PD-L1 groups in both 1 L and 2/3 L cohorts. A high LMR was significantly associated with an improved PFS in 1 L cohorts (P=0.022). Conclusion: Sintilimab alone or combined with chemotherapy had a tolerable safety profile in solid tumors. The combination therapy showed a favorable activity with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and gastric or esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma. LMR might be a prognostic factor for the combination regimen in these patients.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?