Prediction of Immunotherapy Response by Integrating Immune Infiltration and Neoantigen Presentation Score in Late-Stage Melanoma.

Bailiang Li,Charles Abbott,Lee McDaniel,Rachel Pyke,Fabio Navarro,Hima Anbunathan,Michael Synder,Sekwon Jang,Sean Boyle,Richard Chen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jitc-2022-sitc2022.0119
2022-01-01
Abstract:e21554 Background: Single modality biomarkers such as tumor mutational burden (TMB) fail to reliably predict response to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) in part due to their incomplete characterization of complex tumor-immune interactions impacting response. We previously developed the composite biomarker, neoantigen presentation score (NEOPSTM), which integrates neoantigen processing and presentation information and showed it outperformed TMB and other single analyte biomarkers in predicting response in melanoma. Here we combined NEOPS with tumor immune infiltration analysis, and demonstrated further improved patient stratification for ICB response. Methods: We assessed the effect of 17 different immune and stromal cells on NEOPS using logistic regression with interactions in a retrospective cohort of 45 stage III/IV melanoma patients who underwent anti-PD-1 therapy. NEOPS and immune cell infiltration status were both generated using Personalis’ ImmunoID NeXT Platform®. The identified immune-selected phenotype that had a significant effect on NEOPS performance was validated in a cohort of 109 anti-PD1 treated late-stage melanoma patients. Results: The predictive strength of NEOPS was enhanced by considering the infiltration status of 4 distinct immune cell types derived from expression signatures: naïve CD4/CD8 T, exhausted CD8 T, and CD8 T cells. Highly correlated cells were aggregated into naïve (naïve CD4/8 T) and CD8 (exhausted and CD8 T) features. Both features independently boosted the accuracy of NEOPS in the validation cohort (naïve: Pint. = 0.048; CD8: Pint. = 0.11). In immune-selected patients in the validation cohort displaying both high naïve and CD8 features, NEOPS achieved an improved accuracy of 77.2% (vs 69.7% baseline performance, P = 0.013) and an AUC of 0.74 (vs 0.66, P = 0.055). In anti-CTLA4 treatment naïve patients, the immune-selected group attained even better NEOPS performance, with an accuracy of 81.8% (vs 70.6%, P = 0.015) and an AUC of 0.89 (vs 0.68, P = 0.005) in the validation cohort. A separate approach integrating NEOPS with naïve and CD8 features into a single composite biomarker resulted in an AUC of 0.82 (cross validation: 0.78 vs 0.71 baseline). Conclusions: Stratifying immune-selected patients based on cellular composition of the tumor microenvironment significantly increased the accuracy of our neoantigen-based biomarker of ICB response, NEOPS. These data highlight the potential for combining tumor microenvironment information with neoantigen analysis into a composite biomarker to provide more sensitive prediction of immunotherapy response.[Table: see text]
What problem does this paper attempt to address?