Updated Report on Identification of Molecular Predictors of Tazemetostat Response in an Ongoing NHL Phase 2 Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction: B-cell malignancies may depend on the histone methyltransferase EZH2 to perpetuate a less differentiated state, with activating mutations of EZH2 being potential oncogenic drivers. Tazemetostat, a potent, selective EZH2 inhibitor, is in phase 2 clinical development in relapsed or refractory (R/R) non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Objective responses were observed in patients (pts) with EZH2 mutant or wild type tumors in the phase 1 part of the phase 1/2 study. The ongoing phase 2 study is enrolling pts with mutant or wild type EZH2 having R/R diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or follicular lymphoma (FL) to determine efficacy and safety. The primary endpoint is overall response rate. Here we report results of an updated molecular analysis of archived tumor and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) collected from pts plasma and associations with preliminary response data, including the discovery of novel candidate molecular predictors of tazemetostat response. Methods: Archived tumor and/or plasma-derived ctDNA samples were obtained during screening from R/R DLBCL and FL pts enrolled to the phase 2 trial of tazemetostat in NHL (NCT01897571). Next generation sequencing was performed retrospectively on archived tumor DNA (target coverage of 1,500X) and ctDNA (20,000X for somatic mutations and 5,000X for structural alterations). DNA was isolated from archived tumor and was tested across a panel of approximately 200 genes, including 62 genes commonly altered in NHL to identify somatic mutations, amplifications, and translocations. The ctDNA sequencing was restricted to the 62 gene NHL panel. Best objective overall response data (Cheson 2007) as of May 1, 2018 were used to generate two groups: responders (R = CR + PR), and non-responders (NR = progressive disease, stable disease, or unknown clinical response). Fisher's exact test (two tailed) was performed to identify DNA variants associated with either the R or NR groups for FL+DLBCL combined and for each NHL sub-type independently (Table 1). All gene associations met an unadjusted P-value threshold of ≤ 0.1. Results: In the combined analysis for all NHL pts, EZH2, BRCA2, ETV6, IKZF3 and TNFRSF14 mutations were associated with clinical response. Eleven genes, including BCL6, BCL2, TP53, PIM1, HIST1H1B and HIST1H1E, mutations were associated with a lack of response to tazemetostat. Association of detection of mutations in EZH2, BCL6 and HIST1H1E and response were detected in both ctDNA and archived tumor analysis, with all other genes achieving P ≤ 0.1 in either the ctDNA or the archived tumor analysis. Analysis of the NHL subcategories revealed in FL that mutations in EZH2 and STAT6 were associated with clinical response while mutations in BCL2, TNFAIP3, FOXO1 and MYD88 were identified as negative predictors. EZH2 was the only gene identified in both the ctDNA and archived tumor analyses in FL. In DLBCL, while EZH2 was not detected as a predictor of response to tazemetostat at P ≤ 0.1, the number of pts with mutant rather than wild type EZH2 was higher in responders than non-responders in both analyses. Positive predictors of tazemetostat response were detected in DLBCL: MYD88, MEF2B, ETV6, MLH1, RECQL4, and RNF43. Negative predictors of response were also identified in DLBCL: BCL2, PDL1, PDL2 and SOCS1. When the genes identified as associated with tazemetostat response in DLBCL were compared between the archived tumor and ctDNA analyses, no genes in common were identified. Conclusions: These analyses confirm genes previously described as potential predictors of tazemetostat response in analyses using smaller patient numbers and less mature clinical response data such as STAT6, EZH2, MYD88, TP53,BCL2, BCL6, PIM1 and HIST1H1E. In addition, identification of PDL1/PDL2 and RECQL4/MLH1/BRCA2 as novel predictors points to potential relevance of immune checkpoint and DNA damage repair pathways as additional pathways that may be of relevance to tazemetostat response in NHL. Subanalyses performed independently on each NHL subtype revealed disease specific biomarkers of response that may point to differences in the factors that can influence response to tazemetostat in DLBCL and FL. Disclosures McDonald: Epizyme: Employment, Equity Ownership. Thomas:Epizyme: Employment, Equity Ownership. Daigle:Epizyme: Employment, Equity Ownership. Morschhauser:Epizyme: Consultancy; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Salles:Morphosys: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Takeda: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Merck: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Honoraria; Epizyme: Honoraria; Acerta: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Ribrag:Servier, Pharmamar, Nanostring, Gilead, Infinity, BMS, MSD, Epizyme: Consultancy; ESAI: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Other: Travel, expenses, accommodation. McKay:Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria. Tilly:Astra-Zeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Johnson:Kite: Consultancy; Genmab: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Zenyaku Kogyo: Other: Travel, accommodations, expenses; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Eisai: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Travel, accommodations, expenses; Boeringher Ingelheim: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Dickinson:GSK: Consultancy. Opat:Roche, Celgene, Mundipharma, Janssen: Honoraria; Roche, Celgene, Mundipharma, Janssen: Consultancy. Jurczak:Gilead: Consultancy; Morphosys: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; European Medicines Agency: Consultancy; AstraZeneca/Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sandoz-Nowartis: Consultancy; Afimed: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Epizyme: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Nordic Nanovector: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy. Cartron:Gilead Sciences: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria. Zinzani:Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PFIZER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celltrion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Astra Zeneca: Speakers Bureau; Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; SERVIER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; TG Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PFIZER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Assouline:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Radford:BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Equity Ownership; AstraZeneca: Equity Ownership; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gribben:Novartis: Honoraria; Medical Research Council: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Cancer Research UK: Research Funding; Kite: Honoraria; NIH: Resea
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».