Back

A genotoxic antibody drug conjugate targeting CD276/B7H3 demonstrates efficacy across multiple biomarker defined classes of treatment refractory metastatic prostate cancer

Agarwal, S.; Fang, L.; McGowen, K.; Yin, J.; Bowman, J.; Ku, A. T.; Alilin, A. N.; Corey, E.; Roudier, M.; True, L.; Dumpit, R.; Coleman, I.; Lee, J.; Nelson, P. S.; Senatorov, I. S.; Capaldo, B. J.; Sowalsky, A. G.; Hurt, E. M.; Kelly, K.

2022-04-20 cancer biology
10.1101/2022.04.19.488784 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are promising targeted cancer therapy; however, patient selection based solely on target antigen expression without consideration for cytotoxic payload vulnerabilities has plateaued clinical benefits. Biomarkers to capture patients who might benefit from specific ADCs have not been systematically determined for any cancer. We present a comprehensive therapeutic and biomarker analysis of a B7H3-ADC with pyrrolobenzodiazepine(PBD) payload in 26 treatment-resistant, metastatic prostate cancer(mPC) models. B7H3 is a tumor-specific surface protein widely expressed in mPC, and PBD is a DNA cross-linking agent. B7H3 expression was necessary but not sufficient for B7H3-PBD-ADC responsiveness. RB1 deficiency and/or replication stress, characteristics of poor prognosis, conferred sensitivity and were associated with complete tumor regression in both neuroendocrine (NEPC) and androgen receptor positive(ARPC) prostate cancer models, even with low B7H3 levels. Non-ARPC models, which are currently lacking efficacious treatment, demonstrated the highest replication stress and were most sensitive to treatment. In RB1 wild-type ARPC tumors, SLFN11 expression or select DNA repair mutations in SLFN11 non-expressors governed response. Significantly, wild-type TP53 predicted non-responsiveness (7/8 models). Overall, biomarker-focused selection of models led to high efficacy of in vivo treatment. These data enable a paradigm shift to biomarker-driven trial designs for maximizing clinical benefit of ADC therapies.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
33 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
28.1%
2
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 22%
8.5%
3
Clinical Cancer Research
58 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.3%
4
Cell Reports Medicine
140 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.9%
5
Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer
64 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.4%
50% of probability mass above
6
Genome Medicine
154 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.1%
7
Journal of Clinical Investigation
164 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
8
Cancer Research Communications
46 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
9
Cancer Cell
38 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.7%
10
ACS Central Science
66 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.7%
11
Nature Cancer
35 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.5%
12
Cancer Research
116 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
13
Journal of the American Chemical Society
199 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
14
Molecular Therapy
71 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
15
Cell Reports
1338 papers in training set
Top 27%
1.4%
16
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 66%
1.2%
17
Neuro-Oncology
30 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
18
JCI Insight
241 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
19
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 39%
1.0%
20
Cancer Discovery
61 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
21
Oncogene
76 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
22
British Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
23
Brain
154 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
24
EBioMedicine
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
25
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
26
International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
27
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 69%
0.7%
28
Annals of Oncology
13 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
29
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 61%
0.7%
30
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 32%
0.7%