Several inhibitors of programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) have been approved as a form of immunotherapy for multiple cancers. Ionizing radiation therapy (RT) has been shown to enhance the priming and effector phases of the antitumor T-cell response rendering it an attractive therapy to combine with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Preclinical data support the rational combination of the 2 modalities and has paved way for the clinical development of the combination across a spectrum of cancers. In this review, we highlight the preclinical and clinical development of combined RT and PD-1/PD-L1 blockade to date. In addition to a comprehensive evaluation of available safety and efficacy data, we discuss important points of consideration in clinical trial design for this promising combination. Keywords: Radiation therapy, PD-1, PD-L1, Clinical trials, Preclinical, Antitumor, Immune response, Checkpoint inhibitor Background tumor response with associated regression of untreated Early preclinical evidence demonstrated that activation metastases outside of the radiation field has been of the programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and programmed reported and was first described as the abscopal effect death ligand 1 (PD-L1) axis suppressed the activation . Increasing evidence supports that the abscopal ef- and proliferation of tumor antigen-specific T-cells and fect is likely immune-mediated – largely, in a T-cell promoted tumorigenesis [1, 2]. These processes were dependent manner with a complex interplay between reversed with PD-1/PD-L1 blockade and supported proimmunogenic and proinflammatory factors [45–53]. the concept of PD-1/PD-L1 blockade as a potential Over time, recognition of the immunomodulatory prop- form of anti-cancer immunotherapy. The first agents erties of radiation has led to the integration of RT with in the family of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors to be ap- immune-modulating agents including immune check- proved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) point inhibitors to potentially develop a combination were the humanized monoclonal IgG4 antibodies, therapy with enhanced or synergistic anticancer activity pembrolizumab and nivolumab, that targeted PD-1 in (Fig. 1). unresectable or advanced melanoma [3–10]. There are Indeed, an initial preclinical study showed that com- currently 5 PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors approved by the bining RT (1–2 fractions of 12 Gray (Gy) to the primary FDA for the treatment of a number of solid tumors tumor) with an anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated and hematologic malignancies [11–43]. antigen-4 (CTLA-4) monoclonal antibody resulted in Ionizing radiation therapy (RT) is widely used in the synergistic antitumor activity in a poorly immunogenic definitive and metastatic setting for local tumor control; metastatic mammary carcinoma mouse model when however, the ability of radiation to elicit a systemic CTLA-4 blockade by itself was ineffective . Enhanced antitumor responses have also been observed across several preclinical animal models treated with * Correspondence: firstname.lastname@example.org combined RT and CTLA-4 blockade [55–58]. Since the Departments of Radiation Oncology and Biomedical Sciences, Samuel first preclinical studies that highlighted the synergistic Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8700 Beverly Blvd, AC 1023, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA antitumor activity of combination RT and CTLA-4 Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 2 of 17 Fig. 1 Proposed mechanisms of synergy between RT and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Emerging evidence demonstrates that immune modulation from PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors and RT through nonredundant pathways contributes to synergistic antitumor activity, thereby forming the basis for the rationale combination of the two modalities. RT, radiation therapy; PD-1, programmed cell death 1 receptor; PD-L1, programmed death ligand 1; IFN-γ, interferon-γ; cGAS, cyclic GMP-AMP (cGAMP) synthase; STING, stimulator of interferon genes; MHC, major histocompatibility complex; TCR, T-cell receptor; TILs, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, Tregs; regulatory T cells; MDSCs, myeloid-derived suppressor cells blockade, several prospective clinical trials have re- Preclinical studies ported on the activity of RT and ipilimumab in ad- The efficacy of combination RT and checkpoint blockade vanced solid tumors [59–66]. Similarly, there are is associated with modulation of immune parameters numerous ongoing clinical trials investigating the within the tumor microenvironment combination of RT and CTLA-4 blockade that have Early investigations in mouse models of solid and been extensively reviewed and are beyond the scope hematologic malignancies showed enhanced antitumor of this manuscript [67, 68]. Herein, we review in effects when treated with PD-1 or PD-L1 blockade in detail the preclinical and clinical development of the combination with in-field RT, sublethal total body combination of RT and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in can- irradiation (TBI), or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) cer therapy. compared to single modality treatment (Table 1)[69–85]. Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 3 of 17 Table 1 Preclinical studies demonstrating antitumor activity of combined radiation therapy and PD-1/PD-L1 blockade Cell line Experimental model RT dose PD-1/PD-L1 dose Ref. B16-D5 (melanoma) Mice subcutaneous TBI 600 cGy PD-L1 mAb 20 mg/kg IP starting on  (1 fraction) day 4 then every 3–4 days +1X10 gp100 or OVA pulsed dendritic 257–264 cell vaccine SC on day 4 and 11 ± 1X10 pmel T-cells (adoptive transfer) IV on day 4 after inoculation AT.3 (triple-negative Mice xenograft 12 Gy (1 fraction) or PD-1 mAb 100 μg + CD137 mAb [70, 71] mammary) 4–5 Gy (4 fractions) 100 μg IP on days 0, 4, 8, and 12 of RT GL261 (glioma) Mice xenograft 10 Gy (1 fraction) PD-1 mAb 10 mg/kg IP on days 10,  12, and 14 of RT B16-SIY (melanoma) TUBO Mice subcutaneous 25 Gy (2 fractions) PD-L1 mAb 200 μg IP every 3 days  (mammary) 15 Gy (1 fraction) for 4 doses starting 3 weeks after RT 5 T33 (myeloma) Mice intravenous TBI 500 cGy PD-L1 mAb 200 μg IP on days 12, 14,  A20 (B-cell lymphoma) (1 fraction) 17, 19, 21, 26, and 28 after C1498 (leukemia) inoculation 5 T33 (myeloma) Mice intravenous TBI 1100 cGy HSCT on day 0 + PD-L1 mAb 200 μg  (1 fraction) IP on days 3, 5, 10, 12, 17, and 19 after HSCT ± vaccine (irradiated 5 T33 cells or 5 T33 cells transfected with empty vectors) on days 3, 10, and 17 after HSCT 5 T33 (myeloma) Mice intravenous TBI 500 cGy PD-L1 mAb 200 μg IP on days 12, 14,  (1 fraction) 17, 19, 21, 26, and 28 after inoculation ± LAG-3, TIM-3, or CTLA- 4 mAbs 200 μg IP on same days V600E CT26 (colon 4434 (BRAF - Mice subcutaneous 10 Gy (5 fractions) PD-1 or PD-L1 mAb 10 mg/kg IP 3  mutant melanoma) times weekly up to 3 weeks starting 4 T1 (triple-negative on day 1 of RT mammary) TUBO (mammary) Mice subcutaneous 12 Gy (1 fraction) PD-L1 mAb 200 μg IP every 3 days  MC38 (colon for 4 doses starting on day 0 or 1 of RT TSA (mammary) Mice subcutaneous 24 Gy (3 fractions) PD-1 mAb (dose NR) starting on day  15 after inoculation and every 4 days thereafter B16-OVA (melanoma) Mice subcutaneous 15 Gy (1 fraction) PD-1 mAb 10 mg/kg ± CTLA-4 mAb  RENCA (renal) 10 mg/kg IP on days 7, 9, 11, 14, and 16 following tumor cell inoculation B16-OVA (melanoma) Mice subcutaneous 12 Gy (1 fraction) PD-1 mAb 200 μg IP every 3 days for  4 T1-HA (mammary) 3 doses starting 1 day prior to RT PyMT (mammary) Mice subcutaneous 12 Gy (1 fraction) PD-1 mAb dose NR + single dose of  CTLA-4 mAb (dose NR) 3 days prior to PD-1 and RT B16-F10 (melanoma) Mice subcutaneous 20 Gy (1 fraction) PD-L1 mAb 200 μg + CTLA-4 mAb  200 μg IP every 3 days for 3 doses starting 5 or 9 days after inoculation Meer (head and neck Mice subcutaneous 1, 6, 10 Gy fractions PD-L1 antibody dose NR  squamous) Adeno-Cre viral vector (lung) GEMM intrathoracic 8.5 Gy twice daily PD-1 mAb 200 μg IP 3 times weekly  injection over 2 days starting 6 h after second RT dose MB49 (bladder) Mice xenograft 12 Gy (1 fraction) PD-L1 mAb 250 μg IP twice weekly  for 4 doses starting 1 day prior to RT MC38 (colon Mice subcutaneous 24 Gy (3 fractions) PD-1 mAb ± CD137 mAb 5–10 mg/  4 T1 (mammary) B16F10-OVA kg IP on days 13, 15, and 17 after (melanoma) inoculation Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 4 of 17 Table 1 Preclinical studies demonstrating antitumor activity of combined radiation therapy and PD-1/PD-L1 blockade (Continued) Cell line Experimental model RT dose PD-1/PD-L1 dose Ref. 4-hydroxytamoxifen GEMM topical 14 Gy (1 fraction) PD-1 + CD137 or PD-1 + CTLA-4 mAb  induction (BRAF-mutant, induction 100 μg IP twice weekly for 4 doses PTEN-deficient melanoma) on day 1 of RT 344SQ (lung) Mice subcutaneous 36 Gy (3 fractions) PD-1 mAb 10 mg/kg IP starting on  day 1 of RT and continued for additional 3–4 doses ARK (esophageal squamous) Mice subcutaneous 20 Gy (10 fractions) PD-1 mAb (dose NR) starting 2 days  before RT and every 3 days thereafter ± carboplatin and paclitaxel IP (dose NR) on day 1 of RT and every 3 fractions GL261 (glioma) Mice xenograft 10 Gy (1 fraction) PD-1 mAb 200 μg IP on days 10, 12,  and 14 of RT ± TIM-3 mAb 250 μgIP days 7, 11, and 15 of RT V600E CT26 (colon 4434 (BRAF - Mice subcutaneous 10 Gy (5 fractions) PD-1 or PD-L1 mAb 10 mg/kg IP 3  mutant melanoma) times weekly for 1 week starting on day 1 of RT TSA (mammary) Mice subcutaneous 24 Gy (3 fractions) on PD-1 mAb 200 μg IP on days 12, 15,  days 12, 13 and 14 19, 22 and 26 after inoculation after inoculation Hep-55.1c (hepatocellular) Mice orthotopic 30 Gy (3 fractions) PD-1 mAb 250 μg IP on days 7, 14,  and 21 after inoculation KPC and Pan02 (pancreatic) Mice subcutaneous 6, 12, or 20 Gy PD-L1 mAb 10 mg/kg IP on days 4,  (1 fraction) 7, 10, and 13 after inoculation + 10 Gy (5 fractions) gemcitabine 100 mg/kg IP on days 0 15 Gy (5 fractions) and 3 of inoculation HCa-1 (hepatocellular) Mice intramuscular 10 Gy (1 fraction) PD-L1 mAb 10 mg/kg IP every  3 days for 4 doses starting on day 1 of RT LM8 (osteosarcoma) Mice subcutaneous 10 Gy (1 fraction) PD-L1 mAb 150 μg + CTLA-4 mAb  150 μg IP every 3 days for 3 doses starting on days 9, 12, and 15 after inoculation CT26 (colon Mice intradermal RFA 17-gauge single PD-1 mAb 200 μg IP every 3 days for  ablation electrode for 4 doses 3.5–4.5 min at target temperature of 70 degrees C RT radiation therapy, TBI total body irradiation, cGy centigray mAb monoclonal antibody, IP intraperitoneal, SC subcutaneous, IV intravenous, Gy Gray, HSCT hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, LAG-3 lymphocyte-activation gene 3, TIM-3 T-cell immunoglobulin mucin-3, NR not reported, GEMM genetically engineered mouse model, RFA radiofrequency ablation Combined modality therapy was associated with higher Combination modality-induced immune profile changes levels of CD8+/interferon-γ (IFNγ)+/tumor necrosis may be time-dependent factor-α (TNFα) + cytotoxic T-cells, increased PD-1, T-cell Early syngeneic mouse tumor models demonstrating immunoglobulin mucin-3 (TIM-3), lymphocyte-activation significant improvements in survival and tumor volume gene 3 (LAG-3), and 2B4 (immune checkpoints) expres- reduction with the combination of RT and PD-1 or sion on CD8+ T-cells, decreased numbers of CD4 PD-L1 blockade compared to single modality and con- +/FOXP3+ regulatory T-cells (Tregs) and myeloid-derived trol arms identified elevations in tumor cell PD-L1 ex- suppressor cells (MDSCs), upregulation of PD-L1 on pression that were CD8+ T-cell and IFNγ-dependent dendritic cells and tumor cells in irradiated tumors, following irradiation (10 Gy over 5 daily fractions) com- RT-induced upregulation of major histocompatibility pared to non-irradiated mice with peak levels occurring complex (MHC) class I tumor-associated antigen 72 h after last dose of RT . RT-induced increases in complexes, and enhanced antigen cross-presentation in the CD8+/Treg ratio and PD-L1 expression occurred draining lymph nodes compared to single modality 24–96 h post-RT in a separate mouse model . In arms [71, 72, 74, 76–79]. colon carcinoma tumors, the addition of PD-L1 Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 5 of 17 blockade on day 1 of RT (schedule A), day 5 of RT cell-intrinsic activation of the type I IFN pathway as medi- (schedule B), or 7 days after RT (schedule C) showed ated by cyclic GMP-AMP (cGAMP) synthase (cGAS) and that there was no significant difference in overall sur- stimulator of interferon genes (STING) signaling . vival (OS) between schedule A and B (p > 0.05) though RT-induced abscopal responses with PD-1 blockade were sequential therapy (schedule C) was ineffective in enhan- additionally shown to be regulated by Trex1 where induc- cing OS compared to RT alone (median OS 30 days vs. tion of Trex1 expression in cancer cells resulted in loss of 35 days, p > 0.05) . Notably, PD-1 expression was sig- abscopal responses in mice treated with the combination. nificantly decreased on CD8+ T-cells 7 days after RT compared to time-matched controls (p < 0.05). Combined modality therapy reverses T-cell exhaustion Abscopal effects and systemic immunity and resistance to RT and anti-PD-1 therapy On subcutaneous tumor flank rechallenge of Murine tumor xenografts have shown that increasing treatment-naïve mice and mice cured by combination levels of PD-1 and TIM-3 co-expression in CD4+ RT and checkpoint blockade, immunologic memory was T-cells, CD8+ T-cells, and Tregs over time contribute to established in cured mice but not in treatment-naïve an exhausted or impaired T-cell phenotype . mice suggesting that the immune system in cured mice Furthermore, resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy in retained the ability to recognize tumor-associated RT-refractory tumors has been characterized by signifi- antigens and mount an immune response of greater cant elevations in expression of genes associated with magnitude and speed upon rechallenge, i.e., systemic im- T-cell exhaustion, increased levels of checkpoints includ- munity [71, 72]. Abscopal effects have been shown to be ing LAG-3, TIM3, and CTLA-4 on CD4+ T-cells, and mediated, in part, by PD-1 as administration of a single decreased number of CD11c + tumor-associated macro- fraction of 15 Gy by stereotactic ablative radiotherapy phages (TAMs) . The addition of immune check- (SABR) to the primary tumor in a melanoma subcutane- point inhibitors to RT has been shown to enhance ous mouse model resulted in significant reduction in tumor response compared to controls across several tumor volumes of secondary nonirradiated tumors in mouse tumor models through reinvigoration of PD-1-knockout mice compared to PD-1-wild-type (WT) exhausted CD8+ TILs characterized by increased Ki67+ mice . Addition of a PD-1 inhibitor to SABR resulted GzmB+ T-cells within the exhausted PD-1+ Eomes+ in synergistic antitumor activity on the primary tumor T-cell pool, increased CD8+ CD44+ TILs, and increased compared to PD-1 inhibitor or SABR alone and recapit- CD8+/Treg ratio [61, 77, 85]. ulated abscopal effects on secondary nonirradiated tu- Moreover, an anti-PD-1-resistant murine lung cancer mors in PD-1-WT mice when treatment alone with model established through sequential in vivo passage of anti-PD-1 or SABR did not reduce secondary tumor nonresponsive tumors to ongoing anti-PD-1 therapy was growth. Furthermore, following RT, higher levels of characterized by significant downregulation of MHC high PD-1+ CD11a CD8+ T-cells were seen in primary tu- class I and II genes including β2-microglobulin and mors compared to secondary tumors and higher levels reduction in CD4+/CD8+ TILs and IFN-γ production in in irradiated compared to nonirradiated tumors; this resistant tumors compared to parental tumors . population of cells appeared to comprise the principal Addition of RT induced IFN-γ production and MHC tumor-specific reactive phenotype. This latter finding class I expression and ultimately restored response to has been confirmed in another study where RT in- PD-1 blockade in resistant tumors. Addition of a PD-L1 creased T-cell receptor (TCR) repertoire clonality and inhibitor has been shown to reverse RT-induced tumor diversity of the TCR repertoire in irradiated tumors equilibrium in favor of tumor regression in mice sub- compared to controls, however, the addition of PD-1 in- cutaneously injected with melanoma and breast tumors hibition to RT increased TCR diversity both in irradiated demonstrating RT-induced stable disease (SD, defined as and out-of-field sites . Further analysis revealed that ≥3 weeks) characterized by a transient rise and fall in most of these TCR clones arose from progenitor clones levels of tumor-infiltrating CD8+ T-cells and IFNγ . that were established in tumors prior to therapy, and it Extrinsic RT resistance has been recently shown to be is the influx of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) contributed by RT-induced host STING activation from outside the tumor along with resident-tumor resulting in immunosuppressive MDSC recruitment that infiltrating T-cells that contribute to the enhanced is mediated by chemokine receptor type 2 (CCR2) in a tumor responses seen with combination therapy. syngeneic mouse model of colon carcinoma . Treat- Recently, durable regression of irradiated tumors and ment with anti-CCR2 antibodies could potentially serve abscopal responses observed in mammary tumor-bearing a role in reversing RT resistance by attenuating host mouse models treated with combination RT and check- STING-mediated immunosuppression and complement point blockade were shown to be dependent on cancer RT and checkpoint blockade combinations. Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 6 of 17 A growing body of preclinical evidence supports the or after PD-1 blockade produced 6- and 12-month combination of other immunotherapeutic agents with median OS rates of 85 and 78%, respectively . One RT or radiofrequency ablation (RFA), immune check- retrospective study investigated 53 patients with meta- point blockade, and/or chemotherapy to enhance static melanoma treated with RT sequential or concur- tumor growth control (and often systemic control)in rent to anti-PD-1 therapy or as salvage therapy in the preclinical mouse models; synergistic antitumor activ- setting of progression on anti-PD-1 therapy (35 patients ity with multimodality therapy was characterized by received extracranial RT or intracranial SRS and 21 pa- tumor cell PD-L1 expression in a JAK/Stat1-depen- tients received whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT)) and dent manner and reduced numbers of CD11b + Gr1+ showed that median OS and ORR were not significantly cells (MDSCs) [90, 94–99]. different between concurrent and sequential RT/SRS cohorts (Table 2). Toxicities A single-institute retrospective trial analyzed the effi- Several preclinical studies have investigated the toxicity cacy of concurrent SRS and anti-PD-1 or anti-CTLA-4 of combined RT and checkpoint blockade. Notably, one therapy (defined as SRS within 4 weeks of administration investigation of lung-irradiated (20 Gy) C57bl/6-WT of checkpoint inhibitors) in 75 patients with melanoma mice receiving anti-PD-1 antibody (10 mg/kg intraperi- brain metastases and identified significantly improved toneal twice per week for 5 doses) showed more findings median percent reduction in lesion volume with concur- of abnormal alveoli, inflammatory changes, and exudates rent compared to nonconcurrent arms and with in the alveolar septa associated with a 2.1-fold increase anti-PD-1 compared to anti-CTLA-4 arms at 3 months in CD8+ T-cells in the irradiated lung tissues of mice in and 6 months . However, when both anti-PD-1 and the RT and PD-1 blockade arm though post-RT mortal- anti-CTLA-4 therapies were combined there was no sig- ity up to 120 days was not significantly different in the nificant difference in median OS between nonconcurrent RT alone vs. RT and PD-1 blockade arm (p = 0.657) (9.0 months, range 2.1–61.8) and concurrent arms . A separate study, however, using a similar dose of (19.1 months, range 2.7–64.2, p = 0.0691). In solely 20 Gy of thoracic RT (designed to induce mortality) to metastatic NSCLC patients (n = 21), combined RT to oli- C57bl/6 mice identified worse survival with RT and goprogressive sites along with PD-1/PD-L1 blockade or PD-1 blockade (36% survived) than RT alone (70% other immune therapies resulted in excellent local con- survived, p = 0.0169) at 21 days post-RT and increased trol, median time to systemic progression of 2.3 months T-cell infiltrates in lung and cardiac tissues (both in- (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0–4.5), and median OS and out-of-field) of mice treated with RT and PD-1 of 7.2 months (95% CI 4.2–11.1) . Among 25 pa- blockade compared to RT alone putatively due to tients with unresectable melanoma, abscopal responses enhanced healthy tissue damage by T-cell activation with (CR or PR) were observed in 56% of patients with the the addition of PD-1 blockade to thoracic RT . addition of late RT (> 3 months of insufficient response Incorporating PD-1 blockade to cardiac RT in mice to anti-PD-1 monotherapy) . has also shown to decrease survival and exacerbate A group of 137 patients with metastatic melanoma, cardiac dysfunction and myocarditis that are CD8+ NSCLC, and RCC treated with WBRT, SRS, or extracra- T-cell-mediated . nial RT before or after initiation of PD-1 blockade expe- rienced a median OS 249 days (8 months; interquartile Clinical studies range (IQR) 90–689) following the start of anti-PD-1 Retrospective studies therapy though OS was 25.7 months in the cohort re- Numerous case reports and case series have documented ceiving brain RT as first form of palliative RT . On clinically significant, and often durable, tumor responses multivariate analysis, melanoma patients fared best as to the combination of RT and PD-1/PD-L1 blockade in the hazard ratio (HR) for death was 3.1 (95% CI 1.7–5.9) advanced or metastatic melanoma, NSCLC, Hodgkin for NSCLC and HR of 3.2 (95% CI 1.2–7.9) for RCC lymphoma, RCC, and cervical cancer [103–112]. Initial compared to melanoma (p = 0.0008) possibly due to im- retrospective series of patients with melanoma brain proved responses to checkpoint inhibitors in melanoma metastases treated with SRS or fractionated RT within with the incorporation of both PD-1 and CTLA-4 inhib- 3–6 months of receiving anti-PD-1 therapy produced itors into standard care. promising 1-year OS rates and significantly improved 6- A secondary analysis of the phase I KEYNOTE-001 and 12-month distant brain metastasis control and OS trial of 98 patients with locally advanced or metastatic rates in those treated with SRS and anti-PD-1 therapy NSCLC treated with pembrolizumab showed signifi- vs. SRS and chemotherapy (Table 2)[113, 114]. In 24 cantly improved median OS of 10.7 months (95% CI patients with brain metastases from melanoma (54%) 6.5–18.9) vs. 5.3 months (95% CI 2.7–7.7, HR 0.58, 95% and NSCLC (46%), treatment with SRS before, during, CI 0.36–0.94, p = 0.026) in those who ever did and did Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 7 of 17 Table 2 Retrospective clinical studies with available results on the antitumor activity of combined radiation therapy and PD-1/PD-L1 blockade Study n Design Outcomes Toxicities Ref. RS 26 Melanoma BMs treated with SRS or Median OS 11.8 mo (range 0.5–33.9) 1 grade 2 headache relieved with  FSRT (16–30 Gy X 1–5 fractions) and 1-year OS 55% in unresected steroids within 6 mo of nivolumab (1, 3, or BMs; median OS not reached and 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks for 12 1-year OS 100% in resected BMs doses then every 12 weeks for 8 doses) RS 96 Melanoma BMs treated with SRS 6- and 12-mo distant BM control rate For anti-PD-1 therapy: 1 grade 2  (majority 24 Gy X 1 fraction) within 3 61%/38% anti-PD-1, 26%/21% headache managed with steroids mo of nivolumab 3 mg/kg every anti-CTLA-4, 53%/20% BRAF/MEK 2 weeks, pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg inhibitor, 15%/5% chemotherapy every 3 weeks, or other systemic (p = 0.008); 6- and 12-mo OS 81%/ therapies 66% anti-PD-1, 84%/50% anti-CTLA-4, 83%/75% BRAF/MEK inhibitor, 70%/15% chemotherapy (p = 0.004) RS 24 Melanoma and NSCLC BMs treated 6- and 12-mo OS 85 and 78%; 2 patients grade ≥ 3 CNS toxicity: 1  with SRS (median 20 Gy/fraction, IQR median OS not reached; 6- and seizure and 1 symptomatic 16–21) within median 19 weeks 12-mo distant brain progression rate radionecrosis requiring surgery (range 0–107) of nivolumab or 37 and 65% pembrolizumab (median 5 cycles, IQR 3–6) RS 53 Metastatic melanoma treated with Medians OS 6.4 vs. 8.6 mo For RT arm: 3 patients grade ≥ 3  extracranial RT/intracranial SRS (8– (p = 0.7672) for concurrent vs. rash, 1 grade ≥ 3 diarrhea, 2 grade ≥ 30 Gy X 1–10 fractions) or WBRT sequential RT/SRS; ORR 31% vs. 36% 3 radiation dermatitis, 1 grade ≥ 3 (median 30 Gy X10 fractions) and (p = 1) for concurrent vs. sequential radionecrosis; for WBRT arm: 1 pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg every RT/SRS; lesional response rate 45% grade ≥ 3 nausea, 1 grade ≥ 3 3 weeks or nivolumab 3 mg/kg for 30 progressing lesions treated cognitive changes, 2 grade ≥ 3 rash every 2 weeks as concurrent, with salvage RT/SRS sequential, or salvage (following progression on anti-PD-1 therapy) therapy RS 75 Melanoma BMs treated with SRS Median % lesion volume reduction NR  (median 20 Gy, range 12–24 Gy) at 3 mo (− 83.0% vs. -52.8%, within ±4 weeks (concurrent) of p < 0.0001) and 6 mo (− 94.9% vs. pembrolizumab 2 or 10 mg/kg every -66.2%, p < 0.0001) for concurrent vs. 2–3 weeks or nivolumab 3 mg/kg noncurrent; median % lesion volume every 2–3 weeks or ipilimumab reduction at 3 mo (− 89.3% vs. -66.2%, p < 0.0001) and 6 mo (− 95.1% vs. -75.9%, p = 0.0004) for anti-PD-1 vs. anti-CTLA-4 RS 21 Metastatic NSCLC treated with RT 6- and 12-mo local control rates 91.7 1 grade 4 cerebral edema (WBRT)  (8–30 Gy X 1–10 fractions) while and 85.2%; median time to systemic and 1 grade 3 pneumonitis receiving anti-PD-1, anti-PD-L1, progression 2.3 mo (95% CI 1.0–4.5); and/or anti-CTLA-4, or other immune median OS 7.2 mo (95% CI 4.2–11.1) therapy RS 25 Unresectable melanoma treated with CR, PR, SD, and PD rates for radiated No unusual AEs reported  hypofractionated RT (1 weekly sites 24, 8, 44, and 28% and for fraction over 4–5 weeks (84%) or 1 nonirradiated sites 29, 19, 19, and gammaknife RT for BMs (16%)) 33%, respectively; abscopal within 3 mo of anti-PD-1 (early) or > responses (CR or PR) in 56% for 3 mo after anti-PD-1 therapy (late) addition of late RT RS 15 Metastatic melanoma, RCC, NSCLC Safety analysis All-grade immune-related AEs in 3  treated with palliative RT (total patients (20%) and 1 RT-related AE 8–36 Gy via 3–8 Gy fractions) (7%) of moderate mucositis; no cases within ±75 days of PD-1 inhibitor of pneumonitis RS 84 Metastatic melanoma, NSCLC, and No significant differences in toxicity For all-grade AEs: 6 patients with  other solid tumors treated with rates between PD-1/PD-L1 and pneumonitis (7.2%, 1 grade ≥ 3); for thoracic RT (median total dose CTLA-4 inhibitors or concurrent and grade ≥ 2 AEs: 14 fatigue, 9 rash, 10 3000 cGy (range 600–7400 X 10 sequential treatment GI toxicities, 12 infections, 8 thyroid fractions) within 1 month dysfunction, 7 renal injury, and 9 (concurrent) or up 6 months other (sequential) of PD-1/PD-L1 and/or CTLA-4 blockade Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 8 of 17 Table 2 Retrospective clinical studies with available results on the antitumor activity of combined radiation therapy and PD-1/PD-L1 blockade (Continued) Study n Design Outcomes Toxicities Ref. RS 29 Metastatic NSCLC treated with Median PFS and OS of 3.8 mo (95% Possible treatment-related AEs: 1  thoracic RT (10–70 Gy X 1–35 CI 1.9–8) and 9.2 mo (95% CI 5.1-not grade 5 pneumonitis and 2 grade 3 fractions) within 6 mo of PD-1/PD-L1 reached) pneumonitis and/or CTLA-4 blockade RS 133 Metastatic NSCLC, melanoma, and No significant difference in immune- All-grade immune-related AEs: 20%  RCC treated with palliative RT related AEs between those receiving dermatitis, 8% colitis, 5% transaminitis; (8–37.5 Gy X 1–15 fractions) within RT during/after checkpoint inhibitors grade ≥ 3 immune-related AEs: 4% 180 days of PD-1 or CTLA-4 inhibitor and before checkpoint inhibitors colitis, 2% transaminitis, 2% (p = 0.053), receiving RT within hypophysitis 14 days or outside 14 days of checkpoint blockade (p = 0.06), and of site of irradiation RS 137 Metastatic NSCLC, melanoma, and Median OS 249 days (IQR 90–689) No grade 4–5 immune-related AEs  RCC treated with WBRT (12–39 Gy), following PD-1 blockade; on SRS (15–30 Gy), or extracranial RT multivariate analysis HR for death 3.1 (8–66 Gy) within a median 85 days (95% CI 1.7–5.9) for NSCLC and HR (IQR 34–181) of anti-PD-1 therapy 3.2 (95% CI 1.2–7.9) for RCC vs. melanoma (p = 0.0008) RS 17 NSCLC BMs treated with SRS or FSRT Distant brain control rate 57% No neurologic/ cutaneous AEs with  (18–25 Gy X 1–5 fractions) within ±6 (RT during or before PD-1/PD-L1 SRS and anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy mo of nivolumab or durvalumab blockade) vs. 0% (RT after, p = 0.05); (41% received prophylactic median OS for SRS during/before dexamethasone before SRS); 1 PD-1/PD-L1 blockade vs. SRS after patient each discontinued (HR 3.6, 95% CI 0.74–26.9, p = 0.11) PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor due to colitis on multivariate analysis and pneumonitis RS 137 Melanoma BMs treated with SRS or Median OS 16.9 mo; for See outcomes  WBRT (median 20 Gy, range 12–30) radionecrosis: 37 patients (27%); within 1 year of PD-1 or CTLA-4 no difference in risk between blockade ipilimumab and pembrolizumab (p = 0.549) or CTLA-4 and PD-1 (p = 0.86); 1-year OS 78.4% vs. 55.06% (without radionecrosis, p = 0.341) RS 98 Advanced NSCLC treated with Any previous RT vs. no previous RT: All-grade treatment-related pulmon-  palliative RT any time point before median PFS 4.4 mo (95% CI 2.1–8.6) ary toxicity in 3 patients (13%, with (median 9.5 mo, range 1–106) first vs. 2.1 mo (95% CI 1.6–2.3, HR 0.56, RT) vs. 1 (1% without RT, p = 0.046); cycle of pembrolizumab 2 or 95% CI 0.34–0.91, p = 0.019); median grade ≥ 3 treatment-related 10 mg/kg every 2–3 weeks OS 10.7 mo (95% CI 6.5–18.9) vs. 5.3 pulmonary toxicity similar in both mo (95% CI 2.7–7.7, HR 0.58, 95% CI arms (1 each, p = 0.44) 0.36–0.94, p = 0.026) RS 108 Melanoma BMs treated with SRS In combination with RT: median OS 2 radiation necrosis (SRS + anti-PD-1)  and/or WBRT (dose NR) within 7.5 mo with CTLA-4 (95% CI 4.4– treated with surgery, steroids, and ±6 weeks of various systemic 15.6), 20.4 mo PD-1 (95% CI 8.8-NA), bevacizumab therapies and 17.8 mo BRAF ± MEK inhibitor (95% CI 11.8-NA) RS retrospective study, BMs brain metastases, SRS stereotactic radiosurgery, FSRT fractionated stereotactic RT, Gy Gray, OS overall survival, NSCLC non-small cell lung cancer, IQR interquartile range, CNS central nervous system, RT radiotherapy, WBRT whole brain radiation therapy, ORR overall response rate, NR not reported, CI confidence interval, CR complete response, PR partial response, SD stable disease, PD progressive disease, AEs adverse events, RCC renal cell carcinoma, GI gastrointestinal, HR hazard ratio, PFS progression-free survival, NA not applicable not receive RT, respectively . In spite of these inter- Safety analyses esting clinical results, no data are provided on the type, Retrospective safety analyses in patients with ad- dose, schedule of radiotherapy or the tumor burden of vanced solid tumors receiving RT and PD-1/PD-L1 patients receiving therapy making the results hard to in- and/or CTLA-4 blockade have generally not demon- terpret. Interestingly, one retrospective series of 108 pa- strated increased risk of toxicity with the combination tients with melanoma brain metastases treated with SRS beyond those expected with each modality independ- and/or WBRT concurrently with various contemporary ently [123, 124]. There were no significant differences systemic therapies highlighted that RT in combination in toxicity rates between choice of PD-1/PD-L1 and with anti-PD-1 therapy produced among the best OS in CTLA-4 inhibitor or concurrent and sequential treat- the cohort without clinically significant increases in ment with RT . However, another series of 29 neurotoxicity . metastatic NSCLC patients given thoracic RT and Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 9 of 17 PD-1/PD-L1 and/or CTLA-4 inhibitors identified 1 assessment at all irradiated sites and the best ORR was case of possibly treatment-related grade 5 pneumonitis in 44% (4 patients with partial responses (PRs)) by World a patient who received 20 Gy over 5 fractions of thoracic Health Organization (WHO) criteria (Table 3). A phase RT initiated 1 month after the last dose of anti-PD-1 ther- I/II study investigated the safety and efficacy of concur- apy . Interestingly, case reports have documented the rent local palliative RT and durvalumab (PD-L1 inhibi- existence of PD-1 inhibitor-induced radiation recall pneu- tor) in 10 patients with unresectable or metastatic monitis even after 2 years of RT . advanced solid tumors . When RT (to 15 localized A multicenter safety analysis demonstrated no signifi- lesions) was given a median of 8.5 days (range 1–35) cant differences in immune-related AEs regardless of site from the last dose of durvalumab, the combination was of irradiation, between those receiving RT during/after generally tolerated with no grade ≥ 3 RT-related AEs checkpoint inhibitors and before checkpoint inhibitors (Table 3). The 1-year OS and progression-free survival (p = 0.053), and between those receiving RT within 14 days (PFS) rates were 44% (95% CI 12–77) and 30% (95% CI or outside 14 days of checkpoint blockade (p =0.06) . 2–58), respectively. One retrospective series demonstrated that brain RT and Preliminary results from a phase I dose-finding study PD-1/PD-L1 blockade was relatively well-tolerated in pa- of stereotactic body RT (SBRT; 8 Gy X 1 or 5 Gy X 5) tients with NSCLC brain metastases as toxicity rates were and durvalumab or the CTLA-4 inhibitor tremelimumab consistent with those seen with checkpoint inhibitors (or combination of all 3) was administered as alone . Interestingly, the distant brain control (out-- second-line therapy to 24 metastatic pancreatic adeno- of-field) rate for RT during/before PD-1/PD-L1 blockade carcinoma patients. No DLTs have been observed so far was 57% compared to 0% (RT after, p = 0.05). Another . The best response was SD in 5 patients (21%) with retrospective series of 137 patients with melanoma brain rapid progression within 4 weeks in an additional 5 pa- metastases identified 37 patients (27%) who developed tients. A phase II trial involving locally advanced NSCLC radionecrosis following SRS or WBRT and anti-CTLA-4 patients recently reported preliminary results from part I or anti-PD-1 therapy with a median time of onset of of the study . Out of 10 enrolled patients, 7 have 6months (range1.3–31.4 months), which is comparable received atezolizumab added to consolidation carbopla- to rates seen in other series though prospective studies are tin and paclitaxel following weekly carboplatin/paclitaxel limited [129–132]. Notably, 1-year OS did not signifi- and RT and 2 patients have demonstrated PD after 6 and cantly differ between those that developed radionecro- 8 doses of the PD-L1 inhibitor. Given the safety and sis vs. those without (Table 2). However, risk of tolerability of patients in part I, criteria were met for ad- radionecrosis was significantly associated with concur- vancement to part II of the study where atezolizumab rent use of chemotherapy within 6 months of SRS will be added to the chemoradiation portion followed by (HR 2.20, 95% CI 1.22–3.97, p = 0.009) and increased consolidation atezolizumab, carboplatin, and paclitaxel. number of lesions treated (HR 1.09, 95% CI 1.03– Recently, the PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab was granted 1.15, p = 0.002). The lack of significant difference in FDA approval based on superior PFS but similar safety OS between presence and absence of radionecrosis compared to placebo following platinum-based chemo- conflicts with the results of other studies though the radiation in locally advanced, unresectable NSCLC in number of patients treated with brain RT and PD-1 the phase III PACIFIC trial . Patients who did not blockade were likely much smaller [130, 133]. demonstrate PD after ≥2 cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy concurrent with definitive RT were ad- Prospective studies ministered durvalumab or placebo within 1–42 days for A combined preclinical and phase I study was among the up to 1 year (Table 3). Improved outcomes were ob- first to provide preliminary results for the efficacy of com- served in the experimental arm irrespective of PD-L1 bined RT and checkpoint blockade in the prospective set- status or histology. ting . In the phase I dose-finding cohort of 5 patients given local RT for mixed response or asymptomatic pro- Discussion gression to atezolizumab, dual RT and anti-PD-L1 therapy Elucidated mechanisms underlying the immune stimula- was well-tolerated without any dose-limiting toxicities tory properties of RT are growing in complexity (Fig. 1). (DLTs) or severe immune-mediated AEs and all 5 patients The CD8+ T-cell remains a crucial component in the experienced at least SD (Table 3). ability of RT to elicit an antitumor immune response In another phase I trial, 9 patients with advanced mel- within and beyond the radiation field . In addition, anoma received RT during induction, between induction evidence is mounting to support that RT specifically and maintenance, or during maintenance therapy with upregulates MHC tumor-associated antigen complexes, ipilimumab and/or nivolumab . Combined RT and enhances tumor antigen cross-presentation in draining checkpoint inhibition resulted in SD or response by first lymph nodes, and increases T-cell infiltration into Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 10 of 17 Table 3 Prospective clinical studies with available results on the antitumor activity of combined radiation therapy and PD-1/PD-L1 blockade Study n Design Outcomes Toxicities Ref. Phase I 4 solid tumors, 1 Atezolizumab 0.01–20 mg/kg Stabilization of systemic Transient grade 1–2  hematologic every 3 weeks (dose-finding progression in all 5 patients inflammatory AEs (fevers, malignancy cohort) + local fractionated RT (PR at systemic site in 1 flu-like symptoms) observed (dose NR) for mixed responses or patient) but no DLTs or serious asymptomatic PD immune-related AEs Phase I 9 advanced Nivolumab 0.3–10 mg/kg every ORR 44% (4 PRs) as best 5 patients with non-  melanoma 3 weeks X 21 weeks (induction) response by WHO criteria; laboratory grade ≥ 3 AEs, 2 then every 12 weeks X 84 weeks median OS 27 mo; 1- and RT-related grade ≥ 3 AEs (maintenance) ± ipilimumab 3 or 2-year OS rates of 89 and (intracranial hemorrhage, 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks X 78%, respectively diarrhea) 9 weeks (induction) then every 12 weeks X 84 weeks (maintenance) or combined nivolumab 1 mg/kg and ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks X 12 weeks then nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks up to 96 weeks + RT (median 30 Gy X 5 fractions, range 21–37.5 Gy X 1–15 fractions) during induction or maintenance Phase I/II 10 unresectable or Durvalumab 10 mg/kg every In-field ORR 60% (2/10 CRs, 5 cases of (50%) RT-related  metastatic solid 2 weeks + local RT (median 20 Gy, 4/10 PRs); median OS 11.5 grade 2 AEs (3 mucositis, tumors (≥5% PD-L1 range 6–33 X median 5 fractions, mo (95% CI 8.8–13.7); median 1 diarrhea, 1 vomiting) expression) range 1–10) given a median of PSF 6.2 months (95% CI 8.5days (range1–35) of last dose 4.5–12.4); out-of-field 10/14 of durvalumab SD, no responses or abscopal effects were seen Phase I 24 metastatic SBRT (8 Gy X 1 fraction or 25 Gy SD as best ORR in 5 patients No DLTs observed; most  pancreatic X 25 fractions) + durvalumab (21%) common AE was grade 1–2 adenocarcinoma (dose NR) every 2 weeks or fatigue at dose level 2 tremelimumab (dose NR) every 4 weeks X 6 doses then every 12 weeks for 3 doses or triple therapy Phase II 10 locally advanced Weekly carboplatin (AUC 2) and Out of 7 patients receiving 3 patients with potential  NSCLC weekly paclitaxel 50 mg/m +RT atezolizumab, 2 patients immune-related AEs (1 grade 5 days/week for 6–7 weeks developed PD after 6 and 8 3 arthralgia, 1 grade 2 (60–66 Gy over 30–33 fractions) doses of atezolizumab pneumonitis resolved with followed by atezolizumab steroids, 1 grade 3 dyspnea) 1200 mg every 3 weeks + consolidation carboplatin (AUC 6) and paclitaxel 200 mg/m on days 1 and 22 for 2 cycles then atezolizumab alone up to 1 year Phase III 709 stage III, locally 2 or more cycles of platinum- Median PFS 16.8 months Grade 3–4 AEs 29.9% vs.  advanced, based chemotherapy (defined by (95% CI 13.0–18.1) vs. 26.1% (placebo); most unresectable NSCLC local practice) + concurrent 5.6 months (95% CI 4.6–7.8) common grade 3–4 AEs definitive RT (54–66 Gy with with placebo (HR 0.52, 95% CI pneumonia (4.4% vs. 3.8%), mean dose to the lung < 20 Gy 0.42–0.65, p <0.001); median pneumonitis (3.4% vs. 2.6%), or volume of lung parenchyma TTD or distant metastasis and anemia (2.9% vs. 3.4%) in receiving ≥20 Gy < 35%) 23.2 months (95% CI 23.2-NE) durvalumab vs. placebo arms followed by (within 1–42 days) vs. 14.6 months (95% CI durvalumab 10 mg/kg every 10.6–18.6) with placebo 2 weeks up to 1 year or placebo (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.39–0.69, if no PD during chemoradiation p < 0.001); ORR 28.4% vs. 16.0% with placebo (p <0.001) RT radiation therapy, NR not reported, PD progressive disease, PR partial response, DLT dose-limiting toxicity, AEs adverse events, Gy Gray, ORR overall response rate, PR partial response, WHO World Health Organization, CI confidence interval, SD stable disease, SBRT stereotactic body radiation therapy, NSCLC non-small cell lung cancer, AUC area under curve, CR complete response, PFS progression-free survival, HR hazard ratio, TTD time to death, NE not estimable or reached Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 11 of 17 tumors [79, 141]. Local RT appears necessary in eliciting Several points of consideration remain that could po- abscopal effects, but RT alone remains insufficient in tentially impact the rational combination of RT and complete eradication of local and distant tumors likely, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors and their efficacy. Firstly, im- in part, due to activation of negative T-cell regulatory munogenic cell death has been shown to be induced by pathways including the PD-1/PD-L1 axis and immune RT in a dose-dependent manner in vitro . In other checkpoints such as CTLA-4 [76, 86, 87]. However, RT preclinical studies, increasing radiation doses (single has been shown to upregulate expression of PD-1 and fractions above 7.5 Gy but not 5 Gy) were immunosti- PD-L1 on immune and tumor cells rendering it an at- mulatory, associated with elevated IFN-γ production, tractive modality to combine with PD-1/PD-L1 blockade and prevented increases in Tregs . At higher doses [71, 76, 78, 79, 86, 97]. Activation of cGAS-STING sig- (single fractions ≥15 Gy), dose-dependent increases in naling has also been recognized to mediate systemic Tregs were observed and associated with no improve- tumor rejection by combined RT and checkpoint block- ment in antitumor immune responses. Fractionation of ade given that knockdown of cGAS and STING in can- the 15 Gy generally resulted in superior immune re- cer cells abrogated priming of CD8+ T-cells in sponses compared to single-fraction 15 Gy. In a seminal tumor-draining sites and infiltration of abscopal tumors study of 2 preclinical mouse carcinoma models, evalu- by CD8+ T-cells . ation of RT (20 Gy X 1, 8 Gy X 3, or 6 Gy X 5 fractions In efforts to characterize the synergistic antitumor ac- over consecutive days) in combination with an tivity of combined RT and PD-1/PD-L1 blockade, nu- anti-CTLA-4 antibody determined that fractionated RT merous studies have identified significant elevations in but not single-dose RT achieved significantly enhanced CD8+ IFNγ+ TNFα+ T-cells but decreases in CD4+ tumor responses both within and outside the radiation FOXP3+ Tregs leading to an increased CD8+/Treg ratio, field (abscopal effects) when combined with CTLA-4 increases in tumor-antigen specific CD8+ TILs with a blockade . It has been further corroborated that frac- CD44+ effector memory phenotype, decreases in im- tionated RT (8 Gy X 3) with checkpoint blockade was munosuppressive MDSCs, reinvigoration of CD8+ TILs able to elicit abscopal effects whereas checkpoint block- with an exhausted phenotype, and increases in TCR rep- ade with RT doses ≥20 Gy single dose were character- ertoire clonality and diversity of the TCR repertoire in ir- ized by complete loss of abscopal responses through radiated and out-of-field sites as a consequence of induction of Trex1 and downregulation of type I IFN combination radioimmunotherapy [61, 72, 76, 79, 88]. signaling . Furthermore, addition of anti-PD-L1 therapy to tumors The timing of RT in relation to administration of that are nonresponsive to RT has shown the ability to checkpoint inhibitors represents another issue of discus- reverse RT-induced tumor equilibrium in favor of tumor sion. Preclinical data support that RT-associated in- regression . Resistance to RT also appears to be creases in the CD8+ T-cell/Treg ratio, CD8+ T-cell regulated by host STING activation via CCR2; add- PD-1 expression, and tumor cell PD-L1 expression often itional targeting of the CCR2 pathway may therefore occur early with peak levels occurring within 24–96 h aid in reversing RT resistance in the context of post-RT [81, 86]. In an elegant study exploring combined checkpoint blockade . Conversely, integration of anti-PD-L1 therapy and fractionated RT (10 Gy in 5 daily RT to anti-PD-1-resistant tumors restores response to fractions), the addition of PD-L1 blockade on day 1 of RT PD-1 blockade highlighted by RT-induced IFN-γ pro- (concurrent regimen starting at the beginning of RT), day duction and MHC class I expression . 5 of RT (concurrent regimen starting at the end of RT), or Immune modulation from immune checkpoint in- 7 days after RT (sequential therapy) showed that there hibitors and RT through nonredundant pathways that was no significant difference in OS between either concur- altogether contribute to synergistic antitumor activity rent therapy schedules . However, sequential therapy now represents an emerging theme from ongoing in- was ineffective in enhancing OS compared to RT alone vestigations in combination RT and immunotherapy (median OS 30 days vs. 35 days, p > 0.05). Interestingly, [61, 77, 85, 88, 90, 142]. For example, anti-CTLA-4 the rise in PD-1 expression on CD8+ T-cells was evident therapy has been shown to predominantly inhibit Tregs, up to 7 days after the last dose of RT, after which PD-1 increase the CD8+ T-cell/Treg ratio, and promote T-cell levels significantly decreased compared to time-matched expansion. Radiation enhances the diversity of the TCR controls. In the clinical setting, retrospective series have repertoire, shapes the TCR repertoire of expanded periph- documented a wider range of schedules in combining eral T-cell clones in an antigen-driven selection manner, radioimmunotherapy ranging from RT at any point prior and promotes tumor infiltration by antigen-specific CD8+ to immune checkpoint therapy, within 1 month of admin- T-cells. Addition of PD-1/PD-L1 blockade reverses T-cell istration of checkpoint inhibitors, or up to 1 year of check- exhaustion to offset decreases in the CD8+ T-cell/Treg ra- point blockade [117, 121, 124, 129]. Moreover, results tio and further enhances oligoclonal T-cell proliferation. have been largely mixed on the impact of scheduling of Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 12 of 17 RT and checkpoint blockade on survival as several retro- the limited number of larger prospective trials, PD-1 and spective studies have identified that there is no significant PD-L1 blockade have often been incorporated into stand- difference in OS between concurrent and nonconcurrrent ard dosing regimens of SBRT and chemoradiation rou- radioimmunotherapy while another study demonstrated a tinely used in the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic significant improvement in PFS and OS in patients having cancer and NSCLC, for example (Table 3). ever received RT prior to PD-1 blockade compared to It is worthwhile to mention that the Phase III PACIFIC those with no prior RT [116, 117, 121]. It is worthwhile to trial demonstrated the superiority of chemoradiation mention that these retrospective studies were likely lim- followed by durvalumab when the latter was included ited by variability in RT modality, tumor histology, patient within 1–42 days of chemoradiation over chemoradia- characteristics, and cohort size. Notably, abscopal effects tion followed by placebo in locally advanced NSCLC have been observed in 56% of patients with the addition of . On review of the study protocol and Supplementary late RT to PD-1 blockade as well (> 3 months of insuffi- Appendix, the investigators emphasized the initiation of cient response to anti-PD-1 monotherapy) . durvalumab as close as possible to chemoradiation when Another point of consideration in clinical trial design is antigen release and PD-L1 expression is likely to be at its the issue of toxicity with combined RT and PD-1/PD-L1 greatest. An analysis of benefit in those receiving durvalu- blockade. Several preclinical studies demonstrated more mab closer to chemoradiation compared to those treated findings of abnormal alveoli, inflammatory changes, exu- later relative to chemoradiation was not provided; an ana- dates in the alveolar septa, and cardiac toxicity in mice re- lysis of this nature may provide further insight on the pro- ceiving thoracic RT and anti-PD-1 therapy, when posed synergism offered by this combination. For reasons compared to controls, though effects on survival have which are unclear, the median PFS of the placebo arm been mixed [100–102]. Retrospective analyses have gener- (5.6 months) appears worse than historical standards ally shown no increased risk of toxicity with the combin- . It is also unclear whether the benefit derived from ation of RT and checkpoint blockade beyond those the combination arm is due to the efficacy of immuno- expected with either modality alone [121, 124, 127]. For therapy in settings of smaller disease volume as seen pre- brain RT, a study of 137 patients treated with SRS or viously . All of these are potential factors that may WBRT in combination with PD-1 or CTLA-4 blockade contribute to the difference seen in efficacy between ex- identified radionecrosis in 27% though 1-year OS did not perimental and control arms. significantly differ between those that developed radione- Despite the promising results and feasibility of the PA- crosis and those that did not . Reassuringly, retro- CIFIC trial, clinical studies on an upper threshold RT spective series of > 200 patients receiving combined RT dose with checkpoint inhibition by which no further im- and immunotherapy have demonstrated that there are no provement in antitumor immunity is offered (as foresha- significant differences in toxicities regardless of site of ir- dowed by preclinical evidence discussed previously) are radiation, choice of checkpoint inhibitor, or treatment virtually nonexistent, yet duly warranted. Dedicated schedule (concurrent vs. sequential) [124, 127]. dose-escalation studies on combination PD-1/PD-L1 in- Taking together the preclinical evidence on the kinet- hibitors and RT are also needed in other tumor types to ics of PD-1 and PD-L1 expression in relation to RT and determine safety and tolerability. Early phase studies of the clinical data on the safety and tolerability of radioim- this nature are emerging and have demonstrated the munotherapy, there is growing evidence to support that feasibility of this combination while recognizing the im- PD-1/PD-L1 blockade is optimal when synchronized portance of timing of checkpoint blockade with respect with the administration of fractionated RT to prevent to RT administration . Extrapolation of RT dose the development of immunological anergy . Indeed, effects from animal to human studies is not straightfor- the concept of administering PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors ward and great caution is needed in applying dosing concurrently or immediately following fractionated RT schemes and regimens involving combination RT and has already been employed in clinical trials with evi- PD-1/PD-L1 blockade in human patients . Further dence that the combination is generally well-tolerated understanding of the mechanistic and dynamic immunos- (Table 3). However, despite our increased understanding, timulatory properties of RT and PD-1/PD-L1 blockade are preclinical and clinical data have yet to offer a consensus undoubtedly warranted with validation in (ideally) pro- on optimal dosing and modality sequencing to date . spective cohorts prior to maximizing tumor responses The majority of retrospective and prospective studies on with the combination. The ability to optimize immune combination RT and checkpoint blockade have predomin- responses in the future with radioimmunotherapy may antly used fractionated dosing schemes (Tables 2 and 3). potentially depend on the immunotherapeutic strategy However, depending on the tumor type, target site, and used, tumor histology, balance between proimmuno- modality employed, total RT doses from retrospective genic and immunosuppressive effects of either modal- series have ranged widely from 8 to 74 Gy (Table 2). Of ity, and other host factors [50, 148]. Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 13 of 17 Lastly, phase I trials of RT and anti-PD-1 therapy have Received: 26 December 2017 Accepted: 16 May 2018 already provided glimpses into potential mechanisms of failure even with the combination as 1 patient with metastatic RCC who rapidly progressed on combined References 1. Dong H, Strome SE, Salomao DR, Tamura H, Hirano F, Flies DB, et al. Tumor- RT and pembrolizumab had biomarker analyses showing associated B7-H1 promotes T-cell apoptosis: a potential mechanism of an absence of TILs and presence of other nonredundant immune evasion. Nat Med. 2002;8:793–800. immune checkpoints in the tumor microenvironment 2. Iwai Y, Ishida M, Tanaka Y, Okazaki T, Honjo T, Minato N. Involvement of PD-L1 on tumor cells in the escape from host immune system and tumor and periphery that may have contributed to treatment immunotherapy by PD-L1 blockade. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. failure . Accordingly, future studies may seek to 2002;99:12293–7. target multiple checkpoints in combination with RT. 3. Hamid O, Robert C, Daud A, Hodi FS, Hwu WJ, Kefford R, et al. Safety and The incorporation of additional immunotherapeutic tumor responses with lambrolizumab (anti-PD-1) in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:134–44. strategies or other systemic therapies to enhance im- 4. Larkin J, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R, Grob JJ, Cowey CL, Lao CD, et al. mune responses with RT represents another potential Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab or monotherapy in untreated avenue of therapy. Several studies have investigated melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:23–34. 5. Postow MA, Chesney J, Pavlick AC, Robert C, Grossmann K, McDermott D, et combined RT, PD-1/PD-L1, and CTLA-4 blockade while al. Nivolumab and ipilimumab versus ipilimumab in untreated melanoma. N others have evaluated RT and immune checkpoint ther- Engl J Med. 2015;372:2006–17. apy with various combinations of chemotherapy, vaccine 6. Ribas A, Puzanov I, Dummer R, Schadendorf D, Hamid O, Robert C, et al. Pembrolizumab versus investigator-choice chemotherapy for ipilimumab- therapies, or targeted therapies across a spectrum of refractory melanoma (KEYNOTE-002): a randomised, controlled. phase 2 trial cancers [150–157]. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:908–18. 7. Ribas A, Wolchok JD, Robert C, Kefford R, Hamid O, Daud A, et al. P0116 Abbreviations Updated clinical efficacy of the anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody AEs: Adverse events; CCR2: Chemokine receptor type 2; cGAS: Cyclic GMP- pembrolizumab (MK-3475) in 411 patients with melanoma [abstract] AMP (cGAMP) synthase; CI: Confidence interval; CR: Complete response; Eur J Cancer. 2015; 51:Abstr nr P0116. CTLA-4: Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4; DLTs: Dose-limiting toxicities; 8. Robert C, Ribas A, Wolchok JD, Hodi FS, Hamid O, Kefford R, et al. Anti- FDA: Food and drug administration; GEMM: Genetically engineered mouse programmed-death-receptor-1 treatment with pembrolizumab in model; Gy: Gray; HCC: Hepatocellular carcinoma; HR: Hazard ratio; ipilimumab-refractory advanced melanoma: a randomised dose-comparison HSCT: Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; IFNγ: Interferon-γ; cohort of a phase 1 trial. Lancet. 2014;384:1109–17. IQR: Interquartile range; LAG3: Lymphocyte activation gene 3 protein; 9. Robert C, Schachter J, Long GV, Arance A, Grob JJ, Mortier L, et al. MDSCs: Myeloid-derived suppressor cells; MHC: Major histocompatibility Pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N Engl J Med. complex; NSCLC: Non-small cell lung cancer; OS: Overall survival; PD- 2015;372:2521–32. 1: Programmed cell death 1; PD-L1: Programmed death-ligand 1; 10. Weber JS, D'Angelo SP, Minor D, Hodi FS, Gutzmer R, Neyns B, et al. PFS: Progression-free survival; PR: Partial response; RCC: Renal cell carcinoma; Nivolumab versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced melanoma who RFA: Radiofrequency ablation; RT: Radiation therapy; SABR: Stereotactic progressed after anti-CTLA-4 treatment (CheckMate 037): a randomised, ablative radiotherapy; SD: Stable disease; SRS: Stereotactic radiosurgery; controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:375–84. STING: Stimulator of interferon genes; TAMs: Tumor-associated macrophages; 11. Borghaei H, Paz-Ares L, Horn L, Spigel DR, Steins M, Ready NE, et al. TBI: Total body irradiation; TCR: T-cell receptor; TILs: Tumor-infiltrating Nivolumab versus docetaxel in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung lymphocytes; TIM-3: T-cell immunoglobulin mucin-3; TNFα: Tumor necrosis cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1627–39. factor-α; Tregs: Regulatory T-cells; WBRT: Whole brain radiotherapy; 12. Brahmer J, Reckamp KL, Baas P, Crinò L, Eberhardt WE, Poddubskaya E, et al. WHO: World Health Organization; WT: Wild-type Nivolumab versus docetaxel in advanced squamous-cell non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:123–35. Authors’ contributions 13. Garon EB, Rizvi NA, Hui R, Leighl N, Balmanoukian AS, Eder JP, et al. JG, TL, EM, AH and RT – literature search and review, writing, and editing; JG Pembrolizumab for the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer. and RT – conception and design and editing. All authors read and approved N Engl J Med. 2015;372:2018–28. the final manuscript. 14. Herbst RS, Baas P, Kim DW, Felip E, Pérez-Gracia JL, Han JY, et al. Pembrolizumab versus docetaxel for previously treated, PD-L1-positive, Ethics approval and consent to participate advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (KEYNOTE-010): a randomised Not applicable controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387:1540–50. 15. Langer CJ, Gadgeel SM, Borghaei H, Papadimitrakopoulou VA, Patnaik A, Powell SF, et al. Carboplatin and pemetrexed with or without Competing interests pembrolizumab for advanced, non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer: a The authors declare that they have no competing interests. randomised, phase 2 cohort of the open-label KEYNOTE-021 study. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:1497–508. 16. Reck M, Rodríguez-Abreu D, Robinson AG, Hui R, Csőszi T, Fülöp A, et al. Publisher’sNote Pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for PD-L1-positive non-small-cell lung Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:1823–33. published maps and institutional affiliations. 17. Ferris RL, Blumenschein G, Fayette J, Guigay J, Colevas AD, Licitra L, et al. Author details Nivolumab for recurrent squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Department of Medical Oncology, City of Hope National Medical Center, N Engl J Med. 2016;375:1856–67. Duarte, CA, USA. Division of Angiography and Interventional Radiology, 18. Motzer RJ, Escudier B, McDermott DF, George S, Hammers HJ, Srinivas S, et Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. al. Nivolumab versus everolimus in advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Samuel Oschin Med. 2015;373:1803–13. Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, 19. Seiwert TY, Burtness B, Mehra R, Weiss J, Berger R, Eder JP, et al. Safety and CA, USA. Departments of Radiation Oncology and Biomedical Sciences, clinical activity of pembrolizumab for treatment of recurrent or metastatic Samuel Oschin Comprehensive Cancer Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (KEYNOTE-012): an open- 8700 Beverly Blvd, AC 1023, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA. label, multicentre, phase 1b trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:956–65. Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 14 of 17 20. Sharma P, Retz M, Siefker-Radtke A, Baron A, Necchi A, Bedke J, et al. 39. Overman MJ, McDermott R, Leach JL, Lonardi S, Lenz HJ, Morse MA, et al. Nivolumab in metastatic urothelial carcinoma after platinum therapy Nivolumab in patients with metastatic DNA mismatch repair-deficient or (CheckMate 275): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. microsatellite instability-high colorectal cancer (CheckMate 142): an open- 2017;18:312–22. label, multicentre, phase 2 study Lancet Oncol 2017: https://doi.org/10. 21. Balar AV, Castellano DE, O'Donnell PH, Grivas P, Vuky J, Powles T, et al. 1016/S1470-2045(1017)30422-30429. Pembrolizumab as first-line therapy in cisplatin-ineligible advanced 40. Rittmeyer A, Barlesi F, Waterkamp D, Park K, Ciardiello F, von Pawel J, et al. urothelial cancer: results from the total KEYNOTE-052 study population Atezolizumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated non- [abstract]. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:Abstr nr 284. small-cell lung cancer (OAK): a phase 3, open-label, multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2017;389:255–65. 22. Bellmunt J, de Wit R, Vaughn DJ, Fradet Y, Lee JL, Fong L, et al. Pembrolizumab as second-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma. 41. Rosenberg JE, Hoffman-Censits J, Powles T, van der Heijden MS, Balar AV, N Engl J Med. 2017;376:1015–26. Necchi A, et al. Atezolizumab in patients with locally advanced and 23. Ansell SM, Lesokhin AM, Borrello I, Halwani A, Scott EC, Gutierrez M, et al. metastatic urothelial carcinoma who have progressed following treatment PD-1 blockade with nivolumab in relapsed or refractory Hodgkin's with platinum-based chemotherapy: a single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 trial. lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:311–9. Lancet. 2016;387:1909–20. 24. Chen R, Zinzani PL, Fanale MA, Armand P, Johnson NA, Brice P, et al. Phase 42. El-Khoueiry AB, Sangro B, Yau T, Crocenzi TS, Kudo M, Hsu C, et al. II study of the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab for relapsed/refractory Nivolumab in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (CheckMate classic hodgkin lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:2125–32. 040): an open-label, non-comparative, phase 1/2 dose escalation and 25. Younes A, Santoro A, Shipp M, Zinzani PL, Timmerman JM, Ansell S, et al. expansion trial. Lancet. 2017;389:2492–502. 43. Fuchs CS, Doi T, Jang RW, Muro K, Satoh T, Machado M, et al. KEYNOTE-059 Nivolumab for classical Hodgkin's lymphoma after failure of both autologous stem-cell transplantation and brentuximab vedotin: a cohort 1: efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab (pembro) monotherapy in multicentre, multicohort, single-arm phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. patients with previously treated advanced gastric cancer [abstract]. J Clin 2016;17:1283–94. Oncol. 2017;35:Abstr nr 4003. 44. Mole RH. Whole body irradiation; radiobiology or medicine? Br J Radiol. 26. Apolo AB, Ellerton JA, Infante JR, Agrawal M, Gordon MS, Aljumaily R, et al. 1953;26:234–41. Updated efficacy and safety of avelumab in metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC): pooled analysis from 2 cohorts of the phase 1b javelin solid tumor 45. Demaria S, Ng B, Devitt ML, Babb JS, Kawashima N, Liebes L, et al. Ionizing study [abstract]. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:Abstr nr 4528. radiation inhibition of distant untreated tumors (abscopal effect) is immune 27. Apolo AB, Infante JR, Balmanoukian A, Patel MR, Wang D, Kelly K, et al. mediated. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;58:862–70. Avelumab, an anti-programmed death-ligand 1 antibody, in patients with 46. Ma Y, Kepp O, Ghiringhelli F, Apetoh L, Aymeric L, Locher C, et al. refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma: results from a multicenter, phase Chemotherapy and radiotherapy: cryptic anticancer vaccines. Semin Ib study. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:2117–24. Immunol. 2010;22:113–24. 28. Balar AV, Galsky MD, Rosenberg JE, Powles T, Petrylak DP, Bellmunt J, et al. 47. Nobler MP. The abscopal effect in malignant lymphoma and its relationship Atezolizumab as first-line treatment in cisplatin-ineligible patients with to lymphocyte circulation. Radiology. 1969;93:410–2. locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a single-arm, 48. Stone HB, Peters LJ, Milas L. Effect of host immune capability on multicentre. phase 2 trial Lancet. 2017;389:67–76. radiocurability and subsequent transplantability of a murine fibrosarcoma. 29. Diaz LA, Marabelle A, Delord JP, Shapira-Frommer R, Geva R, Peled N, J Natl Cancer Inst. 1979;63:1229–35. et al. Pembrolizumab therapy for microsatellite instability high (MSI-H) 49. Formenti SC, Demaria S. Systemic effects of local radiotherapy. Lancet colorectal cancer (CRC) and non-CRC [abstract]. J Clin Oncol. Oncol. 2009;10:718–26. 2017;35:Abstr nr 3071. 50. Formenti SC, Demaria S. Combining radiotherapy and cancer 30. Diaz LA, Uram JN, Wang H, Bartlett B, Kemberling H, Eyring A, et al. immunotherapy: a paradigm shift. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105:256–65. Programmed death-1 blockade in mismatch repair deficient cancer 51. Frey B, Rubner Y, Wunderlich R, Weiss EM, Pockley AG, Fietkau R, et al. independent of tumor histology [abstract]. J Clin Oncol. Induction of abscopal anti-tumor immunity and immunogenic tumor cell 2016;34:Abstr nr 3003. death by ionizing irradiation - implications for cancer therapies. Curr Med 31. Fader AN, Diaz LA, Armstrong DK, Tanner EJ, Uram J, Eyring A, et al. Chem. 2012;19:1751–64. Preliminary results of a phase II study: PD-1 blockade in mismatch 52. Sharabi AB, Lim M, DeWeese TL, Drake CG. Radiation and checkpoint repair–deficient, recurrent or persistent endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol. blockade immunotherapy: radiosensitisation and potential mechanisms of 2016;141:206–7. synergy. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:e498–509. 32. Fehrenbacher L, Spira A, Ballinger M, Kowanetz M, Vansteenkiste J, Mazieres 53. Tang C, Wang X, Soh H, Seyedin S, Cortez MA, Krishnan S, et al. Combining J, et al. Atezolizumab versus docetaxel for patients with previously treated radiation and immunotherapy: a new systemic therapy for solid tumors? non-small-cell lung cancer (POPLAR): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 Cancer Immunol Res. 2014;2:831–8. randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387:1837–46. 54. Demaria S, Kawashima N, Yang AM, Devitt ML, Babb JS, Allison JP, et al. 33. Hahn NM, Powles T, Massard C, Arkenau HT, Friedlander TW, Hoimes CJ, et Immune-mediated inhibition of metastases after treatment with local al. Updated efficacy and tolerability of durvalumab in locally advanced or radiation and CTLA-4 blockade in a mouse model of breast cancer. metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) [abstract]. J Clin Oncol. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11:728–34. 2017;35:Abstr nr 4525. 55. Dewan MZ, Galloway AE, Kawashima N, Dewyngaert JK, Babb JS, Formenti 34. Kaufman HL, Russell J, Hamid O, Bhatia S, Terheyden P, D'Angelo SP, et al. SC, et al. Fractionated but not single-dose radiotherapy induces an Avelumab in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic Merkel cell immune-mediated abscopal effect when combined with anti-CTLA-4 carcinoma: a multicentre, single-group, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet antibody. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:5379–88. Oncol. 2016;17:1374–85. 56. Belcaid Z, Phallen JA, Zeng J, See AP, Mathios D, Gottschalk C, et al. 35. Le DT UJN, Wang H, Bartlett B, Kemberling H, Eyring A, et al. Programmed Focal radiation therapy combined with 4-1BB activation and CTLA-4 death-1 blockade in mismatch repair deficient colorectal cancer [abstract]. blockade yields long-term survival and a protective antigen-specific J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:Abstr nr 103. memory response in a murine glioma model. PLoS One. 36. Le DT, Uram JN, Wang H, Bartlett BR, Kemberling H, Eyring AD, et al. PD-1 2014;9:e101764. blockade in tumors with mismatch-repair deficiency. N Engl J Med. 57. Pilones KA, Kawashima N, Yang AM, Babb JS, Formenti SC, Demaria S. 2015;372:2509–20. Invariant natural killer T cells regulate breast cancer response to radiation 37. Le DT UJN, Wang H, Kemberling H, Eyring A, Bartlett B, et al. PD-1 blockade and CTLA-4 blockade. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:597–606. in mismatch repair deficient non-colorectal gastrointestinal cancers 58. Ruocco MG, Pilones KA, Kawashima N, Cammer M, Huang J, Babb JS, et al. [abstract]. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:Abstr nr 195. Suppressing T cell motility induced by anti-CTLA-4 monotherapy improves 38. Massard C, Gordon MS, Sharma S, Rafii S, Wainberg ZA, Luke J, et al. Safety antitumor effects. J Clin Invest. 2012;122:3718–30. and efficacy of durvalumab (MEDI4736), an anti-programmed cell death 59. Golden EB, Chachoua A, Fenton-Kerimian M, Demaria S and Formenti S. ligand-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor, in patients with advanced urothelial Abscopal responses in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) bladder cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:3119–25. patients treated on a phase 2 study of combined radiation therapy and Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 15 of 17 ipilimumab: evidence for the in situ vaccination hypothesis of radiation 80. Gong X, Li X, Jiang T, Xie H, Zhu Z, Zhou F, et al. Combined radiotherapy [abstract]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015; 93:Abstr nr 149. and anti-PD-L1 antibody synergistically enhances antitumor effect in non- 60. Kwon ED, Drake CG, Scher HI, Fizazi K, Bossi A, van den Eertwegh AJ, et al. small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2017;12:1085–97. Ipilimumab versus placebo after radiotherapy in patients with metastatic 81. Herter-Sprie GS, Koyama S, Korideck H, Hai J, Deng J, Li YY, et al. Synergy of castration-resistant prostate cancer that had progressed after docetaxel radiotherapy and PD-1 blockade in Kras-mutant lung cancer. JCI Insight. chemotherapy (CA184-043): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 2016;1:e87415. 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:700–12. 82. Kamdem DT, Steel JC, Wise-Draper T, Kassing WM, Hashemi Sadraei N, 61. Twyman-Saint Victor C, Rech AJ, Maity A, Rengan R, Pauken KE, Stelekati E, Mierzwa ML, et al. Combined radiation and PD-L1 blockade improved et al. Radiation and dual checkpoint blockade activate non-redundant tumor control in mouse head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) immune mechanisms in cancer. Nature. 2015;520:373–7. [abstract]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;94:Abstr nr 248. 62. Slovin SF, Higano CS, Hamid O, Tejwani S, Harzstark A, Alumkal JJ, et al. 83. Rodriguez-Ruiz ME, Rodriguez I, Garasa S, Barbes B, Solorzano JL, Perez- Ipilimumab alone or in combination with radiotherapy in metastatic Gracia JL, et al. Abscopal effects of radiotherapy are enhanced by combined castration-resistant prostate cancer: results from an open-label, multicenter immunostimulatory mAbs and are dependent on CD8 T cells and phase I/II study. Ann Oncol. 2013;24:1813–21. crosspriming. Cancer Res. 2016;76:5994–6005. 63. Hiniker SM, Reddy SA, Maecker HT, Subrahmanyam PB, Rosenberg-Hasson Y, 84. Wu CT, Chen WC, Chang YH, Lin WY, Chen MF. The role of PD-L1 in the Swetter SM, et al. A prospective clinical trial combining radiation therapy radiation response and clinical outcome for bladder cancer. Sci Rep. with systemic immunotherapy in metastatic melanoma. Int J Radiat Oncol 2016;6:19740. Biol Phys. 2016;96:578–88. 85. Oh P, Du KL, Leichman L, Aifantis I. PD-1 blockade enhances the efficacy of 64. Tang C, Welsh JW, de Groot P, Massarelli E, Chang JY, Hess KR, et al. chemoradiation in a mouse model of esophageal cancer [abstract]. Ipilimumab with stereotactic ablative radiation therapy: phase I results and Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;96:S127–8. immunologic correlates from peripheral T cells. Clin Cancer Res. 86. Dovedi SJ, Adlard AL, Lipowska-Bhalla G, McKenna C, Jones S, Cheadle EJ, et 2017;23:1388–96. al. Acquired resistance to fractionated radiotherapy can be overcome by 65. Shi W, Wuthrick E, Feeney K, Werner-Wasik M, Andrews DW, Evans JJ, et al. concurrent PD-L1 blockade. Cancer Res. 2014;74:5458–68. Phase I study of ipilimumab with stereotactic radiosurgery for melanoma 87. Park SS, Dong H, Liu X, Harrington SM, Krco CJ, Grams MP, et al. PD-1 patients with brain metastases [abstract]. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50:Abstr nr 141. restrains radiotherapy-induced abscopal effect. Cancer Immunol Res. 66. Williams NL, Kim H, Eldredge-Hindy HB, Feeney KJ, Mastrangelo MJ, Sato T, 2015;3:610–9. et al. Phase I study of ipilimumab combined with whole-brain radiation 88. Dovedi SJ, Cheadle EJ, Popple A, Poon E, Morrow M, Stewart R, et al. therapy or radiosurgery for melanoma patients with brain metastases. Fractionated radiation therapy stimulates anti-tumor immunity mediated by Int J Radiat Oncol biol Phys. 2016;96:Abstr nr 1037. both resident and infiltrating polyclonal T-cell populations when combined 67. Johnson CB, Jagsi R. The promise of the abscopal effect and the future of with PD1 blockade. Clin Cancer Res 2017: https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432. trials combining immunotherapy and radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol CCR-1116-1673. Biol Phys. 2016;95:1254–6. 89. Vanpouille-Box C, Alard A, Aryankalayil MJ, Sarfraz Y, Diamond JM, Schneider 68. Kang J, Demaria S, Formenti S. Current clinical trials testing the combination RJ, et al. DNA exonuclease Trex1 regulates radiotherapy-induced tumour of immunotherapy with radiotherapy. J Immunother Cancer. 2016;4:51. immunogenicity. Nat Commun. 2017;8:15618. 69. Pilon-Thomas S, Mackay A, Vohra N, Mulé JJ. Blockade of PD-L1 enhances 90. Kim JE, Patel MA, Mangraviti A, Kim ES, Theodros D, Velarde E, et al. the therapeutic efficacy of combination immunotherapy against melanoma. Combination therapy with anti-PD-1, anti-TIM-3, and focal radiation results J Immunol. 2010;184:3442–9. in regression of murine gliomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23:124–36. 70. Verbrugge I, Gasparini A, Haynes NM, Hagekyriakou J, Galli M, Stewart TJ, et 91. Wang X, Schoenhals JE, Li A, Valdecanas DR, Ye H, Zang F, et al. al. The curative outcome of radioimmunotherapy in a mouse breast cancer Suppression of type I IFN signaling in tumors mediates resistance to anti- model relies on mTOR signaling. Radiat Res. 2014;182:219–29. PD-1 treatment that can be overcome by radiotherapy. Cancer Res. 2017;77:839–50. 71. Verbrugge I, Hagekyriakou J, Sharp LL, Galli M, West A, McLaughlin NM, et 92. Liang H, Deng L, Chmura S, Burnette B, Liadis N, Darga T, et al. Radiation- al. Radiotherapy increases the permissiveness of established mammary induced equilibrium is a balance between tumor cell proliferation and T tumors to rejection by immunomodulatory antibodies. Cancer Res. cell-mediated killing. J Immunol. 2013;190:5874–81. 2012;72:3163–74. 72. Zeng J, See AP, Phallen J, Jackson CM, Belcaid Z, Ruzevick J, et al. Anti-PD-1 93. Liang H, Deng L, Hou Y, Meng X, Huang X, Rao E, et al. Host STING- blockade and stereotactic radiation produce long-term survival in mice with dependent MDSC mobilization drives extrinsic radiation resistance. intracranial gliomas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;86:343–9. Nat Commun. 2017;8:1736. 73. Hallett WH, Jing W, Drobyski WR, Johnson BD. Immunosuppressive effects 94. Shi L, Chen L, Wu C, Zhu Y, Xu B, Zheng X, et al. PD-1 blockade boosts of multiple myeloma are overcome by PD-L1 blockade. Biol Blood Marrow radiofrequency ablation–elicited adaptive immune responses against tumor. Transplant. 2011;17:1133–45. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22:1173–84. 74. Jing W, Gershan JA, Weber J, Tlomak D, McOlash L, Sabatos-Peyton C, 95. Azad A, Yin Lim S, D'Costa Z, Jones K, Diana A, Sansom OJ, et al. PD-L1 et al. Combined immune checkpoint protein blockade and low dose blockade enhances response of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to whole body irradiation as immunotherapy for myeloma. J Immunother radiotherapy. EMBO Mol Med. 2017;9:167–80. Cancer. 2015;3:2. 96. Friedman D, Baird JR, Young KH, Cottam B, Crittenden MR, Friedman S, et al. 75. Kearl TJ, Jing W, Gershan JA, Johnson BD. Programmed death receptor-1/ Programmed cell death-1 blockade enhances response to stereotactic programmed death receptor ligand-1 blockade after transient radiation in an orthotopic murine model of hepatocellular carcinoma. lymphodepletion to treat myeloma. J Immunol. 2013;190:5620–8. Hepatol Res. 2017;47:702–14. 76. Deng L, Liang H, Burnette B, Beckett M, Darga T, Weichselbaum RR, et al. 97. Kim KJ, Kim JH, Lee SJ, Lee EJ, Shin EC, Seong J. Radiation improves Irradiation and anti-PD-L1 treatment synergistically promote antitumor antitumor effect of immune checkpoint inhibitor in murine hepatocellular immunity in mice. J Clin Invest. 2014;124:687–95. carcinoma model. Oncotarget. 2017;8:41242–55. 77. Pilones KA, Joseph A, Vatner R, Formenti S, Demaria S. Radiation therapy 98. Takahashi Y, Yasui T, Tamari K, Minami K, Koizumi M, Seo Y, et al. Radiation sensitizes a poorly immunogenic breast cancer to PD-1 blockade [abstract]. combined with checkpoint blockades enhanced antitumor efficacy for Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;90:Abstr nr 121. osteosarcoma [abstract]. Cancer Res. 2017;77:Abstr nr 4585. 99. Kroon P, Gadiot J, Peeters M, Gasparini A, Deken MA, Yagita H, et al. 78. Aguilera T, Rafat M, Kariolis M, von Eyben R, Graves E, Giaccia A. Tumor Concomitant targeting of programmed death-1 (PD-1) and CD137 improves immunologic heterogeneity influences response to radiation and the efficacy of radiotherapy in a mouse model of human BRAFV600-mutant combination immunotherapy [abstract]. J Immunother Cancer. melanoma. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2016;65:753–63. 2015;3:Abstr nr P345. 79. Sharabi AB, Nirschl CJ, Kochel CM, Nirschl TR, Francica BJ, Velarde E, et al. 100. Xue J, Du S, Lu Y, Dicker A, Lu B. Anti-PD-1 treatment may potentiate the Stereotactic radiation therapy augments antigen-specific PD-1-mediated radiation-induced lung injury [abstract].Cancer Res. 2017;77:Abstr nr 3671. antitumor immune responses via cross-presentation of tumor antigen. 101. Myers CJ, Lu B. Decreased survival after combining thoracic irradiation and Cancer Immunol Res. 2015;3:345–55. an anti-PD-1 antibody is correlated with increased T cell infiltration into Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 16 of 17 cardiac and lung tissues. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 https://doi.org/ 120. Pike LRG, Bang A, Ott P, Balboni T, Taylor A, Catalano P, et al. Radiation and 10.1016/j.ijrobp2017.1006.2452. PD-1 inhibition: favorable outcomes after brain-directed radiation. Radiother 102. Du S, Zhou L, Shukla G, Wang N, Yang L, Ma X, et al. Pharmacological Oncol. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2017.1006.1006. inhibition of PD-1 exacerbates radiation-induced cardiac toxicity through 121. Shaverdian N, Lisberg AE, Bornazyan K, Veruttipong D, Goldman JW, cytotoxic T cell-mediated myocarditis [abstract]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. Formenti SC, et al. Previous radiotherapy and the clinical activity and 2016;96:S88. toxicity of pembrolizumab in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer: a secondary analysis of the KEYNOTE-001 phase 1 trial. Lancet Oncol. 103. Haymaker CL, Kim D, Uemura M, Vence LM, Phillip A, McQuail N, et al. 2017;18:895–903. Metastatic melanoma patient had a complete response with clonal expansion after whole brain radiation and PD-1 blockade. Cancer Immunol 122. Choong ES, Lo S, Drummond M, Fogarty GB, Menzies AM, Guminski A, et al. Res. 2017;5:100–5. Survival of patients with melanoma brain metastasis treated with 104. Alomari AK, Cohen J, Vortmeyer AO, Chiang A, Gettinger S, Goldberg S, et stereotactic radiosurgery and active systemic drug therapies. Eur J Cancer. al. Possible interaction of anti-PD-1 therapy with the effects of radiosurgery 2017;75:169–78. on brain metastases. Cancer Immunol Res. 2016;4:481–7. 123. Wilhite TJ, Chandra RA, Balboni TA, Taylor A, Aizer AA, Spektor A, et al. 105. Yuan Z, Fromm A, Ahmed KA, Grass GD, Yang GQ, Oliver DE, et al. Toxicity profile of contemporaneous PD-1 inhibitor immunotherapy and Radiotherapy rescue of a nivolumab-refractory immune response in a radiotherapy [abstract]. Cancer Res. 2016;76:Abstr nr 4989. patient with PD-L1 negative metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the 124. von Reibnitz D, Wu AJ, Barker CA, Panchoo K, Rimner A. Safety of lung. J Thorac Oncol. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2017.1004.1029. combining immune checkpoint inhibition and thoracic radiation therapy 106. Ueki K, Kosaka Y, Kimino G, Imagumbai T, Takayama K, Kokubo M. Treatment [abstract]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;96:Abstr nr 351. 125. Ahmed KA, Grass GD, Creelan B, Gray J, Kim S, Dilling TJ, et al. Tolerability of malignant melanoma with nivolumab and vemurafenib combined with hypofractionated radiation therapy. International Cancer Conference Journal. and safety of thoracic radiation and immune checkpoint inhibitors among 2016;5:214–8. patients with lung cancer [abstract]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017;98:Abstr nr 10. 107. Sharabi A, Kim SS, Kato S, Sanders PD, Patel SP, Sanghvi P, et al. Exceptional response to nivolumab and stereotactic body radiation 126. Shibaki R, Akamatsu H, Fujimoto M, Koh Y, Yamamoto N. Nivolumab therapy (SBRT) in neuroendocrine cervical carcinoma with high tumor induced radiation recall pneumonitis after two years of radiotherapy. Ann mutational burden: management considerations from the center for Oncol. 2017;28:1404–5. personalized cancer therapy at UC san Diego Moores Cancer center. 127. Bang A, Wilhite TJ, Pike LRG, Cagney DN, Aizer AA, Taylor A, et al. Oncologist. 2017;22:631–7. Multicenter evaluation of the tolerability of combined treatment with PD-1 108. Takamori S, Toyokawa G, Takada K, Shoji F, Okamoto T and Maehara Y. and CTLA-4 immune checkpoint inhibitors and palliative radiation therapy. Combination therapy of radiotherapy and anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment in Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017;98:344–51. non-small cell lung cancer, a mini-review. Clin Lung Cancer 2017: https:// 128. Ahmed KA, Kim S, Arrington J, Naghavi AO, Dilling TJ, Creelan BC, et al. doi.org/10.1016/j.cllc.2017.1006.1015. Outcomes targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis in conjunction with stereotactic 109. Alevizakos M, Ollila DW, Chera BS, Dodd LG, Kish JB, Moschos SJ. Combined radiation for patients with non-small cell lung cancer brain metastases. modality neoadjuvant treatment for stage III/IV melanoma with PD-1 J Neuro-Oncol. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-11017-12437-11065. blockade plus radiation: a case series. Cancer Treatment and Research 129. Fang P, Jiang W, Allen P, Glitza I, Guha N, Hwu P, et al. Radiation necrosis Communicatons. 2017;10:12–6. with stereotactic radiosurgery combined with CTLA-4 blockade and PD-1 110. Michot JM, Mazeron R, Dercle L, Ammari S, Canova C, Marabelle A, et al. inhibition for treatment of intracranial disease in metastatic melanoma. Abscopal effect in a Hodgkin lymphoma patient treated by an anti- J Neuro-Oncol. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-11017-12470-11064. programmed death 1 antibody. Eur J Cancer. 2016;66:91–4. 130. Colaco RJ, Martin P, Kluger HM, Yu JB, Chiang VL. Does immunotherapy 111. Xie G, Gu D, Zhang L, Chen S and Wu D. A rapid and systemic complete increase the rate of radiation necrosis after radiosurgical treatment of brain response to stereotactic body radiation therapy and pembrolizumab in a metastases? J Neurosurg. 2016;125:17–23. patient with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Cancer Biol Ther 2017: https:// 131. Kiess AP, Wolchok JD, Barker CA, Postow MA, Tabar V, Huse JT, et al. doi.org/10.1080/15384047.15382017.11345389. Stereotactic radiosurgery for melanoma brain metastases in patients 112. LaPlant Q, Deselm C, Lockney NA, Hsieh J and Yamada Y. Potential abscopal receiving ipilimumab: safety profile and efficacy of combined treatment. Int response to dual checkpoint blockade in RCC after reirradiation using dose- J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015;92:368–75. painting SBRT. Pract Radiat Oncol 2017: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prro.2017. 132. Patel KR, Shoukat S, Oliver DE, Chowdhary M, Rizzo M, Lawson DH, et al. 1004.1009. Ipilimumab and stereotactic radiosurgery versus stereotactic radiosurgery 113. Ahmed KA, Abuodeh YA, Echevarria MI, Arrington JA, Stallworth DG, Hogue alone for newly diagnosed melanoma brain metastases. Am J Clin Oncol. C, et al. Clinical outcomes of melanoma brain metastases treated with 2015: https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0000000000000199. stereotactic radiosurgery and anti-PD-1 therapy, anti-CTLA-4 therapy, BRAF/ 133. Kaidar-Person O, Zagar TM, Deal A, Moschos SJ, Ewend MG, Sasaki-Adams D, MEK inhibitors, BRAF inhibitor, or conventional chemotherapy. Ann Oncol. et al. The incidence of radiation necrosis following stereotactic radiotherapy 2016;27:2288–94. for melanoma brain metastases: the potential impact of immunotherapy. 114. Ahmed KA, Stallworth DG, Kim Y, Johnstone PA, Harrison LB, Caudell JJ, et Anti-Cancer Drugs. 2017;28:669–75. al. Clinical outcomes of melanoma brain metastases treated with 134. Sagiv-Barfi I, Rajapaksa A, Czerwinski D, Chang S, Hebb J, Chester C, et al. stereotactic radiation and anti-PD-1 therapy. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:434–41. Local tumor irradiation combined with α-PDL-1 immune checkpoint 115. Olson AC, Patel K, Mowery YM, Wynne J, Ready N, Kirkpatrick JP, et al. Anti- inhibition results in local and systemic anti-tumor responses: successful PD-1 therapy and stereotactic radiation for melanoma and non-small cell translation of a mouse model to a human case series [abstract]. Cancer res. lung cancer patients with brain metastases: a 2-institution series [abstract] . 2014;74:Abstr nr 2941. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016; 96:Abstr nr 2238. 135. Barker CA, Postow MA, Kronenberg SA, Ma J, Yamada Y, Beal K, et al. 116. Liniker E, Menzies AM, Kong BY, Cooper A, Ramanujam S, Lo S, et al. Activity Concurrent radiation therapy (RT), ipilimumab (Ipi) and/or nivolumab (nivo) and safety of radiotherapy with anti-PD-1 drug therapy in patients with on a phase 1 clinical trial [abstract]. Int J Radiat Oncol biol Phys. metastatic melanoma. Oncoimmunology. 2016;5:e1214788. 2015;93:Abstr nr 1133. 117. Qian JM, Yu JB, Kluger HM, Chiang VL. Timing and type of immune 136. Levy A, Massard C, Soria JC, Deutsch E. Concurrent irradiation with the anti- checkpoint therapy affect the early radiographic response of melanoma programmed cell death ligand-1 immune checkpoint blocker durvalumab: brain metastases to stereotactic radiosurgery. Cancer. 2016;122:3051–8. single Centre subset analysis from a phase 1/2 trial. Eur J Cancer. 118. Bledsoe TJ, Rutter CE, Lester-Coll NH, Bi X, Decker RH. Radiation to 2016;68:156–62. oligoprogessive sites of disease can prolong the duration of response to 137. Duffy AG, Makarova-Rusher OV, Kleiner DE, Alewine C, Figg WD, Steinberg immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with metastatic non-small cell SM, et al. A pilot study of immune checkpoint inhibition in combination lung cancer [abstract]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;96:Abstr nr 3178. with radiation therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer 119. Roger A, Finet A, Boru B, Mazeron JJ, Otmezguine Y, Blom A, et al. Efficacy [abstract]. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:Abstr nr e15786. of combined hypofractionated radiotherapy and anti-PD-1 monotherapy in 138. Lin SH, Lin Y, Price J, Parker M, Gomez DR, Welsh JW, et al. DETERRED: PD-L1 patients with melanoma [abstract]. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:Abstr nr e21008. blockade to evaluate the safety of lung cancer therapy using carboplatin, Gong et al. Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer (2018) 6:46 Page 17 of 17 paclitaxel, and radiation combined with MPDL3280A (atezolizumab) [abstract]. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:Abstr nr 3064. 139. Antonia SJ, Villegas A, Daniel D, Vicente D, Murakami S, Hui R, et al. Durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2017:doi:https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1709937. 140. Lee Y, Auh SL, Wang Y, Burnette B, Wang Y, Meng Y, et al. Therapeutic effects of ablative radiation on local tumor require CD8+ T cells: changing strategies for cancer treatment. Blood. 2009;114:589–95. 141. Lugade AA, Moran JP, Gerber SA, Rose RC, Frelinger JG, Lord EM. Local radiation therapy of B16 melanoma tumors increases the generation of tumor antigen-specific effector cells that traffic to the tumor. J Immunol. 2005;174:7516–23. 142. Twyman-Saint Victor C, Rech A, Maity A, Rengan R, Pauken K, Stelekati E, et al. Mechanisms of tumor response and resistance to radiation and dual checkpoint blockade in mice and patients [abstract]. Cancer Immunol Res. 2016;4:Abstr nr A056. 143. Schaue D, Ratikan JA, Iwamoto KS, McBride WH. Maximizing tumor immunity with fractionated radiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;83:1306–10. 144. Dovedi SJ, Illidge TM. The antitumor immune response generated by fractionated radiation therapy may be limited by tumor cell adaptive resistance and can be circumvented by PD-L1 blockade. Oncoimmunology. 2015;4:e1016709. 145. Yoon SM, Shaikh T, Hallman M. Therapeutic management options for stage III non-small cell lung cancer. World J Clin Oncol. 2017;8:1–20. 146. Eggermont AM, Chiarion-Sileni V, Grob JJ, Dummer R, Wolchok JD, Schmidt H, et al. Prolonged survival in stage III melanoma with ipilimumab adjuvant therapy. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:1845–55. 147. Luke JJ, Lemons JM, Karrison TG, Pitroda SP, Melotek JM, Zha Y, et al. Safety and clinical activity of pembrolizumab and multisite stereotactic body radiotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumors. J Clin Oncol 2018: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO2017.1276.2229. 148. Monjazeb AM, Schoenfeld JD. Radiation dose and checkpoint blockade immunotherapy: unanswered questions. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:e3–4. 149. Alexander GS, Palmer JD, Tuluc M, Lin J, Dicker AP, Bar-Ad V, et al. Immune biomarkers of treatment failure for a patient on a phase I clinical trial of pembrolizumab plus radiotherapy. J Hematol Oncol. 2016;9:96. 150. Wu CJ, Tsai YT, Chang CC, Lee IJ, Wu PY, Tao MH. Efficacy of combining radiotherapy and immunotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer and the modulation of tumor [abstract]. J Immunol. 2017;198:79.15. 151. Vermeer DW, Powell S, Spanos WC, Lee JH. PD-1 blockade synergizes with cisplatin radiation therapy aiding in clearance of murine HPV+ oropharyngeal carcinoma [abstract]. Cancer Immunol Res. 2015;3:Abstr nr A55. 152. Nambiar DK, Aguilera T, Bloomstein JD, Cao H, Koong A, Le QT. Targeting galectin-1 in combination with radiation and immune checkpoint therapy in head and neck cancers [abstract]. Cancer Res. 2017;77:Abstr nr LB-180. 153. Budhu S, De Henau O, Zappasodi R, Giese R, Campesato LF, Barker C, et al. Phosphatidylserine targeting antibody in combination with tumor radiation and immune checkpoint blockade promotes anti-tumor activity in mouse B16 melanoma [abstract]. Cancer Res. 2017;77:Abstr nr 574. 154. Zheng W, Skowron KB, Namm JP, Burnette B, Fernandez C, Arina A, et al. Combination of radiotherapy and vaccination overcomes checkpoint blockade resistance. Oncotarget. 2016;7:43039–51. 155. Walker AJ, Nirscle CJ, Nugent K, Nirschle TR, Harris TJ, Wang H, et al. Combining checkpoint blockade with radiation therapy results in tumor and immunological responses in an autochthonous mouse model of lung cancer [abstract]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;90:Abstr nr 117. 156. Kent CL, Mowery YM, Wisdom AJ, Van Mater D, Castle KD, Reddy A, et al. Immune checkpoint inhibition and radiation therapy in 2 primary mouse models of soft tissue sarcoma: impact of tumor mutational load [abstract]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;96:Abstr nr 3418. 157. Wang S, Kuczma M, Pi W, Kong V, Campbell J, Jin JY, et al. Combined stereotactic body radiation therapy and immunotherapy on 4T1 triple- negative breast cancer murine model [abstract]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;96:Abstr nr 3429.
Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer
– Springer Journals
Published: Jun 4, 2018