Opinion Statement
Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is a heterogeneous group of aggressive malignancies that arise from the epithelium of the biliary tract. Most patients present with locally advanced or metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis. For patients with unresectable BTC, the survival advantage provided by systemic chemotherapy was limited. Over the last decade, immunotherapy has significantly improved the therapeutic landscape of solid tumors. There is an increasing number of studies evaluating the application of immunotherapy in BTC, including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), cancer vaccines and adoptive cell therapy. The limited response to ICIs monotherapy in unselected patients prompted investigators to explore different combination therapy strategies. Early clinical trials of therapeutic cancer vaccination and adoptive cell therapy have shown encouraging clinical results. However, there still has been a long way to go via validation of therapeutic efficacy and exploration of strategies to increase the efficacy. Identifying biomarkers that predict the response to immunotherapy will allow a more accurate selection of candidates. This review will provide an up-to-date overview of the current clinical data on the role of immunotherapy, summarize the promising biomarkers predictive of the response to ICIs and discuss the perspective for future research direction of immunotherapy in advanced BTC.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is a heterogeneous group of aggressive malignancies that arise from the epithelium of the biliary tract [1]. Based on the anatomical location, BTC is classified as gallbladder carcinoma (GBC), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (eCCA). The latter is further subdivided into perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA or Klatskin tumor) and distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA) [2]. Due to the differences in geographic distribution and ethnic factors, the incidence of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is low (between 0.35 and 2 cases per 1,000,000 annually) in high-income countries. However, it is up to 40 times higher in endemic regions, including Thailand and China. There has been a steady increase in the incidence of BTC in recent decades, mainly from iCCA but also from eCCA. The incidence of GBC is relatively stable or decreasing in high-income countries, which is probably attributed to the increase in routine cholecystectomy [3]. The main established risk factors associated with BTC include primary sclerosing cholangitis, liver fluke infections, hepatolithiasis, Caroli’s disease, cirrhosis, chronic viral infections (hepatitis virus B and hepatitis virus C), obesity and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease [4]. Notably, most patients with BTC have no identifiable risk factors. Despite variations in pathophysiology, GBC and CCA are often classified together and treated similarly, particularly in advanced stages.
Surgical resection remains the only current potentially curative treatment option for patients with early-stage BTC. However, most patients present with locally advanced or metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis due to the absence of early specific symptoms. Curative surgical resection with negative tumor margins can be achieved in less than 30% of patients [5]. Moreover, the risk of locoregional and distant relapse is still high even after radical resection. The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) can be as low as 20% depending on disease stage [6]. In selected patients with localized and unresectable disease, locoregional therapies, including transarterial chemoembolization, hepatic arterial chemotherapy infusion, radioembolization, radiofrequency ablation, and radiotherapy, can be considered [7]. Unfortunately, none have been validated in prospective randomized controlled trials. Therefore, systemic therapy is currently the mainstay of palliative therapy for patients with advanced or recurrent BTC. Based on the results of the landmark phase III ABC-02 study, the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin represents the standard first-line treatment for patients with locally advanced or metastatic disease, although median overall survival remains poor at less than 1 year [8]. In the phase III ABC-06 trial, second-line therapy with modified 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid/oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) offered a modest overall survival (OS) improvement (median OS, 6.2 vs. 5.3 months) compared to active symptom control alone [9]. The overall limited survival advantage provided by systemic chemotherapy emphasizes the unmet need for more effective treatments in advanced BTC.
The recent advent of molecular testing and next-generation sequencing has led to the delineation of the genetic landscape of BTC, suggesting substantial molecular heterogeneity across iCCA, eCCA, and GBC. Several clinical trials have evaluated the efficacy of novel targeted agents against BTC with certain molecular alterations. In the ClarIDHy phase III trial, patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH1)-mutated CCA who progressed on previous therapies responded considerably to ivosidenib in terms of both progression-free survival (PFS) and OS [10]. In the FIGHT-202 trial, pemigatinib was found to have higher response rates (36%, including three complete responses) and disease control rates (DCR) (80%) in patients with CCA and fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR)-2 fusions or rearrangements than in patients without FGF/FGFR alterations, with a duration of disease control of approximately 7.5 months [11]. The neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) inhibitors larotrectinib and entrectinib have shown high response rates (75%) and durable responses in early-phase trials of NTRK fusion-positive advanced solid tumors, including CCA [12]. Both have been approved by the US FDA for patients with NTRK fusion-positive tumors.
In the last decade, immunotherapy has significantly improved the therapeutic landscape of solid tumors, including melanoma [13], lung cancers [14], renal cancers [15], and hepatocellular carcinoma [16]. There is an increasing number of studies evaluating the application of immunotherapy in BTC, including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting programmed death 1 (PD-1), programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), and cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4), cancer vaccines and adoptive cell therapy [17]. Although these new treatment strategies have improved patient survival, the effectiveness of ICI monotherapy remains relatively limited, with an objective response rate (ORR) of up to approximately 20% [18]. Numerous trials are being conducted to investigate therapeutic strategies using combinations of ICIs with immunotherapy, chemotherapy, antiangiogenics, PARP inhibitors and local therapy, with preliminary results showing promising antitumor efficacy and tolerable safety [19]. Notably, only a minority of patients with advanced BTC are sensitive to immunotherapy. The mechanisms underlying the disparities in the response to immunotherapy are poorly defined. Therefore, the identification of predictive biomarkers for immunotherapy has become urgently warranted.
In this review, we provide an up-to-date overview of the current clinical data on the role of immunotherapy in advanced BTC. Furthermore, we summarize promising biomarkers that could serve as predictors of the response to immunotherapy and discuss perspectives for future research directions of immunotherapy in advanced BTC (Fig. 1).
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (ICI) Monotherapies
PD-1 Inhibitor: Pembrolizumab
Multiple small studies have evaluated the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors as monotherapy in BTC. Pembrolizumab, a highly selective, humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to the PD-1 receptor and blocks its interaction with its ligands, PD-L1 and programmed death ligand 2, has demonstrated activity as monotherapy in numerous tumor types and hematologic malignancies.
At the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Asia 2015 Congress, the interim results from KEYNOTE-028, a phase Ib study of pembrolizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors, were reported [20]. Twenty-four BTC patients with PD-L1 expression experienced an ORR and DCR of 17% and 34%, respectively. Data from KEYNOTE-028 based on approximately 2 years of additional follow-up have been recently published [21]. After a median follow-up of 5.7 months (0.6–55.4), the ORR was 13%, and the median OS and PFS were 5.7 (3.1–9.8) and 1.8 months (1.4–3.1), respectively. A total of 16.7% of patients experienced grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (AEs). There were no grade 4 to 5 treatment-related AEs. Lee et al. [22] evaluated the efficacy of pembrolizumab in patients with advanced MMR-deficient cancers across 12 different tumor types in 2017. Among four CCA patients, three achieved stable disease (SD), and one achieved complete response (CR). Thus, the DCR was 100%. In May 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted accelerated approval to pembrolizumab for patients with unresectable or metastatic, MSI-H or dMMR solid tumors. In June 2020, pembrolizumab was approved by the FDA for TMB-high (more than 10 mutations per megabase) noncolorectal malignancies. To date, KEYNOTE-158 (NCT02628067) is the largest study of ICI monotherapy with pembrolizumab [23]. Among 104 patients with advanced biliary cancers after progression or intolerance to standard therapy, the confirmed ORR was 5.8%; the median duration of response (DOR) was not reached (6.2–26.6 months). The median OS and PFS were 7.4 and 2.0 months, respectively. The rate of grade 3 to 5 treatment-related AEs was 13.5%. Among 22 patients with MSI-H/dMMR CCA who were enrolled in the same study, the ORR was 40.9%. The median OS and PFS were 24.3 and 4.2 months, respectively [24]. Therefore, pembrolizumab monotherapy provided durable antitumor activity, regardless of PD-L1 expression, and manageable toxicity.
PD-1 Inhibitor: Nivolumab
The anticancer activity of the human immunoglobulin G4 monoclonal antibody nivolumab was evaluated in 54 patients with histologically confirmed unresectable or metastatic CCA or gallbladder cancers who were refractory or intolerant to at least 1 line of systemic therapy but no more than 3 prior lines of systemic therapy [25]. Among 46 examined patients who had tumor response evaluation with radiologic imaging, investigator-assessed PR and SD were achieved by 10 patients (22%) and 17 patients (32%), respectively, and thus, the consequent DCR was 59%. Four responders (40%) achieved a durable objective response lasting at least 1 year. mPFS was 3.68 months, and mOS was 14.24 months. The National Cancer Institute Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (NCI-MATCH) trial enrolled three patients with MMR-deficient CCA treated with nivolumab [26]. CR was observed in 1 patient with CCA. The other two patients had PD as the best response.
Bifunctional Fusion Proteins
Higher expression of transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β) is associated with immune escape, resistance to current cancer therapy, and poor prognosis in advanced tumors, including biliary tract cancer [27]. While anti-TGF-β therapeutics offer a potential treatment for cancer, these agents have had little effectiveness in the clinic as monotherapies thus far [28]. M7824 (MSB0011359C) is a first-in-class bifunctional fusion protein composed of the extracellular domain of two TGF-β receptor 2 molecules fused to a fully humanized monoclonal antibody against PD-L1. M7824 simultaneously blocks the PD-L1 and TGF-β pathways of immune evasion, having an impact on both the innate and adaptive immune systems [29]. Thus, M7824 demonstrates encouraging clinical activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with pretreated advanced solid tumors [30].
The data from a phase I trial demonstrated the clinical activity of M7824 in 30 Asian patients with BTC whose disease progressed after standard chemotherapy. The ORR was 20%, and the total clinical response was 30%. The median PFS and OS were 2.5 months and 12.7 months, respectively. Eleven (37%) patients developed grade ≥ 3 TRAEs, including 3 patients who died due to septic shock and interstitial lung disease [31]. Based on these findings, further study of M7824 treatment in patients with BTC is warranted; for example, its use as a monotherapy in second-line BTC (NCT03833661), in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin (NCT04066491), and in combination with hypofractionated radiation therapy (NCT04708067) is worthy of further exploration.
Combination Therapies
ICI In Combination with Immunotherapy
The limited antitumor effect of immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy in advanced CCA has prompted investigators to explore different combination therapy strategies. Combining CTLA-4 and PD-1 blockers may have a synergistic effect on activating the antitumor immune response [32]. The results of clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of CTLA-4 + PD-1 blockers showed that combination therapy was beneficial for metastatic melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, and lung cancer [33,34,35].
Durvalumab is being investigated in phase I studies in Asian patients with biliary tract cancer [36]. The results showed the superiority of the durvalumab–tremelimumab combination versus durvalumab alone in terms of OS (10.1 vs. 8.1 months) and DCR at 12 weeks (32.2 vs. 16.7%). The median DORs for durvalumab and the durvalumab–tremelimumab combination were 9.7 and 8.5 months, respectively. No unexpected toxicities were observed. The CA209-538 trial is a multicenter, nonrandomized open label phase 2 study conducted in Australia for patients with rare advanced cancers after one or more lines of therapy [37]. In this trial, patients received treatment with nivolumab and ipilimumab. The ORR in the BTC subgroup was 23%, with a DCR of 44%. Of note, responses were limited to patients with ICC and GBC, suggesting that the response to dual checkpoint inhibitor therapy in BTC may differ by anatomical site. The median PFS was 2.9 months, and the OS was 5.7 months. Immune-related grade 3 or 4 events were reported in 15% of patients. Tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) make up the majority of immunosuppressive cells in the tumor microenvironment in CCA. The myelopoiesis, recruitment and polarization of TAMs are mediated by tumor-derived granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) [38]. Blocking the GM-CSF axis enhances antitumor T-cell immunity [39]. In a phase II trial, Kelley et al. investigated the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in combination with GM-CSF in 27 advanced BTC patients whose disease worsened after at least one prior therapy [40]. Five of the 24 patients (21%) achieved partial responses. Progression-free survival at 6 months was 35%.
ICI In Combination with Chemotherapy
Chemotherapy has been shown to have low therapeutic efficacy in clinical trials due in part to the immunosuppressive nature of tumor microenvironments. Recent findings have demonstrated a direct or indirect immunostimulatory effect of chemotherapeutic drugs [41]. There is growing evidence that chemotherapy may improve the effectiveness of immunotherapy by reducing the immunosuppressive effects in the microenvironment, increasing the cross-presentation of tumor antigens, and facilitating immune cell infiltration into the tumor core [42].
Nivolumab as monotherapy or in combination with cisplatin plus gemcitabine chemotherapy has been evaluated as a first-line treatment in Japanese patients with advanced BTC [43]. The median OS and PFS for the monotherapy cohort were 5.2 months and 1.4 months, respectively. One of 30 patients (3%) had an objective response. The ORR was 37% in the combination cohort, with an mPFS of 4.2 months and an mOS of 15.4 months. A multi-institutional phase 2 clinical trial (BilT-01) evaluated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin or ipilimumab in patients with advanced BTCs and no prior systemic therapy [44]. The median PFS and OS in the chemo-IO combination arm were 6.6 and 10.6 months and in the IO-IO combination arm were 3.9 and 8.2 months, respectively. Of interest, the observed OS rate at 2 years was 35.4% in the chemo-IO combination arm. However, the probability of survival with chemotherapy alone at 2 years is estimated to be 15%-22% [45, 46]. Gemcitabine and cisplatin plus durvalumab for patients with advanced BTC have been evaluated in the phase 3 TOPAZ-1 study [47]. A total of 685 patients with inoperable, locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic BTC were randomly assigned to receive durvalumab or a placebo. OS and PFS were significantly improved in the durvalumab group. The ORR was 26.7% for durvalumab and 18.7% for placebo. TOPAZ-1 is the first phase 3 trial to show that adding immunotherapy to standard chemotherapy can increase survival in biliary tract cancer without inducing any new serious side effects. Boilève A et al. [48] reported the safety run-in results of the triplet combination of durvalumab, tremelimumab, and paclitaxel in patients with advanced BTC in a noncomparative randomized phase II study (IMMUNOBIL PRODIGE 57). Among 20 enrolled patients, five patients in the triplet combination arm had dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), meeting a stopping rule for the trial inclusions.
In combination with chemotherapy, other anti-PD-1 drugs (mostly camrelizumab and toripalimab) have demonstrated some efficacy in advanced BTC. Toripalimab in combination with gemcitabine and S-1 (GS) showed encouraging efficacy and safety in a single-arm, phase II trial including 50 patients with advanced BTCs. The median PFS was 7 months, and the median OS was 15 months. The disease control rate was 87.8%, and the ORR was 30.6% [49]. The combination of camrelizumab and a gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) regimen in 54 advanced BTC patients was tested in a phase II trial [50]. The 6-month PFS rate was 50%. Twenty (54%) out of 37 patients had an objective response, with a DCR of 89%. The median PFS and OS were 6.1 months and 11.8 months, respectively.
Currently, several trials are evaluating various combination approaches, including cytotoxic chemotherapy with ICIs [51]. Moreover, the results from the phase 3 KEYNOTE-966 trial (gemcitabine and cisplatin plus pembrolizumab or placebo; NCT04003636) and the phase 2 EORTC1607 trial (gemcitabine and cisplatin plus pembrolizumab; NCT03260712) are forthcoming.
ICI In Combination with Anti-Angiogenics
In the vast majority of solid tumors, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is overexpressed and is commonly regarded as a primary mediator of tumor angiogenesis. There are intricate relationships between angiogenesis and immunity in tumors. VEGF inhibits immunological activation by inhibiting the development of dendritic cells [52]. In addition, VEGF could increase PD-1 expression on T cells and mediate CD8 T-cell exhaustion in malignancies [53]. Several immunostimulatory effects of antiangiogenic therapy have been identified, including an increase in the trafficking of T cells into tumors and a decrease in immunosuppressive cytokines and T regulatory cells [54, 55]. Initial clinical evidence also supports the synergistic interaction between antiangiogenic therapy and immunotherapy [56].
Arkenau HT et al. [57] reported the first phase I trial combining antiangiogenic agents (ramucirumab, an IgG1 VEGFR-2 antagonist) with pembrolizumab in patients with previously treated advanced BTC in 2018. Unfortunately, pembrolizumab plus ramucirumab had dismal clinical outcomes, with median PFS and OS of 1.6 months and 6.4 months, respectively. This combination therapy did not demonstrate a significant survival benefit compared with conventional treatment modalities. The combination of pembrolizumab or nivolumab with lenvatinib has shown remarkable results in a retrospective study involving 56 patients with advanced BTC, where the ORR and DCR reached 30.4% and 85.7%, respectively [58]. The median PFS and OS were 5 and 11 months, respectively. In addition, PD-L1-positive expression was associated with a better ORR and a longer PFS. Recently, an open-label phase II trial studied the efficacy of combining lenvatinib with a PD-1 inhibitor for the treatment of advanced BTC for the first time [59]. Thirty-eight patients were enrolled, with an ORR of 42.1% and DCR of 76.3%. The median OS was 17.7 months, and the 1-year OS rate was 47.4%. Thirteen (34.2%) patients achieved downstaging and underwent surgery, six of whom (46.2%) achieved a pathologic response. Treatment response and prognosis were related to the histopathological type of BTC. Patients with GBC showed a greater ORR (61.5%) than those with ICC (40%) or ECC (0%). For patients with advanced gallbladder cancer (GBC), this combination therapy has been shown to be an effective and tolerable therapy in a preliminary single-arm exploratory study [60]. Ten (32.3%) out of 31 patients achieved an objective response. The DCR was 83.9%, with a median PFS of 5.0 months and a median OS of 11.3 months. Encouragingly, three (9.7%) patients were reassigned to surgery, and one patient achieved a pathological complete response.
Currently, no standard second-line systemic treatment regimen has been recommended for advanced BTC. A real-world retrospective study in China included 74 patients with advanced BTCs who experienced progression after CisGem in first-line therapy [61]. Patients treated with lenvatinib plus a PD-1 inhibitor achieved an ORR of 20.27% and a DCR of 71.62%. The mPFS was 4.0 months, and the median OS was 9.5 months. A total of 52.7% of patients developed grade 3/4 AEs. Recently, Lulu X et al. [62] assessed the efficacy of lenvatinib with a PD-1 inhibitor in a single-arm retrospective study focusing on ICC patients after chemotherapy failure. The ORR was 17.5%, and the DCR was 75.0%. The median PFS and 6-month PFS rates were 5.8 months and 32.5%, respectively. The median OS was 14.3 months, and the 12-month and 18-month rates were 61.4% and 34.7%, respectively. Therefore, this combination could provide a new treatment option for advanced ICC.
A combination of angiogenesis/checkpoint blockade with chemotherapy may further enhance antitumor immune responses. In a phase II trial, the combination of toripalimab and lenvatinib plus GEMOX was evaluated as a first-line therapy for locally progressed or metastatic ICC [63]. The ORR was 80% (24/30), and the DCR was 93.3% (28/30) among the 30 enrolled patients. CR was observed in one patient. Three patients with locally advanced disease received resection after being successfully downstaged. The median PFS was 10.0 months, and the median DOR was 9.8 months.
ICI In Combination with PARP Inhibitors
Accumulating evidence suggests that targeting the DNA damage response (DDR) has antitumor effects in a variety of cancer types. The PARP family of proteins plays critical roles in maintaining genomic stability and avoiding the accumulation of DNA damage [64]. PARP inhibitors are the only DDR-targeted agents approved by the FDA for a subset of patients with BRCA mutations and breast, ovarian, or pancreatic cancers [65]. As a tumor suppressor gene, BRCA encodes a nucleic acid protein that regulates transcription, double-stranded DNA repair, and DNA recombination [66]. The incidence of BRCA1/2 mutations in BTC patients varies between 1 and 7% [67, 68].
Xiong F et al. [69] described a patient with BRCA1-mutated and PD-L1-positive recurrent iCCA who received olaparib (a PARP inhibitor) and pembrolizumab. The patient achieved CR without significant adverse events. Such combinations have shown encouraging antitumor activity in other malignancies [70]. Multiple clinical trials are now evaluating the potential role of PARP inhibitors combined with ICIs in metastatic BTC. The combination of the PARP inhibitor olaparib and durvalumab is currently being evaluated in a phase II trial (NCT03991832) in patients with advanced IDH-mutated solid tumors, including CCA. The primary outcomes of this trial are ORR and DCR. The estimated enrollment is 58 patients, and the estimated primary completion date is March 2024. A multicenter phase II trial of rucaparib in combination with nivolumab as maintenance therapy for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer following platinum therapy was recruiting (NCT03639935), with an estimated primary completion date in April 2023.
ICI In Combination with Local Therapy
Local tumor destruction combined with immunotherapy may have a synergistic effect against solid tumors [71]. In addition to reducing tumor burden, radiotherapy can trigger antitumor immunity and reprogram of the tumor microenvironment [72]. By directly destroying DNA, irradiation allows tumor cells to release more neoantigens, which activate the immune system. As a result of localized irradiation, chemokines are released, and T cells are be recruited, converting tumors into immune-susceptible tumors [73].
Reports on the efficacy of immunotherapy combined with radiotherapy in advanced CCA were mainly case reports and small case series. In a case of a chemotherapy-intolerable stage IV ICC patient with multiple distant metastases, a combination of anti-PD-1 immunotherapy and radiotherapy was adopted as first-line treatment [74]. After 26 months of treatment, combined therapy eventually resulted in a complete response to the primary tumor and all metastases. Zhao Q et al. [75] reported four cases of refractory advanced ICC or hilar CCA effectively managed with anti-PD-1 antibody treatment following or concomitant with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). The median OS of these patients was greater than 1 year. Radical surgical resection was performed in one patient with a large lesion (12.9 × 11.8 cm) and multiple satellite lesions who was initially deemed unresectable. The combination strategy exhibited good antitumor activity, sustained clinical efficacy, and a favorable safety profile. A retrospective report on the therapeutic responses of PD-1 blockade combined with SBRT revealed that late-stage or recurrent ICC patients can benefit from this combination therapy, even if they had low TMB, pMMR, MSS or negative PD-L1 expression [76]. It is worth noting that strong abscopal effects were observed in all three patients. Both the recurrent intrahepatic lesion and the lymph node metastases were well controlled. These results indicate that radiotherapy may sensitize patients to immunotherapy and increase its efficacy. The results of the combination of durvalumab and tremelimab with radiation were recently presented [77]. Fifteen patients with metastatic BTC who progressed after first-line therapy or refused standard therapy were enrolled in this pilot study. Of 13 patients who received the combination therapy, the DCR was 33%, with 17% PR and 8% CR. Grade 3–4 toxicities were observed in nine out of 15 patients (60%).
In addition to radiotherapy, local ablation is commonly used for treating small liver tumors of up to 5 cm in diameter. Xie C et al. [78] explored the efficacy of the combination of tremelimumab and microwave ablation in 20 patients with advanced BTC. An overall response rate of 12.5% and a disease control rate of 50% were observed. The median PFS, time to progression (TTP), and OS were 3.4 months, 3.3 months and 6.0 months, respectively. The combination treatment was well tolerated, with less than 10% of patients experiencing grade 3–4 toxicity. Profiling of immune cell subsets in peripheral blood revealed an increase in circulating activated (HLA-DR-positive) CD8 + T cells. Selected published trials on the combination of ICIs with immunotherapy, chemotherapy, anti-angiogenics or local therapy in advanced BTC are shown in Table 1.
Cancer Vaccines
Cancer vaccines utilize tumor-specific antigens based on peptides and DCs to stimulate T cells and enhance the antitumor immune response. As tumor-associated antigens (TAAs), Wilms’ tumor protein 1 (WT1) was found in approximately 80% of BTCs, while mucin protein 1 (MUC1) was reported to be overexpressed in 90% of BTCs [79]. A phase I study of WT1 peptide vaccination combined with gemcitabine in 8 patients with advanced BTC reported that the DCR at 2 months was 50% for BTC, and the median OS was 288 days [80]. WT1-specific T cells were detected in 5/8 of the patients after vaccination. Another phase I clinical trial revealed the safety of the MUC1 peptide vaccine in 8 patients with advanced pancreatic and biliary cancers. However, disease progression was noted in 7 patients [81].
Promising results have been obtained by a case report [82]. A personalized multipeptide vaccination composed of seven tumor-associated epitopes was used to treat a patient with metastatic ICC. The vaccine was designed based on whole exome sequencing (WES), whole transcriptome sequencing (WTS) and HLA ligandome analysis of the tumors. After a follow-up period of 41 months, the patient remained clinically healthy, without any radiologically detectable tumors. A phase I trial reported the antitumor effect of vaccination with four peptides in 9 patients with advanced and chemorefractory BTC [83]. Seven of nine patients demonstrated peptide-specific T-cell immune responses, and six of nine had clinical responses. The median PFS and OS were 156 days and 380 days, respectively. Another study by the same group reported the outcome of a three-peptide vaccination that included cell division cycle associated 1 (CDCA1), cadherin 3 (CDH3) and kinesin family member 20A (KIF20A) in nine patients with advanced BTC [84]. The vaccination was well tolerated. All patients had peptide-specific T-cell responses, with 5/9 patients exhibiting stable disease. In a phase II personalized multipeptide vaccine trial, four HLA-matched peptides selected based on preexisting host immunity were administered in 25 advanced BTC patents [85]. Eight (47%) of the 17 patients who completed the first cycle of vaccination demonstrated an induction of T-cell responses to the vaccine peptides. T-cell responses were observed in 4 of 7 patients (57%) at the second cycle of vaccination.
Dendritic cells (DCs) are the most efficient antigen-presenting cells for activating naive T cells and play a role in regulating both innate and adaptive immune responses. Several tumors, including melanoma, pancreatic cancer, prostate cancer, and thyroid cancer, have been treated with DC-based immunotherapy [86,87,88,89]. In a retrospective study, 65 patients with nonresectable, recurrent, or metastatic BTC received a DC-based vaccine targeting WT1 and/or MUC1 [90]. The median survival time (MST) was 18.5 months. The DCR and ORR were 29 and 6%, respectively. The combination of chemotherapy and DC-based immunotherapy contributed significantly to the extension of MST. No serious treatment-related AEs were observed.
Adoptive Cell Therapy
Adoptive cell therapy (ACT) refers to the intravenous transfer of either tumor-resident or peripheral blood-modified immune cells into cancer patients to mediate an antitumor function [91]. Three different types of ACT exist, namely, autologous tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) infusion, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy targeting specific surface tumor antigens and genetically modified T-cell receptor (TCR) T-cell therapy [92].
The presence of TILs in neoplastic tissue is believed to suggest an antitumor immune response by the host and is closely related to clinical prognosis [93]. A patient with metastatic CCA who progressed after multiple rounds of chemotherapy was enrolled in a tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL)-based ACT protocol for patients with GI cancers [94]. TIL generated from lung metastases contained CD4 + Th1 cells recognizing a mutation in the erbb2 interacting protein (ERBB2IP) expressed by the cancer. The patient received adoptive transfer of TIL followed by interleukin (IL)-2 to enhance T-cell proliferation and function. All target lung and liver lesions markedly shrank after 7 months of follow-up. The patient experienced disease stabilization for approximately 13 months.
Immunotherapy with CAR-T cells has achieved remarkable success in treating hematological malignancies. However, CAR-T therapy for solid tumors faces multiple obstacles, such as trafficking to the tumor sites, the hostile tumor microenvironment, and immune-related adverse events [95]. Feng et al. [96] reported a patient with unresectable/metastatic CCA who was resistant to chemotherapy and radiotherapy and was successively treated with CAR-T cells targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and CD133, respectively. The patient achieved a PR of 8.5 months from the CART-EGFR therapy and 4.5 months from the CART-CD133 treatment. Further investigation is needed on the toxic effects, especially on epidermal/endothelial damage. A phase I study from the same team reported HER2-targeted CAR-T therapy in 11 patients with HER2-positive advanced BTC (n = 9) and pancreatic adenocarcinoma (n = 2) [97]. One patient obtained a 4.5-month PR, and 5 achieved SD. The median PFS was 4.8 months. CAR-T-cell infusions resulted in mild to moderate adverse events, with the exception of one case of grade 3 acute febrile illness and one transaminase abnormality. Guo Y et al. [98] evaluated the clinical outcomes of ACT using autologous T cells expressing an EGFR-specific CAR for the treatment of EGFR-positive advanced unresectable, relapsed/metastatic BTCs. Ten of the 17 evaluable patients had SD for 2.5 to 15 months, while one achieved CR for 22 months. The median PFS was 4 months. The infusion of CAR T cells was well tolerated; however, the predicted cutaneous and mucosal adverse effects of anti-EGFR therapy were detected.
Currently, there is not enough evidence to support the clinical use of CAR T‑cell treatment for advanced CCA. More clinical trials are required to ensure safe and efficacious clinical application. The safety and efficacy of MUC-1 CAR T cells are under investigation in a Chinese I/II trial for patients with ICC (NCT03633773). Another clinical trial based on EGFR-targeting CAR T-cell therapy for patients with chemotherapy-refractory advanced solid tumors is recruiting (NCT01869166).
Predictive Markers of Response
Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapies have been approved for treating human cancers with considerable clinical effects. Nevertheless, only a minority of patients with these cancers are sensitive to ICI therapies. The establishment of predictive biomarkers for immunotherapy and the understanding of resistance mechanisms in nonresponders is therefore of utmost importance to maximize therapeutic benefits.
PD-L1
PD-L1 expression assessed through immunohistochemistry is actually considered a logical biomarker for predicting the efficacy of anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 therapy in a number of tumor types [99]. However, there are limited data on the role of PD-L1 in advanced BTC patients. PD-L1 expression in BTC is highly heterogeneous. According to previous studies, PD-L1 expression is found in 9% to 72% of tumors and 46% to 63% of immune cells within the tumor microenvironment [100, 101]. Gani et al. [101] analyzed 54 tumor samples collected from patients undergoing surgery for ICC. Thirty-nine samples (72.2%) were positive for PD-L1 expression on cells in the tumor front. A recent study investigated the genetic and immune biomarker profiles of surgically resected iCCA with singleplex, whole-slide immunohistochemistry [102]. Of note, PD-L1 staining using clone 22C3 was completely absent in the vast majority of samples (n = 93/97). Other studies showed higher PD-L1 expression using clones 5H1 or E1L3 [101, 103]. Variation in PD-L1 expression is attributable to the type of clone employed, the variability of thresholds to define PD-L1 positivity, the heterogeneity of the sample, and the small sample size.
A comprehensive meta-analysis of 15 independent studies involving 1,776 BTC patients found that increased PD-L1 expression was associated with poor overall survival but not with disease-free survival or clinical characteristics [104]. Kim H et al. [105] analyzed the prognostic value of PD-L1 expression in 186 patients with advanced BTC. PD-L1 expression was not significantly associated with OS or PFS. Interestingly, in the subgroup analysis, extrahepatic CCA patients negative for PD-L1 expression had better OS and PFS than those positive for PD-L1 expression.
To date, increasing data are available regarding the predictive value of PD-L1 expression in patients treated with ICIs. In a subgroup analysis in the KEYNOTE-158 phase II trial [21], the median PFS in the PD-L1-expressing and nonexpressing subgroups was 1.9 and 2.1 months, respectively; the median OS was 7.2 and 9.3 months, respectively. Recently, nivolumab was investigated as a second-line treatment for 54 advanced BTC patients in a phase II trial [25]. PD-L1-positive patients had a significantly longer median PFS than PD-L1-negative patients (10.4 versus 2.3 months). However, there was no correlation between PD-1-expressing TILs and clinical outcome. The efficacy and safety of toripalimab in combination with gemcitabine and S-1 (GS) in patients with advanced BTCs were investigated in a phase II trial [49]. The biomarker analysis revealed that low PD-L1 expression was strongly associated with poorer PFS, while no significant difference was observed with regard to OS. These results were consistent with several retrospective studies evaluating the anticancer efficacy of lenvatinib plus PD-1 antibody in patients with BTC [60, 61]. Lin J et al. [106] reported that PD-L1-positive tumor cells were associated with improved survival outcomes in both PFS and OS in patients with advanced BTC who received combined treatment with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab. However, in the phase III TOPAZ-1 trial, the combination of durvalumab and chemotherapy benefited patients with PD-L1-positive and PD-L1-negative tumors, suggesting that PD-L1 status may have limited value in predicting clinical benefit [58]. Considering the limited sample size, the different PD-L1 assays and cutoff values for PD-L1 expression, the role of PD-L1 expression as an immunotherapy biomarker for advanced BTC remains controversial.
dMMR/MSI-H
DNA mismatch repair (MMR) is a highly conserved repair mechanism in cellular evolution. Inactivation of MMR genes and dysfunction of MMR (dMMR) proteins may lead to microsatellite instability (MSI), which has been recognized as a distinct tumorigenesis pathway [107]. MSI causes the accumulation of mutations, which in turn leads to the formation of neoantigens and the activation of antitumor immune responses.
The incidence of microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) varies from 0–31.37% in 39 cancer types. The published data concerning the overall incidence of dMMR or MSI-H in BTC are controversial. In a systematic review by Silva [108], the estimated frequencies of dMMR or MSI-H were 5% for gallbladder carcinoma, 10% for ICC and 5–13% for extrahepatic CCAs. In another study, 91 CCAs were stained by immunohistochemistry for MMR genes. MMR deficiency was found in 20 tumors (22%) [109]. Conversely, recent studies from China and Germany revealed that only 1.3% to 2.06% of patients with CCA had dMMR or MSI-H status [110,111,112].
Studies suggest that dMMR/MSI-H status could serve as a candidate biomarker for predicting ICI response in patients with solid tumors, regardless of cancer type. Based on the results of the KEYNOTE-016, 164, 012, 028, and 158 trials, pembrolizumab was approved by the FDA in 2017 as a second- or higher-line treatment option for patients with unresectable or metastatic dMMR/MSI-H solid tumors, including CCA [113]. This is the first time that one biomarker defined an indication regardless of the primary tumor site. Data from patients with advanced BTC receiving pembrolizumab showed that only one of 24 patients in the KEYNOTE-028 study had MSI-H tumors, and none of 104 patients in the KEYNOTE-158 study had MSI-H tumors [21]. All six of the responding patients in KEYNOTE-158 were microsatellite stable. In the TOPAZ-1 trial [47], only 5 out of 333 (1.5%) patients with evaluable MSI had MSI-H tumors. Consequently, the significant improvement in OS cannot be attributed solely to the efficacy of durvalumab in patients with MSI-H tumors. Due to the limited data available, the value of dMMR/MSI-H in predicting the efficacy of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy in CCA requires further investigation.
TMB
The tumor mutational burden (TMB) is the total number of somatic nonsynonymous mutations per coding region of a tumor genome. Highly mutated tumors can generate a large number of neoantigens, some of which may increase T-cell reactivity. Several analyses have shown a correlation between high TMB and improved response to treatment with immune checkpoint blockade across several tumor types [114,115,116]. In the prospective exploratory analysis of the KEYNOTE-158 study, Marabelle A et al. [117] found that TMB-high status was associated with a higher proportion of patients with an objective response than nontTMB-high status among patients who received pembrolizumab monotherapy for previously treated solid tumors. A total of 105 (13%) of the 805 patients had a TMB-high status. Most of them had lung and cervical cancer, and none had BTC. The proportions of patients with an objective response in the TMB-high and non-TMB-high groups were 29% and 6%, respectively. Based on these findings, anti-PD-1 therapy was approved by the FDA in 2020 for solid tumors with a TMB of 10 or more mutations per megabase.
Data on the prevalence of TMB-high BTC are limited. Through a comparative genomic profiling analysis of 309 tissues from patients with BTC, TMB-high (TMB ≥ 20 mut/Mb) was found in only 2.9% of cases [118]. A retrospective cohort study using a real-world dataset evaluated the prevalence of TMB-high (TMB ≥ 10 mut/Mb) among 2589 patients with 10 tumor types [119]. The prevalence of TMB-high varies widely depending on tumor type. The prevalence of TMB-high was highest in patients with SCLC (40.0%), NETs (29.3%), and cervical cancer (14.9%), whereas it was lowest in patients with mesothelioma (1.2%), thyroid cancer (2.7%), and biliary cancer (4.0%). In addition, the median TMB varied considerably among the different tumors, with a range from 1.7 mut/Mb to 8.7 mut/Mb. Therefore, the optimal TMB threshold to identify patients for immunotherapy needs to be defined based on the tumor type. Moreover, the frequency of TMB-high differed significantly between BTC subtypes. TMB is significantly higher in eCCA (18%) and GBC (22%) than in iCCA (13%) [120].
Few studies have explored the value of TMB for predicting the response to immunotherapy in patients with BTC. Moreover, the results were inconsistent and conflicting. A series of 24 patients with relapsed or advanced BTC was examined with next-generation sequencing (NGS) [121]. Three patients with TMB-high tumors were treated with nivolumab and chemotherapy. All these patients achieved complete response or partial response. In a retrospective cohort study of 1678 patients with MSS tumors from 16 cancer types who were treated with ICI therapy [122], response rates were generally higher with a high TMB (10 mutations per megabase). However, of 53 patients with hepatobiliary tumors, four (7.5%) patients had a high TMB; none responded to immunotherapy. Zhou C et al. [123] evaluated the value of WES-derived TMB in 309 patients who had received ICI therapy across 5 different cancers. When a fixed number of 10 mutations/Mb was used as the threshold criterion to stratify patients, only 4 of 62 (6.45%) patients with CCA had a TMB-high status, which prevented a meaningful statistical comparison. When the top tertile TMB value was used as the divider, unexpectedly, the TMB-high group had a lower OS than the TMB-low group, although this difference did not achieve statistical significance. Therefore, a strong correlation between TMB-high and ICI benefit in patients with CCA could not be established in this cohort. In the first trial of lenvatinib plus PD-1 inhibitors for the first-line treatment of BTC, Zhang Q et al. [59] also reported that patients with lower TMB had a significantly better ORR and longer OS than patients with higher TMB. In contrast, a real-world retrospective study revealed a prolonged PFS in the TMB-high group among 74 patients with advanced BTC treated with lenvatinib and PD-1 inhibitors [61]. Exploratory analysis of biomarkers in a phase II study that enrolled 50 patients who received toripalimab combined with gemcitabine and S-1 indicated that TMB was not associated with clinical response [49], which is consistent with another recently published study in China [124]. Overall, due to the lack of standardization of tissue TMB calculation, robust predictive cutoffs and the complexity of immune response and resistance, further studies are needed to elucidate the role of TMB in predicting the response to ICIs in BTC patients.
DNA Damage Repair
The development and progression of CCA have been associated with increased DNA damage and genomic instability. The DNA damage response (DDR) is a multicomponent, structured network that has developed to repair damaged DNA, maintain genome fidelity and avoid the accumulation of mutations [125]. DDR gene aberrations impair DNA damage repair processes and drive genomic instability, which may increase tumor immunogenicity and induce a better response to immunotherapy [126]. Next-generation profiling of CCA revealed the presence of alterations in DDR-related genes, including BRCA1/2, PARP, ATM, ATR, BAP1, ARID1A, RAD51, MLH1, TP53, PALB2, PTEN, FANC, NBN, EMSY and MRE11 [127]. The most frequently altered DDR genes were ATM (5%) and BRCA1/2 (4.8%) [128]. Approximately 30% of BTC patients have DDR gene mutations, whereas the rate of BRCA mutations fluctuates between 1 and 7% [129,130,131].
Spizzo G et al. [132] analyzed tumor samples from 1292 patients with BTC using NGS. BRCA mutations were detected in 3.6% (n = 46) of 1292 BTC samples. The results regarding the association of BRCA1/2 mutations with the predictive biomarkers of response to ICIs showed that the median TMB level was significantly higher in BRCA-mutant BTC than in BRCA-WT BTC. Moreover, MSI-H/dMMR was observed more frequently in patients with BRCA-mutant BTC. Therefore, immune checkpoint inhibition may benefit patients with BRCA-mutated BTC. Nonetheless, regarding the methods for testing and defining DDR alterations in BTC, no consensus has been reached thus far. In addition, due to the low incidence of single DDR gene mutations, most small-sample studies have been unable to establish a direct association between DDR gene mutations and the response to ICIs in BTC patients. Further studies are warranted in this direction.
Genetic Alterations
A comprehensive understanding of the genetic characteristics is essential for identifying biomarkers that predict the response to immunotherapy for BTC patients. Chen X et al. [133] assessed the genomic profiles of 98 patients with advanced BTC (CCA, n = 62; GBC, n = 36). The most commonly mutated gene in both CCA (55%) and GBC (72%) was TP53. CCA exhibited a high incidence of KRAS-TP53 comutations, which was associated with a favorable response to camrelizumab (ORR = 75%), while CCA with a single KRAS mutation had a poor immunotherapy outcome. Furthermore, eleven mutated genes with the most powerful prognostic role were selected to develop a genetic signature. The signature wild-type subtype responded better to camrelizumab than its mutated subtype. ERBB2 and ERBB3 mutations have been implicated in a variety of cancers. Li M et al. [134] performed WES to identify novel somatic mutations in 157 patients with GBC. ERBB2 and ERBB3 mutations were observed in 7%-8% of patients. These mutations upregulated PD-L1 expression in GBC cells and effectively suppressed normal T-cell-mediated cytotoxicity in vitro. PD-L1 blockade can enhance the efficacy of anti-ERBB therapy in GBC cells with ERBB2/ERBB3 mutations.
Recently, a comprehensive genomic characterization of a large Western cohort (n = 189) of extrahepatic CCA (eCCA) was performed by Montal R et al. [135]. Four molecular classes (metabolic, proliferation, mesenchymal and immune) were identified based on an integrative molecular analysis. The eCCA immune class had overexpression of PD-1/PD-L1 and displayed marked lymphocytic infiltration. Therefore, the molecular features in the eCCA immune class may define a population that could benefit from ICIs. Yoon JG et al. [136] identified the molecular features of treatment responses to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade therapy in 48 BTC patients. A high intratumoral TIL level at the tumor center was the most important determinant of clinical benefit. KRAS alterations and chromosomal instability (CIN) were found to be associated with a lower clinical benefit rate (CBR) to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade and a shorter PFS after immunotherapy. Patient stratification based on KRAS alterations, CIN status and PD-L1 expression may improve the clinical benefit of immunotherapy in BTC patients.
Discussion
Biliary tract cancers are heterogeneous neoplasms of poor prognosis with specific anatomical, molecular and biological characteristics. Advanced BTC remains a difficult-to-treat malignancy. Most patients are deprived of curative options due to the high heterogeneity and complex tumor microenvironment (TME). Consequently, the development of more effective and personalized treatment options is a great unmet need. In recent years, immunotherapy has brought revolutionary changes in the field of cancer treatment. The role of immunotherapy in advanced BTC is currently being investigated (Table 2). The limited response to ICI monotherapy in unselected patients and the immune-suppressed nature of the biliary TME emphasize the need for the development of combinational therapeutic approaches along with predictive biomarkers.
Based on current evidence from diverse clinical studies, ICIs in combination with immunotherapy, chemotherapy, anti-angiogenics, PARP inhibitors or local therapy could increase the sensitivity of BTC to immune therapies. However, the interpretation of available data is challenged by small sample sizes, single-arm designs, and inherent clinical and molecular heterogeneity. TOPAZ-1 is the first phase 3 trial to demonstrate that the addition of immunotherapy to standard chemotherapy can increase survival in biliary tract cancer, importantly, without inducing any new serious side effects [47]. In the latest NCCN guidelines for hepatobiliary cancers, durvalumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin were adjusted as preferred regimens, representing a milestone for the management of advanced BTC. Recently, the combination of a PD-1 inhibitor with lenvatinib as first-line or second-line treatment for advanced BTC has shown remarkable results in several phase II and retrospective trials, with objective response rates ranging from 10% to 42.1% and median OS ranging from 8.6 to 17.7 months [58,59,60,61,62]. Further randomized phase III studies are still needed to determine their advantages over standard treatments. Given the genetic heterogeneity of advanced BTC, it is essential to obtain genomic profiles from all patients to guide therapeutic options. Because of the interaction between oncogenic and immunologic pathways, combining molecular and immunotherapies may be a promising approach for BTC. For instance, mutations in HER2/HER3 have been linked to PD-L1-mediated immune escape [137]. Mutations in oncogenes such as BRAF and KRAS are more common in BTC with PD-L1 positivity [138]. Combining PD-1 antibodies with targeted agents is now FDA approved for the treatment of advanced melanoma (BRAF/MEK inhibition) and gastric cancer (anti-HER2) [139, 140].
Revealing robust biomarkers to select patients who could benefit from immunotherapies is an important future research direction. Biomarker development in BTC is complicated by the heterogeneity of the tumor and its microenvironment, as well as the scarcity of tumor tissue obtainable for clinical diagnostics or research [141]. The majority of biomarkers of response and resistance to checkpoint blockade have focused on tumor-intrinsic or immune-specific markers, such as PD-L1, TMB-high, and MSI-H/dMMR. The role of PD-L1 as a biomarker in BTC has been mainly studied retrospectively in small phase I/II studies. Randomized studies are required to evaluate the value of PD-L1 IHC. High TMBs (> 10 or > 20 Mut/Mb) are rare in patients with BTCs, and there is no consensus on the optimal TMB cutoff for BTC. Reports about the value of TMB for predicting the response to immunotherapy are inconsistent. MSI-H/dMMR status is exceedingly rare, accounting for only 1% ~ 2% of patients with BTC. Therefore, novel biomarkers are required to identify BTC patients who will benefit from immunotherapy. Other promising biomarkers are currently being investigated, such as the tumor microenvironment and DNA damage repair [68]. Moreover, it seems unlikely that a single biomarker will be adequate to identify patients for immunotherapy. Combinatorial biomarker strategies with the capacity to dynamically capture and integrate various TME parameters will be required [142]. In addition, due to the scarcity of adequate tumor tissue for molecular profiling, liquid biopsy techniques, such as ctDNA in blood or bile, may have particular advantages [143, 144]. In recent years, the field of radiomics has just begun to emerge in medical oncology. Radiomics enables the extraction of a vast quantity of data, including biomolecular and genetic information, by analyzing the texture of radiological images [145]. Further studies on the prognostic value of radiomics as an imaging biomarker in BTC are needed.
Early clinical trials of therapeutic cancer vaccination and adoptive cell therapy have shown encouraging clinical results. However, there is still a long way to go via the validation of therapeutic efficacy and exploration of strategies to increase the efficacy. The strategy of improving clinical efficacy includes discovering new antigens to customize more personalized immunotherapy. In addition, deep integrative genomic analysis can identify significant and potentially immunogenic genetic mutations. For example, Pandey A et al. [146] analyzed 167 gallbladder cancers and identified ELF3 as a significantly mutated gene. Several neoantigens produced by ELF3 mutations are able to activate CD8 + T cells, suggesting that they may be potential cancer vaccine candidates. Available evidence indicates that the tumor microenvironment plays an important role in the progression of BTC [147, 148]. Tumor and immune cells, along with vasculature, extracellular matrix, and signaling molecules, regulate immune responses and influence the effectiveness of immunotherapy. BTC is characterized by a prominent desmoplastic TME with immunosuppressive innate immune cells. The modulation of the crosstalk between BTC and TME by targeting different components of the TME in combination with cytotoxic treatments or ICIs represents an attractive therapeutic prospective [149].
Key References
-
Vogel A, Bridgewater J, Edeline J, Kelley RK, Klümpen HJ, Malka D, et al. Biliary tract cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2023;34(2):127-40.
-
This article provides key recommendations for managing biliary tract cancer, including clinical and pathological diagnosis, staging and risk assessment, treatment and follow-up.
-
-
Valle JW, Kelley RK, Nervi B, Oh DY, Zhu AX. Biliary tract cancer. Lancet. 2021;397(10272):428-44.
-
This article presents new advances in the etiology, diagnosis, molecular classification and treatment of biliary tract cancer.
-
-
Moris D, Palta M, Kim C, Allen PJ, Morse MA, Lidsky ME. Advances in the treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: An overview of the current and future therapeutic landscape for clinicians. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022.
-
This article focuses on current and future ICC treatment strategies, with detailed discussion of surgical and local interventions as well as systemic therapies.
-
-
Lamarca A, Palmer DH, Wasan HS, Ross PJ, Ma YT, Arora A, et al. Second-line FOLFOX chemotherapy versus active symptom control for advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC-06): a phase 3, open-label, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22(5):690-701.
-
The first randomised phase 3 clinical trial to explore the role of second-line chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer. It showes that FOLFOX can improve median overall survival in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer after progression following cisplatin and gemcitabine.
-
-
Oh D-Y, Ruth He A, Qin S, Chen L-T, Okusaka T, Vogel A, et al. Durvalumab plus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer. NEJM Evidence. 2022;1(8):1-11.
-
A randomised, double-blind, global phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of durvalumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin versus placebo in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin as a first-line treatment for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer.
-
-
Li W, Wang Y, Yu Y, Li Q, Wang Y, Zhang C, et al. Toripalimab in advanced biliary tract cancer. Innovation (Camb). 2022;3(4):100255.
-
A phase II, open-label, single-arm, single-centre clinical trial demonstrates the efficacy and safety of toripalimab in combination with GS as first-line treatment for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer.
-
-
Carapeto F, Bozorgui B, Shroff RT, Chagani S, Solis Soto L, Foo WC, et al. The immunogenomic landscape of resected intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Hepatology. 2022;75(2):297-308.
-
This is the first extensive immune marker immunohistochemistry panel in CCA, providing a solid foundation for the rational improvement and personalization of immunotherapeutic strategies.
-
-
Valero C, Lee M, Hoen D, Zehir A, Berger MF, Seshan VE, et al. Response Rates to Anti-PD-1 Immunotherapy in Microsatellite-Stable Solid Tumors With 10 or More Mutations per Megabase. JAMA Oncol. 2021;7(5):739-43.
-
The data from this cohort study demonstrates that immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy for tumours with 10 or more mutations per megabase of TMB generally has a higher response rate across multiple cancer types. However, the predictive value of a single universal threshold for TMB -high tumours is limited because it varies widely across cancer types.
-
-
Yoon JG, Kim MH, Jang M, Kim H, Hwang HK, Kang CM, et al. Molecular Characterization of Biliary Tract Cancer Predicts Chemotherapy and Programmed Death 1/Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Blockade Responses. Hepatology. 2021;74(4):1914-31.
-
This article uses a clinical sequencing platform to predict the molecular characteristics of chemotherapy and immunotherapy responses in advanced biliary tract cancer.
-
-
Martin-Serrano MA, Kepecs B, Torres-Martin M, Bramel ER, Haber PK, Merritt E, et al. Novel microenvironment-based classification of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with therapeutic implications. Gut. 2022.
-
This article describes a comprehensive TME-based iCCA composite stratification and calls it stroma, tumour, immune microenvironment based or STIM.
-
References and Recommended Reading
Razumilava N, Gores GJJL. Cholangiocarcinoma Lancet. 2014;383(9935):2168–79.
Vogel A, Bridgewater J, Edeline J, Kelley RK, Klümpen HJ, Malka D, et al. Biliary tract cancer: ESMO clinical practice guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2023;34(2):127–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2022.10.506.
Valle JW, Kelley RK, Nervi B, Oh DY, Zhu AX. Biliary tract cancer. Lancet. 2021;397(10272):428–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00153-7.
Clements O, Eliahoo J, Kim JU, Taylor-Robinson SD, Khan SA. Risk factors for intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hepatol. 2020;72(1):95–103.
Kelley RK, Bridgewater J, Gores GJ, Zhu AX. Systemic therapies for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. J Hepatol. 2020;72(2):353–63.
Ilyas FZ, Beane JD, Pawlik TM. The state of immunotherapy in hepatobiliary cancers. Cells. 2021;10(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/cells10082096.
Moris D, Palta M, Kim C, Allen PJ, Morse MA, Lidsky ME. Advances in the treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: an overview of the current and future therapeutic landscape for clinicians. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21759.
Valle J, Wasan H, Palmer DH, Cunningham D, Anthoney A, Maraveyas A, et al. Cisplatin plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine for biliary tract cancer. 2010;362(14):1273–81. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0908721.
Lamarca A, Palmer DH, Wasan HS, Ross PJ, Ma YT, Arora A, et al. Second-line FOLFOX chemotherapy versus active symptom control for advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC-06): a phase 3, open-label, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22(5):690–701. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00027-9.
Abou-Alfa GK, Macarulla T, Javle MM, Kelley RK, Lubner SJ, Adeva J, et al. Ivosidenib in IDH1-mutant, chemotherapy-refractory cholangiocarcinoma (ClarIDHy): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(6):796–807.
Abou-Alfa GK, Sahai V, Hollebecque A, Vaccaro G, Melisi D, Al-Rajabi R, et al. Pemigatinib for previously treated, locally advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma: a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(5):671–84.
Doebele RC, Drilon A, Paz-Ares L, Siena S, Shaw AT, Farago AF, et al. Entrectinib in patients with advanced or metastatic NTRK fusion-positive solid tumours: integrated analysis of three phase 1–2 trials. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(2):271–82.
Hodi FS, O’Day SJ, Mcdermott DF, Weber RW. Urba WJJNEJoM. Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. 2010;363(8):711–23. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1003466.
Paz-Ares L, Luft A, Vicente D, Tafreshi A, Gumus M, Mazieres J, et al. Pembrolizumab plus Chemotherapy for Squamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(21):2040–51.
Motzer RJ, Escudier B, McDermott DF, George S, Hammers HJ, Srinivas S, et al. Nivolumab versus Everolimus in Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(19):1803–13.
Llovet JM, Castet F, Heikenwalder M, Maini MK, Mazzaferro V, Pinato DJ, et al. Immunotherapies for hepatocellular carcinoma. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2022;19(3):151–72.
Boileve A, Hilmi M, Smolenschi C, Ducreux M, Hollebecque A, Malka D. Immunotherapy in Advanced Biliary Tract Cancers. Cancers (Basel). 2021;13(7):1569.
Rizzo A, Ricci AD, Brandi G. Recent advances of immunotherapy for biliary tract cancer. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021;15(5):527–36.
Charalampakis N, Papageorgiou G, Tsakatikas S, Fioretzaki R, Schizas DJI. Immunotherapy for cholangiocarcinoma: a 2021 update. Immunotherapy. 2021;13(13):1113–34.
Bang YJ, Doi T, Braud FD, Piha-Paul S, Hollebecque A, Razak ARA, et al. 525 Safety and efficacy of pembrolizumab (MK-3475) in patients (pts) with advanced biliary tract cancer: Interim results of KEYNOTE-028. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:S112.
Piha-Paul SA, Oh DY, Ueno M, Malka D, Chung HC, Nagrial A, et al. Efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab for the treatment of advanced biliary cancer: Results from the KEYNOTE-158 and KEYNOTE-028 studies. Int J Cancer. 2020;147(8):2190–8.
Le DT, Durham JN, Smith KN, Wang H, Bartlett BR, Aulakh LK, et al. Mismatch repair deficiency predicts response of solid tumors to PD-1 blockade. Science. 2017;357(6349):409–13.
Bang Y-J, Ueno M, Malka D, Chung HC, Nagrial A, Kelley RK, et al. Pembrolizumab (pembro) for advanced biliary adenocarcinoma: results from the KEYNOTE-028 (KN028) and KEYNOTE-158 (KN158) basket studies. 2019;37(15_suppl):4079. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2019.37.15_suppl.4079.
Marabelle A, Le DT, Ascierto PA, Giacomo A, Jesus-Acosta AD, Delord JP, et al. Efficacy of Pembrolizumab in Patients With Noncolorectal High Microsatellite Instability/Mismatch Repair-Deficient Cancer: Results From the Phase II KEYNOTE-158 Study. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(1):1–10.
Kim RD, Chung V, Alese OB, El-Rayes BF, Li D, Al-Toubah TE, et al. A Phase 2 Multi-institutional Study of Nivolumab for Patients With Advanced Refractory Biliary Tract Cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2020;6(6):888–94.
Azad NS, Gray RJ, Overman MJ, Schoenfeld JD, Flaherty KT. Nivolumab Is Effective in Mismatch Repair-Deficient Noncolorectal Cancers: Results From Arm Z1D-A Subprotocol of the NCI-MATCH (EAY131) Study. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(3):214–22.
Chen YML, He Q, Zhang S, Zhang C, Jia W. TGF-β1 expression is associated with invasion and metastasis of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Biol Res. 2015;48(1):26.
Lind H, Gameiro SR, Jochems C, Donahue RN, Strauss J, Gulley JM, et al. Dual targeting of TGF-beta and PD-L1 via a bifunctional anti-PD-L1/TGF-betaRII agent: status of preclinical and clinical advances. J Immunother Cancer. 2020;8(1): e000433.
Lan Y, Zhang D, Xu C, Hance KW, Marelli B, Qi J, et al. Enhanced preclinical antitumor activity of M7824, a bifunctional fusion protein simultaneously targeting PD-L1 and TGF-beta. Sci Transl Med. 2018;10(424):eaan5488. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.aan5488.
Fujiwara Y, Koyama T, Helwig C, Watanabe M, Doi T. M7824 (MSB0011359C), a bifunctional fusion protein targeting PD-L1 and TGF-β, in Asian patients with advanced solid tumors. 2018;36(4_suppl):762. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2018.36.4_suppl.762.
Yoo C, Oh DY, Choi HJ, Kudo M, Ueno M, Kondo S, et al. Phase I study of bintrafusp alfa, a bifunctional fusion protein targeting TGF-beta and PD-L1, in patients with pretreated biliary tract cancer. J Immunother Cancer. 2020;8(1): e000564.
Rotte A. Combination of CTLA-4 and PD-1 blockers for treatment of cancer. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2019;38(1):255.
Tawbi HA, Forsyth PA, Algazi A, Hamid O, Hodi FS, Moschos SJ, et al. Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Melanoma Metastatic to the Brain. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(8):722–30.
Ready NHM, Awad MM, Otterson GA, Gutierrez M, Gainor JF, Borghaei HJJ, Horn L, Mates M, Brahmer J, Rabinowitz I, Reddy PS, Chesney J, Orcutt JSD, Reck M, O’Byrne KJ, Paz-Ares L, Hu W, Zerba K, Li X, Lestini BGW, Szustakowski JD, Green G, Chang H, Ramalingam SS. First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (CheckMate 568): Outcomes by Programmed Death Ligand 1 and Tumor Mutational Burden as Biomarkers. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37(12):992–100.
Cella D, Grünwald V, Escudier B, Hammers HJ, George S, Nathan P, et al. Patient-reported outcomes of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib (CheckMate 214): a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(2):297–310.
Ioka T, Ueno M, Oh D-Y, Fujiwara Y, Chen J-S, Doki Y, et al. Evaluation of safety and tolerability of durvalumab (D) with or without tremelimumab (T) in patients (pts) with biliary tract cancer (BTC). 2019;37(4_suppl):387. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2019.37.4_suppl.387.
Klein O, Kee D, Nagrial A, Markman B, Underhill C, Michael M, et al. Evaluation of Combination Nivolumab and Ipilimumab Immunotherapy in Patients With Advanced Biliary Tract Cancers: Subgroup Analysis of a Phase 2 Nonrandomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2020;6(9):1405–9.
Kumar A, Taghi Khani A, Sanchez Ortiz A, Swaminathan S. GM-CSF: A Double-Edged Sword in Cancer Immunotherapy. Front Immunol. 2022;13: 901277.
Ruffolo LI, Jackson KM, Kuhlers PC, Dale BS, Figueroa Guilliani NM, Ullman NA, et al. GM-CSF drives myelopoiesis, recruitment and polarisation of tumour-associated macrophages in cholangiocarcinoma and systemic blockade facilitates antitumour immunity. Gut. 2022;71(7):1386–98.
Kelley R, Mitchell E, Behr S, Hwang J, Keenan B, Cheung A, et al. Phase II trial of pembrolizumab (PEM) plus granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in advanced biliary cancers (ABC). J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:386. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2018.36.4_suppl.386.
Kim J, Manspeaker MP, Thomas SN. Augmenting the synergies of chemotherapy and immunotherapy through drug delivery. Acta Biomater. 2019;88:1–14.
Apetoh L, Ladoire S, Coukos G, Ghiringhelli F. Combining immunotherapy and anticancer agents: the right path to achieve cancer cure? Ann Oncol. 2015;26(9):1813–23.
Ueno M, Ikeda M, Morizane C, Kobayashi S, Ohno I, Kondo S, et al. Nivolumab alone or in combination with cisplatin plus gemcitabine in Japanese patients with unresectable or recurrent biliary tract cancer: a non-randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 1 study. Lancet Gastroenterol & Hepatol. 2019;4(8):611–21.
Sahai V, Griffith KA, Beg MS, Shaib WL, Mahalingam D, Zhen DB, et al. A randomized phase 2 trial of nivolumab, gemcitabine, and cisplatin or nivolumab and ipilimumab in previously untreated advanced biliary cancer: BilT-01. Cancer. 2022;128(19):3523–30.
Malka D, Fartoux L, Rousseau V, Trarbach T, Boucher E, Fouchardiere CDL, et al. Gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) alone or in combination with cetuximab as first-line treatment for advanced biliary cancer: final analysis of a randomized phase II trial (BINGO). 2012;30(15_suppl):4032. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2012.30.15_suppl.4032.
Sahai V, Catalano PJ, Zalupski MM, Lubner SJ, Menge MR, Nimeiri HS, et al. Nab-Paclitaxel and Gemcitabine as First-line Treatment of Advanced or Metastatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Phase 2 Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(12):1707–12.
Oh D-Y, Ruth He A, Qin S, Chen L-T, Okusaka T, Vogel A, et al. Durvalumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin in advanced biliary tract cancer. NEJM Evidence. 2022;1(8):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1056/EVIDoa2200015.
Boileve A, Hilmi M, Gougis P, Cohen R, Rousseau B, Blanc JF, et al. Triplet combination of durvalumab, tremelimumab, and paclitaxel in biliary tract carcinomas: Safety run-in results of the randomized IMMUNOBIL PRODIGE 57 phase II trial. Eur J Cancer. 2021;143:55–63.
Li W, Wang Y, Yu Y, Li Q, Wang Y, Zhang C, et al. Toripalimab in advanced biliary tract cancer. Innovation (Camb). 2022;3(4):100255. A phase II, open-label, single-arm, single-centre clinical trial demonstrates the efficacy and safety of toripalimab in combination with GS as first-line treatment for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xinn.2022.100255.
Chen X, Wu X, Wu H, Gu Y, Shao Y, Shao Q, et al. Camrelizumab plus gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: a single-arm, open-label, phase II trial. J Immunother Cancer. 2020;8(2).
Sclafani F, Fontana E, Wyrwicz L, Wagner AD, Valle JW, Smyth E, et al. Highlights from the 2022 ASCO gastrointestinal cancer symposium: An overview by the EORTC gastrointestinal tract cancer group. Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2022;21(3):188–97.
Liu X-D, Anh H, Zhou L, Kalra S, Yetil A, Sun M, et al. Resistance to Antiangiogenic Therapy Is Associated with an Immunosuppressive Tumor Microenvironment in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma. Cancer Immunol Res. 2015;3(9):1017–29.
Francisco LM, Salinas VH, Brown KE, Vanguri VK, Freeman GJ, Kuchroo VK, et al. PD-L1 regulates the development, maintenance, and function of induced regulatory T cells. J Exp Med. 2009;206(13):3015–29.
Motz GT, Coukos G. The parallel lives of angiogenesis and immunosuppression: cancer and other tales. Nat Rev Immunol. 2011;11(10):702–11.
Terme M, Pernot S, Marcheteau E, Sandoval F, Benhamouda N, Colussi O, et al. VEGFA-VEGFR Pathway Blockade Inhibits Tumor-Induced Regulatory T-cell Proliferation in Colorectal Cancer. Can Res. 2013;73(2):539–49.
Wallin JJ, Bendell JC, Funke R, Sznol M, Korski K, Jones S, et al. Atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab enhances antigen-specific T-cell migration in metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Nat Commun. 2016;7. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms12624.
Arkenau HT, Martin-Liberal J, Calvo E, Penel N, Krebs MG, Herbst RS, et al. Ramucirumab Plus Pembrolizumab in Patients with Previously Treated Advanced or Metastatic Biliary Tract Cancer: Nonrandomized, Open-Label, Phase I Trial (JVDF). Oncologist. 2018;23(12):1407-e136.
Lin J, Yang X, Zhao S, Long J, Pan J, Hu K, et al. Lenvatinib plus PD-1 blockade in advanced bile tract carcinoma. Ann Oncol. 2019;30(suppl 5):253.
Zhang Q, Liu X, Wei S, Zhang L, Tian Y, Gao Z, et al. Lenvatinib Plus PD-1 Inhibitors as First-Line Treatment in Patients With Unresectable Biliary Tract Cancer: A Single-Arm, Open-Label. Phase II Study Front Oncol. 2021;11: 751391.
Zuo B, Yang X, Yang X, Bian J, Long J, Wang D, et al. A real-world study of the efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1 antibodies plus lenvatinib in patients with advanced gallbladder cancer. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2022;71(8):1889–96.
Shi C, Li Y, Yang C, Qiao L, Tang L, Zheng Y, et al. Lenvatinib Plus Programmed Cell Death Protein-1 Inhibitor Beyond First-Line Systemic Therapy in Refractory Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer: A Real-World Retrospective Study in China. Front Immunol. 2022;13: 946861.
Xie L, Huang J, Wang L, Ren W, Tian H, Hu A, et al. Lenvatinib Combined With a PD-1 Inhibitor as Effective Therapy for Advanced Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma. Front Pharmacol. 2022;13: 894407.
Jian Z, Fan J, Shi G-M, Huang X-Y, Wu D, Yang G-H, et al. Gemox chemotherapy in combination with anti-PD1 antibody toripalimab and lenvatinib as first-line treatment for advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a phase 2 clinical trial. 2021;39(15_suppl):4094. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2021.39.15_suppl.4094.
Lord CJ, Ashworth A. PARP inhibitors: Synthetic lethality in the clinic. Science. 2017;355(6330):1152–8.
Vikas P, Borcherding N, Chennamadhavuni A, Garje R. Therapeutic potential of combining PARP inhibitor and immunotherapy in solid tumors. Front Oncol. 2020;10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00570.
Yoshida K, Miki Y. Role of BRCA1 and BRCA2 as regulators of DNA repair, transcription, and cell cycle in response to DNA damage. Cancer Sci. 2004;95(11):866–71.
Nakamura H, Arai Y, Totoki Y, Shirota T, Elzawahry A, Kato M, et al. Genomic spectra of biliary tract cancer. Nat Genet. 2015;47(9):1003–10.
Rizzo A, Ricci AD, Brandi G. PD-L1, TMB, MSI, and other predictors of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in biliary tract cancer. Cancers (Basel). 2021;13(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13030558.
Xiong F, Gong J, Wang Q. Olaparib and Pembrolizumab Treatment for BRCA1-Mutated and PD-L1-Positive Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma Recurrence and Metastasis: A Case Report. Onco Targets Ther. 2020;13:6385–91.
Miller RE, Lewis AJ, Powell ME. PARP inhibitors and immunotherapy in ovarian and endometrial cancers. Br J Radiol. 2021;94(1128):20210002.
Twyman-Saint Victor C, Rech AJ, Maity A, Rengan R, Pauken KE, Stelekati E, et al. Radiation and dual checkpoint blockade activate non-redundant immune mechanisms in cancer. Nature. 2015;520(7547):373–7.
Kreidieh M, Zeidan YH, Shamseddine A. The Combination of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy and Immunotherapy in Primary Liver Tumors. J Oncol. 2019;2019:4304817.
Wang Y, Liu ZG, Yuan H, Deng W, Li J, Huang Y, et al. The Reciprocity between Radiotherapy and Cancer Immunotherapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2019;25(6):1709–17.
Liu ZL, Liu X, Peng H, Peng ZW, Long JT, Tang D, et al. Anti-PD-1 Immunotherapy and Radiotherapy for Stage IV Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Case Report. Front Med (Lausanne). 2020;7:368.
Zhao Q, Chen Y, Du S, Yang X, Chen Y, Ji Y, et al. Integration of radiotherapy with anti-PD-1 antibody for the treatment of intrahepatic or hilar cholangiocarcinoma: reflection from four cases. Cancer Biol Ther. 2021;22(3):175–83.
Liu X, Yao J, Song L, Zhang S, Huang T, Li Y. Local and abscopal responses in advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with low TMB, MSS, pMMR and negative PD-L1 expression following combined therapy of SBRT with PD-1 blockade. J Immunother Cancer. 2019;7(1):204.
Hong TS, Goyal L, Parikh AR, Yeap BY, Ulysse CA, Drapek LC, et al. A pilot study of durvalumab/tremelimumab (durva/treme) and radiation (XRT) for metastatic biliary tract cancer (mBTC): preliminary safety and efficacy. 2020;38(4_suppl):547. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2020.38.4_suppl.547.
Xie C, Duffy AG, Mabry-Hrones D, Wood B, Levy E, Krishnasamy V, et al. Tremelimumab in Combination With Microwave Ablation in Patients With Refractory Biliary Tract Cancer. Hepatology. 2019;69(5):2048–60.
Marks EI, Yee NS. Immunotherapeutic approaches in biliary tract carcinoma: Current status and emerging strategies. World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2015;7(11):338–46.
Kaida M, Morita-Hoshi Y, Soeda A, Wakeda T, Yamaki Y, Kojima Y, et al. Phase 1 trial of Wilms tumor 1 (WT1) peptide vaccine and gemcitabine combination therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic or biliary tract cancer. J Immunother. 2011;34(1):92–9.
Yamamoto K, Ueno T, Kawaoka T, Hazama S, Fukui M, Suehiro Y, et al. MUC1 peptide vaccination in patients with advanced pancreas or biliary tract cancer. Anticancer Res. 2005;25(5):3575–9.
Loffler MW, Chandran PA, Laske K, Schroeder C, Bonzheim I, Walzer M, et al. Personalized peptide vaccine-induced immune response associated with long-term survival of a metastatic cholangiocarcinoma patient. J Hepatol. 2016;65(4):849–55.
Aruga A, Takeshita N, Kotera Y, Okuyama R, Matsushita N, Ohta T, et al. Long-term Vaccination with Multiple Peptides Derived from Cancer-Testis Antigens Can Maintain a Specific T-cell Response and Achieve Disease Stability in Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19(8):2224–31.
Aruga A, Takeshita N, Kotera Y, Okuyama R, Matsushita N, Ohta T, et al. Phase I clinical trial of multiple-peptide vaccination for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. J Transl Med. 2014;12:61.
Yoshitomi M, Yutani S, Matsueda S, Ioji T, Komatsu N, Shichijo S, et al. Personalized peptide vaccination for advanced biliary tract cancer: IL-6, nutritional status and pre-existing antigen-specific immunity as possible biomarkers for patient prognosis. Exp Ther Med. 2012;3(3):463–9.
Kimura YTJ, Tomoda T, Takahashi H, Imai K, Shimamura K, Sunamura M, Yonemitsu YSS, Koido S, Homma S, Okamoto M. Clinical and immunologic evaluation of dendritic cell-based immunotherapy in combination with gemcitabine and_or S-1 in patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma. Pancreas. 2012;41(2):195–205.
Nagayama H, Sato K, Morishita M, Uchimaru K, Oyaizu N, Inazawa T, et al. Results of a phase I clinical study using autologous tumour lysate-pulsed monocyte-derived mature dendritic cell vaccinations for stage IV malignant melanoma patients combined with low dose interleukin-2. Melanoma Res. 2003;13(5):521–30.
Kuwabara K, Mshishita T, Morishita M, Oyaizu N, Yamashita S, Kanematsu T, et al. Results of a phase I clinical study using dendritic cell vaccinations for thyroid cancer. Thyroid. 2007;17(1):53–8.
Kantoff PW, Higano CS, Shore ND, Berger ER, Small EJ, Penson DF, et al. Sipuleucel-T Immunotherapy for Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(5):411–22.
Kobayashi M, Sakabe T, Abe H, Tanii M, Takahashi H, Chiba A, et al. Dendritic cell-based immunotherapy targeting synthesized peptides for advanced biliary tract cancer. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013;17(9):1609–17.
Rohaan MW, Wilgenhof S, Haanen J. Adoptive cellular therapies: the current landscape. Virchows Arch. 2019;474(4):449–61.
Han S, Lee SY, Wang WW, Tan YB, Sim RHZ, Cheong R, et al. A perspective on cell therapy and cancer vaccine in biliary tract cancers (BTCs). Cancers (Basel). 2020;12(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers12113404.
Sun Q, Sun H, Wu N, Cong L, Cong X. Prognostic Significance of Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocyte Grade in Melanoma: A Meta-Analysis. Dermatology. 2020;236(6):481–92.
Tran E, Turcotte S, Gros A, Robbins PF, Lu YC, Dudley ME, et al. Cancer immunotherapy based on mutation-specific CD4+ T cells in a patient with epithelial cancer. 2014;344(6184):641. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1251102.
Ma S, Li X, Wang X, Cheng L, Li Z, Zhang C, et al. Current Progress in CAR-T Cell Therapy for Solid Tumors. Int J Biol Sci. 2019;15(12):2548–60.
Feng KC, Guo YL, Liu Y, Dai HR, Wang Y, Lv HY, et al. Cocktail treatment with EGFR-specific and CD133-specific chimeric antigen receptor-modified T cells in a patient with advanced cholangiocarcinoma. J Hematol Oncol. 2017;10(1):4.
Feng K, Liu Y, Guo Y, Qiu J, Wu Z, Dai H, et al. Phase I study of chimeric antigen receptor modified T cells in treating HER2-positive advanced biliary tract cancers and pancreatic cancers. Protein Cell. 2018;9(10):838–47.
Guo Y, Feng K, Liu Y, Wu Z, Dai H, Yang Q, et al. Phase I Study of Chimeric Antigen Receptor-Modified T Cells in Patients with EGFR-Positive Advanced Biliary Tract Cancers. Clin Cancer Res. 2018;24(6):1277–86.
Teng F, Meng X, Kong L, Yu J. Progress and challenges of predictive biomarkers of anti PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy: A systematic review. Cancer Lett. 2018;414:166–73.
Fontugne J, Augustin J, Pujals A, Compagnon P, Rousseau B, Luciani A, et al. PD-L1 expression in perihilar and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. 2017;8(15). https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.15602.
Gani F, Nagarajan N, Kim Y, Zhu Q, Luan L, Bhaijjee F, et al. Program Death 1 Immune Checkpoint and Tumor Microenvironment: Implications for Patients With Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(8):2610–7.
Carapeto F, Bozorgui B, Shroff RT, Chagani S, Solis Soto L, Foo WC, et al. The immunogenomic landscape of resected intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Hepatology. 2022;75(2):297–308. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.32150.
Kitano Y, Yamashita Y-i, Nakao Y, Itoyama R, Yusa T, Umezaki N, et al. Clinical significance of PD-L1 expression in both cancer and stroma cells of cholangiocarcinoma patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27(2):599–607. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07701-4.
Lei C, Peng X, Gong X, Fan Y, Wu S, Liu N, et al. Prognostic role of programmed death-ligand 1 expression in patients with biliary tract cancer: a meta-analysis. Aging (Albany NY). 2019;11(24):12568–80.
Kim H, Kim J, Byeon S, Jang KT, Hong JY, Lee J, et al. Programmed Death Ligand 1 Expression as a Prognostic Marker in Patients with Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer. Oncology. 2021;99(6):365–72.
Lin J, Yang X, Long J, Zhao S, Mao J, Wang D, et al. Pembrolizumab combined with lenvatinib as non-first-line therapy in patients with refractory biliary tract carcinoma. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr. 2020;9(4):414–24.
Zhao P, Li L, Jiang X, Li Q. Mismatch repair deficiency/microsatellite instability-high as a predictor for anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy efficacy. J Hematol Oncol. 2019;12(1):54.
Silva VW, Askan G, Daniel TD, Lowery M, Klimstra DS, Abou-Alfa GK, et al. Biliary carcinomas: pathology and the role of DNA mismatch repair deficiency. Chin Clin Oncol. 2016;5(5):62.
Kunk PR, Obeid JM, Winters K, Pramoonjago P, Brockstedt DG, Giobbie-Hurder A, et al. Mismatch repair deficiency in cholangiocarcinoma. 2018;36(4_suppl):269. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2018.36.4_suppl.269.
Goeppert B, Roessler S, Renner M, Singer S, Mehrabi A, Vogel MN, et al. Mismatch repair deficiency is a rare but putative therapeutically relevant finding in non-liver fluke associated cholangiocarcinoma. Br J Cancer. 2019;120(1):109–14.
Weinberg BA, Xiu J, Lindberg MR, Shields AF, Hwang JJ, Poorman K, et al. Molecular profiling of biliary cancers reveals distinct molecular alterations and potential therapeutic targets. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2019;10(4):652–62.
Yu J, Zhang X, Huang Q, Tan S, Xiong X, Gou H. Rare DNA Mismatch Repair-Related Protein Loss in Patients with Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma and Combined Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma and Their Response to Immunotherapy. Cancer Manag Res. 2021;13:4283–90.
Lemery S, Keegan P, Pazdur R. First FDA Approval Agnostic of Cancer Site - When a Biomarker Defines the Indication. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(15):1409–12.
Reck M, Ciuleanu TE, Cobo M, Schenker M, Zurawski B, Menezes J, et al. First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with two cycles of chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone (four cycles) in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: CheckMate 9LA 2-year update. Esmo Open. 2021;6(5). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esmoop.2021.100273.
Hugo W, Zaretsky JM, Sun L, Song C, Moreno BH, Hu-Lieskovan S, et al. Genomic and Transcriptomic Features of Response to Anti-PD-1 Therapy in Metastatic Melanoma. Cell. 2016;165(1):35–44.
Rizvi NA, Hellmann MD, Snyder A, Kvistborg P, Makarov V, Havel JJ, et al. Mutational landscape determines sensitivity to PD-1 blockade in non-small cell lung cancer. Science. 2015;348(6230):124–8.
Marabelle A, Fakih M, Lopez J, Shah M, Shapira-Frommer R, Nakagawa K, et al. Association of tumour mutational burden with outcomes in patients with advanced solid tumours treated with pembrolizumab: prospective biomarker analysis of the multicohort, open-label, phase 2 KEYNOTE-158 study. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(10):1353–65.
Jain A, Shroff R, Zuo M, Weatherly J, Meric-Bernstam F, Isaacs R, et al. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) and co-existing actionable mutations in biliary tract cancers (BTC). J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:4086. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2017.35.15_suppl.4086.
Shao C, Li G, Huang L, Pruitt S, Castellanos E, Frampton G, et al. Prevalence of High Tumor Mutational Burden and Association With Survival in Patients With Less Common Solid Tumors. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(10): e2025109.
Abdel-Wahab R, Ali SM, Borad MJ, Shroff RT, Kwong L, Vauthey J-N, et al. Variations in DNA repair genomic alterations and tumor mutation burden in biliary tract cancer (BTC) subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(4_suppl):263. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2018.36.4_suppl.263.
Zhang W, Shi J, Wang Y, Zhou H, Zhang Z, Han Z, et al. Next-generation sequencing-guided molecular-targeted therapy and immunotherapy for biliary tract cancers. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2021;70(4):1001–14.
Valero C, Lee M, Hoen D, Zehir A, Berger MF, Seshan VE, et al. Response rates to anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in microsatellite-stable solid tumors with 10 or more mutations per megabase. JAMA Oncol. 2021;7(5):739–43. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.7684.
Zhou C, Chen S, Xu F, Wei J, Zhou X, Wu Z, et al. Estimating tumor mutational burden across multiple cancer types using whole-exome sequencing. Ann Transl Med. 2021;9(18):1437.
Chen X, Wu X, Wu H, Gu Y, Shao Y, Shao Q, et al. Camrelizumab plus gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: a single-arm, open-label, phase II trial. J Immunother Cancer. 2020;8(2): e001240.
Ye Z, Shi Y, Lees-Miller SP, Tainer JA. Function and Molecular Mechanism of the DNA Damage Response in Immunity and Cancer Immunotherapy. Front Immunol. 2021;12: 797880.
Mouw KW, Goldberg MS, Konstantinopoulos PA, D’Andrea AD. DNA Damage and Repair Biomarkers of Immunotherapy Response. Cancer Discov. 2017;7(7):675–93.
Gonul Geyik O, Anichini G, Ulukaya E, Marra F, Raggi C. DNA damage response inhibitors in cholangiocarcinoma: current progress and perspectives. Cells. 2022;11(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/cells11091463.
Lin J, Shi J, Guo H, Yang X, Jiang Y, Long J, et al. Alterations in DNA Damage Repair Genes in Primary Liver Cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2019;25(15):4701–11.
Lamarca A, Barriuso J, McNamara MG, Valle JW. Biliary Tract Cancer: State of the Art and potential role of DNA Damage Repair. Cancer Treat Rev. 2018;70:168–77.
Abdel-Wahab R, Yap TA, Madison R, Pant S, Cooke M, Wang K, et al. Genomic profiling reveals high frequency of DNA repair genetic aberrations in gallbladder cancer. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-77939-6.
Golan T, Raitses-Gurevich M, Kelley RK, Bocobo AG, Borgida A, Shroff RT, et al. Overall Survival and Clinical Characteristics of BRCA-Associated Cholangiocarcinoma: A Multicenter Retrospective Study. Oncologist. 2017;22(7):804–10.
Spizzo G, Puccini A, Xiu J, Goldberg RM, Grothey A, Shields AF, et al. Molecular profile of BRCA-mutated biliary tract cancers. ESMO Open. 2020;5(3): e000682.
Chen X, Wang D, Liu J, Qiu J, Zhou J, Ying J, et al. Genomic alterations in biliary tract cancer predict prognosis and immunotherapy outcomes. J Immunother Cancer. 2021;9(11). https://doi.org/10.1136/jitc-2021-003214.
Li M, Liu F, Zhang F, Zhou W, Jiang X, Yang Y, et al. Genomic ERBB2/ERBB3 mutations promote PD-L1-mediated immune escape in gallbladder cancer: a whole-exome sequencing analysis. Gut. 2019;68(6):1024–33.
Montal R, Sia D, Montironi C, Leow WQ, Esteban-Fabro R, Pinyol R, et al. Molecular classification and therapeutic targets in extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. J Hepatol. 2020;73(2):315–27.
Yoon JG, Kim MH, Jang M, Kim H, Hwang HK, Kang CM, et al. Molecular characterization of biliary tract cancer predicts chemotherapy and programmed death 1/programmed death-ligand 1 blockade responses. Hepatology. 2021;74(4):1914–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.31862.
Hack SP, Zhu AX. Atezolizumab: an investigational agent for the treatment of biliary tract cancer. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2021;30(10):1007–15.
Mody K, Starr J, Saul M, Poorman K, Weinberg BA, Salem ME, et al. Patterns and genomic correlates of PD-L1 expression in patients with biliary tract cancers. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2019;10(6):1099–109.
Gutzmer R, Stroyakovskiy D, Gogas H, Robert C, Lewis K, Protsenko S, et al. Atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib as first-line treatment for unresectable advanced BRAF(V600) mutation-positive melanoma (IMspire150): primary analysis of the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2020;395(10240):1835–44.
Janjigian YY, Maron SB, Chatila WK, Millang B, Chavan SS, Alterman C, et al. First-line pembrolizumab and trastuzumab in HER2-positive oesophageal, gastric, or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer: an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(6):821–31.
Keenan BP, Kelley RKK. Key challenges for drugs in clinical development for cholangiocarcinoma. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2021;30(4):285–90.
Kockx MM, McCleland M, Koeppen H. Microenvironmental regulation of tumour immunity and response to immunotherapy. J Pathol. 2021;254(4):374–83.
Lamarca A, Frizziero M, McNamara MG, Valle JW. Clinical and Translational Research Challenges in Biliary Tract Cancers. Curr Med Chem. 2020;27(29):4756–77.
Ettrich TJ, Schwerdel D, Dolnik A, Beuter F, Blaette TJ, Schmidt SA, et al. Genotyping of circulating tumor DNA in cholangiocarcinoma reveals diagnostic and prognostic information. Sci Rep. 2019;9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-49860-0.
Rimini M, Puzzoni M, Pedica F, Silvestris N, Fornaro L, Aprile G, et al. Cholangiocarcinoma: new perspectives for new horizons. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021;15(12):1367–83.
Pandey A, Stawiski EW, Durinck S, Gowda H, Goldstein LD, Barbhuiya MA, et al. Integrated genomic analysis reveals mutated ELF3 as a potential gallbladder cancer vaccine candidate. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-17880-4.
Martin-Serrano MA, Kepecs B, Torres-Martin M, Bramel ER, Haber PK, Merritt E, et al. Novel microenvironment-based classification of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with therapeutic implications. Gut. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2021-326514.
Cao H, Huang T, Dai M, Kong X, Liu H, Zheng Z, et al. Tumor Microenvironment and its Implications for Antitumor Immunity in Cholangiocarcinoma: Future Perspectives for Novel Therapies. Int J Biol Sci. 2022;18(14):5369–90.
Louis C, Edeline J, Coulouarn C. Targeting the tumor microenvironment in cholangiocarcinoma: implications for therapy. Expert Opin Ther Targets. 2021;25(2):153–62.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no. 81860117).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
SWY and YPZ designed and wrote the manuscript. WZ revised the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no relevant conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Yue, S., Zhang, Y. & Zhang, W. Recent Advances in Immunotherapy for Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer. Curr. Treat. Options in Oncol. 25, 1089–1111 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-024-01243-y
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-024-01243-y