Purpose:

Trabectedin has shown preclinical synergy with immune checkpoint inhibitors in preclinical models.

Patients and Methods:

TRAMUNE is a phase Ib study investigating the combination of trabectedin with durvalumab through a dose escalation phase and two expansion cohorts, soft tissue sarcoma (STS) and ovarian carcinoma. Trabectedin was given at three dose levels (1 mg/m2, 1.2 mg/m2, and 1.5 mg/m2) on day 1, in combination with durvalumab, 1,120 mg on day 2, every 3 weeks. The primary endpoints were the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of trabectedin combined with durvalumab and the objective response rate (ORR) as per RECIST 1.1. The secondary endpoints included safety, 6-month progression-free rate (PFR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and biomarker analyses.

Results:

A total of 40 patients were included (dose escalation, n = 9; STS cohort, n = 16; ovarian carcinoma cohort, n = 15, 80% platinum resistant/refractory). The most frequent toxicities were grade 1–2 fatigue, nausea, neutropenia, and alanine/aspartate aminotransferase increase. One patient experienced a dose-limiting toxicity at dose level 2. Trabectedin at 1.2 mg/m2 was selected as the RP2D. In the STS cohort, 43% of patients experienced tumor shrinkage, the ORR was 7% [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.2–33.9], and the 6-month PFR was 28.6% (95% CI, 8.4–58.1). In the ovarian carcinoma cohort, 43% of patients experienced tumor shrinkage, the ORR was 21.4% (95% CI, 4.7–50.8), and the 6-month PFR was 42.9% (95% CI, 17.7–71.1). Baseline levels of programmed death-ligand 1 expression and CD8-positive T-cell infiltrates were associated with PFS in patients with ovarian carcinoma.

Conclusions:

Combining trabectedin and durvalumab is manageable. Promising activity is observed in patients with platinum-refractory ovarian carcinoma.

See related commentary by Digklia et al., p. 1745

Translational Relevance

Trabectedin has been shown to impact tumor microenvironment and to be synergistic with immune checkpoint inhibitors in preclinical models. In this phase Ib study including 40 patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) and platinum-refractory ovarian carcinoma, the combination of trabectedin with durvalumab has an acceptable safety profile. The objective response rate was 7% in patients with STS and 21.4% in patients with ovarian carcinoma. Programmed death-ligand 1 expression and CD8-positive cell density in tumor at baseline were significantly associated with progression-free survival in patients with ovarian carcinoma. Combining trabectedin and durvalumab is manageable and deserves further investigation in patients with platinum-refractory ovarian carcinoma.

About 70% of patients with cancer do not exhibit clinical benefit from single-agent programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitors. Combining these agents with other therapeutic approaches may impact favorably the tumor microenvironment and could improve antitumor immune response and overcome primary resistance. Cytotoxic agents can have immunomodulatory effects which may represent opportunities of combination with immunotherapy.

Trabectedin is an alkylating agent which binds the minor groove of DNA and has effect on transcription regulation and DNA repair. This drug is approved in Europe and in the United States as a single agent for the management of patients with advanced L–soft tissue sarcoma (STS), such as leiomyosarcoma and liposarcoma (1, 2), and in Europe in combination with liposomal doxorubicin for patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma (3). Immune checkpoint blockers have shown modest efficacy in these two tumor types (4, 5), possibly as the result of the immunosuppressive action of tumor-associated macrophages (TAM; refs. 4, 6–9).

Trabectedin has an impact on tumor microenvironment, notably through inhibition of the production of cytokines such as CCL2 and IL6, as well as upregulation of expression of PD-1/PD-L1 in vivo, and a selective cytotoxic activity to human monocytes and TAM, in vivo and in treated patients (10). Preclinical data also suggest a strong synergy between trabectedin and anti–PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies in ovarian and sarcoma models, associated with an increase of intratumoral effector T-cell infiltrates and a decrease of immunosuppressive cell infiltrates in these models (11, 12). This led us to assess the combination of trabectedin with the anti–PD-L1 durvalumab in advanced or metastatic pretreated STS and ovarian carcinoma.

TRAMUNE is an open-label, multicenter, single-arm phase Ib trial combining a dose escalation phase, assessing three dose levels of trabectedin combined with durvalumab, followed by two expansion cohorts, in advanced or metastatic pretreated STS and ovarian carcinoma.

Main inclusion criteria were patients ≥18 years with: (i) histologically confirmed and centrally reviewed STS or ovarian carcinoma, (ii) no known germline or somatic BRCA mutation for ovarian carcinoma, (iii) locally advanced or metastatic disease, (iv) at least one line of chemotherapy in the palliative setting, including anthracyclines for STS and platinum salts for ovarian carcinoma, (v) measurable and progressive disease at inclusion according to RECIST v1.1, (vi) a performance status of 0–1, (vi) adequate hematologic, renal, metabolic, and hepatic functions. Complete inclusion criteria are given in the online protocol. All patients provided written informed consent. The trial was done in accordance with Good Clinical Practice and the Declaration of Helsinki. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Institut Bergonié (Bordeaux, France) and is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03085225).

Study design

The dose escalation phase followed a 3 + 3 classical design. In the dose escalation phase, three dose levels of trabectedin were assessed, 1 mg/m2, 1.2 mg/m2, and 1.5 mg/m2 over 3 hours on day 1 after one single administration of dexamethasone 20 mg 30 minutes before infusion, in combination with durvalumab at fixed dose, 1,120 mg on day 2, every 3 weeks. In the expansion cohorts, patients were all treated at the MTD defined in the dose escalation phase. Treatment continued until disease progression assessed by local investigator, or unacceptable toxicity. Dose reductions were permitted, according to the protocol. Safety was assessed according to the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.03. Efficacy was assessed as per RECIST criteria version 1.1 every 6 weeks and after independent blinded central review of imaging.

Study endpoints

The primary endpoint of the dose escalation phase was to assess safety and determine the dose-limiting toxicity, the MTD, and the recommended phase II dose of trabectedin combined with durvalumab. The primary endpoint of the expansion phase was to assess preliminary activity of trabectedin combined with durvalumab in terms of objective response rate (ORR), defined as the proportion of patients with complete or partial response as per RECIST v1.1 from study treatment initiation until its end. Secondary endpoints were best overall response, 3- and 6-month progression-free rate (PFR), 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) and 1-year overall survival (see Supplementary Methods for additional details).

Translational analyses on tumor samples

Sequential tumor biopsies were performed at baseline and at cycle 2 to correlate tumor microenvironment features with patient outcome (see Supplementary Methods for additional details).

Statistical analysis

Dose-limiting toxicity was defined as an adverse event occurring during the first 21 days of treatment, at least possibly related to study treatment, and meeting one of these criteria: any grade 4 toxicity, grade 3 toxicity lasting >7 days, grade 4 neutropenia with fever, or grade >2 thrombocytopenia with bleeding. A minimum of 3 and a maximum of 6 patients were to be included in each dose level. The MTD of trabectedin was defined as the highest dose at which no more than 1 in 6 patients experienced a dose-limiting toxicity during the observation period of the first 21 days. A maximum of 20 patients were planned to be included.

Two independent expansion cohorts were planned at the recommended dose of trabectedin combined with durvalumab: cohort A in STS and cohort B in ovarian carcinoma. Each expansion cohort followed the first stage of a 2-stage Gehan design (13), assuming a 20% efficacy rate, a 5% false positive rate, and a 10% precision. Fourteen eligible and assessable patients were required in each cohort, with at least one objective response needed to consider the combination active. Fifteen patients were planned to be recruited in each cohort (see Supplementary Methods for additional details).

Data sharing

Complete study protocol is available online in the supplementary material. Qualified researchers may request access to individual patient level data by contacting the corresponding author.

Between October 2017 and November 2019, 40 patients were included in two centers, 9 patients in the dose escalation phase, 16 patients in the STS expansion cohort and 15 in the ovarian carcinoma expansion cohort (Fig. 1). Patient's characteristics are detailed in Table 1. Median number of previous lines was 3 (1–6) in the dose escalation phase, 1 (0–4) in the STS expansion cohort, and 3 (1–7) in the ovarian carcinoma expansion cohort (Fig. 1). Most patients with ovarian carcinoma were platinum–resistant/refractory (relapse less than 6 months after or progression during previous platinum-based therapy): 100% and 80% in the dose escalation phase and the expansion cohort, respectively. None had a known BRCA germline or somatic mutation.

Figure 1.

Study flow chart. Two patients were excluded from efficacy analysis in the sarcoma cohort because they did not receive previous treatment including anthracyclines; one patient was excluded from safety and efficacy analysis in the ovarian carcinoma cohort because she had concomitant active infectious disease at inclusion and never started treatment.

Figure 1.

Study flow chart. Two patients were excluded from efficacy analysis in the sarcoma cohort because they did not receive previous treatment including anthracyclines; one patient was excluded from safety and efficacy analysis in the ovarian carcinoma cohort because she had concomitant active infectious disease at inclusion and never started treatment.

Close modal
Table 1.

Patient and disease characteristics at baseline.

Dose escalation phase (n = 9)STS expansion cohort (n = 16)Ovarian expansion cohort (n = 15)
Median age (min–max) 55 (44–70) 66 (25–75) 64 (55–76) 
Sex 
 Female 7 (78%) 10 (62.5%) 15 (100%) 
 Male 2 (22%) 6 (37.5%) 
ECOG performance status 
 0 7 (78%) 10 (62.5%) 10 (67%) 
 1 2 (22%) 6 (37.5%) 5 (33%) 
Histologic subtypes 
 Ovarian carcinoma 4 (44%)  15 (100%) 
 Serous adenocarcinoma  13 
 Carcinosarcoma   
 Endometrioid adenocarcinoma   
 STS 5 (56%) 16 (100%)  
 LMS  
 DDLPS  
 Other 1a 8b  
FNCLCC grade (STS) 
 2 1 (11%) 6 (38%)  
 3 2 (22%) 5 (31%)  
 Not gradable/available 2 (22%) 5 (31%)  
Stage at inclusion 
 Locally advanced 
  Yes 4 (44%) 7 (44%) 5 (33%) 
  No 5 (55%) 9 (56%) 10 (67%) 
 Metastatic 
  Yes 8 (89%) 13 (81%) 14 (93%) 
  No 1 (11%) 3 (19%) 1 (7%) 
No. of previous systemic therapies 
 0 1 (6%) 
 1 2 (22%) 8 (50%) 2 (13%) 
 2 1 (11%) 5 (31%) 4 (27%) 
 ≥3 6 (67%) 2 (13%) 9 (60%) 
Platinum sensitivity status at inclusion 
 Refractory 4 (100%)  12 (80%) 
 Intermediate —  1 (7%) 
 Sensitive —  2 (13%) 
Dose escalation phase (n = 9)STS expansion cohort (n = 16)Ovarian expansion cohort (n = 15)
Median age (min–max) 55 (44–70) 66 (25–75) 64 (55–76) 
Sex 
 Female 7 (78%) 10 (62.5%) 15 (100%) 
 Male 2 (22%) 6 (37.5%) 
ECOG performance status 
 0 7 (78%) 10 (62.5%) 10 (67%) 
 1 2 (22%) 6 (37.5%) 5 (33%) 
Histologic subtypes 
 Ovarian carcinoma 4 (44%)  15 (100%) 
 Serous adenocarcinoma  13 
 Carcinosarcoma   
 Endometrioid adenocarcinoma   
 STS 5 (56%) 16 (100%)  
 LMS  
 DDLPS  
 Other 1a 8b  
FNCLCC grade (STS) 
 2 1 (11%) 6 (38%)  
 3 2 (22%) 5 (31%)  
 Not gradable/available 2 (22%) 5 (31%)  
Stage at inclusion 
 Locally advanced 
  Yes 4 (44%) 7 (44%) 5 (33%) 
  No 5 (55%) 9 (56%) 10 (67%) 
 Metastatic 
  Yes 8 (89%) 13 (81%) 14 (93%) 
  No 1 (11%) 3 (19%) 1 (7%) 
No. of previous systemic therapies 
 0 1 (6%) 
 1 2 (22%) 8 (50%) 2 (13%) 
 2 1 (11%) 5 (31%) 4 (27%) 
 ≥3 6 (67%) 2 (13%) 9 (60%) 
Platinum sensitivity status at inclusion 
 Refractory 4 (100%)  12 (80%) 
 Intermediate —  1 (7%) 
 Sensitive —  2 (13%) 

Note: Data are n (%), unless otherwise indicated.

Abbreviations: DDLPS, dedifferentiated liposarcoma; FNCLCC, Fédération Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer; LMS, leiomyosarcoma.

a1 solitary fibrous tumor.

b2 undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcomas, 1 synovialsarcoma, 1 malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor, 1 solitary fibrous tumor, 1 pleomorphic liposarcoma, 1 epithelioid sarcoma, 1 CIC-DUX4 sarcoma.

In the dose escalation phase, 3 patients were treated at dose level 1 and 6 patients at dose level 2. There was one dose-limiting toxicity observed at dose level 2, a grade 4 alanine aminotransferase (ALAT) increase. The most frequent toxicities reported in the dose escalation phase were grade 1–2 fatigue, nausea, myalgia, neutropenia, and aspartate aminotransferase (ASAT) or ALAT increase. Eight patients had at least one grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse event, detailed on Supplementary Table S1. One [11%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.3–48.3] patient with ovarian carcinoma experienced a complete response at dose level 2 (Supplementary Table S2). This patient had received four lines in the platinum-refractory metastatic setting. Trabectedin 1.2 mg/m2 was considered the MTD in combination with durvalumab 1,120 mg every 3 weeks, and the two dose expansion cohorts were opened at this dosing.

Thirty patients from the expansion cohorts were eligible for the safety analysis. 19 (63%) patients experienced a grade 3–4 and two (7%) a grade 5 treatment-related adverse events (Supplementary Table S3). There were eleven treatment-related serious adverse events reported, including two fatal febrile neutropenia: one in a pretreated STS patient who developed Candida pneumonitis and the other in a patient with pretreated ovarian carcinoma who developed Staphylococcus septicemia.

Median follow-up was 19.3 months (8–20). In the STS expansion cohort, the median number of cycles was 3 (1–27). Five patients discontinued the study for treatment-related toxicity: two for grade 2 and grade 3 left ventricular systolic dysfunction respectively, one for grade 3 thrombocytopenia, one for grade 4 CPK increase, and one for grade 5 febrile neutropenia. Among the 14 patients assessable for efficacy endpoints, 6 (43%) patients experienced tumor shrinkage, resulting in one partial response in a patient with leiomyosarcoma (Fig. 2A). The ORR was 7% (95% CI, 0.2–33.9; Supplementary Table S2). Eight (57%) patients had stable disease as their best response (Fig. 2B). The 3- and 6-month PFRs were 35.7% (95% CI, 12.8–64.9) and 28.6% (95% CI, 8.4–58.1), respectively. The 1-year PFS rate was 14.3% (95% CI, 2.3–36.6; Fig. 2C) and the 1-year overall survival rate was 56.3% (95% CI, 27.2–77.6).

Figure 2.

Waterfall plots of tumor response (A and D), spider plots (B and E), and Kaplan–Meier curves of PFS (C and F), in the STS (A, B, and C) and ovarian carcinoma (D, E, and F) expansion cohorts. Only patients with available tumor assessments after central review at data cutoff are shown. Changes in tumor size were centrally assessed by blinded independent review according to RECIST 1.1. Maximum change in sum of diameters from baseline is shown on the waterfall plots (A and D); time on treatment is shown on spider plots (B and E).

Figure 2.

Waterfall plots of tumor response (A and D), spider plots (B and E), and Kaplan–Meier curves of PFS (C and F), in the STS (A, B, and C) and ovarian carcinoma (D, E, and F) expansion cohorts. Only patients with available tumor assessments after central review at data cutoff are shown. Changes in tumor size were centrally assessed by blinded independent review according to RECIST 1.1. Maximum change in sum of diameters from baseline is shown on the waterfall plots (A and D); time on treatment is shown on spider plots (B and E).

Close modal

In the ovarian carcinoma expansion cohort, the median number of cycles was 4 (1–18). One (7%) patient discontinued the study for treatment-related toxicity, which was a grade 5 febrile aplasia. Among the 14 patients eligible for efficacy endpoints, 6 (43%) patients experienced tumor shrinkage, resulting in three partial responses (Fig. 2D). The ORR was 21.4% (95% CI, 4.7–50.8; Supplementary Table S2). Five (36%) patients had stable disease as their best response (Fig. 2E). The 3- and 6-month PFRs were 42.9% (95% CI, 17.7–71.1) and 42.9% (95% CI, 17.7–71.1), respectively. The 1-year PFS rate was 7.1% (95% CI, 0.5–27.5; Fig. 2F) and the 1-year overall survival rate was 57.1% (95% CI, 28.4–78).

In the STS ancillary cohort, 20 and 13 patients had available tumor material from baseline and C2D8 biopsies, respectively. Four (20%) patients had expression of PD-L1 on tumor cells at baseline and 6 (46%) patients at C2D8. Baseline samples demonstrated a higher median density of CD163-positive cells than CD8-positive cells (Supplementary Table S4). Assessment of coexpression of CD163-positive and CD8-positive cell densities at baseline allowed to classify tumors into three categories according to different patterns of expression: CD8-low and CD163-low “immune desert” tumors, CD8-positive > CD163-positive “inflamed” tumors, and CD163-high “TAM-enriched” tumors (Supplementary Fig. S1). The two most progressive patients had a CD163-high “TAM-enriched” profile at baseline, and the only patient with a confirmed partial response had a PD-L1 positive and CD8-positive > CD163-positive “inflamed” tumor profile at baseline (Supplementary Fig. S1). There was no correlation between CD163-positive or CD8-positive density variations and best overall response (Supplementary Fig. S2). We observed a trend for longer median PFS in patients with baseline CD163-positive and CD8-positive cell density respectively below and above the median (Supplementary Fig. S3), although not statistically significant.

In the ovarian carcinoma ancillary cohort, 16 and 9 patients had available material from baseline and C2D8 biopsies, respectively. Six (37.5%) patients had expression of PD-L1 on tumor cells at baseline, and 4 (44.5%) patients at C2D8. Baseline samples demonstrated a higher median density of CD163-positive cells than CD8-positive cells (Supplementary Table S2). Assessment of coexpression of CD163-positive and CD8-positive cell densities allowed to identify a predominance of a CD163-high “TAM-enriched” profile among tumors at baseline and at C2D8 (Supplementary Fig. S4). The two responding patients with available material at baseline had a PD-L1 positive and CD8-positive > CD163-positive “inflamed” tumor profile (Supplementary Fig. S4). The patient with a complete response had no exploitable material but had consented to genomic profiling that retrieved a p53 mutation, a NF1 duplication, no microsatellites instability and a tumor mutational burden of 4/Mb. There was no correlation between CD163-positive or CD8-positive cell density variations and best overall response (Supplementary Fig. S2). We observed a significantly longer PFS for patients with ovarian carcinoma with PD-L1–positive tumor at baseline [6.8 months (95% CI, 0.9–13.7) vs. 1.3 months (95% CI, 0.9–4.3); log-rank test, P = 0.040, α = 5%; Supplementary Fig. S5] and with CD8-positive cell density above the median at baseline [5.7 months (95% CI, 1.2–9.9) vs. 1.2 months (95% CI, 0.9–1.3); log-rank test, P = 0.018, α = 5%; Supplementary Fig. S5], whereas baseline value or variation of CD163-positive cell density had no impact.

This is the first full report of a study investigating the combination of trabectedin with an immune checkpoint inhibitor in solid tumors. In this study of heavily pretreated patients, there were two toxic deaths, and, 20% and 13% of grade 3 and grade 4 neutropenia, respectively. We also observed 27% and 30% of grade 3 ASAT and ALAT increase, respectively, as well as 3% of grade 4 ALAT increase. Trabectedin toxicity in monotherapy has been extensively assessed in STS (1, 14–21). In the trials from Demetri and colleagues and Bui and colleagues, the discontinuation rates for toxicity were 6% and 20%, respectively, and included one fatal septic shock, one grade 3 LVEF drop, neutropenia and CPK increase. Grade 3–4 adverse event rates were similar to those retrieved in the this study, with 46% grade 3–4 neutropenia reported by Bui and colleagues with the 3-hour schedule at 1.3 mg/m2, and 26% grade 3 and 21% grade 4 neutropenia reported by Demetri with the classical 24-hour infusion schedule at 1.5 mg/m2 (15, 16). In the phase III from Blay and colleagues, 55% of the patients experienced grade 3–4 neutropenia and 49% received G-CSF. There was one fatal rhabdomyolysis (14). In the phase III from Demetri and colleagues, 43% of the patients had received more than two previous lines, and 13% discontinued treatment for toxicity. There were seven deaths related to trabectedin, mostly due to septic shock, rhabdomyolysis, and renal failure (1). Finally, in an expanded access program, 555 (31%) among 1,803 patients assessable for safety had a grade 3–4 adverse event and 23 deaths were related to trabectedin (20). Trabectedin has also been assessed in monotherapy in ovarian carcinoma. Krasner and colleagues reported a rate of grade 3–4 adverse event of 39% and one fatal left cardiac failure related to study drug (22), whereas Del Campo and colleagues reported 11% and 26% of grade 3 and 4 neutropenia, as well as two drug-related deaths from multiorgan failure with the 3-hour infusion schedule at 1.3 mg/m2 (23).

The increase in ASAT/ALAT and a potential overlap in liver toxicity between the two drugs was a subject of concern in the protocol, and there was prespecified weekly monitoring of liver tests in both escalation and expansion phases. In our pooled expansion cohort analysis of patients treated with a 3-hour infusion at 1.2 mg/m2, the rate of grade 3–4 ASAT/ALAT increase was in the range of previously published trials with the monotherapy, keeping in mind that an increase in liver toxicity has been observed with the 3-hour schedule compared with the 24-hour schedule in the literature. The trial by Bui and colleagues assessed trabectedin in STS given as 3-hour or 24-hour infusion. In the 3-hour infusion arm at 1.3 mg/m2, the grade 3–4 ASAT and ALAT increase rates were 35% and 67%, whereas they were 22% and 49% in the 24-hour infusion arm (15). In the 3-hour infusion arm at 1.3 mg/m2 from the trial by Del Campo and colleagues, the rates of grade 3 ASAT and ALAT increase were 17% and 53%, and grade 4 ASAT and ALAT increase 2% and 6%, respectively (23). In our study, these increases occurred during the 3-week interval between two cycles and were rapidly recovering, as typically retrieved with trabectedin. There was no immune-related hepatitis reported. Hematologic and liver toxicities observed in this study were therefore considered related to trabectedin use in a population of patients with pretreated metastatic disease. Discontinuation rate was however higher in the STS cohort than previously reported. Of note, 2 of 5 patients who discontinued treatment for treatment-related toxicity in this cohort had left ventricular dysfunction that was possibly related to trabectedin, in the context of previous use of anthracyclines, antiangiogenics, and preexisting cardiopathy. They had left ventricular ejection fraction drop that recovered with adequate management. There was no myocarditis reported. There was no apparent signal for an unexpected or significant additional toxicity related to the combination with durvalumab.

ORR and PFS rate we observed in the sarcoma expansion cohort were comparable with the ones reported in trabectedin single-agent studies, and there was no clear signal of synergistic activity in this unselected population (1, 14–16). Of note, preliminary data from the SAINT study assessing ipilimumab nivolumab and trabectedin at 1.2 mg/m2 as first line in advanced STS have been reported at ASCO 2020. This phase II reached a promising ORR of 19.5% and a 6-month PFS rate of 50% with a good toxicity profile. Sarcoma heterogeneity and random overrepresentation of “cold” histologies and phenotypes in small samples from phase II immunotherapy trials have been reported previously, and can explain the results from this study (24).

There is no reliable biomarker identified yet to select for trabectedin efficacy. Some data suggest that trabectedin inhibits the production of cytokines such as CCL-22 and IL6 and decrease monocytes and TAM infiltrates, in vivo and in a small series of sarcoma patient samples (10, 25, 26). In this study, we observed high CD163-positive cell density at baseline. However, we did not observe a decrease in CD163-positive cell density under treatment, neither a relationship between CD163-positive cell density and response or PFS. PD-L1 expression and CD8-positive cell density were low in this unselected STS cohort, presuming rather “cold” tumors (27, 28). One explanation for the lack of synergy observed in this study may be the low rate of inflamed tumors at baseline. Main clinical research activity in STS is focusing on determining biomarkers to select the patients the more likely to respond to immunotherapy. In this regards, recent advances have been made, notably with the identification of tertiary lymphoid structures (TLS) as surrogate markers for PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition efficacy in STS (27). Assessing trabectedin and durvalumab in a more homogeneous selected population of TLS-positive STS may represent a relevant approach.

The vast majority of patients with ovarian carcinoma treated in our study had heavily pretreated platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory tumor, a setting of very poor prognosis with low response rates to salvage chemotherapy regimen and poor outcome (29–31). Patients with ovarian carcinoma considered as resistant or refractory to platinum have indeed low response rates (4%–23%) to salvage chemotherapy regimen, including pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, trabectedin, paclitaxel, topotecan or gemcitabine, and poor outcome (29, 30). Trabectedin alone reached an ORR of 18.2% and a median PFS rate of 3 months in this specific population (32). Trabectedin has also been assessed in combination with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (3, 33). The combination showed no increase in median PFS versus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin alone in platinum–resistant/refractory patients (4 months vs. 3.7 months, respectively), leading to consider the combination not indicated in this population (3).

Although ovarian carcinoma has proven to be immunogenic (34, 35), no immunotherapy is approved to date and this holds true especially in the platinum-resistant setting. The tumor microenvironment of platinum-refractory ovarian carcinoma has been described as “cold”, with low infiltration of CD8-positive T cells (36), but also increased PD-L1 positivity, associated with poor prognosis (5, 31, 37, 38). Studies have also shown that platinum salts induce differentiation of macrophages into an M2 phenotype through secretion of IL6 and PGE2 by platinum-treated cells (39). TAM contribute to tumor progression in ovarian cancer models (40), and TAM targeting in combination with PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor has shown activity in several tumor models, including a murine model of ovarian cancer (11, 41). However, the first studies investigating anti–PD-L1/anti–PD-1 antibodies used as single agent in ovarian carcinoma showed response rates of 5% to 15% (5, 37, 42), and platinum sensitivity did not seem to impact response rates, from 5.6% in platinum-sensitive to 7.8% in platinum-resistant patients in the KEYNOTE trial. Combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors plus chemotherapy such pegylated liposomal doxorubicin has been specifically assessed in platinum-resistant ovarian carcinoma in a phase II and a phase III trials. In the phase II, 77% of patients had received two or less previous lines. The ORR of the combination was 26.1% (95% CI, 10.2–48.4), and the 6-month PFS reached a promising rate of 48.5% (95% CI, 27.1–66.9%; ref. 43). In the phase III conducted in a more heavily pretreated population, the combination arm led to an ORR of 13.3% (95% CI, 8.8–19), and a median PFS of 3.7 months versus 3.5 months for pegylated liposomal doxorubicin alone (5). In our heavily pretreated platinum–resistant/refractory ovarian carcinoma cohort, combining trabectedin to the anti–PD-L1 durvalumab reached a promising response rate of 21.4% (95% CI, 4.7–51) and a 6-month PFS of 42.9% (95% CI, 17.7–71.1). Interestingly, PD-L1 positivity was significantly associated with better PFS, as previously shown (5, 31). Other targets than the PD-L1 axis have been reported in ovarian carcinoma microenvironment, such as CSF1R, TLR8, or LAG-3 that are the focus of therapeutic approaches of interest (44).

Trabectedin activity involves transcription coupled nucleotide excision repair (NER) and homologous recombination repair (HR) and has demonstrated synthetic activity in NER-proficient and HR-deficient cells (45–48). The NER pathway is the main mechanism involved in repairing platinum DNA adducts (49), and NER-proficient cells have decreased sensitivity to platinum. On the other hand, up to 50% of high-grade serous and endometrioid ovarian carcinoma present an impairment in HR, or BRCAness phenotype (50). Trabectedin-specific mechanisms of action make it therefore particularly interesting in ovarian cancer with a BRCAness phenotype (46–48). Interestingly, BRCAness has been associated with increase in mutational burden, immune infiltrates, and PD-L1 expression (51, 52). Combination of anti–PD-1/PD-L1 with PARP inhibition has shown promising results in BRCA-mutated platinum-sensitive ovarian carcinoma (53), but also in the BRCA wild-type (WT) platinum-refractory setting (54, 55).

The interpretation of this study is limited by the lack of availability of omics data on patient samples apart from BRCA status.

The promising data we have obtained with trabectedin combined with durvalumab in a BRCA WT heavily pretreated platinum-refractory population, and the existing body of evidence for trabectedin and immune checkpoint inhibitors activity in BRCAness tumors in monotherapy suggest the combination deserves further assessment in BRCAness and BRCA WT ovarian carcinoma patients, in doublet and in association with PARP inhibitors.

A. Bessede reports other support from Explicyte outside the submitted work. J.-P. Guégan reports that he is an employee of Explicyte. J.-Y. Blay reports grants and personal fees from PharmaMar and grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca during the conduct of the study. I. Ray-Coquard reports personal fees from Roche, PharmaMar, AstraZeneca, Clovis, GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol Myers Squibb, Agenus, Mersana, ImmunoGen, MSD, EISAI, and Novartis outside the submitted work. A. Floquet reports grants from PharmaMar and AstraZeneca during the conduct of the study as well as personal fees from PharmaMar and AstraZeneca outside the submitted work. A. Italiano reports grants from AstraZeneca and nonfinancial support from PharmaMar during the conduct of the study as well as grants and personal fees from Bayer; grants from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, and Merck; grants and personal fees from Roche; and nonfinancial support from Epizyme outside the submitted work. No disclosures were reported by the other authors.

M. Toulmonde: Conceptualization, formal analysis, investigation, writing–original draft, writing–review and editing. M. Brahmi: Investigation, writing–review and editing. A. Giraud: Data curation, formal analysis, writing–review and editing. C. Chakiba: Investigation, writing–review and editing. A. Bessede: Data curation, investigation, methodology, writing–review and editing. M. Kind: Data curation, formal analysis, writing–review and editing. E. Toulza: Data curation, writing–review and editing. M. Pulido: Formal analysis, writing–review and editing. S. Albert: Data curation, writing–review and editing. J.-P. Guégan: Formal analysis, writing–review and editing. S. Cousin: Investigation, writing–review and editing. S. Mathoulin-Pelissier: Supervision, writing–review and editing. R. Perret: Formal analysis, writing–review and editing. S. Croce: Formal analysis, writing–review and editing. J.-Y Blay: Investigation, writing–review and editing. I. Ray-Coquard: Investigation, writing–review and editing. A. Floquet: Investigation, writing–review and editing. A. Italiano: Conceptualization, supervision, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, writing–original draft, writing–review and editing.

This study was partly funded by PharmaMar and AstraZeneca. The funder of the study collaborated with academic authors on the study design but not on data collection, analysis, and interpretation. This study was sponsored by Institut Bergonié and partly founded by PharmaMar and AstraZeneca. J.-Y. Blay is supported by NetSARC+ (INCA & DGOS) LYRICAN (INCA-DGOS-INSERM 12563), InterSARC (INCA), LabEx DEvweCAN (ANR-10-LABX0061), PIA Institut Convergence François Rabelais PLAsCAN (PLASCAN, 17-CONV-0002), EURACAN (EC 739521), and RHU4 DEPGYN (ANR-18-RHUS-0009). We thank all patients, caregivers, and families who contributed to the study.

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

1.
Demetri
GD
,
von Mehren
M
,
Jones
RL
,
Hensley
ML
,
Schuetze
SM
,
Staddon
A
, et al
.
Efficacy and safety of trabectedin or dacarbazine for metastatic liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma after failure of conventional chemotherapy: results of a phase III randomized multicenter clinical trial
.
J Clin Oncol
2016
;
34
:
786
93
.
2.
Schuetze
S
.
Trabectedin: useful in leiomyosarcoma and liposarcoma, but less so in other soft tissue sarcomas
.
Ann Oncol
2021
;
32
:
957
8
.
3.
Monk
BJ
,
Herzog
TJ
,
Kaye
SB
,
Krasner
CN
,
Vermorken
JB
,
Muggia
FM
, et al
.
Trabectedin plus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in recurrent ovarian cancer
.
J Clin Oncol
2010
;
28
:
3107
14
.
4.
Toulmonde
M
,
Penel
N
,
Adam
J
,
Chevreau
C
,
Blay
JY
,
Le Cesne
A
, et al
.
Use of PD-1 targeting, macrophage infiltration, and IDO pathway activation in sarcomas: a phase II clinical trial
.
JAMA Oncol
2018
;
4
:
93
7
.
5.
Disis
ML
,
Taylor
MH
,
Kelly
K
,
Beck
JT
,
Gordon
M
,
Moore
KM
, et al
.
Efficacy and safety of avelumab for patients with recurrent or refractory ovarian cancer: phase Ib results from the JAVELIN solid tumor trial
.
JAMA Oncol
2019
;
5
:
393
401
.
6.
Ganjoo
KN
,
Witten
D
,
Patel
M
,
Espinosa
I
,
La
T
,
Tibshirani
R
, et al
.
The prognostic value of tumor-associated macrophages in leiomyosarcoma: a single institution study
.
Am J Clin Oncol
2011
;
34
:
82
6
.
7.
Kryczek
I
,
Wei
S
,
Zhu
G
,
Myers
L
,
Mottram
P
,
Cheng
P
, et al
.
Relationship between B7-H4, regulatory T cells, and patient outcome in human ovarian carcinoma
.
Cancer Res
2007
;
67
:
8900
5
.
8.
Nowak
M
,
Klink
M
.
The role of tumor-associated macrophages in the progression and chemoresistance of ovarian cancer
.
Cells
2020
;
9
:
1299
.
9.
Tsagozis
P
,
Augsten
M
,
Zhang
Y
,
Li
T
,
Hesla
A
,
Bergh
J
, et al
.
An immunosuppressive macrophage profile attenuates the prognostic impact of CD20-positive B cells in human soft tissue sarcoma
.
Cancer Immunol Immunother
2019
;
68
:
927
36
.
10.
Germano
G
,
Frapolli
R
,
Belgiovine
C
,
Anselmo
A
,
Pesce
S
,
Liguori
M
, et al
.
Role of macrophage targeting in the antitumor activity of trabectedin
.
Cancer Cell
2013
;
23
:
249
62
.
11.
Guo
Z
,
Wang
H
,
Meng
F
,
Li
J
,
Zhang
S
.
Combined trabectedin and anti–PD-1 antibody produces a synergistic antitumor effect in a murine model of ovarian cancer
.
J Transl Med
2015
;
13
:
247
.
12.
Ratti
C
,
Botti
L
,
Cancila
V
,
Galvan
S
,
Torselli
I
,
Garofalo
C
, et al
.
Trabectedin overrides osteosarcoma differentiative block and reprograms the tumor immune environment enabling effective combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors
.
Clin Cancer Res
2017
;
23
:
5149
61
.
13.
Gehan
EA
.
The determinatio of the number of patients required in a preliminary and a follow-up trial of a new chemotherapeutic agent
.
J Chronic Dis
1961
;
13
:
346
53
.
14.
Blay
JY
,
Casali
P
,
Nieto
A
,
Tanovic
A
,
Le Cesne
A
.
Efficacy and safety of trabectedin as an early treatment for advanced or metastatic liposarcoma and leiomyosarcoma
.
Future Oncol
2014
;
10
:
59
68
.
15.
Bui-Nguyen
B
,
Butrynski
JE
,
Penel
N
,
Blay
JY
,
Isambert
N
,
Milhem
M
, et al
.
A phase IIb multicenter study comparing the efficacy of trabectedin to doxorubicin in patients with advanced or metastatic untreated soft tissue sarcoma: the TRUSTS trial
.
Eur J Cancer
2015
;
51
:
1312
20
.
16.
Demetri
GD
,
Chawla
SP
,
von Mehren
M
,
Ritch
P
,
Baker
LH
,
Blay
JY
, et al
.
Efficacy and safety of trabectedin in patients with advanced or metastatic liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma after failure of prior anthracyclines and ifosfamide: results of a randomized phase II study of two different schedules
.
J Clin Oncol
2009
;
27
:
4188
96
.
17.
Garcia-Carbonero
R
,
Supko
JG
,
Manola
J
,
Seiden
MV
,
Harmon
D
,
Ryan
DP
, et al
.
Phase II and pharmacokinetic study of ecteinascidin 743 in patients with progressive sarcomas of soft tissues refractory to chemotherapy
.
J Clin Oncol
2004
;
22
:
1480
90
.
18.
Le Cesne
A
,
Blay
JY
,
Judson
I
,
Van Oosterom
A
,
Verweij
J
,
Radford
J
, et al
.
Phase II study of ET-743 in advanced soft tissue sarcomas: a European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) soft tissue and bone sarcoma group trial
.
J Clin Oncol
2005
;
23
:
576
84
.
19.
Le Cesne
A
,
Ray-Coquard
I
,
Duffaud
F
,
Chevreau
C
,
Penel
N
,
Bui Nguyen
B
, et al
.
Trabectedin in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma: a retrospective national analysis of the French Sarcoma Group
.
Eur J Cancer
2015
;
51
:
742
50
.
20.
Samuels
BL
,
Chawla
S
,
Patel
S
,
von Mehren
M
,
Hamm
J
,
Kaiser
PE
, et al
.
Clinical outcomes and safety with trabectedin therapy in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcomas following failure of prior chemotherapy: results of a worldwide expanded access program study
.
Ann Oncol
2013
;
24
:
1703
9
.
21.
Yovine
A
,
Riofrio
M
,
Blay
JY
,
Brain
E
,
Alexandre
J
,
Kahatt
C
, et al
.
Phase II study of ecteinascidin-743 in advanced pretreated soft tissue sarcoma patients
.
J Clin Oncol
2004
;
22
:
890
9
.
22.
Krasner
CN
,
McMeekin
DS
,
Chan
S
,
Braly
PS
,
Renshaw
FG
,
Kaye
S
, et al
.
A phase II study of trabectedin single agent in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer previously treated with platinum-based regimens
.
Br J Cancer
2007
;
97
:
1618
24
.
23.
Del Campo
JM
,
Roszak
A
,
Bidzinski
M
,
Ciuleanu
TE
,
Hogberg
T
,
Wojtukiewicz
MZ
, et al
.
Phase II randomized study of trabectedin given as two different every 3 weeks dose schedules (1.5 mg/m2 24 h or 1.3 mg/m2 3 h) to patients with relapsed, platinum-sensitive, advanced ovarian cancer
.
Ann Oncol
2009
;
20
:
1794
802
.
24.
Toulmonde
M
,
Italiano
A
.
PD-1 inhibition in sarcoma still needs investigation
.
Lancet Oncol
2018
;
19
:
e6
.
25.
Allavena
P
,
Signorelli
M
,
Chieppa
M
,
Erba
E
,
Bianchi
G
,
Marchesi
F
, et al
.
Anti-inflammatory properties of the novel antitumor agent yondelis (trabectedin): inhibition of macrophage differentiation and cytokine production
.
Cancer Res
2005
;
65
:
2964
71
.
26.
Germano
G
,
Frapolli
R
,
Simone
M
,
Tavecchio
M
,
Erba
E
,
Pesce
S
, et al
.
Antitumor and anti-inflammatory effects of trabectedin on human myxoid liposarcoma cells
.
Cancer Res
2010
;
70
:
2235
44
.
27.
Petitprez
F
,
de Reynies
A
,
Keung
EZ
,
Chen
TW
,
Sun
CM
,
Calderaro
J
, et al
.
B cells are associated with survival and immunotherapy response in sarcoma
.
Nature
2020
;
577
:
556
60
.
28.
Toulmonde
M
,
Lucchesi
C
,
Verbeke
S
,
Crombe
A
,
Adam
J
,
Geneste
D
, et al
.
High-throughput profiling of undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcomas identifies two main subgroups with distinct immune profile, clinical outcome and sensitivity to targeted therapies
.
EBioMedicine
2020
;
62
:
103131
.
29.
Adam
JP
,
Boumedien
F
,
Letarte
N
,
Provencher
D
.
Single agent trabectedin in heavily pretreated patients with recurrent ovarian cancer
.
Gynecol Oncol
2017
;
147
:
47
53
.
30.
Naumann
RW
,
Coleman
RL
.
Management strategies for recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer
.
Drugs
2011
;
71
:
1397
412
.
31.
Pujade-Lauraine
E
,
Banerjee
S
,
Pignata
S
.
Management of platinum-resistant, relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer and new drug perspectives
.
J Clin Oncol
2019
;
37
:
2437
48
.
32.
Casado
A
,
Callata
HR
,
Manzano
A
,
Marquina
G
,
Alonso
T
,
Gajate
P
, et al
.
Trabectedin for reversing platinum resistance and resensitization to platinum in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer
.
Future Oncol
2019
;
15
:
271
80
.
33.
Monk
BJ
,
Herzog
TJ
,
Wang
G
,
Triantos
S
,
Maul
S
,
Knoblauch
R
, et al
.
A phase III randomized, open-label, multicenter trial for safety and efficacy of combined trabectedin and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer
.
Gynecol Oncol
2020
;
156
:
535
44
.
34.
Zsiros
E
,
Tanyi
J
,
Balint
K
,
Kandalaft
LE
.
Immunotherapy for ovarian cancer: recent advances and perspectives
.
Curr Opin Oncol
2014
;
26
:
492
500
.
35.
Martinez
A
,
Delord
JP
,
Ayyoub
M
,
Devaud
C
.
Preclinical and clinical immunotherapeutic strategies in epithelial ovarian cancer
.
Cancers
2020
;
12
:
1761
.
36.
Mariya
T
,
Hirohashi
Y
,
Torigoe
T
,
Asano
T
,
Kuroda
T
,
Yasuda
K
, et al
.
Prognostic impact of human leukocyte antigen class I expression and association of platinum resistance with immunologic profiles in epithelial ovarian cancer
.
Cancer Immunol Res
2014
;
2
:
1220
9
.
37.
Hamanishi
J
,
Mandai
M
,
Ikeda
T
,
Minami
M
,
Kawaguchi
A
,
Murayama
T
, et al
.
Safety and antitumor activity of anti–PD-1 antibody, nivolumab, in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer
.
J Clin Oncol
2015
;
33
:
4015
22
.
38.
Hamanishi
J
,
Mandai
M
,
Abiko
K
,
Matsumura
N
,
Baba
T
,
Yoshioka
Y
, et al
.
The comprehensive assessment of local immune status of ovarian cancer by the clustering of multiple immune factors
.
Clin Immunol
2011
;
141
:
338
47
.
39.
Dijkgraaf
EM
,
Heusinkveld
M
,
Tummers
B
,
Vogelpoel
LT
,
Goedemans
R
,
Jha
V
, et al
.
Chemotherapy alters monocyte differentiation to favor generation of cancer-supporting M2 macrophages in the tumor microenvironment
.
Cancer Res
2013
;
73
:
2480
92
.
40.
Colvin
EK
.
Tumor-associated macrophages contribute to tumor progression in ovarian cancer
.
Front Oncol
2014
;
4
:
137
.
41.
Zhu
Y
,
Knolhoff
BL
,
Meyer
MA
,
Nywening
TM
,
West
BL
,
Luo
J
, et al
.
CSF1/CSF1R blockade reprograms tumor-infiltrating macrophages and improves response to T-cell checkpoint immunotherapy in pancreatic cancer models
.
Cancer Res
2014
;
74
:
5057
69
.
42.
Matulonis
UA
,
Shapira-Frommer
R
,
Santin
AD
,
Lisyanskaya
AS
,
Pignata
S
,
Vergote
I
, et al
.
Antitumor activity and safety of pembrolizumab in patients with advanced recurrent ovarian cancer: results from the phase II KEYNOTE-100 study
.
Ann Oncol
2019
;
30
:
1080
7
.
43.
Lee
EK
,
Xiong
N
,
Cheng
SC
,
Barry
WT
,
Penson
RT
,
Konstantinopoulos
PA
, et al
.
Combined pembrolizumab and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: a phase II clinical trial
.
Gynecol Oncol
2020
;
159
:
72
8
.
44.
Morand
S
,
Devanaboyina
M
,
Staats
H
,
Stanbery
L
,
Nemunaitis
J
.
Ovarian cancer immunotherapy and personalized medicine
.
Int J Mol Sci
2021
;
22
:
6532
.
45.
Herrero
AB
,
Martin-Castellanos
C
,
Marco
E
,
Gago
F
,
Moreno
S
.
Cross-talk between nucleotide excision and homologous recombination DNA repair pathways in the mechanism of action of antitumor trabectedin
.
Cancer Res
2006
;
66
:
8155
62
.
46.
Delaloge
S
,
Wolp-Diniz
R
,
Byrski
T
,
Blum
JL
,
Goncalves
A
,
Campone
M
, et al
.
Activity of trabectedin in germline BRCA1/2-mutated metastatic breast cancer: results of an international first-in-class phase II study
.
Ann Oncol
2014
;
25
:
1152
8
.
47.
Erba
E
,
Bergamaschi
D
,
Bassano
L
,
Damia
G
,
Ronzoni
S
,
Faircloth
GT
, et al
.
Ecteinascidin-743 (ET-743), a natural marine compound, with a unique mechanism of action
.
Eur J Cancer
2001
;
37
:
97
105
.
48.
Tavecchio
M
,
Simone
M
,
Erba
E
,
Chiolo
I
,
Liberi
G
,
Foiani
M
, et al
.
Role of homologous recombination in trabectedin-induced DNA damage
.
Eur J Cancer
2008
;
44
:
609
18
.
49.
Hoeijmakers
JH
.
DNA damage, aging, and cancer
.
N Engl J Med
2009
;
361
:
1475
85
.
50.
Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network
.
Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma
.
Nature
2011
;
474
:
609
15
.
51.
Strickland
KC
,
Howitt
BE
,
Shukla
SA
,
Rodig
S
,
Ritterhouse
LL
,
Liu
JF
, et al
.
Association and prognostic significance of BRCA1/2-mutation status with neoantigen load, number of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, and expression of PD-1/PD-L1 in high-grade serous ovarian cancer
.
Oncotarget
2016
;
7
:
13587
98
.
52.
Zhang
AW
,
McPherson
A
,
Milne
K
,
Kroeger
DR
,
Hamilton
PT
,
Miranda
A
, et al
.
Interfaces of malignant and immunologic clonal dynamics in ovarian cancer
.
Cell
2018
;
173
:
1755
69
.
53.
Domchek
SM
,
Postel-Vinay
S
,
Im
SA
,
Park
YH
,
Delord
JP
,
Italiano
A
, et al
.
Olaparib and durvalumab in patients with germline BRCA-mutated metastatic breast cancer (MEDIOLA): an open-label, multicenter, phase I/II, basket study
.
Lancet Oncol
2020
;
21
:
1155
64
.
54.
Konstantinopoulos
PA
,
Waggoner
S
,
Vidal
GA
,
Mita
M
,
Moroney
JW
,
Holloway
R
, et al
.
Single-arm phases I and II trial of niraparib in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian carcinoma
.
JAMA Oncol
2019
;
5
:
1141
9
.
55.
Lampert
EJ
,
Zimmer
A
,
Padget
M
,
Cimino-Mathews
A
,
Nair
JR
,
Liu
Y
, et al
.
Combination of PARP inhibitor olaparib, and PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab, in recurrent ovarian cancer: a proof-of-concept phase II study
.
Clin Cancer Res
2020
;
26
:
4268
79
.

Supplementary data