IP Library Granted Patent US 12,331,359
Granted Patent B2
US 12,331,359 · App. 16/478,818 · Granted Jun 17, 2025

Neoantigens and uses thereof for treating cancer

Inventors: Marta Luksza (New York, NY); Vinod P. Balachandran (New York, NY); Arnold J. Levine (Princeton, NJ); Jedd D. Wolchok (New York, NY); Taha Merghoub (Jersey City, NJ); Steven D. Leach (New York, NY); Timothy A. Chan (New York, NY); Benjamin D. Greenbaum (New York, NY); Michael Laessig (Cologne, DE)
Assignees: Michael Laessig; Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai; The Simons Center for Systems Biology at the Institute for Advanced Study; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
C12Q1/6886A61K35/15A61K35/17A61K39/00A61K39/0011A61K39/00117G01N33/56977G01N33/57438G16B20/10G16B20/20G16B20/30G16B30/10G16B30/20G16B50/00C12Q2600/106C12Q2600/156G01N33/574G01N2800/52G16B30/00
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,331,359
App. No.
16/478,818
Granted
Jun 17, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Systems and methods for determining the likely responsiveness of a human cancer subject to a checkpoint blockade immunotherapy regimen are provided. Sequencing reads are obtained from samples from the subject representative of the cancer. A human leukocyte antigen type and a plurality of clones is determined from the sequencing reads. For each clone, an initial frequency X α in the one or more samples is determined and a corresponding clone fitness score of the clone is computed, thereby computing clone fitness scores. Each such fitness score is computed by identifying neoantigens in the respective clone, computing a recognition potential for each neoantigen, and determining the corresponding clone fitness score of the respective clone as an aggregate of these recognition potentials. A total fitness, quantifying the likely responsiveness of the subject to the regimen, is computed by summing the clone fitness scores across the plurality of clones.

Claims (272)

1. A method for selecting a human subject afflicted with a cancer for treatment with a checkpoint blockade immunotherapy comprising:

(A) obtaining a plurality of sequencing reads from one or more samples from the human cancer subject that is representative of the cancer;

(B) determining a human leukocyte antigen (HLA) type of the human cancer subject;

(C) determining a plurality of clones, and for each respective clone α in the plurality of clones, an initial frequency X α of the respective clone α in the one or more samples;

(D) for each respective clone α in the plurality of clones, computing a corresponding clone fitness score of the respective clone, thereby computing a plurality of clone fitness scores, each corresponding clone fitness score computed for a respective clone α by a first procedure comprising:

(a) identifying a plurality of neoantigens in the respective clone α;

(b) computing a recognition potential of each respective neoantigen in the plurality of neoantigens in the respective clone α by a second procedure comprising:

(i) computing an amplitude A of the respective neoantigen as a function of the relative major histocompatibility complex (MHC) affinity of the respective neoantigen and the wildtype counterpart of the respective neoantigen given the HLA type of the subject,

(ii) computing a probability of T-cell receptor recognition R of the respective neoantigen as a probability that the respective neoantigen is bound by T-cells that are specific to one or more known epitopes in a plurality of epitopes after class I MHC presentation, wherein the plurality of epitopes comprises 1×10 6 epitopes,

wherein the probability of T-cell receptor recognition R is computed as:

R

=

Z

(

k

)

-

1

e

D

exp

[

-

k

(

a

-

|

s

,

e

|

)

]

,

wherein

a is a number that represents a horizontal displacement of a binding curve for the respective neoantigen,

k is a number that sets the steepness of the binding curve at a,

Z(k) is a partition function over the unbound state and all bound states of the respective neoantigen of the form

1

+

e

D

exp

[

-

k

(

a

-

|

s

,

e

|

)

]

wherein,

D is the plurality of epitopes,

each respective epitope e is an epitope from the plurality of epitopes that is positively recognized by T-cells after class I MHC presentation, and

|s, e| is a measure of sequence similarity between the respective neoantigen s and the respective epitope e, and

(iii) computing the recognition potential of the respective neoantigen as a function of the amplitude A of the respective neoantigen and the probability of T-cell receptor recognition R of the respective neoantigen; and

(c) determining the corresponding clone fitness score of the respective clone α as an aggregate of the neoantigen recognition potentials across the plurality of neoantigens in the respective clone α;

(E) computing a total fitness for the one or more samples as a sum of the clone fitness scores across the plurality of clones, wherein:

each clone fitness score is weighted by the initial frequency X α of the corresponding clone α, and

the total fitness quantifies the likelihood that the human subject afflicted with the cancer will be responsive to the treatment regimen; and

(F) administering ipilimumab or tremelimumab to the subject when the total fitness of the subject is lower than a predetermined threshold.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the cancer is a carcinoma, a melanoma, a lymphoma/leukemia, a sarcoma, or a neuro-glial tumor.

3. The method of claim 1 , wherein the cancer is lung cancer, pancreatic cancer, colon cancer, stomach or esophagus cancer, breast cancer, ovary cancer, prostate cancer, or liver cancer.

4. The method of claim 1 , wherein

each clone α in the plurality of clones is uniquely defined by a unique set of somatic mutations, and

the plurality of clones is determined by a variant allele frequency of each respective somatic mutation in a plurality of somatic mutations determined from the plurality of sequencing reads.

5. The method of claim 4 , wherein the somatic mutation is a single nucleotide variant or an indel.

6. The method of claim 1 , wherein

each clone α in the plurality of clones is uniquely defined by a unique set of somatic mutations, and

the plurality of clones is determined by a combination of (i) a variant allele frequency of each respective somatic mutation in the plurality of somatic mutations determined from the plurality of sequencing reads and (ii) an identification of a plurality of inferred copy number variations using the whole-genome sequencing data.

7. The method of claim 1 , wherein each neoantigen in the plurality of neoantigens of a clone in the plurality of clones is a peptide that is eight, nine, ten, or eleven residues in length.

8. The method of claim 1 , the method further comprising identifying a population of neoantigens present in the one or more samples by a third procedure comprising:

determining a plurality of somatic single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the plurality of sequencing reads by comparison of the plurality of sequencing reads to a reference human genome; and

evaluating each respective somatic SNP in the plurality of SNPs as a neoantigen candidate by evaluation of a peptide encoded by a portion of one or more sequencing reads in the plurality of sequencing reads that includes the respective somatic SNP against a classifier that has been trained to predict peptide binding to class 1 MHC of the HLA type of the cancer subject, wherein a neoantigen candidate having a binding score below a threshold value is deemed to be a neoantigen in the population of neoantigens, and

wherein the identifying the plurality of neoantigens in the respective clone α comprises matching the SNPs in the respective clone α to respective neoantigens in the population of neoantigens.

9. The method of claim 1 , wherein the function of the relative class I MHC affinity of the respective neoantigen and the wildtype counterpart of the respective neoantigen given the HLA type of the subject is a ratio of:

(1) a dissociation constant between the respective neoantigen and the class I MHC presented by the cancer subject given the HLA type of the cancer subject, and

(2) a dissociation constant between the wildtype counterpart of the respective neoantigen and the class I MHC presented by the cancer subject given the HLA type of the cancer subject.

10. The method of claim 9 , wherein:

the dissociation constant between the respective neoantigen and the class I MHC presented by the cancer subject is obtained as output from a first classifier upon inputting into the first classifier the amino acid sequence of the neoantigen,

the dissociation constant between the wildtype counterpart of the respective neoantigen and the class I MHC presented by the cancer subject of the HLA type of the subject is obtained as output from the first classifier upon inputting into the first classifier the amino acid sequence of the respective wildtype counterpart of the neoantigen, and

the first classifier is specific to the HLA type of the cancer subject and has been trained with the respective class I MHC binding coefficient and sequence data of each peptide epitope in a plurality of epitopes presented by class I MHC in a training population having the HLA type of the subject.

11. The method of claim 1 , wherein the measure of sequence similarity |s, e| is computed as a sequence alignment between the sequence of the respective neoantigen s and the sequence of the respective epitope e using an amino-acid similarity matrix.

12. The method of claim 1 , wherein the aggregate of the neoantigen recognition potentials across the plurality of neoantigens in the respective clone α is computed as:

F

α

=

-

max

i

Clone

α

(

A

i

×

R

i

)

wherein i is an index iterating over each neoantigen in the plurality of neoantigens in the respective clone α.

13. The method of claim 12 , wherein the computing a total fitness for the one or more samples as a sum of the clone fitness scores across the plurality of clones is computed as:

n (τ)= Z α X α exp( F α τ),

wherein τ is a characteristic evolutionary time scale.

14. The method of claim 1 , wherein the aggregate of the neoantigen recognition potentials across the plurality of neoantigens in the respective clone α is computed as a summation of the recognition potential of all or a subset of the neoantigens in the plurality of neoantigens.

15. The method of claim 1 , wherein the aggregate of the neoantigen recognition potentials across the plurality of neoantigens in the respective clone α is computed as a nonlinear combination of the recognition potential of all or a subset of the neoantigens in the plurality of neoantigens.

16. The method of claim 1 , wherein the total fitness is inversely proportional to (a) a likelihood that the cancer subject will be responsive to immunotherapy and (b) an indication of survival of the cancer subject.

17. The method of claim 1 , wherein the plurality of epitopes consists of epitopes that have been recognized by human T-cells from the human subject.

18. The method of claim 1 , wherein the probability that the respective neoantigen is bound by T-cells that are specific to one or more known epitopes in the plurality of epitopes after class I MHC presentation is computed as:

R

=

Z

(

k

)

-

1

t

F

exp

[

-

k

(

a

-

|

s

,

t

|

)

]

,

wherein

a is a number that represents a horizontal displacement of a binding curve for the respective neoantigen,

k is a number that sets the steepness of the binding curve at a,

Z(k) is a partition function over the unbound state and all bound states of the respective neoantigen of the form

1

+

t

F

exp

[

-

k

(

a

-

|

s

,

t

|

)

]

wherein,

F is a plurality of T-cell receptor sequences,

each respective T-cell receptor t is a T-cell receptor from the plurality of T-cell receptor sequences F, and

|s, t| is a measure of affinity between the respective neoantigen s and the respective T-cell receptor t.

19. The method of claim 18 , wherein the plurality of T-cell receptors is drawn exclusively from the subject.

20. The method of claim 1 , wherein the plurality of clones is determined by identifying a plurality of inferred copy number variations using the plurality of sequencing reads.

21. A method for selecting an immunotherapy for treating a cancer in a subject in need thereof, the method comprising:

(A) obtaining a plurality of sequencing reads from one or more samples from a human cancer subject that is representative of the cancer;

(B) determining a human leukocyte antigen (HLA) type of the human cancer subject from the plurality of sequencing reads;

(C) determining a plurality of clones, and for each respective clone α in the plurality of clones, an initial frequency X α of the respective clone α in the one or more samples from the plurality of sequencing reads;

(D) for each respective clone α in the plurality of clones, computing a corresponding clone fitness score of the respective clone, thereby computing a plurality of clone fitness scores, each corresponding clone fitness score computed for a respective clone α by a first procedure comprising:

(a) identifying a plurality of neoantigens in the respective clone α;

(b) computing a recognition potential of each respective neoantigen in the plurality of neoantigens in the respective clone α by a second procedure comprising:

(i) computing an amplitude A of the respective neoantigen as a function of the relative major histocompatibility complex (MHC) affinity of the respective neoantigen and the wildtype counterpart of the respective neoantigen given the HLA type of the subject,

(ii) computing a probability of T-cell receptor recognition R of the respective neoantigen as a probability that the respective neoantigen is bound by T-cells that are specific to one or more known epitopes in a plurality of epitopes after class I MHC presentation, wherein the plurality of epitopes comprises 1×10 6 epitopes,

wherein the probability of T-cell receptor recognition R is computed as:

R

=

Z

(

k

)

-

1

e

D

exp

[

-

k

(

a

-

"\[LeftBracketingBar]"

s

,

e

"\[RightBracketingBar]"

)

]

,

wherein

a is a number that represents a horizontal displacement of a binding curve for the respective neoantigen,

k is a number that sets the steepness of the binding curve at a,

Z(k) is a partition function over the unbound state and all bound states of the respective neoantigen of the form

1

+

e

D

exp

[

-

k

(

a

-

"\[LeftBracketingBar]"

s

,

e

"\[RightBracketingBar]"

)

]

wherein,

D is the plurality of epitopes,

each respective epitope e is an epitope from the plurality of epitopes that is positively recognized by T-cells after class I MHC presentation, and

|s, e| is a measure of sequence similarity between the respective neoantigen s and the respective epitope e, and

(iii) computing the recognition potential of the respective neoantigen as a function of the amplitude A of the respective neoantigen and the probability of T-cell receptor recognition R of the respective neoantigen; and

(c) determining the corresponding clone fitness score of the respective clone α as an aggregate of the neoantigen recognition potentials across the plurality of neoantigens in the respective clone α; and

(E) selecting at least a first neoantigen from a plurality of neoantigens for a respective clone α in the plurality of respective clones based upon the recognition potential of the at least first neoantigen as the immunotherapy for the cancer,

(F) administering to the human cancer subject a vaccine comprising the at least first neoantigen, a vaccine comprising a polynucleotide encoding the at least first neoantigen, or a T cell population that targets the at least first neoantigen.

Assignments (3)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Sep 4, 2020
From: GREENBAUM, BENJAMIN D.
To: ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI
Reel/Frame 053700/0025 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Sep 4, 2020
From: BALACHANDRAN, VINOD P.; WOLCHOK, JEDD D.; MERGHOUB, TAHA; LEACH, STEVEN D.; CHAN, TIMOTHY A.
To: MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER
Reel/Frame 053700/0226 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Sep 3, 2020
From: LUKSZA, MARTA; LEVINE, ARNOLD J.
To: THE SIMONS CENTER FOR SYSTEMS BIOLOGY AT THE INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDY
Reel/Frame 053685/0218 →
Continuity (7)
Provisional Application 62618540 · Jan 17, 2018
Provisional Application 62582851 · Nov 7, 2017
Provisional Application 62554232 · Sep 5, 2017
Provisional Application 62448247 · Jan 19, 2017
Provisional Application 62448291 · Jan 19, 2017
Provisional Application 62447852 · Jan 18, 2017
Related Publication 20200232040A1 · Jul 23, 2020
References Cited (63)
US 10738355B2 · Sahin · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20140134197A1 · Calenoff · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20180251553A1 · McGranahan · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20190127803A1 · Hacohen · 2019 [cited by examiner]
WO WO2015103037A2 · 2015 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2016081947A2 · 2016 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2016187508A2 · 2017 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2017106638A1 · 2017 [cited by applicant]
Mandal, R. and Chan, T.A. Cancer Discovery 6(7):703-713. Jul. 2016. (Year: 2016). [cited by examiner]
Kamil A. Lipinski, Louise J. Barber, Matthew N. Davies, Matthew Ashenden, Andrea Sottoriva, Marco Gerlinger, Cancer Evolution and the Limits of Predictability in Precision Cancer Medicine, Trends in Cancer, vol. 2, Issu… [cited by examiner]
Balachandran, V., et al., “Identification of unique neoantigen qualities in long-term survivors of pancreatic cancer,” NATURE (LONDON), vol. 551, No. 7681, Nov. 23, 2017 (Nov. 23, 2017), pp. 512-516. [cited by applicant]
Champiat, S., et al: “Exomics and Immunogenics,” ONCOIMMUNOLOGY, vol. 3, No. 1 (Jan. 1, 2014), pp. e27817-1, 6 pages. [cited by applicant]
Fritsch, E.F et al., “HLA-Binding Properties of Tumor Neoepitopes in Humans”, Cancer Immunology Research, vol. 2, No. 6, Mar. 3, 2014 (Mar. 3, 2014), pp. 522-529. [cited by applicant]
Harndahl, M., et al. “Peptide-MHC class I stability is a better predictor than peptide affinity of CTL immunogenicity: Antigen processing”, European Journal of Immunology, vol. 42, No. 6, Jun. 1, 2012 (Jun. 1, 2012), pp… [cited by applicant]
Luksza, M. et al., “A neoantigen fitness model predicts tumour response to checkpoint blockade immunotherapy,” NATURE, Nov. 8, 2017 (Nov. 8, 2017) 20 pages. [cited by applicant]
Bailey, P. et al., “Genomic analyses identify molecular subtypes of pancreatic cancer,” Nature 531, 47-52 (2016). [cited by applicant]
Biankin, A.V. et al., “Pancreatic cancer genomes reveal aberrations in axon guidance pathway genes,” Nature 491, 399-405 (2012). [cited by applicant]
Bindea, G. et al., “Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Intratumoral Immune Cells Reveal the Immune Landscape in Human Cancer,” Immunity 39, 782-795 (2013). [cited by applicant]
Bjerregaard, A.-M., et al., MuPeXI: prediction of neo-epitopes from tumor sequencingdata, Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy 66.9 (20.004.2017: 1123-1130). [cited by applicant]
Chauvin, J.-M. et al., “TIGIT and PD-1 impair tumor antigen-specific CD8+ T cells in melanoma patients,” The Journal of Clinical Investigation 125, 2046-2058 (2015). [cited by applicant]
Chekmasova, A. A. et al., “Successful eradication of established peritoneal ovarian tumors in SCID-Beige mice following adoptive transfer of T cells genetically targeted to the MUC16 antigen,” Clin Cancer Res 16, 3594-3… [cited by applicant]
Dal Molin, M. et al., “Very Long-term Survival Following Resection for Pancreatic Cancer Is Not Explained by Commonly Mutated Genes: Results of Whole-Exome Sequencing Analysis,” Clin Cancer Res 21, 1944-1950 (2015). [cited by applicant]
Das, S. et al., “Carboxyl-terminal domain of MUC16 imparts tumorigenic and metastatic functions through nuclear translocation of JAK2 to pancreatic cancer cells,” Oncotarget 6, 5772-5787 (2015). [cited by applicant]
Deshwar, A. G. et al., “PhyloWGS: reconstructing subclonal composition and evolution from whole-genome sequencing of tumors,” Genome Biol. 16, 35 (2015), 20 pages. [cited by applicant]
Gros, A. et al., “PD-1 identifies the patient-specific CD8+ tumor-reactive repertoire infiltrating human tumors,” The Journal of Clinical Investigation 124, 2246-2259 (2014). [cited by applicant]
Gros, A. et al., “Prospective identification of neoantigen-specific lymphocytes in the peripheral blood of melanoma patients,” Nat Med 22, 433-438 (2016). [cited by applicant]
Gross, L., “Intradermal Immunization of C3H Mice against a Sarcoma That Originated in an Animal of the Same Line,” Cancer Res 3, 326-333 (1943). [cited by applicant]
Gubin, M. M. et al., “Checkpoint blockade cancer immunotherapy targets tumour-specific mutant antigens,” Nature 515, 577-581 (2014). [cited by applicant]
Hidalgo, M. Pancreatic cancer, The New England Journal of Medicine 362, 1605-1617 (2010). [cited by applicant]
Hiraoka, N. et al., “Intratumoral tertiary lymphoid organ is a favourable prognosticator in patients with pancreatic cancer,” Br J Cancer 112, 1782-1790 (2015). [cited by applicant]
Haridas, D et al., “Pathobiological implications of MUC16 expression in pancreatic cancer,” PLOS ONE 6, e26839 (2011), 9 pages. [cited by applicant]
Hundal, J. et al., “pVAC-Seq: A genome-guided in silico approach to identifying tumor neoantigens,” Genome Med 8, 11 (2016), 11 pages. [cited by applicant]
Ino, Y. et al., “Immune cell infiltration as an indicator of the immune microenvironment of pancreatic cancer,” Br J Cancer 108, 914-923 (2013). [cited by applicant]
Kleeff, J. et al. Pancreatic cancer, Nature Publishing Group 2, 16022 (2016), 22 pages. [cited by applicant]
Knudsen, E.S., et al., “Stratification of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Combinatorial Genetic, Stromal, and Immunologic Markers,” Clinical Cancer Research 23.15 (Mar. 27, 2017) 4429-4440. [cited by applicant]
Liu, Q. et al., “C-terminus of MUC16 activates Wnt signaling pathway through its interaction with ß-catenin to promote tumorigenesis and metastasis,” Oncotarget 7, 36800-36813 (2016). [cited by applicant]
Łuksza, M. & Lässig, M, “A predictive fitness model for influenza,” Nature 507, 57-61 (2014). [cited by applicant]
McAllister, F. et al., “Oncogenic Kras activates a hematopoietic-to-epithelial IL-17 signaling axis in preinvasive pancreatic neoplasia,” Cancer Cell 25, 621-637 (2014). [cited by applicant]
McLaren, W. et al., “The Ensembl Variant Effect Predictor,” Genome Biol. 17, 122 (2016), 14 pages. [cited by applicant]
Morgado, M. et al., “Tumor necrosis factor-α and interferon-γ stimulate MUC16 (CA125) expression in breast, endometrial and ovarian cancers through NFκB.,” Oncotarget 7, 14871-14884 (2016). [cited by applicant]
Muniyan, S. et al., “MUC16 contributes to the metastasis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma through focal adhesion mediated signaling mechanism,” Genes Cancer 7, 110-124 (2016). [cited by applicant]
Nathanson, T., et al., “Somatic Mutations and Neoepitope Homology in Melanomas Treated with CTLA-4 Blockade,” Cancer Immunology Research 5.1 (Dec. 12, 2016): 84-91. [cited by applicant]
Nielsen, M. et al., “NetMHCpan, a method for quantitative predictions of peptide binding to any HLA-A and -B locus protein of known sequence,” PLOS ONE 2, e796 (2007), 10 pages. [cited by applicant]
Pearson, H. et al., “MHC class I-associated peptides derive from selective regions of the human genome,” The Journal of Clinical Investigation (2016). doi:10. 1172/JCI88590,13 pages. [cited by applicant]
Remark, R., Merghoub, T. & Grabe, N, “In-depth tissue profiling using multiplexed immunohistochemical consecutive staining on single slide,” Science (2016), 12 pages. [cited by applicant]
Rizvi, N.A. et al., “Cancer immunology. Mutational landscape determines sensitivity to PD-1 blockade in non-small cell lung cancer,” Science 348, 124-128 (2015). [cited by applicant]
Royal, R.E. et al., “Phase 2 trial of single agent Ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma,” Journal of Immunotherapy 33, 828-833 (2010). [cited by applicant]
Rubinsteyn, A., et al., “Computational Pipeline for the PGV-001 Neoantigen Vaccine Trial,” bioRxiv (Oct. 8, 2017); 174516, 7 pages https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2017/08/10/174516.full.pdf. [cited by applicant]
Ryschich, E. et al., “Control of T-cell-mediated immune response by HLA class I in human pancreatic carcinoma,” Clin Cancer Res 11, 498-504 (2005). [cited by applicant]
Sausen, M. et al., “Clinical implications of genomic alterations in the tumour and circulation of pancreatic cancer patients,” Nat Commun 6, 7686 (2015), 6 pages. [cited by applicant]
Schumacher, T.N. & Schreiber, R.D., “Neoantigens in cancer immunotherapy,” Science 348, 69-74 (2015). [cited by applicant]
Shukla, S. K. et al., “MUC16-mediated activation of mTOR and c-Myc reprograms pancreatic cancer metabolism,” Oncotarget 6, 19118-19131 (2015). [cited by applicant]
Siegel, R.L., Miller, K.D. & Jemal, A. Cancer Statistics 65, 5-29 (2015). [cited by applicant]
Snyder, A. et al. “Genetic basis for clinical response to CTLA-4 blockade in melanoma,” N Engl J Med 371, 2189-2199 (2014). [cited by applicant]
Tumeh, P.C. et al., “PD-1 blockade induces responses by inhibiting adaptive immune resistance,” Nature 515, 568-571 (2014). [cited by applicant]
Valsecchi, M.E., Diaz-Canton, E., de la Vega, M. & Littman, S. J., “Recent treatment advances and novel therapies in pancreas cancer: a review,” Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer 45, 190-201 (2014). [cited by applicant]
Van Allen, E. M. et al., “Genomic correlates of response to CTLA-4 blockade in metastatic melanoma,” Science 350, 207-211 (2015). [cited by applicant]
Vétizou, M. et al., “Anticancer immunotherapy by CTLA-4 blockade relies on the gut microbiota,” Science 350, 1079-1084 (2015). [cited by applicant]
Wang et al., “Expression of the Carboxy-Terminal Portion of MUC16/CA125 Induces Transformation and Tumor Invasion,” PLOS ONE 75, 4669-4674 (2015). [cited by applicant]
Witkiewicz, A.K. et al., “Whole-exome sequencing of pancreatic cancer defines genetic diversity and therapeutic targets,” Nat Commun 6, 6744 (2015), 11 pages. [cited by applicant]
Yu, H., Pardoll, D. & Jove, R., “STATs in cancer inflammation and immunity: a leading role for STAT3,” Nat Rev Cancer 9, 798-809 (2009). [cited by applicant]
Zhou, Z., et al., “TSNAD: an Integrated Software for Cancer Somatic Mutation and Tumour-Specific Neoantigen Detection,” Royal Society open science 4.4 (May 4, 2017) 170050,12 pages. [cited by applicant]
Zitvogel, L., Ayyoub, M., Routy, B. & Kroemer, G., “Microbiome and Anticancer Immunosurveillance,” Cell 165, 276-287 (2016). [cited by applicant]