Bjarne R. Bartlett

Bjarne R. Bartlett

Auto-generated profile, based on publicly available information

Bjarne R. Bartlett

Bloomberg-Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

13Years (2014-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
25 June 2015 in New England Journal of Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
DLDung T. Le
Dung T. Le
JUJennifer N. Uram
Jennifer N. Uram
HWHao Wang
Hao Wang
BBBjarne R. Bartlett
Bjarne R. Bartlett
HKHolly Kemberling
Holly Kemberling
LDLuis A. Jr. Diaz
Luis A. Jr. Diaz
Somatic mutations have the potential to encode “non-self” immunogenic antigens. We hypothesized that tumors with a large number of somatic mutations due to mismatch-repair defects may be susceptible to immune checkpoint blockade. We conducted a phase 2 study to evaluate the clinical activity of pembrolizumab, an anti–programmed death 1 immune checkpoint inhibitor, in 41 patients with progressive metastatic carcinoma with or without mismatch-repair deficiency. Pembrolizumab was administered intravenously at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram of body weight every 14 days in patients with mismatch repair–deficient colorectal cancers, patients with mismatch repair–proficient colorectal cancers, and patients with mismatch repair–deficient cancers that were not colorectal. The coprimary end points were the immune-related objective response rate and the 20-week immune-related progression-free survival rate. The immune-related objective response rate and immune-related progression-free survival rate were 40% (4 of 10 patients) and 78% (7 of 9 patients), respectively, for mismatch repair–deficient colorectal cancers and 0% (0 of 18 patients) and 11% (2 of 18 patients) for mismatch repair–proficient colorectal cancers. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were not reached in the cohort with mismatch repair–deficient colorectal cancer but were 2.2 and 5.0 months, respectively, in the cohort with mismatch repair–proficient colorectal cancer (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.10 [P<0.001], and hazard ratio for death, 0.22 [P=0.05]). Patients with mismatch repair–deficient noncolorectal cancer had responses similar to those of patients with mismatch repair–deficient colorectal cancer (immune-related objective response rate, 71% [5 of 7 patients]; immune-related progression-free survival rate, 67% [4 of 6 patients]). Whole-exome sequencing revealed a mean of 1782 somatic mutations per tumor in mismatch repair–deficient tumors, as compared with 73 in mismatch repair–proficient tumors (P=0.007), and high somatic mutation loads were associated with prolonged progression-free survival (P=0.02). This study showed that mismatch-repair status predicted clinical benefit of immune checkpoint blockade with pembrolizumab. (Funded by Johns Hopkins University and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01876511.)

28 July 2017 in Science
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
DLDung T. Le
Dung T. Le
JDJennifer N. Durham
Jennifer N. Durham
KSKellie N. Smith
Kellie N. Smith
HWHao Wang
Hao Wang
BBBjarne R. Bartlett
Bjarne R. Bartlett
LDLuis A. Diaz
Luis A. Diaz
Predicting responses to immunotherapy: Colon cancers with loss-of-function mutations in the mismatch repair (MMR) pathway have favorable responses to PD-1 blockade immunotherapy. In a phase 2 clinical trial, Le et al. showed that treatment success is not just limited to colon cancer (see the Perspective by Goswami and Sharma). They found that a wide range of different cancer types with MMR deficiency also responded to PD-1 blockade. The trial included some patients with pancreatic cancer, which is one of the deadliest forms of cancer. The clinical trial is still ongoing, and around 20% of patients have so far achieved a complete response. MMR deficiency appears to be a biomarker for predicting successful treatment outcomes for several solid tumors and indicates a new therapeutic option for patients harboring MMR-deficient cancers. Science , this issue p. 409 ; see also p. 358

19 February 2014 in Science Translational Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
CBChetan Bettegowda
Chetan Bettegowda
MSMark Sausen
Mark Sausen
RLRebecca J. Leary
Rebecca J. Leary
IKIsaac Kinde
Isaac Kinde
YWYuxuan Wang
Yuxuan Wang
LDLuis A. Diaz
Luis A. Diaz
The development of noninvasive methods to detect and monitor tumors continues to be a major challenge in oncology. We used digital polymerase chain reaction–based technologies to evaluate the ability of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to detect tumors in 640 patients with various cancer types. We found that ctDNA was detectable in >75% of patients with advanced pancreatic, ovarian, colorectal, bladder, gastroesophageal, breast, melanoma, hepatocellular, and head and neck cancers, but in less than 50% of primary brain, renal, prostate, or thyroid cancers. In patients with localized tumors, ctDNA was detected in 73, 57, 48, and 50% of patients with colorectal cancer, gastroesophageal cancer, pancreatic cancer, and breast adenocarcinoma, respectively. ctDNA was often present in patients without detectable circulating tumor cells, suggesting that these two biomarkers are distinct entities. In a separate panel of 206 patients with metastatic colorectal cancers, we showed that the sensitivity of ctDNA for detection of clinically relevant KRAS gene mutations was 87.2% and its specificity was 99.2%. Finally, we assessed whether ctDNA could provide clues into the mechanisms underlying resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor blockade in 24 patients who objectively responded to therapy but subsequently relapsed. Twenty-three (96%) of these patients developed one or more mutations in genes involved in the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway. Together, these data suggest that ctDNA is a broadly applicable, sensitive, and specific biomarker that can be used for a variety of clinical and research purposes in patients with multiple different types of cancer.

14 May 2017 in Clinical Cancer Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
SPSonya Parpart-Li
Sonya Parpart-Li
BBBjarne Bartlett
Bjarne Bartlett
MPMaria Popoli
Maria Popoli
VAVilmos Adleff
Vilmos Adleff
LTLaura Tucker
Laura Tucker
LDLuis A Diaz
Luis A Diaz
Purpose: Analysis of genomic alterations in cell-free DNA (cfDNA) is evolving as an approach to detect, monitor, and genotype malignancies. Methods to separate the liquid from the cellular fraction of whole blood for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analyses have been largely unstudied, although these may be a critical consideration for assay performance. Experimental Design: To evaluate the influence of blood processing on cfDNA and ctDNA quality and yield, we compared the cfDNA levels in serum with those in plasma. Given the limitations of serum for ctDNA analyses, we evaluated the effects of two plasma processing approaches, K2EDTA and Cell-Free DNA BCT (BCT) tubes, on cfDNA and ctDNA recovery. A total of 45 samples from nine patients with cancer were collected in both tube types. Once collected, blood was processed into plasma immediately or kept at room temperature and processed into plasma at 1, 3, 5, or 7 days. Results: As early as 24 hours after collection, plasma isolated from blood collected in K2EDTA tubes contained an elevated level of cfDNA that increased over time compared with BCT tubes where no significant increase in cfDNA levels was observed. When samples from an additional six patients with cancer, collected in the same manner, were stored at 4°C in K2EDTA tubes over the course of 3 days, total cfDNA and ctDNA levels were comparable between samples collected in BCT tubes. At day 3, there was a trend toward a decrease in ctDNA levels in both tubes that was more pronounced when measuring the mutant allele fraction for cases stored at 4°C in K2EDTA tubes. Conclusions: In summary, methods of blood processing have a strong influence on cfDNA and ctDNA levels and should be a consideration when evaluating ctDNA in peripheral circulation. Clin Cancer Res; 23(10); 2471–7. ©2016 AACR.

1 December 2019 in Clinical Cancer Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
AGAndrew Georgiadis
Andrew Georgiadis
JDJennifer N. Durham
Jennifer N. Durham
LKLaurel A. Keefer
Laurel A. Keefer
BBBjarne R. Bartlett
Bjarne R. Bartlett
MZMagdalena Zielonka
Magdalena Zielonka
MSMark Sausen
Mark Sausen
Purpose: Microsatellite instability (MSI) and high tumor mutation burden (TMB-High) are promising pan-tumor biomarkers used to select patients for treatment with immune checkpoint blockade; however, real-time sequencing of unresectable or metastatic solid tumors is often challenging. We report a noninvasive approach for detection of MSI and TMB-High in the circulation of patients. Experimental Design: We developed an approach that utilized a hybrid-capture–based 98-kb pan-cancer gene panel, including targeted microsatellite regions. A multifactorial error correction method and a novel peak-finding algorithm were established to identify rare MSI frameshift alleles in cell-free DNA (cfDNA). Results: Through analysis of cfDNA derived from a combination of healthy donors and patients with metastatic cancer, the error correction and peak-finding approaches produced a specificity of >99% (n = 163) and sensitivities of 78% (n = 23) and 67% (n = 15), respectively, for MSI and TMB-High. For patients treated with PD-1 blockade, we demonstrated that MSI and TMB-High in pretreatment plasma predicted progression-free survival (hazard ratios: 0.21 and 0.23, P = 0.001 and 0.003, respectively). In addition, we analyzed cfDNA from longitudinally collected plasma samples obtained during therapy to identify patients who achieved durable response to PD-1 blockade. Conclusions: These analyses demonstrate the feasibility of noninvasive pan-cancer screening and monitoring of patients who exhibit MSI or TMB-High and have a high likelihood of responding to immune checkpoint blockade. See related commentary by Wang and Ajani, p. 6887

1 September 2019 in Clinical Cancer Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
NLNicolas J. Llosa
Nicolas J. Llosa
BLBrandon Luber
Brandon Luber
ATAda J. Tam
Ada J. Tam
KSKellie N. Smith
Kellie N. Smith
NSNicholas Siegel
Nicholas Siegel
FHFranck Housseau
Franck Housseau
Purpose: Approximately 10% of patients with mismatch repair–proficient (MMRp) colorectal cancer showed clinical benefit to anti-PD-1 monotherapy (NCT01876511). We sought to identify biomarkers that delineate patients with immunoreactive colorectal cancer and to explore new combinatorial immunotherapy strategies that can impact MMRp colorectal cancer. Experimental Design: We compared the expression of 44 selected immune-related genes in the primary colon tumor of 19 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who responded (n = 13) versus those who did not (n = 6) to anti-PD-1 therapy (NCT01876511). We define a 10 gene–based immune signature that could distinguish responder from nonresponder. Resected colon specimens (n = 14) were used to validate the association of the predicted status (responder and nonresponder) with the immune-related gene expression, the phenotype, and the function of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes freshly isolated from the same tumors. Results: Although both IL17Low and IL17High immunoreactive MMRp colorectal cancers are associated with intratumor correlates of adaptive immunosuppression (CD8/IFNγ and PD-L1/IDO1 colocalization), only IL17Low MMRp tumors (3/14) have a tumor immune microenvironment (TiME) that resembles the TiME in primary colon tumors of patients with mCRC responsive to anti-PD-1 treatment. Conclusions: The detection of a preexisting antitumor immune response in MMRp colorectal cancer (immunoreactive MMRp colorectal cancer) is not sufficient to predict a clinical benefit to T-cell checkpoint inhibitors. Intratumoral IL17-mediated signaling may preclude responses to immunotherapy. Drugs targeting the IL17 signaling pathway are available in clinic, and their combination with T-cell checkpoint inhibitors could improve colorectal cancer immunotherapy. See related commentary by Willis et al., p. 5185