Literature DB >> 27141333

POLE proofreading mutation, immune response and prognosis in endometrial cancer.

Inge C van Gool1, Tjalling Bosse1, David N Church2.   

Abstract

Endometrial cancers (ECs) with POLE proofreading mutations are typified by ultramutation and excellent prognosis. We investigated whether these were related, and found that POLE-mutant ECs display a robust T cell response that corresponds to an enrichment of antigenic tumor neopeptides. Enhanced immunogenicity may explain the favorable outcome of POLE-mutant ECs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DNA polymerase ε; POLE; neopeptide; ultramutation

Year:  2015        PMID: 27141333      PMCID: PMC4839358          DOI: 10.1080/2162402X.2015.1072675

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oncoimmunology        ISSN: 2162-4011            Impact factor:   8.110


The proofreading exonuclease activity intrinsic to the replicative DNA polymerases epsilon and delta (Pols ε and δ) is essential to maintain fidelity of DNA replication and prevent mutagenesis. While a role for defective polymerase proofreading in human cancer has long been postulated, this has only recently been confirmed, with the demonstration that germline mutations in the exonuclease domains of POLE and POLD1 (which encode the principal subunits of Pols ε and δ respectively) predispose to cancer. Subsequently, we and others have shown that somatic POLE proofreading mutations occur in 7–12% ECs, 1–2% colorectal cancers (CRCs), as well as cancers of the brain, stomach and pancreas (TCGA unpublished, http://www.cbioportal.org, accessed June 2015). In keeping with the essential contribution of polymerase proofreading to replication fidelity, POLE proofreading-mutant ECs are ultramutated. However, perhaps less predictably, they also have an excellent prognosis. We hypothesized that these two characteristics may be related—more specifically, that tumor neopeptides caused by ultramutation may stimulate a cytolytic immune response, analogous to previous observations in hypermutated mismatch repair-deficient CRCs. In a recent study, we investigated this in two large EC cohorts. Following the observation that POLE proofreading-mutants had a higher density of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) than other ECs, we confirmed that this represented a CD8+ cytotoxic T cell infiltrate likely to be capable of cytolytic activity, as evidenced by co-staining for the activation marker TIA-1. Consistent with these data, examination of RNAseq data from the independent TCGA EC series confirmed significant enrichment for immune-related pathways and a highly specific 200-gene tumor T cell infiltration signature in POLE proofreading-mutant ECs. This analysis also demonstrated that POLE-mutant tumors displayed significantly increased expression of CD8A (gene) and other T cell cytotoxic differentiation and effector markers known to predict favorable outcome in cancer, including T-bet, Eomes, IFNγ, perforin and granzymes B, H, K and M. Using a bio-informatic approach to investigate the possible contribution of antigenic tumor neopeptides to the antitumor immune response, we found that POLE proofreading-mutant ECs were predicted to display substantially more antigenic peptides than other ECs, providing a potential explanation for our findings. Taken together, our data suggest that enhanced immunogenicity contributes to the excellent prognosis of POLE proofreading-mutant ECs, and are concordant with a recent study, which showed that dendritic cells pulsed by POLE-mutant tumor lysates stimulated greater CD4+ and CD8+ cell proliferation than those pulsed by ECs lacking POLE mutations. However, this begs the question of why POLE-mutant ECs are not eliminated by this enhanced cytotoxic T cell response? We found no evidence of an increased frequency of loss of HLA class I protein expression in POLE-mutant ECs, and functional mutations in the antigen presentation machinery also appeared relatively uncommon (2 of 18 cases). In contrast, we found striking increases in the expression of immunosuppressive checkpoint molecules and Treg markers, including LAG3, TIM-3, TIGIT, PD1, CTLA4 and FOXP3, in POLE-mutant ECs, suggesting that this may be the principal mechanism of immune evasion in these tumors. In short, our data suggest that POLE proofreading-mutant ECs evoke a striking antitumor immune response, which is likely to contribute at least partly to their excellent prognosis (Fig. 1). In addition to validating our results in further independent EC series, it will be important to determine whether an enhanced cytotoxic T cell reaction also occurs in other POLE proofreading-mutant cancers. Interestingly, recent data suggest this may be the case in glioblastomas. Given the association between benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors and tumor mutation burden, our study also suggests that the few patients with advanced or recurrent POLE proofreading-mutant cancers may be promising candidates for these agents. Finally, a pressing question is why some POLE-mutant tumors do not appear to stimulate as potent an immune reaction as others? Is it simply that these tumors are less mutated? Or do they harbor novel mechanisms of immune escape? Thus, while much remains unknown, further study of POLE-mutant cancers may provide insights into antitumor immune response and evasion that are generalizable more broadly, with potential benefits for a wide range of cancer patients.
Figure 1.

Possible mechanism linking POLE proofreading mutation, immune response and favorable endometrial cancer prognosis. POLE encodes the catalytic and proofreading subunit of DNA polymerase ε (Pol ε), the leading strand replicase in humans. Cancer-associated POLE exonuclease domain mutations perturb proofreading activity, resulting in tumor ultramutation. Enhanced presentation of mutated antigenic neopeptides stimulates both a cytolytic T cell response and upregulation of immunosuppressive checkpoints; however, increased effector cytokine expression (not shown) suggests that the T cell response is functional and at least partly contributes to the favorable prognosis of POLE proofreading-mutant endometrial cancers.

  10 in total

1.  Polymerase ε (POLE) ultra-mutated tumors induce robust tumor-specific CD4+ T cell responses in endometrial cancer patients.

Authors:  Stefania Bellone; Floriana Centritto; Jonathan Black; Carlton Schwab; Diana English; Emiliano Cocco; Salvatore Lopez; Elena Bonazzoli; Federica Predolini; Francesca Ferrari; Dan-Arin Silasi; Elena Ratner; Masoud Azodi; Peter E Schwartz; Alessandro D Santin
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-04-27       Impact factor: 5.482

2.  Somatic POLE mutations cause an ultramutated giant cell high-grade glioma subtype with better prognosis.

Authors:  E Zeynep Erson-Omay; Ahmet Okay Çağlayan; Nikolaus Schultz; Nils Weinhold; S Bülent Omay; Koray Özduman; Yavuz Köksal; Jie Li; Akdes Serin Harmancı; Victoria Clark; Geneive Carrión-Grant; Jacob Baranoski; Caner Çağlar; Tanyeri Barak; Süleyman Coşkun; Burçin Baran; Doğan Köse; Jia Sun; Mehmet Bakırcıoğlu; Jennifer Moliterno Günel; M Necmettin Pamir; Ketu Mishra-Gorur; Kaya Bilguvar; Katsuhito Yasuno; Alexander Vortmeyer; Anita J Huttner; Chris Sander; Murat Günel
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2015-03-03       Impact factor: 12.300

3.  Genetic basis for clinical response to CTLA-4 blockade in melanoma.

Authors:  Alexandra Snyder; Vladimir Makarov; Taha Merghoub; Jianda Yuan; Jedd D Wolchok; Timothy A Chan; Jesse M Zaretsky; Alexis Desrichard; Logan A Walsh; Michael A Postow; Phillip Wong; Teresa S Ho; Travis J Hollmann; Cameron Bruggeman; Kasthuri Kannan; Yanyun Li; Ceyhan Elipenahli; Cailian Liu; Christopher T Harbison; Lisu Wang; Antoni Ribas
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2014-11-19       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 4.  Microsatellite instability in colorectal cancer-the stable evidence.

Authors:  Eduardo Vilar; Stephen B Gruber
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-02-09       Impact factor: 66.675

5.  Prognostic significance of POLE proofreading mutations in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  David N Church; Ellen Stelloo; Remi A Nout; Nadejda Valtcheva; Jeroen Depreeuw; Natalja ter Haar; Aurelia Noske; Frederic Amant; Ian P M Tomlinson; Peter J Wild; Diether Lambrechts; Ina M Jürgenliemk-Schulz; Jan J Jobsen; Vincent T H B M Smit; Carien L Creutzberg; Tjalling Bosse
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-12-12       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Spatiotemporal dynamics of intratumoral immune cells reveal the immune landscape in human cancer.

Authors:  Gabriela Bindea; Bernhard Mlecnik; Marie Tosolini; Amos Kirilovsky; Maximilian Waldner; Anna C Obenauf; Helen Angell; Tessa Fredriksen; Lucie Lafontaine; Anne Berger; Patrick Bruneval; Wolf Herman Fridman; Christoph Becker; Franck Pagès; Michael R Speicher; Zlatko Trajanoski; Jérôme Galon
Journal:  Immunity       Date:  2013-10-17       Impact factor: 31.745

7.  POLE Proofreading Mutations Elicit an Antitumor Immune Response in Endometrial Cancer.

Authors:  Tjalling Bosse; David N Church; Inge C van Gool; Florine A Eggink; Luke Freeman-Mills; Ellen Stelloo; Emanuele Marchi; Marco de Bruyn; Claire Palles; Remi A Nout; Cor D de Kroon; Elisabeth M Osse; Paul Klenerman; Carien L Creutzberg; Ian Pm Tomlinson; Vincent Thbm Smit; Hans W Nijman
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2015-04-15       Impact factor: 12.531

8.  DNA polymerase ε and δ exonuclease domain mutations in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  David N Church; Sarah E W Briggs; Claire Palles; Enric Domingo; Stephen J Kearsey; Jonathon M Grimes; Maggie Gorman; Lynn Martin; Kimberley M Howarth; Shirley V Hodgson; Kulvinder Kaur; Jenny Taylor; Ian P M Tomlinson
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  2013-03-24       Impact factor: 6.150

9.  Germline mutations affecting the proofreading domains of POLE and POLD1 predispose to colorectal adenomas and carcinomas.

Authors:  Claire Palles; Jean-Baptiste Cazier; Kimberley M Howarth; Enric Domingo; Angela M Jones; Peter Broderick; Zoe Kemp; Sarah L Spain; Estrella Guarino; Estrella Guarino Almeida; Israel Salguero; Amy Sherborne; Daniel Chubb; Luis G Carvajal-Carmona; Yusanne Ma; Kulvinder Kaur; Sara Dobbins; Ella Barclay; Maggie Gorman; Lynn Martin; Michal B Kovac; Sean Humphray; Anneke Lucassen; Christopher C Holmes; David Bentley; Peter Donnelly; Jenny Taylor; Christos Petridis; Rebecca Roylance; Elinor J Sawyer; David J Kerr; Susan Clark; Jonathan Grimes; Stephen E Kearsey; Huw J W Thomas; Gilean McVean; Richard S Houlston; Ian Tomlinson
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2012-12-23       Impact factor: 38.330

10.  Integrated genomic characterization of endometrial carcinoma.

Authors:  Cyriac Kandoth; Nikolaus Schultz; Andrew D Cherniack; Rehan Akbani; Yuexin Liu; Hui Shen; A Gordon Robertson; Itai Pashtan; Ronglai Shen; Christopher C Benz; Christina Yau; Peter W Laird; Li Ding; Wei Zhang; Gordon B Mills; Raju Kucherlapati; Elaine R Mardis; Douglas A Levine
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2013-05-02       Impact factor: 49.962

  10 in total
  16 in total

Review 1.  Replicative DNA polymerase defects in human cancers: Consequences, mechanisms, and implications for therapy.

Authors:  Stephanie R Barbari; Polina V Shcherbakova
Journal:  DNA Repair (Amst)       Date:  2017-06-09

Review 2.  New classification of endometrial cancers: the development and potential applications of genomic-based classification in research and clinical care.

Authors:  A Talhouk; J N McAlpine
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol Res Pract       Date:  2016-12-13

3.  Limited impact of intratumour heterogeneity on molecular risk assignment in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Manouk van Esterik; Inge C Van Gool; Cor D de Kroon; Remi A Nout; Carien L Creutzberg; Vincent T H B M Smit; Tjalling Bosse; Ellen Stelloo
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-04-11

4.  Immunological profiling of molecularly classified high-risk endometrial cancers identifies POLE-mutant and microsatellite unstable carcinomas as candidates for checkpoint inhibition.

Authors:  Florine A Eggink; Inge C Van Gool; Alexandra Leary; Pamela M Pollock; Emma J Crosbie; Linda Mileshkin; Ekaterina S Jordanova; Julien Adam; Luke Freeman-Mills; David N Church; Carien L Creutzberg; Marco De Bruyn; Hans W Nijman; Tjalling Bosse
Journal:  Oncoimmunology       Date:  2016-12-09       Impact factor: 8.110

5.  Clinically actionable mutation profiles in patients with cancer identified by whole-genome sequencing.

Authors:  Anna Schuh; Helene Dreau; Samantha J L Knight; Kate Ridout; Tuba Mizani; Dimitris Vavoulis; Richard Colling; Pavlos Antoniou; Erika M Kvikstad; Melissa M Pentony; Angela Hamblin; Andrew Protheroe; Marina Parton; Ketan A Shah; Zsolt Orosz; Nick Athanasou; Bass Hassan; Adrienne M Flanagan; Ahmed Ahmed; Stuart Winter; Adrian Harris; Ian Tomlinson; Niko Popitsch; David Church; Jenny C Taylor
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Mol Case Stud       Date:  2018-04-02

6.  Phenotype of POLE-mutated endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Sara Imboden; Denis Nastic; Mehran Ghaderi; Filippa Rydberg; Tilman T Rau; Michael D Mueller; Elisabeth Epstein; Joseph W Carlson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-03-27       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Expression of the cancer-associated DNA polymerase ε P286R in fission yeast leads to translesion synthesis polymerase dependent hypermutation and defective DNA replication.

Authors:  Ignacio Soriano; Enrique Vazquez; Nagore De Leon; Sibyl Bertrand; Ellen Heitzer; Sophia Toumazou; Zhihan Bo; Claire Palles; Chen-Chun Pai; Timothy C Humphrey; Ian Tomlinson; Sue Cotterill; Stephen E Kearsey
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2021-07-06       Impact factor: 5.917

8.  Spectrum of germline cancer susceptibility gene mutations in Turkish colorectal cancer patients: a single center study

Authors:  Haktan Bağiş Erdem; Taha Bahsi
Journal:  Turk J Med Sci       Date:  2020-06-23       Impact factor: 0.973

9.  Genomic characterization of five commonly used endometrial cancer cell lines.

Authors:  Eric J Devor; Jesus Gonzalez-Bosquet; Kristina W Thiel; Kimberly K Leslie
Journal:  Int J Oncol       Date:  2020-10-21       Impact factor: 5.650

10.  Medullary Pancreatic Carcinoma Due to Somatic POLE Mutation: A Distinctive Pancreatic Carcinoma With Marked Long-Term Survival.

Authors:  Valentyna Kryklyva; Esther Ter Linden; Leonie I Kroeze; Richarda M de Voer; B Marion van der Kolk; Martijn W J Stommel; John J Hermans; Claudio Luchini; Laura D Wood; Ralph H Hruban; Iris D Nagtegaal; Marjolijn J L Ligtenberg; Lodewijk A A Brosens
Journal:  Pancreas       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 3.243

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.