Emily A Lanzel1, M Paula Gomez Hernandez2, Amber M Bates2, Christopher N Treinen2, Emily E Starman2, Carol L Fischer2, Deepak Parashar3, Janet M Guthmiller4, Georgia K Johnson5, Taher Abbasi3,6, Shireen Vali3,6, Kim A Brogden7,8. 1. Department of Oral Pathology, Radiology and Medicine, College of Dentistry, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA. 2. Iowa Institute for Oral Health Research, N423 DSB, College of Dentistry, The University of Iowa, 801 Newton Road, Iowa City, IA, 52242, USA. 3. Cellworks Research India Ltd, Whitefield, Bangalore, India. 4. College of Dentistry, University of Nebraska Medical Center, 40th and Holdrege, Lincoln, NE, USA. 5. Department of Periodontics, College of Dentistry, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA. 6. Cellworks Group Inc, 2033 Gateway Place Suite 500, San Jose, CA, USA. 7. Iowa Institute for Oral Health Research, N423 DSB, College of Dentistry, The University of Iowa, 801 Newton Road, Iowa City, IA, 52242, USA. kim-brogden@uiowa.edu. 8. Department of Periodontics, College of Dentistry, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA. kim-brogden@uiowa.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Interaction of the programmed death-1 (PD-1) co-receptor on T cells with the programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) on tumor cells can lead to immunosuppression, a key event in the pathogenesis of many tumors. Thus, determining the amount of PD-L1 in tumors by immunohistochemistry (IHC) is important as both a diagnostic aid and a clinical predictor of immunotherapy treatment success. Because IHC reactivity can vary, we developed computational simulation models to accurately predict PD-L1 expression as a complementary assay to affirm IHC reactivity. METHODS: Multiple myeloma (MM) and oral squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) cell lines were modeled as examples of our approach. Non-transformed cell models were first simulated to establish non-tumorigenic control baselines. Cell line genomic aberration profiles, from next-generation sequencing (NGS) information for MM.1S, U266B1, SCC4, SCC15, and SCC25 cell lines, were introduced into the workflow to create cancer cell line-specific simulation models. Percentage changes of PD-L1 expression with respect to control baselines were determined and verified against observed PD-L1 expression by ELISA, IHC, and flow cytometry on the same cells grown in culture. RESULT: The observed PD-L1 expression matched the predicted PD-L1 expression for MM.1S, U266B1, SCC4, SCC15, and SCC25 cell lines and clearly demonstrated that cell genomics play an integral role by influencing cell signaling and downstream effects on PD-L1 expression. CONCLUSION: This concept can easily be extended to cancer patient cells where an accurate method to predict PD-L1 expression would affirm IHC results and improve its potential as a biomarker and a clinical predictor of treatment success.
PURPOSE: Interaction of the programmed death-1 (PD-1) co-receptor on T cells with the programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) on tumor cells can lead to immunosuppression, a key event in the pathogenesis of many tumors. Thus, determining the amount of PD-L1 in tumors by immunohistochemistry (IHC) is important as both a diagnostic aid and a clinical predictor of immunotherapy treatment success. Because IHC reactivity can vary, we developed computational simulation models to accurately predict PD-L1 expression as a complementary assay to affirm IHC reactivity. METHODS:Multiple myeloma (MM) and oral squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) cell lines were modeled as examples of our approach. Non-transformed cell models were first simulated to establish non-tumorigenic control baselines. Cell line genomic aberration profiles, from next-generation sequencing (NGS) information for MM.1S, U266B1, SCC4, SCC15, and SCC25 cell lines, were introduced into the workflow to create cancer cell line-specific simulation models. Percentage changes of PD-L1 expression with respect to control baselines were determined and verified against observed PD-L1 expression by ELISA, IHC, and flow cytometry on the same cells grown in culture. RESULT: The observed PD-L1 expression matched the predicted PD-L1 expression for MM.1S, U266B1, SCC4, SCC15, and SCC25 cell lines and clearly demonstrated that cell genomics play an integral role by influencing cell signaling and downstream effects on PD-L1 expression. CONCLUSION: This concept can easily be extended to cancerpatient cells where an accurate method to predict PD-L1 expression would affirm IHC results and improve its potential as a biomarker and a clinical predictor of treatment success.
Authors: Christopher Poulsen; Leslie A Mehalick; Carol L Fischer; Emily A Lanzel; Amber M Bates; Katherine S Walters; Joseph E Cavanaugh; Janet M Guthmiller; Georgia K Johnson; Philip W Wertz; Kim A Brogden Journal: Toxicol Lett Date: 2015-05-21 Impact factor: 4.372
Authors: Xavier Frigola; Brant A Inman; Christine M Lohse; Christopher J Krco; John C Cheville; R Houston Thompson; Bradley Leibovich; Michael L Blute; Haidong Dong; Eugene D Kwon Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2011-02-25 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Suzanne L Topalian; F Stephen Hodi; Julie R Brahmer; Scott N Gettinger; David C Smith; David F McDermott; John D Powderly; Richard D Carvajal; Jeffrey A Sosman; Michael B Atkins; Philip D Leming; David R Spigel; Scott J Antonia; Leora Horn; Charles G Drake; Drew M Pardoll; Lieping Chen; William H Sharfman; Robert A Anders; Janis M Taube; Tracee L McMiller; Haiying Xu; Alan J Korman; Maria Jure-Kunkel; Shruti Agrawal; Daniel McDonald; Georgia D Kollia; Ashok Gupta; Jon M Wigginton; Mario Sznol Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-06-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Scott E Strome; Haidong Dong; Hideto Tamura; Stephen G Voss; Dallas B Flies; Koji Tamada; Diva Salomao; John Cheville; Fumiya Hirano; Wei Lin; Jan L Kasperbauer; Karla V Ballman; Lieping Chen Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2003-10-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Monica Raina; Amber M Bates; Carol L Fischer; Ann Progulske-Fox; Taher Abbasi; Shireen Vali; Kim A Brogden Journal: J Periodontol Date: 2018-03 Impact factor: 6.993
Authors: Carol L Fischer; Amber M Bates; Emily A Lanzel; Janet M Guthmiller; Georgia K Johnson; Neeraj Kumar Singh; Ansu Kumar; Robinson Vidva; Taher Abbasi; Shireen Vali; Xian Jin Xie; Erliang Zeng; Kim A Brogden Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-07-26 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Amber M Bates; Maria Paula Gomez Hernandez; Emily A Lanzel; Fang Qian; Kim A Brogden Journal: Transl Cancer Res Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 1.241
Authors: Kim A Brogden; Deepak Parashar; Andrea R Hallier; Terry Braun; Fang Qian; Naiyer A Rizvi; Aaron D Bossler; Mohammed M Milhem; Timothy A Chan; Taher Abbasi; Shireen Vali Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2018-02-27 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Giuseppe Troiano; Vito C A Caponio; Khrystyna Zhurakivska; Claudia Arena; Giuseppe Pannone; Marco Mascitti; Andrea Santarelli; Lorenzo Lo Muzio Journal: Cell Prolif Date: 2018-11-15 Impact factor: 6.831
Authors: Leylah M Drusbosky; Robinson Vidva; Saji Gera; Anjanasree V Lakshminarayana; Vijayashree P Shyamasundar; Ashish Kumar Agrawal; Anay Talawdekar; Taher Abbasi; Shireen Vali; Cristina E Tognon; Stephen E Kurtz; Jeffrey W Tyner; Shannon K McWeeney; Brian J Druker; Christopher R Cogle Journal: Leuk Res Date: 2019-01-07 Impact factor: 3.156