Cheng-Peng Yu1,2, Shu-Fang Fu3, Xuan Chen2, Jing Ye2, Yuan Ye4, Ling-Dong Kong4, Zhengming Zhu1. 1. Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, China. 2. The Second Clinic Medical College of Nanchang University, Nanchang, China. 3. Department of Nephrology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, China. 4. The Queen Mary College of Nanchang University, Nanchang, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1) is a heme-containing enzyme catalyzing the initial and rate-limiting steps in the kynurenine pathway, which converts tryptophan into kynurenine. Upregulation of IDO1 decreases tryptophan levels and increases the accumulation of kynurenine and its metabolites. These metabolites can affect the proliferation of T cells. Increasing evidence has shown that IDO1 is highly expressed in various cancer types and associated with poor prognosis of cancer patients. However, the results were inconsistent. METHODS: We searched the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library databases to identify studies evaluating the prognostic value of IDO1 in cancer patients. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using fixed-effects/random-effects models. RESULTS: This systematic review and meta-analysis included 2706 patients from 24 articles. The results indicated a shorter overall survival in patients with high expression of IDO1 (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.56-2.63). Furthermore, disease-free survival was worse in patients with high expression of IDO1 (HR = 2.47, 95% CI: 1.46-4.20). Additionally, the pooled odds ratios (ORs) showed that increased IDO1 was significantly associated with tumor differentiation (OR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.05-3.12), distant metastasis (OR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.02-2.06), and poor clinical stage (OR = 1.89, 95% CI: 1.13-3.17). However, no significant correlation was observed of increased IDO1 expression with age, sex, lymph node metastasis, and tumor size. CONCLUSION: High expression of IDO1 is associated with poor clinical outcomes. IDO1 could serve as a biomarker of prognosis and a potential predictive factor of clinicopathology in various cancers. Further studies should be performed to verify the clinical utility of IDO1 in human solid tumors.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1) is a heme-containing enzyme catalyzing the initial and rate-limiting steps in the kynurenine pathway, which converts tryptophan into kynurenine. Upregulation of IDO1 decreases tryptophan levels and increases the accumulation of kynurenine and its metabolites. These metabolites can affect the proliferation of T cells. Increasing evidence has shown that IDO1 is highly expressed in various cancer types and associated with poor prognosis of cancerpatients. However, the results were inconsistent. METHODS: We searched the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library databases to identify studies evaluating the prognostic value of IDO1 in cancerpatients. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using fixed-effects/random-effects models. RESULTS: This systematic review and meta-analysis included 2706 patients from 24 articles. The results indicated a shorter overall survival in patients with high expression of IDO1 (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.56-2.63). Furthermore, disease-free survival was worse in patients with high expression of IDO1 (HR = 2.47, 95% CI: 1.46-4.20). Additionally, the pooled odds ratios (ORs) showed that increased IDO1 was significantly associated with tumor differentiation (OR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.05-3.12), distant metastasis (OR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.02-2.06), and poor clinical stage (OR = 1.89, 95% CI: 1.13-3.17). However, no significant correlation was observed of increased IDO1 expression with age, sex, lymph node metastasis, and tumor size. CONCLUSION: High expression of IDO1 is associated with poor clinical outcomes. IDO1 could serve as a biomarker of prognosis and a potential predictive factor of clinicopathology in various cancers. Further studies should be performed to verify the clinical utility of IDO1 in humansolid tumors.
Authors: Catherine White; Meredeth A McGowan; Hua Zhou; Nunzio Sciammetta; Xavier Fradera; Jongwon Lim; Elizabeth M Joshi; Christine Andrews; Elliott B Nickbarg; Phillip Cowley; Sarah Trewick; Martin Augustin; Konstanze von Köenig; Charles A Lesburg; Karin Otte; Ian Knemeyer; Hyun Woo; Wensheng Yu; Mangeng Cheng; Peter Spacciapoli; Prasanthi Geda; Xuelei Song; Nadya Smotrov; Patrick Curran; Mee Ra Heo; Pravien Abeywickrema; J Richard Miller; David Jonathan Bennett; Yongxin Han Journal: ACS Med Chem Lett Date: 2020-03-10 Impact factor: 4.345
Authors: Martina Mandarano; Elena Orecchini; Guido Bellezza; Jacopo Vannucci; Vienna Ludovini; Sara Baglivo; Francesca Romana Tofanetti; Rita Chiari; Elisabetta Loreti; Francesco Puma; Angelo Sidoni; Maria Laura Belladonna Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2021-04-22 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Geoffrey T Gibney; Omid Hamid; Jose Lutzky; Anthony J Olszanski; Tara C Mitchell; Thomas F Gajewski; Bartosz Chmielowski; Brent A Hanks; Yufan Zhao; Robert C Newton; Janet Maleski; Lance Leopold; Jeffrey S Weber Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2019-03-20 Impact factor: 13.751
Authors: Jose Ramon Lamas; Benjamin Fernandez-Gutierrez; Arkaitz Mucientes; Fernando Marco; Yaiza Lopiz; Juan Angel Jover; Lydia Abasolo; Luis Rodríguez-Rodríguez Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2019-05-06 Impact factor: 5.156
Authors: Sara Paccosi; Marta Cecchi; Angela Silvano; Sergio Fabbri; Astrid Parenti Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2020-08-10 Impact factor: 4.553