Literature DB >> 30523022

Molecular Subtype Not Immune Response Drives Outcomes in Endometrial Carcinoma.

Brad H Nelson1, Jessica N McAlpine2, Aline Talhouk3, Heather Derocher1, Pascal Schmidt4, Samuel Leung5, Katy Milne1, C Blake Gilks5, Michael S Anglesio3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Tumors with high mutation load are thought to engender stronger immune responses, which in turn promote prolonged patient survival. To investigate this, we assessed tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and immunosuppressive factors across the 4 molecular subtypes of endometrial cancer, which have characteristic mutation rates ranging from low to ultra-high. EXPERIMENTAL
DESIGN: A total of 460 endometrial cancers were stratified by ProMisE (Proactive Molecular Risk Classifier in Endometrial cancer) into 4 molecular subtypes: mismatch repair-deficient (MMRd), POLE mutant (POLE), p53 abnormal (p53abn), and p53 wild-type (p53wt). Immune markers (CD3, CD8, CD79a, CD138, PD-1, PD-L1, FoxP3, IDO-1) were quantified by multiplex IHC and tested for associations with ProMisE subtype, survival, and other clinicopathologic parameters.
RESULTS: Two major TIL patterns were observed. TILhigh tumors harbored dense T- and B-lineage infiltrates and multiple immunosuppressive features and were common in molecular subtypes associated with high mutation load (MMRd and POLE); however, equally strong responses were seen in significant numbers of p53abn and p53wt tumors, which have characteristically low mutation loads. TILlow tumors were generally devoid of immunologic features and were more prevalent in p53abn and p53wt endometrial cancers, yet were also seen in MMRd and POLE subtypes. In multivariable models involving ProMisE subtype, T-cell markers, and TIL clusters, only ProMisE showed independent prognostic significance.
CONCLUSIONS: Immune response correlates with endometrial cancer molecular subtype but does not carry independent prognostic significance. Profound variation in immune response is seen across and within endometrial cancer molecular subtypes, suggesting that assessment of immune response rather than molecular subtype may better predict response to immunotherapy.See related commentary by Mullen and Mutch, p. 2366. ©2018 American Association for Cancer Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30523022     DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-3241

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Cancer Res        ISSN: 1078-0432            Impact factor:   12.531


  30 in total

Review 1.  Immunotherapy: Checkpoint Inhibitors in Lynch-Associated Gynecologic Cancers.

Authors:  J Stuart Ferriss; M Yvette Williams-Brown
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2019-08-23

Review 2.  Circulating Transcripts and Biomarkers in Uterine Tumors: Is There a Predictive Role?

Authors:  Christine De Bruyn; Thaïs Baert; Thierry Van den Bosch; An Coosemans
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2020-01-29       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 3.  Tumour immunotherapy: lessons from predator-prey theory.

Authors:  Phineas T Hamilton; Bradley R Anholt; Brad H Nelson
Journal:  Nat Rev Immunol       Date:  2022-05-05       Impact factor: 53.106

4.  Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Mismatch Repair Status in Advanced Endometrial Cancer: Elective Affinities.

Authors:  Alessandro Rizzo
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 4.964

Review 5.  Endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Vicky Makker; Helen MacKay; Isabelle Ray-Coquard; Douglas A Levine; Shannon N Westin; Daisuke Aoki; Ana Oaknin
Journal:  Nat Rev Dis Primers       Date:  2021-12-09       Impact factor: 65.038

Review 6.  Going to extremes: determinants of extraordinary response and survival in patients with cancer.

Authors:  Flurina A M Saner; Alan Herschtal; Brad H Nelson; Anna deFazio; Ellen L Goode; Susan J Ramus; Ahwan Pandey; Jessica A Beach; Sian Fereday; Andrew Berchuck; Stephanie Lheureux; Celeste Leigh Pearce; Paul D Pharoah; Malcolm C Pike; Dale W Garsed; David D L Bowtell
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 60.716

Review 7.  PARP inhibitors and immunotherapy in ovarian and endometrial cancers.

Authors:  Rowan E Miller; Amy J Lewis; Melanie E Powell
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Development and validation of m6A regulators' prognostic significance for endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Xuecheng Pang; Xiang Zhang; Yue Huang; Sumin Qian
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-07-02       Impact factor: 1.817

Review 9.  Clinical actionability of molecular targets in endometrial cancer.

Authors:  Mary Ellen Urick; Daphne W Bell
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2019-08-06       Impact factor: 60.716

Review 10.  Predictive and Prognostic Value of Microsatellite Instability in Gynecologic Cancer (Endometrial and Ovarian).

Authors:  Camille Evrard; Jérôme Alexandre
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-18       Impact factor: 6.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.