| Literature DB >> 31616965 |
A Marijne Heeren1,2, Iske F van Luijk1, Joost Lakeman1, Noëlle Pocorni2, Jeroen Kole3, Renée X de Menezes4, Gemma G Kenter1, Tjalling Bosse5, Cornelis D de Kroon6, Ekaterina S Jordanova7.
Abstract
Resistance to chemotherapy is widely recognized as one of the major factors limiting therapeutic efficacy and influences clinical outcomes in patients with cancer. Many studies on various tumor types have focused on combining standard-of-care chemotherapy with immunotherapy. However, for cervical cancer, the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) on the local immune microenvironment is largely unexplored. We performed a pilot study on 13 primary cervical tumor samples, before and after NACT, to phenotype and enumerate tumor-infiltrating T-cell subpopulations using multiplex immunohistochemistry (CD3, CD8, FoxP3, Ki67, and Tbet) and automated co-expression analysis software. A significant decrease in proliferating (Ki67+) CD3+CD8- T cells and FoxP3+(CD3+CD8-) regulatory T cells was observed in the tumor stroma after cisplatin and paclitaxel treatment, with increased rates of cytotoxic CD8+ T cells, including activated and CD8+Tbet+ T cells. No effect was observed on the number of tumor-infiltrating T cells in the cervical tumor microenvironment after treatment with cisplatin only. Therefore, we conclude that patients treated with cisplatin and paclitaxel had more tumor-infiltrating T-cell modulation than patients treated with cisplatin monotherapy. These findings enhance our understanding of the immune-modulating effect of chemotherapy and warrant future combination of the standard-of-care therapy with immunotherapy to improve clinical outcome in patients with cervical cancer.Entities:
Keywords: Cervical cancer; Cisplatin; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Paclitaxel; T cells; Tumor microenvironment
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31616965 PMCID: PMC6851216 DOI: 10.1007/s00262-019-02412-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Immunol Immunother ISSN: 0340-7004 Impact factor: 6.968
Patient characteristics
| Characteristic | NACT treatment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Cisplatina | Cisplatin + paclitaxelb | ||
| Number of patients | 6 | 7 | – |
| Age, years | |||
| Mean | 40.3 | 27.3 | |
| Min | 35 | 21 | |
| Max | 45 | 32 | |
| FIGO stagec | |||
| IB1–IB2 | 0 | 1 | |
| IB2 | 6 | 4 | |
| IB2–IIB | 0 | 1 | |
| IIB | 0 | 1 | 0.559# |
| Tumor size pre-NACT | |||
| Mean, cm | 5.45 | 4.30 | |
| Tumor size post-NACT | |||
| Mean, cm | 4.50 | 1.09 | |
| Surgery after NACT | Radical hysterectomy | Radical trachelectomy or hysterectomy | – |
| Pathological responsed | |||
| Responder | 2 | 6 | |
| Non-responder | 4 | 1 | 0.103# |
| Clinical responsee | |||
| Responder | 1 | 6 | |
| Non-responder | 5 | 1 | |
Italics indicate significant P values
a1 out of the 6 patients did not complete cisplatin treatment due to hypertension and progressive disease
bOnly 2 of the 7 patients completed cisplatin and paclitaxel treatment. Data on NACT completion are missing for 3 patients, 1 patient did not complete treatment due to kidney failure, and 1 patient received carboplatin in combination with paclitaxel for a few cycles
cFIGO stage: stage according to International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics
dPathological response defined as responder: no residual tumor (complete response), minimal residual tumor (individual tumor cells and nests < 2 mm, optimal partial response), and easily identifiable tumor (sheets and nests > 2 mm), but also areas with response (suboptimal partial response). Non-responder defined as: no identifiable response
eClinical response defined as responder: no residual tumor left upon medical examination/imaging (complete response) and at least a 30% decrease in the maximum size of the tumor (partial response). Non-responder defined as: < 30% decrease and < 20% increase in maximum tumor size (stable disease) and > 20% increase in maximum tumor size (progressive disease)
*P value was calculated by the Mann–Whitney U test
#P value measured by the Fisher’s exact test
Fig. 1T-cell subset analysis of pre- and post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy-treated cervical cancer. a Example of the identification of various T-cell subsets using multiplex IHC: Tbet+CD8− T cells, (CD3+CD8−Tbet+); regulatory T cells (CD3+CD8−FoxP3+); CD8− T cells (CD3+CD8−); proliferating Tbet+CD8+ T cells (CD8+Ki67+Tbet+); Tbet+CD8+ T cells (CD3+CD8+Tbet+); and CD8+ T cells (CD3+CD8+). Representative six-color multiplex image of a matched b pre- and c post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) cervical tumor sample. d Heatmap showing that most changes in tumor-infiltrating T-cell rates manifested in the stromal compartment of tumors in patients treated with cisplatin and paclitaxel. Patients 7 and 12 had a complete response; therefore, no data can be shown for the intratumoral compartment after NACT (grey). For patient 4, no reliable data were available for the stromal compartment (grey)
Fig. 2Alterations in tumor-infiltrating T-cell rates after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Tumor-infiltrating T cells were quantified and analyzed for phenotype in matched pre- and post- neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) tumor samples from patients with cervical cancer. a CD8+ T-cell numbers, b Tbet+CD8+ T cells, c FoxP3+CD8+ T cells, d FoxP3+Tbet+CD8+ T cells, e Ki67+CD8− T cells, and f FoxP3+Ki67+CD8− T cells per square millimeter in patients treated with cisplatin alone (triangles, left) and in patients treated with cisplatin and paclitaxel (circles, right). Open triangles and open circles represent patients who lacked a clinical response. In the cisplatin only group, no reliable data were available pre-NACT for one patient. P values were calculated by the Wilcoxon signed rank test