| Literature DB >> 31639056 |
Hyung Soon Park1,2, Woo Sun Kwon2,3, Sejung Park2,3, Eunji Jo2,3, So Jung Lim2, Choong-Kun Lee4, Jii Bum Lee4, Minkyu Jung2,4, Hyo Song Kim2,4, Seung-Hoon Beom2,4, Jun Yong Park5, Tae Soo Kim2, Hyun Cheol Chung2,3,4, Sun Young Rha6,7,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to profile the cytokines and immune cells of body fluid from metastatic gastric cancer (mGC), and evaluate the potential role as a prognostic factor and the feasibility as a predictive biomarker or monitoring source for immune checkpoint inhibitor.Entities:
Keywords: Body fluid; Cytokines; Immune profile; Metastatic gastric cancer
Year: 2019 PMID: 31639056 PMCID: PMC6805480 DOI: 10.1186/s40425-019-0708-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Immunother Cancer ISSN: 2051-1426 Impact factor: 13.751
Baseline characteristics
| No. | % | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Healthy volunteers | ( | ||
| Age | median, range | 63 | 27-77 |
| Sex | Male | 7 | 46.7 |
| Female | 8 | 53.3 | |
| Non-cancerous patients | ( | ||
| Age | median, range | 53 | 35-79 |
| Sex | Male | 7 | 63.6 |
| Female | 4 | 36.4 | |
| Gastric cancer patients | ( | ||
| Age | median, range | 58 | 25-75 |
| Sex | Male | 36 | 65.5 |
| Female | 19 | 34.5 | |
| Disease presentation | Recurrent | 14 | 25.5 |
| Metastatic | 41 | 74.5 | |
| Type of surgery | Total gastrectomy | 9 | 16.4 |
| Subtotal gastrectomy | 10 | 18.2 | |
| No | 36 | 65.5 | |
| Differentiation | WD | 3 | 5.5 |
| MD | 9 | 16.4 | |
| PD | 27 | 49.1 | |
| SRC | 12 | 21.8 | |
| Othersa | 4 | 7.3 | |
| Lauren | Intestinal | 7 | 12.7 |
| Diffuse | 10 | 18.2 | |
| Mixed | 1 | 1.8 | |
| Unknown | 37 | 67.3 | |
| HER2 | Negative | 46 | 83.6 |
| Positive | 8 | 14.5 | |
| Unknown | 1 | 1.8 | |
| Type of body fluid | Ascites | 46 | 83.6 |
| Pleural fluid | 9 | 16.4 | |
| Previous palliative chemotherapy at acquisition of body fluid | Chemotherapy-naïve | 11 | 20.0 |
| 1 | 14 | 25.5 | |
| 2 | 15 | 27.3 | |
| ≥3 | 15 | 27.3 |
WD Well differentiated, MD Moderate differentiated, PD Poorly differentiated, SRC Signet ring cell carcinoma, No Number
Othersa: mucinous adenocarcinoma, undifferentiated carcinoma
Fig. 1Pro-angiogenic, immune modulatory cytokine, and immunosuppressive cytokines have different patterns in plasma and body fluid among healthy volunteer, non-cancerous patients, and gastric cancer patients. a Plasma VEGF-A in mGC were significantly higher than those in healthy volunteers (P = 0.013). VEGF-A levels in mGC body fluid were significantly higher than those in mGC plasma and non-cancerous body fluid. b Plasma IL-10 levels in mGC were significantly higher than those in healthy volunteers (P = 0.001). IL-10 levels in mGC body fluid were significantly higher than those in mGC plasma and non-cancerous body fluid (P = 0.014). c TGF-β1 levels in non-cancerous body fluid were significantly lower than those in non-cancerous plasma (P = 0.005) and mGC body fluid. mGC, metastatic gastric cancer. Red line indicates median value. Mann-Whitney U test was used for statistical analysis. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 ***P < 0.001
Fig. 2Proportion of immune cells were significantly higher in body fluid than those in peripheral blood. a Immune cell profiling of mGC body fluid by FACS analysis were compared to those of mGC peripheral blood. Proportion of memory T cell marked with CD45RO (CD3CD45RO, CD4CD45RO and CD8CD45RO) were significantly higher in body fluid than those in peripheral blood of mGC. b Activated T lymphocytes (early activation marker CD3CD69, CD4CD69, CD8CD69) were significantly higher in body fluid than those in peripheral blood of mGC. c T lymphocytes with inhibitory marker including PD-1 (CD3PD1, CD4PD1 and CD8PD1) were significantly higher in body fluid than those in peripheral blood. d Number of FoxP3+ T regulatory cells (Tregs) were significantly higher in body fluid than those in peripheral blood. mGC, metastatic gastric cancer. Red line indicates median value. Mann-Whitney U test was used for statistical analysis. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 ***P < 0.001
Fig. 3Immune cytokines scoring model (patients were divided into two groups by number of high levels of three cytokines - VEGF-A, IL-10 and TGF-β1, 0–1 vs. 2–3) from plasma and proportion of immune cells in malignant body fluid had a significant prognostic role in mGC. a Survival analysis according to the number of high levels of cytokines did not meet the statistical significance for overall survival (P = 0.1). b Patients with high levels of at least two cytokines showed significantly shorter OS than patients with zero or one cytokine at high level (median OS, 1.6 vs. 2.2 months, P = 0.032, c-e Patients with high proportion of CD8 T lymphocyte with memory marker (CD8CD45RO) and late activation marker (CD8HLA-DR) and CD3 T lymphocyte with PD-1 (CD3PD1) were associated with poor prognosis. f Patients with high number of FoxP3+ cells were significantly associated with favorable prognosis than mGC with low number of FoxP3+ cells in body fluid. mGC, metastatic gastric cancer. Kaplan Meier survival analysis was performed for overall survival
Univariate analysis for overall survival
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI |
| HR | 95% CI |
| ||||
| Age (years) | < 58 years | 1 | 0.913 | ||||||
| ≥58 years | 1.03 | 0.57 | 1.86 | ||||||
| Sex | Male | 1 | 0.831 | ||||||
| Female | 0.94 | 0.51 | 1.73 | ||||||
| Disease presentation | Recurrent | 1 | 0.327 | ||||||
| Metastatic | 1.42 | 0.70 | 2.89 | ||||||
| Differentiation | WD | 1 | 0.602 | ||||||
| MD | 4.94 | 0.61 | 39.76 | ||||||
| PD | 4.41 | 0.59 | 32.82 | ||||||
| SRC | 3.41 | 0.44 | 26.72 | ||||||
| Others* | 3.64 | 0.38 | 35.20 | ||||||
| HER2 | Negative | 1 | 0.892 | ||||||
| Positive | 0.81 | 0.34 | 1.93 | ||||||
| Palliative chemotherapy history | No | 1 | 0.003 | 1 | 0.005 | ||||
| Yes | 4.19 | 1.63 | 10.78 | 10.78 | 2.05 | 56.81 | |||
| Molecular subtype of primary tumor | MSI | 0.87 | 0.11 | 6.64 | 0.143 | ||||
| EBV | 19.11 | 1.90 | 192.25 | ||||||
| CIN-like | 1.01 | 0.49 | 2.07 | ||||||
| GS-like | 1 | ||||||||
| Unknown | 1.33 | 0.63 | 2.84 | ||||||
| VEGF-A (pg/mL) | < 100.9 pg/mL | 1 | 0.127 | ||||||
| ≥100.9 pg/mL | 1.58 | 0.88 | 2.86 | ||||||
| IL-10 (pg/mL) | > 243.8 pg/mL | 1 | 0.16 | ||||||
| ≥243.8 pg/mL | 1.64 | 0.82 | 3.25 | ||||||
| TGF-β1 (pg/mL) | < 393.6 pg/mL | 1 | 0.197 | ||||||
| ≥393.6 pg/mL | 1.97 | 0.70 | 5.55 | ||||||
| Cytokine-scoring model | 0–1 | 1 | 0.037 | ||||||
| (number of high level of cytokines) | 2–3 | 1.91 | 1.04 | 3.49 | |||||
| CD4/CD3 (%) | < 41.7% | 1 | 0.232 | ||||||
| ≥41.7% | 0.65 | 0.32 | 1.32 | ||||||
| CD8/CD3 (%) | < 33.3% | 1 | 0.272 | ||||||
| ≥33.3% | 1.58 | 0.70 | 3.57 | ||||||
| CD4/CD8 ratio | < 0.6 | 1 | 0.034 | ||||||
| ≥0.6 | 0.35 | 0.13 | 0.92 | ||||||
| CD8CD45RO+/CD8 (%) | < 67.2% | 1 | 0.021 | 1 | 0.019 | ||||
| ≥67.2% | 2.54 | 1.15 | 5.59 | 3.25 | 1.22 | 8.68 | |||
| CD8CD25+/CD8 (%) | < 1.6% | 1 | 0.081 | ||||||
| ≥1.6% | 1.92 | 0.92 | 3.99 | ||||||
| CD8CD69+/CD8 (%) | < 28.0% | 1 | 0.054 | ||||||
| ≥28.0% | 2.09 | 0.99 | 4.41 | ||||||
| CD8HLA-DR+/CD8 (%) | < 28.4% | 1 | 0.008 | 1 | 0.012 | ||||
| ≥28.4% | 3.77 | 1.43 | 9.96 | 5.36 | 1.45 | 19.88 | |||
| CD8 TIM3+/CD8 (%) | < 0.2% | 1 | 0.082 | ||||||
| ≥0.2% | 0.50 | 0.23 | 1.09 | ||||||
| CD8 LAG3+/CD8 (%) | < 3.7% | 1 | 0.098 | ||||||
| ≥3.7% | 1.92 | 0.89 | 4.17 | ||||||
| CD8 PD1+/CD8 (%) | < 50.2% | 1 | 0.038 | ||||||
| ≥50.2% | 2.58 | 1.06 | 6.31 | ||||||
| CD3 PD1+/CD3 (%) | < 17.2% | 1 | 0.001 | 1 | < 0.001 | ||||
| ≥17.2% | 3.53 | 1.66 | 7.52 | 8.61 | 2.81 | 26.37 | |||
| CD4 PD1+/CD4 (%) | < 32.1% | 1 | 0.052 | ||||||
| ≥32.1% | 2.11 | 0.99 | 4.50 | ||||||
| FoxP3+ Tregs (No) | < 380 | 1 | 0.029 | 1 | 0.001 | ||||
| ≥380 | 0.40 | 0.18 | 0.91 | 0.13 | 0.04 | 0.42 | |||
| PD-L1 positive tumor cells (%) | < 1% | 1 | 0.87 | ||||||
| ≥1% | 1.07 | 0.49 | 2.34 | ||||||
VEGF vascular endothelial growth factor, IL interleukin, TGF-β1 transforming growth factor- beta1, CD cluster of differentiation, WD well differentiated, MD moderate differentiated, PD poorly differentiated, SRC signet ring cell carcinoma, MSI microsatellite instability, EBV Epstein-Barr virus, CIN chromosomal instability, GS genomically stable, HR hazard ratio, CI confidence interval, P p-value, No number
Others*: mucinous adenocarcinoma, undifferentiated carcinoma
Fig. 4Landscape shows the immune signature of body fluid in each molecular subtype of primary tissue. Patients were categorized by The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) molecular subtype which was composed of Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) positive, microsatellite instability (MSI), genomically stable (GS)-like and chromosomal instability (CIN)-like. Diffuse type and intestinal type by Lauren classification were filled with yellow and green, respectively. Molecular markers by histochemistry were classified with positive (red) or negative (orange). Continuous value of cytokine and immune cell proportion were dichotomized by best-cut off which calculates the maximizing hazard ratio (HR) based on log-rank statistics (low vs. high). Low value was filled with blue while high value was filled with pink. * Cytokine model was scored by a number of high levels of VEGF-A, IL-10 and TGF-β1, and it was categorized 0–1 (low group) and 2–3 (high group). TCGA, The Cancer Genome Atlas; EBV, Epstein-Barr virus; MSI-H, microsatellite instability-high; CIN, chromosomal instability; GS, genomically stable; VEGF, vascular endothelial growth factor; IL, interleukin; TGF-β1, transforming growth factor- beta1; CD, cluster of differentiation
Fig. 5VEGF-A and PD-L1 positivity on tumor cell (%) are different between CIN-like and GS-like group, and proportion of T lymphocyte with CD25 is higher in previously chemotherapy treated group than chemotherapy naïve group. a VEGF-A level was significantly higher in GS-like group than that in CIN-like group (median value: 163.9 vs. 17.4 pg/mL, P = 0.003). b PD-L1 (%) of tumor cells showed a higher tendency in CIN-like group than that in GS-like group (median proportion: 0.47 vs. 0.17%, P = 0.08). c-d Proportion of early activated T cells (CD3CD25 and CD4CD25) in previously chemotherapy treated patients was higher level than that in chemotherapy naive patients (P = 0.017 and P = 0.035, respectively). Red line indicates median value. Mann-Whitney U test was used for statistical analysis. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01