BACKGROUND: Unlike estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer, ER-positive breast cancer outcome is less influenced by lymphocyte content, indicating the presence of immune tolerance mechanisms that may be specific to this disease subset. METHODS: A supervised analysis of microarray data from the ACOSOG Z1031 (Alliance) neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitor (AI) trial identified upregulated genes in Luminal (Lum) B breast cancers that correlated with AI-resistant tumor proliferation (percentage of Ki67-positive cancer nuclei, Pearson r > 0.4) (33 cases Ki67 > 10% on AI) vs LumB breast cancers that were more AI sensitive (33 cases Ki67 < 10% on AI). Overrepresentation analysis was performed using WebGestalt. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Thirty candidate genes positively correlated (r ≥ 0.4) with AI-resistant proliferation in LumB and were upregulated greater than twofold. Gene ontologies identified that the targetable immune checkpoint (IC) components IDO1, LAG3, and PD1 were overrepresented resistance candidates (P ≤ .001). High IDO1 mRNA was associated with poor prognosis in LumB disease (Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium, hazard ratio = 1.43, 95% confidence interval = 1.04 to 1.98, P = .03). IDO1 also statistically significantly correlated with STAT1 at protein level in LumB disease (Pearson r = 0.74). As a composite immune tolerance signature, expression of IFN-γ/STAT1 pathway components was associated with higher baseline Ki67, lower estrogen, and progesterone receptor mRNA levels and worse disease-specific survival (P = .002). In a tissue microarray analysis, IDO1 was observed in stromal cells and tumor-associated macrophages, with a higher incidence in LumB cases. Furthermore, IDO1 expression was associated with a macrophage mRNA signature (M1 by CIBERSORT Pearson r = 0.62 ) and by tissue microarray analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Targetable IC components are upregulated in the majority of endocrine therapy-resistant LumB cases. Our findings provide rationale for IC inhibition in poor-outcome ER-positive breast cancer.
BACKGROUND: Unlike estrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer, ER-positive breast cancer outcome is less influenced by lymphocyte content, indicating the presence of immune tolerance mechanisms that may be specific to this disease subset. METHODS: A supervised analysis of microarray data from the ACOSOG Z1031 (Alliance) neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitor (AI) trial identified upregulated genes in Luminal (Lum) B breast cancers that correlated with AI-resistant tumor proliferation (percentage of Ki67-positive cancer nuclei, Pearson r > 0.4) (33 cases Ki67 > 10% on AI) vs LumB breast cancers that were more AI sensitive (33 cases Ki67 < 10% on AI). Overrepresentation analysis was performed using WebGestalt. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Thirty candidate genes positively correlated (r ≥ 0.4) with AI-resistant proliferation in LumB and were upregulated greater than twofold. Gene ontologies identified that the targetable immune checkpoint (IC) components IDO1, LAG3, and PD1 were overrepresented resistance candidates (P ≤ .001). High IDO1 mRNA was associated with poor prognosis in LumB disease (Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium, hazard ratio = 1.43, 95% confidence interval = 1.04 to 1.98, P = .03). IDO1 also statistically significantly correlated with STAT1 at protein level in LumB disease (Pearson r = 0.74). As a composite immune tolerance signature, expression of IFN-γ/STAT1 pathway components was associated with higher baseline Ki67, lower estrogen, and progesterone receptor mRNA levels and worse disease-specific survival (P = .002). In a tissue microarray analysis, IDO1 was observed in stromal cells and tumor-associated macrophages, with a higher incidence in LumB cases. Furthermore, IDO1 expression was associated with a macrophage mRNA signature (M1 by CIBERSORT Pearson r = 0.62 ) and by tissue microarray analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Targetable IC components are upregulated in the majority of endocrine therapy-resistant LumB cases. Our findings provide rationale for IC inhibition in poor-outcome ER-positive breast cancer.
Authors: Abdullah A Tarique; Jayden Logan; Emma Thomas; Patrick G Holt; Peter D Sly; Emmanuelle Fantino Journal: Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 6.914
Authors: J Naidoo; D B Page; B T Li; L C Connell; K Schindler; M E Lacouture; M A Postow; J D Wolchok Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2015-09-14 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Vésteinn Thorsson; David L Gibbs; Scott D Brown; Denise Wolf; Dante S Bortone; Tai-Hsien Ou Yang; Eduard Porta-Pardo; Galen F Gao; Christopher L Plaisier; James A Eddy; Elad Ziv; Aedin C Culhane; Evan O Paull; I K Ashok Sivakumar; Andrew J Gentles; Raunaq Malhotra; Farshad Farshidfar; Antonio Colaprico; Joel S Parker; Lisle E Mose; Nam Sy Vo; Jianfang Liu; Yuexin Liu; Janet Rader; Varsha Dhankani; Sheila M Reynolds; Reanne Bowlby; Andrea Califano; Andrew D Cherniack; Dimitris Anastassiou; Davide Bedognetti; Younes Mokrab; Aaron M Newman; Arvind Rao; Ken Chen; Alexander Krasnitz; Hai Hu; Tathiane M Malta; Houtan Noushmehr; Chandra Sekhar Pedamallu; Susan Bullman; Akinyemi I Ojesina; Andrew Lamb; Wanding Zhou; Hui Shen; Toni K Choueiri; John N Weinstein; Justin Guinney; Joel Saltz; Robert A Holt; Charles S Rabkin; Alexander J Lazar; Jonathan S Serody; Elizabeth G Demicco; Mary L Disis; Benjamin G Vincent; Ilya Shmulevich Journal: Immunity Date: 2018-04-05 Impact factor: 43.474
Authors: Vera J Suman; Lili Du; Tanya Hoskin; Meenakshi Anurag; Cynthia Ma; Isabelle Bedrosian; Kelly K Hunt; Matthew J Ellis; W Fraser Symmans Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2022-08-02 Impact factor: 13.801
Authors: Milana A Bergamino; Gabriele Morani; Joel Parker; Eugene F Schuster; Mariana F Leal; Elena López-Knowles; Holly Tovey; Judith M Bliss; John F R Robertson; Ian E Smith; Mitch Dowsett; Maggie C U Cheang Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2022-03-15 Impact factor: 13.801
Authors: Karsten Krug; Eric J Jaehnig; Shankha Satpathy; Lili Blumenberg; Alla Karpova; Meenakshi Anurag; George Miles; Philipp Mertins; Yifat Geffen; Lauren C Tang; David I Heiman; Song Cao; Yosef E Maruvka; Jonathan T Lei; Chen Huang; Ramani B Kothadia; Antonio Colaprico; Chet Birger; Jarey Wang; Yongchao Dou; Bo Wen; Zhiao Shi; Yuxing Liao; Maciej Wiznerowicz; Matthew A Wyczalkowski; Xi Steven Chen; Jacob J Kennedy; Amanda G Paulovich; Mathangi Thiagarajan; Christopher R Kinsinger; Tara Hiltke; Emily S Boja; Mehdi Mesri; Ana I Robles; Henry Rodriguez; Thomas F Westbrook; Li Ding; Gad Getz; Karl R Clauser; David Fenyö; Kelly V Ruggles; Bing Zhang; D R Mani; Steven A Carr; Matthew J Ellis; Michael A Gillette Journal: Cell Date: 2020-11-18 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Yuan Yuan; Yilu Zhou; Yali Li; Charlotte Hill; Rob M Ewing; Mark G Jones; Donna E Davies; Zhenglin Jiang; Yihua Wang Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2020-02-18 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Melanie Erices-Leclercq; Sabine Lubig; Frank Förster; Robert Förster; Stefan Baldus; Christian Rudlowski; Lars Schröder Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2021-05-15 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Andrea Walens; Linnea T Olsson; Xiaohua Gao; Alina M Hamilton; Erin L Kirk; Stephanie M Cohen; Bentley R Midkiff; Yongjuan Xia; Mark E Sherman; Nana Nikolaishvili-Feinberg; Jonathan S Serody; Katherine A Hoadley; Melissa A Troester; Benjamin C Calhoun Journal: Lab Invest Date: 2021-02-23 Impact factor: 5.662