Yuehong Cui1, Qian Li1, Wei Li1, Yan Wang1, Fang Lv2, Xinying Shi2, Zhaoqing Tang3, Zhenbin Shen3, Yingyong Hou4, Henghui Zhang5, Beibei Mao2, Tianshu Liu1. 1. Department of Medical Oncology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China. 2. Medical Department, Beijing Genecast Biotechnology Co., Beijing, China. 3. Department of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China. 4. Department of Pathology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China. 5. Center of Integrative Medicine, Beijing Ditan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Although traditional treatments confer survival benefits to patients with gastric cancer (GC), many patients experience relapse soon after postoperative adjuvant therapy. Immune-related mechanisms play an important role in GC, and immunotherapeutic strategies are considered to be a promising direction for the treatment of GC. Thus, our study aimed to investigate the expression and prognostic significance of immune-related genes in GC. METHODS: Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples were collected from 48 resectable GC patients. The transcriptome data of the tumor immune microenvironment were assessed using an immuno-oncology 395-gene panel RNA sequencing platform. The prognostic value of the 395 genes was analyzed and validated in the KM plotter and GEPIA databases. The data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA, downloaded from UCSC Xena repository) and Tumor IMmune Estimation Resource (TIMER) were used to evaluate the correlations between prognostic factors and immune signatures. RESULTS: Among the 395 genes, NOTCH3 was identified as a good prognostic factor for GC patients. Its prognostic value was also suggested in both our GC cohort from Zhongshan Hospital and the public databases (KM plotter and GEPIA database). Mechanistically, high NOTCH3 expression correlated with a lower infiltration of activated CD8+ T cells and a higher infiltration of immunosuppressive cells including Tregs and M2 macrophages in the tumor microenvironment. Moreover, high NOTCH3 expression was accompanied by the increased expression of a series of immune checkpoint inhibitors, resulting in a dampened immune response. Interestingly, NOTCH3 expression had a negative association with well-documented predictive biomarkers of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) immunotherapy, including tumor mutation burden (TMB), gene expression profiling (GEP) score and innate anti-PD-1 resistance (IPRES) signature. CONCLUSION: These findings uncovered a new mechanism by which NOTCH3 participates in the immune tolerance of GC, implying the potential of NOTCH3 as a therapeutic target or predictive marker for GC patients.
INTRODUCTION: Although traditional treatments confer survival benefits to patients with gastric cancer (GC), many patients experience relapse soon after postoperative adjuvant therapy. Immune-related mechanisms play an important role in GC, and immunotherapeutic strategies are considered to be a promising direction for the treatment of GC. Thus, our study aimed to investigate the expression and prognostic significance of immune-related genes in GC. METHODS: Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples were collected from 48 resectable GC patients. The transcriptome data of the tumor immune microenvironment were assessed using an immuno-oncology 395-gene panel RNA sequencing platform. The prognostic value of the 395 genes was analyzed and validated in the KM plotter and GEPIA databases. The data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA, downloaded from UCSC Xena repository) and Tumor IMmune Estimation Resource (TIMER) were used to evaluate the correlations between prognostic factors and immune signatures. RESULTS: Among the 395 genes, NOTCH3 was identified as a good prognostic factor for GC patients. Its prognostic value was also suggested in both our GC cohort from Zhongshan Hospital and the public databases (KM plotter and GEPIA database). Mechanistically, high NOTCH3 expression correlated with a lower infiltration of activated CD8+ T cells and a higher infiltration of immunosuppressive cells including Tregs and M2 macrophages in the tumor microenvironment. Moreover, high NOTCH3 expression was accompanied by the increased expression of a series of immune checkpoint inhibitors, resulting in a dampened immune response. Interestingly, NOTCH3 expression had a negative association with well-documented predictive biomarkers of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) immunotherapy, including tumor mutation burden (TMB), gene expression profiling (GEP) score and innate anti-PD-1 resistance (IPRES) signature. CONCLUSION: These findings uncovered a new mechanism by which NOTCH3 participates in the immune tolerance of GC, implying the potential of NOTCH3 as a therapeutic target or predictive marker for GC patients.
Authors: Andrew M Frederickson; Stella Arndorfer; Ina Zhang; Maria Lorenzi; Ralph Insinga; Ashwini Arunachalam; Thomas A Burke; George R Simon Journal: Immunotherapy Date: 2019-02-04 Impact factor: 4.196
Authors: Michael Reedijk; Silvia Odorcic; Lynn Chang; Hui Zhang; Naomi Miller; David R McCready; Gina Lockwood; Sean E Egan Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2005-09-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Franck Pagès; Bernhard Mlecnik; Florence Marliot; Gabriela Bindea; Fang-Shu Ou; Carlo Bifulco; Alessandro Lugli; Inti Zlobec; Tilman T Rau; Martin D Berger; Iris D Nagtegaal; Elisa Vink-Börger; Arndt Hartmann; Carol Geppert; Julie Kolwelter; Susanne Merkel; Robert Grützmann; Marc Van den Eynde; Anne Jouret-Mourin; Alex Kartheuser; Daniel Léonard; Christophe Remue; Julia Y Wang; Prashant Bavi; Michael H A Roehrl; Pamela S Ohashi; Linh T Nguyen; SeongJun Han; Heather L MacGregor; Sara Hafezi-Bakhtiari; Bradly G Wouters; Giuseppe V Masucci; Emilia K Andersson; Eva Zavadova; Michal Vocka; Jan Spacek; Lubos Petruzelka; Bohuslav Konopasek; Pavel Dundr; Helena Skalova; Kristyna Nemejcova; Gerardo Botti; Fabiana Tatangelo; Paolo Delrio; Gennaro Ciliberto; Michele Maio; Luigi Laghi; Fabio Grizzi; Tessa Fredriksen; Bénédicte Buttard; Mihaela Angelova; Angela Vasaturo; Pauline Maby; Sarah E Church; Helen K Angell; Lucie Lafontaine; Daniela Bruni; Carine El Sissy; Nacilla Haicheur; Amos Kirilovsky; Anne Berger; Christine Lagorce; Jeffrey P Meyers; Christopher Paustian; Zipei Feng; Carmen Ballesteros-Merino; Jeroen Dijkstra; Carlijn van de Water; Shannon van Lent-van Vliet; Nikki Knijn; Ana-Maria Mușină; Dragos-Viorel Scripcariu; Boryana Popivanova; Mingli Xu; Tomonobu Fujita; Shoichi Hazama; Nobuaki Suzuki; Hiroaki Nagano; Kiyotaka Okuno; Toshihiko Torigoe; Noriyuki Sato; Tomohisa Furuhata; Ichiro Takemasa; Kyogo Itoh; Prabhu S Patel; Hemangini H Vora; Birva Shah; Jayendrakumar B Patel; Kruti N Rajvik; Shashank J Pandya; Shilin N Shukla; Yili Wang; Guanjun Zhang; Yutaka Kawakami; Francesco M Marincola; Paolo A Ascierto; Daniel J Sargent; Bernard A Fox; Jérôme Galon Journal: Lancet Date: 2018-05-10 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Ruth A Franklin; Will Liao; Abira Sarkar; Myoungjoo V Kim; Michael R Bivona; Kang Liu; Eric G Pamer; Ming O Li Journal: Science Date: 2014-05-08 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Charles S Fuchs; Toshihiko Doi; Raymond W Jang; Kei Muro; Taroh Satoh; Manuela Machado; Weijing Sun; Shadia I Jalal; Manish A Shah; Jean-Phillipe Metges; Marcelo Garrido; Talia Golan; Mario Mandala; Zev A Wainberg; Daniel V Catenacci; Atsushi Ohtsu; Kohei Shitara; Ravit Geva; Jonathan Bleeker; Andrew H Ko; Geoffrey Ku; Philip Philip; Peter C Enzinger; Yung-Jue Bang; Diane Levitan; Jiangdian Wang; Minori Rosales; Rita P Dalal; Harry H Yoon Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2018-05-10 Impact factor: 31.777