| Literature DB >> 33576873 |
Patrick Micke1, Carina Strell2, Torsten Goldmann3,4, Sebastian Marwitz3,4, Dörte Nitschkowski3,4, Rosemarie Krupar3,5, Max Backman1, Hedvig Elfving1, Viktoria Thurfjell1, Amanda Lindberg1, Hans Brunnström6,7, Linnea La Fleur1, Artur Mezheyeuski1, Johanna Sofia Margareta Mattsson1, Johan Botling1.
Abstract
Gene amplification is considered to be one responsible cause for upregulation of Programmed Death Ligand-1 (PD-L1) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to represent a specific molecular subgroup possibly associated with immunotherapy response. Our aim was to analyze the frequency of PD-L1 amplification, its relation to PD-L1 mRNA and protein expression, and to characterize the immune microenvironment of amplified cases. The study was based on two independent NSCLC cohorts, including 354 and 349 cases, respectively. Tissue microarrays were used to evaluate PD-L1 amplification by FISH and PD-L1 protein by immunohistochemistry. Immune infiltrates were characterized immunohistochemically by a panel of immune markers (CD3, CD4, CD8, PD-1, Foxp3, CD20, CD138, CD168, CD45RO, NKp46). Mutational status was determined by targeted sequencing. RNAseq data was available for 197 patients. PD-L1 amplification was detected in 4.5% of all evaluable cases. PD-L1 amplification correlated only weakly with mRNA and protein expression. About 37% of amplified cases were negative for PD-L1 protein. PD-L1 amplification did not show any association with the mutational status. In squamous cell cancer, PD-L1 amplified cases were enriched among patients with high tumoral immune cell infiltration and showed gene expression profiles related to immune exhaustion. In conclusion, PD-L1 amplification correlates with PD-L1 expression in squamous cell cancer and was associated with an immune cell rich tumor phenotype. The correlative findings help to understand the role of PD-L1 amplification as an important immune escape mechanism in NSCLC and suggest the need to further evaluate PD-L1 amplification as predictive biomarker for checkpoint inhibitor therapy.Entities:
Keywords: Check-point inhibitors; Immunotherapy; Lung cancer; Microenvironment; PD-L1 amplification
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33576873 PMCID: PMC8360842 DOI: 10.1007/s00262-020-02825-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Immunol Immunother ISSN: 0340-7004 Impact factor: 6.968
Clinical data and patient characteristics Abbreviations: WHO = world health organization; AC = adenocarcinoma; SqCC = squamous cell carcinoma; AdSq = adenosquamous carcinoma; LCC = large cell carcinoma; LCNEC = large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma; SC = sarcomatoid carcinoma
| Uppsala 06 | Uppsala 95 | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 354 | 349 |
Included in study (PD-L1 FISH data available) | 310 | 224 |
| Age, years | ||
| ≤ 70 | 195 (62.9) | 154 (68.8) |
| > 70 | 115 (37.1) | 70 (31.2) |
| Gender | ||
| Female | 159 (51.3) | 102 (45.5) |
| Male | 151 (48.7) | 122 (54.5) |
| Stage | ||
| Ia–Ib | 195 (62.9) | 158 (70.5) |
| Iia–IV | 115 (37.1) | 66 (29.5) |
| WHO performance score | ||
| 0 | 193 (62.3) | 116 (51.8) |
| 1–3 | 117 (37.7) | 107 (47.8) |
| 4 | – | 1 (0.4) |
| Smoker | ||
| Never | 34 (11) | 19 (8.5) |
| Former or current | 276 (89) | 203 (90.7) |
| Missing | – | 2 (0.8) |
| Histology | ||
| AC | 196 (63.2) | 119 (53.1) |
| SqCC | 94 (30.3) | 82 (36.6) |
| AdSq | 5 (1.6) | – |
| LCC | 5 (1.6) | 23 (10.3) |
| LCNEC | 8 (2.6) | – |
| SC | 2 (0.7) | – |
| Data available for | ||
| PD-L1 IHC | 303/310 | 207/224 |
| PD-L1 mRNA | 180/310 | 122/224 |
Fig. 1a Percentual distribution of the PD-L1 amplified cases and cases with PD-L1 polysomy among all included NSCLC patients of the Uppsala 06 cohort as well as separately within the adenocarcinoma (AC) and squamouscell carcinoma (SqCC) tumor subgroups. b, c Association of the PD-L1 amplification status with (b) PD-L1 mRNA expression (as FPKM) and (c) percentage of PD-L-positive tumor cells on protein level as determined by IHC. Box plots indicate the median with the interquartile range and the whiskers represent the 5–95 percentiles. Outliners are represented as dots. p values are based on Kruskal–Wallis test (two-sided) with Dunn's correction for multiple testing. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.001
Fig. 2a Association of the PD-L1 amplification status with mutational load (synonymous plus non-synonymous) within the adenocarcinoma (AC) and squamouscell carcinoma (SqCC) tumor subgroups of the Uppsala 06 cohort. Box plots indicate the median with the interquartile range and the whiskers represent the 5–95 percentiles. Outliners are represented as dots. b Association of the PD-L1 amplification status (black) with activating driver mutations of the EGFR and KRAS genes as well as mutations of the TP53 gene (blue) are represented as binary heat maps. P-value is based on Fisher’s exact test, two-sided. *p < 0.05
Fig. 3a Association of the PD-L1 amplification status with single immune cells counts within the adenocarcinoma (AC) and squamouscell carcinoma (SqCC) tumor subgroups of the Uppsala 06 cohort. Immune cells counts were determined by IHC. Box plots indicate the median with the interquartile range and the whiskers represent the 5–95 percentiles. Outliners are represented as dots. b Hierarchical cluster analysis using Ward’s method and Euclidian distance of the IHC based immune marker annotation and its association with PD-L1 amplification status and tumor histology
Fig. 4a Summary of genes differentially expressed in the PD-L1 amplified cases (FDR < 0.05) based on a separate analysis of the adenocarcinoma (AC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SqCC) tumor subtypes of the Uppsala 06 cohort. Genes were clustered hierarchically using Ward’s method and Euclidian distance. b Gene ontology (GO) analysis of PD-L1 amplified cases of AC and SqCC. Gene ontology analysis was performed on differentially expressed genes with p-adjusted < 0.05. Only GO terms comprised of > 10 genes were considered. The bars represent the corresponding enrichment scores. Enrichment scores represent the negative logarithm of the enrichment p value based on Fisher’s exact test. Numbers stated within the bars indicate the “number of annotated genes in GO term”/“number of genes significantly enriched”/and the “number of expected genes.”