S Miwa1, T Nojima2, A A Alomesen2, H Ikeda2, N Yamamoto3, H Nishida3, K Hayashi3, A Takeuchi3, K Igarashi3, T Higuchi3, H Yonezawa3, Y Araki3, S Morinaga3, Y Asano3, H Tsuchiya3. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa University, 13-1 Takara-machi, Kanazawa, 920-8640, Japan. smiwa001@yahoo.co.jp. 2. Department of Pathology, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan. 3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kanazawa University, 13-1 Takara-machi, Kanazawa, 920-8640, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although immunotherapy is thought to be a promising cancer treatment, most patients do not respond to immunotherapy. In this post hoc analysis of a phase 1/2 study, associations of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), PD-L2, and HLA class I expressions with responses to dendritic cells (DCs)-based immunotherapy were investigated in patients with advanced sarcoma. METHODS: This study enrolled 35 patients with metastatic and/or recurrent sarcomas who underwent DC-based immunotherapy. The associations of PD-L1, PD-L2, and HLA class I expressions in tumor specimens, which were resected before immunotherapy, with immune responses (increases of IFN-γ and IL-12) and oncological outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Patients who were PD-L2 (+) showed lower increases of IFN-γ and IL-12 after DC-based immunotherapy than patients who were PD-L2 (-). The disease control (partial response or stable disease) rates of patients who were PD-L1 (+) and PD-L1 (-) were 0% and 22%, respectively. Disease control rates of patients who were PD-L2 (+) and PD-L2 (-) were 13% and 22%, respectively. Patients who were PD-L1 (+) tumors had significantly poorer overall survival compared with patients who were PD-L1 (-). No associations of HLA class I expression with the immune response or oncological outcomes were observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that PD-L1 and PD-L2 are promising biomarkers of DC-based immunotherapy, and that addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors to DC-based immunotherapy may improve the outcomes of DC-based immunotherapy.
BACKGROUND: Although immunotherapy is thought to be a promising cancer treatment, most patients do not respond to immunotherapy. In this post hoc analysis of a phase 1/2 study, associations of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), PD-L2, and HLA class I expressions with responses to dendritic cells (DCs)-based immunotherapy were investigated in patients with advanced sarcoma. METHODS: This study enrolled 35 patients with metastatic and/or recurrent sarcomas who underwent DC-based immunotherapy. The associations of PD-L1, PD-L2, and HLA class I expressions in tumor specimens, which were resected before immunotherapy, with immune responses (increases of IFN-γ and IL-12) and oncological outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS:Patients who were PD-L2 (+) showed lower increases of IFN-γ and IL-12 after DC-based immunotherapy than patients who were PD-L2 (-). The disease control (partial response or stable disease) rates of patients who were PD-L1 (+) and PD-L1 (-) were 0% and 22%, respectively. Disease control rates of patients who were PD-L2 (+) and PD-L2 (-) were 13% and 22%, respectively. Patients who were PD-L1 (+) tumors had significantly poorer overall survival compared with patients who were PD-L1 (-). No associations of HLA class I expression with the immune response or oncological outcomes were observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that PD-L1 and PD-L2 are promising biomarkers of DC-based immunotherapy, and that addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors to DC-based immunotherapy may improve the outcomes of DC-based immunotherapy.
Authors: Eytan Ben-Ami; Constance M Barysauskas; Sarah Solomon; Kadija Tahlil; Rita Malley; Melissa Hohos; Kathleen Polson; Margaret Loucks; Mariano Severgnini; Tara Patel; Amy Cunningham; Scott J Rodig; F Stephen Hodi; Jeffrey A Morgan; Priscilla Merriam; Andrew J Wagner; Geoffrey I Shapiro; Suzanne George Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-04-25 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Sandra P D'Angelo; Alexander N Shoushtari; Mary Louise Keohan; Mark A Dickson; Mrinal M Gounder; Ping Chi; Jennifer K Loo; Leigh Gaffney; Lee Schneider; Zarine Patel; Joseph Patrick Erinjeri; Mark J Bluth; Ana Sjoberg; Howard Streicher; Naoko Takebe; Li-Xuan Qin; Cristina Antonescu; Ronald P DeMatteo; Richard D Carvajal; William D Tap Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2016-12-22 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: J D Geiger; R J Hutchinson; L F Hohenkirk; E A McKenna; G A Yanik; J E Levine; A E Chang; T M Braun; J J Mulé Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2001-12-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Allen M Goorin; Douglas J Schwartzentruber; Meenakshi Devidas; Mark C Gebhardt; Alberto G Ayala; Michael B Harris; Lee J Helman; Holcombe E Grier; Michael P Link Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-04-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Hussein A Tawbi; Melissa Burgess; Vanessa Bolejack; Brian A Van Tine; Scott M Schuetze; James Hu; Sandra D'Angelo; Steven Attia; Richard F Riedel; Dennis A Priebat; Sujana Movva; Lara E Davis; Scott H Okuno; Damon R Reed; John Crowley; Lisa H Butterfield; Ruth Salazar; Jaime Rodriguez-Canales; Alexander J Lazar; Ignacio I Wistuba; Laurence H Baker; Robert G Maki; Denise Reinke; Shreyaskumar Patel Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2017-10-04 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Maud Toulmonde; Nicolas Penel; Julien Adam; Christine Chevreau; Jean-Yves Blay; Axel Le Cesne; Emmanuelle Bompas; Sophie Piperno-Neumann; Sophie Cousin; Thomas Grellety; Thomas Ryckewaert; Alban Bessede; François Ghiringhelli; Marina Pulido; Antoine Italiano Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2018-01-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Sandra P D'Angelo; Luca Melchiori; Melinda S Merchant; Donna Bernstein; John Glod; Rosandra Kaplan; Stephan Grupp; William D Tap; Karen Chagin; Gwendolyn K Binder; Samik Basu; Daniel E Lowther; Ruoxi Wang; Natalie Bath; Alex Tipping; Gareth Betts; Indu Ramachandran; Jean-Marc Navenot; Hua Zhang; Daniel K Wells; Erin Van Winkle; Gabor Kari; Trupti Trivedi; Tom Holdich; Lini Pandite; Rafael Amado; Crystal L Mackall Journal: Cancer Discov Date: 2018-06-11 Impact factor: 38.272