| Literature DB >> 33763292 |
Yasmin Kamal1, Dennis Dwan1, Hannah J Hoehn2, Rebeca Sanz-Pamplona3,4, M Henar Alonso3,4,5, Victor Moreno3,4,5, Chao Cheng6,7,8, Michael J Schell9, Youngchul Kim9, Seth I Felder10, Hedy S Rennert11,12, Marilena Melas13,14, Charalampos Lazaris13,15,16, Joseph D Bonner17, Erin M Siegel18, David Shibata19, Gad Rennert11,12, Stephen B Gruber17, H Robert Frost1, Christopher I Amos1,7,8, Stephanie L Schmit2,10.
Abstract
A substantial fraction of patients with stage I-III colorectal adenocarcinoma (CRC) experience disease relapse after surgery with curative intent. However, biomarkers for predicting the likelihood of CRC relapse have not been fully explored. Therefore, we assessed the association between tumor infiltration by a broad array of innate and adaptive immune cell types and CRC relapse risk. We implemented a discovery-validation design including a discovery dataset from Moffitt Cancer Center (MCC; Tampa, FL) and three independent validation datasets: (1) GSE41258 (2) the Molecular Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer (MECC) study, and (3) GSE39582. Infiltration by 22 immune cell types was inferred from tumor gene expression data, and the association between immune infiltration by each cell type and relapse-free survival was assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression. Within each of the four independent cohorts, CD4+ memory activated T cell (HR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.90-0.96; FDR = 0.0001) infiltration was associated with longer time to disease relapse, independent of stage, microsatellite instability, and adjuvant therapy. Based on our meta-analysis across the four datasets, 10 innate and adaptive immune cell types associated with disease relapse of which 2 were internally validated using multiplex immunofluorescence. Moreover, immune cell type infiltration was a better predictors of disease relapse than Consensus Molecular Subtype (CMS) and other expression-based biomarkers (Immune-AICMCC:238.1-238.9; CMS-AICMCC: 241.0). These data suggest that transcriptome-derived immune profiles are prognostic indicators of CRC relapse and quantification of both innate and adaptive immune cell types may serve as candidate biomarkers for predicting prognosis and guiding frequency and modality of disease surveillance.Entities:
Keywords: Metastasis; colorectal adenocarcinoma; comparative transcriptomics; immune microenvironment; tumor infiltrating lymphocytes
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33763292 PMCID: PMC7951964 DOI: 10.1080/2162402X.2020.1862529
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncoimmunology ISSN: 2162-4011 Impact factor: 8.110
Baseline clinical characteristics for MCC, GSE41258, MECC, and GSE39582 participants
| MCC (n = 174) | GSE41258 (n = 169) | MECC (n = 270) | GSE39582 (n = 507) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 64.94 (12.4) | 63.0 (14.1) | 71.62 (11.3) | 67.22 (13.2) | |
| White | 162 (93.1%) | |||
| Black/African American | 8 (4.6%) | |||
| Other/Unknown | 4 (2.3%) | 169(100%) | 10 (3.7%) | 507 (100%) |
| Arab | 14 (5.2%) | |||
| Ashkenazi | 196 (72.6%) | |||
| Sephardic | 50 (18.5%) | |||
| Male | 90 (51.7%) | 88 (52.1%) | 143 (53.0%) | 285 (56.2%) |
| Female | 84 (48.3%) | 81 (47.9%) | 127 (47.0%) | 222 (43.8%) |
| Yes | 88 (50.6%) | 224(44.2%) | ||
| No | 84 (48.3%) | 283(55.8%) | ||
| Unknown | 2 (1.1%) | 169 (100%) | 270 (100%) | |
| Proximal Colon | 86 (49.4%) | 71 (42.0%) | 113 (41.9%) | 207 (40.8%) |
| Distal Colon | 55 (31.6%) | 84 (49.7%) | 106 (39.3%) | 300 (59.2%) |
| Rectum | 33 (19.0%) | 14 (8.3%) | 42 (15.5%) | |
| Unknown | 9 (3.3%) | |||
| MSI | 4 (2.3%) | 35 (20.7%) | 37 (13.7%) | 72 (14.2%) |
| MSS | 23 (13.2%) | 124 (73.4%) | 233 (86.3%) | 435 (85.8%) |
| Unknown | 147 (84.5%) | 10 (5.9%) | ||
| Stage 1 | 37 (21.3%) | 27 (16.0%) | 21 (7.8%) | 36 (7.1%) |
| Stage 2 | 51 (29.3%) | 46 (27.2%) | 131 (48.5%) | 225 (44.4%) |
| Stage 3 | 46 (26.4%) | 46 (27.2%) | 105 (38.9%) | 203(40.0%) |
| Stage 4 | 40 (23.0%) | 50 (29.6%) | 13 (4.8%) | 43 (8.5%) |
| CMS1 | 19 (10.9%) | 29 (17.2%) | 31 (11.5%) | 62 (12.2%) |
| CMS2 | 46 (26.4%) | 67 (39.6%) | 99 (36.7%) | 173 (34.1%) |
| CMS3 | 37 (21.2%) | 11 (6.5%) | 27 (10%) | 81(16.0%) |
| CMS4 | 36 (20.6%) | 22 (13.0%) | 45 (16.7%) | 110 (21.7%) |
| CMS_NA | 36 (20.6%) | 40 (23.7%) | 68 (25.2%) | 81 (16.0%) |
| 27 (20.1%) | 22 (17.9%) | 154 (30.4%) | ||
| 45 (25.9%) | 62 (36.7%) | 96 (35.6%) | ||
| 108.13 | 66 | 80.91 | 45 | |
| 12.57 | 19 | 30.11 | 13.5 |
Notes: All analyses examining relapse as an endpoint excluded stage 4 tumors, while all analyses examining disease-specific survival as an endpoint included stage 4 tumors. Median follow-up until an event refers to a relapse event for the MCC, GSE41258, and GSE39582 datasets and a CRC-specific cause of death for the MECC dataset.
Figure 1.Immune infiltration and disease relapse association. The association between disease relapse and relative immune infiltration of 22 immune cell types in CRC samples across four datasets – MCC (n = 134), GSE41258 (n = 119), MECC (n = 257), GSE39582 (n = 464) – in stage I–III tumors was examined using multivariable Cox regression modeling. For all datasets, the association of each immune cell type with disease relapse was determined while adjusting for age, sex, adjuvant therapy treatment, microsatellite instability (MSI) status, and stage at diagnosis. For the GSE41258 and MECC datasets, adjuvant treatment status was not available while MSI information was not available for the MCC dataset. For the MECC dataset, the association between relative immune infiltrates and CRC-specific death was determined. Overall, 22 regression models were performed for each dataset. The coefficients for each immune cell type are displayed with their respective confidence intervals. A joint meta-analysis was performed based on results from across the four studies so that the collective association of immune cell infiltration on disease relapse could be examined. Meta-analysis is presented with the FDR-adjusted p-values for each immune cell type
Figure 2.Immune infiltration and risk model prediction. Using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso) regression modeling, immune predictors and their combinations that associate with disease relapse were selected for risk modeling. All models were trained on the MCC dataset and applied to the GSE41258 validation dataset. The immune model was developed using the Lasso selected immune variable and includes the clinical variables age, sex, and stage (a). The clinical model was developed only using the clinical variables age, sex, and stage (b). The outputs from the immune and clinical models were dichotomized into high-risk and low-risk groups and their association with disease relapse was examined in both datasets and displayed in Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves with confidence bands (c). Differences between survival curves in the KM plots were determined using log-rank test. Meaningful p-values are shown for the GSE41258 validation dataset
The performance of nine models for predicting CRC relapse was compared in two datasets – MCC and GSE41258. All multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models for a given dataset were compared to one another using the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and the likelihood ratio test (LRT)
| Model | Predictors | SE | p-value | AIC | LRT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CD4+ Memory Resting T Cell | 0.89 (0.80, 0.99) | 0.05 | 0.02 | 238.1 | 0.02 | |
| CD4+ Memory Activated T Cell | 0.91(0.83, 0.99) | 0.04 | 0.03 | 239.1 | 0.03 | |
| CD8+ T Cell | 0.92 (0.84, 0.99) | 0.04 | 0.04 | 239.5 | 0.03 | |
| CD4+ Naïve T Cell | 0.91 (0.83, 0.99) | 0.05 | 0.04 | 239.3 | 0.03 | |
| Neutrophil | 1.06 (1.0, 1.1) | 0.03 | 0.04 | 239.8 | 0.04 | |
| Monocyte | 1.07 (1.01, 1.15) | 0.03 | 0.03 | 238.9 | 0.02 | |
| CMS1 | 0.39 (0.10, 1.53) | 0.68 | 0.17 | |||
| CMS2 | 0.30 (0.10, 0.89) | 0.55 | 0.03 | |||
| CMS3 | 0.29 (0.09, 0.97) | 0.60 | 0.04 | |||
| CMS_NA | 0.22 (0.06, 0.81) | 0.66 | 0.02 | |||
| 241.0 | 0.06 | |||||
| CD8A | 0.99 (0.76, 1.30) | 0.14 | 0.97 | 243.9 | 0.97 | |
| CD3D | 0.84 (0.60, 1.19) | 0.18 | 0.33 | 243.0 | 0.34 | |
| CD4+ Memory Resting T Cell | 0.87 (0.76, 0.99) | 0.07 | 0.04 | 178.2 | 0.03 | |
| CD4+ Memory Activated T Cell | 0.83 (0.72, 0.95) | 0.07 | 0.007 | 175.1 | 0.006 | |
| CD8+ T Cell | 0.80 (0.71, 0.93) | 0.07 | 0.001 | 172.4 | 0.001 | |
| CD4+ Naïve T Cell | 0.93 (0.84, 1.04) | 0.05 | 0.2 | 180.9 | 0.2 | |
| Neutrophil | 1.1 (0.99, 1.24) | 0.06 | 0.06 | 179.1 | 0.06 | |
| Monocyte | 1.11 (1.00,1.25) | 0.06 | 0.04 | 178.4 | 0.04 | |
| CMS1 | 0.53 (0.09, 3.30) | 0.92 | 0.49 | |||
| CMS2 | 0.31 (0.08, 1.21) | 0.68 | 0.09 | |||
| CMS3 | 0.32 (0.03, 2.93) | 1.12 | 0.31 | |||
| CMS_NA | 0.82 (0.22, 3.03) | 0.66 | 0.77 | |||
| 184.6 | 0.40 | |||||
| CD8A | 0.81 (0.39, 1.66) | 0.37 | 0.57 | 182.2 | 0.56 | |
| CD3D | 0.63 (0.27,1.47) | 0.43 | 0.29 | 181.4 | 0.27 |
Note: . . . . where a is age at diagnosis, s is sex, m is pathological stage at diagnosis, ImmuneCell is tumor infiltration by either CD4+ Memory Resting T Cells, CD4+ Memory Activated T Cells, CD8+ T Cells, CD4+ Naïve T Cells, Neutrophils, or Monocytes. CD8A is the gene expression of CD8A, and CD3D is the gene expression of CD3D. For the CMS H3 models, CMS4 is the reference group. For the MCC dataset, t is adjuvant therapy recipient status, while for the GSE41258 dataset, t is microsatellite instability status (MSI), where MSI-low tumors were categorized as microsatellite stable (MSS).
Figure 3.Consensus Molecular Subtype (CMS) association with immune infiltration and disease relapse. Relative immune infiltration across CMS groups was determined by examining the median difference between the immune infiltration in each CMS and the reference CMS4 (left). High immune infiltration is shown in red and low immune infiltration is shown in blue. Distribution of CMS tumors in patients who either did or did not exhibit disease relapse (a and b) or who either did nor did not die from CRC (c) was examined in four independent datasets for stage I–III tumors and is displayed in tables (right). Using a logistic regression framework, we assessed the collective effect of CMS distribution on disease relapse in stage I–III tumors across all four datasets, while adjusting for age, sex, stage, and dataset attributes
CD4+ Memory Resting T Cell infiltration and tumor pathway enrichment correlation in the MCC cohort. Spearman rank correlation was used to determine the association between tumor pathway activity and CD4+ Memory Resting T Cell infiltration scores. Tumor pathways from the C2. Reactome collection in MSigDB were selected if they associated with disease relapse in a multivariable regression model (FDR < 0.1). The gene set size for each pathway of interest is noted. The overlap between gene sets defining a given tumor pathway and genes in the LM22 signature gene set is also shown. In addition, the specific overlap with CD4+ Memory Resting T cell defining genes is also noted
| Pathway Name | ρ | P-value | Gene set Size | Overlap with Immune Signature Genes: N (%) | Overlap with CD4+ Memory Resting T Cell: N (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HALLMARK_ANGIOGENESIS | −0.57 | P < 1*10−16 | 36 | 3 (8.33%) | 0 (0%) |
| REACTOME_EXTRACELLULAR_MATRIX_ORGANIZATION | −0.55 | P < 1*10−16 | 87 | 8 (9.20%) | 0 (0%) |
| REACTOME_L1CAM_INTERACTIONS | −0.53 | 3.84*10−11 | 86 | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
| HALLMARK_EPITHELIAL_MESENCHYMAL_TRANSITION | −0.52 | 9.97*10−11 | 200 | 1 (0.5%) | 0 (0%) |
| REACTOME_CHONDROITIN_SULFATE_DERMATAN_SULFATE_METABOLISM | −0.52 | 1.64*10−10 | 49 | 3 (6.12%) | 0 (0%) |
| REACTOME_COLLAGEN_FORMATION | −0.52 | 1.93*10−10 | 58 | 2 (3.45%) | 0 (0%) |
| REACTOME_GLYCOSAMINOGLYCAN_METABOLISM | −0.52 | 2.23*10−10 | 111 | 5 (4.50%) | 0 (0%) |
| REACTOME_CHONDROITIN_SULFATE_BIOSYNTHESIS | −0.51 | 5.39*10−10 | 21 | 2 (9.52%) | 0 (0%) |
| REACTOME_VEGF_LIGAND_RECEPTOR_INTERACTIONS | −0.49 | 4.42*10−09 | 10 | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
| REACTOME_GAP_JUNCTION_DEGRADATION | −0.48 | 4.96*10−09 | 10 | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
| REACTOME_ADHERENS_JUNCTIONS_INTERACTIONS | −0.47 | 1.52*10−08 | 27 | 1 (3.70%) | 0 (0%) |
| HALLMARK_COAGULATION | −0.46 | 3.51*10−08 | 138 | 4 (2.90%) | 1 (0.007%) |
| HALLMARK_HYPOXIA | −0.45 | 5.12*10−08 | 200 | 3 (1.5%) | 1 (0.005%) |
Notes: Overlap with the immune signature matrix (gene set size = 547 genes) was determined by examining the number of genes shared between the immune signature gene set divided by the total number of genes in the pathway of interest. Overlap with genes n(= 66) defining the CD4+ Memory Resting T cell signature was determined in a similar manner.