Zhaoli Tan1, Chunyan Yue2, Shoujian Ji1, Chuanhua Zhao1, Ru Jia1, Yun Zhang1, Rongrui Liu1, Da Li2, Qian Yu2, Ping Li2, Zhiyuan Hu2, Yanlian Yang2, Jianming Xu1. 1. Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, The Fifth Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China. 2. CAS Key Laboratory of Standardization and Measurement for Nanotechnology, CAS Key Laboratory for Biomedical Effects of Nanomaterial and Nanosafety, CAS Center for Excellence in Nanoscience, National Center for Nanoscience and Technology of China, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Programmed death-1 (PD-1) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) blockade immunotherapies have changed the landscape of cancer therapy. However, the main limitation of these therapies is the lack of definitively predictive biomarkers to predict treatment response. Whether PD-L1 expression on circulating tumor cells (CTCs) is associated with the clinical outcomes of immunotherapy remains to be extensively investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred fifty-five patients with different advanced cancers were enrolled in this study and treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies. Using the Pep@MNPs method, CTCs were isolated and enumerated. The PD-L1 expression levels were analyzed by an immunofluorescence assay for semiquantitative assessment with four categories (negative, low, medium, and high). RESULTS: Prior to immunotherapy, 81.93% (127/155) of patients had PD-L1-positive CTCs, and 71.61% (111/155) had at least one PD-L1-high CTC. The group with PD-L1-positive CTCs had a higher disease control rate (DCR) (71.56%, 91/127), with a DCR of only 39.29% (11/28) for the remaining individuals (p = .001). The objective response rate and DCR in PD-L1-high patients were higher than those in the other patients (32.44% vs. 13.64%, p = .018 and 75.68% vs. 40.91%, p < .0001, respectively). The reduction in the counts and ratios of PD-L1-positive CTCs and PD-L1-high CTCs reflected a beneficial response to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Furthermore, patients with PD-L1-high CTCs had significantly longer progression-free survival (4.9 vs. 2.2 months, p < .0001) and overall survival (16.1 vs. 9.0 months, p = .0235) than those without PD-L1-high CTCs. CONCLUSION: The PD-L1 level on CTCs may serve as a clinically actionable biomarker for immunotherapy, and its dynamic changes could predict the therapeutic response. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study was designed to investigate the role of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression on circulating tumor cells in predicting and monitoring response to programmed death-1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 blockade immunotherapies in patients with advanced cancer. The results of the study showed that PD-L1-high-expression circulating tumor cells (CTCs) were both a predictive biomarker and a prognostic factor in patients with advanced cancer treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies. These observations suggest that PD-L1 level on CTCs is a potential clinical biomarker for immunotherapy.
BACKGROUND: Programmed death-1 (PD-1) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) blockade immunotherapies have changed the landscape of cancer therapy. However, the main limitation of these therapies is the lack of definitively predictive biomarkers to predict treatment response. Whether PD-L1 expression on circulating tumor cells (CTCs) is associated with the clinical outcomes of immunotherapy remains to be extensively investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred fifty-five patients with different advanced cancers were enrolled in this study and treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies. Using the Pep@MNPs method, CTCs were isolated and enumerated. The PD-L1 expression levels were analyzed by an immunofluorescence assay for semiquantitative assessment with four categories (negative, low, medium, and high). RESULTS: Prior to immunotherapy, 81.93% (127/155) of patients had PD-L1-positive CTCs, and 71.61% (111/155) had at least one PD-L1-high CTC. The group with PD-L1-positive CTCs had a higher disease control rate (DCR) (71.56%, 91/127), with a DCR of only 39.29% (11/28) for the remaining individuals (p = .001). The objective response rate and DCR in PD-L1-high patients were higher than those in the other patients (32.44% vs. 13.64%, p = .018 and 75.68% vs. 40.91%, p < .0001, respectively). The reduction in the counts and ratios of PD-L1-positive CTCs and PD-L1-high CTCs reflected a beneficial response to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Furthermore, patients with PD-L1-high CTCs had significantly longer progression-free survival (4.9 vs. 2.2 months, p < .0001) and overall survival (16.1 vs. 9.0 months, p = .0235) than those without PD-L1-high CTCs. CONCLUSION: The PD-L1 level on CTCs may serve as a clinically actionable biomarker for immunotherapy, and its dynamic changes could predict the therapeutic response. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study was designed to investigate the role of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression on circulating tumor cells in predicting and monitoring response to programmed death-1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 blockade immunotherapies in patients with advanced cancer. The results of the study showed that PD-L1-high-expression circulating tumor cells (CTCs) were both a predictive biomarker and a prognostic factor in patients with advanced cancer treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies. These observations suggest that PD-L1 level on CTCs is a potential clinical biomarker for immunotherapy.
Authors: Andrew X Zhu; Richard S Finn; Julien Edeline; Stephane Cattan; Sadahisa Ogasawara; Daniel Palmer; Chris Verslype; Vittorina Zagonel; Laetitia Fartoux; Arndt Vogel; Debashis Sarker; Gontran Verset; Stephen L Chan; Jennifer Knox; Bruno Daniele; Andrea L Webber; Scot W Ebbinghaus; Junshui Ma; Abby B Siegel; Ann-Lii Cheng; Masatoshi Kudo Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2018-06-03 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Dung T Le; Jennifer N Uram; Hao Wang; Bjarne R Bartlett; Holly Kemberling; Aleksandra D Eyring; Andrew D Skora; Brandon S Luber; Nilofer S Azad; Dan Laheru; Barbara Biedrzycki; Ross C Donehower; Atif Zaheer; George A Fisher; Todd S Crocenzi; James J Lee; Steven M Duffy; Richard M Goldberg; Albert de la Chapelle; Minori Koshiji; Feriyl Bhaijee; Thomas Huebner; Ralph H Hruban; Laura D Wood; Nathan Cuka; Drew M Pardoll; Nickolas Papadopoulos; Kenneth W Kinzler; Shibin Zhou; Toby C Cornish; Janis M Taube; Robert A Anders; James R Eshleman; Bert Vogelstein; Luis A Diaz Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-05-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Scott J Antonia; Augusto Villegas; Davey Daniel; David Vicente; Shuji Murakami; Rina Hui; Takashi Yokoi; Alberto Chiappori; Ki H Lee; Maike de Wit; Byoung C Cho; Maryam Bourhaba; Xavier Quantin; Takaaki Tokito; Tarek Mekhail; David Planchard; Young-Chul Kim; Christos S Karapetis; Sandrine Hiret; Gyula Ostoros; Kaoru Kubota; Jhanelle E Gray; Luis Paz-Ares; Javier de Castro Carpeño; Catherine Wadsworth; Giovanni Melillo; Haiyi Jiang; Yifan Huang; Phillip A Dennis; Mustafa Özgüroğlu Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-09-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J K Sabari; G C Leonardi; C A Shu; R Umeton; J Montecalvo; A Ni; R Chen; J Dienstag; C Mrad; I Bergagnini; W V Lai; M Offin; K C Arbour; A J Plodkowski; D F Halpenny; P K Paik; B T Li; G J Riely; M G Kris; C M Rudin; L M Sholl; M Nishino; M D Hellmann; N Rekhtman; M M Awad; A Drilon Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Stephanie Staudte; Konrad Klinghammer; Philipp Sebastian Jurmeister; Paul Jank; Jens-Uwe Blohmer; Sandra Liebs; Peter Rhein; Anja E Hauser; Ingeborg Tinhofer Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-06-06 Impact factor: 6.575