| Literature DB >> 34747716 |
Qinghua Wang1, Juncheng Lyu1, Wenjing Zhang1, Fuyan Shi1, Yanfeng Ren1, Qian Mao1, Yujie Liu1, Yuting Li2, Suzhen Wang1.
Abstract
Recent studies have demonstrated the role of Nod-like receptor protein 3 (NLRP3) inflammasome in promoting melanoma progression. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) treatment dramatically extended the survival outcomes for advanced melanoma patients. Nevertheless, immunologic and immunotherapy implications of NLRP3 mutations in melanoma were obscure. Herein, we utilized publicly genomic data of 750 melanoma patients to explore the association of NLRP3 mutations with immunologic and genomic features. In addition, we curated 336 advanced/metastatic melanoma patients treated with ICI agents from 6 published studies to analyze the response rate and survival outcome in relation to NLRP3 mutations. We observed that patients with NLRP3 mutations had a significantly higher tumor mutation burden (P < 0.001) and neoantigen burden (P < 0.001). Moreover, significantly lower tumor heterogeneity (P = 0.048) and purity (P = 0.022) were also observed in this mutated subgroup. Elevated infiltration of immune-response cells, decreased enrichment of immune-suppressive cells, and immune response-related circuits were markedly enriched in patients with NLRP3 mutations. In the pooled ICI-treated cohort, NLRP3 mutations were linked with the higher response rate (P = 0.031) and preferable survival outcome (P = 0.006). NLRP3 mutations were identified to associate with the elevated mutational burden, favorable immune infiltration, and preferable ICI efficacy. Findings derived from our study suggest that NLRP3 mutations may serve as a potential biomarker for evaluating melanoma immunotherapy response.Entities:
Keywords: NLRP3 mutations; clinical practice; immunotherapy; melanoma; predictive indicator
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34747716 PMCID: PMC8610131 DOI: 10.18632/aging.203678
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Aging (Albany NY) ISSN: 1945-4589 Impact factor: 5.682
Figure 1The mutational patterns of NLR family members and genome maintenance genes. (A) TMB stratified by synonymous and non-synonymous mutations for each patient. (B) Waterfall plot for NLR family members and genome maintenance genes. (C) Association of NLRP3 mutations with BRCA1/2, TP53, POLE, and MMR genes mutations.
Figure 2Association of (A, B) NLRP3 mutations versus TMB with univariate analysis and multivariate regression model. (C, D) NLRP3 mutations versus NB with univariate analysis and multivariate regression model. NLRP3 mutations association with (E) tumor heterogeneity, (F) purity, and (G) ploidy.
Figure 3Association between (A) Diverse infiltration abundance of immune cells based on NLRP3 mutational status. (B) Differential enrichment of overall stromal cells in NLRP3 mutated and wild-type patients. (C) Representation for forest plot of association between NLRP3 mutations and stromal cells enrichment. (D) Distinct distribution of activated stroma subtype in patients with and without NLRP3 mutations. (E) Multivariate Logistic regression model for the association of NLRP3 mutations with activated stroma subtype.
Figure 4Correlation of (A) Distinct ICI response rate in NLRP3 mutated and wild-type patients. (B) Association of NLRP3 mutations with the response rate in multivariate Logistic regression model. (C) Kaplan-Meier survival curve of distinct NLRP3 status in ICI-treated cohort. (D) Forest plot for multivariate Cox regression model with confounders taken into account.
Figure 5(A, B) Association of NLRP3 mutations with response rate and prognosis in patients treated with anti-CTLA-4 agents. (C, D) NLRP3 mutations versus response rate and prognosis in patients treated with anti-PD-1 agents. (E, F) NLRP3 mutations versus response rate and prognosis in patients who received combined therapy.