| Literature DB >> 34823553 |
Xuanli Xu1, Rongrong Li1, Lin Zhang2, Guopei Zhu3, Dandan Ren4, Lijia Wu4, Xiaoli Gong4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy is an important treatment in oncology, but only a fraction of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) benefit from it. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify predictive biomarkers of immunotherapy response for HNSCC in order to improve treatment outcomes.Entities:
Keywords: Efficacy; Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma; Immunotherapy; Prognosis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34823553 PMCID: PMC8620526 DOI: 10.1186/s13000-021-01147-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diagn Pathol ISSN: 1746-1596 Impact factor: 2.644
The clinical features between response and nonresponse groups in the HNSC patients
| Features | Overall | Response | Nonresponse (n = 8) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.000 | ||||
| Male | 31 (83.8) | 24 (82.8) | 7 (87.5) | |
| Female | 6 (16.2) | 5 (17.2) | 1 (12.5) | |
| 0.941 | ||||
| median | 57.0 | 57.0 | 56.5 | |
| IQR | 50.0–64.0 | 49.0–64.0 | 53.8–63.8 | |
| 0.631 | ||||
| Oral cavity | 30 (81.1) | 24 (82.8) | 6 (75.0) | |
| Oropharynx | 7 (18.9) | 5 (17.2) | 2 (25.0) | |
| Negative | 7 (18.9) | 5 (17.2) | 2 (25.0) | NA |
| NA | 30 (81.1) | 24 (82.8) | 6 (75.0) | |
| 1.000 | ||||
| IVa | 26 (70.3) | 19 (65.5) | 7 (87.5) | |
| IVb | 2 (5.4) | 2 (6.9) | 0 (0.0) | |
| IVc | 6 (16.2) | 5 (17.2) | 1 (12.5) | |
| NA | 3 (8.1) | 3 (10.3) | 0 (0.0) | |
| 0.099 | ||||
| T1 | 1 (2.7) | 1 (3.4) | 0 (0.0) | |
| T2 | 4 (10.8) | 2 (6.9) | 2 (25.0) | |
| T4 | 19 (51.4) | 18 (62.1) | 1 (12.5) | |
| NA | 13 (35.1) | 8 (27.6) | 5 (62.5) | |
| 0.664 | ||||
| N1 | 3 (8.1) | 3 (10.3) | 0 (0.0) | |
| N2 | 20 (54.1) | 13 (44.8) | 7 (87.5) | |
| N3 | 1 (2.7) | 1 (3.4) | 0 (0.0) | |
| NA | 13 (35.1) | 12 (41.4) | 1 (12.5) | |
| 0.670 | ||||
| Yes | 13 (35.1) | 9 (31.0) | 4 (50.0) | |
| No | 15 (40.5) | 12 (41.4) | 3 (37.5) | |
| NA | 9 (24.3) | 8 (27.6) | 1 (12.5) | |
| 0.635 | ||||
| Yes | 8 (21.6) | 5 (17.2) | 3 (37.5) | |
| No | 18 (48.6) | 14 (48.3) | 4 (50.0) | |
| NA | 11 (29.7) | 10 (34.5) | 1 (12.5) | |
p-value: Wilcoxon test rank sum or Fisher’s exact test (two sided) was used for the comparison between the fusion burden high and low groups
NA: not available. NA was not included in statistical analysis
IQR: interquartile range
Fig. 1Genetic mutations in patients with advanced HNSCC after immunotherapy (n = 39). (A) The overall mutational landscape of patients; (B) Type analysis of mutated genes; (C) Enrichment pathway analysis of mutated genes
Fig. 2The relationship between gene/signal pathway mutations, TMB and MATH and OS. (A) Survival analysis based on mutations in different gene/signaling pathway, (B) Survival analysis based on TMB/bTMB values, (C) Survival analysis based on MATH values
Fig. 3Immune landscape of HNSC patients treated with immunotherapy. The mIHC images represent (A) the group that responded to immunotherapy and (B) the group that did not respond to immunotherapy. The percentages of differentially expressed cells were log-transformed and z-score standardized. Heatmaps of immune cell infiltration in the (C) tumor region, (D) stroma region and (E) total region. The value in the lower left part of the diagonal in the table represents the correlation coefficient (spearman) of the expression percentage of each marker positive cell subgroup (r value): r > 0, positive correlation; r < 0, negative correlation. Specifically, a certain range of the r value indicates high correlation (0.8–1.0), strong correlation (0.6–0.8), moderate correlation (0.4–0.6), weak correlation (0.2–0.4), and very weak correlation or non-correlation (0.0–0.2). The r value was replaced by the pink circle in the upper right part of diagonal in the table. Pink and blue represent positive and negative correlations, respectively, while the asterisk at the top right represents the P value: * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, and *** P < 0.005
Fig. 4Univariate Cox regression analysis for overall survival