Literature DB >> 34950905

Discover immunotherapy biomarkers from single-cell cytometry data.

Beibei Ru1, Peng Jiang1.   

Abstract

Currently, identifying novel biomarkers remains a crucial need for cancer immunotherapy. By leveraging single-cell cytometry data, Greene et al. developed an interpretable machine learning method, FAUST, to discover cell populations associated with clinical outcomes.
© 2021 The Authors.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 34950905      PMCID: PMC8672134          DOI: 10.1016/j.patter.2021.100384

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patterns (N Y)        ISSN: 2666-3899


Main text

During the development and pathogenesis of biological systems, the cell populations’ composition and physiological state alter continuously across the spatial and temporal dimensions. Bulk genomic profiles fail to reveal such heterogeneous and dynamic processes at the molecular and cellular levels. Recently, single-cell techniques for different modalities (e.g., genomic, transcriptomic, and proteomic) have evolved rapidly, providing an unprecedented opportunity to help biologists understand the function and behavior of cells at various conditions. Compared to single-cell sequencing technology processing on average ∼1,000–100,000 cells per sample, single-cell cytometry can reach a higher order up to millions of cells. Such high-throughput single-cell resources enable a comprehensive analysis of cell compositions, especially uncovering rare cell populations in complex immune ecosystems. Subsequent investigations combined with treatment and clinical information would significantly promote therapeutic development and biomarker discovery. A crucial step in cytometry data analysis is to cluster and annotate cell populations in high-dimensional spaces. Previously, biologists identified cell populations manually (termed as “gating”) by using a 2D scatterplot with pairs of predefined markers. However, this strategy suffers from serious reproducibility issues and becomes unpragmatic with the increasing number of markers (up to ∼40–50). Alternatively, automated computational methods have been developed to reduce subjective bias and automate data processing. Although computational tools succeed in some cases, several new challenges still arise. For example, the number of clusters (cell populations) is often hard to determine for a large-scale single-cell dataset. Low cluster counts might miss rare cell populations, while high cluster counts might produce false subpopulations. Moreover, since numeric labels are assigned for clusters per independent sample, mapping cluster entities across samples is highly challenging for integrated studies. Greene et al. developed an interpretable machine learning method, full annotation using shaped-constrained trees (FAUST), to discover and annotate cell populations from flow and mass cytometry data. By deriving the standardized set of thresholds for marker expression, FAUST can construct decision trees with markers as nodes for each sample to determine the phenotype of each cell. FAUST uses input cytometry data matrices with rows and columns corresponding to cells and markers, respectively. The output is a cell count matrix of cell phenotypes across all samples (Figure 1). Each FAUST phenotype is represented as a marker co-expressing pattern, e.g., Marker 1+ Marker 2− Marker 3+.
Figure 1

Application of FAUST to analyze single-cell cytometry data

FAUST uses decision trees to annotate cell populations. FAUST then carries out statistical testing of differential abundance to identify predictive biomarkers for immunotherapy.

Application of FAUST to analyze single-cell cytometry data FAUST uses decision trees to annotate cell populations. FAUST then carries out statistical testing of differential abundance to identify predictive biomarkers for immunotherapy. In contrast to other tools, FAUST avoids arbitrarily determining cluster numbers and can integrate multiple samples and studies. Subsequently, FAUST can statistically test the difference of cell abundance between two defined groups, e.g., responders versus non-responders or treatment versus control (Figure 1). The authors showcased that FAUST outperformed other existing methods via simulation and benchmark studies. Next, Greene et al. demonstrated that FAUST could identify predictive biomarkers for cancer immunotherapy and verify abundance change of cell populations after treatment. The authors analyzed a cytometry dataset with 78 longitudinal samples from 27 patients with Merkel cell carcinoma receiving pembrolizumab (anti-PD-1) therapy. First, they tested the abundance difference of each T cell sub-phenotype at the baseline (before treatment) between responders and non-responders and found that four of them were significantly associated with response to treatment. These cell populations together can be considered as effector memory T cells expressing CD28 and PD-1. Consistent with this finding, a study showed that bispecific antibodies targeting CD28 on T cells enhance the clinical outcomes of anti-PD-1 immunotherapy. Second, the authors explored the abundance change of CD3+ CD8+ CD4− PD-1-bright phenotype along the course of treatment and observed that its fraction decreases continually after treatment, which may result from blocking PD-1 by pembrolizumab. Similarly, the authors also tested FAUST in several additional cytometry datasets. Greene et al. also demonstrated that FAUST enables meta-analysis across studies with different marker panels. They collected three cytometry datasets with myeloid phenotyping panels, i.e., Merkel cell carcinoma anti-PD-1, FLT3-L+therapeutic Vx, and metastatic melanoma anti-PD-1 trials. Based on the common markers across these datasets, the authors found that CD14+ CD16− HLA-DR+ phenotype has higher abundance for each study in responders than non-responders at baseline. Currently, most patients still do not respond to cancer immunotherapies. Predictive biomarkers can help select patients who might respond before the initiation of therapy to avoid unnecessary treatments. Several studies identified biomarkers from bulk transcriptomic data., Other studies also exploited single-cell sequencing and cytometry to identify cell populations associated with therapy response. Given such data with high dimensions and throughputs, user-friendly tools are essential for biologists to draw reliable conclusions, and many tools have been developed recently. As cytometry techniques evolve rapidly, we foresee that more software will become available, and a comprehensive benchmark will be necessary to guide scientists to choose the appropriate tool to analyze their data.
  10 in total

Review 1.  Primary, Adaptive, and Acquired Resistance to Cancer Immunotherapy.

Authors:  Padmanee Sharma; Siwen Hu-Lieskovan; Jennifer A Wargo; Antoni Ribas
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 41.582

Review 2.  Application and utility of mass cytometry in vaccine development.

Authors:  Patrick M Reeves; Ann E Sluder; Susan Raju Paul; Anja Scholzen; Satoshi Kashiwagi; Mark C Poznansky
Journal:  FASEB J       Date:  2017-11-01       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 3.  Mass Cytometry: Single Cells, Many Features.

Authors:  Matthew H Spitzer; Garry P Nolan
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2016-05-05       Impact factor: 41.582

4.  Tumor-targeted CD28 bispecific antibodies enhance the antitumor efficacy of PD-1 immunotherapy.

Authors:  Janelle C Waite; Bei Wang; Lauric Haber; Aynur Hermann; Erica Ullman; Xuan Ye; Drew Dudgeon; Rabih Slim; Dharani K Ajithdoss; Stephen J Godin; Ilyssa Ramos; Qi Wu; Erin Oswald; Patrick Poon; Jacquelynn Golubov; Devon Grote; Jennifer Stella; Arpita Pawashe; Jennifer Finney; Evan Herlihy; Hassan Ahmed; Vishal Kamat; Amanda Dorvilliers; Elizabeth Navarro; Jenny Xiao; Julie Kim; Shao Ning Yang; Jacqueline Warsaw; Clarissa Lett; Lauren Canova; Teresa Schulenburg; Randi Foster; Pamela Krueger; Elena Garnova; Ashique Rafique; Robert Babb; Gang Chen; Nicole Stokes Oristian; Chia-Jen Siao; Christopher Daly; Cagan Gurer; Joel Martin; Lynn Macdonald; Douglas MacDonald; William Poueymirou; Eric Smith; Israel Lowy; Gavin Thurston; William Olson; John C Lin; Matthew A Sleeman; George D Yancopoulos; Andrew J Murphy; Dimitris Skokos
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 17.956

5.  A roadmap for the Human Developmental Cell Atlas.

Authors:  Muzlifah Haniffa; Deanne Taylor; Sten Linnarsson; Bruce J Aronow; Gary D Bader; Roger A Barker; Pablo G Camara; J Gray Camp; Alain Chédotal; Andrew Copp; Heather C Etchevers; Paolo Giacobini; Berthold Göttgens; Guoji Guo; Ania Hupalowska; Kylie R James; Emily Kirby; Arnold Kriegstein; Joakim Lundeberg; John C Marioni; Kerstin B Meyer; Kathy K Niakan; Mats Nilsson; Bayanne Olabi; Dana Pe'er; Aviv Regev; Jennifer Rood; Orit Rozenblatt-Rosen; Rahul Satija; Sarah A Teichmann; Barbara Treutlein; Roser Vento-Tormo; Simone Webb
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2021-09-08       Impact factor: 69.504

6.  Single-Cell Analyses Inform Mechanisms of Myeloid-Targeted Therapies in Colon Cancer.

Authors:  Lei Zhang; Ziyi Li; Katarzyna M Skrzypczynska; Qiao Fang; Wei Zhang; Sarah A O'Brien; Yao He; Lynn Wang; Qiming Zhang; Aeryon Kim; Ranran Gao; Jessica Orf; Tao Wang; Deepali Sawant; Jiajinlong Kang; Dev Bhatt; Daniel Lu; Chi-Ming Li; Aaron S Rapaport; Kristy Perez; Yingjiang Ye; Shan Wang; Xueda Hu; Xianwen Ren; Wenjun Ouyang; Zhanlong Shen; Jackson G Egen; Zemin Zhang; Xin Yu
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2020-04-16       Impact factor: 41.582

7.  Signatures of T cell dysfunction and exclusion predict cancer immunotherapy response.

Authors:  Peng Jiang; Shengqing Gu; Deng Pan; Jingxin Fu; Avinash Sahu; Xihao Hu; Ziyi Li; Nicole Traugh; Xia Bu; Bo Li; Jun Liu; Gordon J Freeman; Myles A Brown; Kai W Wucherpfennig; X Shirley Liu
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2018-08-20       Impact factor: 53.440

Review 8.  Current trends in flow cytometry automated data analysis software.

Authors:  Melissa Cheung; Jonathan J Campbell; Liam Whitby; Robert J Thomas; Julian Braybrook; Jon Petzing
Journal:  Cytometry A       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 4.355

9.  Synthetic lethality-mediated precision oncology via the tumor transcriptome.

Authors:  Joo Sang Lee; Nishanth Ulhas Nair; Gal Dinstag; Lesley Chapman; Youngmin Chung; Kun Wang; Sanju Sinha; Hongui Cha; Dasol Kim; Alexander V Schperberg; Ajay Srinivasan; Vladimir Lazar; Eitan Rubin; Sohyun Hwang; Raanan Berger; Tuvik Beker; Ze'ev Ronai; Sridhar Hannenhalli; Mark R Gilbert; Razelle Kurzrock; Se-Hoon Lee; Kenneth Aldape; Eytan Ruppin
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2021-04-14       Impact factor: 66.850

10.  High-dimensional single-cell analysis predicts response to anti-PD-1 immunotherapy.

Authors:  Carsten Krieg; Malgorzata Nowicka; Silvia Guglietta; Sabrina Schindler; Felix J Hartmann; Lukas M Weber; Reinhard Dummer; Mark D Robinson; Mitchell P Levesque; Burkhard Becher
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2018-01-08       Impact factor: 87.241

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.