| Literature DB >> 35131864 |
Boris Duchemann1,2, Marie Naigeon1,3, Edouard Auclin4, Roberto Ferrara5, Lydie Cassard1, Jean-Mehdi Jouniaux1, Lisa Boselli1, Jonathan Grivel1, Aude Desnoyer1, François-Xavier Danlos6,7, Laura Mezquita8, Caroline Caramella9, Aurelien Marabelle10,11, Benjamin Besse12,13, Nathalie Chaput14,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) expression has been associated with activation and exhaustion of both the CD4 and CD8 populations in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). Nevertheless, the impact of the balance between circulating CD8+PD-1+ and CD4+PD-1+ in patients treated with immune checkpoint blockers (ICB) is unknown.Entities:
Keywords: CD4-CD8 ratio; biomarkers; immunotherapy; lung neoplasms; tumor
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35131864 PMCID: PMC8823243 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2021-004012
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Immunother Cancer ISSN: 2051-1426 Impact factor: 13.751
Patient characteristics in the discovery cohort
| All patients | Low PERLS | High PERLS | P value | ||
| Age in years, median (IQR) | 61 (55.5; 70.5) | 61 (56; 71.5) | 55.5 (52.75; 61.5) | 0.974 | |
| Sex, n (%) | Female | 35 (46.7) | 32 (47.8) | 3 (37.5) |
|
| Male | 40 (53.3) | 35 (52.2) | 5 (62.5) | ||
| Smoking history, n (%) | Never | 8 (10.8) | 6 (9.1) | 2 (25) |
|
| Former | 39 (52.7) | 35 (53.0) | 4 (50) | ||
| Active | 27 (36.5) | 25 (37.9) | 2 (25) | ||
| Missing | * | * | 0 | ||
| Histology, n (%) | Adenocarcinoma | 61 (81.3) | 53 (79.1) | 8 (100) |
|
| Squamous | 11 (14.7) | 11 (16.4) | 0 (0) | ||
| Other* | 3 (4) | 3 (4.5) | 0 (0) | ||
| TNM†, n (%) | III | 13 (17.3) | 12 (17.9) | 1 (12.5) | * |
| IV | 62 (82.7) | 55 (82.1) | 7 (87.5) | ||
| Tumorous PD-L1 (% tumorous cells), n (%) | <1 | 10 (25) | 8 (22.9) | 2 (40) |
|
| 1%–49 | 6 (15) | 6 (17.1) | 0 (0) | ||
| >49 | 24 (60) | 21 (60) | 3 (60) | ||
| Missing | 35 | 32 | ‡ | ||
| Main molecular alteration, n (%) | K-RAS | 16 (37.2) | 16 (37.2) | 0 (0) | * |
| Wild-type‡ | 18 (41.9) | 18 (41.9) | 0 (0) | ||
| Targetable§ | 9 (20.9) | 9 (20.9) | 0 (0) | ||
| Missing | 32 | 24 | 8 | ||
| N metastatic sites, n (%) | ≤2 | 54 (72) | 49 (73.1) | 5 (62.5) |
|
| >2 | 21 (28) | 18 (26.9) | 3 (37.5) | ||
| ECOG PS, n (%) | 0–1 | 65 (86.7) | 57 (85.1) | 8 (100) |
|
| † | 10 (13.3) | 10 (14.9) | 0 (0) | ||
| Lines of prior therapy, n (%) | 0 | 6 (8) | 4 (6.0) | 2 (25) |
|
| ≥1 | 69 (92) | 63 (94.0) | 6 (75) | ||
| Prior chemotherapy, n (%) | No | 6 (8) | 4 (6.0) | 2 (25) |
|
| Yes | 69 (92) | 63 (94.0) | 6 (75) | ||
| Prior radiotherapy, n (%) | No | 51 (68) | 45 (67.2) | 6 (75) | * |
| Yes | 24 (32) | 22 (32.8) | 2 (25) | ||
| dNLR ≥3, n (%) | No | 36 (60) | 30 (57.7) | 6 (75) |
|
| Yes | 24 (40) | 22 (42.3) | 2 (25) | ||
| Missing | 15 | 15 | 0 | ||
| IrAEs (grade ≥3 or requiring CS)¶ | Yes | 5 (67) | 4 (6) | 1 (13) |
|
| No | 70 (33) | 63 (94) | 7 (87) | ||
| LDH≥ULN, n (%) | No | 20 (47.6) | 17 (46.0) | 3 (60) |
|
| Yes | 22 (52.4) | 20 (54.1) | 2 (40) | ||
| Missing | 33 | 30 | ‡ | ||
| LIPI score**, n (%) | Good | 10 (24.4) | 8 (22.2) | 2 (40) |
|
| Intermediate | 22 (53.7) | 19 (52.8) | 3 (60) | ||
| Poor | 9 (22.0) | 9 (25) | 0 (0) | ||
| NA | 34 | 31 | ‡ |
*Large cell lung cancer, non-small cell lung cancer, not otherwise specified.
†TNM stage eighth edition.
‡Absence of EGFR mutations, KRAS, ALK, ROS1 rearrangements.
§EGFR mutations, ALK, ROS1 rearrangement, HER2 mutations, MET alterations, BRAF mutations. Radiotherapy (including stereotactic radiotherapy) on any site (including bone or central nervous system).
¶Two patients with grade 3 colitis, one with grade 3 pneumonitis and two patients with grade 2 pneumonitis requiring cortico-steroids treatment.
**LIPI high: dNLR ≥3 and LDH ≥ULN; LIPI intermediate: dNLR <3 and LDH ≥ULN or dNLR ≥3 and LDH
dNLR, derived neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (neutrophils/(leukocytes -neutrophils)); IrAEs, immune related adverse events; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; LIPI, lung immune prognostic index; PD-L1, programmed cell death-ligand 1; PS, performance status; TNM, tumour, node, metastases; ULN, upper limit of normal.
Figure 1PERLS is associated with disease clinical benefit (DCB) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with immune checkpoint blockers. Blood T cells populations from patients included in the discovery and the validation cohorts, that is, pooled cohort. (A) PERLS ratio from the pooled cohort in patients with no-DCB and DCB. (B) As in (A) but with the CD8+/CD4+ ratio. (C) As in (A) but with CD8+ PD-1+/Tconv PD-1+ ratio. (D) As in (A) but with the CD8+PD-1+/TregPD-1+ ratio. (E) PFS according to PERLS. (F) Overall survival according to PERLS. PD-1, programmed cell death protein-1; PFS, progression-free survival.
Figure 2The PERLS ratio correlates with naïve T cells at baseline and induction of memory T cells under ICB treatment. Proportion of naïve (CCR7+CD45RA+), effector memory (TEM; CCR7–CD45RA–), central memory (TCM; CCR7+CD45RA–) and terminally differentiated (TEMRA; CCR7–CD45RA+) among CD4+ (CD3+CD4+) and CD8+ (CD3+CD8+) T cells were assessed at baseline (D0) and post-ICB treatment (D60) in the blood of patients. (A) Correlation matrix of PERLS and T cell subsets at baseline (B) Baseline (D0) correlation of naïve CD4+ T cells and PERLS. (C) Baseline (D0) naïve CD4+ T cells in patients with no-DCB and DCB. (D) Evolution (%) from D60 to D0 (%D60–%D0) of naïve CD4+ T cells (left panel) and evolution (%) from D60 to D0 (%D60–%D0) of memory CD8+ T cells (right panel). (E) Correlation of PERLS and evolution (%) of memory CD4+ (black circles) and CD8+ T (white circles) cells. (F) Correlation of memory CD4+ (black circles) and CD8+ T cells (white circles) at D60 and polyfunctionality of CD4+ T cells at D60. DCB, durable clinical benefit; ICB, immune checkpoint blockers.
Figure 3SIP and PERLS composite score. Proportion of SIP (CD3+CD8+CD28–CD57+KLRG1+) cells were determined at D0 in the blood of patients treated with immune checkpoint blockers. (A) Correlation of SIP and PERLS. (B) Number of patients with DCB and no-DCB according to the good (SIP− and PERL+), poor (SIP+, PERLS−) and intermediate (SIP+, PERLS+ or SIP−, PERLS−) composite score. (C) Progression-free survival according to the good, intermediate and poor composite score. (D) As in (C) but with overall survival. DCB, durable clinical benefit; SIP, senescent immune phenotype.