| Literature DB >> 35530307 |
Chao Fang1,2, Wenfeng Fang3, Liqin Xu2,4, Fangfang Gao3, Yong Hou1,2, Hua Zou2, Yuxiang Ma3, Janne Marie Moll4, Yunpeng Yang3, Dan Wang2, Yan Huang3, Huahui Ren1,2, Hongyun Zhao3, Shishang Qin2, Huanzi Zhong1,2, Junhua Li2,5, Sheng Liu2, Huanming Yang2,6, Jian Wang2,6, Susanne Brix4, Karsten Kristiansen1,2,7, Li Zhang3.
Abstract
Background: Programmed death 1 (PD-1) and the ligand of PD-1 (PD-L1) are central targets for immune-checkpoint therapy (ICT) blocking immune evasion-related pathways elicited by tumor cells. A number of PD-1 inhibitors have been developed, but the efficacy of these inhibitors varies considerably and is typically below 50%. The efficacy of ICT has been shown to be dependent on the gut microbiota, and experiments using mouse models have even demonstrated that modulation of the gut microbiota may improve efficacy of ICT.Entities:
Keywords: anti-PD-1; biomarker; gut microbiome; immune checkpoint therapy; lung cancer
Year: 2022 PMID: 35530307 PMCID: PMC9069064 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.837525
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 5.738
Figure 1Factors influencing the anti-PD-1 responsiveness in Chinese NSCLC patients. (A) Sample collection pipeline, including anthropometrics (age, sex, and BMI), tumor mutations based on somatic tumor and normal tissue, blood, and fecal samples. (B) Collection timeline. After 3 months of routinely/regularly administration and response evaluation (see Methods), patients were grouped based on partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), or progressive disease (PD), according to the criteria in RECIST 1.1. Fecal samples were collected at the end of each treatment period. Feces from the first week after initiation of treatment (W1) was collected within 3 days after the first treatment. (C) Comparison of progression-free survival of patients with or without antibiotics before and after treatment. (D) Comparison of progression-free survival of patients with TMB above or below 5.6 (red or blue lines) in patients with a high level of HLA-E type (HLA-B rs1050458 Met/Thr or Met/Met, solid lines) or low level (HLA-B rs1050458 Thr/Thr, dashed lines) of HLA-E type. (E) Changes in alpha diversity in the gut microbiota over time in each response group, displayed as a box plot where MIN and MAX corresponds to 9.59 and 12.7, respectively. Significance level (Kruskal–Wallis): **** for p < 0.0001, *** for p < 0.001, ** for p < 0.01, * for p < 0.05 and ns for non-significant. (F) Changes in alpha diversity in the gut microbiota over time in each response group, displayed with smooth-fit lines. The p-values of the longitudinal group comparison (splinectomeR) were 0.503 for PD vs. SD, 0.031 for PD vs. PR, and 0.005 for SD vs.PR. (G) Changes in beta diversity (Bray–Curtis dissimilarity) in the gut microbiota over time in each response group, displayed as a box plot where MIN and MAX correspond to 0.54 and 0.99, respectively. Significance level (Kruskal–Wallis): **** for p < 0.0001, *** for p < 0.001, ** for p < 0.01, * for p < 0.05 and ns for non-significant. (H) Changes in beta diversity in the gut microbiota over time in each response group, displayed with smooth-fit lines. The p-values of the longitudinal group comparison (splinectomeR) were 0.114 for PD vs. SD, 0.239 for PD vs. PR and 0.042 for SD vs.PR.
Figure 2MGSs differentiating anti-PD-1 response groups. (A) MGSs that differed significantly in abundance between the three response groups as assessed by ANOVA. The heatmap is colored based on the median value (log10) of relative abundances in each response group. “+” defines the group with the highest abundance of a MGS, and “-” defines the group with the lowest abundance of the given MGS. The bottom three MGSs are marked as “NA” with too low occurrence to define an enrichment group. (B) Pairwise comparison of relative abundances of MGSs exhibiting differential enrichment in the response groups. The p value was computed by Tukey’s HSD test.
Figure 3Differential enrichment of gut microbial pathways in the anti-PD-1 response groups. Reporter scores of KEGG-derived pathways based on metagenomics data were computed and compared pairwise between the response groups. (A) The functional reporter score obtained from samples collected at different time points after treatment and compared with that of samples collected before treatment (M0). The Spearman correlation indicates the consistency in enriched pathways between samples collected before and after treatment. (B) Heatmap of reporter scores for the indicated enriched pathways, grouped based on the designated level 1 pathway level categories. For each combination, a positive value (red) means that this pathway was enriched in the response group with improved response (that is, PR excels over SD and PD; and SD over PD). A negative value (blue) indicates that the pathway was enriched in the other group. The threshold of significance was set at 1.96 (equal to a p value = 0.05) and 2.59 (equal to a p value = 0.01).
Figure 4A combined random forest classifier for predicting anti-PD-1 response outcome based on gut microbiota, tumor, and immune data. (A) A two-tiered random forest process with cross-validation for model training was implemented. The method includes two random forest models: The first was trained to distinguish PR and PD. The second was designed to distinguish SD from all the rest. The predicted probability score was weighted by the two models as defined. (B) The classification of the response groups in the training set. All three response groups achieved an AUC above 98.8%. Confidence intervals (CIs) of 95% are shown in parentheses. Shadowed areas were computed by a SE of 95% CI. (C) The classification of the response groups in the test set. All three response groups achieved an AUC above 91%. Confidence interval (CIs) of 95% are shown in parentheses. Shadowed areas were computed by a SE of 95% CI. (D) Adding tumor mutation information (including TMB, EGFR, and ALK mutation type) into the prediction model did not improve the performance. The AUC of the predicting ability for the three response groups in the testing set is shown in the radar plot.
Figure 5Comparison between gut microbiota predictors in Chinese and Caucasian NSCLC cohorts. Metagenomic sequencing data from a publicly accessible French NSCLC cohort (6) were processed for generation of MGSs and functional pathway analysis (n = 40, individuals using ATB were excluded). (A) QQ plot of the similarity between MGSs in the three response groups (pairwise comparisons) in Chinese (x-axis) and French (y-axis) patients. p-values were calculated by ANOVA. (B) The reporter scores obtained from functional pathway analysis as in were compared pairwise in the response groups in the Chinese (x-axis) and French (y-axis) patients. Significant positions (> ± 1.96) were defined by the dashed squares. Pathways that are significantly enriched in one response group are named and colored according to the enriched response group as indicated in the figure.