| Literature DB >> 35836932 |
Ulrich Sommer1,2,3, Celina Ebersbach4,5, Alicia-Marie K Beier4,5, Gustavo B Baretton1,2,3, Christian Thomas2,4, Angelika Borkowetz4, Holger H H Erb4.
Abstract
Immune checkpoint inhibitors have become a promising new therapy for cancer treatment. However, due to prostate cancer's high heterogeneity and immune-suppressive tumour microenvironment, clinical trials with immune checkpoint inhibitors for prostate cancer resulted in low or no response. This descriptive and retrospective study investigates the influence of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) on PD-L1 expression and CD8+ T-cell tumour infiltration and activity in primary prostate cancer tissue. Therefore, immunohistochemistry was used to assess PD-L1, CD8+ T-cell, and the immune activation marker Granzyme B (GrB) in PCa tissue before and under ADT. In line with previous studies, few prostate cancer tissues showed PD-L1 expression and CD8+ T-cell infiltration. However, PD-L1 expression levels on tumour cells or infiltrating immune cells above 5% generated an immune-suppressive tumour microenvironment harbouring hypofunctional CD8+ T-cells. Moreover, analysis of a longitudinal patient cohort before and under ADT revealed that ADT increased hypofunctional CD8+ T cells in the tumour area suggesting a tumour immune milieu optimal for targeting with immunotherapy.Entities:
Keywords: ADT; PCA; checkpoint inhibitors; immune therapy; tumour microenvironment (TME)
Year: 2022 PMID: 35836932 PMCID: PMC9273856 DOI: 10.3389/fmolb.2022.878353
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Mol Biosci ISSN: 2296-889X
FIGURE 1Representative staining of PD-L1, CD8+, and GrB (A + B) Immunohistochemical staining for PD-L1 of representative PCa areas obtained with (A) ×4 objective (Scale bar = 400 µM) and (B) ×20 objective (Scale bar = 50 µM). The red arrow mark represents PD-L1 positive tumour cells. Black arrows mark representative PD-L1 positive infiltrating immune cells. (C + D) Immunohistochemical staining for CD8 and Granzyme B of representative PCa areas was obtained with (A) ×4 objective (Scale bar = 400 µM) and (B) ×63 objective (Scale bar = 20 µM). CD8 is represented by red staining and Granzyme B by brown staining. Black arrows mark representative CD8 and Granzyme B positive infiltrating immune cells.
FIGURE 2Influence of PD-L1 expression on CD8+ T-cell infiltration and activity in primary prostate cancer tissue (A + B + C) Graphical illustration of the distribution of PD-L1 expression on (A) tumour cells, (B) infiltrating immune cells, and the resulting combined positive score (CPS) in all examined tissue specimens (n = 116). Numbers are displayed as column bar blots. (D + E + F) Graphical illustration of the associations of CD8+ T-cells infiltration with (D) PD-L1 expression on tumour cells, (E) PD-L1 expression on tumour-infiltrating immune, and (F) the combined positive score in all examined tissue specimens (n = 116). Values are expressed as Box Whisker Plot (min to max). (G + H + I) Graphical illustration of the associations of CD8+ T-cells activity with (G) PD-L1 expression on tumour cells, (H) PD-L1 expression on tumour-infiltrating immune cells, and (I) the combined positive score in all examined tissue specimens (n = 116). Values are expressed as Box Whisker Plot (min to max). All differences highlighted by asterisks were statistically significant (*: p ≤ 0.05; **: p ≤ 0.01; ***p ≤ 0.001).
FIGURE 3Influence of PD-L1 expression on CD8+ T-cell infiltration and activity on overall survival (A + B + C) Kaplan-Meier analysis of overall survival according to positive and negative PD-L1 expression on tumour cells (A), on tumour-infiltrating immune cells (B), or combined positive score (C). 1% PD-L1 positive expression in TC or IC was used as the threshold. (D + E) Kaplan-Meier analysis of overall survival according to high and low CD8+ T Cell infiltration (D) or CD8+ T-cell activity (E). The median infiltration number of CD8+ T-cell activity was used as the threshold. (F) Kaplan-Meier analysis of overall survival according to absence or presence of GrB staining. Data is displayed together with the hazard ratio (HR), 95% confidence interval (CI), and the p-value calculated using the log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test.
FIGURE 4Influence of ADT on PD-L1 expression on TC and IC (A + B + C) Graphical illustration of the influence of ADT on the distribution of PD-L1 expression on (A) tumour cells (TC), (B) infiltrating immune cells (IC), and the resulting (C) combined positive score (CPS). The “treatment-naïve” cohort included 45 samples and the “ADT” cohort 71 samples. (D + E + F) Graphical illustration of the influence of additional treatment with NHT on the distribution of PD-L1 expression on (D) tumour cells (TC), (E) infiltrating immune cells (IC), and the resulting (F) combined positive score (CPS). The “ADT only” cohort included 57 samples and the “ADT + NHT” cohort 14 samples. Numbers are displayed as column bar blots.
FIGURE 5Influence of ADT on the CD8+ T-cell tumour infiltrates (A + B) Graphical illustration of the influence of ADT on CD8+ T-cells (A) infiltration and (B) activity. The “treatment-naïve” cohort included 45 samples and the “ADT” cohort 71 samples. (C + D) Graphical illustration of the influence of ADT of additional treatment with NHT on CD8+ T-cells (C) infiltration and (D) activity. The “ADT only” cohort included 57 samples and the “ADT + NHT” cohort 14 samples. Values are expressed as Box Whisker Plot (min to max). All differences highlighted by asterisks were statistically significant (*: p ≤ 0.05).