| Literature DB >> 35844502 |
Kang Miao1, Xiaotong Zhang1, Hanping Wang1, Xiaoyan Si1, Jun Ni1, Wei Zhong1, Jing Zhao1, Yan Xu1, Minjiang Chen1, Ruili Pan1, Mengzhao Wang1, Li Zhang1.
Abstract
Background: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has entered the era of immunotherapy. However, only partial patients were able to benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Currently, biomarkers for predicting patients' response to ICIs are primarily tumor tissue dependent and have limited accuracy. There is an urgent need to explore peripheral blood-based biomarkers to predict the efficacy and safety of ICI therapy.Entities:
Keywords: CD4+CD45RA− T cell; CD8+CD38+ T cell; biomarker; immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); lymphocyte subsets
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35844502 PMCID: PMC9283649 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.912180
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 8.786
Basic information.
| Basic Information | Number |
|---|---|
|
| 136 |
|
| |
| male | 94 (69.1%) |
| female | 42 (30.9%) |
|
| 64 (60–70) |
| <60 | 33 (24.3%) |
| ≥60 | 103 (75.7%) |
|
| |
| Non-squamous carcinoma | 75 (55.1%) |
| Squamous carcinoma | 61 (44.9%) |
|
| |
| First line | 71 (52.2%) |
| Second line | 47 (34.6%) |
| Third line and beyond | 10 (13.2%) |
|
| |
| No | 32 (23.5%) |
| Yes | 104 (76.5%) |
|
| |
| No | 52 (38.2%) |
| Yes | 84 (61.8%) |
|
| |
| no | 96 (70.6%) |
| yes | 40 (29.4%) |
|
| |
| 0 | 70 (51.5%) |
| 1 | 53 (39.0%) |
| 2–4 | 13 (9.6%) |
|
| 1295.2 (973.1–1728.4) |
|
| 94.7 (57.1–175.6) |
|
| 916.6 (639.4–1221.1) |
|
| 258 (164.4–360.1) |
|
| 475.9 (302.4 - 668) |
|
| 340.1 (237.5 - 493.3) |
|
| 348.3 (218.3 - 510.1) |
|
| 109.1 (49.4 - 189.1) |
|
| 413.1 (257.7 - 613.7) |
|
| 152.2 (94.9 - 219.7) |
|
| 176.3 (112.3 - 264.2) |
|
| 151.7 (91.3 - 208.9) |
|
| 36.1 (29.1 - 45.4) |
|
| 26.9 (21.7 - 35.4) |
Univariate Cox regression of PFS.
| HR | 95% CI | P-value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Male/female | 1.337 | 0.861-2.075 | 0.196 |
|
| <60/≥60 | 1.412 | 0.842-2.37 | 0.191 |
|
| Non-squamous/squamous | 0.686 | 0.45-1.046 | 0.080 |
|
| First/second/third and beyond | 1.220 | 0.883-1.686 | 0.199 |
|
| No/yes | 1.155 | 0.696-1.919 | 0.577 |
|
| No/yes | 0.782 | 0.513-1.193 | 0.254 |
|
| No/yes | 1.062 | 0.683-1.652 | 0.789 |
|
| 0/1/2-4 | 1.338 | 0.984-1.819 | 0.064 |
|
| ×106 | 0.788 | 0.519-1.197 | 0.264 |
|
| ×106 | 0.749 | 0.493-1.136 | 0.174 |
|
| ×106 | 0.972 | 0.641-1.475 | 0.894 |
|
| ×106 | 0.781 | 0.517-1.178 | 0.238 |
|
| ×106 | 0.785 | 0.517-1.191 | 0.255 |
|
| ×106 | 1.150 | 0.758-1.745 | 0.511 |
|
| ×106 | 0.599 | 0.395-0.907 | 0.016 |
|
| ×106 | 1.016 | 0.67-1.54 | 0.941 |
|
| ×106 | 0.803 | 0.53-1.216 | 0.300 |
|
| ×106 | 0.842 | 0.556-1.274 | 0.416 |
|
| ×106 | 1.021 | 0.673-1.549 | 0.922 |
|
| ×106 | 1.049 | 0.691-1.591 | 0.823 |
|
| ×100% | 0.825 | 0.548-1.248 | 0.363 |
|
| ×100% | 1.803 | 1.182-2.750 | 0.006 |
Multivariate Cox regression of PFS.
| Median PFS | HR | 95% CI | P-value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Male | 8.6 months | Reference | ||
| Female | 7.5 months | 1.203 | 0.718–2.015 | 0.483 | |
|
| <60 | 11.8 months | Reference | ||
| ≥60 | 8.1 months | 1.252 | 0.726–2.161 | 0.419 | |
|
| Non-squamous | 7.5 months | Reference | ||
| Squamous | 11.7 months | 0.793 | 0.483–1.303 | 0.360 | |
|
| First line | 10.5 months | Reference | ||
| Second line | 7 months | 0.938 | 0.558–1.576 | 0.810 | |
| Third line and beyond | 5.9 months | 1.380 | 0.603–3.157 | 0.446 | |
|
| 0 | 11.5 months | Reference | ||
| 1 | 7.5 months | 1.219 | 0.775–1.918 | 0.392 | |
| 2–4 | 5.5 months | 1.131 | 0.510–2.508 | 0.762 | |
|
| Low | 6.2 months | Reference | ||
| High | 11.2 months | 1.035 | 0.642–1.668 | 0.887 | |
|
| Low | 5.9 months | Reference | ||
| High | 11.8 months | 0.644 | 0.417–0.994 | 0.047 | |
|
| Low | 11.8 months | Reference | ||
| High | 6.3 months | 1.806 | 1.122–2.905 | 0.015 | |
Figure 1Total population analysis. (A) Differences of CD4+CD45RA− T cell between benefit group and non-benefit group. (B) ROC curve of CD4+CD45RA− T cell. (C) Kaplan–Meier survival curve of different levels of CD4+CD45RA− T cell. (D) Differences of CD8+ T/lymphocyte (%) between benefit group and non-benefit group. (E) ROC curve of CD8+ T/lymphocyte (%). (F) Kaplan–Meier survival curve of different levels of CD8+ T/lymphocyte (%).
Figure 2Subgroup analysis of ICIs monotherapy. (A) Differences of CD4+CD45RA− T cell between benefit group and non-benefit group. (B) ROC curve of CD4+CD45RA− T cell. (C) Kaplan–Meier survival curve of different levels of CD4+CD45RA− T cell. (D) Differences of CD8+ T/lymphocyte (%) between benefit group and non-benefit group. (E) ROC curve of CD8+ T/lymphocyte (%). (F) Kaplan–Meier survival curve of different levels of CD8+ T/lymphocyte (%).
Basic information matching analysis.
| CD4+CD45RA− T cell | P-value | CD8+ T/lymphocyte (%) | P-value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | High | Low | High | |||
|
| 68 | 68 | 68 | 68 | ||
|
| 1.000 | 0.710 | ||||
| Male | 47 (69.1%) | 47 (69.1%) | 46 (67.6%) | 48 (70.6%) | ||
| Female | 21 (30.9%) | 21 (30.9%) | 22 (32.4%) | 20 (29.4%) | ||
|
| 0.424 | 0.161 | ||||
| <60 | 14 (20.6%) | 19 (27.9%) | 20 (29.4%) | 13 (19.1%) | ||
| ≥60 | 54 (79.4%) | 49 (72.1%) | 48 (70.6%) | 55 (80.9%) | ||
|
| 0.168 | 0.605 | ||||
| Non-squamous carcinoma | 42 (61.8%) | 33 (48.5%) | 39 (57.4%) | 36 (52.9%) | ||
| Squamous carcinoma | 26 (38.2%) | 35 (51.5%) | 29 (42.6%) | 32 (47.1%) | ||
|
| 0.003 | 0.765 | ||||
| First line | 30 (44.1%) | 49 (72.1%) | 38 (55.9%) | 41 (60.3%) | ||
| Second line | 30 (44.1%) | 17 (25.0%) | 24 (35.3%) | 23 (33.8%) | ||
| Third line and beyond | 8 (11.8%) | 2 (2.9%) | 6 (8.8%) | 4 (5.9%) | ||
|
| 0.419 | 1.000 | ||||
| No | 18 (26.5%) | 14 (20.6%) | 16 (23.5%) | 16 (23.5%) | ||
| Yes | 50 (73.5%) | 54 (79.4%) | 52 (76.5%) | 52 (76.5%) | ||
|
| 0.217 | 0.158 | ||||
| No | 30 (44.1%) | 22 (32.4%) | 30 (44.1%) | 22 (32.4%) | ||
| Yes | 38 (55.9%) | 46 (67.6%) | 38 (55.9%) | 46 (67.6%) | ||
|
| 0.572 | 0.707 | ||||
| No | 50 (73.5%) | 46 (67.6%) | 49 (72.1%) | 47 (69.1%) | ||
| Yes | 18 (26.5%) | 22 (32.4%) | 19 (27.9%) | 21 (30.9%) | ||
|
| 0.625 | 0.293 | ||||
| 0 | 33 (48.5%) | 37 (54.5%) | 38 (55.9%) | 32 (47.1%) | ||
| 1 | 27 (39.7%) | 26 (38.2%) | 26 (38.2%) | 27 (39.7%) | ||
| 2–4 | 8 (11.8%) | 5 (7.4%) | 4 (5.9%) | 9 (13.2%) | ||
Figure 3Subgroup analysis of different treatment lines. (A) Differences of CD4+CD45RA− T cell between benefit group and non-benefit group in the first-line patients. (B) ROC curve of CD4+CD45RA− T cell in the first-line patients. (C) Kaplan–Meier survival curve of different levels of CD4+CD45RA− T cell in the first-line patients. (D) Differences of CD4+CD45RA− T cell between the benefit group and the non-benefit group in the second-line and beyond patients. (E) ROC curve of CD4+CD45RA− T cell in the second-line and beyond patients. (F) Kaplan–Meier survival curve of different levels of CD4+CD45RA− T cell in the second-line and beyond patients.
Logistic regression of irAEs.
| irAEs (P-value) | Severe irAEs (P-value) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate | Multivariate | Univariate | ||
|
| Male/female | 0.110 | 0.579 | 0.492 |
|
| <60/≥60 | 0.229 | 0.138 | |
|
| Non-squamous/squamous | 0.765 | 0.188 | |
|
| First/second/third and beyond | 0.191 | 0.412 | 0.779 |
|
| No/yes | 0.603 | 0.500 | |
|
| No/yes | 0.170 | 0.750 | 0.586 |
|
| No/yes | 0.534 | 0.977 | |
|
| 0/1/2–4 | 0.453 | 0.529 | |
|
| ×106 | 0.090 | 0.229 | 0.536 |
|
| ×106 | 0.332 | 0.925 | |
|
| ×106 | 0.120 | 0.017 | 0.502 |
|
| ×106 | 0.410 | 0.870 | |
|
| ×106 | 0.050 | 0.123 | 0.552 |
|
| ×106 | 0.777 | 0.607 | |
|
| ×106 | 0.213 | 0.415 | |
|
| ×106 | 0.009 | 0.206 | 0.911 |
|
| ×106 | 0.101 | 0.599 | 0.747 |
|
| ×106 | 0.678 | 0.540 | |
|
| ×106 | 0.538 | 0.699 | |
|
| ×106 | 0.036 | 0.011 | 0.050 |
|
| ×100% | 0.905 | 0.491 | |
|
| ×100% | 0.219 | 0.924 | |