| Literature DB >> 36230808 |
Davide Massa1,2, Anna Tosi3, Antonio Rosato1,3, Valentina Guarneri1,2, Maria Vittoria Dieci1,2.
Abstract
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of many solid tumors. In breast cancer (BC), immunotherapy is currently approved in combination with chemotherapy, albeit only in triple-negative breast cancer. Unfortunately, most patients only derive limited benefit from ICIs, progressing either upfront or after an initial response. Therapeutics must engage with a heterogeneous network of complex stromal-cancer interactions that can fail at imposing cancer immune control in multiple domains, such as in the genomic, epigenomic, transcriptomic, proteomic, and metabolomic domains. To overcome these types of heterogeneous resistance phenotypes, several combinatorial strategies are underway. Still, they can be predicted to be effective only in the subgroups of patients in which those specific resistance mechanisms are effectively in place. As single biomarker predictive performances are necessarily suboptimal at capturing the complexity of this articulate network, precision immune-oncology calls for multi-omics tumor microenvironment profiling in order to identify unique predictive patterns and to proactively tailor combinatorial treatments. Multiplexed single-cell spatially resolved tissue analysis, through precise epitope colocalization, allows one to infer cellular functional states in view of their spatial organization. In this review, we discuss-through the lens of the cancer-immunity cycle-selected, established, and emerging markers that may be evaluated in multiplexed spatial protein panels to help identify prognostic and predictive patterns in BC.Entities:
Keywords: TILs; breast cancer; cancer-immunity cycle; multiplex; spatial biology; spatial profiling
Year: 2022 PMID: 36230808 PMCID: PMC9562913 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14194885
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.575
Figure 1Multiplexed spatial protein profiling of breast cancer antigenicity. (a) Major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I and II cancer (upper quadrants) and TME profiling (lower quadrant). MHC class I alterations that can be accurately characterized by proteomic profiling are underlined in green. In the blue box: Cancer cells with effective MHC-I signaling can be killed by effector cells or survive despite MHC-I expression if, for example, T cells are present but exhausted, or the TME lacks T cell infiltration, as is the case in an immune-excluded TME. In the green box: Cancer cells lacking MHC class I can be killed by NK cells, but can escape immune-killing in a TME that lacks NK cell infiltration or employs countermeasures that limit NK cell-mediated killing, such as in HLA-E expression. In the yellow box: MHC class II cancer cells can be killed by the coordinated effort of both CD8+ T cells and CD4+ T cells. Nonetheless, an infiltration of LAG3+ and FCRL6+ TILs can interfere with MHC class II signaling and induce cancer cell survival. (b,c) Cancer profiling of tumor-associated antigens’ (TAAs) quantitative expression and spatial distribution. Figure 1b shows relevant TAAs that can be characterized through multiplexed in situ protein profiling and some therapeutics that could benefit from TAA-profiling; Figure 1c underlines the ability of multiplexed spatial protein profiling in evaluating the combined quantitative expression of different TAAs (e.g., TAA-1 and TAA-2) in the same sample and their spatial heterogeneity. Created with BioRender.com.
Figure 2Multiplexed spatial protein profiling of adjuvanticity patterns in breast cancer. On the right side: The positive effects of regulated cell death and damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) released in recruiting and activating dendritic cells (DCs), and tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs), in the tumor microenvironment (TME); further, phosphatidylserine (PS)-mediated activation of the complement system can stimulate B cells expression of ICOSL. On the left side: Some of the critical mechanisms of DAMP interference: (1) DAMPs’ downregulation: ATP concentrations can be limited by CD39/CD73 coordinated action, which can limit both ATP-induced adjuvanticity and favor adenosine-mediated immunosuppression; (2) indirect immune suppression: an indirect mechanism can interact with an effective priming, such as FOXP3+ regulatory T cell (Treg) differentiation, which can interfere with mature DC migration to tumor-draining lymph nodes (see DCs section); (3) alteration of DAMPs sensing machinery: STING downregulation can impair the sensing of free cytoplasmic DNA and thus STING-mediated IFN-γ signaling; (4) indirect interferences with DAMP signaling: CD47 expression can inhibit TAMs-mediated phagocytosis and therefore indirectly limit calreticulin and phosphatidylserine (PS) activity. CD55 can interfere with PS-induced complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) and CDC-induced B cell differentiation into ICOSL+ B cells. Created with BioRender.com.
Main clinical trials exploring ICIs’ role in BC.
| BC Subtype | Trial | Phase | Treatment Arms | Primary Efficacy Endpoints | Biomarker Analysis | References | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| Keynote-173 | I/II | Pembro + T +/− Cb > AC− > S− > pembro adj x 1yr | pCR | PT: sTILs and PD-L1 associated with pCR and ORR; and | 60 (completed) | [ |
| I-SPY 2 | II | Pembro/placebo + T > AC | pCR | MHC II expression predictive of response to ICI | 64 (completed) | [ | ||
| NeoPACT | II | Pembro + CbD | pCR | High sTILs are associated with higher pCR | 117 (active, not recruiting) | [ | ||
| Keynote-522 | III | Pembro/Placebo + CbT > AC > CH > pembro adj x 1yr | pCR + EFS | PD-L1 CPS not predictive of response to ICI | 602 (completed | [ | ||
| NeoTRIPaPDL1 | III | Atezo/placebo + NabP + Cb > S > anthracycline-based CT | EFS | pCR rate + 10% to atezo in immune-rich TME (PDL1 IC+, high/intermediate sTILs/iTILs) | 278 (active, not recruiting) | [ | ||
| Impassion031 | III | Atezo/placebo + NabT > AC | pCR | PT: PD-L1 IC+ and TC+, sTILs, iTILs, and TLS linked to improved pCR in placebo arm; and | 455 (active, not recruiting) | [ | ||
| NCT02489448 | I/II | Durva + nab-paclitaxel > AC | pCR | IHC: sTILs associated with higher pCR, sTILs, and PD-L1 do not predict benefit in multivariate analysis; MHC II expression predicts response to ICI; and | 69 (completed) | [ | ||
| GeparNuevo | II | Durva/placebo + nab-paclitaxel | pCR | PT: High sTILs associated with higher pCR in both arms; | 174 (completed) | [ | ||
|
| Keynote-119 | III | Pembro/CT | OS | sTILs associated with ICI benefit, in particular in previously untreated mTNBC; and | 622 (completed) | [ | |
| Keynote-086 | II | Pembro | DCR, ORR, DoR, PFS, OS | sTILs, PD-L1 CPS+, and CD8 IHC evaluation correlate with the response rate to pembro | 254 (completed) | [ | ||
| Keynote-355 | III | Pembro/placebo + NabP/T/Gem + Cb | PFS, OS | PD-L1 CPS ≥ 10 correlates with improved PFS and OS | 847 (active, not recruiting) | [ | ||
| ENHANCE-I | Ib/II | Pembro + eribulin | ORR | PD-L1 numerically higher ORR | 167 (completed) | [ | ||
| Impassion130 | III | Atezo/placebo + NabT | PFS, OS | PD-L1 IC+ predictive of ICI benefit; and | 902 (completed) | [ | ||
| Impassion131 | III | Atezo/placebo + T | PFS | PD-L1 IC+ does not predict benefit | 651 (active, not recruiting) | [ | ||
| TONIC | II | Nivo/nivo after induction with CT or RT | PFS | PD-L1 IC+, sTILs, and CD8+ higher in responders | 67 (active, not recruiting) | [ | ||
|
|
| Impassion-050 | III | Atezo/placebo + THP + AC > S > atezo/placebo + HP | pCR | PD-L1 IC+ does not predict pCR | 454 (active, not recruiting) | [ |
|
| NCT02605915 | Ib | In LABC: Atezo + HP or atezo/T-DM1 > THP + Cb | ORR + DoR | PT: No correlation between response and PD-L1 IC+, TC+, sTILs, and CD8+ T-cell density in central tumor area and immune phenotypes (ID, IE, or IN); | 76 (completed) | [ | |
|
| PANACEA | I/II | Pembro + trastuzumab | ORR | sTILs correlate with ORR and disease control, as well as higher clinical benefit in PD-L1 + CPS | 58 (completed) | [ | |
| KATE-2 | II | Atezo/placebo + T-DM1 | PFS | High CD8 T cells at invasive margins favor atezo arm in subgroup analysis | 1486 (completed) | [ | ||
|
|
| GIADA | II | Nivo + exemestane + triptorelin + EC | pCR | PT: in pCR patients higher in sTILs, iTILs (iCD4, I CD8, and iCD4+ FOXP3+), and TAMs (intratumoral); TAMs: stromal CD68+ CD163+ TAMs) immune-checkpoints co-expression: PD-1+ on T cells, and PD-L1 on TAMs (CD68+ PD-L1+ and CD68+ CD163+ PD-L1) higher in pCR; | 43 (completed) | [ |
| ISPY-2 | II | Pembro/placebo + T > AC | pCR | MHC II expression predicts response to ICI | 89 (completed) | [ | ||
|
| Keynote-028 | Ib | Pembro | ORR | sTILs do not predict PFS | 83 (completed) | [ | |
| KELLY | II | Pembro + eribulin | CBR | PD-L1 does not predict benefit | 44 (completed) | [ | ||
| NCT03051659 | II | Pembro + eribulin | PFS | sTILs and PD-L1 do not predict benefit | 88 (active, not recruiting) | [ | ||
| NCT03044730 | II | Pembro + capecitabine | PFS | sTILs and PD-L1 do not predict benefit | 14 (completed) | [ | ||
| NIMBUS | II | Pembro + nivo in TMB-H | ORR | sTILs and PD-L1 do not predict benefit | 20 (active, not recruiting) | [ | ||
PT = pre-treatment; OT = on-treatment; mBC: metastatic BC; LABC: locally advanced BC; S = surgery, CT = chemotherapy; ICI = immune checkpoint inhibitors; Atezo = atezolizumab; Durva = durva; Pembro = pembrolizumab; D = docetaxel; E = epirubicin; C = cyclophosphamide; T = taxane; Gem = gemcitabine; H = trastuzumab; P = pertuzumab; Cb = carboplatin; ORR = objective response rate; PFS = progression-free survival; OS = overall survival; pCR = pathological complete response; EFS = event-free survival; DoR = duration of response; DCR = disease control rate; CBR = clinical benefit rate; IC = immune cells; TC = tumoral cells; CPS = combined positive score; ID = immune desert; IE = immune excluded; and IN = immune inflamed.
Figure 3The cancer-immunity cycle and multiplexed in situ spatial protein profiling of relevant cellular interactions and niches in breast cancer. Green—antigen release, presentation and priming: tumor-associated antigens (TAAs) are captured by innate immunity, whose activation is enhanced by damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) and limited by mechanisms altering TME’s adjuvanticity, as depicted in Figure 2. Activated dendritic cells (DCs) can therefore migrate to tumor-draining lymph nodes (TDLN), where they can prime naïve T cells. Regulatory FOXP3+ T cells (Treg) can target migrating DCs and thus limit T cell priming. NK cells can favor DCs’ recruitment and physically interact with DCs and, in TDLN, DCs’ interaction with T cells can foster a transiently activated T cell phenotype or stimulate a stem-like T cell phenotype. Different subtypes of cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) can populate TDLN and influence the incidence and pattern of metastasis, as CAF-S1 and S4. DCs can prime T cells in tertiary lymphoid structures (TLS), thus bypassing TDLN. Blue—trafficking and infiltration: cellular components of the immune system must access and repopulate the TME to exert cancer-immune control. On the far right: cancer cells can limit CD8+ T cells’ endothelial access by inducing the expression of FASL on tumor-associated endothelial cells (TA-EC), meanwhile positively regulating regulatory FOXP3+ T cell (Treg) passage. Cancer cells can alter T cells intrastromal motility by directly altering the extracellular matrix (ECM)—such as with DDR1 expression—or indirectly modulate ECM-structure by subjugating different CAFs subpopulations. On the right: CD8+ T cells engage in peri-vascular niches with FOLR2+ tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs); TCF+ stem-cell like T cells can access the TME through specialized high endothelial venules (HEVs). Further, in grey, the bystander T cells, whose role in BC is still unclear. In the middle—human figure: TME profiling of metastatic sites. > On the upper portion: Cells can indirectly limit T cell infiltration by systemically depleting T cells through TAMs-mediated siphoning of tumor-specific CD8+ T cells in hepatic metastasis. > On the lower portion: hepatic stellate cells’ interaction with NK cells can limit their cancer control ability. TLS present the unique potential of locally stimulating both T cell priming and activation, B cell maturation, and natural antibody production. CXCL13+ follicular T cell helpers (TfhX13) can coordinate CXCR5 positive immune cells into aggregating in multi-cellular structures, which could be the precursors of TLS. Red—recognition and killing: innate and acquired immune cells can find and destroy cancer cells by leveraging their antigenicity (MHC class I/II expression), which is counterbalanced by many immune-evasive mechanisms described in the antigenicity section in Figure 1. Even when T cells are allowed to reach the tumoral bed, cancer cells can express PD-L1 and directly limit the activity of T cells expressing PD-1 or hide from them in niches constructed by CAFs; furthermore, T cells can be physically surrounded by TREM2+ TAMs and other APCs, which can alter their killing endeavor. Created with BioRender.com.