| Literature DB >> 36237314 |
Jwa Hoon Kim1,2, Gi Hwan Kim3, Yeon-Mi Ryu4, Sang-Yeob Kim4, Hyung-Don Kim1, Shin Kyo Yoon1, Yong Mee Cho3, Jae Lyun Lee1.
Abstract
Purpose: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) such as nivolumab and ipilimumab (N/I) are important treatment options for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The tumor microenvironment (TME) in these ICI-treated patients is largely unknown.Entities:
Keywords: immune checkpoint inhibitors; renal cell carcinoma; response; survival; tumor microenvironment
Year: 2022 PMID: 36237314 PMCID: PMC9552830 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.969569
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 5.738
Figure 1Representative examples of multiplexed immunohistochemical staining of advanced renal cell carcinoma tissue sections. (A) hematoxylin and eosin staining. (B) CD20, CD4, CD103, Foxp3, CD137, and CD8. (C) CD206, CD68, CD11c, MHCII, and PDL1. Original magnification, x 200.
Baseline characteristics of the study patients and clinical outcomes with nivolumab plus ipilimumab.
| Total patients (n=24, %) | |
|---|---|
| Median age, years (range) | 61 (39–80) |
| Sex | |
| male | 18 (75.0) |
| female | 6 (25.0) |
| IMDC risk group | |
| Intermediate | 14 (58.3) |
| Poor | 10 (41.7) |
| Histology type | |
| Clear cell* | 23 (95.8) |
| Presence of sarcomatoid component | 8 (33.3) |
| Site of metastasis | |
| Lymph node | 10 (41.7) |
| Lung | 19 (79.2) |
| Liver | 3 (12.5) |
| Bone | 10 (41.7) |
| Previous nephrectomy | 17 (70.8) |
|
| |
| Complete response | 3 (12.5) |
| Partial response | 9 (37.5) |
| Stable disease | 5 (20.8) |
| Progressive disease | 7 (29.2) |
| Objective response rate | 12 (50.0) |
| Disease control rate | 17 (70.8) |
| Median progression-free survival | 11.6 (95% CI 5.2–17.9) months |
| Median overall survival | Not reached |
IMDC; International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium, CI; confidence interval
*One patient had a sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma.
Immune cell infiltration densities between the treatment responders and non-responders.
| Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=24, %) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Responders (n=12),median (IQR 25%-75%) | Non-responders (n=12),median (IQR 25%-75%) |
| |
| CD8+ cytotoxic T cells | 394.2 (157.7-670.4) | 98.1 (50.4-279.3) | 0.005 |
| CD103+ CD8+ tissue-resident T cells | 18.2 (2.5-33.1) | 8.3 (3.7-15.5) | 0.148 |
| CD137+ CD8+ T cells | 5.6 (1.9-45.7) | 0.9 (0.0-8.3) | 0.017 |
| Foxp3- CD4+ helper T cells | 349.1 (251.2-799.6) | 58.2 (25.3-147.2) | 0.003 |
| Foxp3+ CD4+ regulatory T cells | 15.8 (2.3-22.6) | 0.7 (0.2-3.1) | 0.045 |
| CD137+ CD4+ T cells | 7.0 (2.2-120.9) | 3.3 (0.0-33.5) | 0.090 |
| CD20+ B cells | 21.1 (5.8-40.7) | 3.3 (0.7-31.5) | 0.134 |
| CD68+ CD206- M1 macrophages | 643.67 (408.95-1148.24) | 126.50 (71.59-575.16) | 0.008 |
| CD68+ CD206+ M2 macrophages | 3.67 (1.10-12.46) | 0.63 (0.0-2.42) | 0.021 |
| CD11c+ MHC class II+ dendritic cells | 0 (0-1.4) | 0 (0-0) | 0.557 |
| PD-L1+ cells | 770.6 (506.9-1417.7) | 388.3 (92.4-1143.2) | 0.223 |
IQR, interquartile.
Cell densities are measured as the mean/mm2 for each cell population.
Figure 2Progression-free survival with nivolumab plus ipilimumab according to the densities of certain T cell subsets, CD20+ B cells, and M1 macrophages at the tumor margin. (A) Foxp3- CD4+ helper T cells, (B) CD68+ CD206- M1 macrophages, (C) CD137+ CD8+ cytotoxic T cells, (D) CD137+ CD4+ T cells, (E) CD20+ B cells.
Univariate and multivariate analysis for progression-free survival.
| Progression-free survival | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis* | |||
| HR (95% CI) |
| HR (95% CI) |
| |
| Age (≥65 years vs. <65 years) | 0.30 (0.04-2.23) | 0.234 | ||
| Sex (male vs. female) | 0.23 (0.08-0.69) | 0.009 | ||
| IMDC (poor vs. intermediate) | 2.26 (0.72-7.08) | 0.162 | ||
| Presence of sarcomatoid component in histology (yes vs. no) | 0.78 (0.24-2.54) | 0.676 | ||
| Previous nephrectomy (yes vs. no) | 0.75 (0.23-2.48) | 0.642 | ||
| CD8+ cytotoxic T cells (high vs. low) | 0.74 (0.25-2.22) | 0.596 | ||
| CD103+ CD8+ tissue-resident T cells (high vs. low) | 0.82 (0.27-2.47) | 0.726 | ||
| CD137+ CD8+ T cells (high vs. low) | 0.36 (0.11-1.18) | 0.093 | ||
| CD137+ CD4+ T cells (high vs. low) | 0.41 (0.13-1.34) | 0.139 | ||
| FoxP3- CD4+ helper T cells (high vs. low) | 0.25 (0.07-0.83) | 0.024 | 0.19 (0.05-0.73) | 0.016 |
| FoxP3+ CD4+ regulatory T cells (high vs. low) | 0.95 (0.32-2.89) | 0.934 | ||
| CD20+ B cells (high vs. low) | 0.47 (0.15-1.47) | 0.194 | ||
| CD68+ CD206- M1 macrophages (high vs. low) | 0.19 (0.05-0.73) | 0.016 | ||
| CD68+ CD206+ M2 macrophages (high vs. low) | 0.40 (0.12-1.34) | 0.136 | ||
| CD11c+ MHC class II+ dendritic cells (high vs. low) | 1.13 (0.34-3.77) | 0.844 | ||
| PD-L1+ cells (high vs. low) | 0.57 (0.17-1.89) | 0.359 | ||
HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; IMDC, International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium.
*Multivariate analysis included significant factors identified by univariate analysis (P<0.1).