7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The implications of clinical risk factors, CAR index, and compositional changes of immune cells on hyperprogressive disease in non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving immunotherapy

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Immune checkpoint blockades (ICBs) are characterized by a durable clinical response and better tolerability in patients with a variety of advanced solid tumors. However, we not infrequently encounter patients with hyperprogressive disease (HPD) exhibiting paradoxically accelerated tumor growth with poor clinical outcomes. This study aimed to investigate implications of clinical factors and immune cell composition on different tumor responses to immunotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

          Methods

          This study evaluated 231 NSCLC patients receiving ICBs between January 2014 and May 2018. HPD was defined as a > 2-fold tumor growth kinetics ratio during ICB therapy and time-to-treatment failure of ≤2 months. We analyzed clinical data, imaging studies, periodic serologic indexes, and immune cell compositions in tumors and stromata using multiplex immunohistochemistry.

          Results

          Of 231 NSCLC patients, PR/CR and SD were observed in 50 (21.6%) and 79 (34.2%) patients, respectively and 26 (11.3%) patients met the criteria for HPD. Median overall survival in poor response groups (HPD and non-HPD PD) was extremely shorter than disease-controlled group (SD and PR/CR) (5.5 and 6.1 months vs. 16.2 and 18.3 months, respectively, P = 0.000). In multivariate analysis, HPD were significantly associated with heavy smoker ( p = 0.0072), PD-L1 expression ≤1% ( p = 0.0355), and number of metastatic site ≥3 ( p = 0.0297). Among the serologic indexes including NLR, PLR, CAR, and LDH, only CAR had constantly significant correlations with HPD at the beginning of prior treatment and immunotherapy, and at the 1st tumor assessment. The number of CD4+ effector T cells and CD8+ cytotoxic T cells, and CD8+/PD-1+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) tended to be smaller, especially in stromata of HPD group. More M2-type macrophages expressing CD14, CD68 and CD163 in the stromal area and markedly fewer CD56+ NK cells in the intratumoral area were observed in HPD group.

          Conclusions

          Our study suggests that not only clinical factors including heavy smoker, very low PD-L1 expression, multiple metastasis, and CAR index, but also fewer CD8+/PD-1+ TIL and more M2 macrophages in the tumor microenvironment are significantly associated with the occurrence of HPD in the patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC receiving immunotherapy.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-020-07727-y.

          Related collections

          Most cited references39

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

          Assessment of the change in tumour burden is an important feature of the clinical evaluation of cancer therapeutics: both tumour shrinkage (objective response) and disease progression are useful endpoints in clinical trials. Since RECIST was published in 2000, many investigators, cooperative groups, industry and government authorities have adopted these criteria in the assessment of treatment outcomes. However, a number of questions and issues have arisen which have led to the development of a revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Evidence for changes, summarised in separate papers in this special issue, has come from assessment of a large data warehouse (>6500 patients), simulation studies and literature reviews. HIGHLIGHTS OF REVISED RECIST 1.1: Major changes include: Number of lesions to be assessed: based on evidence from numerous trial databases merged into a data warehouse for analysis purposes, the number of lesions required to assess tumour burden for response determination has been reduced from a maximum of 10 to a maximum of five total (and from five to two per organ, maximum). Assessment of pathological lymph nodes is now incorporated: nodes with a short axis of 15 mm are considered measurable and assessable as target lesions. The short axis measurement should be included in the sum of lesions in calculation of tumour response. Nodes that shrink to <10mm short axis are considered normal. Confirmation of response is required for trials with response primary endpoint but is no longer required in randomised studies since the control arm serves as appropriate means of interpretation of data. Disease progression is clarified in several aspects: in addition to the previous definition of progression in target disease of 20% increase in sum, a 5mm absolute increase is now required as well to guard against over calling PD when the total sum is very small. Furthermore, there is guidance offered on what constitutes 'unequivocal progression' of non-measurable/non-target disease, a source of confusion in the original RECIST guideline. Finally, a section on detection of new lesions, including the interpretation of FDG-PET scan assessment is included. Imaging guidance: the revised RECIST includes a new imaging appendix with updated recommendations on the optimal anatomical assessment of lesions. A key question considered by the RECIST Working Group in developing RECIST 1.1 was whether it was appropriate to move from anatomic unidimensional assessment of tumour burden to either volumetric anatomical assessment or to functional assessment with PET or MRI. It was concluded that, at present, there is not sufficient standardisation or evidence to abandon anatomical assessment of tumour burden. The only exception to this is in the use of FDG-PET imaging as an adjunct to determination of progression. As is detailed in the final paper in this special issue, the use of these promising newer approaches requires appropriate clinical validation studies.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Pembrolizumab versus Chemotherapy for PD-L1–Positive Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

            Pembrolizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody against programmed death 1 (PD-1) that has antitumor activity in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with increased activity in tumors that express programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Nivolumab versus Docetaxel in Advanced Nonsquamous Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

              Nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 programmed death 1 (PD-1) immune-checkpoint-inhibitor antibody, disrupts PD-1-mediated signaling and may restore antitumor immunity.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                oncologykang@naver.com
                Journal
                BMC Cancer
                BMC Cancer
                BMC Cancer
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2407
                5 January 2021
                5 January 2021
                2021
                : 21
                : 19
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.411947.e, ISNI 0000 0004 0470 4224, Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Bucheon St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, , The Catholic University of Korea, ; Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [2 ]GRID grid.411947.e, ISNI 0000 0004 0470 4224, Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, , The Catholic University of Korea, ; 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591 Republic of Korea
                [3 ]GRID grid.267370.7, ISNI 0000 0004 0533 4667, Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center, , University of Ulsan College of Medicine, ; Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [4 ]GRID grid.267370.7, ISNI 0000 0004 0533 4667, Department of Convergence Medicine, Asan Medical Center, , University of Ulsan College of Medicine, ; Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [5 ]GRID grid.411947.e, ISNI 0000 0004 0470 4224, Department of Hospital Pathology, College of Medicine, , the Catholic University of Korea, ; Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [6 ]GRID grid.411947.e, ISNI 0000 0004 0470 4224, Department of Radiology, Bucheon St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, , The Catholic University of Korea, ; Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [7 ]GRID grid.411947.e, ISNI 0000 0004 0470 4224, Cancer Research Institute, College of Medicine, , The Catholic University of Korea, ; Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [8 ]GRID grid.411947.e, ISNI 0000 0004 0470 4224, Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Uijeongbu St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, , The Catholic University of Korea, ; Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [9 ]GRID grid.411947.e, ISNI 0000 0004 0470 4224, Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yeouido St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, , The Catholic University of Korea, ; Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [10 ]GRID grid.411947.e, ISNI 0000 0004 0470 4224, Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, St. Vincent’s Hospital, College of Medicine, , The Catholic University of Korea, ; Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [11 ]GRID grid.411947.e, ISNI 0000 0004 0470 4224, Laboratory of Medical Oncology, Cancer Research Institute, College of Medicine, , The Catholic University of Korea, ; Seoul, Republic of Korea
                Article
                7727
                10.1186/s12885-020-07727-y
                7786505
                33402127
                37cea931-dbad-420e-94f6-0d1a8cc27959
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 22 July 2020
                : 11 December 2020
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                non-small cell lung cancer (nsclc),immune checkpoint blockades (icbs),m2 macrophage,tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (til),tumor microenvironment

                Comments

                Comment on this article