BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have changed the clinical management of melanoma. However, not all patients respond, and current biomarkers including PD-L1 and mutational burden show incomplete predictive performance. The clinical validity and utility of complex biomarkers have not been studied in melanoma.MethodsCutaneous metastatic melanoma patients at eight institutions were evaluated for PD-L1 expression, CD8+ T-cell infiltration pattern, mutational burden, and 394 immune transcript expression. PD-L1 IHC and mutational burden were assessed for association with overall survival (OS) in 94 patients treated prior to ICI approval by the FDA (historical-controls), and in 137 patients treated with ICIs. Unsupervised analysis revealed distinct immune-clusters with separate response rates. This comprehensive immune profiling data were then integrated to generate a continuous Response Score (RS) based upon response criteria (RECIST v.1.1). RS was developed using a single institution training cohort (n = 48) and subsequently tested in a separate eight institution validation cohort (n = 29) to mimic a real-world clinical scenario.ResultsPD-L1 positivity ≥1% correlated with response and OS in ICI-treated patients, but demonstrated limited predictive performance. High mutational burden was associated with response in ICI-treated patients, but not with OS. Comprehensive immune profiling using RS demonstrated higher sensitivity (72.2%) compared to PD-L1 IHC (34.25%) and tumor mutational burden (32.5%), but with similar specificity.ConclusionsIn this study, the response score derived from comprehensive immune profiling in a limited melanoma cohort showed improved predictive performance as compared to PD-L1 IHC and tumor mutational burden.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s40425-018-0344-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

When the cell cycle is arrested, even though growth-promoting pathways such as mTOR are still active, then cells senesce. For example, induction of either p21 or p16 arrests the cell cycle without inhibiting mTOR, which, in turn, converts p21/p16-induced arrest into senescence (geroconversion). Here we show that geroconversion is accompanied by dramatic accumulation of cyclin D1 followed by cyclin E and replicative stress. When p21 was switched off, senescent cells (despite their loss of proliferative potential) progressed through S phase, and levels of cyclins D1 and E dropped. Most cells entered mitosis and then died, either during mitotic arrest or after mitotic slippage, or underwent endoreduplication. Next, we investigated whether inhibition of mTOR would prevent accumulation of cyclins and loss of mitotic competence in p21-arrested cells. Both nutlin-3, which inhibits mTOR in these cells, and rapamycin suppressed geroconversion during p21-induced arrest, decelerated accumulation of cyclins D1 and E and decreased replicative stress. When p21 was switched off, cells successfully progressed through both S phase and mitosis. Also, senescent mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) overexpressed cyclin D1. After release from cell cycle arrest, senescent MEFs entered S phase but could not undergo mitosis and did not proliferate. We conclude that cellular senescence is characterized by futile hyper-mitogenic drive associated with mTOR-dependent mitotic incompetence.

We have developed a next-generation sequencing assay to quantify biomarkers of the host immune response in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumor specimens. This assay aims to provide clinicians with a comprehensive characterization of the immunologic tumor microenvironment as a guide for therapeutic decisions on patients with solid tumors. The assay relies on RNA-sequencing (seq) to semiquantitatively measure the levels of 43 transcripts related to anticancer immune responses and 11 transcripts that reflect the relative abundance of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, as well as on DNA-seq to estimate mutational burden. The assay has a clinically relevant 5-day turnaround time and can be conducted on as little as 2.5 ng of RNA and 1.8 ng of genomic DNA extracted from three to five standard FFPE sections. The standardized next-generation sequencing workflow produced sequencing reads adequate for clinical testing of matched RNA and DNA from several samples in a single run. Assay performance for gene-specific sensitivity, linearity, dynamic range, and detection threshold was estimated across a wide range of actual and artificial FFPE samples selected or generated to address preanalytical variability linked to specimen features (eg, tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte abundance, percentage of necrosis), and analytical variability linked to assay features (eg, batch size, run, day, operator). Analytical precision studies demonstrated that the assay is highly reproducible and accurate compared with established orthogonal approaches.

BackgroundPD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) has been traditionally used for predicting clinical responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, there are at least 4 different assays and antibodies used for PD-L1 IHC, each developed with a different ICI. We set to test if next generation RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) is a robust method to determine PD-L1 mRNA expression levels and furthermore, efficacy of predicting response to ICIs as compared to routinely used, standardized IHC procedures.MethodsA total of 209 cancer patients treated on-label by FDA-approved ICIs, with evaluable responses were assessed for PD-L1 expression by RNA-seq and IHC, based on tumor proportion score (TPS) and immune cell staining (ICS). A subset of serially diluted cases was evaluated for RNA-seq assay performance across a broad range of PD-L1 expression levels.ResultsAssessment of PD-L1 mRNA levels by RNA-seq demonstrated robust linearity across high and low expression ranges. PD-L1 mRNA levels assessed by RNA-seq and IHC (TPS and ICS) were highly correlated (p < 2e-16). Sub-analyses showed sustained correlation when IHC results were classified as high or low by clinically accepted cut-offs (p < 0.01), and results did not differ by tumor type or anti-PD-L1 antibody used. Overall, a combined positive PD-L1 result (≥1% IHC TPS and high PD-L1 expression by RNA-Seq) was associated with a 2-to-5-fold higher overall response rate (ORR) compared to a double negative result. Standard assessments of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) showed that a PD-L1 positive assessment for melanoma samples by RNA-seq had the lowest sensitivity (25%) but the highest PPV (72.7%). Among the three tumor types analyzed in this study, the only non-overlapping confidence interval for predicting response was for “RNA-seq low vs high” in melanoma.ConclusionsMeasurement of PD-L1 mRNA expression by RNA-seq is comparable to PD-L1 expression by IHC both analytically and clinically in predicting ICI response. RNA-seq has the added advantages of being amenable to standardization and avoidance of interpretation bias. PD-L1 by RNA-seq needs to be validated in future prospective ICI clinical studies across multiple histologies.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s40425-018-0489-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background We performed profiling of the immune microenvironment of castration‐resistant (CRPC) and castration‐sensitive (CSPC) prostate cancer (PC) in order to identify novel targets for immunotherapy. Methods PD‐L1 and CD3/CD8 immunohistochemistry, PD‐L1/2 fluorescent in situ hybridization, tumor mutation burden, microsatellite instability, and RNA‐seq of 395 immune‐related genes were performed in 19 CRPC and CSPC. Targeted genomic sequencing and fusion analysis were performed in 17 of these specimens. Results CD276, PVR, and NECTIN2 were highly expressed in PC. Comparison of CRPC versus CSPC and primary versus metastatic tissue revealed the differential expression of immunostimulatory, immunosuppressive, and epithelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition (EMT)‐related genes. Unsupervised clustering of differentially expressed genes yielded two final clusters best segregated by CRPC and CSPC status. Conclusion CD276 and the alternative checkpoint inhibition PVR/NECTIN2/CD226/TIGIT pathway emerged as relevant to PC checkpoint inhibition target development.

BackgroundResistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has been linked to local immunosuppression independent of major ICI targets (e.g., PD-1). Clinical experience with response prediction based on PD-L1 expression suggests that other factors influence sensitivity to ICIs in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.MethodsTumor specimens from 120 NSCLC patients from 10 institutions were evaluated for PD-L1 expression by immunohistochemistry, and global proliferative profile by targeted RNA-seq.ResultsCell proliferation, derived from the mean expression of 10 proliferation-associated genes (namely BUB1, CCNB2, CDK1, CDKN3, FOXM1, KIAA0101, MAD2L1, MELK, MKI67, and TOP2A), was identified as a marker of response to ICIs in NSCLC. Poorly, moderately, and highly proliferative tumors were somewhat equally represented in NSCLC, with tumors with the highest PD-L1 expression being more frequently moderately proliferative as compared to lesser levels of PD-L1 expression. Proliferation status had an impact on survival in patients with both PD-L1 positive and negative tumors. There was a significant survival advantage for moderately proliferative tumors compared to their combined highly/poorly counterparts (p = 0.021). Moderately proliferative PD-L1 positive tumors had a median survival of 14.6 months that was almost twice that of PD-L1 negative highly/poorly proliferative at 7.6 months (p = 0.028). Median survival in moderately proliferative PD-L1 negative tumors at 12.6 months was comparable to that of highly/poorly proliferative PD-L1 positive tumors at 11.5 months, but in both instances less than that of moderately proliferative PD-L1 positive tumors. Similar to survival, proliferation status has impact on disease control (DC) in patients with both PD-L1 positive and negative tumors. Patients with moderately versus those with poorly or highly proliferative tumors have a superior DC rate when combined with any classification schema used to score PD-L1 as a positive result (i.e., TPS ≥ 50% or ≥ 1%), and best displayed by a DC rate for moderately proliferative tumors of no less than 40% for any classification of PD-L1 as a negative result. While there is an over representation of moderately proliferative tumors as PD-L1 expression increases this does not account for the improved survival or higher disease control rates seen in PD-L1 negative tumors.ConclusionsCell proliferation is potentially a new biomarker of response to ICIs in NSCLC and is applicable to PD-L1 negative tumors.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s40425-019-0506-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

2020) Expression of TIM3/VISTA checkpoints and the CD68 macrophage-associated marker correlates with anti-PD1/PDL1 resistance: implications of immunogram heterogeneity, OncoImmunology, 9:1, 1708065, ABSTRACTAlthough immunotherapies have achieved remarkable salutary effects among subgroups of advanced cancers, most patients do not respond. We comprehensively evaluated biomarkers associated with the "cancer-immunity cycle" in the pan-cancer setting in order to understand the immune landscape of metastatic malignancies as well as anti-PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor resistance mechanisms. Interrogation of 51 markers of the cancer-immunity cycle was performed in 101 patients with diverse malignancies using a clinical-grade RNA sequencing assay. Overall, the immune phenotypes demonstrated overexpression of multiple checkpoints including VISTA (15.8% of 101 patients), PD-L2 (10.9%), TIM3 (9.9%), LAG3 (8.9%), PD-L1 (6.9%) and CTLA4 (3.0%). Additionally, aberrant expression of macrophage-associated markers (e.g. CD68 and CSF1R; 11-23%), metabolic immune escape markers (e.g. ADORA2A and IDO1; 9-16%) and T-cell priming markers (e.g. CD40, GITR, ICOS and OX40; 4-31%) were observed. Most tumors (87.1%, 88/101) expressed distinct immune portfolios, with a median of six theoretically actionable biomarkers (pharmacologically tractable by Food and Drug Administration approved agents [on-or off-label] or with agents in clinical development). Overexpression of TIM-3, VISTA and CD68 were significantly associated with shorter progression-free survival (PFS) after anti-PD-1/PD-L1-based therapies (among 39 treated patients) (all P < .01). In conclusion, cancer-immunity cycle biomarker evaluation was feasible in diverse solid tumors. High expression of alternative checkpoints TIM-3 and VISTA and of the macrophage-associated markers CD68 were associated with significantly worse PFS after anti-PD-1/PD-L1-based therapies. Most patients had distinct and complex immune expression profiles suggesting the need for customized combinations of immunotherapy. ARTICLE HISTORY

Little is known about endogenous estrogen receptor β (ERβ) gene targets in human breast cancer. We reported that estradiol (E(2)) induces nuclear respiratory factor-1 (NRF-1) transcription through ERα in MCF-7 breast cancer cells. Here we report that 4-hydroxytamoxifen (4-OHT), with an EC(50) of ~1.7 nM, increases NRF-1 expression by recruiting ERβ, cJun, cFos, CBP, and RNA polymerase II to and dismissing NCoR from the NRF1 promoter. Promoter deletion and transient transfection studies showed that the estrogen response element (ERE) is essential and that an adjacent AP-1 site contributes to maximal 4-OHT-induced NRF-1 transcription. siRNA knockdown of ERβ revealed that ERβ inhibits basal NRF-1 expression and is required for 4-OHT-induced NRF-1 transcription. An AP-1 inhibitor blocked 4-OHT-induced NRF-1 expression. The 4-OHT-induced increase in NRF-1 resulted in increased transcription of NRF-1 target CAPNS1 but not CYC1, CYC2, or TFAM despite increased NRF-1 coactivator PGC-1α protein. The absence of TFAM induction corresponds to a lack of Akt-dependent phosphorylation of NRF-1 with 4-OHT treatment. Overexpression of NRF-1 inhibited 4-OHT-induced apoptosis and siRNA knockdown of NRF-1 increased apoptosis, indicating an antiapoptotic role for NRF-1. Overall, NRF-1 expression and activity is regulated by 4-OHT via endogenous ERβ in MCF-7 cells.