Human tumors frequently escape immune destruction, despite the presence of cyototoxic T cells (CTL) recognizing tumor-associated antigens (TAA). We have previously shown that programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1), a recently identified ligand of the B7 superfamily, is expressed on murine tumors and can inhibit antitumor immune responses. To evaluate the clinical relevance of our animal model findings, we examined human tumors and tumorspecific T cells. We found PD-L1 to be constitutively expressed on human renal cell carcinoma (RCC) cell lines and upregulated on human melanoma cell lines upon exposure to interferon-gamma. Similarly, we found binding of anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody (mAb) on frozen sections from RCC and melanomas, but not on normal tissues. The corresponding inhibitory receptor of PD-L1, PD-1, revealed a higher expression on tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes than on peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL) from melanoma patients upon specific antigen stimulation. Stimulation of PBL from healthy donors with peptide-loaded dendritic cells in the presence of anti-PD-L1 mAb altered neither the total T cell numbers after expansion, nor the percentage of peptide-specific CTL, when providing a T cell help by addition of cytokines. However, when stimulating TAA-specific CTL and T helper cells with Ag-pulsed dendritic cells in the absence of exogenous cytokines, PD-L1 blockade increased the cytokine production. Similar to the data achieved in the murine system, the blockade of PD-L1 on human tumors resulted in enhanced cytolytic activity of TAA-specific CTLs and cytokine production of TAA-specific T helper cells when interacting directly with the tumor. In summary, our data suggest that PD-L1/PD-1 interactions negatively regulate T cell effector functions predominately in the absence of exogenous cytokine support, indicating an important role for this pathway in tumor evasion. ' 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.Key words: RCC; PD-L1; PD-1; B7-H1; melanoma Although the prognosis for patients with advanced solid tumors still remains poor, 1 a number of promising approaches, such as cancer immunotherapy, have been developed over the past decade. However, it is still an unsolved question why existing tumor-specific T cells in cancer patients fail to effectively prevent tumor progression. Inefficient T cell stimulation, either due to the absence of efficient antigen-presentation and costimulation or due to the presence of coinhibitory molecules, may contribute to this phenomenon.Data from animal models showing that CD8 1 T cells can lead to regression and rejection of solid tumors, and metastases 2 were reproduced with human cancer patients in clinical studies only partially. [3][4][5][6] Despite the fact that tumor-specific T cells can be expanded and transferred effectively and thus survive and localize into tumors, 7,8 tumor growth is not always controlled.It appears that the microenvironment of cancers protects tumor cells from immune destruction. 9,10 Increasing appreciation of costimulation (via CD28 or ICOS) and coinhibition (...

No abstract

Key Points In AML with bialleleic CEBPA-mut relapse-free survival was improved by allogeneic and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. In relapsed patients second complete remission rate was high and survival was favorable after an allogeneic transplantation.

The preferred type of post-remission therapy (PRT) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in first complete remission (CR1) is a subject of continued debate, especially in patients at higher risk of nonrelapse mortality (NRM), including patients >40 years of age. We report results of a time-dependent multivariable analysis of allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) (n=337) versus chemotherapy (n=271) or autologous HSCT (autoHSCT) (n=152) in 760 patients aged 40-60 years with AML in CR1. Patients receiving alloHSCT showed improved overall survival (OS) as compared with chemotherapy (respectively, 57±3% vs 40±3% at 5 years, P<0.001). Comparable OS was observed following alloHSCT and autoHSCT in patients with intermediate-risk AML (60±4 vs 54±5%). However, alloHSCT was associated with less relapse (hazard ratio (HR) 0.51, P<0.001) and better relapse-free survival (RFS) (HR 0.74, P=0.029) as compared with autoHSCT in intermediate-risk AMLs. AlloHSCT was applied following myeloablative conditioning (n=157) or reduced intensity conditioning (n=180), resulting in less NRM, but comparable outcome with respect to OS, RFS and relapse. Collectively, these results show that alloHSCT is to be preferred over chemotherapy as PRT in patients with intermediate- and poor-risk AML aged 40-60 years, whereas autoHSCT remains a treatment option to be considered in patients with intermediate-risk AML.