Every eye movement produces a shift in the visual image on the retina. The receptive field, or retinal response area, of an individual visual neuron moves with the eyes so that after an eye movement it covers a new portion of visual space. For some parietal neurons, the location of the receptive field is shown to shift transiently before an eye movement. In addition, nearly all parietal neurons respond when an eye movement brings the site of a previously flashed stimulus into the receptive field. Parietal cortex both anticipates the retinal consequences of eye movements and updates the retinal coordinates of remembered stimuli to generate a continuously accurate representation of visual space.

is the most common oncogenic driver in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAC). We previously reported that (KL) or (KP) comutations define distinct subgroups of -mutant LUAC. Here, we examine the efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors in these subgroups. Objective response rates to PD-1 blockade differed significantly among KL (7.4%), KP (35.7%), and K-only (28.6%) subgroups ( < 0.001) in the Stand Up To Cancer (SU2C) cohort (174 patients) with -mutant LUAC and in patients treated with nivolumab in the CheckMate-057 phase III trial (0% vs. 57.1% vs. 18.2%; = 0.047). In the SU2C cohort, KL LUAC exhibited shorter progression-free ( < 0.001) and overall ( = 0.0015) survival compared with ; LUAC. Among 924 LUACs, alterations were the only marker significantly associated with PD-L1 negativity in TMB LUAC. The impact of alterations on clinical outcomes with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors extended to PD-L1-positive non-small cell lung cancer. In-mutant murine LUAC models, loss promoted PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor resistance, suggesting a causal role. Our results identify alterations as a major driver of primary resistance to PD-1 blockade in -mutant LUAC. This work identifies alterations as the most prevalent genomic driver of primary resistance to PD-1 axis inhibitors in-mutant lung adenocarcinoma. Genomic profiling may enhance the predictive utility of PD-L1 expression and tumor mutation burden and facilitate establishment of personalized combination immunotherapy approaches for genomically defined LUAC subsets. .

The space around us is represented not once but many times in parietal cortex. These multiple representations encode locations and objects of interest in several egocentric reference frames. Stimulus representations are transformed from the coordinates of receptor surfaces, such as the retina or the cochlea, into the coordinates of effectors, such as the eye, head, or hand. The transformation is accomplished by dynamic updating of spatial representations in conjunction with voluntary movements. This direct sensory-to-motor coordinate transformation obviates the need for a single representation of space in environmental coordinates. In addition to representing object locations in motoric coordinates, parietal neurons exhibit strong modulation by attention. Both top-down and bottom-up mechanisms of attention contribute to the enhancement of visual responses. The saliance of a stimulus is the primary factor in determining the neural response to it. Although parietal neurons represent objects in motor coordinates, visual responses are independent of the intention to perform specific motor acts.

We studied the activity of single neurons in the frontal eye fields of awake macaque monkeys trained to perform several oculomotor tasks. Fifty-four percent of neurons discharged before visually guided saccades. Three different types of presaccadic activity were observed: visual, movement, and anticipatory. Visual activity occurred in response to visual stimuli whether or not the monkey made saccades. Movement activity preceded purposive saccades, even those made without visual targets. Anticipatory activity preceded even the cue to make a saccade if the monkey could reliably predict what saccade he had to make. These three different activities were found in different presaccadic cells in different proportions. Forty percent of presaccadic cells had visual activity (visual cells) but no movement activity. For about half of the visual cells the response was enhanced if the monkey made saccades to the receptive-field stimulus, but there was no discharge before similar saccades made without visual targets. Twenty percent of presaccadic neurons discharged as briskly before purposive saccades made without a visual target as they did before visually guided saccades, and had weak or absent visual responses. These cells were defined as movement cells. Movement cells discharged much less or not at all before saccades made spontaneously without a task requirement or an overt visual target. The remaining presaccadic neurons (40%) had both visual and movement activity (visuomovement cells). They discharged most briskly before visually guided eye movements, but also discharged before purposive eye movements made in darkness and responded to visual stimuli in the absence of saccades. There was a continuum of visuomovement cells, from cells in which visual activity predominated to cells in which movement activity predominated. This continuum suggests that although visual cells are quite distinct from movement cells, the division of cell types into three classes may be only a heuristic means of describing the processing flow from visual input to eye-movement output. Twenty percent of visuomovement and movement cells, but fewer than 2% of visual cells, had anticipatory activity. Only one cell had anticipatory activity as its sole response. When the saccade was delayed relative to the target onset, visual cells responded to the target appearance, movement cells discharged before the saccade, and visuomovement cells discharged in different ways during the delay, usually with some discharge following the target and an increase in rate immediately before the saccade. Presaccadic neurons of all types were actively suppressed following a saccade into their response fields.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

For many years there has been a debate about the role of the parietal lobe in the generation of behavior. Does it generate movement plans (intention) or choose objects in the environment for further processing? To answer this, we focus on the lateral intraparietal area (LIP), an area that has been shown to play independent roles in target selection for saccades and the generation of visual attention. Based on results from a variety of tasks, we propose that LIP acts as a priority map in which objects are represented by activity proportional to their behavioral priority. We present evidence to show that the priority map combines bottom-up inputs like a rapid visual response with an array of top-down signals like a saccade plan. The spatial location representing the peak of the map is used by the oculomotor system to target saccades and by the visual system to guide visual attention.

When natural scenes are viewed, a multitude of objects that are stable in their environments are brought in and out of view by eye movements. The posterior parietal cortex is crucial for the analysis of space, visual attention and movement. Neurons in one of its subdivisions, the lateral intraparietal area (LIP), have visual responses to stimuli appearing abruptly at particular retinal locations (their receptive fields). We have tested the responses of LIP neurons to stimuli that entered their receptive field by saccades. Neurons had little or no response to stimuli brought into their receptive field by saccades, unless the stimuli were behaviourally significant. We established behavioural significance in two ways: either by making a stable stimulus task-relevant, or by taking advantage of the attentional attraction of an abruptly appearing stimulus. Our results show that under ordinary circumstances the entire visual world is only weakly represented in LIP. The visual representation in LIP is sparse, with only the most salient or behaviourally relevant objects being strongly represented.

Although the parietal cortex has been implicated in the neural processes underlying visual attention, the nature of its contribution is not well understood. We tracked attention in the monkey and correlated the activity of neurons in the lateral intraparietal area (LIP) with the monkey's attentional performance. The ensemble activity in LIP across the entire visual field describes the spatial and temporal dynamics of a monkey's attention. Activity subtending a single location in the visual field describes the attentional priority at that area but does not predict that the monkey will actually attend to or make an eye movement to that location.

In a previous report, we described the visual response properties in the ventral intraparietal area (area VIP) of the awake macaque. Here we describe the somatosensory response properties in area VIP and the patterns of correspondence between the responses of single neurons to independently administered tactile and visual stimulation. VIP neurons responded to visual stimulation only or to visual and tactile stimulation. Of 218 neurons tested, 153 (70%) were bimodal in the sense that they responded to stimuli that were independently applied in either sensory modality. Unimodal visual and bimodal neurons were intermingled within the recording area and could not be distinguished on the basis of their visual response properties alone. Most of the cells with a tactile receptive field (RF) responded well to light touch or air puffs. The distribution of RF locations principally emphasized the head (85%), with approximately equivalent representations of the upper and lower face areas. The tactile and visual RFs were aligned in a congruent manner, with the intersection of the visual vertical and horizontal meridian having its tactile counterpart in the nose/mouth area. Small foveal visual RFs were paired with small tactile RFs on the muzzle, and peripheral visual RFs were associated with tactile RFs on the side of the head or body. Most cells showed a strong sensitivity to moving stimuli, and the preferred directions of visual and tactile motion coincided in 85% of bimodal cells. In some cases, bimodal responses patterns were complementary: cells responding to motion in depth toward the monkey had responses, whereas cells responding to motion in depth away form the monkey had responses. Other forms of bimodal response congruence included orientation selectivity, and , , and / response types. The large proportion of bimodal tactile and visual neurons with congruent response properties in area VIP indicates that there are important functional differences between area VIP and other dorsal stream areas involved in the analysis of motion. We suggest that VIP is involved in the construction of a multisensory, head-centered representation of near extrapersonal space.