Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) and tryptophan 2,3-dioxygenase (TDO2) are the key enzymes of tryptophan (TRP) metabolism in the kynurenine pathway (KP). Both enzymes function as indicators of immunosuppression and poor survival in cancer patients. Direct or indirect targeting of either of these substances seems thus reasonable to improve therapy options for patients. In this study, glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) as well as head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC) were examined because of their different mechanisms of spontaneous and treatment-induced immune escape. Effects on gene expression and protein levels were examined. Accompanying assessment of TRP metabolites from treated GBM cell culture supernatants was conducted. Our results show a heterogeneous and inversely correlated expression profile of TRP-metabolizing genes among GBM and HNSCC cells, with low, but inducible IDO1 expression upon IFNγ treatment. TDO2 expression was higher in GBM cells, while genes encoding kynurenine aminotransferases were mainly confined to HNSCC cells. These data indicate that the KP is active in both entities, with however different enzymes involved in TRP catabolism. Upon treatment with Temozolomide, the standard of care for GBM patients, IDO1 was upregulated. Comparable, although less pronounced effects were seen in HNSCC upon Cetuximab and conventional drugs (i.e., 5-fluorouracil, Gemcitabine). Here, IDO1 and additional genes of the KP (KYAT1, KYAT2, and KMO) were induced. Vice versa, the novel yet experimental cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor Dinaciclib suppressed KP in both entities. Our comprehensive data imply inhibition of the TRP catabolism by Dinaciclib, while conventional chemotherapeutics tend to activate this pathway. These data point to limitations of conventional therapy and highlight the potential of targeted therapies to interfere with the cells' metabolism more than anticipated.

Cyclin-dependent kinases (CDK) control the cell cycle and play a crucial role in oncogenesis. Pharmacologic inhibition of CDK has contributed to the recent clinical approval of dual CDK4/6 inhibitors for the treatment of breast and small cell lung cancer. While the anticancer cell effects of CDK inhibitors are well-established, preclinical and early clinical studies describe additional mechanisms of action such as chemo- and radiosensitization or immune stimulation. The latter offers great potential to incorporate CDK inhibitors in immune-based treatments. However, dosing schedules and accurate timing of each combination partner need to be respected to prevent immune escape and resistance. In this review, we provide a detailed summary of CDK inhibitors in the two solid cancer types head and neck cancer and glioblastoma multiforme; it describes the molecular mechanisms of response vs. resistance and covers strategies to avoid resistance by the combination of immunotherapy or targeted therapy.

Background Cancer vaccines provide a complex source of neoantigens. Still, increasing evidence reveals that the neoantigen quality rather than the quantity is predictive for treatment outcome. Methods Using the preclinical Mlh1−/− tumor model, we performed a side-by side comparison of two autologous cell-line derived tumor lysates (namely 328 and A7450 T1 M1) harboring different tumor mutational burden (TMB; i.e. ultra-high: 328; moderate-high: A7450 T1 M1). Mice received repetitive prophylactic or therapeutic applications of the vaccine. Tumor incidence, immune responses and tumor microenvironment was examined. Results Both tumor cell lysates delayed tumor formation in the prophylactic setting, with the A7450 T1 M1 lysate being more effective in decelerating tumor growth than the 328 lysate (median overall survival: 37 vs. 25 weeks). Comparable results were achieved in therapeutic setting and could be traced back to antigen-driven immune stimulation. Reactive T cells isolated from A7450 T1 M1-treated mice recognized autologous Mlh1−/− tumor cells in IFNγ ELISpot, but likewise YAC-1 cells, indicative for stimulation of both arms of the immune system. By deciphering local effects, vaccines shaped the tumor microenvironment differently. While A7450 T1 M1 prophylactically vaccinated tumors harbored low numbers of myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC) and elevated CD8-T cell infiltrates, vaccination with the 328 lysate evoked MDSC infiltration. Similar effects were seen in the therapeutic setting with stable disease induction only upon A7450 T1 M1 vaccination. Untangling individual response profiles revealed strong infiltration with LAG3+ and PD-L1+ immune cells when treatments failed, but almost complete exclusion of checkpoint-expressing lymphocytes in long-term survivors. Conclusions By applying two tumor cell lysates we demonstrate that neoantigen quality outranks quantity. This should be considered prior to designing cancer vaccine-based combination approaches.

Background Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is heterogeneous in etiology, phenotype and biology. Patient-derived xenografts (PDX) maintain morphology and molecular profiling of the original tumors and have become a standard “Avatar” model for human cancer research. However, restricted availability of tumor samples hindered the widespread use of PDX. Most PDX-projects include only surgical specimens because reliable engraftment from biopsies is missing. Therefore, sample collection is limited and excludes recurrent and metastatic, non-resectable cancer from preclinical models as well as future personalized medicine. Methods This study compares the PDX-take rate, -growth, histopathology, and molecular characteristics of endoscopic specimens with surgical specimens. HNSCC samples (n = 55) were collected ad hoc, fresh frozen and implanted into NOD.Cg-PrkdcscidIl2rgtm1Wjl/SzJ mice. Results Engraftment was successful in both sample types. However, engraftment rate was lower (21 vs. 52%) and growth delayed (11.2 vs. 6.7 weeks) for endoscopic biopsies. Following engraftment, growth kinetic was similar. Comparisons of primary tumors and corresponding PDX models confirmed preservation of histomorphology (HE histology) and molecular profile (Illumina Cancer Hotspot Panel) of the patients’ tumors. Accompanying flow cytometry on primary tumor specimens revealed a heterogeneous tumor microenvironment among individual cases and identified M2-like macrophages as positive predictors for engraftment. Vice versa, a high PD-L1 expression (combined positive score on tumor/immune cells) predicted PDX rejection. Conclusion Including biopsy samples from locally advanced or metastatic lesions from patients with non-surgical treatment strategies, increases the availability of PDX for basic and translational research. This facilitates (pre-) clinical studies for individual response prediction based on immunological biomarkers.

Background: Cancer vaccines provide a complex source of neoantigens. Still, increasing evidence reveals that the neoantigen quality rather than the quantity is predictive for treatment outcome. Methods: Using the preclinical Mlh1-/- tumor model, we performed a side-by side comparison of two autologous cell-line derived tumor lysates (namely 328 and A7450 T1 M1) harboring different tumor mutational burden (TMB; i.e. ultra-high: 328; moderate-high: A7450 T1 M1). Mice received repetitive prophylactic or therapeutic applications of the vaccine. Tumor incidence, immune responses and tumor microenvironment was examined.Results: Both tumor cell lysates delayed tumor formation in the prophylactic setting, with the A7450 T1 M1 lysate being more effective in decelerating tumor growth than the 328 lysate (median overall survival: 37 vs. 25 weeks). Comparable results were achieved in therapeutic setting and could be traced back to antigen-driven immune stimulation. Reactive T cells isolated from A7450 T1 M1-treated mice recognized autologous Mlh1−/− tumor cells in IFNγ ELISpot, but likewise YAC-1 cells, indicative for stimulation of both arms of the immune system. By deciphering local effects, vaccines shaped the tumor microenvironment differently. While A7450 T1 M1 prophylactically vaccinated tumors harbored low numbers of myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC) and elevated CD8-T cell infiltrates, vaccination with the 328 lysate evoked MDSC infiltration. Similar effects were seen in the therapeutic setting with stable disease induction only upon A7450 T1 M1 vaccination. Untangling individual response profiles revealed strong infiltration with LAG3+ and PD-L1+ immune cells when treatments failed, but almost complete exclusion of checkpoint-expressing lymphocytes in long-term survivors. Conclusions: By applying two tumor cell lysates we demonstrate that neoantigen quality outranks quantity. This should be considered prior to designing cancer vaccine-based combination approaches.

Background: Cancer vaccines provide a complex source of neoantigens. Still, increasing evidence reveals that the neoantigen quality rather than the quantity is predictive for treatment outcome. Methods: Using the preclinical Mlh1-/- tumor model, we performed a side-by side comparison of two autologous cell-line derived tumor lysates (namely 328 and A7450 T1 M1) harboring different tumor mutational burden (TMB; i.e. ultra-high: 328; moderate-high: A7450 T1 M1). Mice received repetitive prophylactic or therapeutic applications of the vaccine. Tumor incidence, immune responses and tumor microenvironment was examined.Results: Both tumor cell lysates delayed tumor formation in the prophylactic setting, with the A7450 T1 M1 lysate being more effective in decelerating tumor growth than the 328 lysate (median overall survival: 37 vs. 25 weeks). Comparable results were achieved in therapeutic setting and could be traced back to antigen-driven immune stimulation. Reactive T cells isolated from A7450 T1 M1-treated mice recognized autologous Mlh1−/− tumor cells in IFNγ ELISpot, but likewise YAC-1 cells, indicative for stimulation of both arms of the immune system. By deciphering local effects, vaccines shaped the tumor microenvironment differently. While A7450 T1 M1 prophylactically vaccinated tumors harbored low numbers of myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC) and elevated CD8-T cell infiltrates, vaccination with the 328 lysate evoked MDSC infiltration. Similar effects were seen in the therapeutic setting with stable disease induction only upon A7450 T1 M1 vaccination. Untangling individual response profiles revealed strong infiltration with LAG3+ and PD-L1+ immune cells when treatments failed, but almost complete exclusion of checkpoint-expressing lymphocytes in long-term survivors. Conclusions: By applying two tumor cell lysates we demonstrate that neoantigen quality outranks quantity. This should be considered prior to designing cancer vaccine-based combination approaches.

No abstract

No abstract