Dataset Information

Spatial and Temporal Heterogeneity of PD-L1 Expression and Tumor Mutational Burden in Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma at Baseline Diagnosis and after Chemotherapy.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Intrapatient heterogeneity of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and tumor mutational burden (TMB) in gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA) could influence their roles as predictive biomarkers for response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). In this retrospective analysis, we evaluated the spatiotemporal heterogeneity and prognostic relevance of PD-L1 expression and TMB in GEA.

Experimental design

A cohort of 211 patients with stage II-IV GEA was retrospectively reviewed for a total of 407 tumor samples with PD-L1 expression data and 319 tumor samples with TMB data. PD-L1 status was defined as positive if combined positive score (CPS) ≥1 using the 22C3 pharmDx assay. TMB levels were categorized as low, intermediate, or high (≤5, 5-15, or >15 mutations/Mb), or using a single threshold (<10 or ≥10 mutation/Mb), determined by next-generation sequencing using a targeted gene panel.

Results

Of 407 tumors, 56% were PD-L1 negative and 44% PD-L1 positive. Of 319 tumors, 50% were TMB-low, 45% TMB-intermediate, and 5% TMB-high; 86% had <10 and 14% ≥10 mutations/Mb. TMB level was significantly associated with MSI-status. PD-L1 expression and TMB exhibited marked spatial heterogeneity between baseline primary and metastatic tumors (61% and 69% concordance), and temporal heterogeneity between tumors before and after chemotherapy (57%-63% and 73%-75% concordance). PD-L1 expression and TMB were not significantly associated with overall survival.

Conclusions

PD-L1 expression and TMB exhibit marked spatial and temporal heterogeneity in GEA. This heterogeneity should be considered when obtaining tumor samples for molecular testing and when deciding whether ICI therapy is appropriate.See related commentary by Klempner et al., p. 6401.

SUBMITTER: Zhou KI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7744325 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown promising prospects in locally advanced, resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GC/GEJC) immunotherapy, but their efficacy in neoadjuvant settings remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of integrating programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors into neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) of GC/GEJC treatment.MethodsPubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and main oncology conference databases were systematically searched up to 19 November 2022, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus NACT were included. The main outcomes were pathological complete response (pCR), major pathological response (MPR), R0 resection rate, and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs).ResultsA total of 753 patients from 20 prospective studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled pCR and MPR rates from studies reporting were 21.7% [95% confidence interval (CI), 18.1%-25.5%] and 44.0% (95% CI, 34.1%-53.8%), respectively. The pooled incidence rate of total TRAEs was 89.1% (95% CI, 82.7%-94.3%), and the incidence rate of grade 3 to 4 TRAEs was 34.4% (95% CI, 17.8%-66.5%). The pooled R0 resection rate was reported to be 98.9% (95% CI, 97.0%-99.9%). Subgroup analysis has not found significant differences in efficacy and safety among different PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Moreover, the efficacy in patients with positive PD-L1 expression (combined positive score ≥1) was comparable with that in the entire study population [pCR, 22.5% vs. 21.2% (p > 0.05); MPR, 48.6% vs. 43.7% (p > 0.05)].ConclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis found that PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with NACT for locally advanced GC/GEJC were well tolerated and may confer therapeutic advantages. The integration of ICIs into NACT has shown the potential for application in any PD-L1 expression population.

Project description:Chemotherapy and checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapies are increasingly used in combinations. We determined associations between the presence of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapeutic biomarkers and protein markers of potential chemotherapy response. Data were extracted from a clinical-grade testing database (Caris Life Sciences; February 2015 through November 2017): immunotherapy response markers (microsatellite instability-high [MSI-H], tumor mutational burden-high [TMB-H], and PD-L1 protein expression) and protein chemotherapy response markers (excision repair complementation group 1 [ERCC1], topoisomerase 1 [TOPO1], topoisomerase 2 [TOP2A], thymidylate synthase [TS], tubulin beta 3 [TUBB3], ribonucleotide reductase regulatory subunit M1 [RRM1] and O-6-methyl guanine DNA methyltransferase [MGMT]). Relationships were determined by the Mantel-Haenszel chi-squared test or Fischer's exact tests. Overall, 28,034 patients representing a total of 40 tumor types were assessed. MSI-H was found in 3.3% of patients (73% were also TMB-H), TMB-H, 8.4% (28.3% were also MSI-H) and PD-L1 expression in 11.0% of patients (5.1% were also MSI-H; 16.4% were also TMB-H). Based on concurrent biomarker expression, combinations of immunotherapy with platinum (ERCC1 negativity) or with doxorubicin, epirubicin or etoposide (TOP2A positivity) have a higher probability of response, whereas combinations with irinotecan or topotecan (TOPO1 positivity), with gemcitabine (RRM1 negativity), and fluorouracil, pemetrexed or capecitabine (TS negativity) may be of less benefit. The potential for immunotherapy and taxane (TUBB3 negativity) combinations is present for MSI-H but not TMB-H or PD-L1-expressing tumors; for temozolomide and dacarbazine (MGMT negative), PD-L1 is frequently coexpressed, but MSI-H and TMB-H are not associated. Protein markers of potential chemotherapy response along with next-generation sequencing for immunotherapy response markers can help support rational combinations as part of an individualized, precision oncology approach.