Coinhibitory molecules in cancer biology and therapy

Expression and Clinical Significance of TIGIT in Primary Breast Cancer

Purpose

The roles of T cell immunoreceptor with Ig and ITIM domains (TIGIT) in the diagnosis of primary breast cancer (PBC) are still unclear. This study was designed to investigate the expression of TIGIT in PBC patients, with an aim to analyze its diagnostic value in PBC.

Patients and Methods

We first explore the expression of TIGIT in cancer patients based on TCGA database, and then we analyzed its correlation with clinicopathological features. Afterwards, we compared the protein and mRNA expressions of TIGIT in two BC cell lines (MCF-7 and MDA-MB-231) and normal breast epithelial cell line (MCF-10A). Subsequently, 56 PBC female patients admitted to the Taizhou People's Hospital from October 2018 to June 2021 were included in this study. Flow cytometry was used to detect TIGIT level on peripheral blood CD3⁺ T cells of PBC patients and healthy controls. TIGIT expression in PBC tissues was detected by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and immunofluorescence staining.

Results

TCGA database showed that compared with adjacent tissues, TIGIT was significantly upregulated in tumor tissues. High TIGIT expression was positively correlated with tumor stage and negatively correlated with recurrence free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). TIGIT level in BC cell lines, peripheral blood and tumor tissues of PBC patients was significantly higher than that of control (P < 0.05). TIGIT level was correlated with age (P < 0.05), rather than tumor size, pathological type, lymph node metastasis, ER, PR, HER-2, and P53. ROC curve showed that the optimal critical value of peripheral blood TIGIT for BC screening was 23.38%. Postoperative TIGIT level in peripheral blood was significantly decreased compared to the preoperative TIGIT level (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

TIGIT was upregulated in PBC and was correlated with age. It may be a potential target for the diagnosis and immunotherapy of PBC.

BTLA Expression in CLL: Epigenetic Regulation and Impact on CLL B Cell Proliferation and Ability to IL-4 Production

In our previous study, while chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) cases showed higher levels of B and T lymphocyte attenuator (BTLA) mRNA compared to controls, lower BTLA protein expression was observed in cases compared to controls. Hence we hypothesize that micro RNA (miR) 155-5p regulates BTLA expression in CLL. In line with earlier data, expression of BTLA mRNA and miR-155-5p is elevated in CLL (p = 0.034 and p = 0.0006, respectively) as well as in MEC-1 cell line (p = 0.009 and 0.016, respectively). Inhibition of miR-155-5p partially restored BTLA protein expression in CLL patients (p = 0.01) and in MEC-1 cell lines (p = 0.058). Additionally, we aimed to evaluate the significance of BTLA deficiency in CLL cells on proliferation and IL-4 production of B cells. We found that secretion of IL-4 is not dependent on BTLA expression, since fractions of BTLA positive and BTLA negative B cells expressing intracellular IL-4 were similar in CLL patients and controls. We demonstrated that in controls the fraction of proliferating cells is lower in BTLA positive than in BTLA negative B cells (p = 0.059), which was not observed in CLL. However, the frequency of BTLA positive Ki67+ B cells in CLL was higher compared to corresponding cells from controls (p = 0.055) while there were no differences between the examined groups regarding frequency of BTLA negative Ki67+ B cells. Our studies suggest that miR-155-5p is involved in BTLA deficiency, affecting proliferation of CLL B cells, which may be one of the mechanisms responsible for CLL pathogenesis.

The landscape of novel and complementary targets for immunotherapy: an analysis of gene expression in the tumor microenvironment

Background: Immunotherapies targeting immune checkpoint proteins CTLA-4, PD-1, and PD-L1 have saved lives, but these therapies have only been effective in some patients. Patients positive for expression of immune checkpoint proteins in the tumor microenvironment show better response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. Consequently, knowledge of which genes are consistently expressed in lymphocytes within the tumor microenvironment can convey potentially effective and complementary new immunotherapy targets.

Results: We identified 54 genes that have higher co-expression with the pan T-cell marker CD3E than CTLA4 or PDCD1. In a dataset of 26 patients who received anti-PD-1 therapy, we observed that co-expression between CD3E and PDCD1 was higher among responders than non-responders, supporting our correlation-based approach.

Conclusions: The genes highlighted in these analyses, which include CD6, TIGIT, CD96, and SLAMF6, warrant further investigation of their therapeutic potential.

Methods: We analyzed and ranked genes that were co-expressed with the pan T-cell marker CD3E in 9,601 human tumors, spanning 31 cancer types. To further identify targets that may be complementary to existing PD-1 therapy, we examined and ranked genes with high CD3E co-expression and relatively low PDCD1 co-expression.

Review of Immune Therapies Targeting Ovarian Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

The rise of immunotherapy is the greatest advance in oncology to occur over the last several years, but applications in gynecologic malignancies lag behind other tumors. The term "immunotherapy" envelops monoclonal antibodies as receptor mediators, including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPI), cancer vaccines, and adoptive immunotherapies alone or in combination with other therapeutic approaches. The purpose of this review is to summarize the status of immunotherapy trials in ovarian cancer and to specifically highlight data published in the last 1-2 years.

Review of Immune Therapies Targeting Ovarian Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

The rise of immunotherapy is the greatest advance in oncology to occur over the last several years, but applications in gynecologic malignancies lag behind other tumors. The term "immunotherapy" envelops monoclonal antibodies as receptor mediators, including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPI), cancer vaccines, and adoptive immunotherapies alone or in combination with other therapeutic approaches. The purpose of this review is to summarize the status of immunotherapy trials in ovarian cancer and to specifically highlight data published in the last 1-2 years.

Review of Immune Therapies Targeting Ovarian Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

The rise of immunotherapy is the greatest advance in oncology to occur over the last several years, but applications in gynecologic malignancies lag behind other tumors. The term "immunotherapy" envelops monoclonal antibodies as receptor mediators, including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPI), cancer vaccines, and adoptive immunotherapies alone or in combination with other therapeutic approaches. The purpose of this review is to summarize the status of immunotherapy trials in ovarian cancer and to specifically highlight data published in the last 1-2 years.

Systemic treatments for metastatic cutaneous melanoma

BACKGROUND

The prognosis of people with metastatic cutaneous melanoma, a skin cancer, is generally poor. Recently, new classes of drugs (e.g. immune checkpoint inhibitors and small-molecule targeted drugs) have significantly improved patient prognosis, which has drastically changed the landscape of melanoma therapeutic management. This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2000.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of systemic treatments for metastatic cutaneous melanoma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to October 2017: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS. We also searched five trials registers and the ASCO database in February 2017, and checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered RCTs of systemic therapies for people with unresectable lymph node metastasis and distant metastatic cutaneous melanoma compared to any other treatment. We checked the reference lists of selected articles to identify further references to relevant trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data, and a third review author independently verified extracted data. We implemented a network meta-analysis approach to make indirect comparisons and rank treatments according to their effectiveness (as measured by the impact on survival) and harm (as measured by occurrence of high-grade toxicity). The same two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias of eligible studies according to Cochrane standards and assessed evidence quality based on the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 122 RCTs (28,561 participants). Of these, 83 RCTs, encompassing 21 different comparisons, were included in meta-analyses. Included participants were men and women with a mean age of 57.5 years who were recruited from hospital settings. Twenty-nine studies included people whose cancer had spread to their brains. Interventions were categorised into five groups: conventional chemotherapy (including single agent and polychemotherapy), biochemotherapy (combining chemotherapy with cytokines such as interleukin-2 and interferon-alpha), immune checkpoint inhibitors (such as anti-CTLA4 and anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies), small-molecule targeted drugs used for melanomas with specific gene changes (such as BRAF inhibitors and MEK inhibitors), and other agents (such as anti-angiogenic drugs). Most interventions were compared with chemotherapy. In many cases, trials were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies producing the tested drug: this was especially true for new classes of drugs, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and small-molecule targeted drugs.When compared to single agent chemotherapy, the combination of multiple chemotherapeutic agents (polychemotherapy) did not translate into significantly better survival (overall survival: HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.16, 6 studies, 594 participants; high-quality evidence; progression-free survival: HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.25, 5 studies, 398 participants; high-quality evidence. Those who received combined treatment are probably burdened by higher toxicity rates (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.71, 3 studies, 390 participants; moderate-quality evidence). (We defined toxicity as the occurrence of grade 3 (G3) or higher adverse events according to the World Health Organization scale.)Compared to chemotherapy, biochemotherapy (chemotherapy combined with both interferon-alpha and interleukin-2) improved progression-free survival (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.99, 6 studies, 964 participants; high-quality evidence), but did not significantly improve overall survival (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.06, 7 studies, 1317 participants; high-quality evidence). Biochemotherapy had higher toxicity rates (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.61, 2 studies, 631 participants; high-quality evidence).With regard to immune checkpoint inhibitors, anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies plus chemotherapy probably increased the chance of progression-free survival compared to chemotherapy alone (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.92, 1 study, 502 participants; moderate-quality evidence), but may not significantly improve overall survival (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.01, 2 studies, 1157 participants; low-quality evidence). Compared to chemotherapy alone, anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies is likely to be associated with higher toxicity rates (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.42, 2 studies, 1142 participants; moderate-quality evidence).Compared to chemotherapy, anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies (immune checkpoint inhibitors) improved overall survival (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.48, 1 study, 418 participants; high-quality evidence) and probably improved progression-free survival (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.61, 2 studies, 957 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies may also result in less toxicity than chemotherapy (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.97, 3 studies, 1360 participants; low-quality evidence).Anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies performed better than anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies in terms of overall survival (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.66, 1 study, 764 participants; high-quality evidence) and progression-free survival (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.60, 2 studies, 1465 participants; high-quality evidence). Anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies may result in better toxicity outcomes than anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.91, 2 studies, 1465 participants; low-quality evidence).Compared to anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies alone, the combination of anti-CTLA4 plus anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies was associated with better progression-free survival (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.46, 2 studies, 738 participants; high-quality evidence). There may be no significant difference in toxicity outcomes (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.92, 2 studies, 764 participants; low-quality evidence) (no data for overall survival were available).The class of small-molecule targeted drugs, BRAF inhibitors (which are active exclusively against BRAF-mutated melanoma), performed better than chemotherapy in terms of overall survival (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.57, 2 studies, 925 participants; high-quality evidence) and progression-free survival (HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.34, 2 studies, 925 participants; high-quality evidence), and there may be no significant difference in toxicity (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.48 to 3.33, 2 studies, 408 participants; low-quality evidence).Compared to chemotherapy, MEK inhibitors (which are active exclusively against BRAF-mutated melanoma) may not significantly improve overall survival (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.25, 3 studies, 496 participants; low-quality evidence), but they probably lead to better progression-free survival (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.80, 3 studies, 496 participants; moderate-quality evidence). However, MEK inhibitors probably have higher toxicity rates (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.41, 1 study, 91 participants; moderate-quality evidence).Compared to BRAF inhibitors, the combination of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors was associated with better overall survival (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.82, 4 studies, 1784 participants; high-quality evidence). BRAF plus MEK inhibitors was also probably better in terms of progression-free survival (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.71, 4 studies, 1784 participants; moderate-quality evidence), and there appears likely to be no significant difference in toxicity (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.20, 4 studies, 1774 participants; moderate-quality evidence).Compared to chemotherapy, the combination of chemotherapy plus anti-angiogenic drugs was probably associated with better overall survival (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.81; moderate-quality evidence) and progression-free survival (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.92; moderate-quality evidence). There may be no difference in terms of toxicity (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.09 to 5.32; low-quality evidence). All results for this comparison were based on 324 participants from 2 studies.Network meta-analysis focused on chemotherapy as the common comparator and currently approved treatments for which high- to moderate-quality evidence of efficacy (as represented by treatment effect on progression-free survival) was available (based on the above results) for: biochemotherapy (with both interferon-alpha and interleukin-2); anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies; anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies; anti-CTLA4 plus anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies; BRAF inhibitors; MEK inhibitors, and BRAF plus MEK inhibitors. Analysis (which included 19 RCTs and 7632 participants) generated 21 indirect comparisons.The best evidence (moderate-quality evidence) for progression-free survival was found for the following indirect comparisons:• both combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors (HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.51) and small-molecule targeted drugs (HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.26) probably improved progression-free survival compared to chemotherapy;• both BRAF inhibitors (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.68) and combinations of small-molecule targeted drugs (HR 0.22, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.39) were probably associated with better progression-free survival compared to anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies;• biochemotherapy (HR 2.81, 95% CI 1.76 to 4.51) probably lead to worse progression-free survival compared to BRAF inhibitors;• the combination of small-molecule targeted drugs probably improved progression-free survival (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.68) compared to anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies;• both biochemotherapy (HR 5.05, 95% CI 3.01 to 8.45) and MEK inhibitors (HR 3.16, 95% CI 1.77 to 5.65) were probably associated with worse progression-free survival compared to the combination of small-molecule targeted drugs; and• biochemotherapy was probably associated with worse progression-free survival (HR 2.81, 95% CI 1.54 to 5.11) compared to the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors.The best evidence (moderate-quality evidence) for toxicity was found for the following indirect comparisons:• combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (RR 3.49, 95% CI 2.12 to 5.77) probably increased toxicity compared to chemotherapy;• combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors probably increased toxicity (RR 2.50, 95% CI 1.20 to 5.20) compared to BRAF inhibitors;• the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors probably increased toxicity (RR 3.83, 95% CI 2.59 to 5.68) compared to anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies; and• biochemotherapy was probably associated with lower toxicity (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.71) compared to the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors.Network meta-analysis-based ranking suggested that the combination of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors is the most effective strategy in terms of progression-free survival, whereas anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies are associated with the lowest toxicity.Overall, the risk of bias of the included trials can be considered as limited. When considering the 122 trials included in this review and the seven types of bias we assessed, we performed 854 evaluations only seven of which (< 1%) assigned high risk to six trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found high-quality evidence that many treatments offer better efficacy than chemotherapy, especially recently implemented treatments, such as small-molecule targeted drugs, which are used to treat melanoma with specific gene mutations. Compared with chemotherapy, biochemotherapy (in this case, chemotherapy combined with both interferon-alpha and interleukin-2) and BRAF inhibitors improved progression-free survival; BRAF inhibitors (for BRAF-mutated melanoma) and anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies improved overall survival. However, there was no difference between polychemotherapy and monochemotherapy in terms of achieving progression-free survival and overall survival. Biochemotherapy did not significantly improve overall survival and has higher toxicity rates compared with chemotherapy.There was some evidence that combined treatments worked better than single treatments: anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies, alone or with anti-CTLA4, improved progression-free survival compared with anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies alone. Anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies performed better than anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies in terms of overall survival, and a combination of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors was associated with better overall survival for BRAF-mutated melanoma, compared to BRAF inhibitors alone.The combination of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors (which can only be administered to people with BRAF-mutated melanoma) appeared to be the most effective treatment (based on results for progression-free survival), whereas anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies appeared to be the least toxic, and most acceptable, treatment.Evidence quality was reduced due to imprecision, between-study heterogeneity, and substandard reporting of trials. Future research should ensure that those diminishing influences are addressed. Clinical areas of future investigation should include the longer-term effect of new therapeutic agents (i.e. immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies) on overall survival, as well as the combination of drugs used in melanoma treatment; research should also investigate the potential influence of biomarkers.

Modulation of PD-L1 and CD8 Activity in Idiopathic and Infectious Chronic Inflammatory Conditions

Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) can reduce the immune response by inhibiting CD8 T-cell proliferation and cytotoxic activity. We studied a series of human viral (molloscum, human papillomavirus, herpes simplex, cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus, smallpox) and bacterial infections (Helicobacter pylori) for the in situ expression of PD-L1, mononuclear cell infiltration, and CD8 activity and compared this to noninfectious idiopathic inflammatory conditions to better define which immune responses may be more highly correlated with an infectious agent. Each viral and bacterial infection showed an increased PD-L1 expression that was most prominent in the mononuclear cell/CD8+ infiltrate surrounding the infection. However, the CD8 cells were mostly quiescent as evidenced by the low Ki67 index and minimal granzyme expression. Using a melanoma mouse model, acute reovirus infection increased PD-L1 expression, but decreased CD8 cytotoxic activity and Treg (FOXP3) cell numbers. In comparison, idiopathic noninfectious chronic inflammatory processes including lichen sclerosis, eczema, Sjogren's disease, and ulcerative colitis showed a comparable strong PD-L1 expression in the mononuclear cell infiltrates but much greater Treg infiltration. However, this strong immunosuppressor profile was ineffective as evidenced by strong CD8 proliferation and granzyme expression. These data suggest that viral and bacterial infections induce a PD-L1 response that, unlike noninfectious chronic inflammatory conditions, dampens the activity of the recruited CD8 cells which, in turn, may enhance the ability of anti-PD-L1 therapy to eliminate the infectious agent.

Intragenic Variations in BTLA Gene Influence mRNA Expression of BTLA Gene in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Patients and Confer Susceptibility to Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

The aim of this study was to determine the association between polymorphisms in gene encoding B- and T-lymphocyte attenuator (BTLA) and susceptibility to chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and their influence on mRNA expression of BTLA gene in T and B cells from CLL patients (pts.). The following BTLA single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs): rs2705511, rs1982809, rs9288952, rs76844316, rs16859633, rs9288953, rs2705535, rs1844089, rs2705565, rs2633580 were genotyped with use of TaqMan probes in 321 CLL pts. and in 470 controls. The mRNA levels of human BTLA were determined in subpopulations of T and B cells from 37 CLL patients with use of Applied Biosystems assays. Three SNPs: rs1982809, rs2705511 and rs9288953 were associated with susceptibility to CLL. The frequency of rs1982809[G] allele and rs2705511[C] allele carriers was higher in patients compared to the controls (0.51 vs. 0.41, OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.14-2.02, p = 0.004 and 0.56 vs. 0.44, OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.22-2.16, p = 0.0009, respectively). Furthermore, rs9288953[TT] genotype was overrepresented in CLL pts. compared to the controls (0.22 vs. 0.14, OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.20-2.53, p = 0.004). The evaluation of the influence of BTLA SNPs on BTLA mRNA expression in CLL pts. showed that the presence of rs1982809[G] allele was associated with lower median (±SD) BTLA mRNA expression in T cells (expressed as 2-delta Ct) in CLL pts. as compared to [AA] homozygotes (0.009 ± 0.013 vs. 0.026 ± 0.012, p = 0.03). Our results indicate that rs1982809 BTLA gene polymorphism is associated with mRNA expression level and that variations in the BTLA gene might be considered as potentially low-penetrating CLL risk factor.

Immune checkpoint blockade as a potential therapeutic target in non-small cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

The recent emergence of immune checkpoint blockade therapy and the progression of immunobiology in cancer have spurred an increasing interest in the immunotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), designed to directly target immune inhibitory molecules, have demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC.

AREAS COVERED

In the present article, the authors summarize the mechanism, efficacy and safety of major ICIs for the treatment of advanced or metastatic NSCLC. Combinations of different ICIs or conventional therapy and/or targeted agents for NSCLC treatment in clinical trials are also updated. In addition, immune-related adverse events and the roles of inhibitory immune checkpoint molecules as potential biomarkers in the immune checkpoint blockade therapy for NSCLC are emphatically elucidated.

EXPERT OPINION

Immunotherapies targeting the immune checkpoint pathways have shown potential to generate durable responses and improve survival for NSCLC patients. Although the toxicity profile of this immunotherapy is manageable, immune-related adverse events and drug resistance may cause therapeutic failure. Therefore, a better understanding of the mechanisms underpinning its function and the potential side effects of ICIs, as well as the identification of predictive biomarkers for patient selection are essential.

Immunotherapy for advanced melanoma: future directions

As calculated by the meta-analysis of Korn et al., the prognosis of metastatic melanoma in the pretarget and immunological therapy era was poor, with a median survival of 6.2 and a 1-year life expectancy of 25.5%. Nowadays, significant advances in melanoma treatment have been gained, and immunotherapy is one of the promising approaches to get to durable responses and survival improvement. The aim of the present review is to highlight the recent innovations in melanoma immunotherapy and to propose a critical perspective of the future directions of this enthralling oncology subspecialty.

Strategies and Advancements in Harnessing the Immune System for Gastric Cancer Immunotherapy

In cancer biology, cells and molecules that form the fundamental components of the tumor microenvironment play a major role in tumor initiation, and progression as well as responses to therapy. Therapeutic approaches that would enable and harness the immune system to target tumor cells mark the future of anticancer therapy as it could induce an immunological memory specific to the tumor type and further enhance tumor regression and relapse-free survival in cancer patients. Gastric cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related mortalities that has a modest survival benefit from existing treatment options. The advent of immunotherapy presents us with new approaches in gastric cancer treatment where adaptive cell therapies, cancer vaccines, and antibody therapies have all been used with promising outcomes. In this paper, we review the current advances and prospects in the gastric cancer immunotherapy. Special focus is laid on new strategies and clinical trials that attempt to enhance the efficacy of various immunotherapeutic modalities in gastric cancer.

Personalised medicine: Development and external validation of a prognostic model for metastatic melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to set up a prognostic model for the identification of survival predictors specific for melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

The following prospectively collected data were utilised: patient and primary tumour characteristics, relapse-free-interval, site and number of metastases, previous therapies and level of serum biomarkers (lactic dehydrogenase (LDH), C-reactive protein, β2-microglobulin, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), IL2, IL6, S-100, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), transaminases, leucocyte count, lymphocytes subpopulations). A multivariate prognostic model was developed using the Cox regression model fitted to the data of 113 consecutive metastatic patients treated with ipilimumab (3 mg/kg, q3w) at Veneto Institute of Oncology (IOV). External validation was obtained using the data of 69 and 34 patients treated at European Oncology Institute (IEO) and University of Torino (UT), respectively.

RESULTS

Median survival was 8.3, 4.9 and 7.1 months from first ipilimumab administration at IOV, IEO and UT, respectively. Both higher baseline levels of LDH (Hazard Ratio [HR] v=1.36, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.16-1.58, P<.001) and neutrophils (HR=1.76, 95% CI 1.41-2.10, P<.001) were associated with worse prognosis. Model performance was satisfactory both upon internal validation (Dxy=0.42) and external validation (Dxy=0.40). Serum LDH and neutrophil count discriminated patients who lived more (low neutrophils and low LDH) or less (high LDH or neutrophils) than 24 months.

CONCLUSION

Serum LDH and neutrophil count were significant independent prognostic factors. This externally validated prognostic nomogram, could help clinicians to identify the patients who would benefit most from ipilimumab and consequently to improve resource allocation. These easily available biomarkers deserve further validation.

B7-H1/PD-1 blockade therapy in urological malignancies: current status and future prospects

The stimulatory and inhibitory coreceptors expressed by T lymphocytes are known to play critical roles in regulating cancer immunity. An array of inhibitory coreceptors involved in the inhibition of T-cell functions and the blockade of immune activation have been discovered in recent years, the most important of which are cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4), programmmed death-1 (PD-1), and B7 homolog 1 (B7-H1). Immunotherapies targeting T-cell coinhibitory molecules have proved to be effective in cancer treatment. Several kinds of monoclonal antibodies have been tested in preclinical studies, with better outcomes than conventional therapies in many malignancies. Common urological malignancies including renal cell carcinoma, bladder cancer and prostate cancer are supposed to be immunogenic cancer types and not so sensitive to conventional therapies as other malignancies. This review will focus on B7-H1/PD-1 blockade therapy in urological malignancies, summarizing the results of clinical trials as well as the challenges and prospects of this emerging immunotherapy.

Checkpoint inhibitors in immunotherapy of ovarian cancer

The treatment of ovarian cancer is a major challenge in oncology as mortality from ovarian cancer remains very high. The immune system plays a critical role in controlling cancer through a dynamic relationship with cancer cells. Immunotherapy can establish a sustained immune system response against recurring cancer cells leading to long-term remissions for ovarian cancer patient. The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors, which work by targeting molecules that serve as checks and balances in the regulation of immune responses, might be a promising avenue of immunotherapeutic research in ovarian cancer. In this review, we have focused on the potential of certain immune checkpoint inhibitors, such as anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigens, anti-programmed death agents, and anti-program death ligands against ovarian cancer, with their mechanism of actions. Also, the problems arising due to checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy have been discussed in this review. Checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy is still in early-phase testing for ovarian cancer. Understanding the pivotal role of the tumor microenvironment in suppressing anticancer immunity, the unique adverse effects profiles of these agents, and the exploration of combinatorial treatment regimens will ultimately lead to enhance the efficacy of ovarian cancer immunotherapies and improved patient care.

Contemporary controversies and perspectives in the staging and treatment of patients with lymph node metastasis from melanoma, especially with regards positive sentinel lymph node biopsy

The management of melanoma lymph node metastasis particularly when detected by sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is still controversial. Results of the only randomized trial conducted to assess the therapeutic value of SLNB, the Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial (MSLT-1), have not conclusively proven the effectiveness of this procedure but are interpreted by the authors and guidelines as indicating SLNB is standard of care. After surgery, interferon alpha had a small survival benefit and radiotherapy has limited effectiveness for patient at high-risk of regional recurrence. New drugs, including immune modulating agents and targeted therapies, already shown to be effective in patients with distant metastasis, are being evaluated in the adjuvant setting. In this regard, ensuring high quality of surgery through the identification of reliable quality assurance indicators and improving the homogeneity of prognostic stratification of patients entered onto clinical trials is paramount. Here, we review the controversial issues regarding the staging and treatment of melanoma patients with lymph node metastasis, present a summary of important and potentially practice changing ongoing research and provide a commentary on what it all means at this point in time.

Cellular and molecular mechanisms in cancer immune escape: a comprehensive review

Immune escape is the final phase of cancer immunoediting process wherein cancer modulates our immune system to escape from being destroyed by it. Many cellular and molecular events govern the cancer's evasion of host immune response. The tumor undergoes continuous remodeling at the genetic, epigenetic and metabolic level to acquire resistance to apoptosis. At the same time, it effectively modifies all the components of the host's immunome so as to escape from its antitumor effects. Moreover, it induces accumulation of suppressive cells like Treg and myeloid derived suppressor cells and factors which also enable it to elude the immune system. Recent research in this area helps in defining the role of newer players like miRNAs and exosomes in immune escape. The immunotherapeutic approaches developed to target the escape phase appear quite promising; however, the quest for a perfect therapeutic agent that can achieve maximum cure with minimal toxicity continues.

CTLA-4 blockade and the renaissance of cancer immunotherapy

Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) plays a key role in restraining the adaptive immune response of T-cells towards a variety of antigens including tumor associated antigens (TAAs). The blockade of this immune checkpoint elicits an effective anticancer immune response in a range of preclinical models, suggesting that naturally occurring (or therapeutically induced) TAA specific lymphocytes need to be "unleashed" in order to properly fight against malignant cells. Therefore, investigators have tested this therapeutic hypothesis also in humans: the favorable results obtained with this strategy in patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma are revolutionizing the management of this highly aggressive disease and are fueling new enthusiasm on cancer immunotherapy in general. Here we summarize the biology of CTLA-4, overview the experimental data supporting the rational for targeting CTLA-4 to treat cancer and review the main clinical findings on this novel anticancer approach. Moreover, we critically discuss the current challenges and potential developments of this promising field of cancer immunotherapy.