Synergistic Therapeutic Effects of Low Dose Decitabine and NY-ESO-1 Specific TCR-T Cells for the Colorectal Cancer With Microsatellite Stability

Epigenetic therapy: Research progress of decitabine in the treatment of solid tumors

Decitabine's early successful therapeutic outcomes in hematologic malignancies have led to regulatory approvals from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for addressing myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). These approvals have sparked keen interest in exploring the potential of decitabine for treating solid tumors. Continuous preclinical and clinical trials have proved that low doses of decitabine also bring benefits in treating solid tumors, and various proposed mechanisms attempt to explain the potential efficacy. It is important to note that the application of decitabine in solid tumors is still considered investigational. This article reviews the application mechanism and current status of decitabine in the treatment of solid tumors.

Treatment with decitabine induces the expression of stemness markers, PD-L1 and NY-ESO-1 in colorectal cancer: potential for combined chemoimmunotherapy

BACKGROUND

The mechanism of tumor immune escape and progression in colorectal cancer (CRC) is widely investigated in-vitro to help understand and identify agents that might play a crucial role in response to treatment and improve the overall survival of CRC patients. Several mechanisms of immune escape and tumor progression, including expression of stemness markers, inactivation of immunoregulatory genes by methylation, and epigenetic silencing, have been reported in CRC, indicating the potential of demethylating agents as anti-cancer drugs. Of these, a chemotherapeutic demethylating agent, Decitabine (DAC), has been reported to induce a dual effect on both DNA demethylation and histone changes leading to an increased expression of target biomarkers, thus making it an attractive anti-tumorigenic drug.

METHODS

We compared the effect of DAC in primary 1076 Col and metastatic 1872 Col cell lines isolated and generated from patients' tumor tissues. Both cell lines were treated with DAC, and the expression of the NY-ESO-1 cancer-testis antigen, the PD-L1 immunoinhibitory marker, and the CD44, Nanog, KLF-4, CD133, MSI-1 stemness markers were analyzed using different molecular and immunological assays.

RESULTS

DAC treatment significantly upregulated stemness markers in both primary 1076 Col and meta-static 1872 Col cell lines, although a lower effect occurred on the latter: CD44 (7.85 fold; ***p = 0.0001 vs. (4.19 fold; *p = 0.0120), Nanog (4.1 fold; ***p < 0.0001 vs.1.69 fold; ***p = 0.0008), KLF-4 (4.33 fold; ***p < 0.0001 vs.2.48 fold; ***p = 0.0005), CD133 (16.77 fold; ***p = 0.0003 vs.6.36 fold; *p = 0.0166), and MSI-1 (2.33 fold; ***p = 0.0003 vs.2.3 fold; ***p = 0.0004), respectively. Interestingly, in the metastatic 1872 Col cells treated with DAC, the expression of both PD-L1 and NY-ESO-1 was increased tenfold (*p = 0.0128) and fivefold (***p < 0.0001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that the upregulation of both stemness and immune checkpoint markers by DAC treatment on CRC cells might represent a mechanism of immune evasion. In addition, induction of NY-ESO-1 may represent an immuno-therapeutic option in metastatic CRC patients. Finally, the combination of DAC and anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 antibodies treatment should represent a potential therapeutic intervention for this group of patients.

Therapeutic challenge for immunotherapy targeting cold colorectal cancer: A narrative review

Cold colorectal tumors are not likely to trigger a robust immune response and tend to suppress the immune response. There may be three reasons. First, the complex tumor microenvironment of cold colorectal cancer (CRC) leads to tolerance and clearance of immunotherapy. Second, the modification and concealment of tumor-specific targets in cold CRC cause immune escape and immune response interruption. Finally, the difference in number and function of immune cell subsets in patients with cold CRC makes them respond poorly to immunotherapy. Therefore, we can only overcome the challenges in immunotherapy of cold CRC through in-depth research and understanding the changes and mechanisms in the above three aspects of cold CRC.

Immunotherapies catering to the unmet medical need of cold colorectal cancer

As a common malignant tumor of gastrointestinal tract, the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) has gradually increased in recent years. In western developed countries, it has even become the second largest malignant tumor next to lung cancer. Immunotherapy is a hot topic in the field of cancer therapy, including immune checkpoint blockade (ICB), adoptive cell therapy (ACT), cancer vaccines and cytokines, aiming to improve the ability of the immune system to recognize, target and eliminate cancer cells. However, cold CRC, which accounts for a high proportion of CRC, is not so reactive to it. The development of immunotherapy to prevent cancer cells from forming “immune escape” pathways to the immune system in cold CRC, has been under increasing study attention. There is proof that an organic combination of radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and several immunotherapies can considerably boost the immune system’s capacity to eradicate tumor cells. In this review, we summarized the role of immunotherapy in colorectal cancer. In addition, we propose a breakthrough and strategy to improve the role of immunotherapy in cold CRC based on its characteristics.