Understanding the Effects of Radiotherapy on the Tumour Immune Microenvironment to Identify Potential Prognostic and Predictive Biomarkers of Radiotherapy Response

Condensed Matter Systems Exposed to Radiation: Multiscale Theory, Simulations, and Experiment

This roadmap reviews the new, highly interdisciplinary research field studying the behavior of condensed matter systems exposed to radiation. The Review highlights several recent advances in the field and provides a roadmap for the development of the field over the next decade. Condensed matter systems exposed to radiation can be inorganic, organic, or biological, finite or infinite, composed of different molecular species or materials, exist in different phases, and operate under different thermodynamic conditions. Many of the key phenomena related to the behavior of irradiated systems are very similar and can be understood based on the same fundamental theoretical principles and computational approaches. The multiscale nature of such phenomena requires the quantitative description of the radiation-induced effects occurring at different spatial and temporal scales, ranging from the atomic to the macroscopic, and the interlinks between such descriptions. The multiscale nature of the effects and the similarity of their manifestation in systems of different origins necessarily bring together different disciplines, such as physics, chemistry, biology, materials science, nanoscience, and biomedical research, demonstrating the numerous interlinks and commonalities between them. This research field is highly relevant to many novel and emerging technologies and medical applications.

Lumican is a potential predictor on the efficacy of concurrent chemoradiotherapy in cervical squamous cell carcinoma

Purpose

To identify new novel biomarkers for predicting the efficacy of concurrent chemoradiotherapy(CCRT) in cervical squamous cell carcinoma(CESC).

Methods

Gene expression datasets GSE56363, GSE5787, and GSE168009 were analyzed to identify candidate genes to predict the efficacy of CCRT in CESC. Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data from GSE168652 and CESC patients in The Cancer Genome Atlas(TCGA) were systematically analyzed to explore possible molecular mechanisms. Kaplan-Meier evaluated the correlation between LUM (Lumican) and prognostic significance. The expression of LUM protein in biopsy tissues before CCRT was detected by immunohistochemistry in 15 CESC patients.

Results

LUM mRNA levels were significantly upregulated in nonresponders of CESC.patients receiving CCRT and positively correlated with poor therapeutic effect. Furthermore, high expression of LUM influenced the immune microenvironment in CESC patient-derived organoids treated with CCRT. LUM overexpression in CESC cells induced resistance to CCRT, potentially via immune landscape modulation. Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) revealed that possible mechanisms underlying resistance to CCRT might involve the PARs and IL1 signaling pathway affecting the immune landscape.

Conclusions

High LUM expression is correlated with poor efficacy in CESC patients receiving CCRT, possibly through the PARs and IL1 signaling pathway affecting the immune landscape.

Radiation therapy-activated nanoparticle and immunotherapy: The next milestone in oncology?

Radiotherapy (RT) is a fundamental treatment at the locoregional or oligometastatic stages of cancer. In various tumors, RT effects may be optimized using synergistic combinations that enhance tumor response. Innovative strategies have been designed that explore the radiation mechanisms, at the physical, chemical and biological levels, to propose precision RT approaches. They consist in combining RT with immunotherapy to revert radiation immunosuppressive effects or to enhance radiation-induced immune defenses against the tumor to favor immunogenic cell death. Radiotherapy-activated nanoparticles are another innovation. By increasing radiation response in situ, nanoparticles improve tumor control locally, and can trigger systemic immune reactions that may be exploited to improve the systemic efficacy of RT. Strong clinical evidence of improved outcomes is now available for combinations of RT and immunotherapy on one hand and RT and nanoparticles on the other hand. The triple combination of RT, immunotherapy and nanoparticles is promising in terms of tolerance, local and systemic anti-tumor control. Yet, significant challenges remain to unravel the complexity of the multiscale mechanisms underlying response to this combination and their associated parameters. Such parameters include patient characteristics, tumor bulk and histology, radiation technique, energy, dose, fractionation, immunotherapy targets and predictive biomarkers, nanoparticle type, size, delivery (intratumoral/intravenous), distribution. The temporal combination is another critical parameter. The mechanisms of response of the combinatorial approaches are reviewed, with a focus on underlying mechanisms based on preclinical, translational and clinical studies. Opportunities for translation of current understanding into precision RT trials combined with immunotherapy and nanoparticles are also discussed.

Nanoparticles augment the therapeutic window of RT and immunotherapy for treating cancers: pivotal role of autophagy

Immunotherapies are now emerging as an efficient anticancer therapeutic strategy. Cancer immunotherapy utilizes the host's immune system to fight against cancer cells and has gained increasing interest due to its durable efficacy and low toxicity compared to traditional antitumor treatments, such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy (RT). Although the combination of RT and immunotherapy has drawn extensive attention in the clinical setting, the overall response rates are still low. Therefore, strategies for further improvement are urgently needed. Nanotechnology has been used in cancer immunotherapy and RT to target not only cancer cells but also the tumor microenvironment (TME), thereby helping to generate a long-term immune response. Nanomaterials can be an effective delivery system and a strong autophagy inducer, with the ability to elevate autophagy to very high levels. Interestingly, autophagy could play a critical role in optimal immune function, mediating cell-extrinsic homeostatic effects through the regulation of danger signaling in neoplastic cells under immunogenic chemotherapy and/or RT. In this review, we summarize the preclinical and clinical development of the combination of immunotherapy and RT in cancer therapy and highlight the latest progress in nanotechnology for augmenting the anticancer effects of immunotherapy and RT. The underlying mechanisms of nanomaterial-triggered autophagy in tumor cells and the TME are discussed in depth. Finally, we suggest the implications of these three strategies combined together to achieve the goal of maximizing the therapeutic advantages of cancer therapy and show recent advances in biomarkers for tumor response in the evaluation of those therapies.

ASSESSMENT OF THE STATE OF IMMUNE SYSTEM IN PATIENTS WITH METASTATIC AND GLIAL BRAIN TUMORS AT THE PREPARATORY STAGE OF RADIOTHERAPY

OBJECTIVE

The aim: To assess the state of the immune system in patients before radiation therapy and radiosurgery and compare the features of immunity in metastatic and glial brain tumors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Materials and methods: Our study presents the results of immunograms of 41 patients. Of these: 18 patients with primary glial tumors and 23 patients with secondary metastatic tumors to the brain. The results of 20 conditionally healthy patients who did not have cancer are presented as a control group. The age of patients was 24-75 years. All patients have histological confirmation of the tumor diagnosis. Surgery was performed 1.0-3.0 years before the examination.

RESULTS

Results: When comparing the immune parameters of the number of T and B subpopulations of lymphocytes in patients with primary malignant brain tumors and secondary metastatic tumors, no statistically significant difference was found between these indicators. Glioblastomas show higher levels of IgG and IgA than other tumors, while the concentration of IgM is almost at the same level in all three groups of patients. There is a tendency to decrease the level of IgG and IgM in the blood of patients with metastatic tumors. In the study group of patients there is an inhibition of myeloperoxidase activity of neutrophils on the background of maintaining the function of NBT cell activity.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions: Both metastatic and primary malignant glial have partial changes in various parts of the immune system.

Narrative Review of Synergistics Effects of Combining Immunotherapy and Stereotactic Radiation Therapy

Stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) has become an attractive treatment modality in full bloom in recent years by presenting itself as a safe, noninvasive alternative to surgery to control primary or secondary malignancies. Although the focus has been on local tumor control as the therapeutic goal of stereotactic radiotherapy, rare but intriguing observations of abscopal (or out-of-field) effects have highlighted the exciting possibility of activating antitumor immunity using high-dose radiation. Furthermore, immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of several types of cancers in recent years. However, resistance to immunotherapy often develops. These observations have led researchers to combine immunotherapy with SRT in an attempt to improve outcomes. The benefits of this combination would come from the stimulation and suppression of various immune pathways. Thus, in this review, we will first discuss the immunomodulation induced by SRT with the promising results of preclinical studies on the changes in the immune balance observed after SRT. Then, we will discuss the opportunities and risks of the combination of SRT and immunotherapy with the preclinical and clinical data available in the literature. Furthermore, we will see that many perspectives are conceivable to potentiate the synergistic effects of this combination with the need for prospective studies to confirm the encouraging data.

Irradiation immunity interactions

The immune system can influence cancer development by both impeding and/or facilitating tumour growth and spread. A better understanding of this complex relationship is fundamental to optimise current and future cancer therapeutic strategies. Although typically regarded as a localised and immunosuppressive anti‐cancer treatment modality, radiation therapy has been associated with generating profound systemic effects beyond the intended target volume. These systemic effects are immune‐driven suggesting radiation therapy can enhance anti‐tumour immunosurveillance in some instances. In this review, we summarise how radiation therapy can positively and negatively affect local and systemic anti‐tumour immune responses, how co‐administration of immunotherapy with radiation therapy may help promote anti‐tumour immunity, and how the use of immune biomarkers may help steer radiation therapy‐immunotherapy personalisation to optimise clinical outcomes.

Radiobiology of the FLASH effect

Radiation exposures at ultrahigh dose rates (UHDRs) at several orders of magnitude greater than in current clinical radiotherapy (RT) have been shown to manifest differential radiobiological responses compared to conventional (CONV) dose rates. This has led to studies investigating the application of UHDR for therapeutic advantage (FLASH-RT) that have gained significant interest since the initial discovery in 2014 that demonstrated reduced lung toxicity with equivalent levels of tumor control compared with conventional dose-rate RT. Many subsequent studies have demonstrated the potential protective role of FLASH-RT in normal tissues, yet the underlying molecular and cellular mechanisms of the FLASH effect remain to be fully elucidated. Here, we summarize the current evidence of the FLASH effect and review FLASH-RT studies performed in preclinical models of normal tissue response. To critically examine the underlying biological mechanisms of responses to UHDR radiation exposures, we evaluate in vitro studies performed with normal and tumor cells. Differential responses to UHDR versus CONV irradiation recurrently involve reduced inflammatory processes and differential expression of pro- and anti-inflammatory genes. In addition, frequently reduced levels of DNA damage or misrepair products are seen after UHDR irradiation. So far, it is not clear what signal elicits these differential responses, but there are indications for involvement of reactive species. Different susceptibility to FLASH effects observed between normal and tumor cells may result from altered metabolic and detoxification pathways and/or repair pathways used by tumor cells. We summarize the current theories that may explain the FLASH effect and highlight important research questions that are key to a better mechanistic understanding and, thus, the future implementation of FLASH-RT in the clinic.

A Ferroptosis-Related Gene Model Predicts Prognosis and Immune Microenvironment for Cutaneous Melanoma

Background

Cutaneous melanoma is a common but aggressive tumor. Ferroptosis is a recently discovered cell death with important roles in tumor biology. Nevertheless, the prognostic power of ferroptosis-linked genes remained unclear in cutaneous melanoma.

Methods

Cutaneous melanoma patients of TCGA (The Cancer Genome Atlas) were taken as the training cohort while GSE65904 and GSE22153 as the validation cohorts. Multifactor Cox regression model was used to build a prognostic model, and the performance of the model was assessed. Functional enrichment and immune infiltration analysis were used to clarify the mechanisms.

Results

A five ferroptosis-linked gene predictive model was developed. ALOX5 and GCH1 were illustrated as independent predictive factors. Functional assessment showed enriched immune-linked cascades. Immune infiltrating analysis exhibited the distinct immune microenvironment.

Conclusion

Herein, a novel ferroptosis-related gene prognostic model was built in cutaneous melanoma. This model could be used for prognostic prediction, and maybe helpful for the targeted and immunotherapies.