Activated Eosinophils Predict Longer Progression-Free Survival under Immune Checkpoint Inhibition in Melanoma

m6A- and m5C- modified lncRNAs orchestrate the prognosis in cutaneous melanoma and m6A- modified LINC00893 regulates cutaneous melanoma cell metastasis

BACKGROUND

As the most important modifications on the RNA level, N6-methyladenosine (m6A-) and 5-methylcytosine (m5C-) modification could have a direct influence on the RNAs. Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) could also be modified by methylcytosine modification. Compared with mRNAs, the function of lncRNAs could be more potent to some extent in biological processes like tumorigenesis. Until now, rare reports have been done associated with cutaneous melanoma. Herein, we wonder if the m6A- and m5C- modified lncRNAs could influence the immune landscape and prognosis in melanoma, and we also want to find some lncRNAs which could directly affect the malignant behaviors of melanoma.

METHODS

Systematically, we explored the expression pattern of m6A- and m5C- modified lncRNAs in melanoma from datasets including UCSC Xena and NCBI GEO, and the prognostic lncRNAs were selected. Then, according to the expression pattern of lncRNAs, melanoma samples from these datasets were divided into several subtypes. Prognostic model, nomogram survival model, drug sensitivity, GO, and KEGG pathway analysis were performed. Furthermore, among several selected lncRNAs, we identified one lncRNA named LINC00893 and investigated its expression pattern and its biological function in melanoma cell lines.

RESULTS

We identified 27 m6A- and m5C- related lncRNAs which were significantly associated with survival, and we made a subtype analysis of melanoma samples based on these 27 lncRNAs. Among the two subtypes, we found differences of immune cells infiltration between these two subtypes. Then, LASSO algorithm was used to screen the optimized lncRNAs combination including ZNF252P-AS1, MIAT, FAM13A-AS1, LINC-PINT, LINC00893, AGAP2-AS1, OIP5-AS1, and SEMA6A-AS1. We also found that there was a significant correlation between the different risk groups predicted based on RS model and the actual prognosis. The nomogram survival model based on independent survival prognostic factors was also constructed. Besides, sensitivity to chemotherapeutic agents, GO and KEGG analysis were performed. In different risk groups, a total of 14 drug molecules with different distributions were obtained, which included AZD6482, AZD7762, AZD8055, camptothecin, dasatinib, erlotinib, gefitinib, gemcitabine, GSK269962A, nilotinib, rapamycin, and sorafenib. A total of 55 significantly related biological processes and 17 KEGG signaling pathways were screened. At last, we noticed that LINC00893 had a relatively lower expression in melanoma tissue and cell lines compared with adjacent tissues and epidermal melanocyte, and down-regulation of LINC00893 could promote the malignant behavior of melanoma cells in A875 and MV3. In these two melanoma cell lines, down-regulation of m6A-related molecules like YTHDF3 and METTL3 could promote the expression of LINC00893.

CONCLUSION

We made an analysis of m6A- and m5C- related lncRNAs in melanoma samples and a prediction of these lncRNAs' role in prognosis, tumor microenvironment, immune infiltration, and clinicopathological features. We also found that LINC00893, which is potentially regulated by m6A modification, could serve as a tumor-suppressor in melanoma and play an inhibitory role in melanoma metastasis.

Atopy improves survival and decreases risk of brain metastasis in cutaneous melanoma

Importance

Development of new therapies in melanoma has increased survival, and as a result more patients are living to develop brain metastasis (BrM). Identifying patients at increased risk of BrM is therefore of significant public health importance.

Objective

To determine whether history of atopy is associated with improved survival or reduced incidence of BrM in cutaneous melanoma.

Design

A retrospective cohort study conducted from June 2022 to March 2024.

Setting

Population-based in states with Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) supported cancer registries.

Participants

Individuals (≥65 years) diagnosed with cutaneous melanoma between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2017 that are participants in traditional Medicare.

Exposures

Individuals were compared that had history of atopy (allergic rhinitis, atopic dermatitis, asthma, and/or allergic/atopic conjunctivitis) diagnosed prior to melanoma diagnosis, ascertained using ICD-9 or ICD-10 codes in Medicare claims.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary endpoints were diagnosis with a BrM or death during the follow-up period. Associations between atopy and endpoints were assessed using cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and p-values.

Results

A total of 29,956 cutaneous melanoma cases were identified (median age 76, 60% male and 97% non-Hispanic White). Overall, 7.1% developed BrM during follow up. Among the 35% that had history of atopy, the most common condition was atopic dermatitis (19%). After adjustment for demographic and prognostic factors, atopy was associated with a 16% decrease in death (HR=0.84 [95%CI:0.80-0.87], pFDR<0.001). Among those with non-metastatic disease at time of diagnosis, atopy conferred a 15% decrease in cumulative incidence BrM (HR=0.85 [95%CI: 0.76-0.94], pFDR=0.006), with a 25% decrease associated with atopic dermatitis (HR=0.75 [95%CI:0.65-0.86], pFDR<0.001). Among those with metastatic disease at diagnosis (any metastatic site), only those who received immune checkpoint inhibitors had a survival benefit associated with atopy (HR=0.31, [95%CI:0.15-0.64], p=0.001 vs HR=1.41, [95%CI:0.87-2.27], p=0.165).

Conclusions and Relevance

Atopy, particularly atopic dermatitis, was significantly associated with improved survival and decreased incidence of BrM. The improved survival associated with these conditions in the context of immunotherapy suggests that these conditions in the elderly may identify those with more robust immune function that may be more responsive to treatment.

Eosinophilic granulocytes as a potential prognostic marker for cancer progression and therapeutic response in malignant melanoma

The importance of eosinophilic granulocytes in cancer has been widely discussed in recent years. The current study reviews the evidence on the role of eosinophilic granulocytes in melanoma as a prognostic marker for cancer progression and the efficacy of treatment with modern immune checkpoint inhibitors. A total of 33 human clinical studies were included in the review, with heterogeneous data due to differences in patients populations, study design and inclusion of small study groups. However, 28 of the 33 studies suggested that eosinophilic granulocytes could be used as a prognostic biomarker for outcome and/or potential response to systemic treatment and/or occurrence of adverse events in melanoma patients. Nevertheless, the exact role of eosinophils remains to be elucidated. Further prospective, larger and better controlled studies are warranted to clarify the significance of eosinophilic granulocytes in patients with melanoma, in more details.

Immunotherapy in melanoma: Can we predict response to treatment with circulating biomarkers?

Melanoma is the most aggressive form of skin cancer, representing approximately 4% of all cutaneous neoplasms and accounting for up to 80% of deaths. Advanced stages of melanoma involve metastatic processes and are associated with high mortality and morbidity, mainly due to the rapid dissemination and heterogeneous responses to current therapies, including immunotherapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are currently used in the treatment of metastatic melanoma (MM) and despite being linked to an increase in patient survival, a high percentage of them still do not benefit from it. Accordingly, the number of therapeutic regimens for MM patients using ICIs either alone or in combination with other therapies has increased, together with the need for reliable biomarkers that can both predict and monitor response to ICIs. In this context, circulating biomarkers, such as DNA, RNA, proteins, and cells, have emerged due to their ability to reflect disease status. Moreover, blood tests are minimally invasive and provide an attractive option to detect biomarkers, avoiding stressful medical procedures. This systematic review aims to evaluate the possibility of a non-invasive biomarker signature that can guide therapeutic decisions. The studies reported here offer valuable insight into how circulating biomarkers can have a role in personalized treatments for melanoma patients receiving ICIs therapy, emphasizing the need for rigorous clinical trials to confirm findings and establish standardized procedures.

Pretreatment eosinophil count predicts response to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab therapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

AIM

Pretreatment peripheral blood markers have value in predicting the treatment outcome of various cancers. In particular, the eosinophil count has recently gained attention. However, no study has reported the influence of the pretreatment eosinophil count on the outcomes of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (ATZ/BEV), which is the recommended first-line systemic therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC).

METHODS

We enrolled 114 patients with u-HCC treated with ATZ/BEV (n = 48) or lenvatinib (n = 66). The patients receiving ATZ/BEV or lenvatinib were divided into two groups by calculating the cutoff value of the pretreatment eosinophil count. The groups were compared regarding the clinicopathological characteristics, outcomes, and incidence of adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Twenty-three of 48 patients (47.9%) who received ATZ/BEV therapy were categorized as the ATZ/BEV-eosinophil-high group, which had better responses than the ATZ/BEV-eosinophil-low group (P = 0.0090). Kaplan-Meier curves revealed a trend toward significantly better progression-free survival (PFS) in the ATZ/BEV-eosinophil-high group than the ATZ/BEV-eosinophil-low group (the median PFS: 4.7 months in the ATZ/BEV-eosinophil-low group vs 12.6 months in the ATZ/BEV-eosinophil-high group; P = 0.0064). Multivariate analysis showed that a low eosinophil count was an independent risk factor for worse PFS after ATZ/BEV therapy (P = 0.0424, hazard ratio: 2.24, 95% confidence interval: 1.02-4.89). AEs (≥ grade 3) were significantly more likely to occur in the ATZ/BEV-eosinophil-high group (P = 0.0285). The outcomes did not significantly differ between the LEN-eosinophil-high group and the LEN-eosinophil-low group.

CONCLUSION

A high pretreatment eosinophil count predicted a better response to ATZ/BEV therapy for u-HCC and was associated with the incidence of AEs (≥ grade 3).

Predictive Value of Peripheral Blood Eosinophil Count on the Efficacy of Treatment with Camrelizumab in Combination with Lenvatinib in Patients with Advanced Hepatitis B-Associated Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Objective: To examine the effects of peripheral blood eosinophil (EOS) count and its dynamic alterations on the treatment efficacy and prognosis of patients with advanced hepatitis B virus-associated hepatocellular carcinoma (HBV-HCC) receiving camrelizumab combined with lenvatinib (C + L) therapy. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 200 patients with advanced HBV-HCC who were admitted to two centers from January 2018 to August 2023 and treated with C + L. EOS, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) were determined before C + L treatment (EOS0, NLR0, and PLR0) and after three cycles of treatment (EOS3, NLR3, and PLR3). The area under the curve was calculated using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. NLR and PLR served as references to analyze the effect of differences in EOS in predicting the survival efficacy of patients with HBV-HCC treated using C + L. The independent risk factors affecting progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using univariate and multivariate Cox proportional risk models. Results: The ROC curve revealed that the predictive value of EOS3 was better than those of NLR3 and PLR3 for the long-term treatment efficacy of patients with intermediate and advanced HBV-HCC receiving C + L. Statistically significant differences were observed between groups with different levels of EOS0 and EOS3 and the evaluation of treatment efficacy after 3 weeks (P < 0.05). The median PFS of the high-EOS0 group was higher than that of the low-EOS0 group (P = 0.027); median PFS of the high EOS3 group was higher than that of the low EOS3 group (P = 0.018); median OS of the high EOS0 group was higher than that of the low EOS0 group (P = 0.032); median OS of the high EOS3 group was higher than that of the low EOS3 group (P < 0.0001). Multifactorial Cox analysis revealed that EOS3 was an independent predictor of PFS and that EOS0 was an independent predictor of OS (P < 0.05). Conclusion: EOS may be an ideal indicator for predicting the treatment efficacy and prognosis of patients with advanced HBV-HCC receiving C + L.

Eosinophil may be a predictor of immune-related adverse events induced by different immune checkpoint inhibitor types: A retrospective multidisciplinary study

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can cause severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs). However, biomarkers for irAEs common to different types of ICIs and cancers have not been reported. This study examined whether eosinophils can be used as a predictor of irAEs.

METHODS

Six hundred fourteen patients with cancer (esophageal, gastric, head and neck, lung, melanoma, renal cell, urothelial, and other cancer) received anti-PD-1, anti-PD-L1, or anti-CTLA-4 plus anti-PD-1 therapy. The patients were divided into two groups depending on whether they experienced irAEs (irAE group) or not (non-irAE group). Eosinophils were examined before the two-course treatment.

RESULTS

Patients in the irAE group who received anti-PD-1 or anti-CTLA-4 plus anti-PD-1 therapy had higher eosinophils before the two-course treatment than those in the non-irAE group (p < 0.05). The eosinophils in the anti-PD-L1 therapy group tended to increase in the irAE group. Furthermore, eosinophils in gastric, head and neck, lung, melanoma, renal, and urothelial cancers were significantly higher in the irAE group than in the non-irAE group (p < 0.05). The optimal cutoff value for eosinophils against irAEs was 3.0% (area under the curve = 0.668). In multivariate analyses, eosinophils of ≥3.0% were an independent factor for irAEs (odds ratio: 2.57, 95% CI: 1.79-3.67).

CONCLUSION

An increased eosinophil before the two-course treatment may be a predictor of irAEs in various cancers treated with different ICIs.