What Do We Have to Know about PD-L1 Expression in Prostate Cancer? A Systematic Literature Review. Part 5: Epigenetic Regulation of PD-L1

Epigenetic modification in radiotherapy and immunotherapy for cancers

Radiotherapy (RT) is one of the primary treatment modalities in managing cancer patients. Recently, combined RT and immunotherapy (IT) (i.e., radio-IT [RIT]) have been aggressively investigated in managing cancer patients. However, several issues in conducting RIT are challenging, such as incorporating advanced irradiation techniques, predictive/prognostic biomarkers, and other treatment modalities. Several clinical efforts and novel biomarkers have been introduced and developed to solve these challenges. For example, stereotactic radiosurgery/stereotactic radiotherapy, stereotactic body radiotherapy/stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy, and FLASH-RT have been applied for delivering precise irradiation to lung and liver tumors in conjunction with IT. Besides, several novel IT agents and incorporations of other therapies, such as targeted and thermal therapies, have been further investigated. The present study reviewed the emerging challenges of RIT in modern oncology. We also evaluated clinical practice, bench research, and multimodality treatments. In addition to several clinically applicable biomarkers, we emphasize the roles of advanced irradiation techniques and epigenetic modification as predictive/prognostic biomarkers and potential therapeutic targets. For example, 6(m) A-based epigenetic agents demonstrate the potential to enhance the treatment effects of RIT. However, further prospective randomized trials should be conducted to confirm their roles.

Programmed Death Ligand 1 (PD-L1) Expression in Lymphomas: State of the Art

The interaction of programmed death-1 (PD-1) on T lymphocytes with its ligands Programmed Death Ligand 1 (PD-L1) and Programmed Death Ligand 2 (PD-L2) on tumor cells and/or tumor-associated macrophages results in inhibitory signals to the T-cell receptor pathway, consequently causing tumor immune escape. PD-L1/PD-L2 are currently used as predictive tissue biomarkers in clinical practice. Virtually PD-L1 levels expressed by tumor cells are associated with a good response to immune checkpoint blockade therapies targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis. These therapies restore T-cell antitumor immune response by releasing T-lymphocytes from the inhibitory effects of tumor cells. Immune checkpoint therapies have completely changed the management of patients with solid cancers. This therapeutic strategy is less used in hematological malignancies, although good results have been achieved in some settings, such as refractory/relapsed classic Hodgkin lymphoma and primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma. Variable results have been obtained in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and T-cell lymphomas. Immunohistochemistry represents the main technique for assessing PD-L1 expression on tumor cells. This review aims to describe the current knowledge of PD-L1 expression in various types of lymphomas, focusing on the principal mechanisms underlying PD-L1 overexpression, its prognostic significance and practical issues concerning the evaluation of PD-L1 immunohistochemical results in lymphomas.

Androgen receptor blockade resistance with enzalutamide in prostate cancer results in immunosuppressive alterations in the tumor immune microenvironment

BACKGROUND

Emerging data suggest that patients with enzalutamide-treated prostate cancer with increased programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression may benefit from anti-PD-L1 treatment. Unfortunately, the Phase III IMbassador250 clinical trial revealed that the combination of atezolizumab (a PD-L1 inhibitor) and enzalutamide failed to extend overall survival in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). However, the mechanisms underlying treatment failure remain unknown.

METHODS

Human CRPC C4-2B cells and murine Myc-CaP cells were chronically exposed to increasing concentrations of enzalutamide and the cells resistant to enzalutamide were referred to as C4-2B MDVR and Myc-CaP MDVR, respectively. The mechanisms of action in drug-resistant prostate cancer cells were determined using RNA sequencing analyses, RNA interference, real-time PCR, western blotting, and co-culturing technologies. Myc-CaP and Myc-CaP MDVR tumors were established in syngeneic FVB mice, and tumor-infiltrating leukocytes were isolated after enzalutamide treatment. The stained immune cells were determined by flow cytometry, and the data were analyzed using FlowJo.

RESULTS

Immune-related signaling pathways (interferon alpha/gamma response, inflammatory response, and cell chemotaxis) were suppressed in human enzalutamide-resistant prostate cancer cells. PD-L1 was overexpressed and negatively regulated by androgen receptor signaling in resistant cells and patient with CRPC cohorts. Enzalutamide treatment decreased CD8+ T-cell numbers but increased monocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cell (M-MDSC) populations and PD-L1 expression within murine Myc-CaP tumors. Similarly, chemotaxis and immune response-regulating signaling pathways were suppressed, and PD-L1 expression was also increased using enzalutamide-resistant Myc-CaP MDVR cells. Notably, MDSC populations were significantly increased in Myc-CaP MDVR orthotopic tumors compared with those in Myc-CaP parental tumors. Co-culturing bone marrow cells with Myc-CaP MDVR cells significantly promoted MDSC differentiation and shifted towards M2 macrophage skewing.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that immunosuppressive signaling can be promoted directly by enzalutamide-resistant prostate cancer cells and may be a potential means by which the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in enzalutamide-resistant prostate cancer is diminished.

What Do We Have to Know about PD-L1 Expression in Prostate Cancer? A Systematic Literature Review (Part 6): Correlation of PD-L1 Expression with the Status of Mismatch Repair System, BRCA, PTEN, and Other Genes

Pembrolizumab (anti-PD-1) is allowed in selected metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (PC) patients showing microsatellite instability/mismatch repair system deficiency (MSI-H/dMMR). BRCA1/2 loss-of-function is linked to hereditary PCs and homologous recombination DNA-repair system deficiency: poly-ADP-ribose-polymerase inhibitors can be administered to BRCA-mutated PC patients. Recently, docetaxel-refractory metastatic castration-resistant PC patients with BRCA1/2 or ATM somatic mutations had higher response rates to pembrolizumab. PTEN regulates cell cycle/proliferation/apoptosis through pathways including the AKT/mTOR, which upregulates PD-L1 expression in PC. Our systematic literature review (PRISMA guidelines) investigated the potential correlations between PD-L1 and MMR/MSI/BRCA/PTEN statuses in PC, discussing few other relevant genes. Excluding selection biases, 74/677 (11%) PCs showed dMMR/MSI; 8/67 (12%) of dMMR/MSI cases were PD-L1+. dMMR-PCs included ductal (3%) and acinar (14%) PCs (all cases tested for MSI were acinar-PCs). In total, 15/39 (39%) PCs harbored BRCA1/2 aberrations: limited data are available for PD-L1 expression in these patients. 13/137 (10%) PTEN- PCs were PD-L1+; 10/29 (35%) PD-L1+ PCs showed PTEN negativity. SPOP mutations may increase PD-L1 levels, while the potential correlation between PD-L1 and ERG expression in PC should be clarified. Further research should verify how the efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors in metastatic castration-resistant PCs is related to dMMR/MSI, DNA-damage repair genes defects, or PD-L1 expression.

What Do We Have to Know about PD-L1 Expression in Prostate Cancer? A Systematic Literature Review. Part 7: PD-L1 Expression in Liquid Biopsy

Liquid biopsy is an accessible, non-invasive diagnostic tool for advanced prostate cancer (PC) patients, potentially representing a real-time monitoring test for tumor evolution and response to treatment through the analysis of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and exosomes. We performed a systematic literature review (PRISMA guidelines) to describe the current knowledge about PD-L1 expression in liquid biopsies of PC patients: 101/159 (64%) cases revealed a variable number of PD-L1+ CTCs. Outcome correlations should be investigated in larger series. Nuclear PD-L1 expression by CTCs was occasionally associated with worse prognosis. Treatment (abiraterone, enzalutamide, radiotherapy, checkpoint-inhibitors) influenced PD-L1+ CTC levels. Discordance in PD-L1 status was detected between primary vs. metastatic PC tissue biopsies and CTCs vs. corresponding tumor tissues. PD-L1 is also released by PC cells through soluble exosomes, which could inhibit the T cell function, causing immune evasion. PD-L1+ PC-CTC monitoring and genomic profiling may better characterize the ongoing aggressive PC forms compared to PD-L1 evaluation on primary tumor biopsies/prostatectomy specimens (sometimes sampled a long time before recurrence/progression). Myeloid-derived suppressor cells and dendritic cells (DCs), which may have immune-suppressive effects in tumor microenvironment, have been found in PC patients circulation, sometimes expressing PD-L1. Occasionally, their levels correlated to clinical outcome. Enzalutamide-progressing castration-resistant PC patients revealed increased PD-1+ T cells and circulating PD-L1/2+ DCs.

What Do We Have to Know about PD-L1 Expression in Prostate Cancer? A Systematic Literature Review. Part 1: Focus on Immunohistochemical Results with Discussion of Pre-Analytical and Interpretation Variables

Immunotherapy targeting the PD-1-PD-L1 axis yielded good results in treating different immunologically ''hot'' tumors. A phase II study revealed good therapeutic activity of pembrolizumab in selected prostatic carcinoma (PC)-patients. We performed a systematic literature review (PRISMA guidelines), which analyzes the immunohistochemical expression of PD-L1 in human PC samples and highlights the pre-analytical and interpretation variables. Interestingly, 29% acinar PCs, 7% ductal PCs, and 46% neuroendocrine carcinomas/tumors were PD-L1+ on immunohistochemistry. Different scoring methods or cut-off criteria were applied on variable specimen-types, evaluating tumors showing different clinic-pathologic features. The positivity rate of different PD-L1 antibody clones in tumor cells ranged from 3% (SP142) to 50% (ABM4E54), excluding the single case tested for RM-320. The most tested clone was E1L3N, followed by 22C3 (most used for pembrolizumab eligibility), SP263, SP142, and 28-8, which gave the positivity rates of 35%, 11-41% (depending on different scoring systems), 6%, 3%, and 15%, respectively. Other clones were tested in <200 cases. The PD-L1 positivity rate was usually higher in tumors than benign tissues. It was higher in non-tissue microarray specimens (41-50% vs. 15%), as PC cells frequently showed heterogenous or focal PD-L1-staining. PD-L1 was expressed by immune or stromal cells in 12% and 69% cases, respectively. Tumor heterogeneity, inter-institutional preanalytics, and inter-observer interpretation variability may account for result biases.

What Do We Have to Know about PD-L1 Expression in Prostate Cancer? A Systematic Literature Review. Part 4: Experimental Treatments in Pre-Clinical Studies (Cell Lines and Mouse Models)

In prostate cancer (PC), the PD-1/PD-L1 axis regulates various signaling pathways and it is influenced by extracellular factors. Pre-clinical experimental studies investigating the effects of various treatments (alone or combined) may discover how to overcome the immunotherapy-resistance in PC-patients. We performed a systematic literature review (PRISMA guidelines) to delineate the landscape of pre-clinical studies (including cell lines and mouse models) that tested treatments with effects on PD-L1 signaling in PC. NF-kB, MEK, JAK, or STAT inhibitors on human/mouse, primary/metastatic PC-cell lines variably down-modulated PD-L1-expression, reducing chemoresistance and tumor cell migration. If PC-cells were co-cultured with NK, CD8+ T-cells or CAR-T cells, the immune cell cytotoxicity increased when PD-L1 was downregulated (opposite effects for PD-L1 upregulation). In mouse models, radiotherapy, CDK4/6-inhibitors, and RB deletion induced PD-L1-upregulation, causing PC-immune-evasion. Epigenetic drugs may reduce PD-L1 expression. In some PC experimental models, blocking only the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway had limited efficacy in reducing the tumor growth. Anti-tumor effects could be increased by combining the PD-1/PD-L1 blockade with other approaches (inhibitors of tyrosine kinase, PI3K/mTOR or JAK/STAT3 pathways, p300/CBP; anti-RANKL and/or anti-CTLA-4 antibodies; cytokines; nitroxoline; DNA/cell vaccines; radiotherapy/Radium-223).

What Do We Have to Know about PD-L1 Expression in Prostate Cancer? A Systematic Literature Review. Part 2: Clinic-Pathologic Correlations

Many studies have investigated the potential prognostic and predictive role of PD-L1 in prostatic carcinoma (PC). We performed a systematic literature review (PRISMA guidelines) to critically evaluate human tissue-based studies (immunohistochemistry, molecular analysis, etc.), experimental research (cell lines, mouse models), and clinical trials. Despite some controversial results and study limitations, PD-L1 expression by tumor cells may be related to clinic-pathologic features of adverse outcome, including advanced tumor stage (high pT, presence of lymph node, and distant metastases), positivity of surgical margins, high Grade Group, and castration resistance. Different PD-L1 positivity rates may be observed in matched primary PCs and various metastatic sites of the same patients. Over-fixation, type/duration of decalcification, and PD-L1 antibody clone may influence the immunohistochemical analysis of PD-L1 on bone metastases. PD-L1 seemed expressed more frequently by castration-resistant PCs (49%) as compared to hormone-sensitive PCs (17%). Some series found that PD-L1 positivity was associated with decreased time to castration resistance. Treatment with ipilimumab, cyclophosphamide/GVAX/degarelix, or degarelix alone may increase PD-L1 expression. Correlation of PD-L1 positivity with overall survival and outcomes related to tumor recurrence were rarely investigated; the few analyzed series produced conflicting results and sometimes showed limitations. Further studies are required. The testing and scoring of PD-L1 should be standardized.