3.8 Review

Tumor immune response and immunotherapy in gastric cancer

Journal

Publisher

KOREAN SOC PATHOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4132/jptm.2019.10.08

Keywords

Stomach neoplasms; Immunotherapy; Programmed cell death-ligand 1; Microsatellite instability; Epstein-Barr virus; Tumor mutational burden; Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes; Biomarker

Categories

Funding

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation (NRF) - Ministry of Education, Republic of Korea [NRF-2016 R1D1A1B03931744]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Remarkable developments in immuno-oncology have changed the landscape of gastric cancer (GC) treatment. Because immunotherapy intervenes with tumor immune response rather than directly targeting tumor cells, it is important to develop a greater understanding of tumor immunity. This review paper summarizes the tumor immune reaction and immune escape mechanisms while focusing on the role of T cells and their co-inhibitory signals, such as the immune checkpoint molecules programmed death-1 and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). This paper also describes past clinical trials of immunotherapy for patients with GC and details their clinical implications. Strong predictive markers are essential to improve response to immunotherapy. Microsatellite instability, Epstein-Barr virus, PD-L1 expression, and tumor mutational burden are now regarded as potent predictive markers for immunotherapy in patients with GC. Novel immunotherapy and combination therapy targeting new immune checkpoint molecules such as lymphocyte-activation gene 3, T cell immunoglobulin, and mucin domain containing-3, and indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase have been suggested, and trials are ongoing to evaluate their safety and efficacy. Immunotherapy is an important treatment option for patients with GC and has great potential for improving patient outcome, and further research in immuno-oncology should be carried out.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available