4.5 Article

Loss of HLA-class-I expression in non-small-cell lung cancer: Association with prognosis and anaerobic metabolism

期刊

CELLULAR IMMUNOLOGY
卷 373, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.cellimm.2022.104495

关键词

Lung cancer; HLA; LDH; Hypoxia; Acidity; Beclin-1

资金

  1. Democritus University of Thrace Special Account [81006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cancer immuno-editing often leads to the loss of HLA class-I molecule expression and impairs immune surveillance. This study found that in operable non-small-cell lung carcinomas, approximately 41.5% of cases exhibited complete loss of HLA expression and 23.4% of cases exhibited extensive loss of HLA expression. Low CD8+ and FOXP3+ TIL-density were significantly associated with HLA loss. High PD-L1 expression was linked to sustained HLA expression. Interestingly, loss of HLA expression was associated with poorer survival, independent of cancer stage.
Cancer immuno-editing frequently leads to loss of HLA-class-I molecule (HLA) expression and impaired immune surveillance. We investigated the expression of HLAs in a series of operable non-small-cell lung carcinomas (NSCLCs). Complete loss and extensive loss of expression was noted in 41.5% and 23.4% of cases, respectively. Low CD8 + and FOXP3 + TIL-density was significantly associated with loss of HLAs (p < 0.05 and p = 0.003, respectively). High PD-L1 expression was linked with sustained expression of HLAs. A significant association of loss of HLA-expression with overexpression of LDH5 (p = 0.01) and marginally with HIF1 alpha was recorded. Cell line experiments confirmed that hypoxia and acidity down-regulate the expression of HLAs. A direct association between HLAs and Beclin-1 expression was also noted (p = 0.01). Loss of HLA-expression was linked with poorer survival (p < 0.01), independent of stage. It is concluded that loss of HLA-class-I molecules is frequent in NSCLC and directly linked to micro-environmental hypoxia and acidity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据