4.8 Article

A high interferon gamma signature of CD8(+) T cells predicts response to neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in gastric cancer

期刊

FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.1056144

关键词

gastric cancer; single-cell RNA sequencing; tumor microenvironment; interferon gamma; immune checkpoint blockade; neoadjuvant immunotherapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Single-cell RNA sequencing revealed that a high baseline interferon gamma (IFN-gamma) signature in CD8(+) T cells predicts better responses to neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in gastric cancer (GC). The therapy also leads to a significant decrease in the IFN-gamma signature in multiple cell types and suppresses the exhausted signature of CD8(+) T cells during treatment.
BackgroundWhile the tumor microenvironment (TME) affects immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) efficacy, ICB also reshapes the characteristics of TME. Thus far, studies have focused on the TME evolution during neoadjuvant or adjuvant ICB therapy in gastric cancer (GC). However, the interaction between TME characteristics and neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy remains to be elucidated. MethodsWe performed single-cell RNA sequencing on ten GC specimens pre- and post-neoadjuvant camrelizumab plus mFOLFOX6 to determine the impact of the TME on the efficacy of the combination therapy and the remodeling of TME by the therapy. ResultsA high baseline interferon gamma (IFN-gamma) signature in CD8(+) T cells predicts better responses to the combination therapy. We also observed that the IFN-gamma signature significantly decreased in multiple cell types, and the exhausted signature of CD8(+) T cells was significantly suppressed during the neoadjuvant therapy. ConclusionsOur data reveal interactions between the TME and neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in GC. Importantly, it also highlights the signature of CD8(+) T cells in predicting response to the combination therapy in GC.

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

4.8
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