4.6 Article

Programmed death ligand 1 expression and CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte density differences between paired primary and brain metastatic lesions in non-small cell lung cancer

期刊

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2018.03.053

关键词

Non-small cell lung cancer; Brain metastases; PD-L1; CD8(+) tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte; Heterogeneity

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81472648]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Immunotherapy targeting the programmed cell death-1/programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) pathway has shown promising antitumor activity in brain metastases (BMs) of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with an acceptable safety profile; however, the response rates often differ between primary lesions and intracranial lesions. Studies are necessary to identify detailed characterizations of the response biomarkers. In this study, we aimed to compare the differences of PD-L1 expression and CD8(+) tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) density, two major response biomarkers of PD-1/PD-L1 blockade, between paired primary and brain metastatic lesions in advanced NSCLC. We observed that among primary lesions or BMs, only a small number of patients harbored common PD-L1 expression on both tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating immune cells. Additionally, we found that the numbers of CD8(+) TILs were significantly fewer in BMs than in primary lung cancers. Low stromal CD8(+) TIL numbers in BMs were associated with significantly shorter overall survival compared to high stromal CD8(+) TIL counts. Notably, we demonstrated a discrepancy in PD-Ll expression and CD8(+) TIL density between primary lung cancers and their corresponding BMs. Such heterogeneities are significantly associated with the time at which BMs occurred. Our study emphasizes the spatial and temporal heterogeneity of biomarkers for anti-PD-1/13D-L1 therapy, which should be concerned in clinical practice. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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