J Pathol Transl Med.  2021 Jan;55(1):26-32. 10.4132/jptm.2020.09.23.

DNA-protein biomarkers for immunotherapy in the era of precision oncology

• Kim B
• Kang SY
• Kim KM

• KMID: 2511510
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4132/jptm.2020.09.23

Abstract

The use of biomarkers to guide patient and therapy selection has gained much attention to increase the scope and complexity of targeted therapy options and immunotherapy. Clinical trials provide a basis for discovery of biomarkers, which can then aid in development of new drugs. To that end, samples from cancer patients, including DNA, RNA, protein, and the metabolome isolated from cancer tissues and blood or urine, are analyzed in various ways to identify relevant biomarkers. In conjunction with nucleotide-based, high-throughput, next-generation sequencing techniques, therapy-guided biomarker assays relying on protein-based immunohistochemistry play a pivotal role in cancer care. In this review, we discuss the current knowledge regarding DNA and protein biomarkers for cancer immunotherapy

Keyword

Biomarker; Clinical trial; Next-generation sequencing; Immunohistochemistry

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 High programmed death-ligand 1 (≥ 50%) staining in partial or complete cell membrane (≥ 1+) in ≥ 50% of viable tumor cells in non-small cell lung cancers. (A) Lower magnification. (B) Higher magnification.

• 

  Fig. 2 Programmed death-ligand 1 staining of tumor cells and tumor-associated mononuclear inflammatory cells in gastric cancer, exhibiting two distinct staining patterns: lattice (A) and interface (B).

Reference

References

1. Hoadley KA, Yau C, Hinoue T, et al. Cell-of-origin patterns dominate the molecular classification of 10,000 tumors from 33 types of cancer. Cell. 2018; 173:291–304.

2. Hyman DM, Taylor BS, Baselga J. Implementing genome-driven oncology. Cell. 2017; 168:584–99.

3. Duffy MJ, Crown J. Biomarkers for predicting response to immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients. Clin Chem. 2019; 65:1228–38.

4. Stenzinger A, Allen JD, Maas J, et al. Tumor mutational burden standardization initiatives: Recommendations for consistent tumor mutational burden assessment in clinical samples to guide immunotherapy treatment decisions. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2019; 58:578–88.

5. Chalmers ZR, Connelly CF, Fabrizio D, et al. Analysis of 100,000 human cancer genomes reveals the landscape of tumor mutational burden. Genome Med. 2017; 9:34.

6. Kim J, Kim B, Kang SY, et al. Tumor mutational burden determined by panel sequencing predicts survival after immunotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Front Oncol. 2020; 10:314.

7. Samstein RM, Lee CH, Shoushtari AN, et al. Tumor mutational load predicts survival after immunotherapy across multiple cancer types. Nat Genet. 2019; 51:202–6.

8. Cho J, Ahn S, Son DS, et al. Bridging genomics and phenomics of gastric carcinoma. Int J Cancer. 2019; 145:2407–17.

9. Goodman AM, Kato S, Bazhenova L, et al. Tumor mutational burden as an independent predictor of response to immunotherapy in dverse cancers. Mol Cancer Ther. 2017; 16:2598–608.

10. Vanderwalde A, Spetzler D, Xiao N, Gatalica Z, Marshall J. Microsatellite instability status determined by next-generation sequencing and compared with PD-L1 and tumor mutational burden in 11,348 patients. Cancer Med. 2018; 7:746–56.

11. Ricciuti B, Kravets S, Dahlberg SE, et al. Use of targeted next generation sequencing to characterize tumor mutational burden and efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibition in small cell lung cancer. J Immunother Cancer. 2019; 7:87.

12. Fabrizio DA, George TJ Jr, Dunne RF, et al. Beyond microsatellite testing: assessment of tumor mutational burden identifies subsets of colorectal cancer who may respond to immune checkpoint inhibition. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2018; 9:610–7.

13. Hellmann MD, Ciuleanu TE, Pluzanski A, et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in lung cancer with a high tumor mutational burden. N Engl J Med. 2018; 378:2093–104.

14. Ready N, Hellmann MD, Awad MM, et al. First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (Check-Mate 568): outcomes by programmed death ligand 1 and tumor mutational burden as biomarkers. J Clin Oncol. 2019; 37:992–1000.

15. Rosenberg JE, Hoffman-Censits J, Powles T, et al. Atezolizumab in patients with locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma who have progressed following treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy: a single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 trial. Lancet. 2016; 387:1909–20.

16. Powles T, Duran I, van der Heijden MS, et al. Atezolizumab versus chemotherapy in patients with platinum-treated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor211): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2018; 391:748–57.

17. Weinberg BA, Xiu J, Hwang JJ, Shields AF, Salem ME, Marshall JL. Immuno-oncology biomarkers for gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: why PD-L1 testing may not be enough. Oncologist. 2018; 23:1171–7.

18. Mishima S, Kawazoe A, Nakamura Y, et al. Clinicopathological and molecular features of responders to nivolumab for patients with advanced gastric cancer. J Immunother Cancer. 2019; 7:24.

19. Melendez B, Van Campenhout C, Rorive S, Remmelink M, Salmon I, D’Haene N. Methods of measurement for tumor mutational burden in tumor tissue. Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2018; 7:661–7.

20. Kim S, Park C, Ji Y, et al. Deamination effects in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue samples in the era of precision medicine. J Mol Diagn. 2017; 19:137–46.

21. Garofalo A, Sholl L, Reardon B, et al. The impact of tumor profiling approaches and genomic data strategies for cancer precision medicine. Genome Med. 2016; 8:79.

22. Cho J, Chang YH, Heo YJ, et al. Four distinct immune microenvironment subtypes in gastric adenocarcinoma with special reference to microsatellite instability. ESMO Open. 2018; 3:e000326.

23. Ionov Y, Peinado MA, Malkhosyan S, Shibata D, Perucho M. Ubiquitous somatic mutations in simple repeated sequences reveal a new mechanism for colonic carcinogenesis. Nature. 1993; 363:558–61.

24. Peltomaki P, Lothe RA, Aaltonen LA, et al. Microsatellite instability is associated with tumors that characterize the hereditary non-polyposis colorectal carcinoma syndrome. Cancer Res. 1993; 53:5853–5.

25. Thibodeau SN, Bren G, Schaid D. Microsatellite instability in cancer of the proximal colon. Science. 1993; 260:816–9.

26. Zhao P, Li L, Jiang X, Li Q. Mismatch repair deficiency/microsatellite instability-high as a predictor for anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy efficacy. J Hematol Oncol. 2019; 12:54.

27. Baudrin LG, Deleuze JF, How-Kit A. Molecular and computational methods for the detection of microsatellite instability in cancer. Front Oncol. 2018; 8:621.

28. Chen W, Swanson BJ, Frankel WL. Molecular genetics of microsatellite-unstable colorectal cancer for pathologists. Diagn Pathol. 2017; 12:24.

29. Richman S. Deficient mismatch repair: read all about it (review). Int J Oncol. 2015; 47:1189–202.

30. Salipante SJ, Scroggins SM, Hampel HL, Turner EH, Pritchard CC. Microsatellite instability detection by next generation sequencing. Clin Chem. 2014; 60:1192–9.

31. Niu B, Ye K, Zhang Q, et al. MSIsensor: microsatellite instability detection using paired tumor-normal sequence data. Bioinformatics. 2014; 30:1015–6.

32. Kautto EA, Bonneville R, Miya J, et al. Performance evaluation for rapid detection of pan-cancer microsatellite instability with MANTIS. Oncotarget. 2017; 8:7452–63.

33. Lu Y, Soong TD, Elemento O. A novel approach for characterizing microsatellite instability in cancer cells. PLoS One. 2013; 8:e63056.

34. Dunstan RW, Wharton KA Jr, Quigley C, Lowe A. The use of immunohistochemistry for biomarker assessment: can it compete with other technologies? Toxicol Pathol. 2011; 39:988–1002.

35. Jain KK. The handbook of biomarkers. New York: Springer;2010.

36. Coudray N, Ocampo PS, Sakellaropoulos T, et al. Classification and mutation prediction from non-small cell lung cancer histopathology images using deep learning. Nat Med. 2018; 24:1559–67.

37. Khoury JD, Wang WL, Prieto VG, et al. Validation of immunohistochemical assays for integral biomarkers in the NCI-MATCH EAY131 clinical trial. Clin Cancer Res. 2018; 24:521–31.

38. Kim KM, Bilous M, Chu KM, et al. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in gastric cancer: recommendations of an Asia-Pacific task force. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2014; 10:297–307.

39. Garcia-Diaz A, Shin DS, Moreno BH, et al. Interferon receptor signaling pathways regulating PD-L1 and PD-L2 expression. Cell Rep. 2017; 19:1189–201.

40. Zou W, Wolchok JD, Chen L. PD-L1 (B7-H1) and PD-1 pathway blockade for cancer therapy: Mechanisms, response biomarkers, and combinations. Sci Transl Med. 2016; 8:328rv4.

41. Yang Q, Xu Z, Zheng L, Zhang L, You Q, Sun J. Multimodal detection of PD-L1: reasonable biomarkers for immune checkpoint inhibitor. Am J Cancer Res. 2018; 8:1689–96.

42. Teng MW, Ngiow SF, Ribas A, Smyth MJ. Classifying cancers based on T-cell infiltration and PD-L1. Cancer Res. 2015; 75:2139–45.

43. Taube JM, Anders RA, Young GD, et al. Colocalization of inflammatory response with B7-h1 expression in human melanocytic lesions supports an adaptive resistance mechanism of immune escape. Sci Transl Med. 2012; 4:127ra37.

44. Lee J, Kim KM. Biomarkers for gastric cancer: molecular classification revisited. Precis Future Med. 2017; 1:59–68.

45. Fridman WH, Pages F, Sautes-Fridman C, Galon J. The immune contexture in human tumours: impact on clinical outcome. Nat Rev Cancer. 2012; 12:298–306.

46. Conroy JM, Pabla S, Nesline MK, et al. Next generation sequencing of PD-L1 for predicting response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. J Immunother Cancer. 2019; 7:18.

47. Park C, Cho J, Lee J, et al. Host immune response index in gastric cancer identified by comprehensive analyses of tumor immunity. Oncoimmunology. 2017; 6:e1356150.