Tumor Biology最新文献

Background: Anti-PD-(L)1 immunotherapy has emerged as a promising treatment approach for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), though the response rates remain low. Pre-treatment response prediction may improve patient allocation for immunotherapy. Blood platelets act as active immune-like cells, thereby constraining T-cell activity, propagating cancer metastasis, and adjusting their spliced mRNA content.

Objective: We investigated whether platelet RNA profiles before start of nivolumab anti-PD1 immunotherapy may predict treatment responses.

Methods: We performed RNA-sequencing of platelet RNA samples isolated from stage III-IV NSCLC patients before treatment with nivolumab. Treatment response was scored by the RECIST-criteria. Data were analyzed using a predefined thromboSeq analysis including a particle-swarm-enhanced support vector machine (PSO/SVM) classification algorithm.

Results: We collected and processed a 286-samples cohort, separated into a training/evaluation and validation series and subjected those to training of the PSO/SVM-classification algorithm. We observed only low classification accuracy in the 107-samples validation series (area under the curve (AUC) training series: 0.73 (95% -CI: 0.63-0.84, n = 88 samples), AUC evaluation series: 0.64 (95% -CI: 0.51-0.76, n = 91 samples), AUC validation series: 0.58 (95% -CI: 0.45-0.70, n = 107 samples)), employing a five-RNAs biomarker panel.

Conclusions: We concluded that platelet RNA may have minimally discriminative capacity for anti-PD1 nivolumab response prediction, with which the current methodology is insufficient for diagnostic application.

Background: The value of serum tumor markers (STMs) in the current therapeutic landscape of lung cancer is unclear.

Objective: This scoping review gathered evidence of the predictive, prognostic, and monitoring value of STMs for patients with advanced lung cancer receiving immunotherapy (IT) or targeted therapy (TT).

Methods: Literature searches were conducted (cut-off: May 2022) using PubMed and Cochrane CENTRAL databases. Medical professionals advised on the search strategies.

Results: Study heterogeneity limited the evidence and inferences from the 36 publications reviewed. While increased baseline levels of serum cytokeratin 19 fragment antigen (CYFRA21-1) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) may predict IT response, results for TT were less clear. For monitoring IT-treated patients, STM panels (including CYFRA21-1, CEA, and neuron-specific enolase) may surpass the power of single analyses to predict non-response. CYFRA21-1 measurement could aid in monitoring TT-treated patients, but the value of CEA in this context requires further investigation. Overall, baseline and dynamic changes in individual or combined STM levels have potential utility to predict treatment outcome and for monitoring of patients with advanced lung cancer.

Conclusions: In advanced lung cancer, STMs provide additional relevant clinical information by predicting treatment outcome, but further standardization and validation is warranted.

Background: Programmed cell death receptors and ligands in cancer tissue samples are established companion diagnostics for immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapies.

Objective: To investigate the relevance of soluble PD-1, PD-L1 and PD-L2 for estimating therapy response and prognosis in non-small cell lung cancer patients (NSCLC) undergoing platin-based combination chemotherapies.

Methods: In a biomarker substudy of a prospective, multicentric clinical trial (CEPAC-TDM) on advanced NSCLC patients, soluble PD-1, PD-L1 and PD-L2 were assessed in serial serum samples by highly sensitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays and correlated with radiological response after two cycles of chemotherapy and with overall survival (OS).

Results: Among 243 NSCLC patients, 185 achieved response (partial remission and stable disease) and 58 non-response (progression). The distribution of PD-1, PD-L1 and PD-L2 at baseline (C1), prior to staging (C3) and the relative changes (C3/C1) greatly overlapped between the patient groups with response and non-response, thus hindering the discrimination between the two groups. None of the PD markers had prognostic value regarding OS.

Conclusions: Neither soluble PD-1, PD-L1 nor PD-L2 did provide clinical utility for predicting response to chemotherapy and prognosis. Studies on the relevance of PD markers in ICI therapies are warranted.

 Clinical laboratories are responsible for performing lung cancer tumor marker testing as part of routine clinical care. It is their responsibility to guarantee that the reported tumor marker results are reliable and meet the necessary quality standards for proper clinical use. During the different laboratory phases, pre-analytical, analytical and post-analytical, specific steps and processes can introduce errors and generate incorrect clinical interpretation. This editorial briefly outlines critical laboratory issues related to lung cancer tumor markers, specific for each of these three laboratory phases.

The cumulative pool of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) molecules within bodily fluids represents a highly dense and multidimensional information repository. This "biological mirror" provides real-time insights into the composition, function, and dynamics of the diverse genomes within the body, enabling significant advancements in personalized molecular medicine. However, effective use of this information necessitates meticulous classification of distinct cfDNA subtypes with exceptional precision. While cfDNA molecules originating from different sources exhibit numerous genetic, epigenetic, and physico-chemical variations, they also share common features that complicate analyses. Considerable progress has been achieved in mapping the landscape of cfDNA features, their clinical correlations, and optimizing extraction procedures, analytical approaches, bioinformatics pipelines, and machine learning algorithms. Nevertheless, preanalytical workflows, despite their profound impact on cfDNA measurements, have not progressed at a corresponding pace. In this perspective article, we emphasize the pivotal role of robust preanalytical procedures in the development and clinical integration of cfDNA assays, highlighting persistent obstacles and emerging challenges.

Fundamental studies on biomarkers as well as developed assays for their detection can provide valuable information facilitating clinical decisions. For patients with lung cancer, there are established circulating biomarkers such as serum progastrin-releasing peptide (ProGRP), neuron-specific enolase (NSE), squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCC-Ag), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and cytokeratin-19 fragment (CYFRA21-1). There are also molecular biomarkers for targeted therapy such as epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene, anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene, KRAS gene, and BRAF gene. However, there is still an unmet need for biomarkers that can be used for early detection and predict treatment response and survival. In this review, we describe the lung cancer biomarkers that are currently being used in clinical practice. We also discuss emerging preclinical and clinical studies on new biomarkers such as omics-based biomarkers for their potential clinical use to detect, predict, or monitor subtypes of lung cancer. Additionally, between-method differences in tumor markers warrant further development and improvement of the standardization and harmonization for each assay.

Lung cancer (LC) is one of the leading causes for cancer-related deaths in the world, accounting for 28% of all cancer deaths in Europe. Screening for lung cancer can enable earlier detection of LC and reduce lung cancer mortality as was demonstrated in several large image-based screening studies such as the NELSON and the NLST. Based on these studies, screening is recommended in the US and in the UK a targeted lung health check program was initiated. In Europe lung cancer screening (LCS) has not been implemented due to limited data on cost-effectiveness in the different health care systems and questions on for example the selection of high-risk individuals, adherence to screening, management of indeterminate nodules, and risk of overdiagnosis. Liquid biomarkers are considered to have a high potential to address these questions by supporting pre- and post- Low Dose CT (LDCT) risk-assessment thereby improving the overall efficacy of LCS. A wide variety of biomarkers, including cfDNA, miRNA, proteins and inflammatory markers have been studied in the context of LCS. Despite the available data, biomarkers are currently not implemented or evaluated in screening studies or screening programs. As a result, it remains an open question which biomarker will actually improve a LCS program and do this against acceptable costs. In this paper we discuss the current status of different promising biomarkers and the challenges and opportunities of blood-based biomarkers in the context of lung cancer screening.

 The development of targeted therapies for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), such as the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), anaplastic lymphoma receptor tyrosine kinase (ALK), and ROS proto-oncogene 1 (ROS1), has improved patients' prognosis and significantly extended progression-free survival. However, it remains unclear why some patients do not benefit from the treatment as much or have a rapid disease progression. It is considered that, apart from the oncogenic driver gene, molecular alterations in a number of caretaker and gatekeeper genes significantly impact the efficacy of targeted therapies. The tumor protein 53 (TP53) gene is one of the most frequently mutated genes in NSCLC. To date, numerous studies have investigated the influence of various TP53 alterations on patient prognosis and responsiveness to therapies targeting EGFR, ALK, or ROS1. This review focuses on the latest data concerning the role of TP53 alterations as prognostic and/or predictive biomarkers for EGFR, ALK, and ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in advanced NSCLC patients. Since the presence of TP53 mutations in NSCLC has been linked to its decreased responsiveness to EGFR, ALK, and ROS1 targeted therapy in most of the referenced studies, the review also discusses the impact of TP53 mutations on treatment resistance. It seems plausible that assessing the TP53 mutation status could aid in patient stratification for optimal clinical decision-making. However, drawing meaningful conclusions about the clinical value of the TP53 co-mutations in EGFR-, ALK- or ROS1-positive NSCLC is hampered mainly by an insufficient knowledge regarding the functional consequences of the TP53 alterations. The integration of next-generation sequencing into the routine molecular diagnostics of cancer patients will facilitate the detection and identification of targetable genetic alterations along with co-occurring TP53 variants. This advancement holds the potential to accelerate understanding of the biological and clinical role of p53 in targeted therapies for NSCLC.

The optimal positioning and usage of serum tumor markers (STMs) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) care is still unclear. This review aimed to provide an overview of the potential use and value of STMs in routine advanced NSCLC care for the prediction of prognosis and treatment response. Radiological imaging and clinical symptoms have shown not to capture a patient's entire disease status in daily clinical practice. Since STM measurements allow for a rapid, minimally invasive, and safe evaluation of the patient's tumor status in real time, STMs can be used as companion decision-making support tools before start and during treatment. To overcome the limited sensitivity and specificity associated with the use of STMs, tests should only be applied in specific subgroups of patients and different test characteristics should be defined per clinical context in order to answer different clinical questions. The same approach can similarly be relevant when developing clinical applications for other (circulating) biomarkers. Future research should focus on the approaches described in this review to achieve STM test implementation in advanced NSCLC care.

Background: Tumor markers (TMs) are a heterogeneous group of molecules used in the diagnosis, prognosis and follow-up of cancer patients. During neoplastic differentiation, cells can either directly synthesize or induce the synthesis of TMs, and the release of these molecules into the bloodstream allows their quantification in biological fluids. Although very small concentrations of TMs are usually present in the serum or plasma of healthy subjects, increased concentrations may also be found in the presence of benign diseases or due to technical interference, producing false positive results.

Material and methods and results: Our review analyses the causes of false positives described between January 1970 to February 2023 for the TMs most frequently used in clinical practice: α-fetoprotein (AFP), β2-microglobulin (β2-M), cancer antigen 15-3 (CA 15-3), cancer antigen CA 19-9 (CA 19-9), cancer antigen CA 72-4 (CA 72-4), cancer antigen 125 (CA 125), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), chromogranin A (CgA), choriogonadotropin (hCG), cytokeratin 19 fragment (CYFRA 21-1), neuron-specific enolase (NSE), human epididymis protein 4 (HE4), serum HER2 (sHER2), squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCCA), protein induced by vitamin K absence-II (PIVKA-II), Pro-gastrin-releasing peptide (Pro-GRP), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), Protein S-100 (S-100) and thyroglobulin (Tg). A total of 247 references were included.

Conclusions: A better understanding of pathophysiological processes and other conditions that affect the concentration of TMs might improve the interpretation of results and their clinical application.