It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has demonstrated efficacy by reinvigorating immune cytotoxicity against tumors. However, the mechanisms underlying how ICB induces responses in a subset of patients remain unclear. Using bulk and single-cell transcriptomic cohorts of melanoma patients receiving ICB, we proposed a clustering model based on the expression of an antigen-presenting machinery (APM) signature consisting of 23 genes in a forward-selection manner. We characterized four APM clusters associated with distinct immune characteristics, cancer hallmarks, and patient prognosis in melanoma. The model predicts differential regulation of APM genes during ICB, which shaped ICB responsiveness. Surprisingly, while immunogenically hot tumors with high baseline APM expression prior to treatment are correlated with a better response to ICB than cold tumors with low APM expression, a subset of hot tumors with the highest pre-ICB APM expression fail to upregulate APM expression during treatment. In addition, they undergo immunoediting and display infiltration of exhausted T cells. In comparison, tumors associated with the best patient prognosis demonstrate significant APM upregulation and immune infiltration following ICB. They also show infiltration of tissue-resident memory T cells, shaping prolonged antitumor immunity. Using only pre-treatment transcriptomic data, our model predicts the dynamic APM-mediated tumor-immune interactions in response to ICB and provides insights into the immune escape mechanisms in hot tumors that compromise the ICB efficacy. We highlight the prognostic value of APM expression in predicting immune response in chronic diseases.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Johns Hopkins University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Baltimore, USA (GRID:grid.21107.35) (ISNI:0000 0001 2171 9311); Johns Hopkins University, Institute for Computational Medicine, Baltimore, USA (GRID:grid.21107.35) (ISNI:0000 0001 2171 9311)
2 Johns Hopkins University, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Baltimore, USA (GRID:grid.21107.35) (ISNI:0000 0001 2171 9311); Johns Hopkins University, Institute for Computational Medicine, Baltimore, USA (GRID:grid.21107.35) (ISNI:0000 0001 2171 9311); Johns Hopkins Medicine, Department of Oncology, Baltimore, USA (GRID:grid.469474.c) (ISNI:0000 0000 8617 4175)