Platelet PD-L1 suppresses anti-cancer immune cell activity in PD-L1 negative tumors.

Strategies that interfere with the binding of the receptor programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) to programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) have shown marked efficacy against many advanced cancers, including those that are negative for PD-L1. Precisely why patients with PD-L1 negative tumors respond to PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibition remains unclear. Here, we show that platelet-derived PD-L1 regulates the growth of PD-L1 negative tumors and that interference with platelet binding to PD-L1 negative cancer cells promotes T cell-induced cancer cytotoxicity. These results suggest that the successful outcomes of PD-L1 based therapies in patients with PD-L1 negative tumors may be explained, in part, by the presence of intra-tumoral platelets. Altogether, our findings demonstrate the impact of non-cancer/non-immune cell sources of PD-L1 in the tumor microenvironment in the promotion of cancer cell immune evasion. Our study also provides a compelling rationale for future testing of PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitor therapies in combination with antiplatelet agents, in patients with PD-L1 negative tumors.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) and somatic EGFR mutations are essential, mutually exclusive oncogenic mechanisms for inverted sinonasal papillomas and associated sinonasal squamous cell carcinomas.

Background: Inverted sinonasal (Schneiderian) papilloma (ISP) is a locally aggressive neoplasm often associated with sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma (SNSCC). While the etiology of ISP is not well understood, human papillomavirus (HPV) has been detected in a subset of cases. Our group recently identified activating somatic EGFR mutations in the majority of ISP and ISP-associated SNSCC. However, the relationship between EGFR mutations and HPV infection has not been explored. Patients and methods: We evaluated 58 ISP and 22 ISP-associated SNSCC (including 13 patients with matched ISP/SNSCC samples), as well as 14 SNSCC without clinical or pathologic evidence of an associated ISP. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples were evaluated for EGFR mutations using Sanger sequencing and for HPV infection using GP5+/GP6+ PCR. HPV subtyping based on the L1 sequence was done for HPV positive cases including temporally distinct tumors for four patients. Clinicopathologic data including progression free survival was also analyzed. Results: All ISP and ISP-associated SNSCC demonstrated either an EGFR mutation or HPV infection. HPV and EGFR mutation were mutually exclusive in all cases of ISP-associated SNSCC and all but one ISP; this case was only weakly HPV positive, and analysis of a prior temporally distinct ISP specimen from this patient failed to show HPV infection, suggesting transient infection/incidental colonization. HPV subtypes in ISP and ISP-associated SNSCC were predominantly low-risk, in contrast with SNSCC without ISP association, which showed frequent high-risk HPV. All paired ISP and associated SNSCC samples demonstrated concordant HPV status and EGFR genotypes. ISP progression to SNSCC was significantly associated with the presence of HPV infection and the absence of an EGFR mutation (log-rank = 9.620, P = 0.002). Conclusions: Collectively our data show that EGFR mutations and HPV infection represent essential, alternative oncogenic mechanisms in ISP and ISP-associated SNSCC.

Frequent PD-L1 expression in primary and metastatic penile squamous cell carcinoma: potential opportunities for immunotherapeutic approaches.

BACKGROUND: Despite aggressive multimodal therapy, locally advanced and/or metastatic penile squamous cell carcinoma (SqCC) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, indicating a need for new therapeutic options. Given the emerging clinical utility of immunotherapeutics, we sought to assess the incidence and potential clinical significance of PD-L1 expression in penile SqCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using an anti-PD-L1 primary antibody (clone 5H1), immunohistochemistry was carried out on whole tumor sections from 37 patients with penile SqCC treated at our institution between 2005 and 2013. PD-L1-positive tumors were defined as those with membranous staining in ≥5% of tumor cells. Association between PD-L1 expression and clinicopathologic parameters was examined using Fisher's exact test. Correlation between PD-L1 expression in primary tumors and matched metastases was assessed using the Spearman rank correlation coefficient (ρ). The difference in cancer-specific mortality between PD-L1-positive and -negative groups was examined using the log-rank test. RESULTS: Twenty-three (62.2%) of 37 primary tumors were positive for PD-L1 expression, and there was strong positive correlation of PD-L1 expression in primary and metastatic samples (ρ = 0.72; 0.032 < P < 0.036). Primary tumor PD-L1 expression was significantly associated with usual type histology (P = 0.040) and regional lymph node metastasis (P = 0.024), as well as decreased cancer-specific survival (P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of primary penile SqCC tumors express PD-L1, which is associated with high-risk clinicopathologic features and poor clinical outcome. These data provide a rational basis for further investigation of anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 immunotherapeutics in patients with advanced penile SqCC.