RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Cancer immunotherapy elicits functional activation and changes in immune cell distribution in cancer. Tumour heterogeneity is a reason for treatment failure but is difficult to capture in experimental settings. This proof-of-principle study describes the integrated functional and digital spatial profiling platform iPROFILER to capture in-situ immune activation patterns with high precision. MATERIALS AND METHODS: iPROFILER combines an algorithm-based image analysis approach for spatial profiling with functional analyses of patient-derived tumour fragments (PDTFs). This study utilized a folate receptor 1 (FOLR1)xCD3 bispecific antibody in dual-affinity re-targeting (DART) format as a tool for inducing T-cell responses in patient tumour samples, and an in-depth investigation of the immune perturbations induced in the tumour microenvironment was performed. RESULTS: Ex-vivo DART stimulation induces upregulation of multiple activation markers in CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell populations and secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines in FOLR1-positive tumour specimens. This response was reduced or absent in tissue samples that did not express FOLR1. Immunological responses were driven by a strong induction of interferon gamma (IFNγ) and IFNγ-induced chemokines suggestive of activation of cytotoxic or Th1-like T cells. Ex-vivo DART treatment led to a numerical increase in effector T cells and an upregulation of immune activation markers in the tumour microenvironment as captured by digital image analysis. Analysis of immune activation in tumour and stromal regions further supported the potential of the platform to measure local differences in cell-type-specific activation patterns. CONCLUSIONS: iPROFILER effectively combines functional and spatial readouts to investigate immune responses ex vivo in human tumour samples.
RESUMO
The title of the article has been published incorrectly. The correct title is given below.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Ovarian, tubal, and peritoneal carcinomas primarily affect the peritoneal cavity, and they are typically diagnosed at an advanced tumor stage (Foley, Rauh-Hain, del Carmen in Oncology (Williston Park) 27:288-294, 2013). In the course of primary surgery, postoperative tumor residuals are, apart from the tumor stage, the strongest independent factors of prognosis (du Bois, Reuss, Pujade-Lauraine, Harter, Ray-Coquard, Pfisterer in Cancer 115:1234-1244, 2009). Due to improved surgical techniques, including the use of multi-visceral procedures, macroscopic tumor clearance can be achieved in oncological centers, in most cases (Harter, Muallem, Buhrmann et al in Gynecol Oncol 121:615-619, 2011). However, to date, it has not been shown that peritoneal carcinomatosis is, per se, an independent factor of prognosis or that it excludes the achievement of tumor clearance. Several studies have shown that a preceding drug therapy in peritoneal carcinomatosis could positively influence the overall prognosis (Trimbos, Trimbos, Vergote et al in J Natl Cancer Inst 95:105-112, 2003). In relapses of ovarian carcinoma, studies have shown that peritoneal carcinomatosis is a negative predictor of complete tumor resection; however, when it is possible to resect the tumor completely, peritoneal carcinomatosis does not play a role in the prognosis (Harter, Hahmann, Lueck et al in Ann Surg Oncol 16:1324-1330, 2009). RESULTS: PIPAC is a highly experimental method for treating patients with ovarian, tubal, and peritoneal cancer. To date, only three studies have investigated a total of 184 patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis (Grass, Vuagniaux, Teixeira-Farinha, Lehmann, Demartines, Hubner in Br J Surg 104:669-678, 2017). Only some of those studies were phase I/II studies that included PIPAC for patients with different indications and different cancer entities. It is important to keep in mind that the PIPAC approach is associated with relatively high toxicity. To date, no systematic dose-finding studies have been reported. Moreover, no studies have reported improvements in progression-free or overall survival associated with PIPAC therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Randomized phase III studies are required to evaluate the effect of this therapy compared to other standard treatments (sequential or simultaneous applications with systemic chemotherapy). In cases of ovarian, tubal, and peritoneal cancer, PIPAC should not be performed outside the framework of prospective, controlled studies.
