Advertisement

Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy

, Volume 67, Issue 1, pp 141–151 | Cite as

Tumor-infiltrating immune cells as potential biomarkers predicting response to treatment and survival in patients with metastatic melanoma receiving ipilimumab therapy

  • Tímea Balatoni
  • Anita Mohos
  • Eszter Papp
  • Tímea Sebestyén
  • Gabriella Liszkay
  • Judit Oláh
  • Anita Varga
  • Zsuzsanna Lengyel
  • Gabriella Emri
  • István Gaudi
  • Andrea LadányiEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Monoclonal antibodies targeting immune checkpoints are gaining ground in the treatment of melanoma and other cancers, and considerable effort is made to identify biomarkers predicting the efficacy of these therapies. Our retrospective study was performed on surgical tissue samples (52 lymph nodes and 34 cutaneous/subcutaneous metastases) from 30 patients with metastatic melanoma treated with ipilimumab. Using a panel of 11 antibodies against different immune cell types, intratumoral immune cell densities were determined and evaluated in relation to response to ipilimumab treatment and disease outcome. For most markers studied, median immune cell densities were at least two times higher in lymph node metastases compared to skin/subcutaneous ones; therefore, the prognostic and predictive associations of immune cell infiltration were evaluated separately in the two groups of metastases as well as in all samples as a whole. Higher prevalence of several immune cell types was seen in lymph node metastases of the responders compared to non-responders, particularly FOXP3+ cells and CD8+ T lymphocytes. In subcutaneous or cutaneous metastases, on the other hand, significant difference could be observed only in the case of CD16 and CD68. Associations of labeled cell densities with survival were also found for most cell types studied in nodal metastases, and for CD16+ and CD68+ cells in skin/s.c. metastatic cases. Our results corroborate the previous findings suggesting an association between an immunologically active tumor microenvironment and response to ipilimumab treatment, and propose new potential biomarkers for predicting treatment efficacy and disease outcome.

Keywords

Melanoma Immunotherapy Ipilimumab Biomarker Tumor-infiltrating immune cells 

Abbreviations

ADCC

Antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity

AEC

3-Amino-9-ethylcarbazole

CRP

C-reactive protein

ECOG

Eastern cooperative oncology group

NY-ESO-1

New York esophageal squamous cell carcinoma-1

VEGF

Vascular endothelial growth factor

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Katalin Derecskei and Miklós Kónya (National Institute of Oncology, Budapest) for their excellent technical assistance.

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

The study was supported by the National Research, Development and Innovation Office Grants NKFI K105132, K116295, and by European Union GINOP_2.3.2-15-2016-00020.

Conflict of interest

Tímea Balatoni has received speaker honoraria and financial support for attending symposia from Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD Sharp and Dohme (MSD), Novartis, and Roche. Gabriella Liszkay is on the advisory board and has received honoraria for speaking at conferences as well as financial support for educational programs from Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, MSD, Novartis, and Roche. Judit Oláh has acted as a speaker of symposia and consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Novartis and Roche. Zsuzsanna Lengyel has received speaker honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Novartis, and Roche. Gabriella Emri has received speaker honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, and Roche. All other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval and ethical standards

The study followed the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Scientific and Ethical Committee of Medical Research Council, Hungary (2506-3/2017/EKU). Informed consents from patients were not required by the board in case of retrospective studies where it is not possible to obtain consents from the majority of patients as in this case where most patients were deceased at the time of the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Ladányi A, Sebestyén T, Balatoni T, Varga A, Oláh J, Liszkay G (2015) Tumor-infiltrating immune cells as potential biomarkers predicting response to treatment and survival in patients with metastatic melanoma receiving ipilimumab. Eur J Cancer 51(Suppl 3):S111–112 (Abstract) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balatoni T, Mohos A, Sebestyén T, Varga A, Oláh J, Lengyel Z, Emri G, Liszkay G, Ladányi A (2017) Tumor-infiltrating immune cells as potential predictive markers of response to treatment and survival in metastatic melanoma patients receiving ipilimumab. J Transl Med 15(Suppl 1):8 (O7, Abstract) PubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pardoll DM (2012) The blockade of immune checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy. Nat Rev Cancer 12:252–264CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hodi FS, O’Day SJ, McDermott DF, Weber RW, Sosman JA, Haanen JB, Gonzalez R, Robert C, Schadendorf D, Hassel JC et al (2010) Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med 363:711–723CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Robert C, Thomas L, Bondarenko I, O’Day S, Weber J, Garbe C, Lebbe C, Baurain JF, Testori A, Grob JJ et al (2011) Ipilimumab plus dacarbazine for previously untreated melanoma. N Engl J Med 364:2517–2526CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schadendorf D, Hodi FS, Robert C, Weber JS, Margolin K, Hamid O, Patt D, Chen TT, Berman DM, Wolchok JD (2015) Pooled analysis of long-term survival data from phase II and phase III trials of ipilimumab in unresectable or metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol 33:1889–1894CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Feng Y, Roy A, Masson E, Chen TT, Humphrey R, Weber JS (2013) Exposure–response relationship of the efficacy and safety of ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma. Clin Cancer Res 19:3977–3986CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ascierto PA, Kalos M, Schaer DA, Callahan MK, Wolchok JD (2013) Biomarkers for immunostimulatory monoclonal antibodies in combination strategies for melanoma and other tumor types. Clin Cancer Res 19:1009–1020CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Blank CU, Enk A (2014) Therapeutic use of anti-CTLA-4 antibodies. Int Immunol 27:3–10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weide B, Di Giacomo AM, Fonsatti E, Zitvogel L (2015) Immunologic correlates in the course of treatment with immunomodulating antibodies. Semin Oncol 42:448–458CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Friedman CF, Postow MA (2016) Emerging tissue and blood-based biomarkers that may predict response to immune checkpoint inhibition. Curr Oncol Rep 18:21CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Martens A, Wistuba-Hamprecht K, Geukes Foppen M, Yuan J, Postow MA, Wong P, Romano E, Khammari A, Dreno B, Capone M et al (2016) Baseline peripheral blood biomarkers associated with clinical outcome of advanced melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab. Clin Cancer Res 22:2908–2918CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yuan J, Adamow M, Ginsberg BA, Rasalan TS, Ritter E, Gallardo HF, Xu Y, Pogoriler E, Terzulli SL, Kuk D, Panageas KS, Ritter G, Sznol M, Halaban R, Allison JP, Old LJ, Wolchok JD, Gnjatic S (2011) Integrated NY-ESO-1 antibody and CD8+ T-cell responses correlate with clinical benefit in advanced melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:16723–16728CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ji RR, Chasalow SD, Wang L, Hamid O, Schmidt H, Cogswell J, Alaparthy S, Berman D, Jure-Kunkel M, Siemers NO, Jackson JR, Shahabi V (2012) An immune-active tumor microenvironment favors clinical response to ipilimumab. Cancer Immunol Immunother 61:1019–1031CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hamid O, Schmidt H, Nissan A, Ridolfi L, Aamdal S, Hansson J, Guida M, Hyams DM, Gómez H, Bastholt L, Chasalow SD, Berman D (2011) A prospective phase II trial exploring the association between tumor microenvironment biomarkers and clinical activity of ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. J Transl Med 9:204CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Huang RR, Jalil J, Economou JS, Chmielowski B, Koya RC, Mok S, Sazegar H, Seja E, Villanueva A, Gomez-Navarro J, Glaspy JA, Cochran AJ, Ribas A (2011) CTLA4 blockade induces frequent tumor infiltration by activated lymphocytes regardless of clinical responses in humans. Clin Cancer Res 17:4101–4109CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Champiat S, Ferté C, Lebel-Binay S, Eggermont A, Soria JC (2014) Exomics and immunogenics. Bridging mutational load and immune checkpoints efficacy. OncoImmunology 3:e27817CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Snyder A, Makarov V, Merghoub T, Yuan J, Zaretsky JM, Desrichard A, Walsh LA, Postow MA, Wong P, Ho TS et al (2014) Genetic basis for clinical response to CTLA-4 blockade in melanoma. N Engl J Med 371:2189–2199CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wolchok JD, Hoos A, O’Day S, Weber JS, Hamid O, Lebbé C, Maio M, Binder M, Bonsack O, Nichol G, Humphrey R, Hodi FS (2009) Guidelines for the evaluation of immune therapy activity in solid tumors: immune-related response criteria. Clin Cancer Res 15:7412–7420CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ladányi A, Somlai B, Gilde K, Fejös Z, Gaudi I, Tímár J (2004) T-cell activation marker expression on tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes as prognostic factor in cutaneous malignant melanoma. Clin Cancer Res 10:521–530CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ladányi A, Mohos A, Somlai B, Liszkay G, Gilde K, Fejős Z, Gaudi I, Tímár J (2010) FOXP3+ cell density in primary tumor has no prognostic impact in patients with cutaneous malignant melanoma. Pathol Oncol Res 16:303–309CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ladányi A, Kiss J, Mohos A, Somlai B, Liszkay G, Gilde K, Fejős Z, Gaudi I, Dobos J, Tímár J (2011) Prognostic impact of B-cell density in cutaneous melanoma. Cancer Immunol Immunother 60:1729–1738CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Erdag G, Schaefer JT, Smolkin ME, Deacon DH, Shea SM, Dengel LT, Patterson JW, Slingluff CL Jr (2012) Immunotype and immunohistologic characteristics of tumor-infiltrating immune cells are associated with clinical outcome in metastatic melanoma. Cancer Res 72:1070–1080CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gajewski TF, Woo SR, Zha Y, Spaapen R, Zheng Y, Corrales L, Spranger S (2013) Cancer immunotherapy strategies based on overcoming barriers within the tumor microenvironment. Curr Opin Immunol 25:268–276CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Herbst RS, Soria JC, Kowanetz M, Fine GD, Hamid O, Gordon MS, Sosman JA, McDermott DF, Powderly JD, Gettinger SN et al (2014) Predictive correlates of response to the anti-PD-L1 antibody MPDL3280A in cancer patients. Nature 515:563–567CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fehrenbacher L, Spira A, Ballinger M, Vansteenkiste J, Mazieres J, Park K, Smith D, Artal-Cortes A, Lewanski C, Braiteh F, Waterkamp D, He P, Zou W, Chen DS, Yi J, Sandler A, Rittmeyer A, for the POPLAR Study Group (2016) Atezolizumab versus docetaxel for patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (POPLAR): a multicenter, open-label, phase 2 randomised controlled trial. Lancet 387:1837–1846CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tumeh PC, Harview CL, Yearley JH, Shintaku IP, Taylor EJ, Robert L, Chmielowski B, Spasic M, Henry G, Ciobanu V et al (2014) PD-1 blockade induces responses by inhibiting adaptive immune resistance. Nature 515:568–571CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Taube JM, Klein A, Brahmer JB, Xu H, Pan X, Kim JH, Chen L, Pardoll DM, Topalian SL, Anders RA (2014) Association of PD-1, PD-1 ligands, and other features of the tumor immune microenvironment with response to anti-PD-1 therapy. Clin Cancer Res 20:5064–5074CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Spranger S, Spaapen RM, Zha Y, Williams J, Meng Y, Ha TT, Gajewski TF (2013) Up-regulation of PD-L1, IDO, and Tregs in the melanoma tumor microenvironment is driven by CD8+ T cells. Sci Transl Med 5:200ra116CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bulliard Y, Jolicoeur R, Windman M, Rue SM, Ettenberg S, Knee DA, Wilson NS, Dranoff G, Brogdon JL (2013) Activating Fc γ receptors contribute to the antitumor activities of immunoregulatory receptor-targeting antibodies. J Exp Med 210:1685–1693CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Selby MJ, Engelhardt JJ, Quigley M, Henning KA, Chen T, Srinivasan M, Korman AJ (2013) Anti-CTLA-4 antibodies of IgG2a isotype enhance antitumor activity through reduction of intratumoral regulatory T cells. Cancer Immunol Res 1:32–42CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Simpson TR, Li F, Montalvo-Ortiz W, Sepulveda MA, Bergerhoff K, Arce F, Roddie C, Henry JY, Yagita H, Wolchok JD, Peggs KS, Ravetch JV, Allison JP, Quezada SA (2013) Fc-dependent depletion of tumor-infiltrating regulatory T cells co-defines the efficacy of anti-CTLA-4 therapy against melanoma. J Exp Med 210:1695–1710CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Romano E, Kusio-Kobialka M, Foukas PG, Baumgaertner P, Meyer C, Ballabeni P, Michielin O, Weide B, Romero P, Speiser DE (2015) Ipilimumab-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity of regulatory T cells ex vivo by nonclassical monocytes in melanoma patients. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112:6140–6145CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tímea Balatoni
    • 1
  • Anita Mohos
    • 2
  • Eszter Papp
    • 3
  • Tímea Sebestyén
    • 4
  • Gabriella Liszkay
    • 1
  • Judit Oláh
    • 5
  • Anita Varga
    • 5
  • Zsuzsanna Lengyel
    • 6
  • Gabriella Emri
    • 7
  • István Gaudi
    • 8
  • Andrea Ladányi
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of OncodermatologyNational Institute of OncologyBudapestHungary
  2. 2.1st Institute of Pathology and Experimental Cancer ResearchSemmelweis UniversityBudapestHungary
  3. 3.Department of Surgical and Molecular PathologyNational Institute of OncologyBudapestHungary
  4. 4.Department of PathologySt. John’s HospitalBudapestHungary
  5. 5.Department of Dermatology and Allergology, Albert Szent-Györgyi Medical CenterUniversity of SzegedSzegedHungary
  6. 6.Department of Dermatology, Venerology and OncodermatologyUniversity of PécsPécsHungary
  7. 7.Department of Dermatology, Faculty of MedicineUniversity of DebrecenDebrecenHungary
  8. 8.National Korányi Institute of TB and PulmonologyBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations