Advertisement

Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 23, Issue 8, pp 2610–2617 | Cite as

Program Death 1 Immune Checkpoint and Tumor Microenvironment: Implications for Patients With Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

  • Faiz Gani
  • Neeraja Nagarajan
  • Yuhree Kim
  • Qingfeng Zhu
  • Lan Luan
  • Feriyl Bhaijjee
  • Robert A. AndersEmail author
  • Timothy M. PawlikEmail author
Hepatobiliary Tumors

Abstract

Background

Program death 1 (PD-1) and its ligand (PD-L1) have been identified as potential therapeutic targets for solid and hematologic malignancies. The current study aimed to assess PD-L1 expression in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and relate clinical outcomes to its expression.

Methods

Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor specimens were obtained for patients undergoing surgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital between 1991 and 2011. Immunohistochemistry was used to assess PD-L1 expression in tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) and within the tumor front (TF).

Results

Of 54 tumor samples analyzed, 34 stained positive for PD-L1 expression on TAMs (TAMs+), and 39 stained positive for PD-L1 expression on cells within the tumor front (TF+). The TF+ patients were less likely to present with metastatic lymph nodes (N1 patients: 26.7 vs 7.7 %; p = 0.011), whereas all tumors with intrahepatic metastasis failed to demonstrate staining for PD-L1 around the tumor front (p = 0.020). Patients with tumors shown to be TAMs+ were less likely to present with multiple lesions (35.0 vs 8.8 %; p = 0.017). Patients with tumors exhibiting PD-L1 expression around the tumor front demonstrated a worse overall survival than TF patients (p = 0.008). Multivariable analysis showed that patients with tumors staining for PD-L1 in the tumor front had a 59.5 % reduced survival (TF− vs TF+: time ratio, 0.405; 95 % confidence interval, 0.215–0.761; p = 0.005).

Conclusion

Expression of PD-L1 was noted among a majority of patients, and PD-L1 expression within the tumor front was associated with a 60 % decreased survival. Future clinical trials are necessary to assess the safety and efficacy of anti-PD-L1 therapies among patients with ICC.

Keywords

Overall Survival Tumor Microenvironment Cholangiocarcinoma Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma Akaike Information Criterion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Conflict of interest

Dr. Robert A. Anders receives research funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Five Prime Diagnostics. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interests.

Supplementary material

10434_2016_5101_MOESM1_ESM.docx (15 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 14 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Bridgewater J, Galle PR, Khan SA, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. J Hepatol. 2014;60:1268–89.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aljiffry M, Abdulelah A, Walsh M, et al. Evidence-based approach to cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review of the current literature. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208:134–47.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shaib Y, El-Serag HB. The epidemiology of cholangiocarcinoma. Semin Liver Dis. 2004;24:115–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    YH, Davila JA, McGlynn K, et al. Rising incidence of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in the United States: a true increase? J Hepatol. 2004;40:472–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Topalian SL, Hodi FS, Brahmer JR, et al. Safety, activity, and immune correlates of anti-PD-1 antibody in cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2443–54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brahmer JR, Tykodi SS, Chow LQM, et al. Safety and activity of anti-PD-L1 antibody in patients with advanced cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2455–65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Taube JM, Klein A, Brahmer JR, et al. 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. 2014;20:5064–74.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schultheis AM, Scheel AH, Ozretić L, et al. PD-L1 expression in small cell neuroendocrine carcinomas. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:421–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Llosa NJ, Cruise M, Tam A, et al. The vigorous immune microenvironment of microsatellite instable colon cancer is balanced by multiple counter-inhibitory checkpoints. Cancer Discov. 2015;5:43–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Le DT, Uram JN, Wang H, et al. PD-1 blockade in tumors with mismatch-repair deficiency. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:2509–20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ye Y, Zhou L, Xie X, et al. Interaction of B7-H1 on intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma cells with PD-1 on tumor-infiltrating T cells as a mechanism of immune evasion. J Surg Oncol. 2009;100:500–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Soares KC, Rucki AA, Wu AA, et al. PD-1/PD-L1 blockade together with vaccine therapy facilitates effector T-cell infiltration into pancreatic tumors. J Immunother. 2015;38:1–11.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Robert C, Ribas A, Wolchok JD, et al. Anti-programmed-death-receptor-1 treatment with pembrolizumab in ipilimumab-refractory advanced melanoma: a randomised dose-comparison cohort of a phase 1 trial. Lancet. 2014;384:1109–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hamid O, Robert C, Daud A, et al. Safety and tumor responses with lambrolizumab (anti-PD-1) in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:134–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Taube JM, Anders RA, Young GD, et al. Colocalization of inflammatory response with B7-h1 expression in human melanocytic lesions supports an adaptive resistance mechanism of immune escape. Sci Transl Med. 2012; 4:127ra37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sabbatino F, Villani V, Yearley JH, et al. PD-L1 and HLA class I antigen expression and clinical course of the disease in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(2), 470–478.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leyva-Illades D, McMillin M, Quinn M, et al. Cholangiocarcinoma pathogenesis: role of the tumor microenvironment. Transl Gastrointest Cancer. 2012;1:71–80. Retrieved 7 Sep 2015 http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=3448449&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract.
  18. 18.
    Hasita H, Komohara Y, Okabe H, et al. Significance of alternatively activated macrophages in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Cancer Sci. 2010;101:1913–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tyson GL, El-Serag HB. Risk factors for cholangiocarcinoma. Hepatology. 2011;54:173–84.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ramanathan S, Jagannathan N. Tumor-associated macrophage: a review on the phenotypes, traits, and functions. Iran J Cancer Prev. 2014;7:1–8. Retrieved 2 Sep 2015 http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=4142950&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract.
  21. 21.
    Liengswangwong U, Nitta T, Kashiwagi H, et al. Infrequent microsatellite instability in liver fluke infection-associated intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas from Thailand. Int J Cancer. 2003;107:375–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Faiz Gani
    • 1
  • Neeraja Nagarajan
    • 1
  • Yuhree Kim
    • 1
  • Qingfeng Zhu
    • 2
  • Lan Luan
    • 2
  • Feriyl Bhaijjee
    • 2
    • 3
  • Robert A. Anders
    • 2
    Email author
  • Timothy M. Pawlik
    • 1
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryJohn Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Division of Gastrointestinal and Liver Pathology, Department of PathologyJohns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  3. 3.Department of PathologyAmeriPath IndianaIndianapolisUSA
  4. 4.Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, John L. Cameron Professor of Alimentary Tract SurgeryJohns Hopkins HospitalBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations