0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Clinical implications of systemic and local immune responses in human angiosarcoma

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Angiosarcomas are a rare subtype of soft-tissue sarcomas which exhibit aggressive clinical phenotypes with limited treatment options and poor outcomes. In this study, we investigated the clinical relevance of the peripheral blood neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) as a marker of systemic immune response, as well as its correlation with intra-tumoral immune profiles in a subgroup of cases ( n = 35) using the NanoString PanCancer IO360 panel and multiplex immunohistochemistry. In the overall cohort ( n = 150), angiosarcomas of the head and neck (AS-HN) comprised most cases (58.7%) and median overall survival (OS) was 1.1 year. NLR, classified as high in 78 of 112 (70%) evaluable patients, was independently correlated with worse OS (HR 1.84, 95%CI 1.18–2.87, p = 0.0073). Peripheral blood NLR was positively correlated with intra-tumoral NLR (tNLR) (Spearman’s rho 0.450, p = 0.0067). Visualization of tumor-infiltrating immune cells confirmed that tNLR scores correlated directly with both neutrophil (CD15 + cells, rho 0.398, p = 0.0198) and macrophage (CD68 + cells, rho 0.515, p = 0.0018) cell counts. Interestingly, tNLR correlated positively with oncogenic pathway scores including angiogenesis, matrix remodeling and metastasis, and cytokine and chemokine signaling, as well as myeloid compartment scores (all p < 0.001). In patients with documented response assessment to first-line chemotherapy, these pathway scores were all significantly higher in non-responders (47%) compared to responders. In conclusion, systemic and local immune responses may inform chemotherapy response and clinical outcomes in angiosarcomas.

          Related collections

          Most cited references45

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Hallmarks of Cancer: The Next Generation

          The hallmarks of cancer comprise six biological capabilities acquired during the multistep development of human tumors. The hallmarks constitute an organizing principle for rationalizing the complexities of neoplastic disease. They include sustaining proliferative signaling, evading growth suppressors, resisting cell death, enabling replicative immortality, inducing angiogenesis, and activating invasion and metastasis. Underlying these hallmarks are genome instability, which generates the genetic diversity that expedites their acquisition, and inflammation, which fosters multiple hallmark functions. Conceptual progress in the last decade has added two emerging hallmarks of potential generality to this list-reprogramming of energy metabolism and evading immune destruction. In addition to cancer cells, tumors exhibit another dimension of complexity: they contain a repertoire of recruited, ostensibly normal cells that contribute to the acquisition of hallmark traits by creating the "tumor microenvironment." Recognition of the widespread applicability of these concepts will increasingly affect the development of new means to treat human cancer. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

            Assessment of the change in tumour burden is an important feature of the clinical evaluation of cancer therapeutics: both tumour shrinkage (objective response) and disease progression are useful endpoints in clinical trials. Since RECIST was published in 2000, many investigators, cooperative groups, industry and government authorities have adopted these criteria in the assessment of treatment outcomes. However, a number of questions and issues have arisen which have led to the development of a revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Evidence for changes, summarised in separate papers in this special issue, has come from assessment of a large data warehouse (>6500 patients), simulation studies and literature reviews. HIGHLIGHTS OF REVISED RECIST 1.1: Major changes include: Number of lesions to be assessed: based on evidence from numerous trial databases merged into a data warehouse for analysis purposes, the number of lesions required to assess tumour burden for response determination has been reduced from a maximum of 10 to a maximum of five total (and from five to two per organ, maximum). Assessment of pathological lymph nodes is now incorporated: nodes with a short axis of 15 mm are considered measurable and assessable as target lesions. The short axis measurement should be included in the sum of lesions in calculation of tumour response. Nodes that shrink to <10mm short axis are considered normal. Confirmation of response is required for trials with response primary endpoint but is no longer required in randomised studies since the control arm serves as appropriate means of interpretation of data. Disease progression is clarified in several aspects: in addition to the previous definition of progression in target disease of 20% increase in sum, a 5mm absolute increase is now required as well to guard against over calling PD when the total sum is very small. Furthermore, there is guidance offered on what constitutes 'unequivocal progression' of non-measurable/non-target disease, a source of confusion in the original RECIST guideline. Finally, a section on detection of new lesions, including the interpretation of FDG-PET scan assessment is included. Imaging guidance: the revised RECIST includes a new imaging appendix with updated recommendations on the optimal anatomical assessment of lesions. A key question considered by the RECIST Working Group in developing RECIST 1.1 was whether it was appropriate to move from anatomic unidimensional assessment of tumour burden to either volumetric anatomical assessment or to functional assessment with PET or MRI. It was concluded that, at present, there is not sufficient standardisation or evidence to abandon anatomical assessment of tumour burden. The only exception to this is in the use of FDG-PET imaging as an adjunct to determination of progression. As is detailed in the final paper in this special issue, the use of these promising newer approaches requires appropriate clinical validation studies.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Immunity, inflammation, and cancer.

              Inflammatory responses play decisive roles at different stages of tumor development, including initiation, promotion, malignant conversion, invasion, and metastasis. Inflammation also affects immune surveillance and responses to therapy. Immune cells that infiltrate tumors engage in an extensive and dynamic crosstalk with cancer cells, and some of the molecular events that mediate this dialog have been revealed. This review outlines the principal mechanisms that govern the effects of inflammation and immunity on tumor development and discusses attractive new targets for cancer therapy and prevention. 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                jason.chan.y.s@nccs.com.sg
                Journal
                NPJ Precis Oncol
                NPJ Precis Oncol
                NPJ Precision Oncology
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2397-768X
                12 February 2021
                12 February 2021
                2021
                : 5
                : 11
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.4280.e, ISNI 0000 0001 2180 6431, Cancer Science Institute of Singapore, National University of Singapore, ; Singapore, Singapore
                [2 ]GRID grid.410724.4, ISNI 0000 0004 0620 9745, Division of Medical Oncology, , National Cancer Centre Singapore, ; Singapore, Singapore
                [3 ]GRID grid.428397.3, ISNI 0000 0004 0385 0924, Oncology Academic Clinical Program, Duke-NUS Medical School, ; Singapore, Singapore
                [4 ]GRID grid.163555.1, ISNI 0000 0000 9486 5048, Department of Anatomical Pathology, , Singapore General Hospital, ; Singapore, Singapore
                [5 ]GRID grid.418812.6, ISNI 0000 0004 0620 9243, Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, ; Singapore, Singapore
                [6 ]GRID grid.410724.4, ISNI 0000 0004 0620 9745, Integrated Genomics Platform, National Cancer Centre Singapore, ; Singapore, Singapore
                [7 ]GRID grid.410724.4, ISNI 0000 0004 0620 9745, Laboratory of Cancer Epigenome, Division of Medical Sciences, National Cancer Centre Singapore, ; Singapore, Singapore
                [8 ]GRID grid.410724.4, ISNI 0000 0004 0620 9745, Division of Radiation Oncology, , National Cancer Centre Singapore, ; Singapore, Singapore
                [9 ]GRID grid.410724.4, ISNI 0000 0004 0620 9745, Department of Sarcoma, Peritoneal and Rare Tumours (SPRinT), Division of Surgery and Surgical Oncology, , National Cancer Centre Singapore, ; Singapore, Singapore
                [10 ]GRID grid.163555.1, ISNI 0000 0000 9486 5048, Division of Surgery and Surgical Oncology, , Singapore General Hospital, ; Singapore, Singapore
                [11 ]GRID grid.428397.3, ISNI 0000 0004 0385 0924, Program in Cancer and Stem Cell Biology, Duke-NUS Medical School, ; Singapore, Singapore
                [12 ]GRID grid.410724.4, ISNI 0000 0004 0620 9745, Division of Cellular and Molecular Research, , National Cancer Centre Singapore, ; Singapore, Singapore
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4801-3703
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4973-7404
                Article
                150
                10.1038/s41698-021-00150-x
                7881182
                33580206
                31501802-8d56-4083-b810-dfd6d2e0624d
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 12 August 2020
                : 12 January 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: Singapore Ministry of Health’s National Medical Research Council under its Singapore Translational Research Investigator Award (NMRC/STAR/0006/2009) and Research Training Fellowship (NMRC/Fellowship/0054/2017), as well as SingHealth Duke-NUS Academic Medical Centre and Oncology ACP Nurturing Clinician Scientist Scheme (08-FY2017/P1/14-A28), and SHF-Foundation Research Grant (SHF/FG653P/2017).
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2021

                sarcoma,predictive markers
                sarcoma, predictive markers

                Comments

                Comment on this article