Assessment of programmed death-ligand 1 expression in primary tumors and paired lymph node metastases of gastric adenocarcinoma

B. C. Coimbra, M. A. Pereira, L. Cardili, Venâncio Avancini Ferreira Alves, E. S. de Mello, Ulysses Ribeiro, M. Ramos
{"title":"Assessment of programmed death-ligand 1 expression in primary tumors and paired lymph node metastases of gastric adenocarcinoma","authors":"B. C. Coimbra, M. A. Pereira, L. Cardili, Venâncio Avancini Ferreira Alves, E. S. de Mello, Ulysses Ribeiro, M. Ramos","doi":"10.4251/wjgo.v16.i3.883","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\n Anti-programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) immunotherapy has demonstrated promising results on gastric cancer (GC). However, PD-L1 can express differently between metastatic sites and primary tumors (PT).\n AIM\n To compare PD-L1 status in PT and matched lymph node metastases (LNM) of GC patients and to determine the correlation between the PD-L1 status and clinicopathological characteristics.\n METHODS\n We retrospectively reviewed 284 GC patients who underwent D2-gastrectomy. PD-L1 was evaluated by immunohistochemistry (clone SP142) using the combined positive score. All PD-L1+ PT staged as pN+ were also tested for PD-L1 expression in their LNM. PD-L1(-) GC with pN+ served as the comparison group.\n RESULTS\n Among 284 GC patients included, 45 had PD-L1+ PT and 24 of them had pN+. For comparison, 44 PD-L1(-) cases with pN+ were included (sample loss of 4 cases). Of the PD-L1+ PT, 54.2% (13/24 cases) were also PD-L1+ in the LNM. Regarding PD-L1(-) PT, 9.1% (4/44) had PD-L1+ in the LNM. The agreement between PT and LNM had a kappa value of 0.483. Larger tumor size and moderate/severe peritumoral inflammatory response were associated with PD-L1 positivity in both sites. There was no statistical difference in overall survival for PT and LNM according to the PD-L1 status (P = 0.166 and P = 0.837, respectively).\n CONCLUSION\n Intra-patient heterogeneity in PD-L1 expression was observed between the PT and matched LNM. This disagreement in PD-L1 status may emphasize the importance of considering different tumor sites for analyses to select patients for immunotherapy.","PeriodicalId":504226,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4251/wjgo.v16.i3.883","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND Anti-programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) immunotherapy has demonstrated promising results on gastric cancer (GC). However, PD-L1 can express differently between metastatic sites and primary tumors (PT). AIM To compare PD-L1 status in PT and matched lymph node metastases (LNM) of GC patients and to determine the correlation between the PD-L1 status and clinicopathological characteristics. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed 284 GC patients who underwent D2-gastrectomy. PD-L1 was evaluated by immunohistochemistry (clone SP142) using the combined positive score. All PD-L1+ PT staged as pN+ were also tested for PD-L1 expression in their LNM. PD-L1(-) GC with pN+ served as the comparison group. RESULTS Among 284 GC patients included, 45 had PD-L1+ PT and 24 of them had pN+. For comparison, 44 PD-L1(-) cases with pN+ were included (sample loss of 4 cases). Of the PD-L1+ PT, 54.2% (13/24 cases) were also PD-L1+ in the LNM. Regarding PD-L1(-) PT, 9.1% (4/44) had PD-L1+ in the LNM. The agreement between PT and LNM had a kappa value of 0.483. Larger tumor size and moderate/severe peritumoral inflammatory response were associated with PD-L1 positivity in both sites. There was no statistical difference in overall survival for PT and LNM according to the PD-L1 status (P = 0.166 and P = 0.837, respectively). CONCLUSION Intra-patient heterogeneity in PD-L1 expression was observed between the PT and matched LNM. This disagreement in PD-L1 status may emphasize the importance of considering different tumor sites for analyses to select patients for immunotherapy.
评估胃腺癌原发肿瘤和成对淋巴结转移中程序性死亡配体 1 的表达情况
背景 抗程序性死亡-1/程序性死亡配体1(PD-1/PD-L1)免疫疗法在胃癌(GC)治疗中取得了良好的效果。然而,PD-L1在转移部位和原发肿瘤(PT)中的表达可能不同。目的 比较胃癌患者淋巴结转移灶(PT)和匹配淋巴结转移灶(LNM)的 PD-L1 状态,并确定 PD-L1 状态与临床病理特征之间的相关性。方法 我们回顾性研究了284例接受D2胃切除术的GC患者。我们采用免疫组化方法(克隆 SP142)对 PD-L1 进行了评估,并使用了联合阳性评分。对所有分期为 pN+ 的 PD-L1+ PT 患者的 LNM 也进行了 PD-L1 表达检测。PD-L1(-) GC pN+ 作为对比组。结果 在纳入的 284 例 GC 患者中,45 例为 PD-L1+ PT,其中 24 例为 pN+。作为对比,纳入了44例PD-L1(-)pN+病例(样本丢失4例)。在PD-L1+ PT中,54.2%(13/24例)的LNM中也有PD-L1+。在PD-L1(-)PT中,9.1%(4/44)的LNM中也有PD-L1+。PT与LNM之间的卡帕值为0.483。较大的肿瘤大小和中度/严重的瘤周炎症反应与两个部位的PD-L1阳性有关。根据PD-L1状态,PT和LNM的总生存率没有统计学差异(分别为P = 0.166和P = 0.837)。结论 在PT和匹配的LNM之间观察到了患者内PD-L1表达的异质性。PD-L1 状态的这种差异可能强调了考虑不同肿瘤部位进行分析以选择患者接受免疫疗法的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信