Lukas Kraehenbuehl, Nicola Winkelbeiner, Patrick Turko, Ramon Staeger, Adhideb Ghosh, Vivienn Kaiser, Pia-Charlotte Stadler, Thierry M Nordmann, Marie-Charlotte Brüggen, Mitchell P Levesque, Emmanuel Contassot, Lars E French, Reinhard Dummer, Barbara Meier-Schiesser
{"title":"免疫相关的皮肤不良事件显示不同的临床和分子特征,取决于免疫检查点的目标。","authors":"Lukas Kraehenbuehl, Nicola Winkelbeiner, Patrick Turko, Ramon Staeger, Adhideb Ghosh, Vivienn Kaiser, Pia-Charlotte Stadler, Thierry M Nordmann, Marie-Charlotte Brüggen, Mitchell P Levesque, Emmanuel Contassot, Lars E French, Reinhard Dummer, Barbara Meier-Schiesser","doi":"10.3390/cancers17121992","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives</b>: Immune-related cutaneous adverse events (ircAEs) are common complications of cancer immunotherapy and provide insight into immune-related adverse events (irAEs) more broadly. To enhance our molecular understanding, we characterized ircAEs resulting from single-agent (PD1) and combined immunotherapy regimens (P+C). Clinically, maculopapular rash (MPR) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) resemble ircAEs, providing a valuable basis for investigations. <b>Methods</b>: To investigate the transcriptome and immune infiltrates in ircAEs, we conducted transcriptomic analyses and multiplexed immunohistochemistry on skin biopsies from patients receiving PD1 and P+C, as well as those with MPR, TEN, and healthy controls. <b>Results</b>: Principal component analysis revealed distinct transcriptomic clustering between ircAEs, MPR, and TEN. Specifically, PD1 ircAEs exhibited a gene expression profile similar to TEN, with upregulation of Type-I-response-related genes (e.g., CXCL9 Log2FC 5.34, <i>p</i> < 0.0001, CXCL10 Log2FC 6.03, <i>p</i> < 0.0001), while P+C ircAEs more closely resembled MPR. Immune infiltrates differed significantly between all groups (<i>p</i> = 0.002 by PERMANOVA for all groups). CD4 T-cells were abundant in the dermis of ircAEs from any type of immunotherapy. However, PD1 stained positive in 1.07% of CD4 cells with PD1 monotherapy, compared to 0.3%, 0.4%, and 0.08% in P+C, MPR, and TEN, respectively. <b>Conclusions</b>: This study identified distinct molecular and cellular signatures in ircAEs depending on the type of immune checkpoint blockade. aPD1-associated ircAEs share similarities with the cytotoxic profile of TEN, while P+C more closely mirrored MPR. These findings support the need for tailored management strategies for ircAEs, emphasizing personalized therapeutic approaches to minimize treatment interruptions while preserving the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":9681,"journal":{"name":"Cancers","volume":"17 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12190265/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Immune-Related Cutaneous Adverse Events Display Distinct Clinical and Molecular Characteristics, Depending on Immune Checkpoints Targeted.\",\"authors\":\"Lukas Kraehenbuehl, Nicola Winkelbeiner, Patrick Turko, Ramon Staeger, Adhideb Ghosh, Vivienn Kaiser, Pia-Charlotte Stadler, Thierry M Nordmann, Marie-Charlotte Brüggen, Mitchell P Levesque, Emmanuel Contassot, Lars E French, Reinhard Dummer, Barbara Meier-Schiesser\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/cancers17121992\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives</b>: Immune-related cutaneous adverse events (ircAEs) are common complications of cancer immunotherapy and provide insight into immune-related adverse events (irAEs) more broadly. To enhance our molecular understanding, we characterized ircAEs resulting from single-agent (PD1) and combined immunotherapy regimens (P+C). Clinically, maculopapular rash (MPR) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) resemble ircAEs, providing a valuable basis for investigations. <b>Methods</b>: To investigate the transcriptome and immune infiltrates in ircAEs, we conducted transcriptomic analyses and multiplexed immunohistochemistry on skin biopsies from patients receiving PD1 and P+C, as well as those with MPR, TEN, and healthy controls. <b>Results</b>: Principal component analysis revealed distinct transcriptomic clustering between ircAEs, MPR, and TEN. Specifically, PD1 ircAEs exhibited a gene expression profile similar to TEN, with upregulation of Type-I-response-related genes (e.g., CXCL9 Log2FC 5.34, <i>p</i> < 0.0001, CXCL10 Log2FC 6.03, <i>p</i> < 0.0001), while P+C ircAEs more closely resembled MPR. Immune infiltrates differed significantly between all groups (<i>p</i> = 0.002 by PERMANOVA for all groups). CD4 T-cells were abundant in the dermis of ircAEs from any type of immunotherapy. However, PD1 stained positive in 1.07% of CD4 cells with PD1 monotherapy, compared to 0.3%, 0.4%, and 0.08% in P+C, MPR, and TEN, respectively. <b>Conclusions</b>: This study identified distinct molecular and cellular signatures in ircAEs depending on the type of immune checkpoint blockade. aPD1-associated ircAEs share similarities with the cytotoxic profile of TEN, while P+C more closely mirrored MPR. These findings support the need for tailored management strategies for ircAEs, emphasizing personalized therapeutic approaches to minimize treatment interruptions while preserving the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9681,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancers\",\"volume\":\"17 12\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12190265/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancers\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17121992\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancers","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17121992","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景/目的:免疫相关皮肤不良事件(ircAEs)是癌症免疫治疗的常见并发症,可以更广泛地了解免疫相关不良事件(irAEs)。为了加强我们的分子理解,我们对单药(PD1)和联合免疫治疗方案(P+C)引起的ircAEs进行了表征。临床上,黄斑丘疹(MPR)和中毒性表皮坏死松解(TEN)类似于ircAEs,为研究提供了有价值的依据。方法:为了研究ircAEs的转录组和免疫浸润,我们对接受PD1和P+C治疗的患者,以及MPR、TEN和健康对照者的皮肤活检进行了转录组分析和多重免疫组化。结果:主成分分析显示ircAEs、MPR和TEN之间存在明显的转录组聚类。具体来说,PD1 ircAEs表现出与TEN相似的基因表达谱,与i型反应相关的基因上调(例如,CXCL9 Log2FC 5.34, p < 0.0001, CXCL10 Log2FC 6.03, p < 0.0001),而p +C ircAEs更接近MPR。各组间免疫浸润差异有统计学意义(p = 0.002)。CD4 t细胞在任何类型的免疫治疗的ircAEs真皮中都丰富。然而,PD1单药治疗的CD4细胞中有1.07%的PD1染色阳性,而P+C、MPR和TEN分别为0.3%、0.4%和0.08%。结论:本研究确定了依赖于免疫检查点阻断类型的ircAEs中不同的分子和细胞特征。apd1相关的ircAEs与TEN的细胞毒性谱有相似之处,而P+C更接近MPR。这些发现支持为ircAEs制定量身定制的管理策略的必要性,强调个性化的治疗方法,以尽量减少治疗中断,同时保持癌症免疫治疗的有效性。
Immune-Related Cutaneous Adverse Events Display Distinct Clinical and Molecular Characteristics, Depending on Immune Checkpoints Targeted.
Background/Objectives: Immune-related cutaneous adverse events (ircAEs) are common complications of cancer immunotherapy and provide insight into immune-related adverse events (irAEs) more broadly. To enhance our molecular understanding, we characterized ircAEs resulting from single-agent (PD1) and combined immunotherapy regimens (P+C). Clinically, maculopapular rash (MPR) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) resemble ircAEs, providing a valuable basis for investigations. Methods: To investigate the transcriptome and immune infiltrates in ircAEs, we conducted transcriptomic analyses and multiplexed immunohistochemistry on skin biopsies from patients receiving PD1 and P+C, as well as those with MPR, TEN, and healthy controls. Results: Principal component analysis revealed distinct transcriptomic clustering between ircAEs, MPR, and TEN. Specifically, PD1 ircAEs exhibited a gene expression profile similar to TEN, with upregulation of Type-I-response-related genes (e.g., CXCL9 Log2FC 5.34, p < 0.0001, CXCL10 Log2FC 6.03, p < 0.0001), while P+C ircAEs more closely resembled MPR. Immune infiltrates differed significantly between all groups (p = 0.002 by PERMANOVA for all groups). CD4 T-cells were abundant in the dermis of ircAEs from any type of immunotherapy. However, PD1 stained positive in 1.07% of CD4 cells with PD1 monotherapy, compared to 0.3%, 0.4%, and 0.08% in P+C, MPR, and TEN, respectively. Conclusions: This study identified distinct molecular and cellular signatures in ircAEs depending on the type of immune checkpoint blockade. aPD1-associated ircAEs share similarities with the cytotoxic profile of TEN, while P+C more closely mirrored MPR. These findings support the need for tailored management strategies for ircAEs, emphasizing personalized therapeutic approaches to minimize treatment interruptions while preserving the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy.
期刊介绍:
Cancers (ISSN 2072-6694) is an international, peer-reviewed open access journal on oncology. It publishes reviews, regular research papers and short communications. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced.