PO.IM01.10 · 免疫学
患者来源肿瘤球体中肿瘤和免疫对抗PD-1及DGK抑制的差异性应答揭示相加性杀伤效应
Differential tumor and immune responses to anti PD-1 and DGK inhibition in patient-derived tumor spheroids reveal additive killing effect
作者与单位 Authors & Affiliations
摘要 Abstract
中文摘要
PD-1检查点阻断已变革了癌症治疗,但持久应答仍局限于一部分患者。二酰基甘油激酶(DGK)抑制被提出作为一种互补策略,以增强T细胞活化并重编程肿瘤微环境。我们使用一种保留了肿瘤、基质和免疫结构的患者来源类器官型肿瘤球体(PDOTS)平台,测试了一种新型DGKA和DGKZ双重抑制剂,从而能够在生理性离体环境中对治疗应答进行功能评估。来自22例患者肿瘤的PDOTS接受了retifanlimab-dlwr(PD-1抑制剂)、DGK抑制剂(INC-DGKi,两种剂量)或二者联合的治疗。肿瘤应答定义为上皮肿瘤负荷(EpCAM⁺)或一组复合上皮标志物(用于涵盖鳞状细胞癌)的log₂倍数变化<-0.5。通过多重基因表达分析免疫活化,重点关注CD8⁺效应活性、干扰素刺激基因、细胞因子诱导和抗原呈递。通过流式细胞术测定基线PD-L1和MHC-I。根据肿瘤杀伤和/或免疫活化定义应答(R)和无应答(NR)肿瘤,并通过差异表达和通路分析进行比较。Retifanlimab在22例肿瘤中的6例(约27%)中诱导了肿瘤消退,并在10例(约46%)中触发了免疫活性,包括CD8⁺和NK活性增加及干扰素基因诱导。DGKi在22例中的5例(约23%)中引发肿瘤消退,并在11例(约50%)中刺激了免疫相关转录程序,代表了大体上不同的应答者群体,其中促炎和白细胞募集通路富集。联合治疗在22例中的9例(约41%)中诱导了肿瘤消退,并在6例(约27%)中引发了免疫活化,超过了单药治疗的细胞毒性。基线PD-L1和MHC-I与应答的相关性不一,表明它们是情境性而非普适性的生物标志物。Retifanlimab和DGKi各自在不同的肿瘤亚群中引发抗肿瘤和免疫反应,单药活性相当。联合治疗改善了肿瘤杀伤但未改善免疫参与,提示这两种药物具有互补性,并值得开展更多研究以阐明在联合环境下所观察到的肿瘤消退与免疫信号之间的不一致。这些数据支持生物标志物指导的方法,并凸显PDOTS作为一个用于确定合理免疫治疗联合方案的转化平台。
查看英文原文 English abstract
PD-1 checkpoint blockade has transformed cancer therapy, yet durable responses remain confined to a subset of patients. Diacylglycerol kinase (DGK) inhibition has been proposed as a complementary strategy to enhance T-cell activation and reprogram the tumor microenvironment. We tested a novel dual DGKA and DGKZ inhibitor using a patient-derived organotypic tumor spheroid (PDOTS) platform that preserves tumor, stromal, and immune architecture, enabling functional assessment of therapeutic response in a physiologic ex vivo context. PDOTS from 22 patient tumors were treated with retifanlimab-dlwr (PD-1 inhibitor), DGK inhibitor (INC-DGKi) at two doses, or the combination. Tumor response was defined as a log₂ fold-change < -0.5 in epithelial tumor load (EpCAM⁺) or a composite epithelial marker set to account for squamous cell carcinomas. Immune activation was profiled by multiplexed gene expression emphasizing CD8⁺ effector activity, interferon-stimulated genes, cytokine induction, and antigen presentation. Baseline PD-L1 and MHC-I were measured by flow cytometry. Responsive (R) and non-responsive (NR) tumors were defined by tumor killing and/or immune activation and compared by differential expression and pathway analyses. Retifanlimab induced tumor regression in 6 of 22 (~27%) tumors and triggered immunologic activity in 10 of 22 (~46%), including increased CD8⁺ and NK activity and interferon gene induction. DGKi elicited tumor regression in 5 of 22 (~23%) and stimulated immune-related transcriptional programs in 11 of 22 (~50%), representing largely distinct responders, with pro-inflammatory and leukocyte recruitment pathways enriched. Combination treatment induced tumor regression in 9 of 22 (~41%) and elicited immune activation in 6 of 22 (~27%), exceeding monotherapy cytotoxicity. Baseline PD-L1 and MHC-I variably correlated with response, indicating contextual, not universal, biomarkers. Retifanlimab and DGKi each elicited antitumor and immune responses in distinct tumor subsets, with comparable single-agent activity. Combination therapy improved tumor killing but not immune engagement, suggesting complementarity of the two agents and merits additional studies to clarify the observed discordance between tumor regression and immune signals in the combination setting. These data support biomarker-guided approaches and highlight PDOTS as a translational platform for defining rational immunotherapy combinations.
利益披露 Disclosure
B. Melidosian,
Incyte Corporation Employment.
J. Vail,
Xsphera Biosciences, Inc. Independent Contractor.
X. Ren,
Incyte Corporation Employment.
D. Hagee,
Xsphera Biosciences, Inc. Employment.
M. A. Perricone,
Xsphera Biosciences Employment.
C. Timmers,
Incyte Corporation Employment.