PO.CL05.06 · 临床研究
通过RNA分析识别的乳腺癌中免疫特征的活检部位特异性差异
Biopsy site-specific variation in immune signatures identified by RNA profiling in breast cancer
作者与单位 Authors & Affiliations
摘要 Abstract
中文摘要
背景:乳腺癌通常被认为是免疫“冷”肿瘤;然而,新出现的数据表明其免疫图景存在异质性。三阴性和HER2阳性肿瘤通常比激素受体阳性(HR+)肿瘤表现出更高的免疫细胞浸润。此外,活检部位的局部微环境可能影响肿瘤的免疫特征,从而形成不同的免疫表型。在本研究中,我们使用基因表达谱来评估乳腺癌中免疫活性的活检部位特异性模式。
方法:作为常规临床诊疗的一部分,对1,009例乳腺癌患者(所有来诊者)的肿瘤组织使用实验室自建检测FoundationOne® RNA进行靶向RNA分析。使用单样本基因集富集分析(ssGSEA)并采用一种科研用途算法生成免疫和基质基因集的评分。对Z标准化评分进行K均值聚类,识别出两种免疫表型:免疫高型和免疫低型。轮廓宽度为负值的样本被分类为未知表型。
结果:最常见的样本部位为乳腺(n=363)、肝脏(n=142)、淋巴结(n=120)、骨(n=81)和肺(n=55)。免疫ssGSEA评分因样本部位不同而存在显著差异。脑活检(n=23)的免疫评分最低,仅5%(1/23)被分类为免疫高型,而淋巴结和肺活检显示出更高的免疫评分,分别有42%(51/120)和47%(26/55)被分类为免疫高型(p<0.05)。在局部乳腺样本中,26%(96/363)为免疫高型。尽管肝转移通常被认为是免疫“冷”的,但本队列中有12%(17/142)为免疫高型。与HR+肿瘤免疫活性较低的报道一致,ESR1表达在免疫低型肿瘤中显著高于免疫高型肿瘤(中位表达4,872 vs. 986每百万转录本;p<10^-4)。此外,不同的免疫细胞群和基因特征也表现出部位特异性模式。IFN-γ评分在60%的乳腺活检中高于中位数,而脑、肝、肺转移分别为17%、39%和62%。T细胞和CD8+ T细胞评分通常在肺(65%、62%高于中位数)和淋巴结转移(66%、62%)中较高,在乳腺活检中居中(53%、56%),在肝(32%、37%)和脑转移(17%、22%)中最低。相比之下,树突状细胞评分在肝转移中最高(83%高于中位数),而乳腺样本为48%。
结论:乳腺癌中的免疫表型因样本部位而有显著差异,反映了局部微环境的异质性。这些部位特异性免疫特征可能对免疫治疗选择、预后评估和疫苗开发策略具有重要意义。
查看英文原文 English abstract
Background: Breast cancer is generally considered to be immune cold; however, emerging data indicate heterogeneity in its immune landscape. Triple negative and HER2-positive tumors typically show higher immune cell infiltration than hormone receptor-positive (HR+) tumors. Additionally, the local microenvironment at the biopsy site may influence the immune profile of the tumor, contributing to distinct immunophenotypes. In this study, we used gene expression profiling to evaluate biopsy site-specific patterns of immune activity in breast cancer.
Methods: Tumor tissue from 1,009 patients with breast cancer (all-comers) underwent targeted RNA profiling using a laboratory-developed test, FoundationOne ® RNA, as part of routine clinical care. Scores for immune and stromal gene sets were generated using a single-sample gene set enrichment analysis (ssGSEA) using a research use algorithm. K-means clustering of Z-normalized scores identified two immunophenotypes: immune-high and immune-low. Samples with a negative silhouette width were classified as unknown phenotype.
Results: The most common sample sites were breast (n=363), liver (n=142), lymph node (n=120), bone (n=81), and lung (n=55). Immune ssGSEA scores varied significantly by sample site. Brain biopsies (n=23) exhibited the lowest immune scores, with only 5% (1/23) classified as immune-high, whereas lymph node and lung biopsies showed higher immune scores, with 42% (51/120) and 47% (26/55) classified as immune-high, respectively (p<0.05). Among local breast samples, 26% (96/363) were immune-high. Although liver metastases are typically considered to be immune cold, 12% (17/142) in this cohort were immune-high. Consistent with reports of lower immune activity in HR+ tumors, ESR1 expression was significantly higher in immune-low tumors compared to immune-high tumors (median expression 4,872 vs. 986 transcripts per million; p <10 -4 ). Furthermore, distinct immune cell populations and gene signatures also showed site-specific patterns. IFN-Ɣ scores were above median in 60% of breast biopsies, compared with 17% of brain, 39% of liver, and 62% of lung metastases. T-cell and CD8+ T-cell scores were typically higher in lung (65%, 62% above median) and lymph node metastases (66%, 62%), intermediate in breast biopsies (53%, 56%), and lowest in liver (32%, 37%) and brain metastases (17%, 22%). In contrast, dendritic cell scores were highest in liver metastases (83% above median), compared with breast samples (48%).
Conclusion: Immunophenotypes in breast cancer vary substantially by sample site, reflecting-heterogeneity of the local microenvironment. These site-specific immune signatures may have important implications for immunotherapy selection, prognostic assessment, and vaccine development strategies.
利益披露 Disclosure
S. Sivakumar,
Foundation Medicine, Inc. Employment.
Roche Stock.
E. Ebot,
Foundation Medicine, Inc. Employment.
Roche Stock.
D. I. Lin,
Foundation Medicine, Inc. Employment.
Roche Stock.
M. Montesion,
Foundation Medicine, Inc. Employment.
Roche Stock.
J. S. Ross,
Foundation Medicine, Inc. Employment.
Roche Stock.
L. A. Albacker,
Foundation Medicine, Inc. Employment.
Roche Stock.
G. M. Frampton,
Foundation Medicine, Inc. Employment.
Roche Stock.
E. S. Sokol,
Foundation Medicine, Inc. Employment.
Roche Stock.