MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4412645886 · doi:10.3389/fimmu.2025.1557461

Interplay between tumor mutation burden and the tumor microenvironment predicts the prognosis of pan-cancer anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy

2025· article· en· W4412645886 sur OpenAlexaff
Wuyuan Liao, Xinwei Zhou, Hansen Lin, Zihao Feng, Xinyan Chen, Yuhang Chen, Minyu Chen, Mingjie Lin, G YAO, Jinwei Chen, Haoqian Feng, Yinghan Wang, Zhiping Tan, Jun Lu, Pengju Li, Jinhuan Wei, Li Luo, Liangmin Fu

Notice bibliographique

RevueFrontiers in Immunology · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Établissements canadiensMinistry of Education and Child Care
Organismes subventionnairesGuangdong Medical Research FoundationChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
Mots-clésTumor microenvironmentImmunotherapyOncologyMedicineProportional hazards modelBiomarkerCancerInternal medicineComputational biologyBioinformaticsBiologyGenetics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment landscape for advanced cancers, yet their efficacy remains heterogeneous among patients. Tumor mutation burden (TMB) has been extensively explored as a potential biomarker for predicting ICI response. However, its application is limited by several factors, including inconsistent predictive power across different tumor types and the lack of a clear relationship with overall survival (OS). This study aimed to explore the complex interplay between TMB and the tumor microenvironment (TME) and to identify novel predictive biomarkers that can enhance the precision of ICI therapy across multiple cancer types. Methods: We systematically collected and analyzed genomic and clinical data from patients receiving anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy across multiple cohorts. Our dataset included information from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) pan-cancer database and various ICI clinical trials. We first screened immunosuppression-related genes (ISRGs) that might interfere with TMB's predictive role by analyzing the survival data and gene expression profiles of patients. Using LASSO regression and multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis, we constructed a risk model based on these ISRGs. The model's predictive ability was rigorously validated in multiple independent cohorts. Additionally, we employed algorithms such as CIBERSORT and ESTIMATE to assess the correlation between the risk score and TME components. To further explore the therapeutic implications of our findings, we focused on RPLP0, a ribosomal protein that emerged as a robust biomarker in our model. We investigated its expression in tumor tissues and evaluated the impact of its knockdown on immunotherapeutic efficacy using in vitro and in vivo experiments. Results: Our comprehensive analysis revealed that the predictive power of TMB varies significantly across different cancer types and is highly dependent on its interaction with the TME. In tumors with a favorable immune microenvironment, characterized by high CD8+ T cell infiltration and M1 macrophage presence, TMB maintained its predictive ability. However, in immunosuppressive microenvironments, TMB alone failed to accurately predict patient outcomes. We identified 304 ISRGs and developed a 10-gene risk signature that demonstrated reliable prognostic predictive ability in both ICI cohorts and TCGA pan-cancer. The risk score derived from this model was significantly associated with stromal components and an immunosuppressive TME, characterized by elevated levels of M0 macrophages and activated mast cells. Notably, RPLP0 was identified as the most robust predictive marker during model building. We demonstrated its abnormal overexpression in tumor tissues and further showed that intratumoral RPLP0 knockdown in a subcutaneous bladder cancer model could enhance the efficacy of immunotherapy. The combination of RPLP0 knockdown and anti-PD-1 treatment resulted in significantly suppressed tumor growth and prolonged survival in mice, accompanied by elevated levels of IFN-γ and TNF-α in serum samples, indicating enhanced anti-tumor immunity. Conclusion: This study establishes a reliable risk model that complements TMB in guiding treatment decisions for ICI therapy. By incorporating the interaction between TMB and the TME, our model provides a more accurate prediction of patient prognosis and treatment response across multiple cancer types. The risk score's association with immunosuppressive TME components underscores the importance of considering the tumor's microenvironment in treatment planning. Furthermore, our findings highlight RPLP0 as a promising therapeutic target for combination immunotherapy. The robust predictive ability of our model across various cohorts and its potential to improve therapeutic outcomes offer new insights and directions for enhancing the efficacy of ICI therapy. Future research should focus on further validating this model in larger and more diverse cohorts, refining the gene set selection process, and exploring the specific mechanisms through which the identified biomarkers influence the TME and treatment response.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,001
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,006

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,007
Tête enseignante GPT0,263
Écart entre enseignants0,256 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations7
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueFrontiers in Immunology→Même sujetCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers→Travaux en français237 207→