FLOT and CROSS chemotherapy regimens alter the frequency of CD27+ and CD69+ T cells in oesophagogastric adenocarcinomas: implications for combination with immunotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Combining immunostimulatory chemotherapies with immunotherapy is an attractive strategy to enhance treatment responses in oesophagogastric junctional adenocarcinoma (OGJ). This study investigates the immunostimulatory properties of FLOT, CROSS and MAGIC chemotherapy regimens in the context of OGJ using in vitro and ex vivo models of the treatment-naïve and post-chemotherapy treated tumour microenvironment. FLOT and CROSS chemotherapy regimens increased surrogate markers of immunogenic cell death (HMGB1 and HLA-DR), whereas the MAGIC treatment regimen decreased HMGB1 and HLA-DR on OGJ cells (markedly for epirubicin). Tumour-infiltrating and circulating T cells had significantly lower CD27 expression and significantly higher CD69 expression post-FLOT and post-CROSS treatment. Similarly, the supernatant from FLOT- and CROSS-treated OGJ cell lines and from FLOT- and CROSS-treated OGJ biopsies cultured ex vivo also decreased CD27 and increased CD69 expression on T cells. Following 48 h treatment with post-FLOT and post-CROSS tumour conditioned media the frequency of CD69+ T cells in culture negatively correlated with the levels of soluble immunosuppressive pro-angiogenic factors in the conditioned media from ex vivo explants. Supernatant from FLOT- and CROSS-treated OGJ cell lines also increased the cytotoxic potential of healthy donor T cells ex vivo and enhanced OGJ patient-derived lymphocyte mediated-killing of OE33 cells ex vivo. Collectively, this data demonstrate that FLOT and CROSS chemotherapy regimens possess immunostimulatory properties, identifying these chemotherapy regimens as rational synergistic partners to test in combination with immunotherapy and determine if this combinatorial approach could boost anti-tumour immunity in OGJ patients and improve clinical outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".