Analysing the tumor transcriptome of prostate cancer to predict efficacy of Lu-PSMA therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rationale 177Lu-PSMA ([177Lu]Lutetium-PSMA-617) therapy is an effective treatment option for patients with prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, but still shows a non-responder rate of approximately 30%. Combination regimes of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibition and concomitant 177Lu-PSMA therapy have been proposed to increase the response rate. However, the interplay of immune landscape and 177Lu-PSMA therapy efficacy is poorly understood. Methods Between March 2018 and December 2021, a total of 168 patients were referred to 177Lu-PSMA therapy in our department and received a mean total dose of 21.9 GBq (three cycles in mean). All patients received baseline PSMA positron emission tomography to assess the PSMA uptake. The histopathological specimen of the primary prostate tumor was available with sufficient RNA passing quality control steps for genomic analysis in n=23 patients. In this subset of patients, tumor RNA transcriptomic analyses assessed 74 immune-related features in total, out of which n=24 signatures were not co-correlated and investigated further for outcome prognostication. Results In the subset of patients who received 177Lu-PSMA therapy, PD-L1 was not significantly associated with OS (HR per SD change (95% CI) 0.74 (0.42 to 1.30); SD: 0.18; p=0.29). In contrast, PD-L2 signature was positively associated with longer OS (HR per SD change 0.46 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.74); SD: 0.24; p=0.001; median OS 17.2 vs 5.7 months in higher vs lower PD-L2 patients). In addition, PD-L2 signature correlated with PSA-response (ϱ=−0.46; p=0.04). The PD-L2 signature association with OS was significantly moderated by L-Lactatdehydrogenase (LDH) levels (Cox model interaction p=0.01). Conclusion Higher PD-L2 signature might be associated with a better response to 177Lu-PSMA therapy and warrants further studies investigating additional immunotherapy. In contrast, PD-L1 was not associated with outcome. The protective effect of PD-L2 signature might be present only in men with lower LDH levels.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".