MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4393071362 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2024-6694

Abstract 6694: Gut microbial drivers of response to bladder-sparing therapy in human muscle-invasive bladder cancer enhance immunotherapy efficacy and limit immunosuppression following fecal microbiome transplantation <i>in vivo</i>

2024· article· en· W4393071362 on OpenAlexaff
Éva Michaud, Sabina Fehric, Cynthia Faubert, Bertrand Routy, Irah L. King, José João Mansure, Wassim Kassouf

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsChristie (Canada)Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalInstitute of Infection and ImmunityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunosuppressionMicrobiomeImmunotherapyTransplantationBladder cancerMedicineCancerIn vivoEx vivoImmunologyImmune systemBiologyInternal medicineBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND: Radiation therapy (RT) is a bladder-sparing option for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer (MIBC), yet encounters a 30% non-response rate, with half of the patients succumbing to metastasis. Preclinical models demonstrate enhanced antitumor responses with RT combined with PD-1/PD-L1 blockade but give limited insight into the determinants of success for such combination therapies (CT). The gut microbiome, pivotal in conditioning local and peripheral immunity, influences PD-1-based immunotherapy efficacy in various cancers. Immune profiling indicates heightened systemic and antitumor immunity in responders with a favorable gut microbiome, enriched in Akkermansia muciniphila, Bifidobacterium, and Faecalibacterium. Oral gavage of immunogenic bacteria further enhances combined RT and anti-PD-L1 therapy. We thus aim to 1) elucidate the role of patients’ microbiome in shaping anti-tumor immune responses to CT, and 2) use its composition as a predictive factor for CT success. METHODS: We performed shotgun metagenomics on microbial DNA from fecal materials of MIBC RT responders (R, n=26) and non-responders (NR, n=11). Fecal homogenates from donors were gavaged into germ-free (GF) mice. Three weeks post-gavage, MB49 tumor cells were subcutaneously delivered to mice, randomized into four groups: control, anti-PD-L1, RT, and RT + anti-PD-L1. Tumors were harvested seven days post-treatment for single-cell RNA-seq and TCR sequencing (10X Genomics), while stool samples were collected weekly for 16S sequencing. RESULTS: Significant gut microbial disparities were observed between R and NR MIBC patients, with particular enrichment in known promoters of anti-PD-L1 response, such as Phocaeicola dorei in R. Transplantation of R microbiome into GF mice resulted in significant increases in predicted survival, tumor growth delay, and counts of effector CD4+ T cell infiltration in the RT+PD-L1 arm. Conversely, NR microbiome transplantation correlated with increased neutrophil and Treg infiltration, abrogating the survival tumor growth delay benefits of the combination arm. Spatial tissue analyses revealed higher neutrophil densities around CD8+ T cells in all NR arms. Single-cell RNA-seq of tumor-infiltrating immune cells unveiled skewed CD4 and CD8 polarization between R and NR in vivo batches. SIGNIFICANCE: To our knowledge, this is the first study to use FMT as a modulator of response in the context of radiation therapy combinations in MIBC. Our results highlight that the gut microbiome alone may condition a favorable immune terrain for combinatorial therapies involving radiation. This offers strong predictive value for personalized therapeutic approaches in selecting patients who will benefit the most from bladder-sparing therapies. Citation Format: Eva Michaud, Sabina Fehric, Cynthia Faubert, Bertrand Routy, Irah King, José Joao Mansure, Wassim Kassouf. Gut microbial drivers of response to bladder-sparing therapy in human muscle-invasive bladder cancer enhance immunotherapy efficacy and limit immunosuppression following fecal microbiome transplantation in vivo [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 6694.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.356 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→