MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Using single-cell sequencing to identify endothelial expression of immune checkpoint ligands in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, pre- and post- atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in the phase II INTEGRATE study.

2025· article· en· W4410822180 on OpenAlexaff
Florence T.H. Wu, Jehan Vakharia, Stephanie WY Wong, Adriana Vukosich, Giselle M. Boukhaled, Simone C. Stone, Azin Sayad, Ben X. Wang, Harry Harvey, Cathy Yan, Marco A. Marra, Pamela S. Ohashi, Rachel Garonce-Hediger, Raymond Jang, Robert C. Grant, Eric Xueyu Chen, Jennifer J. Knox, Adrian G. Sacher

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentrePrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtezolizumabMedicineBevacizumabHepatocellular carcinomaCancer researchImmune checkpointVascular endothelial growth factorOncologyImmune systemVEGF receptorsImmunotherapyInternal medicineImmunologyNivolumabChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3129 Background: Atezolizumab (atezo; anti-PD-L1) plus bevacizumab (bev; anti-VEGF-A) became a standard treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after demonstrating an overall survival advantage over sorafenib (inhibitor of VEGFR2 & other kinases) in the phase III clinical trial, IMbrave150. However, the mechanisms of primary and acquired resistance to atezo-bev are poorly understood. VEGFR2 + endothelial cells (ECs) are potential cellular targets of bev and may play a key immunomodulatory role in response to atezo-bev. In this study, we utilized single-cell sequencing to identify potential mediators of resistance within EC subsets. Methods: Eight patients with unresectable HCC were enrolled on the INTEGRATE study, treated with atezo-bev, and underwent intensive biospecimen collection (NCT04563338). Serial tumor biopsies were collected and viably cryopreserved including pre-treatment (n=6), 21-28 days after first dose (n=6), and at disease progression (n=2). Single-cell analysis via cellular indexing of transcriptomes and epitopes (CITEseq) has been performed and data from four patients have been analysed to date. Aggregating their nine biopsies, 8,569 hepatocytes (ALB + FABP1 + FGB + ), 29,072 immune cells (CD45 + ), and 8,028 ECs (CD31 + vWF + KDR + ) were annotated. The differential expression of VEGFR2, PD-L1, and other immune checkpoint ligands by tumor vs. immune vs. endothelial cellswere interrogated (Table). Results: VEGFR2 (receptor for VEGF-A) is predominantly expressed by ECs, at high prevalence & intensity. PD-L1 and PD-L2 (ligands of PD-1) are expressed by ECs at low prevalence & intensity. Galectin3 (LAG3 ligand) is widely expressed by hepatocytes, immune cells and ECs; while L-SECtin (LAG3 ligand) is predominantly expressed by ECs but at low prevalence & intensity. ECs had the highest prevalence of galectin9 (TIM3 ligand) expression. Nectin2 (TIGIT ligand) is expressed by both hepatocytes and ECs at high prevalence & intensity. Conclusions: Liver ECs express a broad array of immune checkpoint ligands, which are more frequent than previously anticipated. These EC subsets may potentially drive resistance by contributing to exhaustion of T cell subsets entering the tumor microenvironment. Complete CITEseq, TCR sequencing, and correlative studies from the full cohort are underway. Clinical trial information: NCT04563338 . Hepatocytes Immune cells ECs VEGFR2 (KDR) 0.06% (<0.01) 0.05% (<0.01) 66% (0.8) PD-L1 (CD274) 0.2% (<0.01) 4% (0.03) 2% (0.01) PD-L2 (PDCD1LG2) 0.02% (<0.01) 2% (0.02) 3% (0.02) L-SECtin (CLEC4G) 0% 0.1% (<0.01) 3% (0.05) Galectin-3 (LGALS3) 68% (0.8) 39% (0.5) 43% (0.5) Galectin-9 (LGALS9) 5% (0.04) 28% (0.3) 34% (0.3) PVR (CD155) 14% (0.1) 1% (<0.01) 18% (0.1) Nectin2 (CD112) 60% (0.5) 5% (0.04) 44% (0.4) % = proportion of cells with positive expression. ( ) = normalized mean expression.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers→French-language works237,207→