Search

Endometrial serous carcinoma (ESC) is an uncommon, aggressive type of endometrial cancer. While immune checkpoint blockade has emerged as a promising treatment option for endometrial carcinomas, research on the expression of immune checkpoints that could serve as prospective immunotherapy targets in ESC is limited. We examined the prevalence and prognostic value of lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3), T-cell immunoglobulin and ITIM domain (TIGIT), V-domain immunoglobulin (Ig) suppressor of T-cell activation (VISTA), and indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IOD1) in 94 cases of ESC and correlated their expression with CD8+ and FOXP3+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs). We observed a positive correlation among LAG-3, TIGIT, and VISTA expressed on immune cells, and among these markers and CD8+ and FOXP3+ TIL densities. In Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, tumors with high levels of LAG-3 and TIGIT expression had better progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) than those with lower levels of expression (LAG-3: PFS, P = .03, OS, P = .04; TIGIT: PFS, P = .01, OS, P = .009). In multivariate analysis, only high TIGIT expression was of independent prognostic value for better OS. VISTA expression in immune or tumor cells, and IDO1 expression in tumor cells, did not show a significant association with survival. Our data indicate that LAG-3, TIGIT, and VISTA immune checkpoints have roles in the microenvironment of ESC, and their expression patterns highlight the complex interactions among the different components of this system. High levels of these markers, together with high CD8+ TIL, suggest the potential immunogenicity of a subset of these tumors. Further studies are needed to elucidate the roles of various immune components in the ESC microenvironment and their association with intrinsic tumor properties., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Like programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1) is known to exert immunosuppressive effects and be variably expressed in human lung cancer. However, IDO1 expression has not been well studied in lung adenocarcinoma. PD-L1 and IDO1 expression was evaluated in 261 resected lung adenocarcinomas using tissue microarrays and H-scores (cutoff: 5). We compared IDO1 and PD-L1 expression with clinical features, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, HLA class I molecule expression, molecular alterations, and patient outcomes. There was expression of PD-L1 in 89 (34%) and IDO1 in 74 (29%) cases, with co-expression in 49 (19%). Both PD-L1 and IDO1 were significantly associated with smoking, aggressive pathologic features, and abundant CD8+ and T-bet+ (Th1 marker) tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. PD-L1 expression was also associated with preserved HLA class I molecule expression (p = 0.002). Compared to PD-L1+/IDO1+ and PD-L1+ only cases, significantly fewer IDO1+ only cases had abundant CD8+ and T-bet+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (p < 0.001, respectively). PD-L1 expression was significantly associated with EGFR wild-type (p < 0.001) and KRAS mutants (p = 0.021), whereas isolated IDO1 expression was significantly associated with EGFR mutations (p = 0.007). As for survival, PD-L1 was a significant predictor of decreased progression-free and overall survival by univariate but not multivariate analysis, while IDO1 was not associated with progression-free or overall survival. Interestingly, there was a significant difference in the 5-year progression-free and overall survival (p = 0.004 and 0.038, respectively), where cases without PD-L1 or IDO1 expression had the longest survival, and those with PD-L1 alone had the shortest survival. While PD-L1+/-IDO1 expression is observed in association with HLA class I expression, cytotoxic T lymphocyte/Th1 microenvironments, EGFR wild-type, and KRAS mutations, isolated IDO1 expression does not demonstrate these associations, suggesting that IDO1 may serve a distinct immunosuppressive role in lung adenocarcinomas. Thus, further investigation of IDO1 may demonstrate its role as a potential biomarker for patients who undergo anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy.

The immune inhibitory enzyme indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) has been associated with immune evasion in numerous malignancies and may mark these cancers as susceptible to anti-IDO therapies. We herein address IDO expression in breast cancers, examine the relationship between IDO and PD-L1, and investigate IDO fidelity across breast cancer primaries and metastases. IDO and PD-L1 expression was assessed in tissue microarrays containing 242 invasive primary breast cancers, 20 nodal metastases, and 19 distant metastases. IDO and PD-L1 were scored by extent in the tumor cells and immune infiltrate. Tumor IDO staining was seen in 14% of primaries including 38% of triple-negative cancers. IDO immune cell staining was seen in 14% of primaries and 29% of triple-negative cancers. Tumoral IDO and PD-L1 co-expression was seen in 8% of primaries, including 70% of tumoral PD-L1-positive cases. Immune IDO and PD-L1 co-expression was identified in 14% of primaries, including 48% of immune PD-L1-positive cases. Tumoral and immune cell IDO was conserved in 94% of matched primary/metastasis. In summary, IDO expression is common among high-grade, triple-negative breast cancers and is frequently associated with PD-L1 co-expression, suggesting that IDO might be a mechanism of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy resistance and that dual therapy may be of utility. Tumoral and immune cell IDO expression shows fidelity between primary and metastatic sites in treatment-naïve cancers, arguing against IDO as an independent driver for metastatic spread. Clinical trials are needed to assess the efficacy of IDO inhibition relative to IDO expression, as well as its possible role in combination with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy.

Mismatch repair-deficient endometrial carcinomas are optimal candidates for immunotherapy given their high neoantigen loads, robust lymphoid infiltrates, and frequent PD-L1 expression. However, co-opting the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway is just one mechanism that tumors can utilize to evade host immunity. Another immune modulatory molecule that has been demonstrated in endometrial carcinoma is indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO). We herein evaluate IDO expression in 60 endometrial carcinomas and assess results in relation to PD-L1 and mismatch repair status. IDO immunohistochemistry was performed on 60 endometrial carcinomas (20 Lynch syndrome (LS)-associated, 20 MLH1 promoter hypermethylated, and 20 mismatch repair-intact). Eight-five percent of endometrial carcinomas showed IDO tumor staining in >1% of cells. Twenty-five percent were positive in >25% of tumor cells and only 7% exceeded 50% staining. Mismatch repair-deficient cancers were more likely than mismatch repair-intact cancers to be >25% IDO-positive (35% vs. 5% p = 0.024). Differences were amplified when Lynch syndrome-associated cases were evaluated in isolation (50% Lynch syndrome-associated vs. 10% mismatch repair-intact and MLH1-hypermethylated, p = 0.001). Of the four cases showing >50% staining, three were Lynch syndrome-associated and one was MLH1-hypermethylated; no mismatch repair-intact cases had >50% staining. Forty-three percent of IDO-positive tumors were also positive for PD-L1, whereas only two cases showed tumoral PD-L1 in the absence of IDO. In summary, IDO expression is prevalent in endometrial carcinomas and diffuse staining is significantly more common in mismatch repair-deficient cancers, particularly Lynch syndrome-associated cases. Given that the majority of PD-L1 positive cancers also express IDO, synergistic combination therapy with anti-IDO and anti-PD1/PD-L1 may be relevant in this tumor type. Furthermore, anti-IDO therapy may be an option for a small subset of mismatch repair-intact cancers.