CMTM6 shapes antitumor T cell response through modulating protein expression of CD58 and PD-L1.

The dysregulated expression of immune checkpoint molecules enables cancer cells to evade immune destruction. While blockade of inhibitory immune checkpoints like PD-L1 forms the basis of current cancer immunotherapies, a deficiency in costimulatory signals can render these therapies futile. CD58, a costimulatory ligand, plays a crucial role in antitumor immune responses, but the mechanisms controlling its expression remain unclear. Using two systematic approaches, we reveal that CMTM6 positively regulates CD58 expression. Notably, CMTM6 interacts with both CD58 and PD-L1, maintaining the expression of these two immune checkpoint ligands with opposing functions. Functionally, the presence of CMTM6 and CD58 on tumor cells significantly affects T cell-tumor interactions and response to PD-L1-PD-1 blockade. Collectively, these findings provide fundamental insights into CD58 regulation, uncover a shared regulator of stimulatory and inhibitory immune checkpoints, and highlight the importance of tumor-intrinsic CMTM6 and CD58 expression in antitumor immune responses.

Patients homozygous for DPYD c.1129-5923C>G/haplotype B3 have partial DPD deficiency and require a dose reduction when treated with fluoropyrimidines.

PURPOSE: Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) is a critical determinant of 5-fluorouracil pharmacology, and reduced activity of DPD as a result of deleterious polymorphisms in the gene encoding DPD (DPYD) can result in severe treatment-related toxicity. Dosing recommendations to individualize treatment have been provided for three DPYD variants (DPYD*2A, c.2846A>T, and c.1679T>G). A fourth variant, c.1129-5923C>G/HapB3, has been shown to increase the risk of fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity, but little is known about the functional effects of this variant. METHODS: By performing a large retrospective screen for DPYD variants, we identified three patients who were homozygous for c.1129-5923C>G/HapB3. We describe their clinical course of treatment and analyzed DPD activity and DPYD gene expression, to provide insight into the phenotypic effects of c.1129-5923C>G/HapB3. RESULTS: DPD activity could be measured in two patients and was 4.1 and 5.4 nmol/mg/h (DPD activity 41 and 55 % compared to controls, respectively). The fluoropyrimidine dose had to be reduced during treatment in both patients. In line with partial DPD deficiency in both patients, sequence analysis of DPD cDNA demonstrated a normal-sized (wild type) cDNA fragment of 486 bp, as well as a larger-sized (mutant) 530-bp fragment containing an aberrant 44-bp insertion in intron 10. Patient three tolerated treatment well, but DPD activity measurement was not possible as the patient had deceased at the time of performing the study. CONCLUSIONS: The presented functional and clinical data indicate that the c.1129-5923C>G variant is both functionally and clinically relevant, and support an upfront dose reduction of the fluoropyrimidine starting dose in patients carrying c.1129-5923C>G homozygously.