JAK-STAT signaling maintains homeostasis in T cells and macrophages.

Immune cells need to sustain a state of constant alertness over a lifetime. Yet, little is known about the regulatory processes that control the fluent and fragile balance that is called homeostasis. Here we demonstrate that JAK-STAT signaling, beyond its role in immune responses, is a major regulator of immune cell homeostasis. We investigated JAK-STAT-mediated transcription and chromatin accessibility across 12 mouse models, including knockouts of all STAT transcription factors and of the TYK2 kinase. Baseline JAK-STAT signaling was detected in CD8+ T cells and macrophages of unperturbed mice-but abrogated in the knockouts and in unstimulated immune cells deprived of their normal tissue context. We observed diverse gene-regulatory programs, including effects of STAT2 and IRF9 that were independent of STAT1. In summary, our large-scale dataset and integrative analysis of JAK-STAT mutant and wild-type mice uncovered a crucial role of JAK-STAT signaling in unstimulated immune cells, where it contributes to a poised epigenetic and transcriptional state and helps prepare these cells for rapid response to immune stimuli.

Off-targets of BRAF inhibitors disrupt endothelial signaling and vascular barrier function.

Targeted therapies against mutant BRAF are effectively used in combination with MEK inhibitors (MEKi) to treat advanced melanoma. However, treatment success is affected by resistance and adverse events (AEs). Approved BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) show high levels of target promiscuity, which can contribute to these effects. The blood vessel lining is in direct contact with high plasma concentrations of BRAFi, but effects of the inhibitors in this cell type are unknown. Hence, we aimed to characterize responses to approved BRAFi for melanoma in the vascular endothelium. We showed that clinically approved BRAFi induced a paradoxical activation of endothelial MAPK signaling. Moreover, phosphoproteomics revealed distinct sets of off-targets per inhibitor. Endothelial barrier function and junction integrity were impaired upon treatment with vemurafenib and the next-generation dimerization inhibitor PLX8394, but not with dabrafenib or encorafenib. Together, these findings provide insights into the surprisingly distinct side effects of BRAFi on endothelial signaling and functionality. Better understanding of off-target effects could help to identify molecular mechanisms behind AEs and guide the continued development of therapies for BRAF-mutant melanoma.

DNA Methylation Signatures Correlate with Response to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Metastatic Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: DNA methylation profiles have emerged as potential predictors of therapeutic response in various solid tumors. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze the DNA methylation profiles of patients with stage IV metastatic melanoma undergoing first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment and evaluate their correlation with a radiological response according to immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (iRECIST). METHODS: A total of 81 tissue samples from 71 patients with metastatic melanoma (27 female, 44 male) were included in this study. We utilized Illumina Methylation EPIC Beadchips to retrieve their genome-wide methylation profile by interrogating >850,000 CpG sites. Clustering based on the 500 most differentially methylated genes was conducted to identify distinct methylation patterns associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor response. Results were further aligned with an independent, previously published data set. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival was 8.5 months (range: 0-104.1 months), and the median overall survival was 30.6 months (range: 0-104.1 months). Objective responses were observed in 29 patients (40.8%). DNA methylation profiling revealed specific signatures that correlated with radiological response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. Three distinct clusters were identified based on the methylation patterns of the 500 most differentially methylated genes. Cluster 1 (12/12) and cluster 2 (12/24) exhibited a higher proportion of responders, while cluster 3 (39/45) predominantly consisted of non-responders. In the validation data set, responders also showed more frequent hypomethylation although differences in the data sets limit the interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that DNA methylation profiling of tumor tissues might serve as a predictive biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibitor response in patients with metastatic melanoma. Further validation studies are warranted to confirm the efficiency of DNA methylation profiling as a predictive tool in the context of immunotherapy for metastatic melanoma.

Efficacy and safety of mTOR inhibition in cutaneous sarcoidosis: a single-centre trial.

BACKGROUND: Sarcoidosis is an inflammatory condition that can affect various organs and tissues, causing the formation of granulomas and subsequent functional impairment. The origin of sarcoidosis remains unknown and there are few treatment options. Mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) activation is commonly seen in granulomas of patients across different tissues and has been shown to induce sarcoidosis-like granulomas in a mouse model. This study aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of the mTOR inhibitor sirolimus as a treatment for cutaneous sarcoidosis. METHODS: We did a single-centre, randomised study treating patients with persistent and glucocorticoid-refractory cutaneous sarcoidosis with sirolimus at the Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna (Vienna, Austria). We recruited participants who had persistent, active, and histologically proven cutaneous sarcoidosis. We used an n-of-1 crossover design in a placebo-controlled, double-blind topical treatment period and a subsequent single-arm systemic treatment phase for 4 months in the same participants. Participants initially received either 0·1% topical sirolimus in Vaseline or placebo (Vaseline alone), twice daily. After a washout period, all participants were subsequently administered a 6 mg loading dose followed by 2 mg sirolimus solution orally once daily, aiming to achieve serum concentrations of 6 ng/mL. The primary endpoint was change in the Cutaneous Sarcoidosis Activity and Morphology Index (CSAMI) after topical or systemic treatment. All participants were included in the safety analyses, and patients having completed the respective treatment period (topical treatment or systemic treatment) were included in the primary analyses. Adverse events were assessed at each study visit by clinicians and were categorised according to their correlation with the study drug, severity, seriousness, and expectedness. This study is registered with EudraCT (2017-004930-27) and is now closed. FINDINGS: 16 participants with persistent cutaneous sarcoidosis were enrolled in the study between Sept 3, 2019, and June 15, 2021. Six (37%) of 16 participants were men, ten (63%) were women, and 15 (94%) were White. The median age of participants was 54 years (IQR 48-58). 14 participants were randomly assigned in the topical phase and 2 entered the systemic treatment phase directly. Daily topical treatment did not improve cutaneous lesions (effect estimate -1·213 [95% CI -2·505 to 0·079], p=0·066). Systemic treatment targeting trough serum concentrations of 6 ng/mL resulted in clinical and histological improvement of skin lesions in seven (70%) of ten participants (median -7·0 [95% CI -16·5 to -3·0], p=0·018). Various morphologies of cutaneous sarcoidosis, including papular, nodular, plaque, scar, and tattoo-associated sarcoidosis, responded to systemic sirolimus therapy with a long-lasting effect for more than 1 year after treatment had been stopped. There were no serious adverse events and no deaths. INTERPRETATION: Short-term treatment with systemic sirolimus might be an effective and safe treatment option for patients with persistent glucocorticoid-refractory sarcoidosis with a long-lasting disease-modulating effect. The effect of sirolimus in granulomatous inflammation should be investigated further in large, multi-centre, randomised clinical trials. FUNDING: Vienna Science and Technology Fund, Austrian Science Fund.