Overcoming malignant cell-based mechanisms of resistance to immune checkpoint blockade antibodies.

Traditional cancer treatment approaches have focused on surgery, radiation therapy, and cytotoxic chemotherapy. However, with rare exceptions, metastatic cancers were considered to be incurable by traditional therapy. Over the past 20 years a fourth modality - immunotherapy - has emerged as a potentially curative approach for patients with advanced metastatic cancer. However, in many patients cancer "finds a way" to evade the anti-tumor effects of immunotherapy. Immunotherapy resistance mechanisms can be employed by both cancer cells and the non-cancer elements of tumor microenvironment. This review focuses on the resistance mechanisms that are specifically mediated by cancer cells. In order to extend the impact of immunotherapy to more patients and across all cancer types, and to inhibit the development of acquired resistance, the underlying biology driving immune escape needs to be better understood. Elucidating mechanisms of immune escape may shed light on new therapeutic targets, and lead to successful combination therapeutic strategies.

Targeting Multiple Receptors to Increase Checkpoint Blockade Efficacy.

Immune checkpoint blockade therapy is a powerful treatment strategy for many cancer types. Many patients will have limited responses to monotherapy targeted to a single immune checkpoint. Both inhibitory and stimulatory immune checkpoints continue to be discovered. Additionally, many receptors previously identified to play a role in tumor formation and progression are being found to have immunomodulatory components. The success of immunotherapy depends on maximizing pro-anti-tumor immunity while minimizing immunosuppressive signaling. Combining immune checkpoint targeted approaches with each other or with other receptor targets is a promising schema for future therapeutic regimen designs.

Antibody dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity selection pressure induces diverse mechanisms of resistance.

Targeted monoclonal antibody therapy has emerged as a powerful therapeutic strategy for cancer. However, only a minority of patients have durable responses and the development of resistance remains a major clinical obstacle. Antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) represents a crucial therapeutic mechanism of action; however, few studies have explored ADCC resistance. Using multiple in vitro models of ADCC selection pressure, we have uncovered both shared and distinct resistance mechanisms. Persistent ADCC selection pressure yielded ADCC-resistant cells that are characterized by a loss of NK cell conjugation and this shared resistance phenotype is associated with cell-line dependent modulation of cell surface proteins that contribute to immune synapse formation and NK cell function. We employed single-cell RNA sequencing and proteomic screens to interrogate molecular mechanisms of resistance. We demonstrate that ADCC resistance involves upregulation of interferon/STAT1 and DNA damage response signaling as well as activation of the immunoproteasome. Here, we identify pathways that modulate ADCC sensitivity and report strategies to enhance ADCC-mediated elimination of cancer cells. ADCC resistance could not be reversed with combinatorial treatment approaches. Hence, our findings indicate that tumor cells utilize multiple strategies to inhibit NK cell mediated-ADCC. Future research and development of NK cell-based immunotherapies must incorporate plans to address or potentially prevent the induction of resistance.

Tumor mechanisms of resistance to immune attack.

The immune system plays a key role in the interactions between host and tumor. Immune selection pressure is a driving force behind the sculpting and evolution of malignant cancer cells to escape this immune attack. Several common tumor cell-based mechanisms of resistance to immune attack have been identified and can be broadly categorized into three main classes: loss of antigenicity, loss of immunogenicity, and creation of an immunosuppressive microenvironment. In this review, we will discuss in detail the relevant literature associated with each class of resistance and will describe the relevance of these mechanisms to human cancer patients. To conclude, we will outline the implications these mechanisms have for the treatment of cancer using currently available therapeutic approaches. Immunotherapy has been a successful addition to current treatment approaches, but many patients either do not respond or quickly become resistant. This reflects the ability of tumors to continue to adapt to immune selection pressure at all stages of development. Additional study of immune escape mechanisms and immunotherapy resistance mechanisms will be needed to inform future treatment approaches.

A Mechanism of Resistance to Antibody-Targeted Immune Attack.

Targeted monoclonal antibody therapy is a promising therapeutic strategy for cancer, and antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) represents a crucial mechanism underlying these approaches. The majority of patients have limited responses to monoclonal antibody therapy due to the development of resistance. Models of ADCC provide a system for uncovering immune-resistance mechanisms. We continuously exposed epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR+) A431 cells to KIR-deficient NK92-CD16V effector cells and the anti-EGFR cetuximab. Persistent ADCC exposure yielded ADCC-resistant cells (ADCCR1) that, compared with control ADCC-sensitive cells (ADCCS1), exhibited reduced EGFR expression, overexpression of histone- and interferon-related genes, and a failure to activate NK cells, without evidence of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition. These properties gradually reversed following withdrawal of ADCC selection pressure. The development of resistance was associated with lower expression of multiple cell-surface molecules that contribute to cell-cell interactions and immune synapse formation. Classic immune checkpoints did not modulate ADCC in this unique model system of immune resistance. We showed that the induction of ADCC resistance involves genetic and epigenetic changes that lead to a general loss of target cell adhesion properties that are required for the establishment of an immune synapse, killer cell activation, and target cell cytotoxicity.

The utility of STAT6 and ALDH1 expression in the differential diagnosis of solitary fibrous tumor versus prostate-specific stromal neoplasms.

Solitary fibrous tumor (SFT) diagnosis in prostate can be challenging on small biopsies. Prostatic stromal tumors of unknown malignant potential (STUMP) and SFT have overlapping features. NAB2-STAT6 gene fusions that were recently identified in various SFTs lead to nuclear translocalization of STAT6. Nuclear STAT6 immunostaining is now considered an adjunct for SFT diagnosis. We evaluated STAT6 and an emerging stemness marker, ALDH1, in the differential diagnosis of SFT versus prostatic stromal lesions. Sixteen STUMPs, 12 SFTs, and 4 prostatic stromal sarcomas (12 needle biopsies, 13 radical prostatectomies, 7 transurethral resections) were retrieved (1995-2015). Sections were stained with polyclonal STAT6 antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA; S20, 1:100) and monoclonal ALDH1 antibody (BD Biosciences, San Jose, CA; clone 44, 1:250). In STAT6 cases, only unequivocal nuclear staining (with/without cytoplasmic staining) was considered positive. Cytoplasmic ALDH1 staining was counted positive. Ten of 11 evaluable SFTs demonstrated strong and diffuse nuclear STAT6 positivity; 4 of 16 STUMPs had nuclear staining that was weak (1/4) or focal (1/4). ALDH1 positivity was seen in 10 of 12 evaluable SFTs and 3 of 15 STUMPs. Prostatic stromal sarcomas were STAT6 negative (4/4); 2 of 4 were ALDH1 positive. The sensitivity and specificity for STAT6 for the diagnosis of SFT were 91% and 75%, respectively. Coexpression of STAT6 and ALDH1 yielded the same sensitivity but improved the specificity (100%) for the diagnosis of SFT. STAT6 is a useful marker in the differential diagnosis of SFT versus STUMP. Using STAT6 and ALDH1 together increases specificity. STUMPs can show STAT6 positivity, and when they do, it is likely to be weak or focal.

For staining of ALK protein, the novel D5F3 antibody demonstrates superior overall performance in terms of intensity and extent of staining in comparison to the currently used ALK1 antibody.

Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor (IMT) is a rare neoplasm. Approximately 50 % of IMTs show an anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene fusion resulting in ALK overexpression on immunohistochemistry (IHC). A novel anti-ALK monoclonal antibody (D5F3) has been suggested to be of superior sensitivity to the ALK1 antibody which is currently used. We compared the performance of D5F3 in detecting ALK protein expression in IMTs from various anatomic sites compared to the currently utilized ALK1. We selected 25 IMTs from our surgical pathology files (2005-2015). The novel rabbit monoclonal anti-human CD246 (clone D5F3) and the currently used mouse monoclonal anti-human CD246 (clone ALK1) were used for immunohistochemical staining (IHC) in an automated slide stainer. The percentage of immunoreactive tumor cells (0, <5 %, 5-50 %, >50 %) and cytoplasmic staining intensity (graded 0-3) were assessed and compared between the two antibodies. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) studies for ALK gene rearrangement were performed on 11 tumors. D5F3 antibody stained 76 % and ALK1 antibody stained 72 % of IMTs (p = 0.747). Compared to staining with ALK1, D5F3 stained a higher proportion of cases extensively (>50 % cells) (76 vs. 28 %, p < 0.001) and with high intensity (grade 3 76 % vs 0; p < 0.001). FISH and IHC findings (for both antibodies) were concordant in 9/10 (90 %) IMTs, in which results were informative. The novel anti-ALK rabbit monoclonal antibody (D5F3 clone) demonstrates superior overall performance in term of intensity and extent of staining of ALK protein in IMT. We found IHC staining with both antibody clones to correlate equally well with FISH results for detection of ALK rearrangement.