Erratum: Multi-Gene Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Detection in Gastric Cancer Based on Ion Semiconductor Sequencing Platform.

This corrects the article 10.3791/66058.

Multi-Gene Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Detection in Gastric Cancer Based on Ion Semiconductor Sequencing Platform.

Gastric cancer is a common heterogeneous tumor. Most patients have advanced gastric cancer at the time of diagnosis and often need chemotherapy. Although 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is widely used for treatment, its therapeutic sensitivity and drug tolerance still need to be determined, which emphasizes the importance of individualized administration. Pharmacogenetics can guide the clinical implementation of individualized treatment. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), as a genetic marker, contribute to the selection of appropriate chemotherapy regimens and dosages. Some SNPs are associated with folate metabolism, the therapeutic target of 5-FU. Methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) rs1801131 and rs1801133, dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) rs1650697 and rs442767, methionine synthase (MTR) rs1805087, gamma-glutamyl hydrolase (GGH) rs11545078 and solute carrier family 19 member 1 (SLC19A1) rs1051298 have been investigated in different kinds of cancers and antifolate antitumor drugs, which have potential forecasting and guiding significance for application of 5-FU. The ion torrent next-generation semiconductor sequencing technology can rapidly detect gastric cancer-related SNPs. Each time a base is extended in a DNA chain, an H+ will be released, causing local pH changes. The ionic sensor detects pH changes and converts chemical signals into digital signals, achieving sequencing by synthesis. This technique has low sample requirement, simple operation, low cost, and fast sequencing speed, which is beneficial for guiding individualized chemotherapy by SNPs.

Clinical outcomes of conversion surgery following immune checkpoint inhibitors and chemotherapy in stage IV gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: The clinical benefit of conversion surgery following immunochemotherapy in patients with stage IV gastric cancer (GC) remains uncertain. This study aims to clarify the clinical outcomes of conversion surgery for such patients. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study enroled consecutive patients with stage IV GC treated with a combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors and chemotherapy and/or anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 targeted therapy as first-line therapy. Cumulative survival curves were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method. Logistic regression and Cox regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with conversion surgery and survival, respectively. RESULTS: Among the 136 patients included in the study. The disease control rate was 72.1% (98/136), with objective response rate in 58.8% (80/136) and complete response rate in 5.9% (8/136). Among 98 patients with disease control, 56 patients underwent palliative immunochemotherapy with median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival at 9.2 and 16.2 months, respectively; the remaining 42 patients underwent conversion surgery, yielding an unreached median PFS over a 19.0-month median follow-up, accompanied by 1-year overall survival and PFS rates of 96.6% and 89.1%, respectively. The R0 resection rate reached 90.5% (38/42). 7 out of 42 patients achieved pathological complete response, of whom three patients demonstrated human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 positivity. No serious complications leading to death were observed during the perioperative period. Multivariate analysis indicated that programmed death ligand 1 combined positive score greater than or equal to 5 (odds ratio, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.08-0.57; P =0.002) favored successful conversion surgery, while signet ring cell carcinoma (hazard ratio, 6.29; 95% CI, 1.56-25.36; P =0.010) was the poor prognostic factor associated with survival in patients who underwent conversion surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Conversion surgery holds the potential for significant survival benefits in stage IV GC patients who have achieved a favourable clinical response to immunochemotherapy. Individuals with signet ring cell carcinoma may experience increased post-conversion surgery recurrence.

Prognostic characteristics and clinical response to immunotherapy targeting programmed cell death 1 for patients with advanced gastric cancer with liver metastases.

Background: The specific efficacy of immunotherapy for patients with liver metastases of gastric cancer is unclear. This study set out to explore the treatment response and related prognostic factors for patients with liver metastases of gastric cancer treated with immunotherapy. Patients and methods: This retrospective cohort study included 135 patients with unresectable advanced gastric cancer. According to the presence of liver metastases and/or first-line treatment with immunotherapy, patients were divided into the following three groups: I-LM(-) group(patients without liver metastases treated with immunotherapy, n=66), I-LM(+) group(patients with liver metastases treated with immunotherapy, n=36), C-LM(+) group(patients with liver metastases treated with chemotherapy and/or target therapy, n=33). Cox regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with survival in all patients and the three groups, respectively. Results: For the patients with liver metastases treated with immunotherapy, multivariate analysis showed that only the presence of peritoneal metastases was significantly associated with shorter PFS [hazard ratios (HR), 3.23; 95% CI, 1.12-9.32; P=0.030] and the patients with peritoneal metastases had shorter median PFS than patients without peritoneal metastases(3.1 vs 18.4 months; P=0.004), while the objective response rate was 100% in patients with HER2-positive (2 complete radiographic responses and 2 partial responses; 3 of 4 patients were still ongoing benefits [median follow-up time, 15.3 months ; interquartile range(IQR), 6.3-17.9 months]). Conclusions: The findings suggest that patients with various types of gastric cancer liver metastases respond differently to immune checkpoint inhibitors, HER2-positive patients may derive clinical benefits from immune checkpoint inhibitors, while the presence of peritoneal metastases is associated with resistance.

Association of peripheral basophils with tumor M2 macrophage infiltration and outcomes of the anti-PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy combination in advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although the anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitor plus chemotherapy combination has been approved as the standard first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer, a proportion of patients do not significantly benefit from this therapy. Who would respond poorly to this treatment and the underlying mechanisms of treatment failure are far from clear. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the associations between the peripheral basophils at baseline and clinical outcomes in 63 advanced gastric cancer patients treated with anti-PD-1 plus chemotherapy and 54 patients treated with chemotherapy alone. Immunohistochemistry and immunofluorescence staining in gastric cancer samples were utilized to investigate the basophil-related immunophenotype. RESULTS: The optimal cutoff of basophil count to distinguish responders to anti-PD-1 plus chemotherapy from non-responders was 20.0/µL. Compared with the low basophil group (≤ 20.0/µL, n = 40), the high basophil group (> 20.0/µL, n = 23) had a significantly lower objective response rate (ORR 17.4% vs. 67.5%, p = 0.0001), worse progression-free survival (median PFS 4.0 vs. 15.0 months, p = 0.0003), and worse overall survival (median OS not reached, p = 0.027). Multivariate analyses identified a basophil count of > 20.0/µL as an independent risk factor for a worse ORR (OR 0.040, 95% CI 0.007-0.241, p = 0.0004), worse PFS (HR 3.720, 95% CI 1.823-7.594, p = 0.0003) and worse OS (HR 3.427, 95% CI 1.698-6.917, p = 0.001). In contrast, there was no significant association between peripheral basophil counts and tumor response or survival in the chemotherapy-alone group (p > 0.05). In primary gastric cancer samples, we observed a correlation between higher peripheral basophil counts and the accumulation of tumor-infiltrating basophils (r = 0.6833, p = 0.005). Tumor-infiltrating basophils were found to be spatially proximate to M2 macrophages within TME and positively correlated with tumor M2 macrophage infiltration (r = 0.7234, p = 0.0023). The peripheral basophil counts also had a significant positive correlation with tumor-infiltrating M2 macrophage counts (r = 0.6584, p = 0.003). Further validation in tumor samples treated with the neoadjuvant anti-PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy combination suggests that the peripheral basophils, tumor infiltration of basophils, and M2 macrophages were significantly more abundant in non-responders than in responders (p = 0.0333, p = 0.0007, and p = 0.0066, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The peripheral basophil count was observed to be a potential biomarker of anti-PD-1 efficacy for advanced gastric cancer. Moreover, basophils may induce an immune-evasive tumor microenvironment by increasing M2 macrophage infiltration, which could be a potential immunotherapeutic target for advanced gastric cancer.