Significant changes in macrophage and CD8 T cell densities in primary prostate tumors 2 weeks after SBRT.

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy impacts the local immune response to cancers. Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) is a highly focused method to deliver radiotherapy often used to treat prostate cancer. This is the first direct comparison of immune cells within prostate cancers before and after SBRT in patients. METHODS: Prostate cancers before and 2 weeks after SBRT are interrogated by multiplex immune fluorescence targeting various T cells and macrophages markers and analyzed by cell and pixel density, as part of a clinical trial of SBRT neoadjuvant to radical prostatectomy. RESULTS: Two weeks after SBRT, CD68, and CD163 macrophages are significantly increased while CD8 T cells are decreased. SBRT markedly alters the immune environment within prostate cancers.

High-dose per Fraction Radiotherapy Induces Both Antitumor Immunity and Immunosuppressive Responses in Prostate Tumors.

PURPOSE: The use of high-dose per fraction radiotherapy delivered as stereotactic body radiotherapy is a standard of care for prostate cancer. It is hypothesized that high-dose radiotherapy may enhance or suppress tumor-reactive immunity. The objective of this study was to assess both antitumor and immunosuppressive effects induced by high-dose radiotherapy in prostate cancer coclinical models, and ultimately, to test whether a combination of radiotherapy with targeted immunotherapy can enhance antitumor immunity. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We studied the effects of high-dose per fraction radiotherapy with and without anti-Gr-1 using syngeneic murine allograft prostate cancer models. The dynamic change of immune populations, including tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL), T regulatory cells (Treg), and myeloid-derived suppressive cells (MDSC), was evaluated using flow cytometry and IHC. RESULTS: Coclinical prostate cancer models demonstrated that high-dose per fraction radiotherapy induced a rapid increase of tumor-infiltrating MDSCs and a subsequent rise of CD8 TILs and circulating CD8 T effector memory cells. These radiation-induced CD8 TILs were more functionally potent than those from nonirradiated controls. While systemic depletion of MDSCs by anti-Gr-1 effectively prevented MDSC tumor infiltration, it did not enhance radiotherapy-induced antitumor immunity due to a compensatory expansion of Treg-mediated immune suppression. CONCLUSIONS: In allograft prostate cancer models, high-dose radiotherapy induced an early rise of MDSCs, followed by a transient increase of functionally active CD8 TILs. However, systemic depletion of MDSC did not augment the antitumor efficacy of high-dose radiotherapy due to a compensatory Treg response, indicating blocking both MDSCs and Tregs might be necessary to enhance radiotherapy-induced antitumor immunity.

The intraprostatic immune environment after stereotactic body radiotherapy is dominated by myeloid cells.

BACKGROUND: Hundreds of ongoing clinical trials combine radiation therapy, mostly delivered as stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), with immune checkpoint blockade. However, our understanding of the effect of radiotherapy on the intratumoral immune balance is inadequate, hindering the optimal design of trials that combine radiation therapy with immunotherapy. Our objective was to characterize the intratumoral immune balance of the malignant prostate after SBRT in patients. METHODS: Sixteen patients with high-risk, non-metastatic prostate cancer at comparable Gleason Grade disease underwent radical prostatectomy with (n = 9) or without (n = 7) neoadjuvant SBRT delivered in three fractions of 8 Gy over 5 days completed 2 weeks before surgery. Freshly resected prostate specimens were processed to obtain single-cell suspensions, and immune-phenotyped for major lymphoid and myeloid cell subsets by staining with two separate 14-antibody panels and multicolor flow cytometry analysis. RESULTS: Malignant prostates 2 weeks after SBRT had an immune infiltrate dominated by myeloid cells, whereas malignant prostates without preoperative treatment were more lymphoid-biased (myeloid CD45+ cells 48.4 ± 19.7% vs. 25.4 ± 7.0%; adjusted p-value = 0.11; and CD45+ lymphocytes 51.6 ± 19.7% vs. 74.5 ± 7.0%; p = 0.11; CD3+ T cells 35.2 ± 23.8% vs. 60.9 ± 9.7%; p = 0.12; mean ± SD). CONCLUSION: SBRT drives a significant lymphoid to myeloid shift in the prostate-tumor immune infiltrate. This may be of interest when combining SBRT with immunotherapies, particularly in prostate cancer.

Phase 1 Trial of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Neoadjuvant to Radical Prostatectomy for Patients With High-Risk Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of prostate stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) neoadjuvant to radical prostatectomy (RP) in a phase 1 trial. The primary endpoint was treatment completion rate without severe acute surgical complications. Secondary endpoints included patient-reported quality of life and physician-reported toxicities. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with nonmetastatic high-risk or locally advanced prostate cancer received 24 Gy in 3 fractions to the prostate and seminal vesicles over 5 days, completed 2 weeks before RP. Patients with pN1 disease were treated after multidisciplinary discussion and shared decision making. Patient-reported quality of life (International Prostate Symptom Score and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite 26-item version questionnaires) and physician-reported toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.03) were assessed before SBRT, immediately before surgery, and at 3-month intervals for 1 year. RESULTS: Twelve patients were enrolled, and 11 completed treatment (1 patient had advanced disease on prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography after enrollment but before treatment). There were no significant surgical complications. After RP, 2 patients underwent additional radiation therapy to nodes with androgen suppression for pN1 disease. Median follow-up after completion of treatment was 20.1 months, with 9 of 11 patients having a follow-up period of >12 months. Two patients had biochemical recurrence (prostate-specific antigen ≥0.05) within the first 12 months, with an additional 2 patients found to have biochemical recurrence after the 12-month period. The highest Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events genitourinary grades were 0, 1, 2, and 3 (n = 1, 4, 4, and 2, respectively), and the highest gastrointestinal grades were 0, 1, and 2 (n = 9, 1, and 1, respectively). At 12 months, incontinence was the only grade ≥2 toxicity. One and 2 of 9 patients had grade 2 and 3 incontinence, respectively. On the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (26-item version), the mean/median changes in scores from baseline to 12 months were -32.8/-31.1 for urinary incontinence, -1.6/-6.2 for urinary irritative/obstructive, -2.1/0 for bowel, -34.4/-37.5 for sexual function, and -10.6/-2.5 for hormonal. The mean/median change in International Prostate Symptom Score from baseline to 12 months was 0.5/0.5. CONCLUSIONS: RP after neoadjuvant SBRT appears to be feasible and safe at the dose tested. The severity of urinary incontinence may be higher than RP alone.

Interference with DNA repair after ionizing radiation by a pyrrole-imidazole polyamide.

Pyrrole-imidazole (Py-Im) polyamides are synthetic non-genotoxic minor groove-binding small molecules. We hypothesized that Py-Im polyamides can modulate the cellular response to ionizing radiation. Pre-treatment of cells with a Py-Im polyamide prior to exposure to ionizing radiation resulted in a delay in resolution of phosphorylated γ-H2AX foci, increase in XRCC1 foci, and reduced cellular replication potential. RNA-sequencing of cell lines exposed to the polyamide showed induction of genes related to the ultraviolet radiation response. We observed that the polyamide is almost 10-fold more toxic to a cell line deficient in DNA ligase 3 as compared to the parental cell line. Alkaline single cell gel electrophoresis reveals that the polyamide induces genomic fragmentation in the ligase 3 deficient cell line but not the corresponding parental line. The polyamide interferes directly with DNA ligation in vitro. We conclude that Py-Im polyamides may be further explored as sensitizers to genotoxic therapies.