OBJECTIVE Pituitary adenoma is one of the most common primary intracranial neoplasms. Most of these tumors are soft, but up to 17% may have a firmer consistency. Therefore, knowing the tumor consistency in the preoperative setting could be helpful. Multiple imaging methods have been proposed to predict tumor consistency, but the results are controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of MR elastography (MRE) in predicting tumor consistency and its potential use in a series of patients with pituitary adenomas. METHODS Thirty-eight patients with pituitary adenomas (≥ 2.5 cm) were prospectively evaluated with MRI and MRE before surgery. Absolute MRE stiffness values and relative MRE stiffness ratios, as well as the relative ratio of T1 signal, T2 signal, and diffusion-weighted imaging apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were determined prospectively by calculating the ratio of those values in the tumor to adjacent left temporal white matter. Tumors were classified into three groups according to surgical consistency (soft, intermediate, and firm). Statistical analysis was used to identify the predictive value of the different radiological parameters in determining pituitary adenoma consistency. RESULTS The authors included 32 (84.21%) nonfunctional and 6 (15.79%) functional adenomas. The mean maximum tumor diameter was 3.7 cm, and the mean preoperative tumor volume was 16.4 cm 3 . Cavernous sinus invasion was present in 20 patients (52.63%). A gross-total resection was possible in 9 (23.68%) patients. The entire cohort’s mean absolute tumor stiffness value was 1.8 kPa (range 1.1–3.7 kPa), whereas the mean tumor stiffness ratio was 0.66 (range 0.37–1.6). Intraoperative tumor consistency was significantly correlated with absolute and relative tumor stiffness (p = 0.0087 and 0.007, respectively). Tumor consistency alone was not a significant factor for predicting gross-total resection. Patients with intermediate and firm tumors had more complications compared to patients with soft tumors (50.00% vs 12.50%, p = 0.02) and also had longer operative times (p = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS Whereas other MRI sequences have proven to be unreliable in determining tumor consistency, MRE has been shown to be a reliable tool for predicting adenoma consistency. Preoperative knowledge of tumor consistency could be potentially useful for surgical planning, counseling about potential surgical risks, and estimating the length of operative time.
Frequency of false-positive FISH 1p/19q codeletion in adult diffuse astrocytic gliomas
AbstractBackgroundOligodendroglioma is genetically defined by concomitant IDH (IDH1/IDH2) mutation and whole-arm 1p/19q codeletion. Codeletion of 1p/19q traditionally evaluated by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) cannot distinguish partial from whole-arm 1p/19q codeletion. Partial 1p/19q codeletion called positive by FISH is diagnostically a “false-positive” result. Chromosomal microarray (CMA) discriminates partial from whole-arm 1p/19q codeletion. Herein, we aimed to estimate the frequency of partial 1p/19q codeletion that would lead to a false-positive FISH result.MethodsFISH 1p/19q codeletion test probe coordinates were mapped onto Oncoscan CMA data to determine the rate of partial 1p/19q codeletion predicted to be positive by FISH. Diffuse astrocytic gliomas with available CMA data (2015–2018) were evaluated and classified based on IDH1-R132H/ATRX/p53 immunohistochemistry, IDH/TERT promoter targeted sequencing, and/or CMA according to classification updates. Predicted false-positive cases were verified by FISH whenever possible.ResultsThe overall estimated false-positive FISH 1p/19q codeletion rate was 3.6% (8/223). Predicted false positives were verified by FISH in 6 (of 8) cases. False-positive rates did not differ significantly (P = .49) between IDH-mutant (4.6%; 4/86) and IDH-wildtype (2.9%; 4/137) tumors. IDH-wildtype false positives were all WHO grade IV, whereas IDH-mutant false positives spanned WHO grades II-IV. Testing for 1p/19q codeletion would not have been indicated for most false positives based on current classification recommendations.ConclusionSelective 1p/19q codeletion testing and cautious interpretation for conflicting FISH and histopathological findings are recommended to avoid potential misdiagnosis.
Background Trans-acting programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) derives from malignant cells in three known forms. High levels of secreted splice variant PD-L1 (sPD-L1), ADAM10/ADAM17-shed sPD-L1, and PD-L1-positive extracellular vesicles (evPD-L1) each predict poor prognosis and limited response to PD-(L)1 checkpoint inhibitors in cancer. To our knowledge, no clinical intervention has reduced any of these circulating forms of extracellular PD-L1. Here, we explore therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) as a treatment to reduce circulating extracellular PD-L1. Results In patients with melanoma, sPD-L1 levels above 0.277 ng/mL predicted inferior overall survival. In patients undergoing TPE for non-malignant indications, each TPE session removed a mean 70.8% sPD-L1 and 73.1% evPD-L1 detectable in plasma. TPE also reduced total and ADAM10-positive extracellular vesicles. Conclusion Here, we report the first known clinical intervention to remove either sPD-L1 or evPD-L1 from plasma in vivo. TPE reduces plasma sPD-L1 and evPD-L1 in vivo and may have a role in treatment with immunotherapy. TPE may also prove useful in patients with other extracellular vesicle-related conditions.
ADAM10 and ADAM17 cleave PD-L1 to mediate PD-(L)1 inhibitor resistance
Journal of Neurological Surgery Part B: Skull Base | February 5, 2020 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: No page available
Abstract A210: Tumor-associated ADAM10 and ADAM17 produce soluble PD-L1 (sPD-L1, sB7-H1) and affect downstream tumor immunity – A resistance mechanism to PD-1 checkpoint blockade in melanoma
Abstract Background: Tumor surface PD-L1 (B7-H1) signals through T-cell surface receptor PD-1 to suppress antitumor immunity. PD-1 inhibitors like pembrolizumab block this pathway to prevent tumor escape from immunosurveillance. These PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors achieve objective response in 20-30% of patients with melanoma (1-3). As the majority of these patients are resistant to this treatment, there is a critical need to combat PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor resistance in melanoma. What is the mechanism of PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor resistance in melanoma? Our group has reported that soluble PD-L1 (sPD-L1, sB7-H1) is elevated in the serum of patients with PD-1 inhibitor-resistant melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (4). We have also shown that soluble PD-L1 is produced by cleavage from other tumor types and leads to apoptosis in CD8+ T-cells (5). The aim of this study is to confirm the source of sPD-L1 in human melanoma and its relation to outcomes. Methods: B7H1-expressing transgenic melanoma cells (Mel-B7H1) were treated with an array of protease inhibitors over 24 hours. Cells were then pelleted and supernatants were analyzed by ELISA for sPD-L1 (sB7-H1) production. Tumor serum samples were also analyzed by ELISA for sPD-L1 production.Tumor pathology slides from patients with melanoma (serum donors from the above study) were stained by immunohistochemistry with antibodies against proteases ADAM10 or ADAM17. Slides were visualized by microscopy for the presence of these antigens. Activated human CD8+ T-cells were cultured with recombinant human B7-H1 (PD-L1) protein, sPD-L1-rich, or sPD-L1-depleted supernatants from a tumor cell line in the presence of placebo or PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor antibodies. Cell survival was measured at 48 hours by flow cytometry.Results: ADAM10 inhibitor GI254023X, ADAM17 inhibitor TAPI-0, and broad metalloprotease inhibitor TAPI-2 inhibited Mel-B7H1 production of sB7H1 (p<0.001, 0.095, and 0.001 respectively). Specific inhibitors of other metalloproteases did not significantly alter sB7H1 production. PD-L1 transcription levels were not significantly altered. Tumor pathology slides from patients with high serum sPD-L1 exhibited high ADAM10 and/or ADAM17 staining. Conversely, tumors from patients with low-sPD-L1levels tended to exhibit low ADAM10 and/or ADAM17 staining. Recombinant PD-L1 and PD-L1-rich supernatants induced cell death of CD8+ T-cells, whereas PBS control solution and PD-L1-depleted supernatants did not. Supraphysiologic doses of pembrolizumab decreased cell death in PD-L1-rich supernatant-treated CD8+ T-cells. Conclusions: Matrix metalloprotease inhibitors ADAM10 and ADAM17 mediate sPD-L1 production from melanoma cells. In samples from patients with melanoma, immunohistochemical staining of these proteases in tumor tissue correlates with serum sPD-L1 levels. As we have shown previously, sPD-L1 induces apoptosis of activated CD8+ T-cells, which may explain PD-1 inhibitor resistance in most patients with melanoma.We posit that sPD-L1 outcompetes PD-1 inhibitors to suppress tumor immunosurveillance. Our results suggest that the combination of ADAM10/17 inhibitor and PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor may overcome this mechanism of PD-1 resistance in melanoma and other cancers. Future studies will determine (A) how a combined ADAM10/17 inhibitor and PD-1 inhibitor may function in clinical use, (B) how tumor-derived sPD-L1 signals downstream to cause apoptosis in T-cells, and (C) whether surface ADAM10/17 predict surface PD-L1 staining in melanoma. References: 1. Ribas et al., Lancet Oncol 2015;16(8):908–18. 2. Hamid et al., Ann Oncol 2016;27:6. 3. Weber et al., Lancet Oncol 2015:16(4):375–84. 4. Dronca et al., J Clin Oncol 2017:35(15):11534. 5. Orme et al., AACR Adv Malig Lymphoma 2018. Citation Format: Jacob J. Orme, Khalid Jazieh, Susan Harrington, Matthew Ball, Tariq U. Azam, Xin (Cindy) Liu, Tiancheng Xie, Aaron Mansfield, Roxana S. Dronca, Haidong Dong. Tumor-associated ADAM10 and ADAM17 produce soluble PD-L1 (sPD-L1, sB7-H1) and affect downstream tumor immunity – A resistance mechanism to PD-1 checkpoint blockade in melanoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Fourth CRI-CIMT-EATI-AACR International Cancer Immunotherapy Conference: Translating Science into Survival; Sept 30-Oct 3, 2018; New York, NY. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Immunol Res 2019;7(2 Suppl):Abstract nr A210.