Guha, Chandan

Abstract Glioblastoma (GBM) is a deadly brain cancer with near-universal recurrence despite maximal treatment for which new innovations are sorely needed. Immunotherapy has yet to make significant gains in GBM treatment despite revolutionizing other cancer therapies, due in part to GBM-mediated immune suppression. This immune derangement proceeds through several mechanisms, but increasing evidence points to critical roles for tumor-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs) and immunosuppressive myeloid cells as key factors in this process. In the present study, we demonstrate broad expression of TIGIT across myeloid cell populations in the GBM microenvironment, a finding recapitulated by conditioning healthy monocytes with GBM-derived EVs. Further, knockdown of TIGIT expression reduced the immunosuppressive polarization of monocytes, resulting in improvement in T cell function. This finding proceeded in an NLRP3-dependent manner, with substantial co-localization of TIGIT and NLRP3 expression prior to knockdown. These findings point to a novel role for TIGIT expression in diverse myeloid cells in the GBM microenvironment as a marker of immunosuppressive activity and further indicate a hierarchy of immunomodulatory protein activity in these myeloid cells, with TIGIT knockdown unmasking the pro-inflammatory activity of NLRP3. This study bolsters understanding of the immunosuppressive complexities of myeloid cells in the GBM microenvironment, while lending further support to prevention or attenuation of immunosuppressive myeloid cell activity as a means of restoring immune function in GBM. Graphical abstract (Created in BioRender. Asad, M. (2025) https://BioRender.com/euiljoq Key Points Tumor-mediated immune suppression is a key barrier to the development of effective immunotherapies for GBM. TIGIT is broadly expressed in myeloid cells within the GBM microenvironment and can be induced by GBM-derived extracellular vesicles. Knockdown of TIGIT reduces immunosuppressive polarization of monocytes and enhances T cell activity via NLRP3 signaling, implicating TIGIT expression as a targetable modifier of immunosuppressive activity in GBM-associated myeloid cells. Importance of the Study Glioblastoma (GBM) remains a formidable clinical challenge, with poor prognosis and limited response to current immunotherapies. This study uncovers a novel immunosuppressive axis involving TIGIT expression in myeloid cells, which are key players in the GBM tumor microenvironment. By demonstrating GBM-derived extracellular vesicles induce TIGIT in healthy monocytes and TIGIT knockdown diminishes immunosuppressive polarization in an NLRP3-dependent manner, this study highlights TIGIT as both a marker and modulator of immune dysfunction in GBM. These findings introduce a functional hierarchy of immunoregulatory proteins in tumor-associated myeloid cells, positioning TIGIT as a potential checkpoint target. Restoring immune activity by disrupting this axis could enhance the efficacy of immunotherapy in GBM. Thus, this research not only advances our understanding of tumor-induced immune suppression but also opens a promising therapeutic avenue to reinvigorate anti-tumor immunity in a cancer type historically resistant to immunotherapeutic approaches.

489 Background: To determine if SBRT followed by sorafenib (SBRT/S) improves overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS) and quality of life (QOL) vs. sorafenib alone (S), in patients (pts) with HCC. Methods: Eligible pts had new or recurrent HCC, unsuitable for surgery, ablation or TACE, with Zubrod performance status (PS) 0-2, Child-Pugh (CP) A, BCLC stage B or C, ≤ 5 HCCs, sum of hepatic HCCs ≤ 20 cm, and distant metastases ≤ 3 cm. Pts were randomized 1:1 to S 400 mg BID vs. SBRT (27.5-50 Gy in 5 fractions) followed by S 200 mg BID, increased to 400 mg BID after 28 days. Primary endpoint was OS; reported secondary endpoints - PFS, adverse events (AEs - CTCAEv4), and QOL (improvement in FACT-Hep score by ≥ 5 points from baseline to 6 months). Planned sample size was 292 pts (238 OS events, HR=0.72, 80% power, 1-sided α=0.05). Accrual closed early, due to a change in HCC standard of care. Statistics were amended to report as of 7/1/2022, projecting 155 OS events, with 65% power and the same α. OS and PFS were estimated by Kaplan-Meier and arms compared using log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards models were used to analyze treatment effect. Secondary endpoints were tested with 2-sided α=0.05. Results: Of 193 pts accrued from April 2013 to March 2021 from 23 sites, 177 eligible pts were randomized to S (n=92) vs. SBRT/S (n=85). Median age was 66 yrs (27-84); 41% had Hep. C; 19% had Hep. B or B/C. 82% were BCLC stage C. 74% had macrovascular invasion (MVI), 63% with VP3 or VP4 MVI. 4% had metastases. Median sum of max diameter of HCCs was 8.2 cm for S and 6.7 cm for SBRT/S; 40% had a single HCC. Median follow-up for all and alive pts was 13.2 and 33.7 mo. 22% of S pts received SBRT after discontinuing S. With 153 OS events, median OS was improved from 12.3 mo. (90% CI 10.6, 14.3) with S to 15.8 mo. (90% CI 11.4-19.2) with SBRT/S (HR=0.77, 1-sided p=0.0554). After adjusting for PS, M stage, CP A5 vs. 6, and degree of MVI, OS was statistically significantly improved for SBRT/S (HR=0.72, 95% CI 0.52-0.99, 2-sided Cox p=0.042). Median PFS was improved from 5.5 mo. (95% CI 3.4-6.3) with S to 9.2 months (95% CI 7.5-11.9) with SBRT/S (HR=0.55, 95% CI 0.40-0.75, 2-sided p=0.0001). 8 grade (G) 3+ bleeds were seen: 5 in S arm (1 G3 variceal, 2 G3 upper GI, 1 G3 hepatic, and 1 G4 abdominal) and 3 post SBRT/S (2 G3 upper GI, 1 G3 lower GI). Treatment-related G3+ AEs were not significantly different (S - 42%; SBRT/S - 47%; p=0.52), with 3 G5 AEs (S - 1 hepatic failure, 1 death NOS; SBRT/S - 1 lung infection). 83 (47%) pts consented to QoL. Of 20 S and 17 SBRT/S pts with QoL assessments at baseline and 6 months, 10% on S improved in FACT-Hep score vs 35% on SBRT/S. Conclusions: Compared to S alone, SBRT improved OS & PFS in patients with HCC, with no observed increase in AEs, and a strong suggestion for QOL benefit at 6 months. Supported by U10CA180868 (NRG Onc. Op., U10CA180822 (NRG Onc. SDMC), UG1CA189867 (NCORP), and U24CA180803 (IROC) from the NCI. Clinical trial information: NCT01730937 .

Abstract Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has emerged as a major cause of cancer deaths globally. The landscape of systemic therapy has recently changed, with six additional systemic agents either approved or awaiting approval for advanced stage HCC. While these agents have the potential to improve outcomes, a survival increase of 2–5 months remains poor and falls short of what has been achieved in many other solid tumor types. The roles of genomics, underlying cirrhosis, and optimal use of treatment strategies that include radiation, liver transplantation, and surgery remain unanswered. Here, we discuss new treatment opportunities, controversies, and future directions in managing HCC.