Retrospective study identifies a cilia-associated signature predicting resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy in lung adenocarcinoma, indicating a potential biomarker for treatment selection.
BACKGROUND: Targeting immune checkpoints, specifically programmed death 1, has significantly improved clinical outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer. However, only a proportion of patients benefited from immune checkpoint blockades (ICBs) therapy. Thus, identifying novel biomarkers to better select responders to ICBs is critically important in clinical practice. METHODS: This retrospective study included two cohorts, a discovery cohort (n = 24) and a validation cohort (n = 21) of lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) patients treated with ICB at Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital between April 2016 and November 2019. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples were collected for RNA sequencing. Additionally, a TCGA dataset (GSE135222) and a clinical study dataset (POPLAR) were utilized as external validation and test sets, respectively. RESULTS: In the discovery cohort, cilia-associated pathways were significantly enriched in LUAD patients with non-durable benefit. A three-gene cilia-associated signature (TMEM100, DNAH3, and NEFH) was established and effectively predicted resistance to ICB treatment (discovery cohort, Hazard Ratio [HR, 95% CI] = 0.21 [0.056-0.791], P = 3.64e-05; validation cohort, HR [95% CI] = 0.200 [0.049-0.830], P = 0.0003). This signature was further validated in an external cohort (HR [95% CI] = 0.461 [ 0.164-1.292], P = 0.067). Further analysis demonstrated that the cilia-associated signature was negatively associated with various types of tumor-infiltrating immune cells, including effector T cells, macrophages, and dendritic cells. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that cilia-associated signature may serve as a potential biomarker to identify LUAD patients with reduced likelihood of benefiting from ICB therapy, though further validation in larger cohorts is warranted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhou et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: