Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Many cancers are termed immuno-evasive due to expression of immuno-modulatory ligands. Programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) and cluster of differentiation 80/86 (CD80/86) interact with their receptors, programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein-4 (CTLA-4), on tumour infiltrating leukocytes, thus eliciting immunosuppression. Immunotherapies aimed at blocking these interactions are revolutionising cancer treatments, albeit in an inadequately described patient subset. Our prognostic assay, utilising amplified two-site time-resolved Förster resonance energy transfer (iFRET), quantifies PD-1/ PD-L1 and CTLA-4/ CD80 cell-cell interactions in single cell assays and tumour biopsies. iFRET efficiencies demonstrate, in cell-cell engagement models, that receptor-ligand interactions are significantly lower with anti-PD-1 or anti-CTLA-4 blocking antibodies. In patient samples, iFRET detects immune-cell/tumour-cell interaction variance in different cancers. These results revealed inter-cancer, inter-patient and intra-tumoural heterogeneity of engaged immune-checkpoints, contradicting their ligand expression patterns. Exploiting spatio-temporal interactions of immune-checkpoint proteins defined biomarker functionality for determining whether checkpoint inhibitors are appropriate treatments. Statement of Significance Quantitative photophysics exploitation in determining immune-checkpoint engagement, as predictive biomarkers in cancers led to revealing inter-cancer, inter-patient and intra-tumoural heterogeneity of the engaged immune-checkpoints. This receptor-ligand interaction did not reflect simple expression patterns of these immuno-modulatory proteins. Our findings may affect immunotherapies aimed at blocking these intercellular interactions in patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sánchez‐Magraner et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: