Background
Sarcomas are a rare and highly heterogeneous group of neoplasms originating from the bone and soft tissue, which account for <1 % of all human malignancies [
1,
2]. With strikingly variable genetic aberrations, various sarcomas have abnormal fusion proteins arising from translocations. In spite of the multimodality treatments with surgery, radiotherapy, and combination chemotherapy, more than 40 % of cases ultimately experience tumor recurrence, which results in an overall survival (OS) of <12 months [
3]. There are still only a few treatment options left when conventional treatment fails; thereby, novel anti-cancer therapeutics are desperately needed to treat these devastating diseases.
It is well known that the prognosis of a malignant tumor is closely related to host immune responses. During the immune response, the priming and activation of T-cells are critical processes in the induction of adaptive immunity, and the ultimate amplitude of the immune response is regulated by a balance between co-stimulatory and inhibitory signals. In this T-cell-mediated process, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) provides inhibitory signals in the priming phase of the T-cell response within the lymph node. The programmed death 1 (PD-1) receptor is one of the key inhibitory signals that is induced during the chronic antigen exposure in peripheral tumor microenvironments. The interaction between PD-L1 in tumor cells and PD-1 in T-lymphocytes negatively regulates the effector function of tumor-specific T-lymphocytes and allows tumor cells to evade the host immune system. Recent studies have indicated that high expression of PD-L1 is associated with poor prognosis in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), ovarian cancer, and kidney cancer [
4‐
7]. Furthermore, because anti-PD-1 antibodies were approved in melanoma and lung cancer with robust efficacy and safety profiles, much attention has paid to the PD-L1 expression in various solid malignancies. However, the presence of PD-L1 and its clinical implications in sarcoma have not been widely investigated to date.
In this study, we investigated PD-L1 expression in soft tissue sarcoma and evaluated its clinical relevance according to different subtypes of sarcoma. We thereafter analyzed the prognostic potential of PD-L1 to provide a practical guide as a diagnostic and therapeutic strategy.
Discussion
In this study, we evaluated the clinical relevance of PD-L1 expression in various sarcoma subtypes. PD-L1 was differently expressed according to the histologic subtypes of sarcoma and it was found to be an independent prognostic factor for OS.
William Coley, a bone surgeon at New York Memorial Hospital, depicted the spontaneous tumor regression of sarcoma patients after severe bacterial infection more than 100 years ago [
10,
11]. Subsequently, there were several reports related to the cure of metastatic sarcoma with aggressive surgical resection, which suggested a potential therapeutic role of immune surveillance [
12]. Since then, the interest in immunotherapy for sarcoma treatment has risen and fallen. Hypothetically, because several types of sarcoma have a common and specific chromosomal translocation, the resulting fusion proteins may be potential tumor neoantigens that could be appropriate targets for immunotherapy [
13].
Based on this theoretical background, numerous clinical trials were attempted in sarcoma patients with various immunomodulatory agents such as macrophage-colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF), peptide vaccines, and anti-CTLA-4 antibody [
14‐
16]. Inhaled GM-CSF was introduced for 43 patients with first isolated pulmonary recurrence of osteosarcoma [
14]. Although this treatment seemed feasible with low toxicity, no immunomodulatory effect or improved outcome was observed. Another study with the anti-CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab for synovial sarcoma was halted due to poor accrual and no clinical response [
16]. Besides these disappointing results in previous clinical trials, there have been few studies exploring potential therapeutic targets for immunotherapy in sarcoma conducted to date.
Recently, with the impressive and outstanding success of pembrolizumab and nivolumab in melanoma, NSCLC, and other malignancies [
17,
18], immune checkpoint inhibitors have come into the limelight for the treatment of various solid tumors. Although numerous trials of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors are ongoing for various solid tumors, there has been minimal research to investigate the clinical significance of the PD-1/PD-L1 axis in sarcoma. In the present study, we revealed that 42.7 % of the sarcoma patients had positive expression of PD-L1, which varied according to histologic subtypes. Epithelioid and synovial sarcoma had higher positive expression rates (100 and 53 %), whereas mesenchymal chondrosarcoma cases revealed no PD-L1 expression. This finding suggests that PD-L1 expression is also heterogeneous according to different histologic subtypes of sarcoma, and that PD-L1 blockade could be a novel and promising therapeutic strategy in this orphan tumor.
The PD-1/PD-L1 expression level has been reported to be related to poor survival in other solid tumors. In a previous report of renal cell carcinoma, PD-1 expression in tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes was observed in half of the cases and was associated with poor survival [
7]. Moreover, PD-L1 expression was reported in half of the gastric cancer and lung cancer cases and was an independent negative prognostic factor for OS [
19,
20]. In the present study, in addition to determining the frequency of PD-L1 expression according to histologic subtypes, we were able to demonstrate the prognostic role of the intratumoral PD-L1 expression in sarcoma. PD-L1 was significantly associated with shorter 5-year OS regardless of sex, age, tumor size, histology, location, surgical outcome, and adjuvant treatment, implying that PD-L1 is an independent negative prognostic factor in sarcoma.
Moreover, besides the prognostic value of PD-L1 expression in human cancers, it is becoming increasingly recognized as an important biomarker for predicting the treatment efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 blockade. In the KEYNOTE-012 phase IB trial (Clinical Trials.gov Identifier; NCT01848834) [
21], patients with advanced gastric cancer were screened for PD-L1 expression (positivity was defined as PD-L1 expression in ≥ 1 % of cells in tumor nests or according to stromal staining using IHC with the 22C3 PD-L1 antibody), and 41 % were PD-L1-positive cases. After treatment with an anti-PD-1 antibody, pembrolizumab, a promising objective response rate (22 %), 6-month progression free survival (26 %), and 6-month OS (66 %) were observed. Furthermore, Herbst et al. [
22] reported the association of PD-L1 expression in tumor-infiltrating immune cells with the response to an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody, MPDL3280A, in which 83 % of IHC 3+ NSCLC cases showed a response, whereas the response rate was less than 20 % in IHC 0–1+ cases. In contrast to the above-stated findings, the survival outcome for another anti-PD-1 antibody, nivolumab, was not significantly different according to PD-L1 subgroup in melanoma patients [
23]. Taken together, the predictive value of PD-L1 expression under treatment with PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors has not yet been fully established, and therefore further validation is strongly warranted through further studies.
Unfortunately, the IHC criteria for PD-L1 expression have not yet been standardized. Indeed, different definitions of positive PD-L1 expression have been used in the clinical trials conducted to date. In the CheckMate 017 study with NSCLC patients, OS and response rate were significantly better with nivolumab than with docetaxel, regardless of the PD-L1 expression level [
17]. PD-L1 expression (of tumor cells only) was neither prognostic nor predictive of nivolumab efficacy in the study. A prospective study with pembrolizumab, KENOTE-010, confirmed the clinical usefulness of the tumor proportion score (PD-L1 expression in at least 1 % of tumor cells) [
24]. Considering that patients with a higher tumor proportion score (≥50 %) had a significantly increased benefit compared to those with a lower score (≥1 %), further studies are required to determine the appropriate cutoff value of the proportion score. Furthermore, because previous studies reported marked intra-patient discordance and longitudinal heterogeneity of PD-L1 assays, rigorous validation with clinical trials are still needed [
25]. Comprehensive incorporation with tumor-infiltrating cells [
26], inflammatory gene signatures [
27], or the immune microenvironment [
28] will be helpful to improve patient identification. Currently, a blueprint project to comprehensively compare various PD-L1 assay are ongoing by FDA and ASCO (Sholl et al. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2016), we can wait these results to answer this important question.
The main limitations of our study include its patient selection, small sample size, and imbalance of histologic type. Because we initially intended to analyze the PD-L1 expression in CD99 positive tumors, this study mainly enrolled pediatric STS, which could result in relatively younger median age of patients and longer survival outcome. Moreover, due to the small sample size and imbalance of histologic type between PD-L1 positive and negative groups, especially epithelioid sarcoma and mesenchymal chondrosarcoma, there could be a possibility of type I error. Therefore, our findings should be validated in an independent STS cohort and according to the response to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in future clinical trials.
Acknowledgements
We thank Intae Park for his technical assistance.