Predictive value of MLH1 and PD-L1 expression for prognosis and response to preoperative chemotherapy in gastric cancer
- 428 Downloads
Microsatellite instability (MSI) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) are candidate predictors for the response to immune checkpoint inhibitors, and may predict chemotherapy sensitivity. We investigated the simultaneous expression of mutL homolog 1 (MLH1), a mismatch repair gene, and PD-L1 in gastric cancers.
We examined MLH1 and PD-L1 expression in surgical specimens from 285 gastric cancer patients treated with or without preoperative chemotherapy, and assessed the relation between expression results and both histological response and recurrence-free survival (RFS).
Of 285 patients, 28 (9.8%) and 70 (24.6%) exhibited negative MLH1 and high PD-L1 expression, respectively. Most MLH1-negative tumors (85.7%) showed high MSI, and these tumors exhibited high PD-L1 expression more frequently than MLH1-positive tumors (57.1% vs. 21.0%, P < 0.001). MLH1-negative patients were significantly less likely to respond to preoperative chemotherapy than MLH1-positive patients (16.7% vs. 61.2%, P = 0.005), whereas there was no significant difference between high- and low-PD-L1 expression patients (55.9% vs. 56.6%, P = 0.95). RFS in patients without preoperative chemotherapy was significantly longer in the MLH1-negative group than in the MLH1-positive group (HR 0.30; 95% CI 0.09–0.95; P = 0.030), whereas in patients with preoperative chemotherapy there was no significant difference in RFS between the two groups (HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.30–1.63; P = 0.41). PD-L1 expression was not associated with RFS in patients with or without chemotherapy.
Loss of MLH1 was associated with chemoresistance and did not prolong survival following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The strong association between MLH1 and MSI status suggests that immune checkpoint inhibitors may be preferable to conventional chemotherapy for MLH1-negative gastric cancer.
KeywordsMutL homolog 1 Programmed death-ligand 1 Mismatch repair deficient Microsatellite instability Neoadjuvant chemotherapy
The authors declare that this study was not funded.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Written informed consent was obtained from all patients prior to the procedure. The study was approved by the ethics committee of the Institutional Review Board.
- 7.Leung SY, Yuen ST, Chung LP, Chu KM, Chan AS, Ho JC. hMLH1 promoter methylation and lack of hMLH1 expression in sporadic gastric carcinomas with high-frequency microsatellite instability. Cancer Res. 1999;59:159–64.Google Scholar
- 10.Smyth EC, Wotherspoon A, Peckitt C, Gonzalez D, Hulkki-Wilson S, Eltahir Z, et al. Mismatch repair deficiency, microsatellite instability, and survival: an exploratory analysis of the medical research council adjuvant gastric infusional chemotherapy (MAGIC) trial. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3:1197–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Choi YY, Kim H, Shin SJ, Kim HY, Lee J, Yang HK, et al. Microsatellite instability and programmed cell death-ligand 1 expression in stage II/III gastric cancer: post hoc analysis of the CLASSIC randomized controlled study. Ann Surg. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002803. (Epub ahead of print).Google Scholar
- 33.Fink D, Nebel S, Aebi S, Zheng H, Cenni B, Nehmé A, et al. The role of DNA mismatch repair in platinum drug resistance. Cancer Res. 1996;56:4881–6.Google Scholar
- 34.Aebi S, Fink D, Gordon R, Kim HK, Zheng H, Fink JL, et al. Resistance to cytotoxic drugs in DNA mismatch repair-deficient cells. Clin Cancer Res. 1997;3:1763–7.Google Scholar