Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 1 of 1
Results per page:
Applied filters
General Orthopaedics

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 104-B, Issue SUPP_12 | Pages 76 - 76
1 Dec 2022
Eltit F Ng T Gokaslan Z Fisher C Dea N Charest-Morin R
Full Access

Giant cell tumors of bone (GCTs) are locally aggressive tumors with recurrence potential that represent up to 10% of primary tumors of the bone. GCTs pathogenesis is driven by neoplastic mononuclear stromal cells that overexpress receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B/ligand (RANKL). Treatment with specific anti-RANKL antibody (denosumab) was recently introduced, used either as a neo-adjuvant in resectable tumors or as a stand-alone treatment in unresectable tumors. While denosumab has been increasingly used, a percentage of patients do not improve after treatment. Here, we aim to determine molecular and histological patterns that would help predicting GCTs response to denosumab to improve personalized treatment.

Nine pre-treatment biopsies of patients with spinal GCT were collected at 2 centres. In 4 patients denosumab was used as a neo-adjuvant, 3 as a stand-alone and 2 received denosumab as adjuvant treatment. Clinical data was extracted retrospectively. Total mRNA was extracted by using a formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded extraction kit and we determined the transcript profile of 730 immune-oncology related genes by using the Pan Cancer Immune Profiling panel (Nanostring). The gene expression was compared between patients with good and poor response to Denosumab treatment by using the nSolver Analysis Software (Nanostring). Immunohistochemistry was performed in the tissue slides to characterize cell populations and immune response in CGTs.

Two out of 9 patients showed poor clinical response with tumor progression and metastasis. Our analysis using unsupervised hierarchical clustering determined differences in gene expression between poor responders and good responders before denosumab treatment. Poor responding lesions are characterized by increased expression of inflammatory cytokines as IL8, IL1, interferon a and g, among a myriad of cytokines and chemokines (CCL25, IL5, IL26, IL25, IL13, CCL20, IL24, IL22, etc.), while good responders are characterized by elevated expression of platelets (CD31 and PECAM), coagulation (CD74, F13A1), and complement classic pathway (C1QB, C1R, C1QBP, C1S, C2) markers, together with extracellular matrix proteins (COL3A1, FN1,. Interestingly the T-cell response is also different between groups. Poor responding lesions have increased Th1 and Th2 component, but good responders have an increased Th17 component. Interestingly, the checkpoint inhibitor of the immune response PD1 (PDCD1) is increased ~10 fold in poor responders.

This preliminary study using a novel experimental approach revealed differences in the immune response in GCTs associated with clinical response to denosumab. The increased activity of checkpoint inhibitor PD1 in poor responders to denosumab treatment may have implications for therapy, raising the potential to investigate immunotherapy as is currently used in other neoplasms. Further validation using a larger independent cohort will be required but these results could potentially identify the patients who would most benefit from denosumab therapy.