Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated to be highly efficient in treating solid tumors; however, many patients have limited benefits in terms of response and survival. This rapidly led to the investigation of combination therapies to enhance response rates. Moreover, predictive biomarkers were assessed to better select patients. Although PD-L1 expression remains the only validated marker in clinics, molecular profiling has brought valuable information, showing that the tumor mutation load and microsatellite instability (MSI) status were associated to higher response rates in nearly all cancer types. Moreover, in lung cancer, EGFR and MET mutations, oncogene fusions or STK11 inactivating mutations were associated with low response rates. Cancer progression towards invasive phenotypes that impede immune surveillance relies on complex regulatory networks and cell interactions within the tumor microenvironment. Epigenetic modifications, such as the alteration of histone patterns, chromatin structure, DNA methylation status at specific promoters and changes in microRNA levels, may alter the cell phenotype and reshape the tumor microenvironment, allowing cells to grow and escape from immune surveillance. The objective of this review is to make an update on the identified epigenetic changes that target immune surveillance and, ultimately, ICI responses, such as histone marks, DNA methylation and miR signatures. Translational studies or clinical trials, when available, and potential epigenetic biomarkers will be discussed as perspectives in the context of combination treatment strategies to enhance ICI responses in patients with solid tumors.

The transmembrane receptor tyrosine kinase HER2 is overexpressed in approximately 15% of breast tumors and correlates with poor clinical prognosis. Several treatments that target HER2 are approved for treatment of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. The serum biomarkers most widely used to monitor anti-HER2 therapies in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer currently are CA15.3 and CEA. Nevertheless, their clinical utility in patients with breast cancer remains a subject of discussion and controversy; thus, additional markers may prove useful in monitoring the therapeutic responses of these patients. The extracellular domain of HER2 can be shed by proteolytic cleavage into the circulation and this shed form, sHER2, is reported to be augmented during metastasis of HER2-positive breast tumors. Here, we studied the clinical usefulness of sHER2, CA15.3, and CEA for monitoring treatment for breast cancer. We measured prospectively pretreatment and post-treatment serum levels (day 1, 30, 60 and 90) of these three biomarkers in 47 HER2-positive, metastatic breast cancer patients treated with trastuzumab in combination with paclitaxel. Evaluation of the disease was performed according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor (RECIST) at day 90. Patients with progressive disease at day 90 had smaller relative changes between day 1 and day 30 than those with complete, partial or stable responses at day 90: -9% versus -38% for sHER2 (P = 0.02), +23% versus -17% for CA15.3 (P = 0.005) and +29% versus -26% for CEA (P = 0.02). Patients with progressive disease at day 90 were less likely than the other patients to have a relative decrease of > 20% in their biomarker levels at day 30: 6% vs 33% for sHER2 (P = 0.03), 0% vs 27% for CA15.3 (P = 0.03), 4% vs 29% for CEA (P = 0.04). No patient with progressive disease at day 90 had > 20% reduction of the average combined biomarker levels at day 30 whereas 63% of the other patients had (P = 0.003). Moreover, when we analyzed a > 10% reduction of the average biomarker levels no patient with progressive disease at day 90 had a decrease > 10% at day 30 whereas 78% of other patients had (P 10% appears to be the best parameter to distinguish patients who go on to have progressive disease from those who will have a complete, partial or stable response.

This review is the second part of the workshop on digital PCR (dPCR) proposed by the working group of the French society of clinical biology. The first part of the paper discusses the advantages and limitations of dPCR for the search of different molecular abnormalities such as point mutations, copy number variants, DNA methylation, RNA analysis and a more innovative application, the single-cell dPCR. This synthesis makes it possible to propose a positioning of the dPCR compared to the other available technologies in a medical laboratory. In a second part, the main current applications of the dPCR will be addressed including the oncology of solid tumors and liquid biopsies, oncohematology and the follow-up of hemopathies treatments by hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. We will also detail non-invasive prenatal diagnosis and diagnosis of mosaic genetic disease, using the example of McCune-Albright syndrome. Several French specialists in the field who have implemented these techniques in their laboratory have written these different examples of applications jointly. In summary, this manuscript offers an up-to-date view of the positioning of dPCR in relation to other existing technologies in order to best meet the expectations of precision medicine.