Hwang KT, et al. J Breast Cancer. 2019 Jul;22:e55. https://doi.org/10.4048/jbc.2019.22.e55

Glucose transporter-1 (GLUT1) has been proposed as a prognosticator in various cancers associated with therapeutic resistance and immune evasion; however little data is available on the role of GLUT1 in cervical cancer. Most cervical cancers are caused by human papilloma virus (HPV), but studies on the treatment response and prognosis depending on the HPV subtype, are conflicting. This hypothesis-generating study aims to investigate the prognostic impact of GLUT1 in cervical cancer, in conjunction with HPV subtype. Clinicopathologic factors, along with mRNA expression data were obtained using The Cancer Genome Atlas database. Tumor HPV status and immune cell scores were extracted from previous publications. In total, 298 patients were analyzed. High GLUT1 expression was associated with old age, squamous cell carcinoma, high tumor stage, pelvic lymph node metastases, and low hysterectomy rate. Multivariate survival analysis revealed that high GLUT1 expression (Hazard ratio (HR) 2.57, p = 0.002) and HPV16 subtype (HR 0.56, p = 0.033) were independent prognostic factors for overall survival. In the subgroup analysis, poor prognostic impact of high GLUT1 expression was maintained in HPV16-positive group (p < 0.001), but not in HPV16-negative group (p = 0.495). Decreased immune cell scores of CD8⁺ T cells, B cells, and Th1 cells by high GLUT1 expression were observed only in HPV16-positive group. In conclusion, these results suggested that GLUT1 expression and HPV16 subtype might have an independent prognostic value in cervical cancer. GLUT1-mediated immunomodulation might be an important cause of treatment failure, especially in HPV16-positive group.

PurposeThis study aimed to compare the failure patterns before and after the introduction of immunotherapy and to determine the role of thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) treatment.Materials and MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 294 patients with ES-SCLC, of which 62.2% underwent chemotherapy alone, 13.3% underwent chemotherapy followed by consolidative TRT (TRT group), and 24.5% underwent chemotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI group). We performed propensity-score matching (PSM) to compare each treatment group. ResultsThe median follow-up duration was 10.4 months. At the first relapse, in the cohort showing objective response, the proportion of cases showing intrathoracic progression was significantly lower in the TRT group (37.8%) than in the chemotherapy-alone (77.2%, p < 0.001) and the ICI (60.3%, p=0.03) groups. Furthermore, in the subgroup analysis, TRT showed benefits related to intrathoracic progression-free survival (PFS) in comparison with ICI in patients with less than two involved extrathoracic sites (p=0.008) or without liver metastasis (p=0.02) or pleural metastasis (p=0.005) at diagnosis. After PSM, the TRT group showed significantly better intrathoracic PFS than both chemotherapy-alone and ICI groups (p < 0.001 and p=0.04, respectively), but showed no significant benefit in terms of PFS and overall survival in comparison with the ICI group (p=0.17 and p=0.31, respectively).ConclusionIn ES-SCLC, intrathoracic progression was the most dominant failure pattern after immunotherapy. In the era of chemoimmunotherapy, consolidative TRT can still be considered a useful treatment strategy for locoregional control.