A comprehensive analysis of immune landscape of Indian triple negative breast cancer

Aruna Korlimarla,PS Hari,Jyoti Prabhu,Chanthirika Ragulan,Yatish Patil,VP Snijesh,Krisha Desai,Aju Mathews,Sandhya Appachu,Ravi B. Diwakar,BS Srinath,Maggie Cheang,Anguraj Sadanandam

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.06.483159

2022-03-07

Abstract:Abstract Background Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a heterogeneous disease with a significant clinical challenge. TNBC alarmingly comprises 25-30% of breast cancers in India compared with only 10-15% in the West. However, immunotherapy was approved for high-risk early-stage TNBCs in the West. Hence, a long-standing question is whether Indian TNBCs immunologically and clinically resemble Western TNBCs such that they respond similarly to immunotherapies. Here we sought to elucidate the immune landscape of Indian TNBCs for the first time, compare them to Western disease and associate them with clinical parameters, cellular types/signaling, and immunotherapy response. Methods We profiled 730 immune genes in 88 retrospective Indian TNBC samples using NanoString platform, clustered them into subtypes using a machine-learning approach, and compared them with Western TNBCs (n=422; public datasets). Subtype-specific gene signatures were identified, followed by clinicopathological, immune cell type, and pathway (multiomics) analyses. We also assessed responses to (cross-cancer) immunotherapy. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and pan-macrophage marker were evaluated using hematoxilin-eosin staining and immunohistochemistry, respectively. Results We identified three robust and similarly distributed TNBC immune transcriptome subtypes (Subtypes-1-3) in Indian women, and they are represented correspondingly in Western TNBCs and associated with well-known TNBC subtypes. Irrespective of the ethnicity, Subtype-1 harbored tumor microenvironmental and anti-tumor immune events associated with smaller tumors, younger age, and a better prognosis. Subtype-1 mainly represented basal-like/claudin-low breast cancer and immunomodulatory TNBC subtypes. Subtype-1 showed an increase in a cascade of events, including damage-associated molecular patterns, acute inflammation, Th1 responses, T-cell receptor-related and chemokine-specific signaling, antigen presentation, and viral-mimicry pathways. Subtype-1 was significantly (p<0.05) associated with pre-menopausal women, dense TILs and responses and/or improved prognosis to anti-PD-L1 and MAGEA3 immunotherapies. Subtype-2 was enriched for Th2/Th17 responses, CD4 + regulatory cells, basal-like/mesenchymal subtypes, and an intermediate prognosis. Subtype-3 patients expressed innate immune genes/proteins, including those representing macrophages and neutrophils, and had poor survival. Conclusion We identified three immune-specific TNBC subtypes in Indian patients with differential clinical and immune behaviors, which largely overlapped with the Western TNBC cohorts. This study suggests cancer immunotherapy in TNBC may work similarly in both populations. Hence, this may expedite pharmaceutical adoption of immunotherapy to Indian TNBC patients.