Skip to main content
Frontiers in Oncology logoLink to Frontiers in Oncology
. 2018 Nov 19;8:530. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2018.00530

Serum Level of Soluble CD163 May Be a Predictive Marker of the Effectiveness of Nivolumab in Patients With Advanced Cutaneous Melanoma

Taku Fujimura 1,*, Yota Sato 1, Kayo Tanita 1, Yumi Kambayashi 1, Atsushi Otsuka 2, Yasuhiro Fujisawa 3, Koji Yoshino 4, Shigeto Matsushita 5, Takeru Funakoshi 6, Hiroo Hata 7, Yuki Yamamoto 8, Hiroshi Uchi 9, Yumi Nonomura 2, Ryota Tanaka 3, Megumi Aoki 5, Keisuke Imafuku 7, Hisako Okuhira 8, Naoko Wada 9, Hiroyuki Irie 2, Takanori Hidaka 1, Akira Hashimoto 1, Setsuya Aiba 1
PMCID: PMC6252386  PMID: 30510916

Abstract

Antibodies against programmed cell death protein 1, such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab, are widely used for treating various cancers, including advanced melanoma. Nivolumab significantly prolongs survival in patients with metastatic melanoma, and sequential administration with lipilimumab may improve outcomes when switched at the appropriate time. Biomarkers are therefore needed to evaluate nivolumab efficacy soon after first administration. This study analyzed serum levels of soluble cluster of differentiation 163 (sCD163) in 59 cases of advanced cutaneous melanoma and 16 cases of advanced mucosal melanoma treated using nivolumab. Serum levels of sCD163 were significantly increased after 6 weeks in responders compared to non-responders after initial administration of nivolumab for cutaneous melanoma. In contrast, no significant difference between responders and non-responders was seen among patients with non-cutaneous melanoma. These results suggest that sCD163 may be useful as a biomarker for selecting patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma most likely to benefit from anti-melanoma immunotherapy.

Keywords: sCD163, TAMs, melanoma, nivolumab, prediction of efficacy

Introduction

The programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) pathway plays a critical role in tumor immune response. Anti-PD-1 antibodies such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab are thus in wide use for the treatment of various cancers, including advanced melanoma (1, 2). Nivolumab significantly prolongs survival in patients with metastatic melanoma (1), and co-administration with ipilimumab also leads to improved outcomes (13). Ipilimumab is a fully humanized immunoglobulin (Ig)G1 monoclonal antibody that blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen (CTLA-4) to activate and increase T cells, and suppress the function of regulatory T cells (Tregs) (4). Previous reports have suggested ipilimumab is useful for treating advanced melanoma, particularly in combination with other anti-melanoma reagents (13, 5). Moreover, combination therapy using nivolumab and ipilimumab reportedly increases the response rate for untreated metastasis of melanoma to the brain (6). However, the efficacy of ipilimumab in patients with nivolumab-resistant melanoma is extremely low after objective tumor progression (7). Because both co-administration of nivolumab and ipilimumab and sequential administration of nivolumab and ipilimumab with a planned switch leads to a high frequency of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in patients with advanced melanoma (1, 3), determining the efficacy of nivolumab monotherapy before the planned switch from nivolumab to ipilimumab is important.

Tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) are characterized by their heterogeneity and plasticity, and may be functionally reprogrammed to polarized phenotypes by exposure to cancer-related factors, stromal factors, or infection, leading to the production of various chemokines that play significant roles in maintaining the tumor microenvironment (813). Because PD-1 expression in TAMs is one of the key factors in M2 macrophage polarization (14), administration of an anti-PD1 antibody might repolarize TAMs, leading to TAM activation in melanoma patients. Because the main population of TAMs in skin cancer is CD163+ M2 macrophages, and soluble cluster of differentiation 163 (sCD163) is a TAM marker that appears in the serum as a result of proteolytic shedding (15), we hypothesized that serum sCD163 may offer a predictive marker for the efficacy of nivolumab in the early stage of disease. This study analyzed serum levels of sCD163 in 59 cases of advanced cutaneous melanoma and 16 cases of advanced mucosal melanoma treated with nivolumab.

Patients and methods

Ethics statement for human experiments

The protocol for this human study was approved by the ethics committee of Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan (Permit No: 2017-1-064). All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. All patients provided written informed consent.

Patients

Data from patients treated with nivolumab were collected from eight clinical sites in Japan. Patients were eligible if they had unresectable stage III melanoma, the tumor was resectable but the patient had declined resection, or if the patient had stage IV melanoma with accessible cutaneous, subcutaneous, and/or nodal lesions (staging was performed according to the AJCC Staging Manual, 7th edition, 2011). All patients received 2 mg/kg of nivolumab followed by a 3-week rest period or 3 mg/kg of nivolumab followed by 2 weeks of rest, both of which are approved dosing schedules in Japan. Serum from patients was obtained on days 0 and 42.

Serum levels of sCD163

On days 0 and 42 after nivolumab administration, we stored the serum and analyzed serum levels of soluble sCD163 by enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) according to the protocol provided by the manufacturer (catalog number DY1607; R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN). Data from each donor were obtained as the mean of duplicate assays. Serum levels on day 42 were compared to baseline (day 0) and statistically analyzed.

Statistical methods

Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were applied to calculate cut-off values for serum levels of sCD163 and areas under the curve (AUCs). Cut-offs were determined using Youden's index (16) (sensitivity + specificity −1) to determine the point of maximum index value. ROC curves were established to evaluate serum levels of sCD163 in patients administered nivolumab. For a single comparison between two groups, the Mann-Whitney U-test was used. Levels of significance were set at p < 0.01. All statistical analyses were performed using JMP version 14.1 software (SAS Institute, Tokyo, Japan).

Results

Patients

We collected data from 75 melanoma patients treated with nivolumab, including 59 patients with cutaneous melanoma (Table 1) and 16 patients with non-cutaneous (e.g., digestive tract, vagina, nasal cavity) melanoma (Table 2). Mean patient age was 68.0 years for cutaneous melanoma (range, 31–93 years) and 66.0 years for non-cutaneous melanoma (range, 54–82 years). The percentages of male patients with cutaneous and non-cutaneous melanoma were 57.6 and 56.3%, respectively. The most common primary tumor site was the extremities (55.9%), followed by the head and neck (15.3%), trunk (11.9%), mucosal origin (8.5%), and unknown origin (8.5%).

Table 1.

Characteristics and serum levels of sCD163 in patients with cutaneous melanoma.

Age (y) Sex Location Body weight (kg) Prior systemic therapy Efficacy at 3 months Increase of sCD163 Change ratio of sCD163 (%)
No. 1 61–70 M Extremities 63.2 DAV+IFN-β PR 11.556 149
No. 2 61–70 M Extremities 48 PR 50.8525 227.8
No. 3 81–90 F Extremities 48.7 DPCP PR 12.676 152.7
No. 4 61–70 M Extremities 70.4 DAV+IFN-β PR 13.27122 146.2
No. 5 61–70 M Extremities 58.5 DAV+IFN-β PR 7.17709 127
No. 6 61–70 M Lip 69.8 DAV+IFN-β PR 5.834 123.1
No. 7 71–80 M Trunk 59.4 PR 21.49956 133.4
No. 8 71–80 F Extremities 68 PR −12.9704 81.6
No. 9 31–40 F Extremities 55.4 DTIC+IFN-β PR 24.5042321 189.5
No. 10 71–80 M Extremities 61.2 PR 3.36944 109.5
No. 11 51–60 F Extremities 41.7 CR 2.109187 170.7
No. 12 81–90 M Unknown 68.3 PR 3.07118 111.3
No. 13 71–80 F Extremities 50.1 IFN-α PR 35.7011169 158.5
No. 1 51–60 M Trunk 68.7 SD 1.5625 107.5
No. 2 31–40 F Extremities 60.8 CBDCA+PTX PD −9.6755 82.4
No. 3 61–70 M Trunk 62 DTIC+IFN-β PD 2.884 109.6
No. 4 81–90 F Extremities 44.9 IFN-α PD −0.333 98.7
No. 5 71–80 M Head and neck 59.2 IFN-β SD 0.998 103.6
No. 6 81–90 F Trunk 41.9 IFN-β PD 6.76453 116.9
No. 7 91–100 M Extremities 55 IFN-β PD 4.02405 113
No. 8 71–80 M Extremities 85.9 IFN-β SD −5.10307 89.9
No. 9 31–40 M Extremities 73 TMZ PD −16.806 67.8
No. 10 61–70 M Extremities 55 anti-CCR4 Abs PD 2.706 115.4
No. 11 61–70 F Extremities 66.3 DAV+IFNβ PD 0.653 103.4
No. 12 61–70 M Head and neck 55 DTIC PD −0.094 99.6
No. 13 61–70 M Extremities 115.4 DAV+IFN-β SD 0.177 100.5
No. 14 61–70 M Extremities 77.6 IFN-β PD −61.59461 35.5
No. 15 81–90 F Unknown 47.8 SD −6.54815 86.5
No. 16 71–80 M Extremities 54.4 IFN-β SD −4.74553 80.8
No. 17 61–70 F Trunk 46.5 PD 17.3346 140.4
No. 18 71–80 M Extremities 53.7 PD −1.595225 93
No. 19 51–60 F Head and neck 49.2 DTIC+IFN-β PD 5.457395 115.9
No. 20 31–40 M Trunk 78.8 IFN-α SD −12.615365 53.7
No. 21 61–70 F Trunk 48.8 IFN-β PD −1.7178157 96.2
No. 22 31–40 F Head and neck 52.3 IFN-β PD 3.88229 120.1
No. 23 71–80 F External genitalia 59.1 SD −3.34502 92.1
No. 24 71–80 F External genitalia 53.4 IFN-β SD −7.38773 70.5
No. 25 61–70 F Extremities 47.0 PD −4.11263 64
No. 26 61–70 M Unknown 53.6 PD −3.78005 75.6
No. 27 61–70 F Extremities 60.9 IFN-β PD −0.54818 95.9
No. 28 61–70 F Head and neck 41.6 IFN-α PD −1.456879 80.8
No. 29 71–80 M Trunk 56 PD −0.71335 77.2
No. 30 41–50 F External genitalia 69.2 PD −0.170996 94.4
No. 31 71–80 F Extremities 53.3 PD −0.682222 85.8
No. 32 61–70 M Extremities 61 SD 2.202349 183.2
No. 33 71–80 M Unknown 55 PD 0.328041 107.4
No. 34 61–70 F Extremities 68 SD 0.228017 106.3
No. 35 71–80 M Extremities 59.3 IFN-β SD −1.7178157 96.2
No. 36 61–70 M Unknown 49.1 PD 0.428485 117.4
No. 37 61–70 M Head and neck 61 SD 0.164125 110.7
No. 38 41–50 F External genitalia 56 SD 1.268748 247.2
No. 39 71–80 F Extremities 47 PD −0.721186 86.1
No. 40 41–50 M Head and neck 103 DTIC PD −0.111639 98
No. 41 61–70 M Extremities 73 IFN-β SD 0.421323 113.8
No. 42 31–40 M Extremities 63.5 PD 0.9897167 102.1
No. 43 71–80 F Extremities 66.2 SD 7.3643392 116.5
No. 44 71–80 M Extremities 63.7 IFN-β PD −7.0989841 91.9
No. 45 71–80 M Head and neck 57.4 PD −0.5957191 98.4
No. 46 41–50 M Extremities 62.7 IFN-β PD 2.4247196 105.7

CBDCA, carboplatin; PTX, paclitaxel; DTIC; dacarbazine; TMZ, temozolomide; DAV, dacarbazine + nimustine hydrochloride + vincristine. Serum level changes of sCD163 from each patient (n = 59) between day 42 and day 0 were examined by ELISA. Data for each donor represent the means of duplicate assays.

Table 2.

Characteristics and serum levels of sCD163 in patients with non-cutaneous melanoma.

Age (y) Sex Location Body weight (kg) Prior systemic therapy Efficacy at 3 months Increase of sCD163 Change ratio of sCD163 (%)
No. 1 61–70 M Digestive duct 62 PR −0.444523 81.5
No. 2 61–70 F Palate 52.8 PR −0.799493 77.6
No. 3 61–70 M Paranasal 71 PR −1.803397 62.8
No. 4 61–70 F Vagina 52.5 PR 0.469173 114.6
No. 1 61–70 M Vagina 53.4 SD −17.52087 78.7
No. 2 61–70 M Vagina 80.4 PD 49.95895 134.6
No. 3 51–60 F Conjunctiva 84 SD 8.27076 115.4
No. 4 81–90 M Digestive duct 49.5 PD 19.6379 158.1
No. 5 61–70 F Digestive duct 49.3 SD 20.26377 155.2
No. 6 71–80 F Vagina 50.1 PD 28.525981 192.1
No. 7 61–70 M Nasal cavity 47.2 DTIC PD 17.0558 132.6
No. 8 61–70 F Vagina 53.1 DAV + IFN-β PD −17.787 64.2
No. 9 61–70 M Paranasal 56 DTIC PD 0.16109 132.6
No. 10 51–60 M Palate 52.9 PD 1.086 107.3
No. 11 71–80 M Nasal cavity 53.1 DAV + IFN-β SD 2.52838 107.6
No. 12 71–80 F Nasal cavity 53 SD −0.345647 89.4

DAV, dacarbazine + nimustine hydrochloride + vincristine; DTIC, dacarbazine Serum level changes of sCD163 from each patient (n = 16) between day 42 and day 0 were examined by ELISA. Data for each donor represent the means of duplicate assays.

Efficacy of nivolumab at 3 months after first administration

Among patients with cutaneous melanoma, complete response (CR) was seen in 1 patient (1.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0–3.4%), partial response (PR) in 12 patients (20.3%; 95%CI, 0–40.6%), stable disease (SD) in 16 patients (27.1%; 95%CI, 0–54.2%), and progressive disease (PD) in 29 patients (49.2%; 95%CI, 0–98.4%). The objective response rate (ORR) at 3 months after first administration was thus 22.0% (95%CI, 0–44.0%). Tumor responses of individual patients are listed in Table 1. Among patients with mucosal melanoma, PR was seen in 4 patients (25.0%; 95%CI, 0–50.0%), SD in 5 patients (31.3%; 95%CI, 0–62.6%), and PD in 7 patients (43.8%; 95%CI, 0–87.6%). The ORR at 3 months after first administration was thus 25.0% (95%CI, 0–50.0%). Tumor responses of individual patients are listed in Table 2.

Serum levels of sCD163

To determine whether serum levels of sCD163 may predict early response in melanoma patients treated with nivolumab, we evaluated levels in 75 patients with advanced melanoma treated using nivolumab (Supplemental Figure 1). Compared to baseline (day 0), serum levels of sCD163 at day 42 were significantly increased in the group showing objective response (p < 0.0001; Figure 1A) among patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma, whereas no significant difference in serum sCD163 levels was seen among patients with advanced mucosal melanoma (Figure 2A). Increases in serum sCD163 and efficacy at 3 months after the first administration of nivolumab in each patient are described in Tables 1, 2. The thresholds for sCD163 change between day 42 and day 0 to distinguish responders from non-responders were respectively 3.07 ± 0.07 ng/mL and 0.47 ± 0.05 ng/mL in cutaneous and non-cutaneous melanoma. In the cutaneous melanoma cohort, the mean change ratio in sCD163 serum level was 144.6% for those patients showing objective response, compared to 101.0% for non-responders (Table 1). In the mucosal melanoma cohort, the mean change ratio in sCD163 serum level was 84.1% for those patients showing objective response, and 122.3% for non-responders (Table 2). The threshold for increased serum sCD163 in cutaneous melanoma was 3.07 ± 0.07 ng/mL, whereas that in non-cutaneous melanoma was 0.47 ± 0.05 ng/mL. The sensitivity and specificity of serum sCD163 in cutaneous melanoma were 84.6 and 87.0%, respectively (p = 0.0030; Figure 1B), whereas the sensitivity and specificity of serum sCD163 in non-cutaneous melanoma were 100 and 66.7%, respectively (p = 0.3154; Figure 2B).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Serum levels of sCD163 and ROC curve in cutaneous melanoma. Serum level changes of sCD163 in each patient (n = 59) (A) on day 42. The ROC curve was applied to calculate cut-offs for sCD163 serum levels and AUC (B). Cut-offs were determined to distinguish responders from nonresponders using Youden's index.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Serum levels of sCD163 and ROC curve in non-cutaneous melanoma. Serum level changes of sCD163 in each patient (n = 16) (A) on day 42. The ROC curve was applied to calculate cut-offs for sCD163 serum levels and AUC (B). Cut-offs were determined to distinguish responders from nonresponders using Youden's index.

Discussion

Because nivolumab shows higher efficacy than other anti-melanoma drugs (e.g., ipilimumab and dacarbazine) (1, 17), and induces a longer duration of anti-tumor response than BRAF/MEK inhibitors (e.g., vemurafenib, dabrafenib, trametinib) (18, 19), oncologists have been particularly interested in combining nivolumab with agents that enhance anti-tumor immune responses in patients with metastatic melanoma (13, 20). The efficacy of nivolumab appears significantly increased when combined with ipilimumab (57.7%), but the rate of severe treatment-related AEs (Grade 3 or 4) is unfortunately also significantly increased with this particular combination (59.0%) (1, 2). To avoid severe AEs caused by ipilimumab, predictive biomarkers are needed to evaluate the efficacy of nivolumab monotherapy at 2–3 months after first administration, to prepare for any planned switch from nivolumab to ipilimumab.

CD163 is a member of the scavenger receptor cysteine-rich family, and is exclusively expressed on cells of the monocyte/macrophage lineage (15). As previously reported, in metastatic melanoma, a substantial number of CD163+ TAMs are present in metastatic melanoma and are activated by stromal factors, leading to an increase in serum levels of sCD163 as a result of proteolytic shedding (2123). In addition, Jensen et al. (21) previously reported sCD163 and CD163+ TAMs as a prognostic marker for early-stage cutaneous melanoma. Notably, as Gordon et al. (14) reported, PD-1 expression is a key factor in maintaining TAMs as M2-polarized, and blockade of PD-1/PD-L1 leads to conversion of TAMs into M1-polarized activated macrophages. Because TAMs in melanoma comprise a heterogeneous, mainly immunosuppressive population (9, 23), and because repolarization of TAMs into the activated subtype by immunomodulatory drugs has been reported to significantly suppress melanoma growth in a spontaneous mouse melanoma model (8), we hypothesized that one of the targets for nivolumab in melanoma is activated CD163+ TAMs.

To prove our hypothesis, we analyzed serum levels of sCD163 in 59 cases of advanced cutaneous melanoma and 16 cases of advanced mucosal melanoma treated with nivolumab. Serum levels of sCD163 were significantly increased 6 weeks after initial administration of nivolumab in the response group compared to the non-response group in cutaneous melanoma. In contrast, no significant difference between nivolumab responders and non-responders was seen for non-cutaneous melanoma. Interestingly, in non-cutaneous melanoma, serum levels of sCD163 in non-responders tended to be even higher than those in responders. This discrepancy might be explained by differences in cancer stroma that could stimulate TAMs in the tumor microenvironment of each organ. Such studies should be performed in the future.

According to the present results, sCD163 may represent a predictive biomarker for evaluating the efficacy of nivolumab at 3 months after first administration for advanced cutaneous melanoma. Because sequential administration of ipilimumab followed by nivolumab is only effective for advanced melanoma before the melanoma develops tolerance for nivolumab (7), and administration of ipilimumab leads to the development of irAEs more frequently than nivolumab (2, 3), predicting the efficacy of nivolumab before first tumor estimation is crucial to determining whether the patient will successfully adapt to the planned switch from nivolumab to ipilimumab therapy. The present study suggested that sCD163 may be a useful biomarker for the selection of those cutaneous melanoma patients most likely to benefit from anti-melanoma immunotherapy using nivolumab and ipilimumab. Because this was a pilot study, future independent studies with larger patient cohorts are needed to confirm our findings.

Author contributions

TFuj designed the research study. TFuj, YS, KT, and YK performed and analyzed the ELISA data. TFuj, YK, AO, YF, KY, SM, TFun, HH, YY, HU, YN, RT, MA, KI, HO, NW, HI, TH, and AH treated the patients and acquired the clinical data and samples. TFuj wrote the manuscript. TFuj and SA supervised the study.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

This study was supported in part by the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (l8cm01643h0001) and grants-in-aid for scientific research from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (16K10143).

Footnotes

Funding. This study was partially funded by Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. and Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fonc.2018.00530/full#supplementary-material

Supplemental Figure 1

Serum levels of sCD163 at day 0 in patients with cutaneous and non-cutaneous melanoma. Mean serum levels of sCD163 in responders (n = 13) and non-responders (n = 46) at day 0 (A). Mean serum levels of sCD163 in responders (n = 4) and non-responders (n = 12) at day 0 (B) n.s, not significant.

References

  • 1.Wolchok JD, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R, Rutkowski P, Grob JJ, Cowey CL, et al. Overall survival with combined nivolumab and ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N Engl J Med. (2017) 377:1345–56. 10.1056/NEJMoa1709684 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Larkin J, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R, Grob JJ, Cowey CL, Lao CD, et al. Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab or monotherapy in untreated melanoma. N Engl J Med. (2015) 373:23–34. 10.1056/NEJMoa1504030 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Weber JS, Gibney G, Sullivan RJ, Sosman JA, Slingluff CL Jr, Lawrence DP, et al. Sequential administration of nivolumab and ipilimumab with a planned switch in patients with advanced melanoma (CheckMate 064): an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. (2016) 17:943–55. 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30126-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Callahan MK, Wolchok JD, Allison JP. Anti-CTLA-4 antibody therapy: immune monitoring during clinical development of a novel immunotherapy. Semin Oncol. (2010) 37 :473–84. 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2010.09.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Robert C, Thomas L, Bondarenko I, O'Day S, Weber J, Garbe C, et al. Ipilimumab plus dacarbazine for previously untreated metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med. (2011) 364:2517–26. 10.1056/NEJMoa1104621 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Tawbi HA, Forsyth PA, Algazi A, Hamid O, Hodi FS, Moschos SJ, et al. Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab in melanoma metastatic to the brain. N Engl J Med. (2018); 379:722–30. 10.1056/NEJMoa1805453 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Fujisawa Y, Yoshino K, Otsuka A, Funakoshi T, Fujimura T, Yamamoto Y, et al. Retrospective study of advanced melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab after nivolumab: analysis of 60 Japanese patients. J Dermatol Sci. (2018) 89:60–6. 10.1016/j.jdermsci.2017.10.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Perry CJ, Muñoz-Rojas AR, Meeth KM, Kellman LN, Amezquita RA, Thakral D, et al. Myeloid-targeted immunotherapies act in synergy to induce inflammation and antitumor immunity. J Exp Med. (2018) 215:877–93. 10.1084/jem.20171435 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Noy R, Pollard JW. Tumor-associated macrophages: from mechanisms to therapy. Immunity (2014) 41:49–61. 10.1016/j.immuni.2014.06.010.Review [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Fujimura T, Kambayashi Y, Furudate S, Asano M, Kakizaki A, Aiba S. Receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand (RANKL) promotes the production of CCL17 from RANK+ M2 macrophages. J Invest Dermatol. (2015) 135:2884–7. 10.1038/jid.2015.209 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Komohara Y, Fujiwara Y, Ohnishi K, Takeya M. Tumor-associated macrophages: Potential therapeutic targets for anti-cancer therapy. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. (2016) 99(Pt B):180–5. 10.1016/j.addr.2015.11.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Caronni N, Savino B, Bonecchi R. Myeloid cells in cancer-related inflammation. Immunobiology (2015) 220:249–53. 10.1016/j.imbio.2014.10.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Furudate S, Fujimura T, Kakizaki A, Kambayashi Y, Asano M, Watabe A, et al. The possible interaction between periostin expressed by cancer stroma and tumor-associated macrophages in developing mycosis fungoides. Exp Dermatol. (2016) 25:107–12. 10.1111/exd.12873 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Gordon SR, Maute RL, Dulken BW, Hutter G, George BM, McCracken MN, et al. PD-1 expression by tumour-associated macrophages inhibits phagocytosis and tumour immunity. Nature (2017) 545:495–9. 10.1038/nature22396 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Van Gorp H, Delputte PL, Nauwynck HJ. Scavenger receptor CD163, a Jack-of-all-trades and potential target for cell-directed therapy. Mol Immunol. (2010) 47:1650–60. 10.1016/j.molimm.2010.02.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Youden WJ: Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer (1950) 3:32–35. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Robert C, Long GV, Brady B, Dutriaux C, Maio M, Mortier L, et al. Nivolumab in previously untreated melanoma without BRAF mutation. N Engl J Med. (2015) 372:320–30. 10.1056/NEJMoa1412082 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.McArthur GA, Chapman PB, Robert C, Larkin J, Haanen JB, Dummer R, et al. Safety and efficacy of vemurafenib in BRAF(V600E) and BRAF(V600K) mutation-positive melanoma (BRIM-3): extended follow-up of a phase 3, randomised, open-label study. Lancet Oncol. (2014) 15:323–32. 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70012-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Long GV, Stroyakovskiy D, Gogas H, Levchenko E, de Braud F, Larkin J, et al. Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition versus BRAF inhibition alone in melanoma. N Engl J Med. (2014) 371:1877–88. 10.1056/NEJMoa1406037 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Fujimura T, Hidaka T, Kambayashi Y, Furudate S, Kakizaki A, Tono H, et al. Phase I study of nivolumab combined with IFN-β for patients with advanced melanoma. Oncotarget (2017) 8:71181–7. 10.18632/oncotarget.17090 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Jensen TO, Schmidt H, Møller HJ, Høyer M, Maniecki MB, Sjoegren P, et al. Macrophage markers in serum and tumor have prognostic impact in American Joint Committee on Cancer stage I/II melanoma. J Clin Oncol. (2009) 27:3330–7. 10.1200/JCO.2008.19.9919 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Fujimura T, Sato Y, Tanita K, Kambayashi Y, Otsuka A, Fujisawa Y, et al. Serum soluble CD163 and CXCL5 could be predictive markers for immune related adverse event in patients with advanced melanoma treated with nivolumab. Oncotarget (2018) 9:15542–51. 10.18632/oncotarget.24509 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Fujimura T, Kambayashi Y, Fujisawa Y, Hidaka T, Aiba S. Tumor-associated macrophages: therapeutic targets for skin cancer. Front Oncol. (2018) 8:3. 10.3389/fonc.2018.00003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplemental Figure 1

Serum levels of sCD163 at day 0 in patients with cutaneous and non-cutaneous melanoma. Mean serum levels of sCD163 in responders (n = 13) and non-responders (n = 46) at day 0 (A). Mean serum levels of sCD163 in responders (n = 4) and non-responders (n = 12) at day 0 (B) n.s, not significant.


Articles from Frontiers in Oncology are provided here courtesy of Frontiers Media SA

RESOURCES