Skip to main content
Drug Design, Development and Therapy logoLink to Drug Design, Development and Therapy
. 2019 Jan 11;13:291–300. doi: 10.2147/DDDT.S181122

Hyperprogression after anti-programmed cell death ligand-1 therapy in a patient with recurrent metastatic urothelial bladder carcinoma following first-line cisplatin-based chemotherapy: a case report

Shiyu Mao 1,*, Junfeng Zhang 1,*, Yadong Guo 1,*, Ziwei Zhang 1, Yuan Wu 2, Wentao Zhang 2, Longsheng Wang 1, Jiang Geng 1, Yang Yan 1,, Xudong Yao 1,
PMCID: PMC6333318  PMID: 30666091

Abstract

Background

Immune checkpoint blockade targeting programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1)/programmed death-1 (PD-1) signaling was approved recently for locally advanced and metastatic urothelial bladder carcinoma (UBC). Some patients experience a very rapid tumor progression, rather than clinical benefit, from anti-PD-L1/PD-1 therapy.

Case presentation

A 58-year-old male diagnosed with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer 3 years ago received transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) and intravesical chemotherapy. TURBT was repeated a year later for recurrent and progressive UBC. Following further disease progression, he received a radical cystectomy (RC), pathologically staged as T2bN2M0, and adjuvant cisplatin-containing combination chemotherapy. When his disease progressed to metastatic UBC, he was started on anti-PD-L1 monotherapy and experienced ultrarapid disease progression within 2 months; imaging scans ruled out pseudoprogression. We observed a fourfold increase in tumor growth rate, defined as the ratio of post- to pretreatment rates. Next-generation sequencing of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded RC tissues showed MDM2 amplification without MDM4 amplification, EGFR aberrations, or DNMT3A alterations. Immunohistochemistry showed grade 2+ PD-L1 labeling intensity of the RC tissues, with 15%–25% and 5%–10% PD-LI immunopositive tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating immune cells, respectively.

Conclusion

Even in cases with PD-L1-positive tumors, MDM2 gene amplification may result in failure of anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy and rapid tumor growth. Therefore, genomic profiling may identify patients at risk for hyperprogression before immunotherapy.

Keywords: urothelial bladder carcinoma, programmed cell death ligand-1, immune checkpoint blockade, hyperprogression, MDM2

Introduction

Although platinum-based combination chemotherapy often prolongs the survival of patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial bladder carcinoma (UBC), progression remains almost inevitable with a median overall survival of only 14 months in 2014.1 The recent US FDA approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors that target the programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1)/programmed death-1 (PD-1) receptor axis has changed how advanced or metastatic UBC is managed.2 Monoclonal PD-L1 antibodies can revitalize and enhance anticancer immunity by preventing PD-L1 from binding to PD-1 receptors.3

PD-L1 antibody was confirmed to produce durable objective responses and to have good tolerability in patients with inoperable advanced or metastatic UBC,47 leading to its approval for use in patients whose disease progressed during or within 12 months following neoadjuvant or adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy.8 However, immunomodulatory therapies, such as PD-L1 immunotherapy, can produce opposing effects in a subset of patients. Indeed, there have been several recent reports of patients who experienced rapid tumor progression while on immune checkpoint blockade (ICB), consistent with ICB-promoted hyperprogression.914 Thus, there is a critical and urgent need to identify the predictors and mechanisms of such hyperprogression to prevent tragic adverse outcomes of ICB. A recent study showed an association between tumor hyperprogression and specific genomic alterations, including MDM2 family amplification and EGFR aberrations.14

Here, we report the case of an adult male patient with recurrent metastatic UBC whose disease progressed following platinum-based chemotherapy and then hyperprogressed shortly after initiation of ICB. UBCs have been reported to have relatively high PD-L1 expression among all cancers, and elevated PD-L1 expression intensity has been related to a higher probability of clinical response.6,7,1517 Thus, we investigated the genomic profile and PD-L1 protein expression of the patients’ primary tumor following radical cystectomy (RC).

Case presentation

Patient characteristics and history

A 55-year-old man presented with left hip pain in October 2014. An initial workup revealed a left posterior mass in his bladder. Transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) pathology indicated stage-TaG3 UBC. After the TURBT procedure, he began a 12-month course of intravesical instillation of epirubicin chemotherapy. However, 14 months after the resection surgery, a cystoscope examination revealed bladder tumor recurrence. TURBT pathology indicated that the recurrent tumor was stage T1G3. The patient then received an additional 12-month course of adjuvant intravesical epirubicin chemotherapy instillations.

Disease progression was detected 11 months later, and TURBT pathology indicated that the advancing lesion was a stage T2G3 N0 UBC. He then received a RC, and the removed tumor was pathologically staged as T2bN2M0. Subsequently, he was treated with adjuvant cisplatin-containing combination chemotherapy for 3 months.

Twelve months after the RC, follow-up chest radiography and computer tomography (CT) revealed metastases in the right lumbar muscles, left adrenal gland, and lungs (Figure 1). In addition to bladder cancer, patient had no other history of cancer. The patient’s right lumbar mass biopsy puncture results indicated urothelial carcinoma. The patient was started on PD-L1 blockade monotherapy on December 19, 2017. Chest radiography and a full-body CT on January 15, 2018 showed pronounced enlargement of a left lung metastasis (1,004% increase from preimmunotherapy size) and progression of the right lumbar muscle and left adrenal gland metastases, as well as new multiple lymph node metastases involving a mediastinal, a left supraclavicular, and two hilar lymph nodes (Figure 1). He had developed a progressively enlarging right back mass with localized swelling and persistent severe pain, and was therefore admitted to our hospital.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Treatment intervention process and imaging of disease progress after PD-L1 blockade.

Notes: (A) Summary of interventions received by the present patient. Arrowheads indicate time points for each intervention. (B) PET/CT or CT images for metastatic lesions before and after PD-L1 blockade.

Abbreviations: PET, positron emission tomography; CT, computer tomography; PD-L1, programmed cell death ligand-1; IHC, immunohistochemistry; NGS, next-generation sequencing.

In the hospital, while still receiving PD-L1 blockade monotherapy, the patient experienced unusually rapid disease progression demonstrated in repeated CT scans to rule out pseudoprogression. The patient terminated the immunotherapy after receiving two cycles of PD-L1 blockade treatment due to his rapid disease progression. A full-body CT, upper abdomen MRI, and positron emission tomography-CT on January 29, 2018 showed rapid progression of the metastatic lung lesions (1,078% increase from pre-immunotherapy cumulative size) and continued growth of the right lumbar muscle and left adrenal metastases, as well as the emergence of three liver metastases and at least seven bone metastases. Upon discovery of these changes, the patient’s treatment plan was changed to cisplatin/gemcitabine chemotherapy. One month after the patient began cisplatin/gemcitabine chemotherapy, we observed drastic reductions in lesion size (Figure 1).

To evaluate the patient’s treatment responses, we calculated tumor growth rate (TGR) vis-à-vis comparisons of tumor volume over time. TGR ratio was defined as the ratio of tumor volume growth change after, relative to that observed prior to, the treatment of interest. Comparing the TGR for the 8-week period following ICB to that for the 1-week period prior to ICB, we determined that the patient had a TGR ratio of 4.0, reflecting a fourfold increase in growth rate in association with ICB onset, meeting the criteria for hyperprogression (Figure 2). We employed Kato et al’s definition of hyperprogression criteria as follows: time-to-treatment failure (TTF) <2 months; increase in tumor burden >50%; and a >2-fold increase in TGR.14 All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of Shanghai Tenth People’s Hospital (SHSY-IEC-4.0/17-16/01) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its amendments or comparable ethical standards. Written informed consent was obtained from the patient to have the case details and any accompanying images published. The publication of the case details was approved by ethics committee of Shanghai Tenth People’s Hospital.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Tumor metastasis changes over time. The 0-month time point represents the start of PD-L1 blockade treatment.

Abbreviation: PD-L1, programmed cell death ligand-1.

Assessments

Formalin-fixed paraffin embedded RC tissue samples were obtained from the Department of Pathology, Shanghai Tenth People’s Hospital. The samples were subjected to next-generation sequencing (NGS) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) with the aim of identifying possible predictive factors for immunotherapy-triggered hyperprogression. NGS was performed with a 499-gene panel assay (Table S1). The panel included sequences for multiple gene variants previously suggested to be associated with hyperprogression including MDM2 family amplification, EGFR aberration, and DNMT3A alteration sequences. The mean sequencing coverage depth exceeded 15,000×. The NGS method employed revealed copy number alterations, gene rearrangements, and somatic mutations with 95% specificity and >90% sensitivity. The presence of ≥3 gene copies was considered gene amplification. IHC carried out with monoclonal rabbit anti-PD-L1 antibody (clone MXR003, working solution for 15 hours; Fujian Maixin, Fujian, PR China), goat anti-rabbit and -mouse secondary antibody (PV-6000, working solution for 1 hour; ZSGB-BIO, Beijing, PR China), and horse-radish peroxidase to enhance visualization (ZLI-9017; ZSGB-BIO). IHC-AP cell membrane staining intensity was graded as follows: 0, none; 1+, weak or incomplete; 2+, weak to medium; 3+, medium to strong and complete.

Predictors of hyperprogression

NGS showed that the RC specimen from the present case had several malignancy-related alterations, including MDM2 amplification, a KRAS mutation, and a KMT2D mutation. It was not harboring an MDM4 amplification, EGFR aberrations, or DNMT3A alterations. The genomic alterations found are reported in Table 1 with descriptive information, including abundance, location, base and amino acid changes, and type of mutation.

Table 1.

Summary of NGS-revealed gene mutations

Gene Location Base mutation Amino acid change Abundance Mutation type
KRAS chr12:25398284 c.35G>A p.Gly12Asp 22.82% Missense
KMT2D chr12:49426895 c.11593C>T p.Gln3865Ter 21.78% Nonsense
MDM2 11.92 copies Amplification
SPEN chr1:16264490 c.10693C>T p.Arg3565Ter 1.26% Nonsense
NOTCH2 chr1:120462059 c.5657G>A p.Arg1886His 1.09% Missense
AR chrX:66765516 c.528C>A p.Ser176Arg 95.11% Missense
MUTYH chr1:45798136 c.715G>A p.Val239Ile 1.52% Missense
DDR2 chr1:162748503 c.2417G>A p.Arg806Gln 1.43% Missense
TCF7L2 chr10:114910785 c.904C>T p.His302Tyr 13.55% Missense
PTPN11 chr12:112926915 c.1535G>A p.Arg512Gln 1.09% Missense
IDH2 chr15:90630711 c.775G>A p.Asp259Asn 1.19% Missense
IGF1R chr15:99465453 c.2278G>A p.Ala760Thr 1.32% Missense
PLCG2 chr16:81902844 c.505A>G p.Ile169Val 46.35% Missense
AXIN2 chr17:63554353 c.386G>A p.Arg129Gln 1.08% Missense
SMARCA4 chr19:11100064 c.1190G>A p.Arg397Gln 1.16% Missense
LRP1B chr2:141283458 c.7981G>A p.Gly2661Arg 1.55% Missense
CASP8 chr2:202136289 c.533C>A p.Ser178Tyr 53.30% Missense
BAP1 chr3:52442077 c.272G>T p.Cys91Phe 15.58% Missense
EPHA5 chr4:66231683 c.2017T>A p.Ser673Thr 46.75% Missense
TET2 chr4:106155794 c.695A>G p.Gln232Arg 46.42% Missense
INPP4B chr4:143043366 c.2050G>A p.Val684Ile 27.15% Missense
FAT1 chr4:187524812 c.10868C>T p.Thr3623Met 44.02% Missense
FAT1 chr4:187541475 c.6265G>A p.Val2089Ile 41.88% Missense
PDGFRB chr5:149501461 c.2326G>A p.Asp776Asn 50.00% Missense
ARID1B chr6:157405827 c.2069C>T p.Thr690Met 37.91% Missense
ETV1 chr7:14027789 c.55G>A p.Gly19Arg 45.92% Missense
MAGI2 chr7:78150951 c.550G>A p.Gly184Ser 1.45% Missense
KMT2C chr7:151860428 c.10234C>T p.Arg3412Trp 1.07% Missense
KAT6A chr8:41906155 c.341G>C p.Gly114Ala 4.56% Missense
PREX2 chr8:69033224 c.3664C>A p.Pro1222Thr 50.00% Missense
GID4 chr17:17942909 c.131G>C p.Arg44Pro 12.48% Missense
SOX10 chr22:38370185 c.718A>C p.Thr240Pro 10.47% Missense

Abbreviation: NGS, next-generation sequencing.

To calibrate PD-L1 expression relative to the proportion of tumor cells present in the RC specimen, alternate sections were subjected to H&E staining and anti-PD-L1 IHC prior to evaluating PD-L1 expression. In the H&E-stained sections (Figure 3A), we observed a 40% tumor cell ratio; >100 PD-L1 immunopositive tumor cells were examined under a light microscope. PD-L1 staining was localized primarily to cell membranes, with some non-specific cytoplasm staining. Tumor-associated immune cells had PD-L1 immunopositive cytoplasm and membranes. Both tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating immune cells had grade 2+ PD-L1 staining intensity. We found that 15%–25% and 5%–10% of tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating immune cells, respectively, showed PD-L1 immunopositivity (Figure 3B).

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Anti-PD-L1 immunohistochemistry of bladder cancer tissues.

Notes: (A) H&E stained tumor section with 40% tumor cell proportion. (B) Image of IHC PD-L1 labeled section subjected to PD-L1 percentage scoring. The percentages of tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating immune cells are 15%–25% and 5%–10%, respectively.

Abbreviations: PD-L1, programmed cell death ligand-1; IHC, immunohistochemistry.

Discussion

Blockade of the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway has produced durable clinical responses for some solid tumors and anti-PD-L1 agents have demonstrated a manageable safety profile and favorable clinical activity in patients with advanced, previously treated UBC.2,57 Currently, it is still a challenge to select the patients most likely to respond to treatment with immunotherapeutic agents. Robertson et al reported that clustering by mRNA, lncRNA, and miRNA expression converged to identify subsets with differential epithelial–mesenchymal transition status, carcinoma-in-situ scores, histologic features, and survival in bladder cancer. Their analyses identified five expression subtypes that may stratify response to different treatments. Among these, mRNA luminal-papillary subtype and basal-squamous subtypes show increased expression of CD270 (PD-L1) and PD-1 immune markers, which correspond to lncRNA 1 and miRNA 2 subtypes, lncRNA 4 and miRNA 4 subtypes, respectively. These two subtypes may serve as predictive markers for response to immune checkpoint therapy.18 However, the occurrence of immunotherapy-induced hyperprogression in some patients with various cancer types has drawn attention to a critical potential risk of immunotherapy.13,14 Reports of UBC hyperprogression with anti-PD-1 antibody treatment specifically are rare. To the best of our knowledge, the presently reported circumstance of dramatic growth and metastatic spreading of neoplastic lesions following anti-PD-L1 antibody initiation in an MDM2-amplified patient with UBC is quite rare. The rapid shrinking of multiple metastatic lesions, especially in the lungs, observed during the subsequent cisplatin-gemcitabine treatment indicated that the ICB-associated progression observed in this patient was not pseudoprogression but rather true hyperprogression.

Predictors of and mechanisms underlying ICB-triggered hyperprogression remain to be elucidated. The limited information available to date has implicated two clinical variables, namely older age and regional recurrence in an irradiated field,13 and a handful of genomic alterations, namely MDM2/4 amplification, EGFR aberrations, and DNMT3A alterations, in hyperprogression.14 In a study of 131 patients, encompassing 21 tumor types, treated with PD-1/PD-L1 pathway blockade, without genomic profiling, Champiat et al observed rapid progression in 12 patients (9%), including 2/8 patients (25%) with bladder cancer.13 In a study of 155 patients with diverse cancers, Kato et al reported that 49 patients (31.6%) had poor clinical outcomes of immunotherapy, defined as a TTF <2 months. Molecular profiling of Kato et al’s patient group showed that those with a poor clinical outcome harbored MDM2/4, EGFR, and/or DNMT3A alterations, each of which emerged as an independent predictor of a poor outcome. Six patients had MDM2 or –4 amplification, and all of them experienced hyperprogression, including one patient with bladder cancer harboring an MDM2 amplification.14

In the presently reported case, this patient was only 58 years old and had not received radiation therapy (RT). Upon starting anti-PD-L1 antibody treatment, the patient experienced rapid clinical deterioration with a marked acceleration in tumor growth (fourfold increase in progression rate and TTF of 1.4 months) accompanied by the emergence of new liver and bone metastases. IHC revealed PD-L1 expression in up to a quarter of RC tumor cells and up to a tenth of tumor-infiltrating immune cells, which suggests that PD-L1 immunopositivity is not a reliable indicator of immunotherapy sensitivity. Retrospective genomic profiling by NGS aimed at identifying hyperprogression predictors and clues regarding its mechanism showed MDM2 amplification without accompanying MDM4 or ERGR alterations. Similarly, Kriegmair et al found that patients with low MDM4 and high MDM2 expression tended to have poor muscle-invasive bladder cancer outcomes.19 These data point to MDM2 amplification as a predictive biomarker candidate for rapid ICB-triggered cancer progression.

Normally, PD-1/PD-L1 pathway activation is associated with anti-tumor immunity evasion that enables immunogenic tolerance. However, unfortunately, in some patients with UBC, the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway appears to have been linked with oncogenic signaling that triggers tumor proliferation and progression. Melanoma cell-intrinsic functions of PD-1/PD-L1 signaling might modulate several alternative signaling networks, including some that favor tumor growth.20 Such an effect may be secondary to an accumulation of oncogenes in tumor cells. Because our patient’s tumor had MDM2 amplification, in the absence of a p53 mutation, it may be that amplification of MDM2 inhibited the wild-type p53 tumor suppressor.21 Indeed, antigen-specific CD4+ T-cell responses have been reported to down-modulate tumor suppressor p53 through T-cell receptor signaling by decreasing expression of p53 while escalating expression of MDM2, the protein product of which mediates posttranscriptional inactivation of p53.22 In addition to T-cell receptor signaling increasing interferon-γ suppression of the PD-1 pathway – which activates JAK-STAT signaling thereby increasing interferon regulatory factor-8 expression – it may also induce MDM2 expression.2326

Immune checkpoints occupy crucial regulatory pathways for the maintenance of immune homeostasis. Numerous immune cell subsets express PD-1 in tumor microenvironments, including macrophages, T cells, B cells, natural killer cells, and dendritic cells.27 Thus, ICB could trigger compensatory mechanisms and adaptive immune resistance, enabling an acceleration of tumor growth.

If the presently observed hyperprogression phenomenon is specific to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy, it might be solved with mechanistically sound combination therapies. In metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer mouse models, intratumoral myeloid-derived suppressor cells inhibited CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell proliferation, and PD-1/PD-L1 blockade combined with myeloid-derived suppressor cell-targeted therapies yielded excellent synergistic efficacy against ICB resistance.28 Indeed, RT has been reported to enhance T-cell recognition of malignant cells through induction of MHCI expression and neoantigen generation.29 Meanwhile, PD-L1 has been found to be upregulated after RT,12,30 and combining RT with PD-L1 blockade has been found to enhance anti-tumor treatment effects.30,31 Likewise, chemotherapy has been reported to augment intra-tumor CD8+ T-cell infiltration, consistent with the notion that immunogenic chemotherapies could increase the anticancer efficacy of ICB.3234 These studies support the strategy of developing innovative combination therapies to overcome undesirable tumor responsivity to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade.

In summary, genomic testing of malignant tumors prior to treatment, preferably in an early stage, may reveal which patients harbor genetic alterations associated with hyperprogression. The present case indicates that patients with MDM2 amplification in particular should not receive anti-PD-L1 monotherapy, even in cases where tumor cells or tumor-associated immune cells are found to express PD-L1. Large-cohort studies are needed to confirm this link. ICB-triggered hyperprogression may be avoided with a combined treatment.

Supplementary material

Table S1.

Gene detection list

ABL1 ABL2 ACVR1 ACVR1B AGO2 AKT1 AKT2 AKT3 ALK ALOX12B
AMER1 AR APC ANKRD11 ARAF ARFRP1 ARID1A ARID1B ARID2 ARID5B
ASXL1 ASXL2 ATM ATR ATRX AURKA AURKB AXIN1 AXIN2 AXL
B2M BAP1 BARD1 BCL10 BCL2 BCL2L1 BCL2L11 BCL2L2 BCL6 BCOR
BCORL1 BIRC3 BLM BMPR1A BRAF BRCA1 BRCA2 BRD3 BRD4 BRIP1
BTG1 BTK C11orf30 CARD11 CALR CARM1 CASP8 CBFB CBL CCND1
CCND2 CCND3 CCNE1 CD274 CD276 CD74 CD79A CD79B CDC42 CDC73
CDH1 CDK12 CDK4 CDKN1A CDK6 CDKN2A CDKN1B CDK8 CDKN2B CIC
CEBPA CHD2 CHD4 CHEK1 CHEK2 CDKN2C CREBBP CRKL CRLF2 CSDE1
CSF1R CSF3R CTCF CTLA4 CUL3 CTNNB1 CTNNA1 CXCR4 CYLD CYSLTR2
DAXX DDR2 DICER1 DNMT3B DNAJB1 DNMT1 DNMT3A DIS3 DOT1L DROSHA
DUSP4 E2F3 EED EGF EGFR EIF1AX EIF4A2 ELF3 EML4 EP300
EPAS1 EPCAM EPHA3 EPHA5 EPHA7 EPHB1 ERBB2 ERBB3 ERBB4 ERCC1
ERCC2 ERCC3 ERCC4 ERCC5 ERF ERG ERRFI1 ESR1 ETV1 ETV6
EZH2 FAM46C FAM58A FAM175A FANCA FANCD2 FANCE FANCC FANCF FANCG
FANCL FAS FAT1 FBXW7 FGF10 FGF14 FGF19 FGF23 FGF3 FLT3
FGF4 FGF6 FGFR1 FGFR2 FGFR3 FGFR4 FLCN FH FLT1 FLT4
FOLR3 FOXA1 FOXL2 FOXO1 FOXP1 FRS2 FUBP1 FYN GABRA6 GATA1
GATA2 GATA3 GATA4 GATA6 GID4 GLI1 GNA11 GNA13 GNAQ GNAS
GOPC GPR124 GREM1 GRIN2A GRM3 GSK3B GSTA1 H3F3A H3F3B HDAC1
HDAC4 HIST1H1C HGF HIST1H3B HLA-A HLA-B HIST1H2BD HNF1A HIST1H3G HOXB13
HRAS HSP90AA1 HSD3B1 ID3 IDH1 IDH2 IFNGR1 IGF1 IGF1R IGF2
IKBKE IKZF1 IL10 IL7R INHBA INPP4A INPP4B INPPL1 INSR IRF2
IRF4 IRS1 IRS2 JAK1 JAK2 JAK3 JUN KAT6A KDM5A KDM5C
KDM6A KDR KEAP1 KEL KIT KLF4 KLHL6 KMT2A KMT2B KMT2C
KMT2D KNSTRN KRAS LATS1 LATS2 LMO1 LRP1B LRRK2 LYN LZTR1
MAGI2 MALT1 MAP2K1 MAP2K2 MAP2K4 MAP3K1 MAP3K13 MAPK1 MAP3K14 MAPK3
MAX MCL1 MDC1 MDM2 MDM4 MED12 MEF2B MEN1 MET MGA
MITF MLH1 MPL MRE11A MSH2 MSH3 MSH6 MSI2 MST1R MTOR
MUTYH MYC MYCL MYCN MYD88 MYOD1 NAT2 NBN NCOA3 NCOR1
NEGR1 NF1 NF2 NFE2L2 NFKBIA NKX2-1 NOTCH1 NOTCH2 NOTCH3 NOTCH4
NPM1 NRAS NSD1 NTRK1 NTRK2 NTRK3 NUF2 NUP93 OPRM1 PAK1
PAK3 PAK7 PALB2 PARK2 PARP1 PARP2 PAX5 PBRM1 PDCD1 PDK1
PDGFRA PDGFRB PDPK1 PGR PIK3CA PHOX2B PDCD1LG2 PIK3C3 PIK3C2B PIK3C2G
PIK3CB PIK3CD PIK3CG PIK3R1 PIK3R2 PIK3R3 PPP2R1A PIM1 PLCG2 PMS1
PMS2 PNRC1 POLD1 PTPN11 POLE PPARG PPM1D PPP6C PRDM1 PRDM14
PREX2 PRKAR1A PRKCI PRKD1 PRKDC PRSS8 PTCH1 PTCH2 PTEN PTPRD
PTPRS PTPRT QKI RAB35 RAC1 RAC2 RAD21 RAD50 RAD51 RAD51B
RAD51C RAD51D RAD52 RAD54L RAF1 RANBP2 RARA RASA1 RB1 RBM10
RECQL RECQL4 REL RET RFWD2 RHEB RHOA RICTOR RIT1 RNF43
ROCK1 ROS1 RPTOR RUNX1T1 RRAGC RPS6KB1 RPS6KA4 RRAS2 RRM1 RTEL1
RUNX1 RXRA RYBP SDHAF2 SDHA SDHB SLC19A1 SDHC SDHD SETD2
SF3B1 SMARCA4 SH2B3 SMARCB1 SHOC2 SHQ1 SMARCD1 SLIT2 SLX4 SMAD2
SMAD3 SNCAIP SMAD4 SOCS1 SMO SOS1 STAT5A SOX10 SOX17 SOX2
SOX9 STAT5B SPEN STK11 SPOP SPTA1 SUFU SRC SRSF2 STAG2
STAT3 SUZ12 STAT4 SYK TAF1 TAP1 TAP2 TBX3 TCEB1 TCF3
TEK TCF7L2 TERT TGFBR1 TET1 TET2 TGFBR2 TOP1 TMEM127 TMPRSS2
TNFAIP3 TNFRSF14 TOP2A TP53 TP63 TP53BP1 TRAF7 TRAF2 TSC1 TSC2
TSHR TYMS U2AF1 VEGFA VHL WHSC1 WHSC1L1 WISP3 WT1 WWTR1
XIAP XPO1 XRCC2 YAP1 YES1 ZBTB2 ZFHX3 ZNF217 ZNF703

Acknowledgments

This study was funded by the Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number 81472389) and Shanghai Health and Family Planning Commission Key Project (grant number 20124008). The abstract of this paper was presented at the Global Congress on Bladder Cancer 2018 as a poster presentation with interim findings. The poster’s abstract was published in Abstract book (ISBN 9789462210165) and as an e-poster online: https://abstracts.mirrorsmed.org/abstracts/hyperprogression-after-immunotherapy-patient-recurrent-and-metastatic-urothelial-bladder.

Footnotes

Author contributions

YY and XY designed and guided the present study. SM, JZ, and YG collected the study data. SM, YW, ZZ, and WZ analyzed and interpreted the data. LW, JZ, and YG made figures and tables. SM was a major contributor in writing the manuscript. JG, YY, and XY revised the manuscript. All authors contributed to data analysis, drafting and revising the article, gave final approval of the version to be published, and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

References

  • 1.Bellmunt J, Orsola A, Leow JJ, et al. Bladder cancer: ESMO practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(Suppl 3):iii40–iii48. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu223. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Balar AV, Galsky MD, Rosenberg JE, et al. Atezolizumab as first-line treatment in cisplatin-ineligible patients with locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 trial. Lancet. 2017;389(10064):67–76. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32455-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Stewart R, Morrow M, Hammond SA, et al. Identification and characterization of MEDI4736, an antagonistic anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody. Cancer Immunol Res. 2015;3(9):1052–1062. doi: 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-14-0191. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Rosenberg JE, Hoffman-Censits J, Powles T, et al. Atezolizumab in patients with locally advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma who have progressed following treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy: a single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10031):1909–1920. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00561-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Powles T, Eder JP, Fine GD, et al. MPDL3280A (anti-PD-L1) treatment leads to clinical activity in metastatic bladder cancer. Nature. 2014;515(7528):558–562. doi: 10.1038/nature13904. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Powles T, O’Donnell PH, Massard C, et al. Efficacy and safety of durvalumab in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: updated results from a phase 1/2 open-label study. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3(9):e172411. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.2411. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Massard C, Gordon MS, Sharma S, et al. Safety and efficacy of durvalumab (MEDI4736), an anti-programmed cell death ligand-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor, in patients with advanced urothelial bladder cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(26):3119–3125. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.67.9761. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Syed YY. Durvalumab: first global approval. Drugs. 2017;77(12):1369–1376. doi: 10.1007/s40265-017-0782-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Saâda-Bouzid E, Defaucheux C, Karabajakian A, et al. Hyperprogression during anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Ann Oncol. 2017;28(7):1605–1611. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdx178. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Chubachi S, Yasuda H, Irie H, et al. A case of non-small cell lung cancer with possible “disease flare” on nivolumab treatment. Case Rep Oncol Med. 2016;2016:1–3. doi: 10.1155/2016/1075641. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Yoshida T, Furuta H, Hida T. Risk of tumor flare after nivolumab treatment in patients with irradiated field recurrence. Med Oncol. 2017;34(3):3434. doi: 10.1007/s12032-017-0895-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Alexander GS, Palmer JD, Tuluc M, et al. Immune biomarkers of treatment failure for a patient on a phase I clinical trial of pembrolizumab plus radiotherapy. J Hematol Oncol. 2016;9(1):96. doi: 10.1186/s13045-016-0328-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Champiat S, Dercle L, Ammari S, et al. Hyperprogressive disease is a new pattern of progression in cancer patients treated by anti-PD-1/PD-L1. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23(8):1920–1928. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-1741. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Kato S, Goodman A, Walavalkar V, Barkauskas DA, Sharabi A, Kurzrock R. Hyperprogressors after immunotherapy: analysis of genomic alterations associated with accelerated growth rate. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23(15):4242–4250. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-3133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Zou W, Chen L. Inhibitory B7-family molecules in the tumour micro-environment. Nat Rev Immunol. 2008;8(6):467–477. doi: 10.1038/nri2326. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Borghaei H, Paz-Ares L, Horn L, et al. Nivolumab versus docetaxel in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(17):1627–1639. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1507643. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Ferris RL, Blumenschein G, Fayette J, et al. Nivolumab for recurrent squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(19):1856–1867. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1602252. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Robertson AG, Kim J, Al-Ahmadie H, et al. Comprehensive molecular characterization of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Cell. 2018;174(4):1033. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2018.07.036. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Kriegmair MC, Balk M, Wirtz R, et al. Expression of the p53 inhibitors MDM2 and MDM4 as outcome predictor in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Anticancer Res. 2016;36(10):5205–5214. doi: 10.21873/anticanres.11091. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Kleffel S, Posch C, Barthel SR, et al. Melanoma cell-intrinsic PD-1 receptor functions promote tumor growth. Cell. 2015;162(6):1242–1256. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2015.08.052. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Wade M, Li YC, Wahl GM. MDM2, MDMX and p53 in oncogenesis and cancer therapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2013;13(2):83–96. doi: 10.1038/nrc3430. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Watanabe M, Moon KD, Vacchio MS, Hathcock KS, Hodes RJ. Downmodulation of tumor suppressor p53 by T cell receptor signaling is critical for antigen-specific CD4(+) T cell responses. Immunity. 2014;40(5):681–691. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2014.04.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Peng W, Liu C, Xu C, et al. PD-1 blockade enhances T-cell migration to tumors by elevating IFN-γ inducible chemokines. Cancer Res. 2012;72(20):5209–5218. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-1187. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Schindler C, Levy DE, Decker T. JAK-STAT signaling: from interferons to cytokines. J Biol Chem. 2007;282(28):20059–20063. doi: 10.1074/jbc.R700016200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Waight JD, Netherby C, Hensen ML, et al. Myeloid-derived suppressor cell development is regulated by a STAT/IRF-8 axis. J Clin Invest. 2013;123(10):4464–4478. doi: 10.1172/JCI68189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Zhao Y, Yu H, Hu W. The regulation of MDM2 oncogene and its impact on human cancers. Acta Biochim Biophys Sin (Shanghai) 2014;46(3):180–189. doi: 10.1093/abbs/gmt147. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Gordon SR, Maute RL, Dulken BW, et al. PD-1 expression by tumour-associated macrophages inhibits phagocytosis and tumour immunity. Nature. 2017;545(7655):495–499. doi: 10.1038/nature22396. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Lu X, Horner JW, Paul E, et al. Effective combinatorial immunotherapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer. Nature. 2017;543(7647):728–732. doi: 10.1038/nature21676. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Newcomb EW, Demaria S, Lukyanov Y, et al. The combination of ionizing radiation and peripheral vaccination produces long-term survival of mice bearing established invasive GL261 gliomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12(15):4730–4737. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-0593. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Dovedi SJ, Adlard AL, Lipowska-Bhalla G, et al. Acquired resistance to fractionated radiotherapy can be overcome by concurrent PD-L1 blockade. Cancer Res. 2014;74(19):5458–5468. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-14-1258. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Walshaw RC, Honeychurch J, Illidge TM, Choudhury A. The anti-PD-1 era – an opportunity to enhance radiotherapy for patients with bladder cancer. Nat Rev Urol. 2018;15(4):251–259. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2017.172. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Galluzzi L, Buqué A, Kepp O, Zitvogel L, Kroemer G. Immunological effects of conventional chemotherapy and targeted anticancer agents. Cancer Cell. 2015;28(6):690–714. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2015.10.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Dosset M, Vargas TR, Lagrange A, et al. PD-1/PD-L1 pathway: an adaptive immune resistance mechanism to immunogenic chemotherapy in colorectal cancer. Oncoimmunology. 2018;7(6):e1433981. doi: 10.1080/2162402X.2018.1433981. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Song W, Shen L, Wang Y, et al. Synergistic and low adverse effect cancer immunotherapy by immunogenic chemotherapy and locally expressed PD-L1 trap. Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):2237. doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-04605-x. [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

Table S1.

Gene detection list

ABL1 ABL2 ACVR1 ACVR1B AGO2 AKT1 AKT2 AKT3 ALK ALOX12B
AMER1 AR APC ANKRD11 ARAF ARFRP1 ARID1A ARID1B ARID2 ARID5B
ASXL1 ASXL2 ATM ATR ATRX AURKA AURKB AXIN1 AXIN2 AXL
B2M BAP1 BARD1 BCL10 BCL2 BCL2L1 BCL2L11 BCL2L2 BCL6 BCOR
BCORL1 BIRC3 BLM BMPR1A BRAF BRCA1 BRCA2 BRD3 BRD4 BRIP1
BTG1 BTK C11orf30 CARD11 CALR CARM1 CASP8 CBFB CBL CCND1
CCND2 CCND3 CCNE1 CD274 CD276 CD74 CD79A CD79B CDC42 CDC73
CDH1 CDK12 CDK4 CDKN1A CDK6 CDKN2A CDKN1B CDK8 CDKN2B CIC
CEBPA CHD2 CHD4 CHEK1 CHEK2 CDKN2C CREBBP CRKL CRLF2 CSDE1
CSF1R CSF3R CTCF CTLA4 CUL3 CTNNB1 CTNNA1 CXCR4 CYLD CYSLTR2
DAXX DDR2 DICER1 DNMT3B DNAJB1 DNMT1 DNMT3A DIS3 DOT1L DROSHA
DUSP4 E2F3 EED EGF EGFR EIF1AX EIF4A2 ELF3 EML4 EP300
EPAS1 EPCAM EPHA3 EPHA5 EPHA7 EPHB1 ERBB2 ERBB3 ERBB4 ERCC1
ERCC2 ERCC3 ERCC4 ERCC5 ERF ERG ERRFI1 ESR1 ETV1 ETV6
EZH2 FAM46C FAM58A FAM175A FANCA FANCD2 FANCE FANCC FANCF FANCG
FANCL FAS FAT1 FBXW7 FGF10 FGF14 FGF19 FGF23 FGF3 FLT3
FGF4 FGF6 FGFR1 FGFR2 FGFR3 FGFR4 FLCN FH FLT1 FLT4
FOLR3 FOXA1 FOXL2 FOXO1 FOXP1 FRS2 FUBP1 FYN GABRA6 GATA1
GATA2 GATA3 GATA4 GATA6 GID4 GLI1 GNA11 GNA13 GNAQ GNAS
GOPC GPR124 GREM1 GRIN2A GRM3 GSK3B GSTA1 H3F3A H3F3B HDAC1
HDAC4 HIST1H1C HGF HIST1H3B HLA-A HLA-B HIST1H2BD HNF1A HIST1H3G HOXB13
HRAS HSP90AA1 HSD3B1 ID3 IDH1 IDH2 IFNGR1 IGF1 IGF1R IGF2
IKBKE IKZF1 IL10 IL7R INHBA INPP4A INPP4B INPPL1 INSR IRF2
IRF4 IRS1 IRS2 JAK1 JAK2 JAK3 JUN KAT6A KDM5A KDM5C
KDM6A KDR KEAP1 KEL KIT KLF4 KLHL6 KMT2A KMT2B KMT2C
KMT2D KNSTRN KRAS LATS1 LATS2 LMO1 LRP1B LRRK2 LYN LZTR1
MAGI2 MALT1 MAP2K1 MAP2K2 MAP2K4 MAP3K1 MAP3K13 MAPK1 MAP3K14 MAPK3
MAX MCL1 MDC1 MDM2 MDM4 MED12 MEF2B MEN1 MET MGA
MITF MLH1 MPL MRE11A MSH2 MSH3 MSH6 MSI2 MST1R MTOR
MUTYH MYC MYCL MYCN MYD88 MYOD1 NAT2 NBN NCOA3 NCOR1
NEGR1 NF1 NF2 NFE2L2 NFKBIA NKX2-1 NOTCH1 NOTCH2 NOTCH3 NOTCH4
NPM1 NRAS NSD1 NTRK1 NTRK2 NTRK3 NUF2 NUP93 OPRM1 PAK1
PAK3 PAK7 PALB2 PARK2 PARP1 PARP2 PAX5 PBRM1 PDCD1 PDK1
PDGFRA PDGFRB PDPK1 PGR PIK3CA PHOX2B PDCD1LG2 PIK3C3 PIK3C2B PIK3C2G
PIK3CB PIK3CD PIK3CG PIK3R1 PIK3R2 PIK3R3 PPP2R1A PIM1 PLCG2 PMS1
PMS2 PNRC1 POLD1 PTPN11 POLE PPARG PPM1D PPP6C PRDM1 PRDM14
PREX2 PRKAR1A PRKCI PRKD1 PRKDC PRSS8 PTCH1 PTCH2 PTEN PTPRD
PTPRS PTPRT QKI RAB35 RAC1 RAC2 RAD21 RAD50 RAD51 RAD51B
RAD51C RAD51D RAD52 RAD54L RAF1 RANBP2 RARA RASA1 RB1 RBM10
RECQL RECQL4 REL RET RFWD2 RHEB RHOA RICTOR RIT1 RNF43
ROCK1 ROS1 RPTOR RUNX1T1 RRAGC RPS6KB1 RPS6KA4 RRAS2 RRM1 RTEL1
RUNX1 RXRA RYBP SDHAF2 SDHA SDHB SLC19A1 SDHC SDHD SETD2
SF3B1 SMARCA4 SH2B3 SMARCB1 SHOC2 SHQ1 SMARCD1 SLIT2 SLX4 SMAD2
SMAD3 SNCAIP SMAD4 SOCS1 SMO SOS1 STAT5A SOX10 SOX17 SOX2
SOX9 STAT5B SPEN STK11 SPOP SPTA1 SUFU SRC SRSF2 STAG2
STAT3 SUZ12 STAT4 SYK TAF1 TAP1 TAP2 TBX3 TCEB1 TCF3
TEK TCF7L2 TERT TGFBR1 TET1 TET2 TGFBR2 TOP1 TMEM127 TMPRSS2
TNFAIP3 TNFRSF14 TOP2A TP53 TP63 TP53BP1 TRAF7 TRAF2 TSC1 TSC2
TSHR TYMS U2AF1 VEGFA VHL WHSC1 WHSC1L1 WISP3 WT1 WWTR1
XIAP XPO1 XRCC2 YAP1 YES1 ZBTB2 ZFHX3 ZNF217 ZNF703

Articles from Drug Design, Development and Therapy are provided here courtesy of Dove Press

RESOURCES