Abstract
Background
Natural killer (NK) cells are non-antigen specific innate immune cells that can be redirected to targets of interest using multiple strategies, although none are currently FDA-approved. We sought to evaluate NK cell infiltration into tumors to develop an improved understanding of which histologies may be most amenable to NK cell-based therapies currently in the developmental pipeline.
Methods
DNA (targeted/whole-exome) and RNA (whole-transcriptome) sequencing was performed from tumors from 45 cancer types (N = 90,916 for all cancers and N = 3365 for prostate cancer) submitted to Caris Life Sciences. NK cell fractions and immune deconvolution were inferred from RNA-seq data using quanTIseq. Real-world overall survival (OS) and treatment status was determined and Kaplan–Meier estimates were calculated. Statistical significance was determined using X2 and Mann–Whitney U tests, with corrections for multiple comparisons where appropriate.
Results
In both a pan-tumor and prostate cancer (PCa) -specific setting, we demonstrated that NK cells represent a substantial proportion of the total cellular infiltrate (median range 2–9% for all tumors). Higher NK cell infiltration was associated with improved OS in 28 of 45 cancer types, including (PCa). NK cell infiltration was negatively correlated with common driver mutations and androgen receptor variants (AR-V7) in primary prostate biopsies, while positively correlated with negative immune regulators. Higher levels of NK cell infiltration were associated with patterns consistent with a compensatory anti-inflammatory response.
Conclusions
Using the largest available dataset to date, we demonstrated that NK cells infiltrate a broad range of tumors, including both primary and metastatic PCa. NK cell infiltration is associated with improved PCa patient outcomes. This study demonstrates that NK cells are capable of trafficking to both primary and metastatic PCa and are a viable option for immunotherapy approaches moving forward. Future development of strategies to enhance tumor-infiltrating NK cell-mediated cytolytic activity and activation while limiting inhibitory pathways will be key.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains a significant burden and a leading cause of death for men in the United States and throughout the world. While there has been significant interest in harnessing the immune system to treat mCRPC [1,2,3], only a small proportion of patients derive a benefit. Currently approved immunotherapies include Sipuleucel-T [4] and pembrolizumab, which is approved for only a narrow subset of patients with tumor mutation burden high features or microsatellite instability (~3–5% of mCRPC patients) [5, 6]. Attempts using other immune checkpoint inhibitors in isolation and in combination have had mixed results in small subsets of patients and remains under exploration [7,8,9,10,11]. There remains an urgent need to develop immune and cellular-based therapies that are both efficacious and applicable to a broader population. Numerous T cell products have been either developed or are under development for mCRPC, including chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells and T cell engagers as reviewed by Zarrabi et al. [12]. Similar products are under development utilizing natural killer (NK) or NK-T cells as the effectors [13,14,15] as previously reviewed by our group [16].
Natural killer cells are cytotoxic lymphocytes which are part of the innate immune system and are capable of destroying malignant and virally-infected cells without the need for priming as is required by T cells [17]. Circulating NK cells comprise between 5 and 20% of lymphocytes and the vast majority are phenotypically-defined by the presence of the surface marker CD56 and absence of CD3 (CD56+/CD3−) with variable CD16 expression depending on developmental stage. Notably, there are subsets of CD56 negative NK cells [18], which are missed by conventional analysis for this marker and has led to the proposal of alternative markers such as NKp46 and NKp30 [19]. NK cells are not antigen-specific [20]; however, NK cells can be redirected with CARs [21, 22] or via immune engagers/monoclonal antibodies to induce antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) [23]. In contrast to T cell-derived immune therapies, NK cell approaches allow for use of allogeneic (off-the-shelf) products, do not cause graft-versus-host disease, and have considerably lower risk for cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) [24]. Due to these key characteristics, development of NK cell products and strategies to overcome dysfunction are of increasing interest [25].
No prior studies have delved into the influence of tumor-intrinsic mutational and gene expression profiles [26] associated with NK cell infiltration and the association with outcomes with standard-of-care (SOC) therapies used for treatment of PCa. Using the largest collection of PCa samples with comprehensive molecular profiling of DNA and RNA (n = 3365) from a database of real-world patient samples, we sought to evaluate whether NK cells infiltrate into PCa, to explore effects of NK cell infiltration on patient outcomes, and to understand tumor features affecting NK cell infiltration.
Materials and methods
Specimens
We retrospectively reviewed molecular alterations and related survival outcomes of N = 90,916 for all cancers and N = 3365 for PCa. Comprehensive molecular profiling, including whole-exome sequencing (WES) and whole transcriptome sequencing (WTS), was performed in a CLIA/CAP/ISO15189 certified clinical laboratory (Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ, USA) [27]. This study was conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, Belmont Report, and U.S. Common Rule. In keeping with 45 CFR 46.101(b)(4), this study was performed by using retrospective and deidentified clinical data. Therefore, this study was considered institutional review board exempt, and no patient consent was necessary.
Survival analysis
Real-world evidence (RWE) outcomes were assessed from insurance claims data. RWE overall survival (OS) was defined as time of treatment initiation date to either death or last contact in the insurance claims repository. As previously reported, patient death was assumed for any patient without a claim for more than 100 days, which holds true for more than 95% of patients with a recorded death in the NDI (National Death Index). Cox proportional hazard ratios were calculated for each comparison group and significance was determined as p values of <0.05 using the log-rank statistic.
DNA Next-generation sequencing (NGS)
Direct sequence analysis was conducted on genomic DNA isolated from microdissected, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor samples using the NextSeq platform (Illumina, Inc., San Diego, CA) for 592 cancer-relevant genes [28] or the Illumina Novaseq 6000 platform for whole exome sequencing (WES). For WES, a hybrid pulldown of baits designed to enrich for 720 clinically relevant genes at high coverage and high read-depth was used, along with another panel designed to enrich for an additional >20k genes at a lower depth and a 500 Mb SNP backbone panel (Agilent Technologies) to help with gene amplification/deletion detection as previously described [27].
RNA whole transcriptome sequencing (WTS)
Qiagen RNA FFPE tissue extraction kit was used for extraction. RNA quality and quantity were determined using the Agilent TapeStation (Agilent TapeStation Laptop, RRID:SCR_019547). Biotinylated RNA baits were hybridized to the synthesized and purified cDNA targets, and the bait–target complexes were amplified in a post-capture PCR reaction. The Illumina NovaSeq 6500 was used to sequence the whole transcriptome from patients to an average of 60 M reads. Raw data was demultiplexed by the Illumina Dragen BioIT accelerator, trimmed, counted, removed of PCR-duplicates, and aligned to human reference genome hg19 by the STAR aligner. For transcription counting, transcripts per million molecules were generated using the Salmon expression [27].
Immune cell infiltration
To examine the associations with NK cells in PCa patients, NK cell tumor infiltration was inferred using quanTIseq, a computational method for quantifying immune cell fractions by deconvolution of bulk RNA-seq data [29]. NK cell infiltration was assessed in 90,916 tumor biopsies across 45 distinct tumor types, including 3365 PCa patients.
Statistical analyses
Statistical significance was determined using X2 and Mann–Whitney U tests with corrections for multiple comparisons (Benjamini-Hochberg) where appropriate.
Results
Characterization of NK cell fractions in PCa
NK cell infiltration was assessed in 90,916 tumor biopsies across 45 distinct tumor types, including 3,365 PCa patients. Median NK cell fraction by tumor type ranged from a high of 7–9% (medulloblastoma and gliomas) to a low of 2% (thyroid and thymic cancers), with a pan-cancer median of 3.50% (95% CI 3.49–3.51%) (Fig. 1A). Based on these measurements, PCa had the 11th highest median NK cell fraction among the 45 cancer types examined (4.9%, 95% CI 4.8–5.0%). Given that prostate tumors have distinct outcomes and molecular characteristics based on disease site, we also compared the distribution of NK cell fractions between PCa biopsies from prostate, and distant metastatic sites (Fig. 1B). In tumors from metastatic PCa (mPCa) sites, the NK cell fractions were lower (4.1%, 95% CI 4.0–4.2%) compared to prostate biopsy samples. We also observed notable NK cell fractions upon partitioning the samples into common metastatic sites including the liver, bone, lymph node, lung, and bladder (Fig. 1C). Available demographic data for groups are included in Table S1.
NK cell profiles are associated with overall clinical outcomes and treatment regimen
Within each cancer type, we stratified samples into NK cell-low and -high subgroups (<50th vs >50th percentile, respectively). For 28 of 45 cancer types that we examined, high levels of NK cell fractions were associated with improved OS (HR for individual tumor types ranging from 0.28–0.84, p < 0.05), while 16 of 45 cancer types (including low-grade glioma, GIST, and thyroid cancers) had HR < 1.0 (range from 0.264–0.997) with 95% CI crossing 1.0 (Fig. 2A). Among all PCa patients, NK cell-high tumors were associated with significantly improved OS (Fig. 2B, HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.57–0.71, p < 0.00001). We further stratified the PCa patients by NK cell fraction quartiles to assess more granular associations with clinical outcomes. Increased NK cell fractions were associated with improved OS in PCa patients who had undergone primary prostate biopsy (Fig. 2C). However, NK cell infiltrates were not associated with statistically significant differences in outcomes regardless of metastatic biopsy site (Fig. 2D).
Interestingly, biopsies derived from the prostate with high NK fractions exhibited improved outcomes when treated with ADT (p < 0.0001), there was no significant difference in OS from the start of treatment among patients with metastatic biopsy samples (Fig. S1A), but no association with docetaxel (Fig. S1B). Similar to outcomes of patients treated with ADT, we observed that high levels of NK cell infiltrates were significantly associated with anti-PD(L)1 response (p = 0.04) in samples derived from the prostate (Fig. S1C).
The interaction of NK cell profiles with driver mutations in PCa
To understand how NK cells may be associated with specific drivers or pathogenic mutations in PCa, we compared the mutation and mRNA expression profiles of NK cell-low (Q1) and -high (Q4) populations. Recurrent genomic alterations in RB1, TP53, and PTEN are associated with advanced metastatic PCa and poor prognosis [30,31,32]. For both prostate and metastatic biopsies, we observed significantly lower RB1, TP53, and PTEN mutation frequencies in NK cell-high tumors relative to NK-low tumors (Fig. 3A). AR alterations, including genomic alterations, aberrant expression of splice variants (e.g. AR-V7), and genes that regulate AR signaling are key drivers of advanced PCa and poor hormonal responsivenness [30,31,32]. Interestingly, we found that TMPRSS2-ERG fusions were significantly more common in NK cell-high tumors from both the prostate, but not metastatic biopsies. AR-V7 expression was significantly decreased in NK cell-high tumors from prostate biopsies (Fig. 3B). Examining the expression of AR and AR-related signaling genes, we found that key targets such as KLK2, KLK3, STEAP2, and FOXA1 demonstrated increased expression in NK-high samples even without increases in AR expression (Fig. 3C). Altogether, while AR transcriptional targets indicate activated AR signaling in NK cell high tumors, the activity was not consistently associated with higher levels of AR or AR-V7.
To analyze for effects in other signaling pathways, we conducted Gene Set Enrichment Anlaysis (GSEA) on the transcription profiles of the tumors either from the prostate, or metastatic sites [33]. Overall, there were no Hallmark pathways enriched in the NK cell high samples, regardless of whether the sample was obtained from the prostate or a metastatic site. However, several pathways were enriched in the NK cell low samples, which was reflected in the negative Normalized Enrichment Scores (NES) (Table S2). We additionally included the differential expression profiles in Table S3. Of specific pathways that have been implicated in immune or tumor cell regulation, there was not enrichment of pathways that reflect cell cycle regulation, apoptosis, senescence, or proliferation. We found that the epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) signature had a negative NES, and thus was enriched in NK low samples.
NK cell abundance and current immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) targets
To determine whether NK cell infiltrates are associated with these immunomodulatory receptors, we examined the expression levels of pro- and anti-inflammatory immune regulators in NK-high and -low prostate and metastatic PCa tumors (Fig. 4). In biopsies from the prostate, high NK cell infiltration was associated with a significant increase in all analyzed target genes, including T cell-expressed costimulatory marker CD28 and professional antigen presenting cell-expressed second signals CD40 and CD80. There was concurrent and significantly increased expression of the immune checkpoint pathway markers HAVCR2 (TIM-3), CTLA-4, PDCD1 (PD-1), PDCD1LG2 (PD-L1), LAG3, and TIGIT, demonstrating increased immune suppressive signaling from both the tumor and immune cell populations. Metastatic biopsy samples had increased expression of PD-L1, CD28, and LAG3 (Fig. 4).
Interaction with other immune cells and chemokines
We next characterized the TME composition of NK cell-high and -low samples. Primary prostate tumors with high NK cells had significantly increased B cell and M2 macrophage infiltration (1.4-fold increase, p-value < 0.0001), while neutrophil infiltration was significantly decreased compared to NK cell-low tumors (2.8-fold decrease, p-value < 0.0001) (Fig. 5). In PCa tumors from metastatic sites, there were similar increases in B cell and M2 macrophage counts in NK cell-high tumors (1.4-fold increase, q < 0.0001 for both) (Fig. 5). Neutrophil infiltration was decreased in metastatic NK cell-high tumors as well, but to a lesser extent than tumors from the prostate (2.2-fold decrease, q < 0.0001) (Fig. 5). NK cell-high tumors additionally had significant increases in myeloid dendritic cell infiltration in both primary PCa (10.87-fold increase, q < 0.0001) and metastatic biopsy samples (1.38-fold increase, p-value < 0.0001) (Fig. 5). Although the effects were greater in the prosatate samples, both NK cell-high PCa tumors from the prostate and metastatic sites exhibited significant association with the expression of a consistent set of chemokines including CCL19 and CCL6 (Fig. S2). CX3CL1 and CXCL3 were increased in primary prostate biopsies only (Fig. S2).
Discussion
In this study we present the largest compilation to our knowledge of whole exome and whole transcriptome analyses from PCa patients, consisting of 3365 PCa specimens. The prior largest datasets analyzed from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) contained 497 [34] and 537 [35] PCa samples, respectively. It is important to note that the vast majority of cancer samples within TCGA are pre-treatment primary prostate tumors, while our cohort is a mix of pre- and on-treatment samples obtained from the prostate and prevalent metastatic sites such as the liver and bone [36]. Within PCa itself, we demonstrated robust infiltration of NK cell populations of approximately 5% of the total cell number. We further showed that PCa was among the top tumor types in terms of NK cell infiltration, pointing towards the possibility that NK cell therapies may be more useful than previously thought for this cancer type. Due to differences in output (percent of total cells [35] and cell score [34]), it is difficult to make direct comparisons between our study and those previously published.
When we further stratified OS with the biopsy site, the upper quartile of NK cell infiltration was associated with statistically significant prolongation of survival for prostatic samples. No survival benefit was noted in patients from whom metastasic samples were sequenced. We then sought to evaluate whether the specific treatment regimen utilized had an effect upon overall survival based on quartiles of NK cell infiltration and biopsy site. Survival was improved in patients with upper quartile NK cell infiltration who underwent prostate biopsy and treatment with ADT. Note that we were not able to further stratify based on receipt of novel androgen receptor targeting (ART) versus conventional ADT.
Significantly reduced NK cell infiltration was associated with the presence of known PCa driver mutations PTEN, RB1, or TP53 in primary biopsy samples. We then focused on pathognomonic mutations associated with PCa and discovered that AR-V7 variants were more frequently associated with lower NK cell infiltration, while good-prognosis TMPRSS2-ERG fusions [37,38,39,40] were associated with increased NK cell infiltration in primary prostate samples. Whether these associations with NK cell infiltration were driven by better prognosis at baseline or if there is a role for ADT in NK cell function and infiltration remain to be determined.
In both primary prostate and metastatic biopsies, markers of immune stimulation/co-stimulation (CD28) and exhaustion (LAG3 and PD-L1) were significantly increased in NK cell-high samples. While our evidence thus far points towards improved survival of patients with increased NK cell function, our analysis of these markers demonstrates that the NK cells that are infiltrating into the prostate are likely either exhausted or become quickly exhausted, further limiting their ability to destroy prostate cancer cells that they encounter. Of particular interest is the marked reduction in immunosuppressive neutrophils, M2 macrophages, and regulatory T cells, which is consistent with a compensatory regulatory mechanism counteracting increased inflammation induced by infiltrating NK cells [41,42,43]. Interestingly, CD4 and CD8 populations were not significantly associated with differences in NK cell infiltration.
Finally, we sought to determine possible differences in chemokines that may be affecting NK cell infiltration into prostate tissue. Across both primary prostate and metastatic biopsies, CCL19 and CXCL6 were elevated in NK cell-high samples, while CCL5, CXCL1 and CX3CL1 were increased only in primary prostate biopsies. CCL19 is primarily a chemoattractant for activated CD56bright NK cells and does not induce cytotoxicity [44]. CCL5 is typically associated with dendritic, T, and resting NK cell chemotaxis while augmenting NK cell cytolytic activity [44]. This is in contrast to resting CD56dim NK cells which typically lack CC family chemokine receptors and would not be affected by CCL5 [44]. CCL5 is a particularly important factor for stimulation of NK cell cytolytic activity and is produced by activated NK cells. CXCL1 is bound by CXCR2 and highly produced by neutrophils, while promoting trafficking of immune suppressive myeloid cells [45]. Our associations strongly support the presence of chemokines that both attract NK cells to the PCa TME and induce NK activation.
There are limitations to our study given the nature of the samples and bulk RNA sequencing methods used. While tissues were microdissected to enrich for tumor tissue, we are limited in describing the immune landscape of these tumor samples due to the use of bulk sequencing rather than single-cell (sc) RNA sequencing, although scRNA datasets remain somewhat limited in the number of samples analyzed [46, 47]. Thus, the immune populations in this study are inferred based on gene expression signatures of the whole microdissected sample rather than from individual cells. Different methods for immune cell deconvolution of RNA-seq data have been utilized, with CIBERSORT [48] being the most common method used in comparable studies and quanTIseq being used in ours [29]. quanTIseq (quantification of the Tumor Immune contexture from human immune RNA-seq data) is a computational method that determines the abolute fractions of immune cells using unique bulk gene expression signatures based on 10 distinct immune cell types [29]. Altought this is used on bulk WTS data, quanTIseq outputs have been validated compared to flow cytometry, immunohistochemistry, and multiple publicly available data sets [29]. Direct comparisons between data produced from these two analytic tools (CIBERSORT versus quanTIseq) are difficult, but Finotello et al. [49] did compare various immune deconvolution strategies to gold-standard FACS and immunohistochemistry. That study demonstrated an overall strong correlation between bulk RNA-seq data analyzed with immune deconvolution strategies and gold-standard analysis with typical r-values of >0.68 for macrophages/monocytes, NK cells and total CD4 + T cells [49].
Due to the nature of the biopsies collected, it is not possible to make inferences regarding associations with localized versus metastatic disease as well or include clinical features such as Gleason score due to the information included with our dataset, limiting further correlative analyses. In particular, prostate biopsies are not necessarily solely from patients with localized disease as the prostate may be biopsied even in metastatic cases; however, we can make inferences regarding metastatic disease alone.
Conclusions
We present here the largest study analyzing the immune environment and associated molecular features associated with NK cell infiltration in prostate adenocarcinoma, strongly supporting further development of NK cell therapies to treat prostate cancers. Strategies to reduce immune populations that suppress cytotoxic NK cells from infiltrating prostate cancer tissue are needed along with molecular markers or engagers to both promote NK cell infiltration and prevent NK cell exhaustion. These results point to the potential promise of NK cell therapies, including bi- and tri-specific immune engager molecules and CAR-NK, iNK-T therapies for the treatment of PCa.
Data availability
The datasets analyzed during the current study are not publicly available but can be made available upon reasonable request. The deidentified sequencing data are owned by Caris Life Sciences, and qualified researchers can apply for access by contacting Caris Life Sciences and signing a data usage agreement.
References
Cha H-R, Lee JH, Ponnazhagan S. Revisiting immunotherapy: a focus on prostate cancer. Cancer Res. 2020;80:1615–23.
Dorff TB, Narayan V, Forman SJ, Zang PD, Fraietta JA, June CH, et al. Novel redirected T–cell immunotherapies for advanced prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2021;28:576–84.
Antonarakis ES, Park SH, Goh JC, Shin SJ, Lee JL, Mehra N, et al. Pembrolizumab plus olaparib for patients with previously treated and biomarker-unselected metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: the randomized, open-label, phase III KEYLYNK-010 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:3839.
Kantoff PW, Higano CS, Shore ND, Berger ER, Small EJ, Penson DF, et al. Sipuleucel-T immunotherapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer. N. Engl J Med. 2010;363:411–22.
Hansen A, Massard C, Ott P, Haas N, Lopez J, Ejadi S, et al. Pembrolizumab for advanced prostate adenocarcinoma: findings of the KEYNOTE-028 study. Ann Oncol. 2018;29:1807–13.
Antonarakis ES, Piulats JM, Gross-Goupil M, Goh J, Ojamaa K, Hoimes CJ, et al. Pembrolizumab for treatment-refractory metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: multicohort, open-label phase II KEYNOTE-199 study. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38:395.
Shenderov E, Boudadi K, Fu W, Wang H, Sullivan R, Jordan A, et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab, with or without enzalutamide, in AR-V7-expressing metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A phase-2 nonrandomized clinical trial. Prostate. 2021;81:326–38.
Sharma P, Pachynski RK, Narayan V, Flechon A, Gravis G, Galsky MD, et al. Initial results from a phase II study of nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC; CheckMate 650). J Clin Oncol. 2019;37. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2019.37.7_suppl.142
Pachynski RK, Retz M, Goh JC, Burotto M, Gravis G, Castellano D, et al. CheckMate 9KD cohort A1 final analysis: Nivolumab (NIVO) + rucaparib for post-chemotherapy (CT) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:5044–44.
Fizazi K, González Mella P, Castellano D, Minatta JN, Rezazadeh A, Shaffer DR, et al. CheckMate 9KD Arm B final analysis: Efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus docetaxel for chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2021;39. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2021.39.6_suppl.12
Evan YY, Kolinsky MP, Berry WR, Retz M, Mourey L, Piulats JM, et al. Pembrolizumab plus docetaxel and prednisone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: long-term results from the phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 cohort B study. Eur Urol. 2022;82:22–30.
Zarrabi KK, Narayan V, Mille PJ, Zibelman MR, Miron B, Bashir B, et al. Bispecific PSMA antibodies and CAR-T in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Ther Adv Urol. 2023;15:17562872231182219.
Miller J, Zorko N, Merino A, Phung G, Khaw M, Howard P, et al. 755P B7H3-targeted tri-specific killer engagers deliver IL-15 to NK cells but not T-cells, and specifically target solid tumors as a pan-tumor antigen strategy mediated through NK cells. Ann Oncol. 2022;33:S889.
Phung SK, Soignier Y, Zorko N, Nelson T, Walker J, Kennedy PP, et al. 1204 Enhancing NK cell function in the ‘cold’tumor microenvironment of prostate cancer with a novel tri-specific Killer Engager against prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA). J Immuno ther Cancer. 2022;10. https://doi.org/10.1136/jitc-2022-SITC2022.120.
Carneiro B, Garmezy B, Hamm JT, Sanborn RE, Wise-Draper T, Khoueiry AE-, et al. Abstract CT275: Phase 1 clinical update of allogeneic invariant natural killer T cells (iNKTs), agenT-797, alone or in combination with pembrolizumab or nivolumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. Cancer Res. 2023;83:CT275–CT.
Zorko NA, Ryan CJ. Novel immune engagers and cellular therapies for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: do we take a BiTe or ride BiKEs, TriKEs, and CARs? Prostate Cancer P D. 2021;24:986–96.
Kannan GS, Aquino-Lopez A, Lee DA. Natural killer cells in malignant hematology: a primer for the non-immunologist. Blood Rev. 2017;31:1–10.
Björkström NK, Ljunggren H-G, Sandberg JK. CD56 negative NK cells: origin, function, and role in chronic viral disease. Trends Immunol. 2010;31:401–6.
Barrow AD, Martin CJ, Colonna M. The natural cytotoxicity receptors in health and disease. Front Immunol. 2019;10:909.
Vivier E, Tomasello E, Baratin M, Walzer T, Ugolini S. Functions of natural killer cells. Nat Immunol. 2008;9:503–10.
Liu E, Marin D, Banerjee P, Macapinlac HA, Thompson P, Basar R, et al. Use of CAR-transduced natural killer cells in CD19-positive lymphoid tumors. N. Engl J Med. 2020;382:545–53.
Xie G, Dong H, Liang Y, Ham JD, Rizwan R, Chen J. CAR-NK cells: a promising cellular immunotherapy for cancer. EBioMedicine. 2020;59:102975.
Romain G, Senyukov V, Rey-Villamizar N, Merouane A, Kelton W, Liadi I, et al. Antibody Fc engineering improves frequency and promotes kinetic boosting of serial killing mediated by NK cells. Blood, J Am Soc Hematol. 2014;124:3241–9.
Berrien-Elliott MM, Jacobs MT, Fehniger TA. Allogeneic natural killer cell therapy. Blood. 2023;141:856–68.
Myers JA, Miller JS. Exploring the NK cell platform for cancer immunotherapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2021;18:85–100.
Wang C, Zhang Y, Gao W-Q. The evolving role of immune cells in prostate cancer. Cancer Lett. 2022;525:9–21.
Nazha B, Zhuang T, Wu S, Brown JT, Magee D, Carthon BC, et al. Comprehensive genomic profiling of penile squamous cell carcinoma and the impact of human papillomavirus status on immune-checkpoint inhibitor-related biomarkers. Cancer. 2023;129:3884–93.
Testing Menu [Internet]. Caris Life Sciences. 2024 [cited 2024 Jan 2]. Available from: https://www.carislifesciences.com/products-and-services/molecular-profiling/testing-menu/
Finotello F, Mayer C, Plattner C, Laschober G, Rieder D, Hackl H, et al. Molecular and pharmacological modulators of the tumor immune contexture revealed by deconvolution of RNA-seq data. Genome Med. 2019;11:34.
Abida W, Cyrta J, Heller G, Prandi D, Armenia J, Coleman I, et al. Genomic correlates of clinical outcome in advanced prostate cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2019;116:11428–36.
Robinson D, Van Allen EM, Wu YM, Schultz N, Lonigro RJ, Mosquera JM, et al. Integrative clinical genomics of advanced prostate cancer. Cell. 2015;161:1215–28.
Quigley DA, Dang HX, Zhao SG, Lloyd P, Aggarwal R, Alumkal JJ, et al. Genomic hallmarks and structural variation in metastatic prostate cancer. Cell. 2018;174:758–69 e9.
Subramanian A, Tamayo P, Mootha VK, Mukherjee S, Ebert BL, Gillette MA, et al. Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2005;102:15545–50.
Cózar B, Greppi M, Carpentier S, Narni-Mancinelli E, Chiossone L, Vivier E. Tumor-infiltrating natural killer cells. Cancer Discov. 2021;11:34–44.
Wu Z, Chen H, Luo W, Zhang H, Li G, Zeng F, et al. The landscape of immune cells infiltrating in prostate cancer. Front Oncol. 2020;10:517637.
Liu J, Lichtenberg T, Hoadley KA, Poisson LM, Lazar AJ, Cherniack AD, et al. An integrated TCGA pan-cancer clinical data resource to drive high-quality survival outcome analytics. Cell 2018;173:400–16.e11.
Dal Pra A, Lalonde E, Sykes J, Warde F, Ishkanian A, Meng A, et al. TMPRSS2-ERG status is not prognostic following prostate cancer radiotherapy: implications for fusion status and DSB repair. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19:5202–9.
Kulda V, Topolcan O, Kucera R, Kripnerova M, Srbecka K, Hora M, et al. Prognostic significance of TMPRSS2-ERG fusion gene in prostate cancer. Anticancer Res. 2016;36:4787–93.
Nam R, Sugar L, Yang W, Srivastava S, Klotz L, Yang L, et al. Expression of the TMPRSS2: ERG fusion gene predicts cancer recurrence after surgery for localised prostate cancer. Br J cancer. 2007;97:1690–5.
Semaan L, Mander N, Cher ML, Chinni SR. TMPRSS2-ERG fusions confer efficacy of enzalutamide in an in vivo bone tumor growth model. BMC cancer. 2019;19:1–10.
Obradovic AZ, Dallos MC, Zahurak ML, Partin AW, Schaeffer EM, Ross AE, et al. T-Cell infiltration and adaptive treg resistance in response to androgen deprivation with or without vaccination in localized prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2020;26:3182–92.
Erlandsson A, Carlsson J, Lundholm M, Fält A, Andersson SO, Andrén O, et al. M2 macrophages and regulatory T cells in lethal prostate cancer. Prostate. 2019;79:363–9.
Spiegel A, Brooks MW, Houshyar S, Reinhardt F, Ardolino M, Fessler E, et al. Neutrophils suppress intraluminal NK cell–mediated tumor cell clearance and enhance extravasation of disseminated carcinoma cells. Cancer Discov. 2016;6:630–49.
Robertson MJ. Role of chemokines in the biology of natural killer cells. J Leukoc Biol. 2002;71:173–83.
Susek KH, Karvouni M, Alici E, Lundqvist A. The role of CXC chemokine receptors 1–4 on immune cells in the tumor microenvironment. Front Immunol. 2018;9:2159.
Tuong ZK, Loudon KW, Berry B, Richoz N, Jones J, Tan X, et al. Resolving the immune landscape of human prostate at a single-cell level in health and cancer. Cell Rep. 2021;37:110132.
Hirz T, Mei S, Sarkar H, Kfoury Y, Wu S, Verhoeven BM, et al. Dissecting the immune suppressive human prostate tumor microenvironment via integrated single-cell and spatial transcriptomic analyses. Nat Commun. 2023;14:663.
Newman AM, Liu CL, Green MR, Gentles AJ, Feng W, Xu Y, et al. Robust enumeration of cell subsets from tissue expression profiles. Nat methods. 2015;12:453–7.
Sturm G, Finotello F, Petitprez F, Zhang JD, Baumbach J, Fridman WH, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of transcriptome-based cell-type quantification methods for immuno-oncology. Bioinformatics. 2019;35:i436–i45.
Funding
This work was funded by Caris Life Sciences and the Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, University of Minnesota. NAZ was supported by a Department of Defense Early Investigator Award (W81XWH-22-1-0242), a 2022 Prostate Cancer Foundation Young Investigator Award (22YOUN08), the University of Minnesota Institute for Prostate and Urologic Cancers Philanthropic Fund, and The Randy Shaver Community Cancer Fund. JRL is supported by NIH MSTP grant T32 GM008244 and the American Society of Hematology (ASH) Medical Student Minority Award. MF is supported by Department of Defense Award W81XWH-20-1-0659. JSM is supported by NCI grants R35 CA283892 and P01 CA111412. ESA is partially supported by NCI grant P30 CA077598.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
NAZ, AM, JHH and EAS conceptulizated and designed the study, analyzed data, drafted/revised manuscript, and approved of final manuscript. AE designed the study, acquired data, analyzed data, drafted/revised manuscript, and approved of final manuscript. SK, JRR, ATA, MF, MS, PB, YZ, VN, MNS, KKZ, MAB, MR, GS, WSE, EIH, DSBH, CH, JSM interpreted results, drafted/revised manuscript, and approved of final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
Nicholas Zorko reports paid travel from Caris Life Sciences and Telix Pharmaceuticals. Andrew Elliott, Milan Radovich, George Sledge, and Chadhi Nabhan are employees of Caris Life Sciences. Yousef Zakharia reports personal fees (Advisory Board) from Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Eisai, Exelixis, Genzyme Corporation, Pfizer. Vivek Narayan reports grants from Janssen, Merck, Regeneron, Pfizer, and Bristol Myers Squibb; and personal fees from Janssen, Merck, Regeneron, Pfizer, Exelixis, AstraZeneca, Myovant, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Mark N. Stein serves in a consulting or advisory role for Bristol-Myers Squibb/Medarex; Exelixis; Exelixis; Janssen Oncology; Merck Sharp & Dohme; Vaccitech; Xencor and receives research funding from Advaxis (Inst); AstraZeneca (Inst); Bellicum Pharmaceuticals; Bicycle Therapeutics (Inst); Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst); Exelixis (Inst); Genocea Biosciences (Inst); Harpoon (Inst); Janssen Oncology (Inst); Lilly (Inst); Medivation/Astellas (Inst); Merck Sharp & Dohme (Inst); Nektar (Inst); Oncoceutics (Inst); Regeneron (Inst); Seagen (Inst); Suzhou Kintor Pharmaceuticals (Inst); Tmunity Therapeutics, Inc. (Inst); Xencor (Inst). Kevin K. Zarrabi reports advising/consulting fees from Exelixis, Esai. Akash Patniak reports Consultancy/Advisory Board for Janssen, Exelixis, Jounce Therapeutics, BostonGene. Grant/Research support from BMS. Clinical Trial Support from BMS, Clovis Oncology, Progenics, Janssen, Laekna, Astrazeneca, Xencor, and Zenith. Honoraria from Exelixis, Janssen, Roche, Clovis Oncology, Merck, Prime, Curio. M.A. Bilen has acted as a paid consultant for and/or as a member of the advisory boards of Exelixis, Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Calithera Biosciences, Genomic Health, Nektar, EMD Serono, SeaGen, and Sanofi and has received grants to his institution from Merck, Xencor, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech/Roche, SeaGen, Incyte, Nektar, AstraZeneca, Tricon Pharmaceuticals, Genome & Company, AAA, Peloton Therapeutics, and Pfizer for work performed as outside of the current study. Elisabeth I. Heath – Advisory/Consulting: Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Sanofi; Steering Committee: Janssen; Honararia/Paid Travel: Astellas, Bayer, Caris, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics; Speaker’s Bureau: Sanofi; Research Support: Astellas, Arvinas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BioXcel, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Calibr, Calithera, Caris, Corcept, Corvis, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Exelixis, Five Prime, Fortis, GlaxoSmithKline, Gilead Sciences, Harpoon, Hoffman-La Roche, Infinity, iTeos, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck, Mirati, Modra, Novartis, Oncolys, Peloton, Pfizer, Pharmacyclics, POINT Biopharma, Seattle Genetics. Emmanuel S. Antonarakis reports grants and personal fees from Janssen, Sanofi, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Curium, Novartis, Merck, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Clovis, and Orion; and personal fees from Astellas, Amgen, Blue Earth, Exact Sciences, Invitae, Eli Lilly, and Foundation Medicine; in addition, he has an issued patent for an AR-V7 biomarker technology that is licensed to Qiagen. The remaining authors have no relevant discolsures or conflicts of interest to declare.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Zorko, N.A., Makovec, A., Elliott, A. et al. Natural Killer Cell Infiltration in Prostate Cancers Predict Improved Patient Outcomes. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-024-00797-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-024-00797-0