Supplemental Material

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Tumor CompartmentStromal Compartment mask C D EF A B Supplemental Fig 1. Epithelial and stromal PD-L1 expression. AQUA scores for PD-L1 in the epithelium.
Advertisements

TRAB/2FTRAB/2O A Normal Breast Epithelium Supplemental Figure 1 iii iii iv TRAB/2FTRAB/2O GFs B M.W. None=0
Age, SexHistologyPredominant subtype Pathological stage EGFR mutation CAF1 61, MaleAdenocarcinoma Solid predominant pT3N2M0 L858R CAF2 71, MaleAdenocarcinoma.
Ki-67 index cutoff value of 1% is a valuable prognostic biomarker for pulmonary carcinoids based on this large cohort. Our data also provide strong evidence.
Supplementary Table S1. Patient demographics of the RRBS discovery set. Characteristics RRBS discovery set TotalIDH1/2 WT IDH1 MUT No. of Patients
until tumour progression until tumour progression
Table S1. CD44 expression and clinicopathologic characteristics Cases (n=54) CD44 protein expression P value* Negativ e WeakStrong (n=8)(n=23) Age
Clinicopathologic Features of EML4-ALK Mutant Lung Cancer Shaw AT et al. ASCO 2009; Abstract (Poster)
Personalized medicine in lung cancer R4 김승민. Personalized Medicine in Lung Cancer patients with specific types and stages of cancer should be treated.
Erlotinib Therapy in Non Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients - Survival of Patients on Reduced Erlotinib Doses M. Pesek 1, J. Krejci 1, J. Skrickova 2, P.
Mok TS, Wu SL, Thongprasert S, et al. Gefitinib or carboplatin-paclitaxel in pulmonary adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2009;361: Gefitinib Superior.
Date of download: 6/23/2016 Copyright © 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. From: Effect of Selumetinib vs Chemotherapy on Progression-Free.
Pooled analysis of clinical outcomes in studies of patients with EGFR mutations treated with either an EGFR TKI or chemotherapy Luis Paz-Ares 1, Denis.
1 LUX-Lung 3 clinical trial ECOG=Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Sequist LV et al. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(27): Treatment-naïve Advanced NSCLC.
Lung Cancer in Never-Smokers from the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre 1 Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada;
D. Cortinovis S.C. Oncologia Medica H S. Gerardo Monza L’immunoterapia per pochi selezionati pazienti Camogli, 29 apr 2016 Camogli, 29 apr 2016.
EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations
Belani CP et al. ASCO 2009; Abstract CRA8000. (Oral Presentation)
Table S1: Antibodies Used for Flow Cytometric Analysis
CCO Independent Conference Coverage
LUX-Lung 3 clinical trial
Immune Oncology Drugs: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing?
Rosell R et al. Proc ASCO 2011;Abstract 7503.
Fig 1A. Patient enrollment flow chart
Copyright © 2009 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Intervista a Federico Cappuzzo
Prognosis of younger patients in non-small cell lung cancer
Intervista a Lucio Crinò
Patient Case 1 Patient Case 1: PET/CT Scan.
Covariate AD N (%) SCC N (%) p-values Sex 63/63 96/ M
Unità Clinica di Diagnostica Istopatologica e Molecolare
until tumour progression until tumour progression
“Analyses of Pre-therapy Peripheral Immunoscore and Response to
The New Taxonomy of Metastatic NSCLC and Physician Treatment Based on Pathologic and Molecular Characteristics The New Taxonomy of Metastatic Non-Small.
EGFR-GRB2 Protein Colocalization Is a Prognostic Factor Unrelated to Overall EGFR Expression or EGFR Mutation in Lung Adenocarcinoma  Maria I. Toki, MD,
New Patient Journeys in Non-small cell lung cancer
Immunotherapy Combinations for Lung Cancers
A. B. C. H1975 xenografts: long-term treatment
Updates in Lung Cancer: Insights From Vienna
Introduction. For Pulmonologists by Pulmonologists: Diagnosis of NSCLC in an Age of Biomarkers.
EGFR Inhibitors in Advanced NSCLC: Who, When, and Why?
Figure 4 Example of a patients with CUP
EVALUATE EFFECTIVENESS OF GEFIITINIB IN FIRST LINE TREATIMENT AVANCED NSCLC PATIENTS WITH EGFR MUTATION BS TRẦN THỊ CHUNG, Ths. NGUYỄN THỊ OANH Oncology.
Supplemental Figure S1 B A C D.
EGFR Molecular Profiling in Advanced NSCLC: A Prospective Phase II Study in Molecularly/Clinically Selected Patients Pretreated with Chemotherapy  Michele.
Nicolas Jacquelot, María Paula Roberti, David P
The Unique Characteristics of MET Exon 14 Mutation in Chinese Patients with NSCLC  Si-Yang Liu, MD, Lan-Ying Gou, MD, An-Na Li, MD, Na-Na Lou, MMed, Hong-Fei.
What is the best frontline regimen for CLL patients
Oncologia Polmonare – AOU S. Luigi Gonzaga, Orbassano (To)
Progress of the NSCLC Revolution
TBP 200 LC2/ad MGH134 MGH134 CCDC6-RET MGH134 EV CCDC6-RET PC9
EGFR TKIs plus WBRT Demonstrated No Survival Benefit Other Than That of TKIs Alone in Patients with NSCLC and EGFR Mutation and Brain Metastases  Tao.
Jamie A. Saxon, PhD, Lynette M. Sholl, MD, Pasi A. Jänne, MD, PhD 
Jessica J. Lin, MD, Stephanie Cardarella, MD, Christine A
Final Overall Survival Results from a Phase III, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Parallel-Group Study of Gefitinib Versus Placebo as Maintenance Therapy.
High CDK6 expression predicts poor prognosis in EOC patients
Supplementary Table S2 Correlation between pre-operative plasma miR-451 or miR-486 concentrations and clinicopathologic features in gastric cancer patients.
Finding the Right Sequence in Patients With EGFR-Mutated NSCLC
Esteller, New England Journal of Medicine, 2008
What's on the Horizon in the Management of EGFR-Mutated Lung Cancer?
A user's perspective on GeoMxTM digital spatial profiling
Figure S1. A. B. Figure S1. Kaplan-Meier curve of progression-free survival by treatment group in soluble heregulin (HRG)-high population (A) and soluble.
Patients’ characteristics
MHC proteins confer differential sensitivity to CTLA-4 and PD-1 blockade in untreated metastatic melanoma by Scott J. Rodig, Daniel Gusenleitner, Donald.
A user's perspective on GeoMxTM digital spatial profiling
DO NOT POST #4054 Gene expression Difference (GED) Revealed Immune Function Gene UP- or Down-regulation as Tumor-associated Inflammatory Cell (TAIC) Infiltration.
median of follow-up (month)
* OS >3yr with No Next Line * * * * *
Presentation transcript:

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Figure Legends Table S1: Immune marker panels used in NanoString DSP. CAB# is custom antibody ID, which uniquely identifies this reagent. Table S2: Clinicopathological characteristics of EGFR TKI treated NSCLC patients in Yale cohort A. Table S3: Clinicopathological characteristics of NSCLC patients in Yale cohort B. Table S4: Clinicopathological characteristics of ICIs treated melanoma patients in Yale cohort C. Table S5: Multivariate analysis of the predictive markers for PFS in Yale melanoma ICIs treated cohort C. Table S6: Multivariate analysis of the predictive markers for OS in Yale melanoma ICIs treated cohort C.   Figure S1: Representative images of NanoString DSP and AQUA compartment selection in NSCLC. The epithelial compartment was defined by cytokeratin positivity (green) which allowed the measurement of targets by both assays in the same compartment. Stroma was defined by cytokeratin negative DNA positive regions (purple). Figure S2: NanoString DSP reproducibility across different cores in ITx melanoma cohort C. (A) CD8 reproducibility across 2 cores (B) CD68 reproducibility across 2 cores Figure S3: NanoString DSP sequential compartment assignment. CD8 counts by NanoString DSP in tumor, CD68+ and CD45+ compartment. Compartment definition accuracy is affected by the order of barcode collection from each compartment. In overlapping compartments, measurement of a marker can be assigned to only one compartment.

Table S1 Table S2 Table S3 Yale NSCLC Cohort A Yale NSCLC Cohort B   n=43 % Age <70 31 72.1 ≥70 12 27.9 Sex Female 26 60.5 Male 17 39.5 Smoking history Never smoker 13 30.2 Former/ Current smoker 30 69.8 Stage I/II III/IV Histology ADC 41 95.3 SCC 2 4.7 EGFR mutation Yes 36 83.7 Exon 18 3 7.0 Exon 19 16 37.2 Exon 20 Exon 21 14 32.6 Unknown 1 2.3 No 6 EGFR TKI treatment Afatinib Erlotinib Osimertinib Regorafenib Yale NSCLC Cohort B   n= 113 % Age <70 64 56.6 ≥70 49 43.4 Sex Female 59 52.2 Male 54 47.8 Smoking history Never smoker 7 6.2 Former/ Current smoker 106 93.8 Stage I/II 85 75.2 III/IV 28 24.8 Histology ADC 66 58.4 SCC 22 19.5 Other 20 17.7 Unknown 5 4.4 Table S3 Yale Melanoma Cohort C   n= 58 % Age <70 38 65.5 ≥70 20 34.5 Sex Female 25 43.1 Male 33 56.9 Stage I 10 17.2 II 11 19.0 III 22 37.9 IV 12 20.7 Unknown 3 5.2 Itx treatment Pembro Nivo Ipi+Nivo Specimen Primary Met LN 15 25.9 Mutation None 32 55.2 BRAF 17 29.3 NRAS 8 13.8 CKIT 1 1.7

Table S4 Cocktail A – Yale NSCLC cohort A Cocktail B – Yale NSCLC cohort B Cocktail C - Yale Melanoma Cohort C # Target CAB # Working Conc. (ug/mL) 1 Beta-Catenin 963 2 0.5 2.5 CD8 1022 PMS2 934 3 B7-H3 959 4 CD4 941 5 FOXP3 268 6 Mouse IgG1 891 Phospho-p70S6K 336 7 CD68 1023 8 Phospho-RPS6 767 Rabbit IgG 836 9 CD14 397 10 S6 837 11 GZMB 1068 MLH1 937 12 Ki-67 314 CD34 1041 13 Beta-2-microglobulin 964 MSH2 919 14 Histone H3 387 1.3 15 Akt 962 16 CD3 1019 17 VISTA 940 18 PD1 1024 0.2 19 Phospho-STAT3 458 20 CD44 619 21 STAT3 957 MSH6 920 22 CD56 1020 23 PD-L1 1039 24 CD45 1018   P-AKT 624 25 CD19 642 26 CD20 706 27 Pan-Cytokeratin 886 28 CD45RO 77 29 Tim3 1038 Bcl-2 960 30 HLA-DR 1052 31 32 33 34 35 B7-H4 1053 36 Ik-Ba 907 37 BIM 894 38 IDO1 1033 39 CD11c 1036 40 Mouse IgG2a 1258 41 BCL6 880 42 c-Myc 878 43 Phospho-STAT5 882 44 CD163 1031

Table S5 Table S6 Predictive markers for PFS - Multivariate Analysis Tumor ROI Cutpoint Hazard Ratio 95% CI P value CD68+ ROI CD45+ ROI IDO1 Low (1st and 2nd tertile) vs High (3rd tertile) 0.42 0.14 to 1.20 0.1 PDL1 0.51 0.19 to 1.27 0.15 B2M Median 0.3869 0.1998 to 0.7494 0.0033 CD11c 0.7 0.31 to 1.48 0.36 CD8 0.62 0.25 to 1.43 0.27   HLADR 1.14 0.37 to 3.17 0.8 TIM3 0.79 0.33 to 1.79 0.58 0.91 0.42 to 1.91 0.82 0.96 0.36 to 2.35 0.93 0.86 0.19 to 3.07 0.83 CD3 0.87 0.20 to 3.48 0.85 Table S6 Predictive markers for OS - Multivariate Analysis Tumor ROI Cutpoint Hazard Ratio 95% CI P value CD68+ ROI CD45+ ROI CD20 Median 0.39 0.10 to 1.22 0.11 PDL1 Low (1st and 2nd tertile) vs High (3rd tertile) 0.2 0.03 to 0.88 0.032 B2M 0.38 0.12 to 1.03 0.059 HLADR 0.29 0.05 to 1.64 0.17 CD4 0.46 0.14 to 1.36 0.16 MSH2 1.98 0.62 to 7.66 0.25 IDO1 0.5 0.09 to 2.09 0.35 MYC 2.15 0.70 to 7.08 PMS2 1.3 0.33 to 4.54 0.68 CD8 1.88 0.3 to 10.24 0.48 1.81 0.63 to 5.52 0.26   1.21 0.38 to 3.40 0.72 0.88 0.24 to 3.10 0.85 CD3 1.18 0.18 to 7.79 0.86 0.93 0.14 to 5.33 0.94

Figure S1 Figure S2 A B

Figure S3