免疫系统
医学
核糖核酸
癌症研究
生物标志物
基因
免疫组织化学
基因表达
RNA结合蛋白
免疫检查点
癌症
比例危险模型
转录组
肿瘤科
细胞
腺癌
克洛丹
信使核糖核酸
免疫疗法
队列
内科学
PD-L1
生存分析
基因型
免疫学
生物
抗原
病理
自然杀伤细胞
小RNA
分子生物学
作者
Guoqiang Zhang,Diarmuid Moran,Qunli Xu,Abraham Guerrero
标识
DOI:10.1200/jco.2026.44.2_suppl.744
摘要
744 Background: CLDN18.2, a validated therapeutic target and biomarker in gastric cancer, is often highly expressed in PDAC. Methods: Correlation between CLDN18 protein expression (VENTANA CLDN18 [43-14A] RxDx Assay; Roche Diagnostics) and CLDN18.2 RNA expression (RNAseq assay) was assessed in matched PDAC samples. A real-world clinical genomic cohort of patients with PDAC (Tempus database) was stratified into CLDN18.2 RNA-high, -low, and -negative groups by protein–RNA correlation. CLDN18.2 RNA groups were compared for molecular subtypes, mutations, programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), immune cell proportions, and gene signature scores. Overall survival (OS) of CLDN18.2 RNA groups was compared using Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. Results: CLDN18 protein and CLDN18.2 RNA showed strong correlation ( R =0.89; P =2.2E−16) in 60 matched samples. The threshold for CLDN18.2 RNA-high tumors, corresponding to ≥75% of tumor cells with moderate to strong membranous CLDN18 immunohistochemistry staining, was set at 5.22 log2 transcripts per million (TPM); the threshold for CLDN18.2 RNA-negative tumors was 1 TPM. Baseline demographics were balanced among groups. Basal-like and classical subtypes were more abundant in CLDN18.2 RNA-negative and -high tumors, respectively; CLDN18.2 RNA groups had a moderate to strong association with these molecular subtypes (Cramér’s V=0.48; P =1.6E−43). No notable associations between mutations and CLDN18.2 RNA groups were found in this analysis. A significant but weak negative association was shown between PD-L1 and CLDN18.2 RNA (Cramér’s V=0.22; P =2.0E−7). CLDN18.2 RNA-negative tumors had higher levels of immune cells (B cells, natural killer cells, neutrophils, macrophages, and T cells) as well as immunosuppressive cells (such as regulatory T cells and M2 macrophages) and were associated with higher interferon γ, inflammatory, and mesenchymal gene signatures. Compared with the overall population (N=539), CLDN18.2 RNA-negative patients (n=172) had unfavorable OS and CLDN18.2 RNA-high patients (n=151) had no significant difference in OS. In a multivariable OS analysis (Table), CLDN18.2 was not an independent prognostic factor. Conclusions: Real-world data suggest that CLDN18.2 is not an independent factor associated with prognosis (OS) in PDAC. Observations regarding the association of CLDN18.2 RNA expression with various molecular and cellular contexts warrant further exploration. Multivariable OS analysis with CLDN18.2 RNA groups and molecular subtypes as covariates. Group HR95% CI P value CLDN18.2 RNA-negative 1.120.81–1.54 0.49 CLDN18.2 RNA-low 0.940.70–1.26 0.69 CLDN18.2 RNA-high Reference Basal-like 2.281.76–2.94 3.0E−10 Classical Reference CLDN18.2, claudin 18.2; HR, hazard ratio; OS, overall survival.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI