RESUMEN
This review explores genetic contributors to drug interactions, known as drug-gene and drug-drug-gene interactions (DGI and DDGI, respectively). This article is part of a mini-review issue led by the International Society for the Study of Xenobiotics (ISSX) New Investigators Group. Pharmacogenetics (PGx) is the study of the impact of genetic variation on pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and adverse drug reactions. Genetic variation in pharmacogenes, including drug metabolizing enzymes and drug transporters, is common and can increase the risk of adverse drug events or contribute to reduced efficacy. In this review, we summarize clinically actionable genetic variants, and touch on methodologies such as genotyping patient DNA to identify genetic variation in targeted genes, and deep mutational scanning as a high-throughput in vitro approach to study the impact of genetic variation on protein function and/or expression in vitro. We highlight the utility of physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models to integrate genetic and chemical inhibitor and inducer data for more accurate human PK simulations. Additionally, we analyze the limitations of historical ethnic descriptors in pharmacogenomics research. Altogether, the work herein underscores the importance of identifying and understanding complex DGI and DDGIs with the intention to provide better treatment outcomes for patients. We also highlight current barriers to wide-scale implementation of PGx-guided dosing as standard or care in clinical settings.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The interaction between programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) on activated T-lymphocytes and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) on tumor cells or antigen-presenting cells sends immunosuppressive signals leading to the escape of tumor cells from the host anti-tumor immune response. Inhibiting this interaction with antibodies against PD-1 or PD-L1 is emerging as a valuable therapeutic strategy. However, tissue distribution patterns for PD-L1 and PD-1 in breast cancer patients from India are not reported, yet many clinical trials are underway. In this study the expression of PD-1 and PD-L1 in breast cancer patient samples from India was characterized. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 392 cases of operated breast cancer (2012-2017) from a tertiary cancer care center in Bangalore, Karnataka, India. Paraffin blocks were retrievable and receptor status was known. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed using anti-PD-L1 and anti-PD-1 antibodies. RNA was isolated from 76 fresh tumors and nine adjacent normal tissues (2019). PD-L1 transcript levels were measured by RT-qPCR using Hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyl transferase (HPRT) as a reference gene. RESULTS: Based on IHC, PD-1 expression within tumor-infiltrating immune cells (TIICs) was observed in 55/385 cases (14%) across all breast cancer types. In triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), 21/132 cases (16%) showed PD-1 staining in TIICs. The overall expression of PD-L1 in breast tumor cells across all breast cancer subtypes and TIICs was 11% (41/378) and 39% (151/385), respectively. A relatively higher proportion of TNBC cases had PD-L1 expression in tumor cells (17/132 cases, 13%) and immune cells (68/132 cases, 52%). We also detected PD-L1 transcript expression by qRT-PCR in freshly isolated tumor samples. CONCLUSION: These findings show that around 52% (68/132) of the TNBC cases express PD-L1 in TIICs. Hence, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy alone or combined with chemotherapy may be a promising treatment for TNBC in Indian patients.