Mechanisms of local immunosuppression in cutaneous melanoma

Cutaneous melanoma is highly immunogenic, yet primary melanomas and metastases develop successfully in otherwise immunocompetent patients. To investigate the local immunosuppressive microenvironment, we examined the presence of suppressor T lymphocytes and tolerising dendritic cells (DCs), the expression of immunosuppressive cytokines (IL-10, TGFβ1 and TGFβ2) and the enzyme indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) using qRT–PCR and immunohistochemistry in primary skin melanomas, negative and positive sentinel lymph nodes (SLN), and lymph nodes with advanced metastases. Our results indicate that tolerogenic DCs and suppressor T lymphocytes are present in melanoma at all stages of disease progression. They express transforming growth factor β receptor 1 (TGFβR1), and are therefore susceptible to TGFβ1 and TGFβ2 specifically expressed by primary melanoma. We found that expression of IDO and interleukin 10 (IL-10) increased with melanoma progression, with the highest concentration in positive SLN. We suggest that negative SLN contain immunosuppressive cells and cytokines, due to preconditioning by tolerogenic DCs migrating from the primary melanoma site to the SLN. In primary melanoma, TGFβ2 is likely to render peripheral DCs tolerogenic, while in lymph nodes IDO and TGFβ1 may have a major effect. This mechanism of tumour-associated immunosuppression may inhibit the immune response to the tumour and may explain the discrepancy between the induction of systemic immunity by anti-melanoma vaccines and their poor performance in the clinic

Effect of sitagliptin on cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking on the long-term effect on cardiovascular events of adding sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor, to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind study, we assigned 14,671 patients to add either sitagliptin or placebo to their existing therapy. Open-label use of antihyperglycemic therapy was encouraged as required, aimed at reaching individually appropriate glycemic targets in all patients. To determine whether sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo, we used a relative risk of 1.3 as the marginal upper boundary. The primary cardiovascular outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 3.0 years, there was a small difference in glycated hemoglobin levels (least-squares mean difference for sitagliptin vs. placebo, -0.29 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.32 to -0.27). Overall, the primary outcome occurred in 839 patients in the sitagliptin group (11.4%; 4.06 per 100 person-years) and 851 patients in the placebo group (11.6%; 4.17 per 100 person-years). Sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo for the primary composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.09; P<0.001). Rates of hospitalization for heart failure did not differ between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.20; P = 0.98). There were no significant between-group differences in rates of acute pancreatitis (P = 0.07) or pancreatic cancer (P = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease, adding sitagliptin to usual care did not appear to increase the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, hospitalization for heart failure, or other adverse events