Impact of disruptions in antigen processing and presentation machinery on sarcoma

Background: The antigen processing machinery (APM) plays a critical role in generating tumor-specific antigens that can be recognized and targeted by the immune system. The status of the APM in sarcomas is not well characterized. Methods: We investigated 126 patients with 8 types of bone and soft tissue sarcoma operated between 2001-2021. Tissue microarrays mapped 11 specific areas in each case. The presence/absence of APM protein was determined through immunohistochemistry. Bayesian networks were used. Results: All investigated sarcomas had some defects in APM. The least damaged component was HLA Class I subunit β2-microglobulin and HLA Class II. The proteasome LMP10 subunit was defective in leiomyosarcoma (LMS), myxoid liposarcoma (MLPS), and dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS), while MHC I transporting unit TAP2 was altered in undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS), gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST), and chordoma (CH). Among different neoplastic areas, high-grade areas showed different patterns of expression compared to high lymphocytic infiltrate areas. Heterogeneity at the patient level was also observed. Loss of any APM component was prognostic of distant metastasis (DM) for LMS and DDLPS and of overall survival (OS) for LMS. Conclusion: Sarcomas exhibit a high degree of defects in APM components, with differences among histotypes and tumoral areas. The most commonly altered APM components were HLA Class I subunit β2-microglobulin, HLA Class I subunit α (HC10), and MHC I transporting unit TAP2. The loss of APM components was prognostic of DM and OS and clinically relevant for LMS and DDLPS. This study explores sarcoma molecular mechanisms, enriching personalized therapeutic approaches. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. ### Funding Statement This study did not receive any funding ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: The Independent Ethics Committee of IRCCS Humanitas Clinical Research reviewed the following project, giving approval on February 21, 2023 (145/23). I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes All data produced are available online at https://zenodo.org/communities/humanitasirccs.