3.3. RNA-Seq-Based Transcriptomics Unveil Mechanisms of AG14361 and AZD4635 Combination Therapy
To elucidate the molecular underpinnings of the superior antitumor activity observed with the combination of AG14361 and AZD4635 compared to monotherapy, we conducted a comprehensive transcriptional analysis using RNA-seq on ID8 cells treated with the drug combination or left untreated (
Figure 2a). Prior to investigating the molecular mechanisms, we assessed the reliability of our experimental design and the reproducibility among samples through correlation and principal component analysis (PCA) of the expression levels of the loaded samples. Correlation analysis reveals that the repeated samples in the control and treatment groups exhibit high similarity and strong correlation in their expression patterns (
Figure 2b). In line with this, PCA results demonstrate that samples within each group are highly similar to one another, thereby corroborating the robustness of our experimental design (
Figure 2c).
RNA-seq analysis identified 898 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) exhibiting
p-values below 0.05 and absolute log
2 fold changes of ≥1. Specifically, compared with the control group, the combination-treated ID8 cells exhibited 388 upregulated DEGs and 510 downregulated DEGs (
Figure 2d and
Supplementary file S1). Hierarchical clustering analysis was then performed to assess the expression patterns of these DEGs across different treatment groups, clustering genes and samples based on the correlation of their expression patterns. The clustering results were further categorized into nine distinct clusters according to the expression trends of the DEGs across various samples, with each cluster representing a unique expression trend (
Figure 2e). Notably, DEGs in clusters 1–5 were upregulated in the combination-treated group relative to the control group, while those in clusters 6–9 were downregulated.
To further elucidate the biological significance of these DEGs, we performed KEGG pathway enrichment analysis on the RNA-seq data of the combination-treated ID8 cells. The analysis revealed that the 388 upregulated genes were significantly involved in several key signaling pathways, including the ErbB signaling pathway, HIF-1 signaling pathway, NF-kappa B signaling pathway, JAK-STAT signaling pathway, MAPK signaling pathway, IL-17 signaling pathway, and p53 signaling pathway (
Figure 2f and
Supplementary file S2). In contrast, the 510 downregulated genes were prominently associated with the Hippo signaling pathway, MAPK signaling pathway, and Wnt signaling pathway (
Figure 2g). Additionally, we conducted Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) to gain deeper insights into the functional impact of these DEGs. The Gene Ontology (GO)-GSEA results indicated that in ID8 cells treated with the combination of AG14361 and AZD4635, the target gene set related to “regulation of ATP-dependent activity (GO:0043462)” was significantly downregulated, while several immune-related pathways, such as “positive regulation of immune response (GO:0050778),” “positive regulation of immune system process (GO:0002684),” “regulation of interleukin-17 production (GO:0032660),” and “regulation of lymphocyte mediated immunity (GO:0002706),” were significantly upregulated (
Figure 2h). Similarly, the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG)-GSEA showed that the target gene sets of the “B cell receptor signaling pathway (mmu04662)” and “cAMP signaling pathway (mmu04024)” were significantly downregulated, while immune-related pathways, such as the “HIF-1 signaling pathway (mmu04066),” “JAK-STAT signaling pathway (mmu04630),” and “Th17 cell differentiation (mmu04659),” were significantly upregulated (
Figure 2i).
Collectively, these findings highlight the potentially critical role of these signaling and immune-related pathways in the enhanced antitumor efficacy of AG14361 when combined with AZD4635 in ovarian cancer. To a certain extent, these results elucidate the mechanism by which AZD4635 enhances the therapeutic effects of AG14361 in ovarian cancer by inhibiting adenosine generation and modulating key signaling and immune-related pathways.
3.4. AZD4635-Mediated Adenosine Antagonism Enhances AG14361 Efficacy in Ovarian Cancer via cAMP/Creb Pathway Regulation
Given that AZD4635 functions as an A2AR antagonist, we posited that its mechanism of action involves the inhibition of adenosine-mediated signaling pathways. To explore this hypothesis, we subjected the DEGs previously identified to further scrutiny, ultimately pinpointing 23 DEGs intricately linked to adenosine regulation, with their expression profiles depicted in
Figure 3a. Upon conducting a combined GO-KEGG analysis on these genes, we unveiled that they are pivotal in the metabolic processes of ATP, ADP, and AMP, as well as in cAMP metabolism and binding, and predominantly participate in the cAMP signaling pathway (
Figure 3b). This finding resonates strongly with our prior GO-GSEA and KEGG-GSEA analyses, exemplified by the mechanisms of “regulation of ATP-dependent activity (GO:0043462)” and the “cAMP signaling pathway (mmu04024)”. Moreover, through protein–protein interaction (PPI) analysis of these genes, we singled out Pde4a, Adcy7, and Rapgef3 as the core players in the cAMP signaling pathway (
Figure 3c). Existing literature reports that the binding of adenosine to A2AR can increase cAMP concentration and activate a series of downstream signaling pathways, thereby exerting immune suppression and promoting tumor growth [
29]. As an important intracellular second messenger, cAMP activates cAMP-dependent protein kinase A, which subsequently phosphorylates cAMP response element-binding protein (Creb) to regulate the expression of target genes, thus triggering a series of cellular events.
Building on these insights, we formulated the hypothesis that the enhancement of AG14361’s therapeutic efficacy in ovarian cancer by AZD4635 may be attributable to the regulation of the cAMP/Creb pathway. To validate this hypothesis, we embarked on measuring the cAMP levels across various treatment groups, both in vivo and in vitro, employing ELISA for quantification. The results revealed that AG14361 treatment elicited a significant upsurge in cAMP levels in ovarian cancer compared to the control group; however, this increase was effectively counteracted by the co-administration of the A2AR antagonist AZD4635, which curbed cAMP accumulation in ID8 cells and mouse tumor tissues (
Figure 3d). Subsequently, we harnessed Western blotting to gauge the expression levels of Creb and its phosphorylated counterpart, p-Creb. The data indicated that AG14361 treatment engendered a marked escalation in p-Creb/Creb expression levels in ovarian cancer relative to the control group; yet, this elevation was thwarted by the co-administration of AZD4635, which repressed the p-Creb/Creb expression levels in ID8 cells and mouse tumor tissues (
Figure 3e,f).
Given the essential roles of CD39 and CD73 in this pathway, we propose that modulating the conversion of ATP to adenosine is crucial for elucidating how AZD4635 enhances the therapeutic efficacy of AG14361 in ovarian cancer by inhibiting the cAMP/Creb pathway. To delineate the roles of Cd39 and Cd73 in adenosine generation and AG14361-mediated ovarian cancer therapy, we engineered three siRNAs targeting Cd39 and Cd73, respectively, to transiently suppress their expression in ID8 cells. After validating the silencing efficacy of the siRNAs through qRT-PCR (
Figure 3g), we employed ELISA to quantify cAMP levels in ID8 cells, thereby evaluating the impact of Cd39 and Cd73 knockdown on adenosine generation. The results revealed that, compared to controls, cAMP levels were significantly diminished in cells subjected to Cd39 or Cd73 knockdown, whereas AG14361 treatment elicited a substantial increase in cAMP (
Figure 3h,i). Notably, in Cd39 or Cd73 knockdown cells treated with AG14361, cAMP levels remained significantly elevated relative to their respective knockdown groups. Concurrently, under identical treatment conditions, we assessed the expression of the A2AR downstream effectors Creb and p-Creb using Western blotting. Relative to controls, Cd39 or Cd73 knockdown markedly reduced p-Creb/Creb expression, while AG14361 treatment robustly enhanced p-Creb/Creb levels. Consistent with the cAMP findings, the AG14361-induced upregulation of p-Creb/Creb was still pronounced in Cd39 or Cd73 knockdown cells compared to their knockdown counterparts (
Figure 3j,k). These observations underscore that, within the CD39/CD73/A2AR axis, A2AR likely serves as the pivotal regulatory node of the cAMP signaling pathway. This insight indirectly substantiates the rationale and superiority of employing A2AR antagonists to augment PARPi efficacy in our study. Our data demonstrate that inhibiting A2AR function can mitigate the AG14361-induced surge in cAMP levels mediated by adenosine. Collectively, these results suggest that the accumulation of adenosine and the engagement of the CD39/CD73/A2AR axis may curtail the therapeutic potential of AG14361 in ovarian cancer. Importantly, this limitation can be surmounted through the co-administration of AZD4635.
3.5. CD39 and CD73 Expression Levels Correlate with Ovarian Cancer Prognosis and Immune Microenvironment
In the preceding results, we uncovered a significant correlation between the expression levels of CD39 and CD73 and the limited efficacy of AG14361 in treating ovarian cancer. This cascade ultimately impacts the regulation of the immune microenvironment and tumor growth. Therefore, elucidating the expression patterns and functions of CD39 and CD73 in clinical ovarian cancer patients is critical to understanding whether the A2AR antagonist AZD4635 can effectively address the limitations of AG14361 treatment. To this end, we harnessed the gene expression dataset of TCGA-OV from the TCGA database to perform co-expression heatmap analyses of CD39 (gene name ENTPD1) and CD73 (gene name NT5E) with the adenosine-related DEGs previously identified. Our analyses revealed that CD39 and CD73 exhibit similar expression patterns with several genes, including RAPGEF3, ADCY7, PDE4A, AK5, AK4, AMPD1, and CREB3L1 (
Figure 4a). Notably, ovarian cancer patients with high expression of CD39 and CD73 also displayed elevated expression levels of these adenosine-related DEGs. These findings suggest that CD39 and CD73 may influence the immune microenvironment and tumor growth, and thus the efficacy of AG14361 treatment, by affecting adenosine-related genes or pathways.
To further explore the relationship between CD39 and CD73 expression levels and ovarian cancer prognosis, we conducted Kaplan–Meier survival analyses on a cohort of 66 ovarian cancer patients from the TCGA-OV dataset (
Supplementary file S3). The results demonstrated significant differences in overall survival between the high CD39 expression group (median survival time = 951 days) and the low CD39 expression group (median survival time = 1511 days), as well as between the high CD73 expression group (median survival time = 992 days) and the low CD73 expression group (median survival time = 1458 days) (Log-rank
p values were <0.001 and 0.02, respectively) (
Figure 4b). These data indicate that high expression of CD39 or CD73 is closely associated with poor prognosis in ovarian cancer patients. We further stratified the 66 ovarian cancer patients into four groups based on CD39 and CD73 expression levels: the double-low expression group, the double-high expression group, the group with low CD39 and high CD73 expression, and the group with high CD39 and low CD73 expression. Kaplan–Meier survival analyses revealed distinct survival curves among these groups. Specifically, the double-high expression group exhibited the shortest median survival time (822 days) and the worst prognosis, whereas the double-low expression group had the longest median survival time (1511 days) and the best prognosis. Moreover, patients with at least one low expression of CD39 or CD73 had significantly better survival than those with double-high expression (
p < 0.05). These findings further underscore the critical roles of CD39 and CD73 in ovarian cancer progression and highlight the strong association between double-high expression of CD39/CD73 and poor prognosis in ovarian cancer patients.
Additionally, we analyzed the clinical data of ovarian cancer patients with high and low expression of CD39 or CD73 (
Figure 4c). The results showed that patients with low expression of CD39 or CD73 were more likely to be in the early or intermediate stages of disease, whereas those with high expression were predominantly in advanced and more malignant stages. Regarding tumor location, bilateral involvement was common among ovarian cancer patients and was not significantly correlated with CD39/CD73 expression. However, among patients with unilateral involvement (left or right), high CD39 expression or low CD73 expression was more frequently observed on the left side. In terms of age, elderly ovarian cancer patients typically exhibited high expression of CD39 or CD73. Regarding treatment response, most patients with low expression of CD39 or CD73 achieved complete remission after treatment, whereas those with high expression often experienced partial remission or disease progression.
To further investigate the relationship between CD39 and CD73 expression levels and immune cell composition in ovarian cancer patients, we collected immune cell composition data for the 66 ovarian cancer patients from The Cancer Immunome Atlas database and performed group analyses based on CD39 and CD73 expression levels. The results showed that CD39 and CD73 expression significantly impacted the immune cell composition in ovarian cancer patients (
Figure 4d). Specifically, compared with patients with low CD39 expression, those with high CD39 expression exhibited a significant increase in the proportion of macrophages (including both M1 and M2 types) and regulatory T cells, while the proportions of monocytes and CD4-positive T cells were significantly reduced. Similarly, compared with patients with low CD73 expression, those with high CD73 expression had a significant increase in the proportion of macrophages (particularly M2 type), monocytes, and B cells, whereas the proportions of macrophages (M1 type), CD4-positive T cells, and regulatory T cells were significantly decreased.
We further analyzed the immune cell composition of the four patient groups: the double-low expression group, the double-high expression group, the group with low CD39 and high CD73 expression, and the group with high CD39 and low CD73 expression. The results showed that, compared with the double-low expression group, the double-high expression group had a significant increase in the proportion of macrophages (M1 and M2 types), dendritic cells, and regulatory T cells, while the proportions of B cells, CD4-positive T cells, and monocytes were significantly reduced. These findings demonstrate that the immune cell composition in ovarian cancer is closely related to CD39 and CD73 expression levels. The expression of CD39 and CD73 plays a critical role in ovarian cancer progression. Their high expression may promote adenosine production and downstream pathway activation, thereby influencing the tumor immune microenvironment, driving tumor malignancy, and ultimately affecting treatment efficacy.
3.7. Single-Cell Transcriptomics Unveiled the AG14361–AZD4635-Driven Rewiring of the Ovarian Cancer Immune Microenvironment
To elucidate the intricate immune cell composition in ovarian cancer tissues following treatment with AG14361 and AZD4635, we employed single-cell RNA sequencing on tumor samples from the ID8 mouse ovarian cancer model. Our analysis encompassed six samples—three controls and three treated—with the experimental design depicted in
Figure 6a. By isolating CD45
+ immune cells, we captured a total of 19,153 cells, which were subsequently subjected to non-linear dimensionality reduction using Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection (UMAP). Through meticulous examination of clustering results and canonical marker gene expression, we identified seven major immune cell types: T cells (Cd3d, Cd3e, Cd3g), B cells (Cd19, Cd79a, Cd79b, Ms4a1), granulocytes (S100a8), dendritic cells (Bst2, Irf8, Siglech), macrophages (Cd163, Cd68, C1qa, Mrc1), NK cells (Gzma, Nkg7, Klrd1), and plasma cells (Jchain, Iglv1, Ighg1) (
Figure 6b,c). Bubble plots visualized the distribution of these markers across cell subpopulations (
Figure 6d), while heatmap analysis highlighted the top 5 upregulated genes in each cell type, such as Themis, Bcl11b, Icos, Trac, and Cd3e in T cells; Ms4a1, Fcmr, Bank1, Pax5, and Fcer2a in B cells; C3ar1, Pid1, Clec4a1, Fcgr1, and Arg1 in macrophages; and Ncr1, Gzma, Xcl1, Spry2, and Klre1 in NK cells (
Figure 6e). Subsequently, we conducted a combined GO and KEGG analysis on the differentially upregulated genes among these subclusters, which provided compelling evidence for further elucidating the biological functions and mechanisms of these distinct cell subpopulations (
Figure 6f). Comparative analysis of immune cell populations between control and treated groups revealed significant shifts in cell cluster proportions. Notably, combined treatment altered the abundance of B cells, T cells, macrophages, and NK cells (
Figure 6g). Quantitative assessment of cell subpopulation abundance, via the ratio of observed to expected cell numbers (Ro/e), indicated increased enrichment of T cells, macrophages, NK cells, dendritic cells, and granulocytes following drug treatment, while B cell enrichment decreased (
Figure 6h).
Given the crucial roles of adenosine metabolism and the CD39/CD73/A2AR and cAMP signaling pathways in the therapeutic efficacy of AG14361 and AZD4635, we constructed gene sets targeting these pathways. The CD39/CD73/A2AR gene set not only encompasses the “adenosine gene signature” (AdenoSig), including Cxcl1, Cxcl2, Cxcl3, Cxcl5, Cxcl6, Cxcl8, Ptgs2, and Il-1β, but also includes “adenosine signaling score” markers, such as Pparg, Cybb, Col3a1, Foxp3, Lag3, App, Cd81, Gpi, Ptgs2, Casp1, Fos, Mapk1, Mapk3, and Creb1 [
21]. Additionally, we further incorporated genes closely related to adenosine generation, such as Lyve1, Pdpn, Vegfc, AdoA2AR, Nt5e, and Entpd1. The cAMP signaling pathway gene set was derived from KEGG database annotations. The analysis of specific gene set enrichment unveils distinct patterns of enrichment across various immune cell types (
Figure 6i). Notably, granulocytes and macrophages exhibit significantly higher scores within the CD39/CD73/A2AR pathway gene set compared to other cell types, suggesting a potential role in immune regulation mediated by this pathway. Similarly, NK cells and macrophages display relatively higher expression in the cAMP signaling pathway gene set, indicative of heightened activity in cAMP signal transduction. In contrast, T cells and B cells maintain relatively lower expression levels in these gene set scores. We further compared gene set enrichment scores between control and drug combination-treated groups (
Figure 6j). Within the CD39/CD73/A2AR pathway gene set, B cells, T cells, and macrophages from the drug combination group exhibited reduced scores compared to the control group. In contrast, no significant differences were observed among groups for NK cells, dendritic cells, and granulocytes. For the cAMP signaling pathway gene set, most cell types, except macrophages and granulocytes, showed lower scores in the drug combination group.
Based on these findings, we propose that the combination of AG14361 and AZD4635 in treating ovarian cancer may inhibit adenosine production, thereby blocking the downstream CD39/CD73/A2AR and cAMP signaling pathways. This could effectively reverse the immune suppressive state within the tumor microenvironment, exemplified by increased T cell infiltration, thereby enhancing therapeutic efficacy. Conversely, AG14361 treatment alone may activate the cAMP signaling pathway in macrophages, inducing immune suppressive effects that persist even with AZD4635 co-treatment, thus limiting AG14361’s anti-tumor efficacy. Thus, macrophages may be a key factor in addressing AG14361’s efficacy challenges. Furthermore, we conducted gene set scoring analysis for key biological processes, including inflammation, stemness, metastasis, apoptosis, anti-angiogenesis, and invasion. These gene sets were consistently downregulated in the treated group (
Figure 6k). This comprehensive analysis not only enriches our understanding of the mechanisms underlying drug combination therapy but also suggests that the combination of AG14361 and AZD4635 may broadly inhibit tumor progression by targeting multiple biological processes, providing valuable insights into the therapeutic potential of this drug regimen.
3.8. Heterogeneity of Macrophage Subpopulations in Ovarian Cancer and Their Response to AG14361 and AZD4635 Combination Therapy
As previously suggested, macrophages may be a crucial factor in addressing the efficacy challenges associated with AG14361. Considering the significant influence of macrophages on the efficacy of combination therapies, it is imperative to delve deeper into their roles. In this study, we employed scRNA-seq to re-cluster 2347 macrophages, thereby identifying four distinct subpopulations: M0, M1, M2, and M3. Each subpopulation exhibited a unique gene expression profile, with the M0 cluster characterized by high expression of Plpp3, Lhfpl2, and Ctsk; the M1 cluster by Clec10a, C1qa, Fcgrt, and Selenop; the M2 cluster by Isg15, Ccl5, and Ly6c1; and the M3 cluster by Ifitm1, Vcan, and S100a4 (
Figure 7a and
Figure A1a). Based on the highly upregulated marker genes depicted in the heatmap, we designated these clusters as Lhfpl2-, C1qa-, Ccl5-, and Vcan-macrophages, respectively. Violin plots further revealed that the expression specificity of each marker gene was largely confined to a unique subpopulation (
Figure 7b).
To further characterize these four macrophage clusters, we conducted differential expression analysis of upregulated genes in these cell populations (
Figure 7c and
Supplementary file S4). The M0_Lhfpl2 cluster was found to specifically overexpress the Lhfpl2 gene, a transmembrane protein associated with reproduction whose relationship with tumor-associated macrophages has been scarcely explored. This cluster also exhibited high expression of Arg2, a key regulator of macrophage anti-inflammatory responses. Additionally, the M0_Lhfpl2 cluster also exhibited high expression of genes associated with angiogenesis (Vegfa and Cd44) and phagosome proteolytic cathepsins (Ctsa, Ctsz, Ctsd, Ctsl, and Ctsk), suggesting that this subpopulation may play a key role in promoting tumor angiogenesis and immune suppression. Macrophages in the M1_C1qa cluster highly expressed complement genes C1qa/C1qb/C1qc, which are initiators of the classical complement pathway and are implicated in various immune functions, including pathogen recognition, immune complex clearance, and phagocytosis of apoptotic cell debris. Concurrently, this cell subpopulation highly expressed genes related to phagocytic function (Mrc1), lipid metabolism (Apoe), and local antioxidant function (Selenop), underscoring the importance of the M1_C1qa cell subpopulation in phagocytosis and metabolic regulation. Macrophages in the M2_Ccl5 cluster exhibited high expression of chemokines (Ccl2/3/4/5) and inflammatory-related factors such as tumor necrosis factor, which are instrumental in the recruitment, activation, and polarization of macrophages. Additionally, this subpopulation highly expressed the gene Isg15, which is associated with the induction of M2-like macrophages. The M3_Vcan cluster was characterized by high expression of Vcan and S100a transcripts (S100a4/6/10), previously associated with monocytes. Furthermore, this cell subpopulation highly expressed M1-like markers, antigen presentation-related MHC II molecules (H2-Aa, H2-Ab1, H2-Ea, H2-Eb1, and H2-DMa), and Cd74, which are crucial for antigen processing and presentation to CD4
+ T cells. Subsequently, we performed an integrated GO and KEGG analysis on the differentially upregulated genes among these subclusters, which furnished robust and persuasive evidence for delving deeper into the biological functions and underlying mechanisms of these distinct cell subpopulations (
Figure 7d).
To further dissect the functional roles of each macrophage subpopulation in ovarian cancer development and drug combination, we analyzed the scores of each cell based on markers for M1, M2, angiogenesis, and phagocytosis to explore the functional phenotypes of each cell subpopulation [
30] (
Supplementary file S5). The results revealed that the M0_Lhfpl2 cluster exhibited higher M2 markers, and the M1_C1qa and M2_Ccl5 clusters also showed higher M2 enrichment. However, intriguingly, the M2_Ccl5 cluster, in addition to high M2 enrichment, also exhibited higher expression of classical M1 markers, indicating that the M2_Ccl5 cluster co-expressed M1 and M2 gene markers (
Figure 7e). To enrich this analysis, we also referred to the methods of Azizi et al. [
31] and conducted a polarization scoring assessment of M1 and M2 for these macrophage clusters. The results showed that the M3_Vcan cluster exhibited a more pronounced trend towards M1 polarization, while the M1_C1qa and M2_Ccl5 clusters also demonstrated varying degrees of M1 polarization. In terms of M2 polarization trends, the results were consistent with the previous analysis: the M0_Lhfpl2 cluster exhibited higher expression of M2 marker genes. Macrophage functional phenotypes have been reported to exist in an in vitro M1/M2 dual-polarization state [
32]. The practice of dividing populations using only M1/M2 macrophage marker genes is outdated and overly simplistic, which limits our in-depth study of the functions of macrophage clusters. Overall, these results further demonstrate the limitations of this in vitro polarization model. Additionally, the scoring results for angiogenesis and phagocytosis marker gene sets showed that the M1_C1qa exhibited significantly higher “phagocytosis scores,” closely related to phagocytosis, which is crucial for immune responses; in contrast, the M0_Lhfpl2 relatively showed enrichment of angiogenesis-related genes. We applied the aforementioned scoring model to the four macrophage clusters across different treatment groups (
Figure 7f). The results revealed that the combination drug treatment significantly diminished the enrichment of M1 macrophage markers within the M1_C1qa cluster while concurrently augmenting the enrichment of M2 macrophage markers in the M0_Lhfpl2 cluster. Within the polarization model, only the M0_Lhfpl2 cluster exhibited a significant elevation in M2 macrophage polarization enrichment relative to the control group. Regarding angiogenesis scores, the treatment groups of the M0_Lhfpl2, M2_Ccl5, and M3_Vcan clusters all demonstrated significant enrichment to varying extents. In contrast, with respect to phagocytosis scores, only the treatment group of the M1_C1qa cluster manifested significant enrichment compared to the control group.
Given the more complex phenotypes of tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) in the TME [
33], to further explore the diverse functions and heterogeneous nature of these macrophage subpopulations, we utilized a consensus model of TAM diversity to select six TAM subpopulations, including interferon-preprocessed TAMs (IFN-TAMs), immune regulatory TAMs (Reg-TAMs), inflammatory cytokine-rich TAMs (Inflam-TAMs), lipid-associated TAMs (LA-TAMs), angiogenic TAMs (Angio-TAMs), and proliferative TAMs (Prolif-TAMs), and performed gene set scoring on our samples using their marker genes (
Supplementary file S5). The results unveiled functional heterogeneity among these four macrophage clusters. IFN-TAMs were highly enriched in the M1_C1qa and M2_Ccl5 clusters, characterized by high expression of IFN-regulated genes and M1-like markers; Inflam-TAMs, marked by their expression characteristics of inflammatory cytokines, were highly enriched in the M2_Ccl5 cluster, followed by M0_Lhfpl2 and M3_Vcan clusters; LA-TAMs were not highly enriched in any of the four macrophage clusters, and Prolif-TAMs were also essentially not enriched; Angio-TAMs were highly enriched in the M0_Lhfpl2 cluster, consistent with the previous results, and the M2_Ccl5 cluster also highly enriched this subpopulation; most interestingly, the Reg-TAMs scoring showed that the M1_C1qa cluster was highly enriched in Reg-TAMs among the four macrophage clusters, and this subpopulation, similar to alternatively activated macrophages, may possess immune suppressive functions. Subsequently, we applied the consensus model of TAM diversity to the four macrophage subpopulations in different groups (
Figure 7g). The results demonstrated that AG14361 combined with AZD4635 treatment reshaped the functional heterogeneity of macrophage populations in tumor tissues. For instance, the drug treatment group significantly reduced the enrichment of IFN-TAMs in the M0, M2, and M3 macrophage populations and the enrichment of Inflam-TAMs in the M0 and M1 macrophage populations, while significantly increasing the enrichment of Angio-TAMs in the M0 and M2 macrophage populations and the enrichment of Reg-TAMs in the M0, M1, and M2 macrophage populations. These alterations in macrophage subpopulation enrichment may underlie the limited efficacy of AG14361.
Utilizing the Ro/e index as our analytical framework, we uncovered marked alterations in the macrophage immune infiltration subtypes within the ovarian cancer tissues of mice subsequent to AG14361 and AZD4635 combination therapy. Notably, the M1_C1qa cluster was significantly enriched in the drug combination treatment cohort (
p < 0.05), whereas the M0_Lhfpl2, M2_Ccl5, and M3_Vcan macrophage subtypes predominantly resided in the control group (
Figure A1b,c). While the M1_C1qa macrophages exhibited elevated phagocytosis-related gene scores post-treatment, suggestive of enhanced tumor phagocytic capacity and a potential boon to the antitumor immune response, a concomitant high score for Reg-TAMs complicates this interpretation. This dual profile indicates that M1_C1qa macrophages may simultaneously secrete immunosuppressive cytokines, thereby dampening immune cell activation and function and aiding tumor cells in evading immune detection. Based on these findings, we propose that the M1_C1qa cluster serves as a critical regulatory node in enhancing the efficacy of the AZD4635 and AG14361 combination against ovarian cancer. Thus, a comprehensive characterization of this subgroup is imperative for optimizing the therapeutic outcomes of this drug regimen.
We also conducted intergroup differential gene analysis of these macrophage subpopulations. Identifying subgroup-upregulated genes is conducive to the development of molecular markers for cell subtypes and provides new insights into the core functional genes of special cell subtypes. The results revealed that there were varying numbers of differentially expressed genes in each cell subpopulation. To elucidate the transcriptional profiles of these subclusters, we identified the top 10 significantly upregulated genes within each subpopulation and visualized their expression patterns using heatmaps (
Figure A1d and
Supplementary file S6). Concurrently, we identified the top 5 most significantly upregulated and downregulated genes, which were visualized in a volcano plot to further accentuate the expression alterations of these key genes (
Figure 7h). Compared with the control group samples, we found that macrophage scavenger receptors (Stab1, Msr1, Cd163), chemokine receptors (Ccr2, Ccr5), arginase isoenzymes (Arg1, Arg2), phagosome proteases (Ctsa, Ctsb, Ctsl), and Selenop were upregulated to varying degrees in each cell subpopulation in the drug combination-treated samples. However, chemokines Ccl2, Ccl5, and cytokine Il1b were downregulated in the drug combination-treated samples (
Figure 7i). Meanwhile, we also utilized GSEA to study the differentially enriched pathways in macrophage clusters (
Figure A1e). The results showed that cluster M0 was enriched in the adipogenesis (NES = 1.39,
p < 0.01), coagulation (NES = 1.38,
p < 0.05), IL6-JAK-STAT3 signaling pathway (NES = 1.34,
p < 0.05), p53 pathway (NES = 1.28,
p < 0.05), and mTORC1 signaling pathway (NES = 1.28,
p < 0.05); cluster M1 was enriched in the TNFα/NF-κB signaling pathway (NES = −1.26,
p < 0.05), and protein secretion (NES = 1.38,
p < 0.05); cluster M2 was enriched in the epithelial–mesenchymal transition (NES = 1.41,
p < 0.01), apical junction (NES = 1.32,
p < 0.05), hypoxia (NES = 1.30,
p < 0.05), myogenesis (NES = 1.29,
p < 0.05), glycolysis (NES = 1.28,
p < 0.05), and mTORC1 signaling pathway (NES = 1.27,
p < 0.05); and cluster M3 was enriched in the mitotic spindle (NES = 1.29,
p < 0.05).
To further explore the changes in macrophage subtype-specific gene expression in the tumor immune heterogeneity formed after drug combination treatment, we employed Monocle2 technology to reconstruct the pseudotime trajectory inference of all obtained macrophages (
Figure 7j,k). Through this technology, the developmental trajectory of macrophages was divided into 13 developmental layers (states 1–13), with the M1_C1qa located at the starting point of the cell evolution in this atlas (
Figure A1f), presenting a complex multi-branch structure: M1_C1qa as the root node, and the remaining macrophages clusters distributed at the terminal states of different branches. Notably, the M1_C1qa was largely concentrated at the starting point, with a small portion located at the terminal end of one branch. We also mapped the calculated pseudotime values and differentiation states back to the original UMAP dimensionality reduction map, and the results showed that the developmental trajectory of macrophages exhibited significant differences at the starting state. Specifically, cells with lower pseudotime values or in state 1 were essentially the M1_C1qa cluster, and as the pseudotime value increased, the degree of cell differentiation increased, revealing that M1_C1qa plays a crucial role in the development and progression of ovarian cancer after drug treatment (
Figure 7l).
Additionally, using Monocle technology, based on the gene expression signals in all cells and the pseudotime values of each cell, we screened for genes differentially expressed over time to identify key genes related to the developmental differentiation process. The results showed that the gene expression trends varied among each cell cluster (
Supplementary file S7). For example, in cluster 1, the expression abundance of genes such as Mrc1, C1qa, C1qb, Ccl8, and Selenop gradually decreased along the pseudotime axis, while in cluster 5, the expression abundance of genes such as Il1b, Cd52, and Ifitm3 gradually increased along the pseudotime axis (
Figure A1g). Given the importance of branches 1 and 2 in the pseudotime trajectory, we analyzed these two branches using Monocle to identify differentially expressed genes in their pseudotime differentiation fates (
Supplementary file S7). We also selected some genes of interest for heatmap analysis, including chemokines (Ccl2/4/5, Cxcl1/2/11), MHC-II molecules (H2-Aa, H2-Ab1, H2-Ea, H2-Eb1, and H2-DMa), phagosome proteolytic cathepsins (Ctsa, Ctsb, Ctsl), and complement genes (C1qa/C1qb/C1qc) (
Figure A1h,i).
To assess the differences in transcription factor (TF) expression levels during macrophage differentiation, we performed single-cell regulatory network inference and clustering (SCENIC) analysis. After completing the SCENIC analysis, we used bar charts to display the number of predicted regulons, TFs, and target genes (
Figure A1j). The regulon activity heatmap revealed differences in the activity of the same regulon among different cells, facilitating the identification of cell subpopulations specifically regulated by regulons. The results showed higher regulon enrichment in the M0_Lhfpl2 cluster (
Figure A1k). Further analysis revealed that although some TFs were shared between the control and drug combination groups, they also exhibited unique TFs (
Figure 7m). For example, Jund, Erg1, Maf, Klf4, Mitf, Zmiz1, and Runx1 were identified in both the control and treatment groups, but the openness in the treatment group was higher (
Figure 7n). Meanwhile, the openness of these TFs also varied among different macrophage clusters, with higher openness in the M0_Lhfpl2 and M1_C1qa clusters (
Figure 7o). Specifically, Jund exhibited specific functionality in M1_C1qa, while Zmiz1, Mitf, and Runx1 exhibited specific functionality in M0_Lhfpl2, and they may play important roles in the treatment of ovarian cancer with AG14361 combined with AZD4635.
In summary, our study underscores the pivotal role of macrophages in the combined treatment of ovarian cancer with AG14361 and AZD4635. Our observations reveal that macrophage infiltration in drug-treated samples is closely associated with genes and pathways related to scavenger receptors, phagocytosis, angiogenesis, and chemokine signaling. However, the activation of these pathways may have counteracted the enhancement of AG14361’s antitumor immune effect by AZD4635, ultimately influencing the overall outcome of the combination therapy.
3.9. Heterogeneity of T Cell Subpopulations in Ovarian Cancer and Their Response to AG14361 and AZD4635 Combination Therapy
In our study, we delved into the characteristics and distribution of lymphocytes within the samples, in addition to examining the features of macrophages. Through batch-corrected UMAP and clustering analysis of all T cells (n = 6417) from both the control and drug combination treatment groups, we were able to delineate seven distinct T cell subclusters (
Figure 8a). Utilizing T cell markers Cd8A, Cd8b1, Cd4, and Cd40lg, we further identified and separated two CD8
+ T cell subclusters (TC_C1 and TC_C3) and four CD4
+ T cell subclusters (TC_C0, TC_C2, TC_C4, and TC_C5) (
Figure 8b). Moreover, within the T cell population, we uncovered a double-negative T (DNT) cell cluster (TC_C6), which was defined by the absence of CD4 and CD8 expression but notable for the expression of T cell receptor genes Trdv4, Trgv2, and Trgv6 (
Figure 8c).
To further interrogate the properties of these subclusters, we conducted marker gene heatmap analyses. The results unveiled unique gene expression profiles for each subcluster. For instance, the C0 subcluster was characterized by high expression of Igfbp4, Lef1, S1pr1, and Dusp10; the C1 subcluster by Klrc1, Ly6c2, Ly6c1, and Ccl5; the C2 subcluster by Tnfsf8, Tbc1d4, Smco4, and Eea1; the C3 subcluster by Fgf13, Sidt1, Cd8b1, and Cd8a; the C4 subcluster by Myb, Ift80, Ikzf2, and lzumo1r; the C5 subcluster by Foxp3, Itgae, Tnfrsf9, and Tnfrsf4; and the C6 subcluster by Trdv4, Blk, Abi3bp, and Scart1 (
Figure A2a). We delved deeper into the specificities of CD8
+ and CD4
+ T cells. As the marker gene heatmap unfolded, it revealed that the marker genes within the CD4
+ T cell cluster largely echoed the findings from our earlier analyses. Yet, the results pertaining to CD8
+ T cells turned out to be particularly intriguing: the C1 subcluster was marked by high expression of Gzmb, S100a4, Ccr2, S100a6, and Ifng, whereas the C3 subcluster was distinguished by high expression of Ccr7, Sell, Aff3, Cmah, and Lef1 (
Figure A2b,c). By examining the expression of functional markers and marker genes, we successfully identified and characterized T lymphocyte subclusters (
Figure 8d). Among CD4
+ T cells, we distinguished three functional and phenotypic states: TC_C0 and TC_C4 were naive CD4
+ T cells (Tn; highly expressing Ccr7, Sell, Lef1, Tcf7), but TC_C4 also highly expressed T cell exhaustion markers Ctla4 and Tnfrsf9; TC_C2 were T helper (Th) cells producing interferon-gamma-like (Th1-like; highly expressing Ucp2, Arpc1b, Tbx21, and Ifng), but these cells also highly expressed Ctla4; TC_C5 were regulatory CD4
+ T cells (Treg; highly expressing Foxp3, Il2ra, Ctla4, Tnfrsf9, and Tnfrsf18). Among CD8
+ T cells, we defined TC_C1 as CD8
+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs; highly expressing Nkg7, Gzmk, Gzma, Gzmb, and Ifng), while TC_C3 was defined as naive CD8
+ T cells (Tn; highly expressing Ccr7, Sell, Lef1, Il7r, and Tcf7). We also followed the method of Jie Xiong et al. [
34] to conduct a heatmap analysis of expression functional markers and marker genes for the seven cell clusters, further validating the phenotypic state of each T cell subcluster (
Figure 8e). Subsequently, we performed a combined GO and KEGG analysis on the DEGs among these subclusters, providing robust evidence for elucidating the biological functions and mechanisms of these distinct T cell subpopulations (
Figure A2d and
Supplementary file S8).
Given the complexity of T cell functions and phenotypic states, which cannot be fully captured by the aforementioned methods, we adopted a strategy inspired by the work of Azizi et al. [
31]. We meticulously selected a panel of transcriptionally distinct genes to perform gene set scoring across the seven T cell clusters, visualizing the results through a heatmap (
Figure 8f and
Supplementary file S9). Our analysis revealed that TC_C0 is predominantly involved in the type II interferon response; TC_C1 exhibits high enrichment for genes associated with pro-inflammatory and cytolytic effector pathways, as well as the type II interferon response; TC_C2 is highly enriched for genes regulated by anergy and hypoxia/HIF; TC_C5 shows high enrichment for genes related to T cell terminal differentiation and anti-inflammatory responses; and TC_C6 is highly enriched for genes regulated by hypoxia/HIF. These findings suggest that these T cells may be differentially exposed to inflammatory, hypoxic, anergic, and cytotoxic effector pathways. To further explore these differences, we compared several characteristic gene sets between groups. The results indicated that in the drug combination treatment group, the anergy score of TC_C0 was significantly higher than that of the control group, the cytolytic effector pathway score of TC_C1 was lower, and the anti-inflammatory score of TC_C5 was higher (
Figure 8g). These differential scores in the drug-treated T cells provide valuable insights into the mechanisms underlying the therapeutic effects of the drug combination.
Utilizing the Ro/e index, we observed significant shifts in the proportions of T cell immune infiltration subtypes in the ovarian cancer tissues of mice following treatment with AG14361 and AZD4635. Naive CD4
+ T cells (TC_C0 and TC_C4), Th1-like cells (TC_C2), Tregs (TC_C5), and naive CD8
+ T cells (TC_C3) were predominantly found in the control group, whereas CTLs (TC_C1) and γδ T cells (TC_C6) were more prevalent in the drug combination treatment group (
Figure 8h and
Figure A2e). These results highlight that combination therapy effectively inhibits the infiltration of immunosuppressive Tregs while enhancing the infiltration of CTLs, key immune cells for antitumor responses, thereby strengthening antitumor immunity, preventing immune evasion, and curbing ovarian cancer progression. Given that T cell effects are regulated by a balance between activation and exhaustion, and that T cell exhaustion is a critical mechanism for tumor immune evasion, we conducted exhaustion scoring for these T cell clusters using markers such as Pdcd1, Tox, Cxcl13, Tigit, Ctla4, Tnfrsf9, Havcr2, and Lag3. Data showed that T cells in ovarian cancer tissues after drug combination treatment exhibited weaker exhaustion characteristics compared to the control group (
Figure A2f). Moreover, exhaustion scores varied among T cell clusters, with TC_C5 showing the most significant exhaustion characteristics, followed by TC_C4, TC_C2, and TC_C6, while TC_C0, TC_C1, and TC_C3 exhibited less pronounced exhaustion (
Figure 8i). We also assessed the expression of immune checkpoint genes that determine T cell cytotoxic function. These genes, including Cd274, Ctla4, Icos, Lag3, Cd27, Tnfrsf18, and Vsir, were predominantly enriched in Tregs (TC_C5), with a small subset (Lgals1 and Lgals3) enriched in γδ T cells (TC_C6) (
Figure 8j). Comparative analysis between groups revealed that Cd274, Ctla4, Icos, Lag3, Cd27, and Vsir were highly expressed in Tregs of the drug combination treatment group, whereas Lgals1 and Lgals3 were highly expressed in γδ T cells of the control group. Collectively, these results suggest that AZD4635 enhances the antitumor effect of AG14361 by inhibiting Treg infiltration and promoting their exhaustion, thereby weakening their role in tumor immune evasion. However, the high expression of immune checkpoint genes in Tregs may also indicate a potential mechanism for tumor cell insensitivity to PARP inhibitors, which could offset or limit the maximum therapeutic efficacy of the drug combination.
To further elucidate the impact of the drug combination on T cell subclusters, we performed differential expression analysis between the two groups. The results revealed that the drug combination treatment significantly reshaped the gene expression profiles of T cell subclusters (
Supplementary file S10). We employed volcano plots (top 5) and heatmaps (top 3) to visualize the expression patterns of upregulated and downregulated genes within each subcluster. Notably, genes such as Pf4, Saa3, Apoe, Cish, S100a6, Lyz2, Ndst1, and Appbp2 exhibited significant upregulation, while Mrpl43, Nme2, Prdx2, Igkc, Pold4, Rfxap, Pop5, Pts, and Dtymk were significantly downregulated (
Figure 8k and
Figure A2g). GSEA pathway analysis highlighted significant enrichment of pathways such as EMT, complement, inflammatory response, Kras signaling, IL2/STAT5 signaling, TGF beta signaling, and hypoxia in the T cell subclusters following drug combination treatment, with a concomitant reduction in the oxidative phosphorylation pathway (
Figure A2h).
To decipher the developmental trajectories of T cells, we utilized the Monocle 2 algorithm to perform pseudotime ordering on CD8
+ and CD4
+ T cells (
Figure 8l,m and
Figure A2i). This pseudotime analysis, based on transcriptional similarity, revealed distinct developmental processes among the T cell subclusters. The analysis traced the progression from state 1, encompassing naive CD4
+ T cells (TC_C0) and naive CD8
+ T cells (TC_C3), through branching into state 2 (TC_C1, TC_C2, TC_C5, TC_C6) and state 3 (TC_C0, TC_C2, TC_C4, TC_C5). Notably, exhausted T cells were highly enriched in the later stages of pseudotime, indicative of a transition from activation to exhaustion. By leveraging Monocle technology to identify genes differentially expressed over time, we pinpointed key genes associated with developmental differentiation. The gene expression trends varied markedly among the clusters: in cluster 1, naive T cell markers (Tcf7, Sell, Ccr7, Lef1) and ribosomal proteins showed decreasing expression along the pseudotime axis; in cluster 2, cytotoxic effector molecules and pro-inflammatory cytokines exhibited increasing expression; and in cluster 3, exhaustion-related markers initially increased before declining (
Figure A2j and
Supplementary file S11).
To explore the regulatory networks underlying these changes, we employed SCENIC analysis. The bar charts and heatmaps revealed variable enrichment of regulatory factors across the T cell subclusters (
Figure A2k and
Figure 8n). Fil1, Elf1, and Ets1 were consistently identified across all subclusters, while Nfkb1, Tcf7, Foxo1, and Stat3 exhibited differential openness. Notably, TCF7 showed higher openness in TC_C0 and TC_C3, whereas Stat3 was most open in TC_C2 (
Figure 8o). Post-treatment, the openness of Tcf7 decreased, while that of Stat3 increased (
Figure 8p). These findings suggest that Stat3 and Tcf7 may play pivotal roles in the antitumor effects of AG14361 and AZD4635 combination therapy in ovarian cancer.
3.10. Heterogeneity of B Cell Subpopulations in Ovarian Cancer and Their Response to AG14361 and AZD4635 Combination Therapy
In subsequent analyses, we conducted an in-depth examination of B cells (n = 3779) and identified five distinct clusters (
Figure 9a). During the initial phase of cluster annotation, we leveraged classic markers Cd19 and Ms4a1 (Cd20) for identification, as these markers are expressed throughout various stages of B cell development (
Figure 9b). In the second phase, we adopted the approach of Weisel et al. [
35] to assign phenotypic characteristics of naive B cells and memory B cells to these clusters. Specifically, when M exceeds N, it indicates higher expression of the relevant genes in memory B cells (MBCs); conversely, when M is less than N, it suggests more significant expression in naive B cells (NBCs). Our analysis revealed that clusters B_C0, B_C1, and B_C3 exhibited higher naive B cell markers, while cluster B_C4 displayed higher memory B cell markers (
Figure 9c).
Next, we utilized differentially expressed markers to further assign functional phenotypes to these clusters, including activation, proliferation, and regulatory B cells (Bregs). Notably, cluster B_C2 was characterized by high expression of proliferation markers such as Stmn1, Mki67, and Hmgb2. We also classified these clusters using activation markers Cd69 and Cd83, finding that clusters B_C1 and B_C0 highly expressed these markers. Given the critical immunomodulatory role of Bregs in tumor progression, it is essential to explore the related phenotypes of these clusters in depth. Although no single marker can specifically identify all Bregs, the combined use of multiple markers (such as Havcr1, Cd5, and Cd1d) can aid in their identification and study. We observed that cluster B_C4 relatively highly expressed Cd5 and Cd1d, which are markers of regulatory B10 cells. Additionally, clusters B_C1 and B_C0 upregulated MHC-II genes, indicating their potential for antigen presentation.
To further interrogate the distinctiveness of these five B cell subclusters, we conducted a marker gene heatmap analysis, revealing unique gene expression profiles for each subcluster (
Figure 9d). To elucidate the biological functions and molecular characteristics of these subclusters, we performed GO and KEGG analyses on their DEGs (
Supplementary file S12). Notably, subclusters B_C1, B_C2, and B_C3 exhibited enhanced activity in B cell receptor (BCR) signaling, B cell activation, immune response activation, and T cell activation regulation. Specifically, B_C2 showed increased activity in lymphocyte proliferation, phagocytosis, and cell cycle progression (
Figure 9e). Additionally, we analyzed the proportion of B cell immune infiltration subtypes after treatment with AG14361 in combination with AZD4635. Compared to the control group, we observed a significant decrease in the immune infiltration of B_C0 and B_C3, while B_C1 showed a significant increase (
Figure 9f).
To validate our cluster annotations, we performed trajectory analysis to delineate their developmental trajectories. Pseudotime analysis revealed that proliferating B cells (B_C2) gradually differentiated into memory B cells (B_C4) or naive B cells (B_C0 and B_C3), with naive B cells eventually forming activated B_C1 (
Figure 9g). The expression patterns of key genes further corroborated these findings: proliferative genes such as Mki67 and Stmn1 decreased over time, while naive B cell markers (Cxcr4) and memory B cell markers (Pecam1) increased (
Supplementary file S13). Similarly, the expression of the activation marker Cd83 also showed an upward trend (
Figure 9h).
Finally, we performed differential expression analysis on B cell subclusters from both the control and drug combination treatment groups. Volcano plots (top 5) demonstrated that the drug combination treatment significantly altered the gene expression patterns of B cell subclusters (
Figure 9i and
Supplementary file S14). For instance, genes such as Pf4, Saa3, Lgmn, Lyz2, Ctsb, and Ckap4 were significantly upregulated, while Gle1, Gng12, Prdx4, Nrip1, Ift172, and Akna (
p < 0.05) were significantly downregulated.