Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Advertisement

Scientific Reports
  • View all journals
  • Search
  • My Account Login
  • Content Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed
  1. nature
  2. scientific reports
  3. articles
  4. article
Molecular profiling of primary versus paired asynchronous metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma reveals heterogeneity in tumor immune microenvironment
Download PDF
Download PDF
  • Article
  • Open access
  • Published: 28 January 2026

Molecular profiling of primary versus paired asynchronous metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma reveals heterogeneity in tumor immune microenvironment

  • Brittney Cotta1,
  • Srinivas Nallandhighal2,
  • Steven Monda2,
  • Zayne Knuth2,
  • Daniel Triner2,
  • Yuping Zhang4,5,
  • Rui Wang4,5,
  • Fengyun Su4,5,
  • Amy Kasputis2,
  • Xuhong Cao4,5,7,
  • Aaron Udager4,5,
  • Saravana M. Dhanasekaran4,5,
  • Ganesh S. Palapattu2,3,
  • Rohit Mehra3,4,5,
  • Marcin P. Cieslik4,5,6,
  • Todd M. Morgan2,3 &
  • …
  • Simpa S. Salami2,3,4 

Scientific Reports , Article number:  (2026) Cite this article

We are providing an unedited version of this manuscript to give early access to its findings. Before final publication, the manuscript will undergo further editing. Please note there may be errors present which affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.

Subjects

  • Biomarkers
  • Cancer
  • Computational biology and bioinformatics
  • Immunology
  • Oncology

Abstract

The tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) shows significant heterogeneity in primary clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). As TIME heterogeneity between primary and paired metastatic tumors of ccRCC is less understood, we characterized and compared the TIME of primary ccRCC with paired asynchronous metastases. We analyzed patients who developed ccRCC recurrence post radical nephrectomy and had both primary and metastatic treatment-naïve tissue available. Capture whole-transcriptome sequencing was performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) specimens using the Illumina platform. Differential gene expression (DGE) analysis and gene set enrichment analysis (GSE) was performed using R packages limma and fgsea respectively. TIME deconvolution was quantified using CIBERSORT, an in-silico flow cytometry tool. In aggregate, 42 tumor samples from 19 patients (19 primary tumors with 23 matched metastases) were analyzed. Metastatic sites included lung (n = 6), bone (n = 6), adrenal (n = 4), liver (n = 2), lymph node (n = 2), and soft tissue (n = 3). In unsupervised hierarchical clustering, primary tumors clustered together and not with their matched metastatic tumor. Of the immune cells assayed, primary tumors displayed greater Tregs than their matched (and unmatched) metastases (p < 0.001). Among metastatic sites, bone had high levels of EMT activity compared to their matched primary tumors and lung metastatic tumors were enriched in E2F targets. We demonstrate differences in pathway enrichment and immune cell populations in primary ccRCC and their matched metastases, including a higher infiltration of immunosuppressive T regulatory cells in the tumor immune microenvironment of primary ccRCC. Metastatic tumors not only differed from their paired primary tumors but also differed in gene expression, gene set enrichment, and immune cell composition between metastatic tissue sites.

Data availability

Data used for downstream analyses such as differentially expressed genes, pathway enrichment scores, Cibersort and Estimate immune deconvolution results are deposited in Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) under the accession code: GSE278174. R code will be provided by the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Leibovich, B. C. et al. Prediction of progression after radical nephrectomy for patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a stratification tool for prospective clinical trials. Cancer 97(7), 1663–1671. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.11234 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Choueiri, T. K. et al. Prognostic factors associated with long-term survival in previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Ann. Oncol. 18(2), 249–255. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdl371 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bedke, J. et al. Updated European association of urology guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: Nivolumab plus Cabozantinib joins immune checkpoint inhibition combination therapies for treatment-naïve metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol. 79(3), 339–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.12.005 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cotta, B. H. et al. Current landscape of genomic biomarkers in clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol. 84, 166 175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2023.04.003 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Meerveld-Eggink, A. et al. Primary renal tumour response in patients treated with Nivolumab and Ipilimumab for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: real-world data assessment. Eur Urol Open Sci. 35, 54–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2021.11.003 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Singla, N. et al. Pathologic response and surgical outcomes in patients undergoing nephrectomy following receipt of immune checkpoint inhibitors for renal cell carcinoma. Urol Oncol. 37(12), 924–931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2019.08.012 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bakouny, Z. et al. Upfront cytoreductive nephrectomy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted therapy: an observational study from the international metastatic renal cell carcinoma database consortium. Eur Urol. 83(2), 145–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2022.10.004 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Turajlic, S. et al. Tracking cancer evolution reveals constrained routes to metastases: TRACERx renal. Cell 173(3), 581-594.e12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.03.057 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Turajlic, S. et al. Deterministic evolutionary trajectories influence primary tumor growth: TRACERx renal. Cell 173(3), 595-610.e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.03.043 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Salami, S. S. et al. Transcriptomic heterogeneity in multifocal prostate cancer. JCI Insight. 3(21), e123468. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.123468 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hovelson, D. H. et al. Development and validation of a scalable next-generation sequencing system for assessing relevant somatic variants in solid tumors. Neoplasia 17(4), 385–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neo.2015.03.004 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cieslik, M. et al. The use of exome capture RNA-seq for highly degraded RNA with application to clinical cancer sequencing. Genome Res. 25(9), 1372–1381. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.189621.115 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Robinson, M. D., McCarthy, D. J. & Smyth, G. K. edgeR: a Bioconductor package for differential expression analysis of digital gene expression data. Bioinformatics 26(1), 139–140. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btp616 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ritchie, M. E. et al. limma powers differential expression analyses for RNA-sequencing and microarray studies. Nucleic Acids Res. 43(7), e47. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv007 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Subramanian, A. et al. Gene set enrichment analysis: A knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 102(43), 15545–15550. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0506580102 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hänzelmann, S., Castelo, R. & Guinney, J. GSVA: gene set variation analysis for microarray and RNA-seq data. BMC Bioinformatics 14, 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-14-7 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Korotkevich, G., Sukhov, V. & Sergushichev, A. Fast gene set enrichment analysis.. bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/060012 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Liberzon, A. et al. The molecular signatures database hallmark gene set collection. Cells Syst. 1, 417–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cels.2015.12.004 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Newman, A. M. et al. Robust enumeration of cell subsets from tissue expression profiles. Nat Methods. 12(5), 453–457. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.3337 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Yoshihara, K. et al. Inferring tumour purity and stromal and immune cell admixture from expression data. Nat Commun. 4(1), 2612. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms3612 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Motzer, R. J. et al. Molecular subsets in renal cancer determine outcome to checkpoint and angiogenesis blockade. Cancer Cell 38(6), 803-817.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccell.2020.10.011 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Saliby, R. M. et al. Impact of renal cell carcinoma molecular subtypes on immunotherapy and targeted therapy outcomes. Cancer Cell 42(5), 732–735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccell.2024.03.002 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Therneau, T. M. & Grambsch, P. M. The Cox Model. In Modeling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model (Springer, 2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3294-8.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Gutknecht, M. F. et al. Identification of the S100 fused-type protein hornerin as a regulator of tumor vascularity. Nat Commun. 8(1), 552. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-00488-6 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Sato, Y. et al. Integrated molecular analysis of clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. Nat Genet. 45(8), 860–867. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2699 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Clark, D. J. et al. Integrated proteogenomic characterization of clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Cell 179(4), 964-983.e31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2019.10.007 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  27. The Cancer Genome Atlas Program (TCGA) - NCI. May 13, 2022. Accessed May 31, 2023. https://www.cancer.gov/ccg/research/genome-sequencing/tcga

  28. Kaida, A. et al. DNAJA1 promotes cancer metastasis through interaction with mutant p53. Oncogene 40(31), 5013–5025. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41388-021-01921-3 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Cordani, M. et al. Mutant p53 proteins alter cancer cell secretome and tumour microenvironment: Involvement in cancer invasion and metastasis. Cancer Lett. 376(2), 303–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canlet.2016.03.046 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Fu, S. J. et al. Hornerin promotes tumor progression and is associated with poor prognosis in hepatocellular carcinoma. BMC Cancer 18(1), 815. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-4719-5 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Zou, W. Regulatory T cells, tumour immunity and immunotherapy. Nat Rev Immunol. 6(4), 295–307. https://doi.org/10.1038/nri1806 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Curiel, T. J. et al. Specific recruitment of regulatory T cells in ovarian carcinoma fosters immune privilege and predicts reduced survival. Nat Med. 10(9), 942–949. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm1093 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Chao, J. L. & Savage, P. A. Unlocking the complexities of tumor-associated regulatory T cells. J Immunol. 200(2), 415–421. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1701188 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Fernando, M. et al. Dysregulated G2 phase checkpoint recovery pathway reduces DNA repair efficiency and increases chromosomal instability in a wide range of tumours. Oncogenesis. 10(5), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41389-021-00329-8 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Oshi, M. et al. The E2F pathway score as a predictive biomarker of response to neoadjuvant therapy in ER+/HER2− breast cancer. Cells 9(7), 1643. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells9071643 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  36. García-Mulero, S. et al. Lung metastases share common immune features regardless of primary tumor origin. J Immunother Cancer. 8(1), e000491. https://doi.org/10.1136/jitc-2019-000491 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Del Conte, A. et al. Bone metastasis and immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): microenvironment and possible clinical implications. Int J Mol Sci. 23(12), 6832. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23126832 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Ruatta, F. et al. Prognosis of renal cell carcinoma with bone metastases: Experience from a large cancer centre. Eur J Cancer. 107, 79–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2018.10.023 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Negishi, T. et al. Site-specific response to nivolumab in renal cell carcinoma. Anticancer Res. 41(3), 1539–1545. https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.14913 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  40. HHLA2 HHLA2 member of B7 family [Homo sapiens (human)] - Gene - NCBI. Accessed August 16, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/11148

  41. Ying, H., Xu, J., Zhang, X., Liang, T. & Bai, X. Human endogenous retrovirus-H long terminal repeat-associating 2: The next immune checkpoint for antitumour therapy. EBioMedicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2022.103987 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Şenbabaoğlu, Y. et al. Tumor immune microenvironment characterization in clear cell renal cell carcinoma identifies prognostic and immunotherapeutically relevant messenger RNA signatures. Genome Biol. 17(1), 231. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-016-1092-z (2016).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Funded by National Comprehensive Cancer Network (T.M.M.). S.S.S., T.M.M. are supported by the University of Michigan Health System-Peking University Health Science Center (UMHS-PUHSC) Joint Institute (JI). S.S.S. is supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation as part of the Harold Amos Medical Faculty Development Program (AMFDP). S.S.S. is supported in part by the Urology Care Foundation Rising Stars in Urology Research Award Program and Astellas, Inc. R.M., S.S.S., T.M.M. are supported by P30 CA046592. B.H.C was supported by 5T32CA180984-06 Ruth L. Kirschstein NRSA Institutional Research Training Grant S.M.D supported in part by U24CA271037.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA

    Brittney Cotta

  2. Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Srinivas Nallandhighal, Steven Monda, Zayne Knuth, Daniel Triner, Amy Kasputis, Ganesh S. Palapattu, Todd M. Morgan & Simpa S. Salami

  3. University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, 1500 E Medical Center Dr, 7306, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109-5948, USA

    Ganesh S. Palapattu, Rohit Mehra, Todd M. Morgan & Simpa S. Salami

  4. Michigan Center for Translational Pathology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Yuping Zhang, Rui Wang, Fengyun Su, Xuhong Cao, Aaron Udager, Saravana M. Dhanasekaran, Rohit Mehra, Marcin P. Cieslik & Simpa S. Salami

  5. Department of Pathology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Yuping Zhang, Rui Wang, Fengyun Su, Xuhong Cao, Aaron Udager, Saravana M. Dhanasekaran, Rohit Mehra & Marcin P. Cieslik

  6. Computational Medicine & Bioinformatics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Marcin P. Cieslik

  7. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Chevy Chase, Maryland, 20815, USA

    Xuhong Cao

Authors
  1. Brittney Cotta
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Srinivas Nallandhighal
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Steven Monda
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zayne Knuth
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Daniel Triner
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yuping Zhang
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Rui Wang
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Fengyun Su
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Amy Kasputis
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Xuhong Cao
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Aaron Udager
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Saravana M. Dhanasekaran
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Ganesh S. Palapattu
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Rohit Mehra
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Marcin P. Cieslik
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Todd M. Morgan
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Simpa S. Salami
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

B.C. interpreted the data, formulated conclusions, and wrote the main manuscript text, S.N. analyzed data and prepared figures S.M analyzed data and prepared figure supplement 2. S.S. provided guidance on experimental design and data interpretation, oversaw the overall research progress, and contributed to the critical review and editing of the manuscript. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simpa S. Salami.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information 1.

Supplementary Information 2.

Supplementary Information 3.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cotta, B., Nallandhighal, S., Monda, S. et al. Molecular profiling of primary versus paired asynchronous metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma reveals heterogeneity in tumor immune microenvironment. Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-35021-7

Download citation

  • Received: 09 July 2025

  • Accepted: 01 January 2026

  • Published: 28 January 2026

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-35021-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • Kidney cancer metastasis
  • Oncologic outcomes
  • Survival
  • Tumor immune microenvironment
Download PDF

Advertisement

Explore content

  • Research articles
  • News & Comment
  • Collections
  • Subjects
  • Follow us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Twitter
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed

About the journal

  • About Scientific Reports
  • Contact
  • Journal policies
  • Guide to referees
  • Calls for Papers
  • Editor's Choice
  • Journal highlights
  • Open Access Fees and Funding

Publish with us

  • For authors
  • Language editing services
  • Open access funding
  • Submit manuscript

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Find a job
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

Scientific Reports (Sci Rep)

ISSN 2045-2322 (online)

nature.com sitemap

About Nature Portfolio

  • About us
  • Press releases
  • Press office
  • Contact us

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Articles by subject
  • protocols.io
  • Nature Index

Publishing policies

  • Nature portfolio policies
  • Open access

Author & Researcher services

  • Reprints & permissions
  • Research data
  • Language editing
  • Scientific editing
  • Nature Masterclasses
  • Research Solutions

Libraries & institutions

  • Librarian service & tools
  • Librarian portal
  • Open research
  • Recommend to library

Advertising & partnerships

  • Advertising
  • Partnerships & Services
  • Media kits
  • Branded content

Professional development

  • Nature Awards
  • Nature Careers
  • Nature Conferences

Regional websites

  • Nature Africa
  • Nature China
  • Nature India
  • Nature Japan
  • Nature Middle East
  • Privacy Policy
  • Use of cookies
  • Legal notice
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Your US state privacy rights
Springer Nature

© 2026 Springer Nature Limited

Nature Briefing: Cancer

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Cancer newsletter — what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Cancer