Patients diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) have high cure rates with current treatment options including immuno-polychemotherapy. However, around 30% of cases do not respond or develop relapse disease. For this, it is necessary to search for new therapeutic options. In recent years, therapy using chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells has been a strategy for those patients with LBDCG in progression or relapse, although only 30–40% of cases achieve durable remissions. The programmed death-1 (PD-1) receptor regulates the T-cell-mediated immune response through binding to its ligands (PD-L1). Some tumor cells present high expression of PD-L1, which down-regulates T-cell activation. The beneficial antitumor activity of PD-1 and PD-L1 has been widely demonstrated in certain solid organ malignancies. However, their utility in the treatment of lymphomas is complex. To date, different clinical trials have demonstrated its usefulness as an innovative therapeutic alternative in these tumors. In this review article, we evaluate the literature on the role of the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway in DLBCL and describe future strategies involving these new anticancer agents in this lymphoid neoplasm.
Citation: Luis Miguel Juárez-Salcedo, Luis Manuel González, Samir Dalia. Immunotherapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: current use of immune checkpoint inhibitors therapy[J]. AIMS Medical Science, 2023, 10(3): 259-272. doi: 10.3934/medsci.2023020
[1] | Dongxing Fu, Xiaowei Xu, Zhibing Zhao . Generalized tilting modules and Frobenius extensions. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(9): 3337-3350. doi: 10.3934/era.2022169 |
[2] | Jiangsheng Hu, Dongdong Zhang, Tiwei Zhao, Panyue Zhou . Balance of complete cohomology in extriangulated categories. Electronic Research Archive, 2021, 29(5): 3341-3359. doi: 10.3934/era.2021042 |
[3] | Dong Su, Shilin Yang . Representation rings of extensions of Hopf algebra of Kac-Paljutkin type. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(9): 5201-5230. doi: 10.3934/era.2024240 |
[4] | Haiyu Liu, Rongmin Zhu, Yuxian Geng . Gorenstein global dimensions relative to balanced pairs. Electronic Research Archive, 2020, 28(4): 1563-1571. doi: 10.3934/era.2020082 |
[5] | Agustín Moreno Cañadas, Isaías David Marín Gaviria, Pedro Fernando Fernández Espinosa . Brauer configuration algebras and Kronecker modules to categorify integer sequences. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(2): 661-682. doi: 10.3934/era.2022035 |
[6] | Yajun Ma, Haiyu Liu, Yuxian Geng . A new method to construct model structures from left Frobenius pairs in extriangulated categories. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(8): 2774-2787. doi: 10.3934/era.2022142 |
[7] | Yongjie Wang, Nan Gao . Some properties for almost cellular algebras. Electronic Research Archive, 2021, 29(1): 1681-1689. doi: 10.3934/era.2020086 |
[8] | Xiuhai Fei, Cuixian Lu, Haifang Zhang . Nonlinear Jordan triple derivable mapping on ∗-type trivial extension algebras. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(3): 1425-1438. doi: 10.3934/era.2024066 |
[9] | Kailash C. Misra, Sutida Patlertsin, Suchada Pongprasert, Thitarie Rungratgasame . On derivations of Leibniz algebras. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(7): 4715-4722. doi: 10.3934/era.2024214 |
[10] | Agustín Moreno Cañadas, Robinson-Julian Serna, Isaías David Marín Gaviria . Zavadskij modules over cluster-tilted algebras of type A. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(9): 3435-3451. doi: 10.3934/era.2022175 |
Patients diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) have high cure rates with current treatment options including immuno-polychemotherapy. However, around 30% of cases do not respond or develop relapse disease. For this, it is necessary to search for new therapeutic options. In recent years, therapy using chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells has been a strategy for those patients with LBDCG in progression or relapse, although only 30–40% of cases achieve durable remissions. The programmed death-1 (PD-1) receptor regulates the T-cell-mediated immune response through binding to its ligands (PD-L1). Some tumor cells present high expression of PD-L1, which down-regulates T-cell activation. The beneficial antitumor activity of PD-1 and PD-L1 has been widely demonstrated in certain solid organ malignancies. However, their utility in the treatment of lymphomas is complex. To date, different clinical trials have demonstrated its usefulness as an innovative therapeutic alternative in these tumors. In this review article, we evaluate the literature on the role of the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway in DLBCL and describe future strategies involving these new anticancer agents in this lymphoid neoplasm.
Right (resp., left, null) quasi-Frobenius extensions of rings were first introduced by Müller [1] as a generalization of quasi-Frobenius rings and Frobenius extensions. They are closely related with separable extensions and group rings [1,2]. For instance, K. Hirata [2] established that a central projective separable extension equivalently characterized as a quasi-Frobenius extension. Extensive research has focused on the invariant properties of rings under right (resp., null) quasi-Frobenius extensions. Notably, key homological invariants such as the dominant dimension, injectivity, and related properties are preserved under quasi-Frobenius extensions, as demonstrated in [1,3].
In the 1960s, Auslander and Bridge [4] initially introduced the concept of finitely generated modules having Gorenstein dimension zero over a Noetherian ring; these modules are now widely termed Gorenstein projective (see [4,5] for further details). A number of studies, including [6,7,8,9,10], have explored the invariance of Gorenstein projective modules under various ring extensions such as excellent extensions, Frobenius extensions, trivial ring extensions, and separable equivalences.
It is known that the Gorenstein algebra, the Cohen-Macaulay finite algebra (CM-finite algebra, for short), and the Cohen-Macaulay finite algebra (CM-free algebra, for short) are characterized in terms of Gorenstein projective modules [3,11]. Recall that a ring Λ is called a Gorenstein ring, if the injective dimension of ΛΛ and that of ΛΛ are finite. Let Γ≥Λ be a quasi-Frobenius extension of Λ with ΓΛ a generator for Λ-modules. It follows from [3, Proposition 7] that Λ is a Gorenstein ring when Γ is so. Note that a generator for Λ-modules is completely faithful, but a completely faithful module is not a generator in general (see [12, P234], for detail). In this study, we shall develop their arguments and apply obtained results to right quasi-Frobenius extensions ultimately establishing the following theorem.
Theorem A. Let Γ be a right quasi-Frobenius extension of a two-sided Noetherian ring Λ.
(1) Suppose that Γ is a completely faithful left Λ-module. Then, Λ is a Gorenstein ring, when Γ is so.
(2) Suppose that Γ is a separable extension of Λ. Then, Γ is a Gorenstein ring, when Λ is so.
In [10], Zhao proved that CM-free (resp., CM-finite) properties are invariant under separable Frobenius extensions of commutative Artin rings. It is shown by Huang et al. [7] that CM-free (resp., CM-finite) properties are invariant under the strongly separable quasi-Frobenius extensions. In this paper, we shall improve them and prove the same results for right quasi-Frobenius extensions of Artin algebras.
Theorem B. Let Γ be a separable right quasi-Frobenius extension of an Artin algebra Λ.
(1) If Λ is CM-free, then so is Γ. Furthermore, if Γ is a generator for Λ-modules, the converse also holds.
(2) If Λ is CM-finite, then so is Γ. Furthermore, if M is a relative generator for FG(Γ), where FG(Γ) is the category formed by all finitely generated Gorenstein projective left Λ-modules, then EndΛM is a right quasi-Frobenius extension of EndΓM.
Essential definitions and results frequently employed in this work are given in Section 2. Theorems A and B are proved in Section 3.
In this study, unless otherwise specified, all rings are assumed to be two-sided Noetherian rings, and all modules are finitely generated left modules. Given a ring Λ, the category composed of all finitely generated left Λ-modules is denoted by modΛ.
Definition 2.1. ([1, Definition 1.1]) Let Λ be a subring of Γ containing the identity of Γ. Then Γ is said to be a ring extension of Λ, represented as Γ≥Λ. Such an extension Γ≥Λ is said to be a right quasi-Frobenius extension (right QF-extension, for short), if
(1) ΓΛ is projective;
(2) ΛΓΓ∈addΛ(HomΛ(ΓΓΛ,ΛΛΛ)Γ, where addΛ(HomΛ(ΓΓΛ,ΛΛΛ)Γ denotes the category formed by direct summands of finite copies of ΛHomΛ(ΓΓΛ,ΛΛΛ)Γ.
The definition of a left quasi-Frobenius extension follows analogously. When a right QF-extension Γ≥Λ additionally satisfies the criteria for a left QF-extension, it is termed a quasi-Frobenius extension (QF-extension, for short). Moreover, a QF-extension Γ≥Λ is called a Frobenius extension if there is a bimodule isomorphism ΛΓΓ≅ΛHomΛ(ΓΓΛ,ΛΛΛ)Γ; see [13, Theorem 1.2] for detail.
The following remark is easy, which is important for our arguments.
Remark 2.2. Let Γ≥Λ be a right QF-extension, then
(1) ΓHomΛ(ΛΓΓ,ΛΛ)Λ∈addΓΓΛ.
(2) ΛΓ is projective.
Recall from [13, Section 2.4] that a ring extension Γ≥Λ is said to be a separable extension, if the map
π:Γ⊗ΛΓ→Γviaπ(a⊗b)=ab |
is a split epimorphism of the Γ-bimodule. By the definition of separable extensions, we have the following lemma.
Lemma 2.3. Let Γ≥Λ be a separable extension and N∈modΓ. Then, we have ΓN∈addΓ(Γ⊗ΛN).
Proof. By the definition of separable extensions, there exist a Γ-bimodule Y and a Γ-bimodule isomorphism ΓΓΓ⊕ΓYΓ≅Γ(Γ⊗ΛΓ)Γ. Then, for a Γ-module N, one gets Γ-module isomorphisms
ΓΓ⊗ΛN≅Γ(Γ⊗ΛΓ)⊗ΓN≅Γ(Γ⊕Y)⊗ΓN≅ΓN⊕Γ(Y⊗ΓN). |
Thus, we have ΓN∈addΓ(Γ⊗ΛN).
For a module M∈modΛ with the projective presentation,
P1f→P0⟶M⟶0. |
Following [4], the transpose of M, denoted by TrM, is defined as the cokernel of the dualized map of f∗, where (−)∗=HomΛ(−,Λ).
Lemma 2.4. ([6, Lemma 3.1]) Suppose that Γ≥Λ is a ring extension.
(1) For any M∈modΛ, there exist projective right Γ-modules Q1,Q2 and a right Γ-module isomorphism Tr(Γ⊗ΛM)Γ⊕Q1≅(TrM⊗ΛΓ)Γ⊕Q2.
(2) If ΓΛ is projective and N∈modΓ, then there exist projective right Λ-modules P1,P2 and a right Λ-module isomorphism (TrN)Λ⊕P1≅TrN⊗ΓHomΛ(ΛΓΓ,ΛΛ)Λ⊕P2.
Recall from [4, Proposition 3.8] that M is said to have Gorenstein dimension zero, denoted by GpdΛM=0, if Ext≥1Λ(ΛM,Λ)=0=Ext≥1Λo((TrM)Λ,Λ). These modules are now often termed Gorenstein projective (see [5, Definition 10.2.1] for detail). The full subcategory of modΛ comprising all finitely generated Gorenstein projective modules is denoted by FG(Λ). The Gorenstein projective dimension (or Gorenstein dimension) of M, denoted by GpdΛM, is defined as the minimal integer n≥1 for which there exists an exact sequence in modΛ: 0→Dn→⋯→D1→D0→M→0 with each Di∈FG(Λ) (see [4,14] for detail). If no such finite sequence exists, GpdΛM is defined to be infinite. The finitistic dimension of Λ, denoted fin.dimΛ, is defined as the supremum of projective dimensions across all modules M in modΛ having finite projective dimensions.
Lemma 2.5. [6, Lemma 2.5] For a two-sided Noetherian ring Λ, fin.dimΛ=sup{GpdM∣M∈modΛ and GpdM<∞}.
Let B be a Λ-module. From [15, P87], we know that its character module B+ is the right Λ-module HomZ(B,Q/Z). Recall from [12, P233] that B is called completely faithful, provided that for every homomorphism f, f⊗ΛB=0 implies f=0. Recall that B is a generator (resp., cogenerator) for Λ-modules if each Λ-module is a quotient (resp., submodule) of direct sums (resp., products) of B. Clearly, every generator is completely faithful, but the converse is not true in general.
Lemma 2.6. ([12, P234]) The equivalence of the following statements holds for a projective Λ-module Q.
(1) Q is a completely faithful module.
(2) Let V be a right Λ-module. Then, V⊗ΛQ=0 implies V=0,
(3) The character module Q+ is a cogenerator in modΛop.
Lemma 2.7. Let Λ and Γ be Noetherian rings.
(1) [15, Corollary 10.65] In the situation (ΛA,ΓBΛ,ΓC), assume that BΛ is projective. Then, for any n≥1, there is an isomorphism
ExtnΓ(B⊗ΛA,C)≅ExtnΛ(A,HomΓ(B,C)). |
(2) [5, Theorem 3.2.15] In the situation (ΛA,ΓBΛ,ΓC), assume that ΛA is projective. Then, for any n≥1, there is an isomorphism
ExtnΓ(C,B⊗ΛA)≅ExtnΓ(C,B)⊗ΛA. |
Lemma 3.1. Let Γ≥Λ be a right QF-extension, and X∈modΛ. Then, for any i≥1, we have the following isomorphisms
(1) ExtiΓ(Γ⊗ΛX,Γ)≅ExtiΛ(X,Λ)⊗ΛΓ;
(2) ExtiΓ(Γ⊗ΛX,Γ)≅ExtiΛ(ΛX,ΛΓ).
Proof. Noting that ΛΓ and ΓΛ are projective by assumption and by Remark 2.2(2), the assertion follows directly from Lemma 2.7.
Lemma 3.2. Suppose that Γ≥Λ is a right QF-extension with ΛΓ completely faithful. Then,
(1) HomΛ(ΛΓ,ΛΛΛ) is a completely faithful right Λ-module.
(2) ΓΛ is completely faithful.
Proof. (1) It suffices to prove that the character module HomΛ(ΛΓ,ΛΛΛ)+Λ is a cogenerator by Lemma 2.6(3), because HomΛ(ΛΓ,ΛΛΛ)Λ is projective by Remark 2.2(1).
Let X be a finitely generated right Λ-module satisfying HomΛ(X,HomΛ(ΛΓΓ,ΛΛΛ)+)=0. Since ΛΓ is projective, by [14, P78,Theorem 3.2.11], there are isomorphisms
0=HomΛ(XΛ,HomΛ(ΛΓΓ,Λ)+Λ)≅HomΛ(XΛ,Λ+⊗ΛΓ)≅HomΛ(XΛ,Λ+)⊗ΛΓ, |
So, HomΛ(ΛX,Λ+)=0 by the completely faithful property of ΛΓ. Since Λ+ is also a cogenerator, X=0, which implies that HomΛ(ΛΓ,ΛΛ)+ is a cogenerator. Thus, we obtain our claim by Lemma 2.6(3).
(2) Since HomΛ(ΛΓΓ,Λ)Λ∈addΓΛ by Remark 2.2(1), Γ is a completely faithful right Λ-module as desired.
Remark 3.3. (1) Let Γ≥Λ be a right QF-extension such that Γ is a completely faithful right Λ-module. It is not known that Γ is completely faithful as a left Λ-module.
(2) Let Γ≥Λ be a right QF-extension with ΛΓ a generator for Λ-modules, then ΓΛ is completely faithful by Lemma 3.2. For example, if Γ is an excellent extension of Λ. It follows from [6, Proposition 4.3] that Γ is a right QF-extension of Λ. By the definition of excellent extensions, Γ is a free Λ-module. It follows from Lemma 3.2 that Γ is a completely faithful right Λ-module.
Proposition 3.4. Let Γ≥Λ be a right QF-extension, and let M∈modΛ. If ΛM is Gorenstein projective, so is Γ(Γ⊗ΛM). Furthermore, if ΛΓ is a completely faithful Λ-module, then the converse holds.
Proof. By assumption, for any i≥1, we have ExtiΛ(M,Λ)=0=ExtiΛ((TrM)Λ,Λ). Since Γ≥Λ is a right QF-extension, one obtains that ΛΓ is projective by Remark 2.2(2). By Lemma 3.1(1), one has ExtiΓ(Γ⊗ΛM,Γ)≅ExtiΛ(M,Λ)⊗ΛΓ=0 for any i≥1. On the other hand, since both ΛΓ and ΓΛ are projective, by Lemma 2.4 and Lemma 3.1(2), for any i≥1, there are isomorphisms
ExtiΓ(Tr(Γ⊗ΛM)Γ,Γ)≅ExtiΓ((TrM)⊗ΛΓ,Γ)≅ExtiΛ(TrM,Γ)=0. |
This implies that Γ⊗ΛM∈FG(Γ).
Conversely, assume that ΛΓ is completely faithful and Γ⊗ΛM∈FG(Γ). Then, ExtiΓ(Γ⊗ΛM,Γ)=0=ExtiΓ(Tr(Γ⊗ΛM),Γ) for any i≥1.
By Lemma 3.1(1), one gets 0=ExtiΓ(Γ⊗ΛM,Γ)≅ExtiΛ(M,Λ)⊗ΛΓ for any i≥1. Since ΛΓ is completely faithful, by Lemma 2.6(2), ExtiΛ(M,Λ)=0 for each i≥1.
It remains to show Ext≥1Λ(TrM,Λ)=0. Since ΛΓ is projective by Remark 2.2(2), for i≥1, we have
0=ExtiΓ(Tr(Γ⊗ΛM),ΓΓ)≅ExtiΓ(TrM⊗ΛΓ,ΓΓ) (by Lemma 2.4)≅ExtiΛ((TrM)Λ,ΓΛ)≅ExtiΛ((TrM)Λ,Γ⊗ΛΛ)≅Γ⊗ΛExtiΛ(TrM,Λ). (by Lemma 2.7(2)) |
Note that Γ is a completely faithful right Λ-module by Lemma 3.2(2), then Ext≥1Λ((TrM)Λ,ΛΛ) = 0.
Corollary 3.5. Let Γ≥Λ be a right QF-extension with ΛΓ completely faithful, and let M∈modΛ. Then
GpdΓ(Γ⊗ΛM)=GpdΛM. |
Proof. Since ΓΛ is projective, by [6, Proposition 3.2], one obtains GpdΓ(Γ⊗ΛM)≤GpdΛM.
On the other hand, without loss of generality, let GpdΓ(Γ⊗ΛM)=n<∞. Taking an exact sequence in modΛ,
0→Kn→Gn−1→⋯→G1→G0→M→0 |
with each Gi∈FG(Λ). Applying the exact functor Γ⊗Λ− to the above sequence yields an exact sequence in modΓ
0→Γ⊗ΛKn→Γ⊗ΛGn−1→⋯→Γ⊗ΛG1→Γ⊗ΛG0→Γ⊗ΛM→0. |
By the first part of Proposition 3.4, one gets Γ⊗ΛGi∈FG(Γ) for all 0≤i≤n−1. So, Γ⊗ΛKn∈FG(Γ) by assumption and by [16, Theorem 2.20]. It follows from the second part of Proposition 3.4 that Kn∈FG(Λ). This implies GpdΛM≤n by [16, Corollary 2.21].
Corollary 3.6. Suppose that Γ≥Λ is a right QF-extension of Λ and M∈modΛ. If M is Gorenstein projective as a Λ-module, then so is HomΛ(ΛΓΓ,M) as a Γ-module.
Proof. Since Γ≥Λ is a right QF-extension, from Remark 2.2 one has HomΛ(ΛΓΓ,M)≅HomΛ(ΛΓΓ,Λ)⊗ΛM ∈addΓ(Γ⊗ΛM). By Proposition 3.4, Γ⊗ΛM is Gorenstein projective. The assertion follows from [16, Theorem 2.5].
Proposition 3.7. Let Γ be a right QF-extension of Λ and N∈modΓ. Suppose that N is Gorenstein projective as a Γ-module, then so is the underlying module N as a Λ-module. Furthermore, the converse holds when Γ≥Λ is separable.
Proof. By assumption, for any i≥1, one has ExtiΓ(N,Γ)=0=ExtiΓ((TrN)Γ,Γ). Hence, for each i≥1, ExtiΓ(ΓN,HomΛ(ΛΓΓ, Λ))=0, because ΓHomΛ(ΛΓΓ,Λ) is projective by Remark 2.2(1). By Lemma 2.7(1), for any positive integer i, we have
ExtiΛ(ΛN,Λ)≅ExtiΛ(ΛΓ⊗ΓN,Λ)≅ExtiΓ(ΓN,HomΛ(ΛΓΓ,ΛΛ))=0. |
On the other hand, since ΛΓ is projective by Remark 2.2(2), for any positive integer i, we have
ExtiΛ((TrN)Λ,Λ)≅ExtiΛ(TrΓN⊗ΓHomΛ(ΛΓΓ,ΛΛ),Λ) (by Lemma 2.4)≅ExtiΓ(TrΓN,HomΛ(HomΛ(ΛΓΓ,ΛΛ),Λ)) (by Lemma 2.7(1))≅ExtiΓ((TrN)Γ,Γ)=0. |
This means ΛN∈FG(Λ) as desired.
Conversely, assume that N∈FG(Λ). By the first part of Proposition 3.4, Γ⊗ΛN∈FG(Γ). Noting that Γ≥Λ is separable, then, by Lemma 2.3, we obtain ΓN∈addΓ(Γ⊗ΛN). Thus, by [16, Theorem 2.5], one gets N∈FG(Γ).
Proposition 3.8. Let Γ≥Λ be a right QF-extension, and let N∈modΓ. Then, GpdΛN≤GpdΓN. Moreover, the equality holds true when Γ≥Λ is separable.
Proof. We may assume, without loss of generality, that GpdΓN=m, then we have the following exact sequence in modΓ:
0→Dm→Dm−1→⋯→D0→N→0 |
in modΓ, where each ΓDi lies in FG(Γ). Clearly, the above sequence remains exact in modΛ. Also, by the first part of Proposition 3.7, we have ΛDi∈FG(Λ), for each 0≤i≤m. This implies GpdΛN≤m.
Let Γ≥Λ be a separable right QF-extension, and we have ΓN∈addΓ(Γ⊗ΛN), by Lemma 2.3. So, one has GpdΓN≤GpdΓ(Γ⊗ΛN)≤GpdΛN by ([6, Proposition 3.2].
Theorem 3.9. If Γ≥Λ is a separable right QF-extension with ΛΓ completely faithful, then
fin.dimΓ=fin.dimΛ. |
Proof. This assertion follows immediately from Lemma 2.5, Corollary 3.5, and the second part of Proposition 3.8.
Theorem 3.10. Let Γ and Λ be two Artin algebras.
(1) Let Γ≥Λ be a right QF-extension with ΛΓ completely faithful. If Γ is Gorenstein, then so is Λ.
(2) Let Γ≥Λ be a separable right QF-extension. If Λ is Gorenstein, then so is Γ.
Proof. According to [17, Theorem 1.1], an Artin algebra is Gorenstein precisely when every finitely generated left module has finite Gorenstein projective dimension. (1) follows directly from Corollary 3.5, while (2) is an immediate consequence of the first part of Proposition 3.8.
Let Λ be an Artin algebra over a commutative Artin ring R. Recall from [18, Section 1] that a Λ-module M is termed semi-Gorenstein projective, provided Ext≥1Λ(M,Λ)=0. We write ⊥Λ={X∈modΛ|Ext≥1Λ(X,Λ)=0}. Λ is termed left weakly Gorenstein, if GP(Λ)=⊥Λ. The notion of left weakly Gorenstein algebras is a generalization of that of Gorenstein algebras. Hence, Λ is left weakly Gorenstein if, and only if, every semi-Gorenstein projective Λ-module is Gorenstein projective.
Theorem 3.11. Let Γ and Λ be two Artin R-algebras.
(1) Let Γ≥Λ be a right QF-extension with ΛΓ completely faithful. If Γ is left weakly Gorenstein, then so is Λ.
(2) Let Γ≥Λ be a separable right QF-extension. If Λ is left weakly Gorenstein, then so is Γ.
Proof. (1) Let M be a semi-Gorenstein projective Λ-module. Then, one has Ext≥1Λ(M,Λ)=0. By assumption and by Remark 2.2(2), both ΛΓ and ΓΛ are projective. Then, by Lemma 2.7(1), for any i≥1, we have ExtiΓ(Γ⊗ΛM,Γ)≅ExtiΛ(M,Γ)=0, which implies that Γ⊗ΛM is semi-Gorenstein projective. So, Γ⊗ΛM∈FG(Γ) by assumption. It follows from the second part of Proposition 3.4 that M∈FG(Λ). Hence, Λ is a left weakly Gorenstein algebra.
(2) suppose that Λ is left weakly Gorenstein. Given a semi-Gorenstein Γ-module N, by Lemma 2.7(1) and by [6, Proposition 3.2], there are isomorphisms ExtiΛ(N,Λ)≅ExtiΛ(Γ⊗ΓN,Λ)≅ExtiΓ(ΓN,HomΛ(ΛΓΓ,Λ)) = 0 for any i≥1, because ΓHomΛ(ΛΓΓ, Λ) is projective by Remark 2.2(1). It implies that N is also a semi-Gorenstein Λ-module, and, hence, one obtains N∈FG(Λ) by assumption. Therefore, N∈FG(Γ) by the second part of Proposition 3.7. Thus, we complete this proof.
The following lemma is due to Y. Kitamura in [19].
Lemma 3.12. [19, Theorem 1.2] Let Γ≥Λ be a right QF-extension and N∈modΓ. If ΓΓ⊗ΛN∈addΓN, then EndΛN≥EndΓN also is a right QF-extension.
Let Λ be an Artin R-algebra. By D(−), we denote the standard duality HomR(−,E(R/rad(R))), where E(R/rad(R)) is the injective envelope of R/rad(R). Following [11, Section 1], Λ is termed Cohen-Macaulay free, or simply, CM-free, provided FG(Λ)=P(Λ) (where P(Λ) is the category of finitely generated projective Λ-modules). Additionally, Λ is called Cohen-Macaulay finite[20, Section 8], or simply, CM-finite, if there exists a Gorenstein projective Λ-module G such that FG(Λ)=addΛG, and G is called a relative generator for FG(Λ). Clearly, a Cohen-Macaulay free algebra is Cohen-Macaulay finite.
Theorem 3.13. Suppose Γ is a separable right QF-extension of an Artin R-algebra Λ. Then,
Λ is CM− free generator ⟷Γ is CM− free↓↓Λ is CM− finite→Γ is CM− finite. |
That is,
(1) If Λ is CM-free, then so is Γ. Moreover, the converse holds when Γ is a generator for modΛ.
(2) If Λ is CM-finite, then so is Γ. Moreover, if M is a relative generator for FG(Γ), then the ring homomorphism ρ:EndΓM→EndΛM is a right QF-extension.
Proof. (1) For N∈FG(Γ), one has N∈FG(Λ) by the first part of Proposition 3.7. Hence, by assumption, one obtains ΛN∈P(Λ). So, Γ⊗ΛN∈P(Γ). Noting that Γ≥Λ is separable, ΓN∈addΓ(Γ⊗ΛN) by Lemma 2.3. Then, ΓN is projective. Thus, Γ is a CM-free algebra.
Conversely, assume that ΛΓ is a generator, and Γ is CM-free. Let M∈FG(Λ). By Corollary 3.6, we have HomΛ(ΛΓΓ,M)∈FG(Γ), which is projective by assumption. Hence, D(HomΛ(ΛΓΓ,M)) is an injective right Γ-module. By [15, Lemma 3.60], there is an isomorphism D(HomΛ(ΛΓΓ,M))≅DM⊗ΛΓ. Hence, DM is injective by [3, Proposition 7], which implies that M is projective. Therefore, Λ is CM-free.
(2) Assume that Λ is Cohen-Macaulay finite, with G being a relative generator for FG(Λ). By Proposition 3.4, we have Γ⊗ΛG∈FG(Γ). For any X∈FG(Γ), one gets ΛX∈FG(Λ) by Proposition 3.7. So, ΛX∈addΛG and, hence, one gets Γ(Γ⊗ΛX)∈addΓ(Γ⊗ΛG). On the other hand, noting that the ring extension Γ≥Λ is separable, we have ΓX∈addΓ(Γ⊗ΛX). It follows that ΓX∈addΓ(Γ⊗ΛG), which means that Γ is CM-finite.
By assumption and by the above discussion, one obtains that Γ is Cohen-Maulay finite. If M is a relative generator for FG(Γ), then we have that M∈FG(Λ) by Proposition 3.7. It follows from the first part of Proposition 3.4 that Γ(Γ⊗ΛM)∈FG(Γ). So, Γ(Γ⊗ΛM)∈addΓM by assumption and by Proposition 3.4, which satisfies the condition of Lemma 3.12. Therefore, EndΛM≥EndΓM is a right QF-extension as a direct consequence of Lemma 3.12.
Recall that a separable extension Γ≥Λ is said to be strongly separable, if M∈addΛ(Γ⊗ΛM) for any Λ-module M. Under this condition, ΛΓ is a generator for Λ-modules. Due to Theorems 3.10 and 3.13, we re-obtain results in [7].
Corollary 3.14. Let Γ be a strongly separable quasi-Frobenius extension of Λ. Then
(1) ([7, Corollary 3.9]) Λ is Gorenstein if, and only if, Γ is Gorenstein.
(2) ([7, Corollary 3.10]) Λ is CM-free if, and only if, Γ is CM-free.
The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
This work was financially supported by NSFC 12061026 and Foundation for University Key Teacher by Henan Province 2019GGJS204.
The authors declare there are no conflicts of interest.
[1] |
Swerdlow SH, Campo E, Pileri SA, et al. (2016) The 2016 revision of the World Health Organization classification of lymphoid neoplasms. Blood 127: 2375-2390. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2016-01-643569 ![]() |
[2] |
Alaggio R, Amador C, Anagnostopoulos I, et al. (2022) The 5th edition of the World Health Organization classification of haematolymphoid tumours: lymphoid neoplasms. Leukemia 36: 1720-1748. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41375-022-01620-2 ![]() |
[3] |
Keane C, Vari F, Hertzberg M, et al. (2015) Ratios of T-cell immune effectors and checkpoint molecules as prognostic biomarkers in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: A population-based study. Lancet Haematol 2: e445-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-3026(15)00150-7 ![]() |
[4] |
Purroy N, Bergua J, Gallur L, et al. (2015) Long-term follow-up of dose-adjusted EPOCH plus rituximab (DA-EPOCH-R) in untreated patients with poor prognosis large B-cell lymphoma. A phase II study conducted by the Spanish PETHEMA group. Br J Haematol 169: 188-198. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjh.13273 ![]() |
[5] | Major A, Smith SM (2021) DA-R-EPOCH vs R-CHOP in DLBCL: how do we choose?. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol 19: 698-709. |
[6] |
Dunleavy K (2018) Approach to the diagnosis and treatment of adult Burkitt's lymphoma. J Oncol Pract 14: 665-671. https://doi.org/10.1200/JOP.18.00148 ![]() |
[7] |
Howlett C, Snedecor SJ, Landsburg DJ, et al. (2015) Front-line, dose-escalated immunochemotherapy is associated with a significant progression-free survival advantage in patients with double-hit lymphomas: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Haematol 170: 504-514. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjh.13463 ![]() |
[8] |
Gisselbrecht C, Glass B, Mounier N, et al. (2010) Salvage regimens with autologous transplantation for relapsed large B-cell lymphoma in the rituximab era. J Clin Oncol 28: 4184-4190. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2010.28.1618 ![]() |
[9] |
Crump M, Kuruvilla J, Couban S, et al. (2014) Randomized comparison of gemcitabine, dexamethasone, and cisplatin versus dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatin chemotherapy before autologous stem-cell transplantation for relapsed and refractory aggressive lymphomas: NCIC-CTG LY.12. J Clin Oncol 32: 3490-3496. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2013.53.9593 ![]() |
[10] |
Crump M, Neelapu SS, Farooq U, et al. (2017) Outcomes in refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: results from the international SCHOLAR-1 study. Blood 130: 1800-1808. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2017-03-769620 ![]() |
[11] |
Locke F, Miklos DB, Jacobson C, et al. (2021) Primary analysis of ZUMA‑7: A phase 3 randomized trial of axicabtagene ciloleucel (Axi-Cel) versus standard‑of‑care therapy in patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma. Blood 138: 2. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2021-148039 ![]() |
[12] |
Kamdar M, Solomon SR, Arnason J, et al. (2022) Lisocabtagene maraleucel versus standard of care with salvage chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation as second-line treatment in patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (TRANSFORM): results from an interim analysis of an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet 399: 2294-2308. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00662-6 ![]() |
[13] |
Nastoupil LJ, Jain MD, Feng L, et al. (2020) Standard-of-care axicabtagene ciloleucel for relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma: results from the US lymphoma CAR T consortium. J Clin Oncol 38: 3119-3128. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.19.02104 ![]() |
[14] |
Schuster SJ, Svoboda J, Chong EA, et al. (2017) Chimeric antigen receptor T cells in refractory B-cell lymphomas. N Engl J Med 377: 2545-2554. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1708566 ![]() |
[15] |
Schuster SJ, Tam CS, Borchmann P, et al. (2021) Long-term clinical outcomes of tisagenlecleucel in patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive B-cell lymphomas (JULIET): A multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol 22: 1403-1415. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00375-2 ![]() |
[16] |
Zhang X, Schwartz JCD, Guo X, et al. (2004) Structural and functional analysis of the costimulatory receptor programmed death-1. Immunity 20: 337-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1074-7613(04)00051-2 ![]() |
[17] |
Dermani FK, Samadi P, Rahmani G, et al. (2019) PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint: potential target for cancer therapy. J Cell Physiol 234: 1313-1325. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcp.27172 ![]() |
[18] |
Chatterjee P, Patsoukis N, Freeman GJ, et al. (2013) Distinct roles of PD-1 ITSM and ITIM in regulating interactions with SHP-2, ZAP-70 and Lck, and PD-1-mediated inhibitory function. Blood 122: 191. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.V122.21.191.191 ![]() |
[19] |
Youngnak P, Kozono Y, Kozono H, et al. (2003) Differential binding properties of B7-H1 and B7-DC to programmed death-1. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 307: 672-677. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0006-291x(03)01257-9 ![]() |
[20] |
Juárez-Salcedo LM, Sandoval-Sus J, Sokol L, et al. (2017) The role of anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 agents in the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: the future is now. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 113: 52-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2017.02.027 ![]() |
[21] |
Xu-Monette ZY, Zhou J, Young KH (2018) PD-1 expression and clinical PD-1 blockade in B-cell lymphomas. Blood 131: 68-83. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2017-07-740993 ![]() |
[22] |
Cioroianu AI, Stinga PI, Sticlaru L, et al. (2019) Tumor microenvironment in diffuse large B-Cell lymphoma: role and prognosis. Anal Cell Pathol 2019: 8586354. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/8586354 ![]() |
[23] |
Ansell SM (2016) Where do programmed death-1 inhibitors fit in the management of malignant lymphoma?. J Oncol Pract 12: 101-106. https://doi.org/10.1200/JOP.2015.009191 ![]() |
[24] |
Sun C, Mezzadra R, Schumacher TN (2018) Regulation and function of the PD-L1 checkpoint. Immunity 48: 434-452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2018.03.014 ![]() |
[25] |
Song MK, Park BB, Uhm J (2019) Understanding immune evasion and therapeutic targeting associated with PD-1/PD-L1 pathway in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Int J Mol Sci 20: 1326. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20061326 ![]() |
[26] |
Georgiou K, Chen L, Berglund M, et al. (2016) Genetic basis of PD-L1 overexpression in diffuse large B-cell lymphomas. Blood 127: 3026-3034. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2015-12-686550 ![]() |
[27] |
Satou A, Nakamura S (2021) EBV-positive B-cell lymphomas and lymphoproliferative disorders: review from the perspective of immune escape and immunodeficiency. Cancer Med 10: 6777-6785. https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.4198 ![]() |
[28] |
Shi Y, Liu Z, Lin Q, et al. (2021) MiRNAs and cancer: key link in diagnosis and therapy. Genes 12: 1289. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes12081289 ![]() |
[29] |
He B, Yan F, Wu C (2018) Overexpressed miR-195 attenuated immune escape of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma by targeting PD-L1. Biomed Pharmacother 98: 95-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2017.11.146 ![]() |
[30] |
Ansell SM, Minnema MC, Johnson P, et al. (2019) Nivolumab for relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in patients ineligible for or having failed autologous transplantation: A single-arm, phase II study. J Clin Oncol 37: 481-489. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.18.00766 ![]() |
[31] |
Godfrey J, Tumuluru S, Bao R, et al. (2019) PD-L1 gene alterations identify a subset of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma harboring a T-cell-inflamed phenotype. Blood 133: 2279-2290. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2018-10-879015 ![]() |
[32] |
Hu LY, Xu XL, Rao HL, et al. (2017) Expression and clinical value of programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) in diffuse large B cell lymphoma: A retrospective study. Chin J Cancer 36: 94. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40880-017-0262-z ![]() |
[33] |
Roemer MGM, Advani RH, Ligon AH, et al. (2016) PD-L1 and PD-L2 genetic alterations define classical hodgkin lymphoma and predict outcome. J Clin Oncol 34: 2690-2697. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.66.4482 ![]() |
[34] |
Kiyasu J, Miyoshi H, Hirata A, et al. (2015) Expression of programmed cell death ligand 1 is associated with poor overall survival in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Blood 126: 2193-2201. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2015-02-629600 ![]() |
[35] |
Andorsky DJ, Yamada RE, Said J, et al. (2011) Programmed death ligand 1 is expressed by non-hodgkin lymphomas and inhibits the activity of tumor-associated T cells. Clin Cancer Res 17: 4232-4244. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-2660 ![]() |
[36] |
Tuscano JM, Maverakis E, Groshen S, et al. (2019) A phase I study of the combination of rituximab and ipilimumab in patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell lymphoma. Clin Cancer Res 25: 7004-7013. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-0438 ![]() |
[37] |
Zhang J, Medeiros LJ, Young KH (2018) Cancer immunotherapy in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Front Oncol 8: 351. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2018.00351 ![]() |
[38] |
Lesokhin AM, Ansell SM, Armand P, et al. (2016) Nivolumab in patients with relapsed or refractory hematologic malignancy: preliminary results of a phase Ib study. J Clin Oncol 34: 2698-2704. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2015.65.9789 ![]() |
[39] |
Smith SD, Till BG, Shadman MS, et al. (2020) Pembrolizumab with R-CHOP in previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: potential for biomarker driven therapy. Br J Haematol 189: 1119-1126. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjh.16494 ![]() |
[40] |
Green MR, Monti S, Rodig SJ, et al. (2010) Integrative analysis reveals selective 9p24.1 amplification, increased PD-1 ligand expression, and further induction via JAK2 in nodular sclerosing Hodgkin lymphoma and primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma. Blood 116: 3268-3277. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2010-05-282780 ![]() |
[41] |
Camus V, Bigenwald C, Ribrag V, et al. (2021) Pembrolizumab in the treatment of refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma: safety and efficacy. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 21: 941-956. https://doi.org/10.1080/14737140.2021.1953986 ![]() |
[42] |
Shah NJ, Kelly WJ, Liu SV, et al. (2018) Product review on the Anti-PD-L1 antibody atezolizumab. Hum Vaccin Immunother 14: 269-276. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2017.1403694 ![]() |
[43] |
Younes A, Burke JM, Cheson BD, et al. (2023) Safety and efficacy of atezolizumab with rituximab and CHOP in previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Blood Adv 7: 1488-1495. https://doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2022008344 ![]() |
[44] |
Palomba ML, Till BG, Park SI, et al. (2022) Combination of atezolizumab and obinutuzumab in patients with relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: results from a phase 1b study. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 22: e443-e451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clml.2021.12.010 ![]() |
[45] |
Palomba ML, Cartron G, Popplewell L, et al. (2022) Combination of atezolizumab and tazemetostat in patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: results from a phase Ib study. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 22: 504-512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clml.2021.12.014 ![]() |
[46] |
Jeanson A, Barlesi F (2017) MEDI 4736 (durvalumab) in non-small cell lung cancer. Expert Opin Biol Ther 17: 1317-1323. https://doi.org/10.1080/14712598.2017.1351939 ![]() |
[47] |
Nowakowski GS, Willenbacher W, Greil R, et al. (2022) Safety and efficacy of durvalumab with R-CHOP or R2-CHOP in untreated, high-risk DLBCL: A phase 2, open-label trial. Int J Hematol 115: 222-232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12185-021-03241-4 ![]() |