Journal Articles

Case of complete response to immunotherapy in MMR-deficient prostate cancer associated with NK-like and CD4+CD8+ T cells

Spotlight 

In a patient with advanced prostate cancer, pembrolizumab resulted in CR and, followed by a radical prostatectomy, prevented recurrence out to 18mo. Tumor whole-exome NGS indicated dMMR/MSI-H and an extremely high TMB. Among PBMCs, CD56+ NK-like CD8+ T cells and CD4+CD8+ double-positive (DP) T cells were observed at high frequency relative to healthy donors, expressed cytotoxic/effector gene signatures and TEMRA phenotype, and clonally expanded after ICB. In other trials (prostate and dMMR/MSI-H cancers), CD56+CD8+ and DP T cells were found among TILs in ICB-treated patients, and DP T cell expansion was positively associated with patient response.

Contributed by Alex Najibi

In a patient with advanced prostate cancer, pembrolizumab resulted in CR and, followed by a radical prostatectomy, prevented recurrence out to 18mo. Tumor whole-exome NGS indicated dMMR/MSI-H and an extremely high TMB. Among PBMCs, CD56+ NK-like CD8+ T cells and CD4+CD8+ double-positive (DP) T cells were observed at high frequency relative to healthy donors, expressed cytotoxic/effector gene signatures and TEMRA phenotype, and clonally expanded after ICB. In other trials (prostate and dMMR/MSI-H cancers), CD56+CD8+ and DP T cells were found among TILs in ICB-treated patients, and DP T cell expansion was positively associated with patient response.

Contributed by Alex Najibi

ABSTRACT: Mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) and microsatellite instability (MSI-H) are rare in prostate cancer, occurring in 2%-4% of cases. These defects result in increased genomic instability and elevated tumor mutational burden (TMB), which can support responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Here, we report a patient with locally advanced Gleason 5 + 5 = 10 prostatic adenocarcinoma harboring MSH2 and MSH6 genomic deletions with ultrahigh TMB (>250 mutations/megabase) in whom pembrolizumab resulted in a striking complete radiographic, pathologic, and molecular response. Using digital-spatial microscopy, single-cell RNA/T cell receptor (TCR) sequencing, and multiplex cytometry, we identify atypical tumor-infiltrating T cells with natural killer-like phenotypes and CD4(+)CD8(+) (double-positive) lymphocytes. These clonal T cell populations expand preferentially following ICI and adopt terminally differentiated and cytotoxic profiles that may drive clinical response. Similar T cells are also present in diverse cancers and expand exclusively in ICI-responsive patients. These findings inform on the cellular mechanisms by which immunotherapies may mediate profound responses in patients with dMMR solid tumors.

Author Info: (1) Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesot

Author Info: (1) Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Center for Immunology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. (2) Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. (3) Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. (4) Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. (5) Institute for Health Informatics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Clinical Translational Science Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55415, USA. (6) Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. (7) Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. (8) Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA. (9) Department of Pharmacology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. (10) Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. (11) Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA. (12) Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. (13) Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA. (14) Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA. (15) Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ 85040, USA. (16) Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. (17) Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. (18) Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. (19) Allina Health Cancer Institute, Minneapolis, MN 55407, USA. (20) Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. (21) Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. (22) Institute for Health Informatics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Clinical Translational Science Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55415, USA. (23) Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. (24) Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA. (25) Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA. (26) Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. (27) Division of Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA. Electronic address: anton401@umn.edu.

A radiopharmaceutical enhances CAR T cells against radio-sensitive and radio-resistant neuroblastoma by tumor sensitization and TME remodeling Spotlight 

Rodriguez and Edinger et al. showed that pre-treatment with VLA-4-targeted, low-dose radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) using [67Cu] Cu-LLP2A enhanced GD2 or B7-H3 CAR T cell efficacy, resulting in significant tumor regression in xenogeneic, preclinical neuroblastoma models. The mechanism of action varied with tumor radiosensitivity. In radiosensitive tumors, RPT was directly tumoricidal and enhanced CAR T cell efficacy via TNF-α, leading to paracrine T cell activation. In radioresistant tumors, RPT remodeled the TIME by decreasing the number of M2-like TAMs and stimulating the formation of enriched cytotoxic CD4+ and CD8+ T cell clusters.

Contributed by Katherine Turner

Rodriguez and Edinger et al. showed that pre-treatment with VLA-4-targeted, low-dose radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) using [67Cu] Cu-LLP2A enhanced GD2 or B7-H3 CAR T cell efficacy, resulting in significant tumor regression in xenogeneic, preclinical neuroblastoma models. The mechanism of action varied with tumor radiosensitivity. In radiosensitive tumors, RPT was directly tumoricidal and enhanced CAR T cell efficacy via TNF-α, leading to paracrine T cell activation. In radioresistant tumors, RPT remodeled the TIME by decreasing the number of M2-like TAMs and stimulating the formation of enriched cytotoxic CD4+ and CD8+ T cell clusters.

Contributed by Katherine Turner

ABSTRACT: Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy has limited efficacy against solid tumors such as neuroblastoma (NB). Key obstacles include extensive tumor burden and the presence of an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME). We employ targeted radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) using [(67)Cu]Cu-LLP2A and show that it potentiated the anti-tumor activity of CAR T cells in radio-sensitive and radio-resistant NB models via distinct mechanisms. In radio-sensitive NB, RPT is directly tumoricidal while also enhancing CAR T cell efficacy through pro-immune pathways, most notably via the TNF-_ pathway, leading to paracrine activation of T cells. In radio-resistant NB, RPT improves CAR T cells by remodeling the myeloid compartment in the TME and increasing the formation of immunological niches of cytotoxic CD8(+) GZMB(+) and CD4(+) GZMB(+) CAR T cells. While neither treatment modality alone can effectively treat NB, the combination of VLA-4-targeted RPT and GD2 or B7-H3 CAR T cells augments anti-tumor efficacy, resulting in marked tumor regression in preclinical NB models.

Author Info: (1) Pediatric Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (2) Department of Radiation Oncology, Univer

Author Info: (1) Pediatric Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (2) Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. (3) Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. (4) Pediatric Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (5) Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (6) Pediatric Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (7) Pediatric Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (8) Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (9) Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (10) Pediatric Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (11) Pediatric Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (12) Pediatric Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (13) Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. (14) Pediatric Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (15) Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. (16) Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. (17) Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. (18) Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (19) Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (20) Rutgers Cancer Institute, New Brunswick, NJ, USA; Department of Pediatrics, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, USA. (21) Departments of Chemistry and Radiology, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA. (22) Molecular Imaging Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA; Radiation Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. Electronic address: freddy.escorcia@gmail.com. (23) Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. Electronic address: patelr20@upmc.edu. (24) Pediatric Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. Electronic address: hongharosa.nguyen@nih.gov.

Activation of tumor-specific CD8+ T cells prior to radiopharmaceutical therapy improves antitumor response Spotlight 

Shim et al. investigated how the timing of tumor antigen-specific CD8+ T cell activation shaped responses to radiopharmaceutical therapy with ⁹⁰Y-NM600 (RPT) in E.G7-OVA and TRAMP-C1 tumor models. Low-dose RPT led to an increase in CD8+ T cell infiltration, but failed to enrich antigen-specific CD8+ T cells. Ex vivo- or (with vaccination) in vivo-activated, but not naive, OT-I cells given prior to RPT slowed tumor growth and expanded antigen-specific effector memory CD8+ T cells in a type I IFN-dependent, cGAS–STING-independent manner. In the TRAMP-C1 prostate cancer model, an AR-encoding DNA vaccine given prior to RPT enhanced tumor control.

Contributed by Shishir Pant

Shim et al. investigated how the timing of tumor antigen-specific CD8+ T cell activation shaped responses to radiopharmaceutical therapy with ⁹⁰Y-NM600 (RPT) in E.G7-OVA and TRAMP-C1 tumor models. Low-dose RPT led to an increase in CD8+ T cell infiltration, but failed to enrich antigen-specific CD8+ T cells. Ex vivo- or (with vaccination) in vivo-activated, but not naive, OT-I cells given prior to RPT slowed tumor growth and expanded antigen-specific effector memory CD8+ T cells in a type I IFN-dependent, cGAS–STING-independent manner. In the TRAMP-C1 prostate cancer model, an AR-encoding DNA vaccine given prior to RPT enhanced tumor control.

Contributed by Shishir Pant

BACKGROUND: Radiopharmaceutical therapy (RPT) delivers radiation systemically, enabling the treatment of metastatic cancers. Beyond killing tumor cells, RPT can modulate the tumor immune microenvironment. With RPTs and immunotherapies already approved or in development for prostate cancer, many preclinical and clinical studies are evaluating their use in combination. However, due to the radiosensitivity of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, further studies are needed to determine the effects of RPT on these cells to better inform the sequence of immunotherapies that activate T cells when given with RPT. METHODS: E.G7-OVA tumor-bearing mice received na•ve or activated OT-I CD8+T cells prior to or following the administration of RPT using (90)Y-NM600. Changes in tumor growth were monitored, and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes were evaluated for phenotypic and functional markers. The murine prostate tumor model TRAMP-C1 was used to evaluate this approach using tumor antigen-specific vaccination with (90)Y-NM600. RESULTS: Antitumor efficacy was improved if OT-I CD8+T cells were present and activated prior to (90)Y-NM600 administration than if the cells were delivered after RPT. Similarly, in vivo activation of adoptively transferred OT-I CD8+T cells, using ovalbumin (OVA)-specific vaccination, prior to RPT slowed tumor growth and increased the frequency of tumor-infiltrating OVA(257-264)-specific CD8+T cells with effector memory phenotype and effector molecule production. Blockade of type I interferon, but not the upstream inhibition of stimulator of interferon genes, abrogated tumor growth delay resulting from the combination treatment. Tumor antigen-specific vaccination prior to (90)Y-NM600 administration similarly improved antitumor outcomes in the TRAMP-C1 tumor model. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that tumor-specific CD8+T cells need to be present and activated prior to RPT to enhance antitumor outcomes. This study highlights the importance of considering the effects of RPT on tumor-infiltrating CD8+T cells when combining other T-cell activating therapies with RPT, as they may similarly display sequence-dependent antitumor outcomes.

Author Info: (1) University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. (2) University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. (3) University of Wisconsin

Author Info: (1) University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. (2) University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. (3) University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. (4) University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. (5) University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. (6) University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. (7) University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. (8) University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. (9) University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, Madison, Wisconsin, USA dm3@medicine.wisc.edu.

Tumor suppressor genotype influences the extent and mode of immunosurveillance in lung cancer Spotlight 

Using genetically engineered conditional mouse models and lentiviral-mediated somatic gene inactivation, Adler and Xu et al. developed models that allowed them to quantify immunoediting by evaluating fixed neoantigen expression against genotypic tumor backgrounds defined by common driver mutations and different tumor suppressor genes. While genetic features promoting tumor proliferation generally correlated with increased sensitivity to immunosurveillance, different genotypes differentially affected immune cell recruitment, selection of tumor cells with neoantigen silencing, tumor growth, and mechanisms of immune evasion.

Contributed by Lauren Hitchings

Using genetically engineered conditional mouse models and lentiviral-mediated somatic gene inactivation, Adler and Xu et al. developed models that allowed them to quantify immunoediting by evaluating fixed neoantigen expression against genotypic tumor backgrounds defined by common driver mutations and different tumor suppressor genes. While genetic features promoting tumor proliferation generally correlated with increased sensitivity to immunosurveillance, different genotypes differentially affected immune cell recruitment, selection of tumor cells with neoantigen silencing, tumor growth, and mechanisms of immune evasion.

Contributed by Lauren Hitchings

ABSTRACT: The impact of cancer driving mutations on immunosurveillance throughout tumor development remains poorly understood. To better understand the contribution of tumor genotype to immunosurveillance, we generated and validated lentiviral-based vectors that create increasingly immunogenic neoantigens. This vector system is compatible with autochthonous Cre-regulated cancer models, CRISPR/Cas9-mediated somatic genome editing, and tumor barcoding. Here, we show that in the context of oncogenic KRAS-driven lung cancer and strong neoantigen expression, tumor suppressor genotype dictates the degree of immune cell recruitment, positive selection of tumors with neoantigen silencing, and tumor outgrowth. By quantifying the impact of 11 commonly inactivated tumor suppressor genes on tumor growth across neoantigenic contexts, we show that the growth-promoting effects of tumor suppressor gene inactivation correlate with increasing sensitivity to immunosurveillance. Importantly, some genotypes also dramatically changed sensitivity to immunosurveillance independently of their growth-promoting effects. We propose a model of immunoediting in which tumor suppressor gene inactivation works in tandem with neoantigen expression to shape tumor immunosurveillance and immunoediting such that the same neoantigens uniquely modulate tumor immunoediting depending on the genetic context.

Author Info: (1) Department of Cancer Biology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Abramson Family Cancer Research Institute, Perelman School of Medi

Author Info: (1) Department of Cancer Biology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Abramson Family Cancer Research Institute, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Cell and Molecular Biology Graduate Group, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (2) Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA. Department of Biology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA. (3) Department of Cancer Biology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Abramson Family Cancer Research Institute, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Cell and Molecular Biology Graduate Group, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (4) Department of Cancer Biology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Abramson Family Cancer Research Institute, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Cell and Molecular Biology Graduate Group, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (5) Department of Cancer Biology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Abramson Family Cancer Research Institute, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (6) Department of Cancer Biology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Abramson Family Cancer Research Institute, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. Cell and Molecular Biology Graduate Group, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (7) Department of Biology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA. (8) Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA. mwinslow@stanford.edu. Department of Biology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA. mwinslow@stanford.edu. Department of Pathology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA. mwinslow@stanford.edu. (9) Department of Cancer Biology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. dfeldser@upenn.edu. Abramson Family Cancer Research Institute, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. dfeldser@upenn.edu. Cell and Molecular Biology Graduate Group, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. dfeldser@upenn.edu.

Immune microenvironment and noncoding RNA shape early colorectal carcinogenesis in patients with premalignant lesions Spotlight 

Morgand et al. performed a retrospective, longitudinal study characterizing 258 pre-malignant colorectal lesions across discovery and validation cohorts. Patients were stratified based on polyps per year. Sequenced lesions shared few mutations, suggesting their sporadic and independent origin. Patients with the lowest polyp development rates exhibited lesions characterized by high immune cell infiltration and mature TLSs persisting from initial polyp onset to recurrent lesions. Such lesions showed increased expression of non-coding RNAs, which were associated with higher predicted immunogenicity and increased T cell density in tumor centers.

Contributed by Paula Hochman

Morgand et al. performed a retrospective, longitudinal study characterizing 258 pre-malignant colorectal lesions across discovery and validation cohorts. Patients were stratified based on polyps per year. Sequenced lesions shared few mutations, suggesting their sporadic and independent origin. Patients with the lowest polyp development rates exhibited lesions characterized by high immune cell infiltration and mature TLSs persisting from initial polyp onset to recurrent lesions. Such lesions showed increased expression of non-coding RNAs, which were associated with higher predicted immunogenicity and increased T cell density in tumor centers.

Contributed by Paula Hochman

ABSTRACT: Early cancer detection and prophylactic intervention remain the primary strategies for reducing colorectal carcinoma incidence and mortality. Although the immune microenvironment and tumor-associated antigens have been shown to play a pivotal role in carcinogenesis, the factors shaping immune dynamics during the premalignant phase remain poorly understood. In this study, we performed a comprehensive multimodal characterization of the immune microenvironment in 258 longitudinal premalignant colorectal lesions. Using a discovery cohort of 135 lesions from 26 patients stratified by low versus high polyp development rate, we identified distinct immune states associated with polyp burden. These findings were validated in an independent cohort of 123 lesions from 43 patients. Lesions from patients with low polyp development rates exhibited signatures of robust immune surveillance characterized by enhanced adaptive immune infiltration, including defined T cell subsets, and a higher prevalence of mature tertiary lymphoid structures compared with lesions from patients with high polyp frequency. These immune features were accompanied by increased expression of noncoding RNAs. These transcripts were predicted to encode noncanonical antigens with high MHC-I (major histocompatibility complex class I) binding affinity, potentially increasing lesion immunogenicity. We propose that early carcinogenesis is shaped by the immune microenvironment in association with noncoding RNAs, revealing potential early biomarkers in individuals at high risk of developing colorectal cancer.

Author Info: (1) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers,

Author Info: (1) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (2) Institut Roi Albert II, Department of Medical Oncology Cliniques Universitaires St-Luc and Institut de Recherche Clinique et Experimentale (Pole MIRO), UniversitŽ Catholique de Louvain, 1200 Brussels, Belgium. (3) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (4) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (5) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (6) Department of Pathology, Cliniques Universitaires St-Luc and Institut de Recherche Clinique et Experimentale (Pole GAEN) UniversitŽ Catholique de Louvain, 1200 Brussels, Belgium. (7) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (8) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (9) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (10) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (11) UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, INSERM U970 PARCC, Paris Institute for Transplantation and Organ Regeneration, 75015 Paris, France. (12) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (13) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (14) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (15) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (16) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (17) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (18) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. (19) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. Assistance Publique-H™pitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Immunomonitoring Platform, Laboratory of Immunology, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, 75015 Paris, France. (20) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. Assistance Publique-H™pitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Immunomonitoring Platform, Laboratory of Immunology, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, 75015 Paris, France. (21) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. Assistance Publique-H™pitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Immunomonitoring Platform, Laboratory of Immunology, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, 75015 Paris, France. (22) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France. Assistance Publique-H™pitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Immunomonitoring Platform, Laboratory of Immunology, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, 75015 Paris, France. (23) Sidra Medicine, P.O. Box 26999, Doha, Qatar. (24) Sidra Medicine, P.O. Box 26999, Doha, Qatar. (25) Sidra Medicine, P.O. Box 26999, Doha, Qatar. (26) Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center and Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Miami, Miami, FL 33136, USA. (27) Sidra Medicine, P.O. Box 26999, Doha, Qatar. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Genoa, 16132 Genoa, Italy. (28) INSERM, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, F-75006 Paris, France. Equipe LabellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, F-75006 Paris, France. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, F-75006 Paris, France.

CD4+ T cells impair tumor growth through IL-3 and TNF-dependent vascular damage

Spotlight 

Lian and Nie et al. showed that LCMV gp66-specific CD4+ T cells inhibited tumor growth in an MC38-GP model in an antigen-specific manner, independent of direct lymphoid cell-mediated cytotoxicity. CD4+ T cells initiated antigen-dependent perivascular, myeloid cell-dense structures in the TIME, reprogrammed myeloid transcriptomes, and leveraged recruited myeloid cells to control tumor growth. Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics showed that CD4+ T cell-derived IL-3 programmed macrophages to secrete tumor necrosis factor, which damaged intratumoral vasculature, compromised blood supply, and induced localized tumor cell death and regression.

Contributed by Shishir Pant

Lian and Nie et al. showed that LCMV gp66-specific CD4+ T cells inhibited tumor growth in an MC38-GP model in an antigen-specific manner, independent of direct lymphoid cell-mediated cytotoxicity. CD4+ T cells initiated antigen-dependent perivascular, myeloid cell-dense structures in the TIME, reprogrammed myeloid transcriptomes, and leveraged recruited myeloid cells to control tumor growth. Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics showed that CD4+ T cell-derived IL-3 programmed macrophages to secrete tumor necrosis factor, which damaged intratumoral vasculature, compromised blood supply, and induced localized tumor cell death and regression.

Contributed by Shishir Pant

ABSTRACT: Most cancer immunotherapy strategies are focused on direct tumor killing by immune cells, especially T lymphocytes. Clinical and conceptual limitations of these approaches create a need for additional strategies. We identified a tumor stroma-targeting mechanism in which tumor antigen-specific CD4(+) T cells inhibit tumor growth through myeloid cell and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-dependent vascular damage. Multiplex immunofluorescence and single-cell and tissue transcriptomics showed that CD4(+) T cells trigger the formation of perivascular myeloid cell clusters containing "classically activated" macrophages that produce TNF in response to T cell-derived interleukin-3. TNF causes intratumoral endothelial damage and blood supply disruption, which are associated with localized tumor cell death. Thus, intratumoral antigen-triggered T cell activation can mediate antitumor effects without direct recognition of living tumor cells, thereby avoiding many of the inhibitory mechanisms that limit anti-tumor immunity.

Author Info: (1) Lymphocyte Biology Section, Laboratory of Immune System Biology, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (2) La

Author Info: (1) Lymphocyte Biology Section, Laboratory of Immune System Biology, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (2) Laboratory of Immune Cell Biology and Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (3) Single Cell Analysis Facility, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (4) Laboratory of Immune Cell Biology and Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (5) Molecular Histopathology Laboratory, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, USA. (6) Lymphocyte Biology Section, Laboratory of Immune System Biology, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (7) Laboratory of Immune Cell Biology and Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (8) Laboratory of Immune Cell Biology and Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (9) Lymphocyte Biology Section, Laboratory of Immune System Biology, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (10) Laboratory of Immune Cell Biology and Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (11) Molecular Histopathology Laboratory, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Frederick, MD, USA. (12) Single Cell Analysis Facility, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (13) Lymphocyte Biology Section, Laboratory of Immune System Biology, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. (14) Laboratory of Immune Cell Biology and Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.

ILT2 identifies an unexploited pool of intratumoral CD8+ bystander T cells with TCR-independent cytotoxicity in renal cell carcinoma Spotlight 

Analyzing primary ccRCC samples, Laboureur et al. identified a subset of CD8+ILT2+PD-1- TILs that were terminally differentiated and expressed high baseline levels of granzyme B, perforin, and NKG2D, but lacked tumor specificity and tissue residency markers. These “bystander” T cells, likely recruited from the periphery, exhibited CD3-driven activation and IFNγ production in response to viral antigens, as well as IL-15/NKG2D-driven, TCR-independent cytotoxicity. The innate-like cytotoxicity was inhibited by HLA-G (an ILT2 ligand expressed on tumor cells), suggestive of a checkpoint axis that could potentially be targeted for immunotherapy.

Contributed by Lauren Hitchings

Analyzing primary ccRCC samples, Laboureur et al. identified a subset of CD8+ILT2+PD-1- TILs that were terminally differentiated and expressed high baseline levels of granzyme B, perforin, and NKG2D, but lacked tumor specificity and tissue residency markers. These “bystander” T cells, likely recruited from the periphery, exhibited CD3-driven activation and IFNγ production in response to viral antigens, as well as IL-15/NKG2D-driven, TCR-independent cytotoxicity. The innate-like cytotoxicity was inhibited by HLA-G (an ILT2 ligand expressed on tumor cells), suggestive of a checkpoint axis that could potentially be targeted for immunotherapy.

Contributed by Lauren Hitchings

ABSTRACT: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have improved clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) therapy, yet many patients remain unresponsive. Alternative strategies are needed, and the HLA-G/ILT2 axis has emerged as a promising immunosuppressive pathway. Here, we deeply characterized CD8_ILT2_ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) as a distinct subset from CD8_PD1_ TILs in ccRCC, using high-dimensional spectral flow cytometry, single-cell transcriptomics, and TCR clonotype analysis. CD8_ILT2_ TILs were terminally differentiated, highly cytotoxic "bystander" cells, enriched for virus-specific TCRs. They phenotypically, transcriptionally and functionally mirrored their circulating counterparts, suggesting peripheral recruitment. In dynamic co-culture assays, they exhibited potent TCR-independent cytotoxicity, mediated by activating innate receptors, namely NKG2D. However, HLA-G inhibited this activity, underscoring the immune-evasive role of the HLA-G/ILT2 axis. Our study defines CD8_ILT2_ TILs as an untapped effector population with potential antitumor activity and a promising therapeutic target in ccRCC. These findings offer new insights into TIL functional diversity and pave the way for innovative immunotherapies beyond conventional ICIs.

Author Info: (1) CEA Fontenay-aux-Roses Paris France. ROR: https://ror.org/010j2gw05 (2) H™pital Saint-Louis Paris France. ROR: https://ror.org/049am9t04 (3) CEA Grenoble Grenoble France. ROR:

Author Info: (1) CEA Fontenay-aux-Roses Paris France. ROR: https://ror.org/010j2gw05 (2) H™pital Saint-Louis Paris France. ROR: https://ror.org/049am9t04 (3) CEA Grenoble Grenoble France. ROR: https://ror.org/02mg6n827 (4) CEA Fontenay-aux-Roses Paris France. ROR: https://ror.org/010j2gw05 (5) Inserm Paris France. ROR: https://ror.org/02vjkv261 (6) Inserm Paris France. ROR: https://ror.org/02vjkv261 (7) CEA Fontenay-aux-Roses Paris France. ROR: https://ror.org/010j2gw05 (8) APHP Paris France. (9) H™pital Saint-Louis, Assistance publique H™pitaux de Paris Paris France. (10) APHP Paris France. (11) Assistance Publique - H™pitaux de Paris Paris France. ROR: https://ror.org/00pg5jh14 (12) CEA Paris-Saclay - Etablissement de Fontenay-aux-roses Paris France. (13) Commissariat ˆ l'Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives Paris France. (14) AP-HP, H™pital Saint-Louis Paris France. (15) Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives (CEA) Grenoble France. (16) Inserm Paris France. ROR: https://ror.org/02vjkv261 (17) CEA Fontenay-aux-Roses Paris France. ROR: https://ror.org/010j2gw05 (18) Atomic Energy and Alternative Energies Commission Paris France. ROR: https://ror.org/00jjx8s55

Tumor-resident T cells and dendritic cells form an in situ archetype during immunotherapy response in melanoma Spotlight 

Pietro and Au et al. profiled melanoma lymph node metastases from untreated, ICB-resistant, and ICB-responsive patients using flow cytometry, mIHC, and single-cell transcriptomics to dissect tumor-resident (TR) T cell niches. ICB-responsive tumors were enriched for clonally expanded, cytotoxic CD8⁺ TR cells and cytotoxic/helper CD4⁺ TR cells within an immune-activated microenvironment, whereas ICB-resistant tumors displayed chronic IFNγ signaling, exhausted T cell states, and impaired clonal diversification. Spatial analyses identified CD8⁺ TRs, CD4⁺ TRs, and DC3s forming in situ immune triads as an essential feature of ICB responders.

Contributed by Shishir Pant

Pietro and Au et al. profiled melanoma lymph node metastases from untreated, ICB-resistant, and ICB-responsive patients using flow cytometry, mIHC, and single-cell transcriptomics to dissect tumor-resident (TR) T cell niches. ICB-responsive tumors were enriched for clonally expanded, cytotoxic CD8⁺ TR cells and cytotoxic/helper CD4⁺ TR cells within an immune-activated microenvironment, whereas ICB-resistant tumors displayed chronic IFNγ signaling, exhausted T cell states, and impaired clonal diversification. Spatial analyses identified CD8⁺ TRs, CD4⁺ TRs, and DC3s forming in situ immune triads as an essential feature of ICB responders.

Contributed by Shishir Pant

ABSTRACT: Tumor-resident (TR) T cells, known as tissue-resident memory (TRM) T cells in mice, play a central role in melanoma immunosurveillance, yet their contribution to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy has not been comprehensively explored. We performed spatial and single-cell profiling on 32 metastatic melanoma lymph node samples, from treatment-naïve, ICI-resistant and ICI-responsive patients. Here we show that tumor areas in ICI-responders were enriched for both CD8+ and CD4+ TR. CD8+ TR cells were clonally expanded, and both CD8+ and CD4+ TR cells upregulated cytotoxicity-related gene expression, suggesting functional anti-tumor immunity. Conversely, ICI-resistant tumors displayed chronic IFN-γ response pathways, linked to T cell exhaustion. We further identified a spatially organized immune triad composed of CD8⁺ TR, CD4⁺ TR, and type-3 dendritic cells (DC3) that is exclusive to responding tumors. These findings define coordinated cellular interactions within the tumor microenvironment that underpin successful immunotherapy and provide a framework for spatial biomarkers of response.

Author Info: (1) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Cancer Immunology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Austra

Author Info: (1) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Cancer Immunology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (2) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Cancer Immunology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (3) Bioinformatics, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (4) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Bioinformatics, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (5) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Cancer Immunology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (6) Cancer Immunology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (7) Cancer Immunology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (8) Cancer Immunology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (9) Cancer Immunology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (10) Cancer Immunology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (11) Cancer Immunology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (12) Roche Innovation Center, Zurich, Switzerland. (13) Roche Innovation Center Basel, Roche Pharma Research and Early Development, Basel, Switzerland. (14) Roche Innovation Center Basel, Roche Pharma Research and Early Development, Basel, Switzerland. (15) Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. (16) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Melanoma Research Victoria, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Division of Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (17) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Melanoma Research Victoria, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Division of Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (18) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Melanoma Research Victoria, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Division of Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (19) Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (20) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (21) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (22) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (23) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (24) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (25) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Melanoma Research Victoria, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Division of Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Cancer Biology and Therapeutics Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (26) Department of Microbiology and Immunology, The University of Melbourne at the Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. (27) Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. paul.neeson@petermac.org. Cancer Immunology Program, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. paul.neeson@petermac.org.

Cuproptosis-immunity crosstalk informs strategy to overcome immunotherapy resistance Spotlight 

Lei, Lu, and Xu et al. showed that cuproptosis induced immunogenic cell death, releasing DAMPs that drove DC maturation, DC-dependent cross-priming, and M1-like TAM and effector CD8+ T cell remodeling, with enhanced tumor suppression in immunocompetent hosts. CD8+ T cell-derived IFNγ activated STAT1–IRF1 signaling to upregulate mitochondrial FDX1 in tumor cells, increasing protein lipoylation and sensitization to cuproptosis. In breast, lung, and pancreatic tumor models, combining cuproptosis inducers with anti-PD-L1 amplified tumoral cuproptosis, increased intratumoral CD8+ T cell functions, and overcame intrinsic and acquired ICB resistance.

Contributed by Shishir Pant

Lei, Lu, and Xu et al. showed that cuproptosis induced immunogenic cell death, releasing DAMPs that drove DC maturation, DC-dependent cross-priming, and M1-like TAM and effector CD8+ T cell remodeling, with enhanced tumor suppression in immunocompetent hosts. CD8+ T cell-derived IFNγ activated STAT1–IRF1 signaling to upregulate mitochondrial FDX1 in tumor cells, increasing protein lipoylation and sensitization to cuproptosis. In breast, lung, and pancreatic tumor models, combining cuproptosis inducers with anti-PD-L1 amplified tumoral cuproptosis, increased intratumoral CD8+ T cell functions, and overcame intrinsic and acquired ICB resistance.

Contributed by Shishir Pant

ABSTRACT: Cuproptosis is a recently identified form of copper-dependent cell death that depends on ferredoxin 1 (FDX1)-mediated protein lipoylation. Here, we reveal that CD8(+) T cell-mediated antitumor immunity enhances tumor cell susceptibility to cuproptosis, leading to a more potent tumor-suppressive effect of cuproptosis inducers in immunocompetent hosts compared with immunodeficient ones. Mechanistically, cuproptotic tumor cells act as a form of immunogenic cell death, releasing damage-associated molecular patterns that activate dendritic cells and enhance antitumor immunity. Reciprocally, CD8(+) T cell-derived interferon (IFN)-_ enhances FDX1 transcription in tumor cells by activating the signal transducer and activator of transcription 1 (STAT1)-IFN regulatory factor-1 (IRF1) signaling axis, resulting in heightened tumor cell sensitivity to cuproptosis. Consequently, combining a cuproptosis inducer with anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) therapy amplifies tumoral cuproptosis and demonstrates efficacy in overcoming PD-L1 therapy resistance across multiple preclinical models. Our findings unveil a previously unrecognized connection between antitumor immunity and cuproptosis and highlight a potential therapeutic approach to counteract tumor immunotherapy resistance by targeting this unique cell death pathway.

Author Info: (1) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. Electronic address: guanglei_csu@163.com. (2) Departme

Author Info: (1) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. Electronic address: guanglei_csu@163.com. (2) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (3) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (4) Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (5) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (6) Department of Molecular and Cellular Oncology, Division of Basic Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (7) Metabolomics Core Facility, Department of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (8) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (9) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (10) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (11) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (12) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (13) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (14) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (15) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (16) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (17) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (18) Department of Biostatistics, Division of Discovery Science, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (19) Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (20) Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (21) Department of Molecular and Cellular Oncology, Division of Basic Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (22) Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (23) Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (24) Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (25) Department of Biostatistics, Division of Discovery Science, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (26) Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (27) Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Division of Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (28) Department of Thoracic/Head and Neck Medical Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (29) Department of Molecular and Cellular Oncology, Division of Basic Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (30) Department of Cancer Biology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (31) Department of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (32) Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (33) Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (34) Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY 10461, USA. (35) Department of Biostatistics, Division of Discovery Science, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. (36) Department of Experimental Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Houston, TX 77030, USA. Electronic address: bgan@mdanderson.org.

Neutrophil regulation of immunotherapy for cancer is controlled by type II interferon Featured  

Pei et al. found that the IFNγ produced in tumors during treatment with various immunotherapies induced PD-L1 expression by neutrophils and drove them towards an aged/immunosuppressive phenotype, which contributed to treatment resistance. This could be alleviated by eliminating neutrophils or disrupting type II IFN signaling or PD-L1 expression, which shifted neutrophil polarization to a more pro-inflammatory state. The accumulation of aged, PD-L1+ neutrophils was also evident in data from immunotherapy-treated human tumors, suggesting possible avenues for intervention to improve immunotherapy responses.

Pei et al. found that the IFNγ produced in tumors during treatment with various immunotherapies induced PD-L1 expression by neutrophils and drove them towards an aged/immunosuppressive phenotype, which contributed to treatment resistance. This could be alleviated by eliminating neutrophils or disrupting type II IFN signaling or PD-L1 expression, which shifted neutrophil polarization to a more pro-inflammatory state. The accumulation of aged, PD-L1+ neutrophils was also evident in data from immunotherapy-treated human tumors, suggesting possible avenues for intervention to improve immunotherapy responses.

ABSTRACT: Tumor resistance to immunotherapy is driven by several mechanisms, including those imposed by myeloid populations. Neutrophils are prominent within this landscape and display functional heterogeneity. Here, we investigated the contextual role of neutrophils, and using neutropenic mice, we found that the dominating function was to block the response when targeting T cells or myeloid cells. We found that neutrophils upregulated programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) in response to the treatment and, using this as a target, depleted this population. The upregulation of PD-L1 was dependent on interferon-γ (IFN-γ) produced by cytotoxic lymphocytes. Specific genetic deletion of cd274 or Ifngr1 on neutrophils showed that this was cell intrinsic. Moreover, in the absence of the capacity for specific IFN-γ-driven suppression, neutrophils changed their phenotype to support immunotherapy. Thus, we find that the type II interferon, IFN-γ, is key in determining whether neutrophils will support or block immunotherapy for cancer.

Author Info: (1) Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. (2) Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology, Karolinska Institutet, Sto

Author Info: (1) Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. (2) Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. (3) Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. (4) Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. (5) Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. (6) Department of Gastroenterology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China. (7) Laboratory of Molecular Genetics and Immunology, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA. (8) University of Munster, Institute of Experimental Pathology, Munster, Germany. (9) Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Electronic address: mikael.karlsson@ki.se.

Close Modal

Small change for you. Big change for us!

This Thanksgiving season, show your support for cancer research by donating your change.

In less than a minute, link your credit card with our partner RoundUp App.

Every purchase you make with that card will be rounded up and the change will be donated to ACIR.

All transactions are securely made through Stripe.