4.6 Review

Strategies for the Construction of Mouse Models With Humanized Immune System and Evaluation of Tumor Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy

Journal

FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY
Volume 11, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.673199

Keywords

humanized immune system; mouse model; tumor; immunotherapy; combination therapy

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation Program of China [31772546, 32070532]
  2. Shaanxi Natural Science Foundation Program [2020PT-005]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article summarizes strategies for the development and use of HIS mice models in tumor immunotherapies, proposes a method of tumor identification and classification in HIS mice based on the tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and PD-L1 expression, and suggests different combination treatment strategies to enhance the effect of immunotherapy.
Immunotherapy has been used as a first-line treatment for a variety of advanced tumors, allowing remarkable progress to be made in cancer treatment. Nonetheless, only a small number of patients can benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy. To improve the effect of immunotherapy, the underlying mechanism of combination therapy was investigated in the context of an intact human tumor immune microenvironment using mice with a human immune system (HIS) bearing human tumors. Herein, we summarize and discuss strategies for the development and use of HIS mice models in tumor immunotherapies. Most importantly, this review proposes a method of t11umor identification and classification in HIS mice based on the tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and PD-L1 expression, and according to this classification, we propose different combination treatment strategies that can be utilized to enhance the effect of immunotherapy. Thus, we provide effective experimental schemes for tumor immunotherapy in HIS mice models.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available