4.7 Article

Expression of TNFR2 by regulatory T cells in peripheral blood is correlated with clinical pathology of lung cancer patients

Journal

CANCER IMMUNOLOGY IMMUNOTHERAPY
Volume 64, Issue 11, Pages 1475-1485

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00262-015-1751-z

Keywords

CD4(+)FoxP3(+) regulatory T cells; Tumor necrosis factor receptor type II (TNFR2); Lung cancer; Clinical pathology; Immunosuppression

Funding

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [81171983, 81401888]
  2. Tianjin Natural Science Foundation [12JCYBJC16100]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

CD4(+)FoxP3(+) regulatory T cells (Tregs) represent a major cellular mediator of cancer immune evasion. The expression of tumor necrosis factor receptor type II (TNFR2) on Tregs is reported to identify the maximally suppressive Treg population in both mice and human. We therefore investigated the phenotype and function of TNFR2(+) Tregs present in the peripheral blood (PB) of 43 lung cancer patients. Further, the association of TNFR2 expression on Tregs with clinicopathological factors was analyzed. The results showed that in the PB of lung cancer patients, Tregs expressed markedly higher levels of TNFR2 than conventional T cells (Tconvs). Expression of TNFR2 appeared to correlate better than CD25(+) and CD127(-) with FoxP3 expression. PB TNFR2(+) Tregs in lung cancer patients were more proliferative and expressed higher levels of the immunosuppressive molecule CTLA-4, and consequently more potently suppressed IFN gamma production by cocultured CD8 CTLs. More importantly, higher TNFR2 expression levels on Tregs were associated with lymphatic invasion, distant metastasis and more advanced clinical stage of lung cancer patients. Therefore, our study suggests that TNFR2(+) Tregs play a role in promoting tumor progressive metastasis and expression of TNFR2 by PB Tregs may prove to be a useful prognostic marker in lung cancer patients.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available