4.7 Review

The specific targeting of immune regulation: T-cell responses against Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase

Journal

CANCER IMMUNOLOGY IMMUNOTHERAPY
Volume 61, Issue 8, Pages 1289-1297

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00262-012-1234-4

Keywords

IDO; Antigen; Immune suppression; Supporter T cells; PIVAC 11

Funding

  1. Novo Nordisk Foundation
  2. Danish Cancer Society
  3. Danish Medical Research Council
  4. Lundbeck Foundation
  5. Herlev Hospital

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) is an immunoregulatory enzyme that is implicated in suppressing T-cell immunity in many settings including cancer. In recent years, we have described spontaneous CD8(+) as well as CD4(+) T-cell reactivity against IDO in the tumor microenvironment of different cancer patients as well as in the peripheral blood of both cancer patients and to a lesser extent in healthy donors. We have demonstrated that IDO-reactive CD8(+) T cells were peptide-specific, cytotoxic effector cells, which are able to recognize and kill IDO-expressing cells including tumor cells as well as dendritic cells. Consequently, IDO may serve as a widely applicable target for immunotherapeutic strategies with a completely different function as well as expression pattern compared to previously described antigens. IDO constitutes a significant counter-regulatory mechanism induced by pro-inflammatory signals, and IDO-based immunotherapy may consequently be synergistic with additional immunotherapy. In this regard, we have shown that the presence of IDO-specific T cells boosted immunity against CMV and tumor antigens by eliminating IDO+ suppressive cells and changing the regulatory microenvironment. The current review summarizes current knowledge of IDO as a T-cell antigen, reports the initial results that are suggesting a general function of IDO-specific T cells in immunoregulation, and discusses future opportunities.

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