4.8 Article

Defining T Cell States Associated with Response to Checkpoint Immunotherapy in Melanoma

期刊

CELL
卷 175, 期 4, 页码 998-+

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2018.10.038

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH Shared Instrumentation program [1S10OD012027-01A1, 1S10OD016372-01, 1S10RR020936-01, 1S10RR023440-01A1]
  2. Broad Next-10
  3. Cancer Research Institute (Clinic and Laboratory Integration Program)
  4. Adelson Medical Research Foundation
  5. Sanofi
  6. Arthur
  7. Sandra
  8. Sarah Irving
  9. MGH
  10. NIH/NHGRI [5U54HG003067]
  11. NIH/NCI [R01CA208756, U54CA224068]
  12. Institute for Medical Research Israel-Canada
  13. Tosteson & Fund for Medical Discovery fellowships
  14. Broad-ISF fellowship
  15. NIH [F32AI129249, 1T32CA207021-01]
  16. John R. Svenson Fellowship
  17. NCI [R01 CA190394-01, U01 CA214381]
  18. Expect Miracles Foundation
  19. Weizmann award for Women in Science

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Treatment of cancer has been revolutionized by immune checkpoint blockade therapies. Despite the high rate of response in advanced melanoma, the majority of patients succumb to disease. To identify factors associated with success or failure of checkpoint therapy, we profiled transcriptomes of 16,291 individual immune cells from 48 tumor samples of melanoma patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors. Two distinct states of CD8(+) T cells were defined by clustering and associated with patient tumor regression or progression. A single transcription factor, TCF7, was visualized within CD8(+) T cells in fixed tumor samples and predicted positive clinical outcome in an independent cohort of checkpoint-treated patients. We delineated the epigenetic landscape and clonality of these T cell states and demonstrated enhanced antitumor immunity by targeting novel combinations of factors in exhausted cells. Our study of immune cell transcriptomes from tumors demonstrates a strategy for identifying predictors, mechanisms, and targets for enhancing checkpoint immunotherapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据