4.8 Review

Direct and Indirect Modulation of T Cells by VEGF-A Counteracted by Anti-Angiogenic Treatment

期刊

FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.616837

关键词

VEGF-A (vascular endothelial growth factor-A); effector T-cells; regulatory T (Treg) cells; tumor; anti-angiogenic therapy; immunosuppression; immune check point inhibitor (ICI)

资金

  1. ITMO Cancer AVIESAN (Alliance Nationale pour les Sciences de la Vie et de la Sante, National Alliance for Life Sciences Health)
  2. Association pour la Recherche contre le Cancer
  3. Canceropole Ile de France/INCa [2017-1-EMERG-74-INSERM-5-1]
  4. SIRIC CARPEM
  5. Labex Immuno-oncology
  6. Ligue contre le Cancer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

VEGF-A plays a central role in tumor angiogenesis and is also an immunosuppressive factor, modulating immune cells and affecting regulatory T cells. Anti-angiogenic agents targeting VEGF-A/VEGFR can limit tumor-induced immunosuppression and enhance treatment efficacy.
Vascular endothelial growth factor A is known to play a central role in tumor angiogenesis. Several studies showed that VEGF-A is also an immunosuppressive factor. In tumor-bearing hosts, VEGF-A can modulate immune cells (DC, MDSC, TAM) to induce the accumulation of regulatory T-cells while simultaneously inhibiting T-cell functions. Furthermore, VEGFR-2 expression on activated T-cells and FoxP3(high) regulatory T-cells also allow a direct effect of VEGF-A. Anti-angiogenic agents targeting VEGF-A/VEGFR contribute to limit tumor-induced immunosuppression. Based on interesting preclinical studies, many clinical trials have been conducted to investigate the efficacy of anti-VEGF-A/VEGFR treatments combined with immune checkpoint blockade leading to the approvement of these associations in different tumor locations. In this review, we focus on the impact of VEGF-A on immune cells especially regulatory and effector T-cells and different therapeutic strategies to restore an antitumor immunity.

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