4.7 Article

Distribution, phenotype, functional and clinical relevance of CD8+CD103+ tissue-resident memory T cells in human gastric cancer

期刊

CANCER IMMUNOLOGY IMMUNOTHERAPY
卷 71, 期 7, 页码 1645-1654

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00262-021-03105-0

关键词

Gastric cancer; CD8(+)CD103(+) tissue-resident memory T cells; PD-1; 4-1BB

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [81872331, 81773042]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In gastric cancer, tumor-infiltrating CD8(+)CD103(+) tissue-resident memory T cells are decreased compared to non-tumor tissues and show impaired cytolytic function. Restoring the function of these cells through PD-1 blockade and 4-1BB co-stimulation may be a promising strategy for treating gastric cancer and improving patient survival.
CD8(+)CD103(+) tissue-resident memory T cells (TRMs) are involved in tumor immune response and linked to favorable clinical outcome in human cancer. However, the distribution, phenotype, functional properties and clinical relevance of these cells in gastric cancer (GC) remain elusive. Here, our data show that, in comparison to non-tumor tissues, the percentages of CD8(+)CD103(+) TRMs in tumors are significantly decreased. Most tumor-infiltrating CD8(+)CD103(+) TRMs are CD45RA(-)CCR7(-) effector-memory cells with higher PD-1 and 4-1BB expression than those from non-tumor tissues. Further, tumor-infiltrating CD8(+)CD103(+) TRMs show impaired cytolytic capacity due to decreased granzyme B and perforin expression. Moreover, ex vivo PD-1 blockade could restore the cytolytic capacity of tumor-infiltrating CD8(+)CD103(+) TRMs, and such anti-PD-1-mediated reinvigoration of CD8(+)CD103(+) TRMs could be further enhanced by 4-1BB co-stimulation. Finally, lower levels of Tumor-infiltrating CD8(+)CD103(+) TRMs are positively correlated with GC progression and poor patients' survival. Our data suggest that restoring CD8(+)CD103(+) TRM function by combining PD-1 blockade and 4-1BB co-stimulation may be a promising strategy for treating GC.

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

4.7
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