4.6 Article

Chemoattractant Receptors BLT1 and CXCR3 Regulate Antitumor Immunity by Facilitating CD8+ T Cell Migration into Tumors

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 197, 期 5, 页码 2016-2026

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1502376

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [R01 CA138623] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Immunotherapies have shown considerable efficacy for the treatment of various cancers, but a multitude of patients remain unresponsive for various reasons, including poor homing of T cells into tumors. In this study, we investigated the roles of the leukotriene B4 receptor, BLT1, and CXCR3, the receptor for CXCL9, CXCL10, and CXCL11, under endogenous as well as vaccine-induced antitumor immune response in a syngeneic murine model of B16 melanoma. Significant accelerations in tumor growth and reduced survival were observed in both BLT1(-/-) and CXCR3(-/-) mice as compared with wild-type ( WT) mice. Analysis of tumor-infiltrating leukocytes revealed significant reduction of CD8 + T cells in the tumors of BLT1(-/-) and CXCR3(-/-) mice as compared with WT tumors, despite their similar frequencies in the periphery. Adoptive transfer of WT but not BLT1(-/-) or CXCR3(-/-) CTLs significantly reduced tumor growth in Rag2(-/-) mice, a function attributed to reduced infiltration of knockout CTLs into tumors. Cotransfer experiments suggested that WT CTLs do not facilitate the infiltration of knockout CTLs to tumors. Anti-programmed cell death-1 ( PD-1) treatment reduced the tumor growth rate in WT mice but not in BLT1(-/-) , CXCR3(-/-) , or BLT1(-/-) CXCR3(-/-) mice. The loss of efficacy correlated with failure of the knockout CTLs to infiltrate into tumors upon antiPD- 1 treatment, suggesting an obligate requirement for both BLT1 and CXCR3 in mediating anti-PD-1 based antitumor immune response. These results demonstrate a critical role for both BLT1 and CXCR3 in CTL migration to tumors and thus may be targeted to enhance efficacy of CTL-based immunotherapies.

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

4.6
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