4.8 Article

Calreticulin couples with immune checkpoints in pancreatic cancer

期刊

CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 36-44

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/ctm2.10

关键词

calreticulin; cancer immunotherapy; immune checkpoint; immunogenic cell death; immunogenic chemotherapy; pancreatic cancer

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31970696, 81502975, 81830089]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2016T90413, 2015M581693]
  3. SEU-Alphamab Joint Center [SA2015001]
  4. Zhejiang Provincial Program for the Cultivation of High-level Innovative Health Talents

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although immune checkpoint blockade is considered to be the dominant approach in future cancer immunotherapy, whether it will apply to pancreatic cancer remains largely unknown. To address this issue, pancreatic cancer-associated datasets were individually collected by Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis 2 (GEPIA2), cBioPortal, and Tumor and Immune System Interaction Database (TISIDB), and subsequently subjected to prognostic, genomic, and immunologic analyses of all well-established immune checkpoints. The results indicate that immune checkpoints might not be ideal targets for pancreatic cancer therapy. Intriguingly, the genomic alteration of calreticulin, the key mediator of chemotherapy-induced cancer immunogenic cell death, was found to couple with immune checkpoints in pancreatic cancer. Moreover, calreticulin was observed to be highly expressed in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and high calreticulin expression significantly favors both overall survival and disease-free survival of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Importantly, calreticulin was further revealed to be closely related to anti-tumor immunity in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, including multiple immune effector molecules and T-cell signatures. Taken together, calreticulin-based therapy may represent a more promising prospect for pancreatic cancer immunotherapy than immune checkpoint blockade therapy.

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