4.5 Review

Immunogenic cancer cell death: a key-lock paradigm

期刊

CURRENT OPINION IN IMMUNOLOGY
卷 20, 期 5, 页码 504-511

出版社

CURRENT BIOLOGY LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.coi.2008.05.007

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer
  2. European Union
  3. Canceropole Ile-de-France
  4. nstitut National du Cancer
  5. Association for International Cancer Research
  6. INSERM
  7. Fondation pour la recherche medicale
  8. Swedish Research Council
  9. EMBO
  10. Agence Nationale pour la Recherche

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Physiological cell death, which occurs as a continuous byproduct of cellular turnover, is non-immunogenic or even tolerogenic, thereby avoiding autoimmunity. By contrast, cancer cell death elicited by radiotherapy and some chemotherapeutic agents such as anthracyclines is immunogenic. Recent data suggest that innate and cognate immune responses elicited by such anti-cancer agents are required for an optimal therapeutic outcome, underscoring the clinical relevance of immunogenic cell death. Here we discuss the concept that immunogenic death involves changes in the composition of the cell surface, as well as the release of soluble immunogenic signals that occur in a defined temporal sequence. This 'key' then operates on a series of receptors expressed by dendritic cells (DC, the 'lock') to allow for the presentation of tumor antigens to T cells and for the initiation of a productive immune response. Immunogenic cell death is characterized by the early cell surface exposure of chaperones including calreticulin and/or heat shock proteins, which determine the uptake of tumor antigens and/or affect DC maturation. Moreover, the late release of High mobility group box 1 (HMGB1), which acts on toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4), is required for optimal presentation of antigens from dying tumor cells. Nonetheless, numerous details on the molecular events that define immunogenicity remain to be defined, both at the level of the dying cancer cells and at the level of the responding innate effectors.

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

4.5
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