A Window of Opportunity: Targeting Cancer Endothelium to Enhance Immunotherapy

Abstract

Vascular abnormalities in tumors have a major impact on the immune microenvironment in tumors. The consequences of abnormal vasculature include increased hypoxia, acidosis, high intra-tumoral fluid pressure, and angiogenesis. This introduces an immunosuppressive microenvironment that alters immune cell maturation, activation, and trafficking, which supports tumor immune evasion and dissemination of tumor cells. Increasing data suggests that cancer endothelium is a major barrier for traveling leukocytes, ranging from a partial blockade resulting in a selective endothelial barrier, to a complete immune infiltration blockade associated with immune exclusion and immune desert cancer phenotypes. Failed immune cell trafficking as well as immunosuppression within the tumor microenvironment limits the efficacy of immunotherapeutic approaches. As such, targeting proteins with key roles in angiogenesis may potentially reduce immunosuppression and might restore infiltration of anti-tumor immune cells, creating a therapeutic window for successful immunotherapy. In this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of established as well as more controversial endothelial pathways that govern selective immune cell trafficking across cancer endothelium. Additionally, we discuss recent insights and strategies that target tumor vasculature in order to increase infiltration of cytotoxic immune cells during the therapeutic window of vascular normalization hereby improving the efficacy of immunotherapy.

Introduction

Immunotherapy of cancer boost the host immune system to eradicate transformed cancerous cells. In the last decade a great variety of immunotherapeutic approaches emerged that transformed modern cancer treatment, including antibodies targeting immune inhibitory checkpoints (e.g., PD-1 and CTLA-4), monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) directed against tumor-associated antigens (TAA), anti-cancer vaccines, and chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR T cells). Novel immunotherapeutic approaches have expanded current treatment options tremendously, in particular for patients that have unresectable or metastatic solid tumors. Checkpoint blockade with PD-1 and CTLA-4 showed durable control of highly aggressive melanomas and has led to spectacular results showing rapid eradication of large metastatic tumors in response to one dose of Ipilimumab (CTLA-4) and Nivolumab (PD-1) (1, 2). As such, immunotherapy was acknowledged as breakthrough of the year 2017 by the journal Science and currently accepted as treatment option for many metastatic solid tumors including metastatic melanoma as well as lung cancer. However, immunotherapy does not help everyone. Approximately 50%–80% of patients that receive immunotherapy do not benefit from the treatment, and many patients experience severe side effects (3). Up to now multiple mechanisms have been described that can induce resistance to immunotherapy, underscoring the complexity and heterogeneity in immunotherapeutic responses between individuals.

Classifying tumors according their immunological status and localization of immune cells within the tumor supports the existence of three different cancer-immune phenotypes (4–6). Firstly, the immune inflamed phenotype is characterized by high infiltration of immune cells in the tumor. Secondly, the immune-excluded phenotype is characterized by the restriction of immune cells at the periphery of cancer nests (5, 6), or by confinement of immune cells in stromal regions of the tumor (7), which can also be present further towards the centre of the tumor (6, 8). Immune-excluded tumors may reflect the presence of inhibitory vascular growth factors (9), vascular barriers (10), inhibitory receptors on endothelium (11), might be induced by a specific chemokine state (12) or inhibition in stromal regions (7, 13). Lastly, the immune desert phenotype is characterized by limited neoantigens, tolerance induction and lack of appropriate T cell priming or activation (4–6), resulting in the absence of immune cells. While clinical responses to immunotherapy occur most often in patients with inflamed tumors, clinical responses in immune-excluded tumors are uncommon and not observed in tumors exhibiting the immune-desert phenotype (4, 14). Each immune phenotype is associated with specific underlying mechanisms that might limit immunotherapeutic responses. For instance, in immune deserts, a lack of sufficient neoantigens to activate cytotoxic T cells has been proposed while in inflamed tumors T cell exhaustion might be a major factor contributing to therapeutic insensitivity.

As an alternative explanation for the therapeutic variety in response rates to immunotherapy, we support the hypothesis that abnormal tumor vasculature fulfills a central position in selective immune cell trafficking, which in part regulatesthe localization of immune cells within the tumor site, reflecting the various immune phenotypes. In addition, abnormal tumor vasculature may have a key role in maintenance of immunosuppression in tumors, limiting immunotherapeutic responses (15–18). Dysfunctional tumor vessels give rise to hypoxia that in turn lowers pH, creates leaky vasculature, and impairs fluid drainage increasing interstitial fluid pressure, which altogether supports an unfavorable tumor microenvironment (TME) and cancer metastasis (19). These circumstances in tumors alter the functionality of many immune effector cells, leading to the release of immunosuppressive cytokines that disables immune effector functions rendering immunotherapy ineffective (20–24).

Equally important, angiogenic factors released in response to hypoxia interfere with immune cell trafficking (10, 11, 13, 25–29). The severity of impaired leukocyte entry into tumors ranges from a partial blockade resulting in a selective endothelial barrier in case of inflamed and in part in immune excluded tumors, to a complete immune infiltration blockade associated with tumors lacking immune infiltration. Several studies showed that the efficacy of immunotherapy was strongly related to tumor infiltrating leukocyte levels (30–34). The existence of non-inflamed tumors supports the idea that exclusion of immune cells from the TME plays an important role in cancer escape and resistance to immunotherapy.

Several lines of evidence have shown that vascular normalization using anti-angiogenesis agents could restore leukocyte recruitment (31–34) into the tumor microenvironment and relieve immunosuppression (32, 35, 36). Targeting dysfunctional tumor vasculature using antiangiogenic agents has therefore the potential to create a window of therapeutic opportunity in which immunotherapy could have a better outcome then used as a single therapeutic agent (15, 17, 37).

How Abnormal Tumor Vasculature Contributes to Immunosuppression in Cancer

Early stage tumors are going through many cycles of growth and death. As nutrients and oxygen cannot reach cells in the tumor’s core, proliferation is followed by necrosis confining the size of the primary tumor to about 2–3 square millimeters (38). A tumor remains in this state until it acquires the ability to control its own growth through induction of angiogenesis. This event is called the angiogenic switch (39), which supports tumor progression in various ways. It improves supply of nutrients and oxygen and contributes to removal of toxic waste products (40). In addition, the connection to the vascular network facilitates infiltration of inflammatory immune cells into the tumor, increasing the complexity of the tumor microenvironment. Hypoxia as well as acquired mutations in proangiogenic growth factor pathways (e.g., loss of PTEN) have been implicated as key factors driving tumors into the angiogenic switch (17, 41–43).

In the 1980´s, it was proposed that tumors behave as a wounds that do not heal (44). There are many similarities between developing tumors and healing wounds, sharing overlapping biological players and pathways including recruitment of leukocytes and angiogenesis (45). Physiological angiogenesis in wounds typically occurs through vessel destabilization, sprouting, endothelial migration and proliferation, followed by resolution and stabilization of the new vessel. In cancer, angiogenesis is, however, characterized by a failure of the resolution phase. This results in a highly abnormal and disorganized vascular network that contains many intercellular gaps, abnormal spouts, and holds significant areas which are not well perfused (Figure 1). Intravital imaging in human melanoma tumors revealed that up to half of the neovasculature in tumors does not support blood flow (46). The lack of vessel perfusion creates areas of hypoxic tumor tissue that in turn may reinforce angiogenesis, initiating a vicious cycle, as hypoxia is a key inducer of angiogenesis (19). In cells, low oxygen levels are sensed by special proteins called hypoxia-inducible factors (HIFs) that in response to hypoxia translocate to the nucleus to initiate transcription of genes to promote cell survival in hypoxic conditions. These include glycolysis enzymes, which allow ATP synthesis in an oxygen-independent manner and pro-angiogenic proteins such as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and angiopoietin-2 (Ang2) (47).

Figure 1

In addition to induction of angiogenesis, pro-angiogenic proteins such as VEGF can also induce immunosuppressive functions (15) (Figure 1). One of the first described immunosuppressive mechanisms of VEGF was the inhibition of dendritic cell maturation with major consequences for presentation of tumor associated antigens (48). In addition, VEGF has also been implicated in inhibition of T cell function by inducing increased expression of immune inhibitory checkpoints including PD-1, CTLA-4, and Tim-3 mediating T cell exhaustion and anergy (9, 49). An additional factor found in the hypoxic tumor microenvironment are increased levels of HIFs (50). HIFs promote expression of ligands for immune inhibitory checkpoints (Figure 1). For instance, HIF1α increases the expression of PD-L1 on myeloid derived suppressor cells (MDSCs), tumor cells, DCs, and macrophages, hereby limiting T cell activation (20).

Hypoxic zones in tumors also attract MDSCs (21, 51, 52), tumor associated macrophages (TAMs) (22, 53) and regulatory T cells (Treg cells) (23, 54). In turn, these immune subtypes respond to hypoxia by secreting various anti-inflammatory cytokines and growth factors (e.g., IL10, TGFβ, VEGF and ANG2) in an attempt to relieve hypoxic stress (Figure 1). Many of these factors, however, contribute to immunosuppression and cancer escape through pro-tumorigenic immune cell polarization (24) or partial leukocyte trafficking blockade. Low hypoxia levels have also been reported to slow down tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (55). Collectively, this data shows how abnormal tumor vasculature contributes to immunosuppression in cancer.

Consequences of Angiogenesis in Tumors for Leukocyte Trafficking

The vascular network provides a conduit for leukocytes to reach specific places in the body. The endothelium, paving the inner lining of the vascular network, acts as a gatekeeper for leukocytes, providing guidance where to exit the bloodstream. Leukocytes breaching the endothelium, also referred to as leukocyte transendothelial migration or diapedesis, is a common process that occurs during physiological as well as pathological conditions (56). For instance, immune cells travel in and out of lymphoid structures via high endothelial venules to perform immune surveillance or breach endothelial barriers to counter a bacterial infection. During acute inflammation, pro-inflammatory cytokines induce endothelial cell activation, creating local endothelial patches that express high levels of cell adhesion molecules (CAMs, i.e., Selectins, ICAM-1 and VCAM-1) at their surface to mark the exit site for leukocytes, close to the inflammatory site (57). This active endothelial state allows leukocytes to cross the endothelial barrier.

In general, every leukocyte diapedesis event occurs through the same fundamentally conserved multistep process, which was first described by Springer and Butcher et al, as a three step process, that became known as the multistep paradigm of leukocyte transendothelial migration (58, 59). The current steps include rolling, crawling, firm adhesion, arrest, docking structure formation, and transendothelial migration (56, 60).

Selectin-mediated interactions promote leukocyte recruitment to the site of inflammation or cancer progression (61). Endothelial-selectins, including E-selectin (also known as CD62-E, ELAM-1) and P-selectin (CD62-P) mediate the first step in the multistep process of leukocyte diapedesis (61). The primary selectin ligand on leukocytes, P-selectin glycoprotein ligand-1 (PSGL-1) triggers intracellular signaling through P-selectin or E-selectin binding mediating tethering and rolling of various hematopoietic cells (61, 62). Secondly, selective chemokines presented on the endothelial surface by heparan sulfate activate specific integrin subsets expressed by leukocytes (e.g., LFA-1 and VLA-4), and result in more stable leukocyte adhesion via CAM binding on the endothelium. Leukocyte binding to endothelial CAMs (e.g., ICAM-1 and VCAM-1) support the adhesion phase including crawling, firm adhesion, arrest and docking structure formation (63, 64). The last step, transmigration, occurs either between two or more adjacent endothelial cells (paracellular route) or through the cell body of an individual endothelial cell (transcellular route). In both cases, an F-actin ring within the endothelium prevents vascular rupture and leakage while leukocytes pass the endothelial cell layer (57).

In addition, several processes shape the multistep paradigm and may refine leukocyte trafficking at predefined endothelial “hotspots” (60). These include the recruitment of leukocytes towards an optimal concentration of chemokines (chemotaxis), the density of adhesion molecules (haptotaxis), cellular stiffness (durotaxis) and migrating of leukocytes along the path of least resistance (tenertaxis), which also governs decisions making where to exit the endothelium (65, 66).

To infiltrate a tumor and to become part of the TME, immune cells must adhere and breach the endothelial lining of cancer vessels. The vasculature in cancer is, however, not normal. On a genetic level tumor endothelium differs from those located in normal resting tissues. Cytogenetic studies on epithelial renal cell carcinoma and nonepithelial (liposarcoma and melanoma) tumors have reported chromosomal aberrations and aneuploidy in tumor endothelial cells (67, 68), indicating that tumor endothelial cells, like tumor cells, can be genetically instable (67). On the transcription level, two particularly interesting studies compared the gene expression profiles of endothelial cells isolated from five distinct tumors and eight resting normal tissues (69, 70). Of the transcripts identified, 25 were overexpressed in tumor versus normal endothelium. Most of the genes identified had expected roles in angiogenesis and cell-cycle control, but those specific to tumor endothelium were mainly cell surface molecules of unknown function. Another intriguing study revealed that the most downregulated gene classes in tumor endothelial cells involved antigen presentation (i.e., Major histocompatibility complex class I, II), immune cell homing molecules (i.e., ICAM-1), and chemotaxis related molecules (i.e., CCL2, CCL18, and IL6), which might explain how tumor cells gain immuno-tolerance (71). Furthermore, single-RNA sequencing revealed the breadth in heterogeneity of lung tumor endothelial cell phenotypes in human patients and mouse tumor model systems. Tip tumor endothelial cells were congruent across species and models and shared conserved markers (72).

On a cellular level the origin of cancer endothelium considers various cellular sources (Figure 1). Endothelial patches are homogeneous, and can be derived from angiogenesis-induced spouts, co-opt nearby vessels, or are derived from bone-marrow or vessel wall endothelial progenitor cells (73, 74). Additionally, vessels may also be derived from unexpected sources, including endothelial cells derived from transdifferentiated myeloid and mesenchymal cells, or even from tumor cells mimicking endothelial cells (74). The multi-source origin of endothelial cells in abnormal tumor vessels may explain the plasticity of tumor vessels to escape anti-angiogenesis therapy (74).

Gene expression profiles in cancer endothelial cells might also depend on tumor size. For instance, it was suggested that smaller tumors express different angiogenic gene profiles compared to larger tumors. One study that explored this relationship found that genes associated with angiogenesis did not change during the different growth stages. However, cell surface molecules involved in leukocyte trafficking, i.e., ICAM-1 and VCAM-1 were downregulated in intermediate and large tumors (75). Moreover, several papers have shown a clear link between angiogenesis-modulatory molecules such as VEGF and basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) and downregulation of CAMs on tumor endothelial cells (76, 77). Together this data shows how angiogenesis modulating factors interfere with CAM expression on tumor endothelium which alters leukocyte infiltration into tumors.

Cancer Endothelium a Selective Barrier for Leukocytes

As evidenced by the various immune phenotypes in cancer, i.e., desert, immune-excluded and inflamed tumors the severity of impaired leukocyte entry into tumors ranges from a partial blockade to a complete immune infiltration blockade into tumors. The fact that some immunosuppressive immune cells such as regulatory T cells (Tregs) and MDSCs can enter the TME while cytotoxic effector cells are excluded also suggests a selective barrier at the level of the endothelium. What factors contribute to this selectivity is currently debated and of ongoing investigation.

Selective immune cell trafficking is regulated by a unique combination of endothelial specific CAMs and surface bound chemokines that interact with matching counterparts (integrins and chemokine receptors) expressed by specific leukocyte subtypes. In the context of cancer there are multiple pathways and mechanisms described that drive selective immune cell trafficking. It is important to realize that some of these pathways exist only temporally as they are continuously subjected to changing microenvironments as tumor development progresses and pathways might differ across tumor and tissue type. For many tumor types there is limited information on this topic so the represented information is based on a selected number of studies and may therefore not cover all tumor microenvironments and tumor types. Models (Figures 2–7) are simplified to improve understandability and serve as a starting point to understand and unravel the complete breadth of molecules involved in selective immune cell trafficking of diverse immune subtypes across diverse tumor types and tissues. While many parallels between inflammation and cancer development have been described, it remains to be evaluated how the various selectins, CAMs and chemokines mediate selective trafficking in cancer. We will now discuss the most established mechanisms of selective immune cell trafficking in cancer.

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

CD8 T Cell Trafficking Across Cancer Endothelium

In non-lymphoid tissues, resting endothelial cells lining small capillaries are usually refractory to leukocyte adhesion. Tissue entry via the vasculature occurs only occasionally by monocytes and a few recirculating T lymphocytes. L-selectin controls the capacity for naïve T cells to migrate to the lymph nodes, whereas P- and E-selectin capture activated T cells on activated inflamed endothelium to initiate their migration into non-lymphoid tissues (62). In tumors, initiation of T cell infiltration has been suggested to start with an initial infiltration of a few T cells, followed by a large influx of both specific and nonspecific T cells (78).

To enter tumor tissue via the vasculature CD8+ T cells first establish weak interactions through selectin based adhesions, likely mediated by P and E-selectin binding to PSGL-1 on the T cell (62, 79). These weak interactions slow down the leukocyte, inducing a slow-rolling behavior (Figure 2). Slow-rolling leukocytes subsequently interact with surface bound chemokines on the endothelium using a specific repertoire of chemokine receptors expressed by the cytotoxic T cell. A major chemokine receptor expressed by activated tumor infiltrating leukocytes (TILs) is CXCR3, which has been found on many CD8+ T cells that infiltrated breast, colon and melanoma tumors (31, 80–84). CXCR3 recognizes CXCL9 (Mig) and CXCL10 (IP10) which is presented on the inner lining of cancer vasculature. CXCR3 binding to CXCL9 and CXCL10 activate integrins (e.g., VLA-4) expressed on the cell surface of CD8+ T cells. Activated VLA-4 (also known as α4β1) enables transient interactions with VCAM-1 expressed on the cell surface of cancer endothelium supporting adhesion and transmigration (Figure 2).

Solid tumors expressing CXCL9 and CXCL10 recruited more CD8 T cells and showed better response to immunotherapy (85, 86). There are also tumors in which CXCL9 and 10 are low, which may explain why some tumors have low levels of CD8 T cell infiltration (80, 82). In addition to the C-X-C motif containing chemokines, T cells are predominantly recruited in some tumors via chemokines C-C motif ligands including CCL2, CCL3, CCL4, and CCL5 (80). Of these chemokines, CCL2 has been shown to increase homing of chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR T cells) that express functional CCR2 (receptor for CCL-2) (87).

Furthermore, cytokines may also modulate CD8 T cell trafficking as cytokines released by immune or cancer cells have shown to affect the expression of selective chemokines and CAMs at the surface of cancer endothelium. For instance, TNFα is known to increase endothelial adhesion molecules, in particular E-selectin, ICAM-1 and VCAM-1 (88). However, TNF alone has limited influence to enhance T cell entry into tumors this requires the presence of additional cytokines/chemokines. For instance interferon gamma (IFNγ) a key effector molecule released by activated cytotoxic T lymphocytes. Interestingly, the combination of TNF and IFNγ amplifies endothelial ICAM-1 and VCAM-1 surface expression and simultaneously provides selectively to CD8+ T cell recruitment by inducing several chemokines specific for CD8+ T cells including CXCL9/10/11 and CCL5 (89–91). Several studies have examined which endothelial adhesion molecules enable infiltration of effector CD8+ T-cells into tumors, either directly using genetic knockout models (and blocking antibodies) or as a correlation (10, 30, 31, 92–97). Increased ICAM-1 and VCAM-1 expression by the tumor vasculature in response to the pro-inflammatory agent CpG-ODN correlated with improved CD8+ T cell trafficking in a mouse model of pancreatic islet cell carcinoma (RIP1-Tag5) (94). In addition, in glioblastoma increased infiltration of CD8+ T cells also correlated with the expression of ICAM-1 and VCAM-1 on the vessel surface (95) Either, ICAM-1 and VCAM-1 blocking antibodies reduced T cell infiltration. Combined ICAM-1/VCAM-1 blockade showed the strongest impairment of T cell infiltration in glioblastoma (95). Furthermore, analyses of partly rejected B16/BL6 melanoma tumors revealed increased expression of ICAM and VCAM by the tumor vasculature, providing support for the idea that expression of these molecules strongly correlates with immune cell infiltration and tumor rejection (30). LFA-1 deficient mice failed to reject immunogenic MC57 fibrosarcoma tumors showing an important role for LFA-1 in CD8+ T cell recruitment and tumor rejection (96). Moreover, in a model for ovarian carcinoma and fibrosarcoma VLA-4-VCAM-1 as well as LFA-1-ICAM-1 interactions have been shown to mediate T cell infiltration in response to IL-12 treatment (92). In a separate ovarian cancer study anti-ICAM-1 blocking antibodies only partly blocked CD8+ T cell infiltration, suggesting that additional molecules like VCAM-1 may mediate CD8+ T cell extravasation as well (10). In other studies, the infiltration of CD8+ T cells was shown to be mediated by either ICAM-1 or VCAM-1 alone. In a study that combined vaccination with VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) inhibitor, in a M05 mouse breast cancer model, it was shown that VCAM-1 blocking antibodies or blocking the CXCR3 receptor impaired CD8+ T cell infiltration and therapeutic efficacy (31). Evaluating ICAM-1 expression in a pancreatic islet cell carcinoma (RIP1-Tag5 model), a colorectal cancer model (CT26) and B16-OVA tumors showed that extravasation of CD8+ T cells was E-selectin, P-selectin and ICAM-1 dependent, which could be blocked using corresponding blocking antibodies (93). The lack of CD8 T-cell infiltration into subcutaneous B16-OVA melanoma was confirmed in ICAM-1−/− mice (93), although conflicting it was shown that T cell penetration into B16 melanoma did not differ between wild-type and ICAM-1-/- mice (98). Moreover, also in models of pancreatic and hepatocellular cancer no significant differences in CD8+ T cell adhesion and infiltration were found in ICAM-1 and MAC-1 deficient mice. Instead an important role for LFA-1 was found (97). Perhaps in pancreatic and hepatocellular cancer LFA-1 mediated CD8+ T cell extravasation via its other ligands including ICAM-2, ICAM-3, ICAM-4, ICAM-5, and JAM-A (99), which might play an important role to establish firm adhesion to cancer endothelium Together this supports a model for CD8+ T cell transmigration across cancer endothelium that occurs predominantly through the CD8+ T cell attracting chemokines CCL2, CXCL9, and CXCL10, as well as via CD8+ T cell integrins, LFA-1 and VLA-4, and endothelial E-selectin, ICAM-1 and VCAM-1. The direct role of VCAM-1, ICAM-1, and ligands for CXCR3 or other chemokine receptors in mediating T-cell entry into additional murine and human tumors and the concomitant effects on other immune subtypes still needs to be thoroughly examined.

Cancer Immune Evasion Through Inhibition of Cytotoxic T Cell Recruitment

The direct effects of hypoxia, abnormal vasculature and hypoxia induced angiogenic factors such as VEGF-A, C, D, bFGF, EGFL7 have profound immunosuppressive effects and block T cell infiltration in tumors in various ways (Figure 3). First, angiogenic factors reduce endothelial VCAM-1 expression which limits T cell infiltration (76, 77).

Second, T cell trafficking to cancer is blocked through several mechanisms that interfere with chemokine signaling. For instance, T cell infiltration has been shown to be blocked by chemokine decoy receptor expression on tumor vessels (like DARC) that scavenge the CD8+ T cell recruiting chemokines CCL2 and CCL5 (100). Chemokine decoy receptors can also increase trafficking of immunosuppressive cells, for instance through downregulation of chemokine decoy receptor D6 that normally keeps CCL22 expression in check, increasing Treg cell recruitment (101). Moreover, CD8+ T cell infiltration can also be impaired through VEGF-A-mediated reduction of CD8+ T-cell recruiting chemokines CXCL9, 10, and 11. Reduced chemokine presentation can occur through downregulation or proteolytic processing as has been shown for CXCL11, which is an important chemokine recruiting CXCR3 expressing effector T cells. Dysfunctional CXCL11 impairs binding and signaling of the chemokine, ultimately reducing lymphocyte infiltration in tumors (102). Furthermore, loss of homeostatic chemokine expression can interfere with T cell infiltration as well. In skin tumors, loss of CCL27, a chemokine constitutively expressed by normal keratinocytes, impaired T-cell homing to cutaneous tumors accelerating tumor outgrowth in a tumor mouse model of B16F10 melanoma (12).

In addition, interference with T cell attracting chemokines has also been described to involve nitrosylation. In response to reactive nitrogen species (RNS) tumor cells modify CCL2 intro nitrosylated CCL2. Nitro-CCL2 recruits monocyte derived suppressor cells and repels trafficking of cytotoxic T cells and Th1 effector cells, confining T cells in stromal regions that surround cancers cells (13).

Another mechanism of endothelial anergy (lack of responsiveness) involves the binding of endothelin-1 to endothelin B receptor (ETBR), which prevents T cell adhesion to cancer endothelium, even in the presence of the inflammatory cytokine TNFα (10, 103). In oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma high ETBR expression correlated with angiogenesis and lower survival rates (104).

Finally, cancer endothelial cells are able to increase FasL expression in response to VEGF-A. Upregulation of FAS ligands on cancer endothelium has been suggested to induce T cell apoptosis (11). In addition to Fas ligands, cancer endothelium can also express increased levels of the immune inhibitory checkpoints PD-L1 and PD-L2 (26). The expression of PD-L1/2 may initiate T cell anergy and exhaustion even before entering the tumor microenvironment.

T Regulatory Cell Trafficking Across Cancer Endothelium

As outlined previously, tumor growth results in hypoxia, which inducesangiogenesis in tumors. Because angiogenic tumor vessels are often dysfunctional and not well perfused angiogenesis in tumors is likely to result in more hypoxia. These hypoxic conditions in turn promote the recruitment of T regulatory cells (Treg cells). which promotes tolerance and angiogenesis to support tumor growth and dissemination (23). L-selectin expression is required for proper trafficking and distribution of Tregs cells under physiological conditions (105). In an inflammatory model Tregs have been shown to perform rolling under high shear stress using tether and sling formation and the authors predicted that Treg cells will also show P- and E-selectin-dependent homing to sites of inflammation (106). The precise involvement of selectin based Treg cell rolling in cancer recruitment requires further investigation. Treg cells express CCR4 and are recruited into the tumor micro environment in response to CCL22, which is produced mainly by macrophages and tumor cells (25) (Figure 4). Another chemokine shown to recruit Treg cells is the hypoxia related chemokine CCL28 (23) which may reinforce the vicious cycle of hypoxia induced angiogenesis resulting in more abnormal vasculature and hypoxia. In addition, Tregs exposed to hypoxia show increased CXCR4 surface expression which in turn can interact with its ligand stromal-derived-factor-1 (SDF-1 also called CXCL12) to mediate infiltration of Treg cells into breast cancer (107).

Several angiogenic factors including VEGF-A,C,D, bFGF, and Egfl7, increased expression of the ETBR (10, 103). Glioblastomas with higher numbers of ETBR-expressing vessels showed lower infiltration by cytotoxic T cells and higher numbers of regulatory T cells. Cytotoxic T cells infiltrated around ETBR-negative blood vessels, but were absent around vessels expressing ETBR (28). The common lymphatic endothelial and vascular endothelial receptor-1 (Clever-1, also known as stabilin-1) also selectively mediates transmigration of Tregs across cancer endothelium. In tumors, VEGF-A induces upregulation of Clever-1, recruiting Tregs while repelling CD8 T cell binding (27). Clever-1 knockout mice show impaired Treg trafficking while trafficking of CD8 T cells was unchanged (108). Clever-1 knockout mice also had impaired tumor migration via lymphatics (108).

In addition to ETBR and Clever-1, several adhesion molecules have been described to regulate selective transmigration of Tregs across cancer endothelium and might be cancer type specific. In pancreatic carcinoma, selective transmigration of Tregs involved the mucosal adressin cell adhesion molecule-1 (MAdCAM-1), VCAM-1, E-selectin, and activated leukocyte cell adhesion molecule (ALCAM, also known as CD166). Blocking antibodies against the ligands β7 integrin, L-selectin, and CD166 specifically expressed on the surface of Treg cells impaired Treg trafficking (29). In contrast, blocking antibodies against P-selectin, ICAM-1 and ICAM-2 did not block Treg transmigration (29).

NK Cell Trafficking Across Cancer Endothelium

NK cells play an active role in immune surveillance which is particularly effective for hematological tumors, early stage solid tumors and metastatic cells circulating in the blood (109, 110). Conversely, NK cells are less effective in controlling advanced solid tumors that are characterized by an abundant variety of immunosuppressive factors typical for a tumor microenvironment. These include the direct effects of hypoxia and angiogenesis factors on cancer and immune cells increasing the amount of surface expressed immune inhibitory checkpoints, such as PD-L1 and B7-H3 (9, 111) as well as immunosuppressive cytokines such as TGFβ released by tumor cells and tumor associated macrophages (112–114).

Another aspect that impacts the performance of NK cell mediated immune surveillance is the low frequency and/or type of NK cell recruited to the tumor. The two major functions of NK cells, i.e., cytokine production and cytotoxic activity are conventionally associated with distinct NK cell subsets. Whereas cytotoxic activity is mostly confined to NK cell variants identified as CD56dimCD16pos, production of cytokines, i.e., IFNγ occurs mainly by immature CD56brightCD16low/neg NK cells (115). In line with tumors escaping immune surveillance, cytotoxic CD56dimCD16pos NK cells are sporadically found in advanced solid tumors whereas immature CD56brightCD16low/neg NK cell variants represent the majority of tumor infiltrated NK cells.

The adhesion of NK cell variants to cancer endothelium shows similarities to that of CD8 T cells, starting with selectin-induced rolling, followed by VCAM-1-VLA-4 mediated adhesion and transmigration (Figure 5). Mice deficient in E- and P-selectin were defective in NK cell recruitment to subcutaneous Lewis lung carcinoma (LLC) and MC38 tumors, showing the relevance of these molecules in NK cell tumor infiltration (116). IL-2-induced NK cell infiltration into lung, liver and subcutaneous B16 melanoma was mediated by endothelial VCAM-1 interacting with VLA-4 on NK cells. NK cell infiltration was neither blocked by anti-ICAM-1 nor LFA-1 blocking antibodies (117). Selective recruitment however, is determined by distinct chemokines presented at the surface of cancer endothelium. Immature pro-tumor CD56brightCD16low/neg NK cell recruitment occurs via increased expression of CXCL9, CXCL10, CXCL19, CXCL21, and CCL5, and reduced expression of CXCL2, CX3CL1, CXCL1, and CXCL8 (118). Conversely, CXCL2, CX3CL1, CXCL1, and CXCL8 are important recruiters of cytotoxic CD56dimCD16pos NK cells into the TME. Of note, CXCL9 and CXCL10 recruiting pro-tumor immature CD56brightCD16low/neg NK cells are also involved in the recruitment of cytotoxic CD8 T cells.

Neutrophil Trafficking Across Cancer Endothelium

In a physiological setting, neutrophils play a vital role to counter microbial infections and have supportive functions during wound healing. In cancer, however, neutrophils have shown to support tumor growth and progression through angiogenesis induction and immunosuppressive functions (119, 120). In general, neutrophil transmigration across cancer endothelium resembles that of inflammation. Heparan sulfate deficiency in mice showed reduced L-selectin and chemokine-mediated neutrophil trafficking in an inflammatory model, showing two important functions of endothelial heparan sulfate: acting as a ligand for L-selectin and presenting chemokines at the luminal surface of the endothelium (63, 64). Furthermore, the use of L-selectin and E-selectin deficient mice in lung and CRC models have shown that selectin-mediated recruitment of neutrophils support cancer metastasis (121, 122). In inflammatory settings the integrin LFA-1 (CD11a/CD18, αLβ2) is required to establish firm adhesion and transmigration of neutrophils across vascular beds. Mice lacking CD18 (β2 integrin) have impaired infiltration of neutrophils in solid tumors, indicating that this integrin is also involved in neutrophil migration into tumors (123). A study examining the recruitment of CD11bpos myeloid cells in response to tissue damage and hypoxia in irradiated tumors corroborated the importance of CD18 in myeloid recruitment, whereas CD11b was redundant (124). Together this supports that neutrophil interaction with the vasculature are predominantly regulated by LFA-1-ICAM-1 interactions (Figure 6).

IL-17, the signature cytokine expressed by γδ T Cells and Th17 cells, was recently associated with shaping neutrophil recruitment to tumors (125, 126). The combined activation of endothelial cells by TNF and IL-17 synergistically increased P-selectin, E-selectin, and ICAM-1, which enhanced neutrophil specific rolling and adhesion to the vasculature. TNF in combination with IL-17 stimulation dampened VCAM-1 levels compared to TNF alone, whereas ICAM-1 levels remained highly expressed on the endothelium (90). Importantly, IL-17 and TNF synergistically increased the neutrophil-recruiting chemokines CXCL1 (GRO-α), CXCL2 (MIP2α), CXCL5 (LIX), and induced secretion of GM-CSF and G-CSF to mobilize myeloid cells including neutrophils from the bone marrow into the circulation (90, 127). Another study showed that Ly6Clow monocytes recruited Ly6G+ neutrophils via CXCL5 (128).

The anti-tumor functions of neutrophils are controversial, and substantial evidence suggest that the anti-tumor activity of neutrophils is context dependent. In pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma the CXCR2-CXCL5 axis increased infiltration of neutrophils, which promoted tumor growth (128). Conversely, in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma IL-17 stimulated CXCL2 production by tumor cells, which is also associated with increased infiltration of neutrophils. However, in this context neutrophil infiltration induced anti-tumor effects since IL-17 potentiated the direct killing capability of neutrophils by enhancing the production of cytotoxic molecules, including reactive oxygen species (ROS), MPO, TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL), and IFNγ (129). Another example of beneficial anti-tumor neutrophils has been shown in the context of early stage epithelial carcinogenesis. Hypoxia induced expression of CXCL1 (GRO-α), CXCL2 (MIP2α), CXCL5 (LIX) recruited anti-tumor neutrophils, which inhibited tumor growth by inducing tumor cell detachment from the basement membrane (130). Neutrophils have also been implicated to induce vascular damage, resulting in ischemic hemorrhagic necrosis and tumor rejection, for instance in response to intratumoral IL-12 injections (131). This type of neutrophil mediated tumor death seemed to play a crucial role in the rejection of subcutaneous tumors but not in lung metastasis (131). Furthermore, DC101 (anti-VEGFR2) enhanced neutrophil and macrophage infiltration, and in combination with a glucuronide prodrug had increased anti-tumor activity in experimental mouse models (132). In a co-culture of UKF-NB-4 neuroblastoma tumor cells and human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC) it has been shown that direct tumor-endothelial cell-cell contact promotes downregulation of endothelial CD44 receptor expression, impairing neutrophil binding (133, 134). How endothelial CD44 inhibition may repel an effective anticancer attack by neutrophils was not investigated.

Monocyte Trafficking Across Cancer Endothelium

Two monocyte type subsets have been identified, i.e., classical monocytes (Ly6Chi CD14pos CD16neg) and non-classical monocytes (Ly6Clow CD14neg CD16pos) (135). Both subsets show anti-tumor as well as pro-tumor effects, which are context-dependent (135). Classical monocytes mainly support tumor growth and metastasis through VEGF-A release, which promotes angiogenesis (136–138) and worsens clinical outcome (139). Classical monocytes have also been associated with anti-tumor effects (138, 140).

Classical monocytes express high levels of the chemokine receptor, CCR2 (136). CCR2 mediates monocyte activation upon recognition of immobilized CCL2 at the endothelium (136), which is mediated by TNF (141). This CCR2-CCL2 axis has shown to recruit angiogenic classical monocytes in PyMT spontaneous breast carcinoma, KCKO pancreatic carcinoma, and MC38 colorectal carcinoma (136, 139, 142, 143) (Figure 7). In a model for pancreatic carcinoma and liver metastasis CCR2 deficiency or CCR2 blockade has shown to impair classical monocyte recruitment, angiogenesis inhibition and relief of immunosuppression (139, 143). In addition, CCR2 inhibition decreased the number of tumor associated MDSCs and improved anti-PD-1 therapy in resistant murine gliomas (144).

The use of E- and L-selectin-deficient mice in a lung cancer model (LLC) and CRC model (MC-38) has shown that selectin-mediated recruitment of monocytes and macrophages supports tumor metastasis (121, 122, 145). This indicates the importance of E-selectin (ligand for, e.g., PSGL-1) and L-selectin (ligand for, e.g., GlyCAM-1, CD34, etc.) for myeloid cell recruitment in cancer (62).The integrin VLA-4 has been shown to regulate recruitment of classical monocytes to tumors promoting angiogenesis (146). VLA-4 is known to interact with VCAM-1. However in the context of vascular abnormalities in cancer, monocytes may use VLA-4 to bind to fibronectin, as the disruptive endothelium in cancer contains many intercellular gaps, hereby exposing fibronectin (Figure 7). Indeed, VLA-4 has shown to be important for selective homing of monocytes to tumors (146).

An interesting phenomenon affecting leukocyte trafficking and immunosuppression in cancer involves the effects of hypoxia on myeloid cells. Hypoxia causes myeloid cells to produce arginase (ARG) and nitric oxide synthase. Arginase inhibits effector T cell function inducing immunosuppression (119, 147). Moreover, nitric oxide synthase is an important producer of peroxynitrate, a molecule important to form reactive nitrogen species (RNS), affecting selective trafficking of leukocytes into tumors. RNS have been implicated in chemokine nitrosylation, a posttranslational modification forming chemical barriers for certain leukocyte subsets. Nitrosylated CCL2 forms a physical barrier for cytotoxic T cells and Th1 effector cells (Figure 7). Conversely, nitro-CCL2 recruits MDSCs supporting angiogenesis and tumor growth (13). CCR2 knockout mice fail to recruit MDSC to cancers (148). High levels of CCL2 have been found in breast, gastric and ovarian cancers, which correlated with MDSC infiltration (148).

In contrast to CCR2-dependent recruitment of classical monocytes, the mobilization and homing of non-classical monocytes (also known as patrolling monocytes) to tumors involves the chemokine receptor CX3CR1 (149) (Figure 7). CX3CR1 mediates the migration of non-classical monocytes through CX3CL1 recognition on cancer endothelium. In melanoma, breast and lung cancer non-classical monocytes show anti-tumor effects predominantly through recruitment of cytotoxic NK cells (150–153). Conversely, in colorectal cancer, non-classical monocytes promoted tumor growth through induction of angiogenesis and immune suppression (51, 52, 154). Interestingly, these non-classical monocytes also release CXCL5 to recruit neutrophils and produce IL-10, inhibiting adaptive immunity (52).

Tumor Dissemination via Vascular and Lymphatic Networks

Pathological angiogenesis in cancer forms an abnormal tumor vascular network. The connection of this abnormal vascular network to the vascular system provides a conduit for cancer cells to spread over the body, facilitating tumor metastasis (155, 156). Abnormal tumor vessels are characterized by an immature morphology, meaning lower pericyte and smooth muscle cell coverage, discontinuous endothelial cell-cell junctions, and an abnormal basement membrane (157, 158). Moreover, the blood flow in tumors does not always follow a constant unidirectional path, and an extensive amount of the tortuous tumor vascular network is not well perfused (46, 159). Despite less perfusion of tumor vessels metastasis via the blood circulation occurs more frequently than distant metastasis via the lymphatics (155). Pericytes are important supportive stromal cells for endothelial cell function and monolayer integrity. Consequently, the lack of pericyte coverage cause improper and loose endothelial cell-cell contacts, leaky, and permeable vessels which increase the number of tumor cells to metastasize via the blood stream (158). Dysfunctional angiogenic vasculature in tumors generally increases hypoxia, which can further promote cancer cell motility and metastasis through the activation of epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) (160, 161). EMT mechanisms decrease epithelial cell-to-cell junctions and increase cancer cell motility, enhancing invasiveness and cancer escape. Downregulation of E-cadherin, an important molecule for stability of cell-cell contacts, and upregulation of the transcriptional factors Snail1, Snail2, Slug, and Twist are described as main drivers for EMT (161, 162). In addition, hypoxia related TGF-β3 induction (163, 164) and Notch signaling pathways are reported as EMT promoting mechanisms as well (165).

In addition to EMT mechanisms and metastasis via the blood circulation, abnormal lymphatic vessels and lymph angiogenesis also facilitate tumor dissemination. VEGF-C and VEGF-D are key promoters of tumor-associated lymph angiogenesis, increasing lymphatic vessel diameter (166) and cancer metastasis via lymphatics (166–169). Blocking VEGF-C and VEGF-D signaling with neutralizing antibodies or soluble VEGFR3 correlated with suppressed tumor lymph angiogenesis and lymph node metastasis (170, 171). Moreover, the leaky nature of vessels combined with dysfunctional lymphatic drainage results in increased interstitial fluid pressure in the tumor microenvironment. Consequently, high fluid pressure drives cancer cells passively into enlarged tumor associated lymphatic vessels and supports cancer metastases to distal organs (172, 173). An active mechanism of tumor dissemination via lymphatics involves the chemokines CCL21 and CCL19, which are secreted by tumor cells. In response to high fluid pressure CCL21 and CCL19 are pushed towards tumor draining lymph nodes, which are simply followed by cancer cells that sense the fluid pressure induced chemokine gradients via CCR7 (166). Altogether, the vascular network in tumors sustains a favorable niche for cancer cells to thrive and ultimately metastasize.

A RationalE to Combine Immunotherapy With Anti-Angiogenic Agents

Vascular abnormalities are a hallmark of most solid tumors. Targeting angiogenesis in tumors with monoclonal antibodies such as Bevacizumab (anti-VEGF) were initially aimed to starve tumors to death and prevent metastatic spread. However, the benefits of Bevacizumab used as a single agent were modest evidenced by limited tumor regression and low overall survival (174–176). The lack of durable anti-tumor responses might be attributed, in part, by compensatory mechanisms in angiogenesis pathways, including alternative angiogenesis pathways such as the Ang2 pathway (177), co-option of nearby vessels or vessel mimicry (73, 178). Moreover, tumors that relapsed from angiogenesis treatment showed increased expression of immune inhibitory checkpoints such as PD-L1 (179), which provides a rational to combine anti-angiogenic agents with checkpoint blockade.

As outlined, pro-angiogenic proteins have profound effects on a broad range of immune cells, which alter immune cell maturation, activity and trafficking and hereby support immune suppression and tumor immune evasion. A logical intervention to tackle the leukocyte trafficking problem and immunosuppression in cancer is to also target angiogenic tumor vessels in addition to immunotherapy. The majority of the anti-angiogenic approaches (e.g., anti-VEGF antibodies or VEGF tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI)) induce vessel normalization, which is characterized by increased vessel perfusion, pericyte coverage (180), increased oxygen (181–183), reduced permeability (36), regression of tortuous vasculature (184–186), reduced interstitial fluid pressure (185), and upregulation of Ang-1 gene expression (184). In addition, targeting pro-angiogenic proteins such as VEGF counteracts immunosuppressive effects on immune cells as a result of reduced hypoxia in tumors (15, 17, 37). Furthermore, substantial evidence underscores the potential of angiogenesis inhibition to restore endothelial function allowing the infiltration of cytotoxic immune cells by improving vascular-leukocyte interactions and chemotaxis (9, 31–34, 187, 188) which overall may improve the efficacy of many immunotherapy formats.

Likewise, preclinical studies show that immune checkpoint blockade brings about anti-vascular immune responses against tumor vessels showing the synergistic potential of combining anti-angiogenic agents with immunotherapy (179, 189–191).

Anti-angiogenic agents yield a therapeutic window of vascular normalization in which new strategies can be explored to increase infiltration of cytotoxic immune cells improving the efficacy of immunotherapy. This may yield a better overall efficacy. The dosing of anti-angiogenic agents, however, needs to be carefully evaluated as high dose can also result in increased vessel pruning and hypoxia, mediating resistance to therapy (37, 73, 177). Altogether, anti-angiogenic agents have the potential to reprogram the immunosuppressive TME to a microenvironment that supports anti-tumor immunity.

Targeting Tumor Vessels to Enhance Leukocyte Trafficking and Immunotherapy

To date, there are a handful of approaches to increase selective trafficking of leukocytes into tumors. These include anti-angiogenic agents, blocking antibodies targeting key surface molecules involved in leukocyte traffic, targeted delivery of pro-inflammatory cytokines and nanoparticles that deliver content to silence leukocyte specific chemokine expression (Figure 8). Because tumor vasculature is very distinct from resting endothelial cells in healthy tissue, a great variety of surface molecules, commonly involving angiogenesis related proteins, are available to enable targeted therapy of tumor vessels.

Figure 8

Anti-Angiogenic Approaches

An established way of targeting tumors and increase leukocyte infiltration in tumors is through inhibition of angiogenesis (Figure 8A) including anti-VEGF/VEGFR2 (32–34, 179, 187, 192–195), Ang2 (190, 196), VEGF TKI (9, 31, 188, 197, 198), or Tie2 agonists (36). The majority of these anti-angiogenic approaches induce vessel normalization, which is characterized by increased vessel perfusion, pericyte coverage (180), increased oxygen (181–183), reduced permeability (36), regression of tortuous vasculature (184–186), increased leukocyte traffic (9, 31–34, 187, 188) reduced interstitial fluid pressure (185) and upregulation of Ang-1 gene expression (184).

Vascular normalization creates a window of opportunity to combine anti-angiogenic agents with other anti-cancer therapies, especially with immunotherapy (15, 17). As such, targeting tumor vessels with anti-angiogenic agents in combination with immune inhibitory checkpoints (9, 179, 190, 195, 196, 199–202), adoptive cell transfer (34, 187, 193, 194, 197, 203), or cancer vaccines (31–33, 188, 192, 198) has shown improved anti-cancer effects. Normalization effects of anti-VEGF on tumor vasculature can already observed as early as one day after treatment in mice and human, as more matured vessels were observed as well as reduced tortuous vessels, which had smaller diameter and were shorter in length (204). The time that the therapeutic window persists depends on the therapy dosage (32, 174) and on tumor origin (19). At the right dose, the window might last for about a week in mice (32, 204). In humans the window is suggested to last longer (15, 19).

Perhaps counterintuitive, extensive treatment, and high dose anti-angiogenic agents shorten the therapeutic window as this leads to enhanced vessel pruning, which leads to vascular disruption and increased hypoxia that may ultimately result in induction of alternative angiogenesis pathways such as Ang2 pathway, hereby driving therapeutic resistance (73, 177). This also suggests that targeting multiple angiogenic pathways simultaneously may enhance angiogenic therapeutic responses. Combined targeting of Ang2 and VEGF pathways was show to extend the normalization window (35, 205, 206).

In addition to the effects of VEGF blockade on the tumor vasculature, single targeting of VEGF or in combination with Ang2 blockade converted the immunosuppressive environment into an immune stimulatory environment, evidenced by increased detection of M1 macrophages and increased CD8+ T cells infiltration in GL261 glioblastoma tumors (35), or in a model of MCaP0008 breast cancer (32). Furthermore, inhibition of angiogenesis and simultaneously activating the Tie2 pathway (stabilizing/strengthening endothelial junctions) normalized vessels effectively, increasing oxygen levels and diminished immunosuppression (36). Because the majority of anti-angiogenic approaches relieve immunosuppression (32, 35) and increase leukocyte entry into tumors through normalization of tumor vessels (32), the use of anti-angiogenic therapy in combination with immunotherapy exhibits great potential to enhance tumor killing.

The potential to combine anti-angiogenic therapy with immunotherapy, in particular with checkpoint inhibitors, was corroborated by many combinations in various preclinical mouse models (Table 1) and tested in a large number of clinical phase I, II and III trials that confirm the synergistic effect of combinational therapy (Table 2). In pre-clinical studies the general outcome of combining anti-angiogenic agents with immunotherapy shows increased tumor regression and overall survival, often associated with relief of immunosuppression, evidenced by reduced presence of tumor resident MDSC and Treg cells, which often coincided with increased infiltration of CD4 and CD8 T cells (9, 31–34, 187, 188, 221). However, the majority of studies do not include metrics to show that vascular normalization is achieved. Blocking anti-VEGF in combination with checkpoint inhibition and its effects on the vasculature should be investigated in more detail in further research.

Several clinical trials corroborated the increased progression-free survival rates found in preclinical studies. In a phase III trial, investigating the survival benefits for patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma upon dual targeting with checkpoint inhibitors and angiogenesis blockade, combined effects of pembrolizumab (anti-PD-1) with axitinib (VEGFR TKI) resulted in a significantly longer overall and -progression-free survival, as well as a higher objective response rate, compared to sunitinib (VEGFR TKI) treatment alone (222). Another study (phase I), tested the combined effects of the immune checkpoint CTLA-4 (ipilimumab) and VEGF inhibition by bevacizumab on immune infiltration in metastatic melanoma patients. This study corroborated the effect of antiangiogenic agents on vessel normalization and activation, evidenced by increased E-selectin expression on intratumoral endothelial cells, which coincided with increased infiltration of CD8⁺ cytotoxic T cells, CD163⁺ macrophages and minimal change in Foxp3⁺ Treg cells (210). Moreover, a study combining bevacizumab and an anti-tumor vaccine, followed by adoptive T-cell transfer showed clinical benefit for recurrent ovarian cancer, including one complete response (223). Together, this data emphasizes the power to combine anti-angiogenic therapy with immunotherapy and highlight its clinical potential.

Targeting Cancer Endothelial Metabolism

In addition to the more established vascular normalizing-agents anti-VEGF or -ANG2, an emerging way of inducing vascular normalization is introduced through targeting of endothelial cell metabolism (Figure 8B). Endothelial sprouting involved in angiogenesis relies on glycolysis rather than oxidative phosphorylation for ATP production. As such blocking PFKFB3, a key molecule involved in endothelial glycolysis, reduced vessel sprouting and angiogenesis (224, 225). In a cancer setting, transient reduction of glycolysis by PFKFB3 blockade improved vessel normalization, impaired tumor metastasis and improved chemotherapy delivery (226). In this setting, vessel normalization was characterized as a tighter barrier with increased pericyte coverage. However, glycolysis blockade also interfered with NF-κB signaling, which reduced endothelial adhesion molecules, i.e., ICAM-1 and VCAM-1. The reduction of CAM expression reduced metastatic spread, but might also interfere with infiltration of cytotoxic effector cells. In addition, there are also dose dependent limitations of using PFKFB3 blockade. High dose PFKFB3 aggravates vessel integrity, tumor hypoxia, and metastasis, highlighting the importance of adequately dosing a glycolytic inhibitor for anticancer treatment (227). As such, future research should identify whether endothelial glycolysis blockade in combination with immunotherapy is beneficial. Moreover, further studies now investigate the potential of studying tumor endothelial cell metabolism and its heterogeneity (228).

Modulating Selective Leukocyte Recruitment During Vascular Normalization

Vascular normalization with anti-angiogenic drugs or glycolysis blockade may create a therapeutic window for immunotherapy, but success of therapeutic efficacy also depends on either effective recruitment of cytotoxic immune cells or inhibition of immunosuppressive cells. Therefore, targeting agents that affect selective trafficking of leukocytes across cancer endothelium become increasingly relevant. Thus far, a couple of approaches have been developed to regulate immune cell trafficking to provide access and selectivity for some immune cell subtypes to cross the endothelial barrier (Figures 8C–F).

First, selective immune cell trafficking was regulated through targeted-delivery of cytokines using cytokine-peptide fusions or cytokines-antibody fusion, i.e., immunocytokines (Figure 8C). An promising example is the targeted delivery of low dose TNF using a TNF-RGR peptide, which increased vessel stabilization, vessel perfusion and enhanced T cell infiltration, hereby improving overall survival after antitumor vaccination or adoptive T-cell therapy (229). Similar results were obtained with a NGR-TNF peptide (230). Another method involves immunocytokines, of which the target molecules are often angiogenesis related molecules in solid cancers, including EDA and EDB domains of fibronectin and the extra-domain A1 of tenascin-C. These molecules are specifically expressed in angiogenic parts of tumor vasculature but not detectable in normal tissues (231). F8, L19 and F16 antibodies are specific to the EDA, EDB, and A1 domain, respectively (232, 233). As such, these antibodies are ideal to generate cytokine-fusion antibodies targeting tumor associated vasculature.

L19-IL2 is a well described immunocytokine having a central role in the regulation of T cell responses and effects on other immune cells, such as natural killer cells, B cells, monocytes, macrophages and neutrophils. IL2 can induce tumor regression through its ability to stimulate a potent cell-mediated immune response in vivo (234, 235). L19-IL2 as well as L19TNF are now being evaluated in phase II clinical trials through intratumoral application in stage III or IV melanoma patients (236).

Targeting tumor vasculature with anti-angiogenesis agents or immunocytokines increases leukocyte trafficking through upregulation of CAM expression on cancer endothelium. As such, blocking key adhesion receptors involved in leukocyte transendothelial migration might be an effective approach to modulate selective trafficking of leukocytes (Figure 8D). Although generic CAMs can bind integrins expressed by several leukocyte subtypes, blocking specific CAMs might govern selective migration across tumor vessels. For instance, blocking antibodies targeting Clever-1 or ETBR, which are key surface molecules involved in Treg cell transmigration across tumor vasculature, impaired Treg cell but not CD8+ T cell entry into tumors (10, 103, 108).

Another approach to modulate selectivity through endothelial CAM expression is targeting the co-stimulatory molecule CD137 (4-1BB), which is selectively expressed on the surface of tumor endothelial cells, and induced by hypoxia. Agonistic antibodies targeting CD137 increase E-selectin, ICAM-1, and VCAM-1 surface expression on tumor vessels. This restoration of CAM expression increased T cell trafficking across tumor blood vessels improving infiltration of T lymphocytes into malignant tissue (237) (Figure 8E).

Finally, selective trafficking of leukocytes might be modulated through interfering with chemokine signals. Such an approach may involve targeted delivery of siRNAs that locally interferes with chemokine signaling affecting the selective trafficking of certain leukocytes into the TME (Figure 8F). Several lines of data show the feasibility of this approach. For instance, in vivo nanoparticle delivery of siCX3CL1 inhibited non classical Ly6C^lo monocyte infiltration and enhanced efficacy of anti-VEGFR2 therapy (154). Additionally, intelligent nanorobots have been described that are able to deliver anticancer therapeutics to tumor vessels, targeting tumor endothelial specific nucleolin (238). In this case thrombin was locally delivered to induce rapid shutdown of tumor vasculature, which induced necrosis and inhibition of tumor growth. Similar nanorobots may also deliver cytokines and/or anti-angiogenesis agents locally to tumors to redirect selective trafficking of leukocytes and to modulate the tumor microenvironment.

Concluding Remarks and Future Directions

In conclusion, vascular normalization with anti-angiogenic agents may counteract immunosuppression and increase leukocyte entry into tumors, hereby opening a window of opportunity to combine anti-angiogenic agents with immunotherapy. Understanding the regulation of selective immune cell trafficking may establish better approaches that govern selective immune cell infiltration in cancer to make better use of the therapeutic window during vascularization normalization. So far, the majority of research is focused on increasing the infiltration of cytotoxic immune cells in tumors. However, the selective inhibition of immunosuppressive immune cells might be equally important, as these cells modulate the activity of cytotoxic immune cells after they have entered the TME. Thus, molecules involved in selective trafficking might provide novel predictive markers to provide a rational for combining vascular targeting agents with specific immunotherapy strategies. Ultimately, improving immunotherapy through vascular normalization may lead to significantly better clinical outcome of many cancer patients.

Funding

NH is supported by the Dutch Cancer Society grant 12863 and Cancer Center Amsterdam grant CCA2017-5-39. ME is supported by the Dutch Cancer Society grant 12749. GD is supported by the Program of Selection and Placement of Students for Overseas Postgraduate Education (YLSY) scholarship, awarded by the Turkish Ministry of National Education.

References

• 1

  ChapmanPBD’AngeloSPWolchokJD. Rapid eradication of a bulky melanoma mass with one dose of immunotherapy. N Engl J Med (2015) 372:2073–4. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1501894

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 2

  RobertCSchachterJLongGVAranceAGrobJJMortierLet al. Pembrolizumab versus Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma. N Engl J Med (2015) 372:2521–32. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1503093

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 3

  DammeijerFLauSPvan EijckCHJvan der BurgSHAertsJGJV. Rationally combining immunotherapies to improve efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade in solid tumors. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev (2017) 36:5–15. doi: 10.1016/j.cytogfr.2017.06.011

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 4

  ChenDSMellmanI. Elements of cancer immunity and the cancer-immune set point. Nature (2017) 541:321–30. doi: 10.1038/nature21349

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 5

  HegdePSKaranikasVEversS. The where, the when, and the how of immune monitoring for cancer immunotherapies in the era of checkpoint inhibition. Clin Cancer Res (2016) 22:1865–74. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-1507

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 6

  GalonJBruniD. Approaches to treat immune hot, altered and cold tumours with combination immunotherapies. Nat Rev Drug Discovery (2019) 18:197–218. doi: 10.1038/s41573-018-0007-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7

  JoyceJAFearonDT. T cell exclusion, immune privilege, and the tumor microenvironment. Cancer Immunol Immunother (2015) 348:74–80. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8

  PaiSICesanoAMarincolaFM. The Paradox of Cancer Immune Exclusion: Immune Oncology Next Frontier. Cancer Treat Res (2020) 180:173–95. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2017.03.040

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 9

  VoronTColussiOMarcheteauEPernotSNizardMPointetALet al. VEGF-A modulates expression of inhibitory checkpoints on CD8+ T cells in tumors. J Exp Med (2015) 212:139–48. doi: 10.1084/jem.20140559

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 10

  BuckanovichRJFacciabeneAKimSBenenciaFSasaroliDBalintKet al. Endothelin B receptor mediates the endothelial barrier to T cell homing to tumors and disables immune therapy. Nat Med (2008) 14:28–36. doi: 10.1038/nm1699

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 11

  MotzGTSantoroSPWangLPGarrabrantTLastraRRHagemannISet al. Tumor endothelium FasL establishes a selective immune barrier promoting tolerance in tumors. Nat Med (2014) 20:607–15. doi: 10.1038/nm.3541

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 12

  PivarcsiAMüllerAHippeARiekerJVan LieropASteinhoffMet al. Tumor immune escape by the loss of homeostatic chemokine expression. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2007) 104:19055–60. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0705673104

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 13

  MolonBUgelSDel PozzoFSoldaniCZilioSAvellaDet al. Chemokine nitration prevents intratumoral infiltration of antigen-specific T cells. J Exp Med (2011) 208:1949–62. doi: 10.1084/jem.20101956

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 14

  KatherJNSuarez-CarmonaMCharoentongPWeisCAHirschDBankheadPet al. Topography of cancer-associated immune cells in human solid tumors. Elife (2018) 7:1–19. doi: 10.7554/eLife.36967

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 15

  FukumuraDKloepperJAmoozgarZDudaDGJainRK. Enhancing cancer immunotherapy using antiangiogenics: Opportunities and challenges. Nat Rev Clin Oncol (2018) 15:325–40. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2018.29

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 16

  RamjiawanRGriffioenAWDudaDG. Anti-angiogenesis for cancer revisited: Is there a role for combinations with immunotherapy? Angiogenesis (2017) 20:185–204. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2017.03.040

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 17

  KhanKAKerbelRS. Improving immunotherapy outcomes. Nat Rev Clin Oncol (2018) 15:310–24. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2018.9

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 18

  HuangYKimBYSChanCKHahnSMWeissmanILJiangW. Improving immune–vascular crosstalk for cancer immunotherapy. Cancer Immunother Perspect (2018) 18:195–203. doi: 10.1038/nri.2017.145

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 19

  JainRK. Antiangiogenesis strategies revisited: from starving Ttumors to alleviating hypoxia. Cancer Cell (2014) 26:605–22. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2014.10.006.ANTIANGIOGENESIS

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 20

  NomanMZDesantisGJanjiBHasmimMKarraySDessenPet al. PD-L1 is a novel direct target of HIF-1α, and its blockade under hypoxia enhanced: MDSC-mediated T cell activation. J Exp Med (2014) 211:781–90. doi: 10.1084/jem.20131916

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 21

  CorzoCACondamineTLuLCotterMJYounJChengPet al. HIF-1α regulates function and differentiation of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in the tumor microenvironment. J Exp Med (2010) 207:2439–53. doi: 10.1084/jem.20100587

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 22

  DoedensALStockmannCRubinsteinMPLiaoDDenardoDGCoussensLMet al. Macrophage Expression of HIF-1α Suppresses T cell Function and Promotes Tumor Progression. Cancer Lett (2010) 70:7465–75. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-1439.Macrophage

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23

  FacciabeneAPengXHagemannISBalintKBarchettiAWangLPet al. Tumour hypoxia promotes tolerance and angiogenesis via CCL28 and T reg cells. Nature (2011) 475:226–30. doi: 10.1038/nature10169

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 24

  ColegioORChuNQSzaboALChuTRhebergenAMJairamVet al. Functional polarization of tumour-associated macrophages by tumour-derived lactic acid. Nature (2014) 513:559–63. doi: 10.1038/nature13490

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 25

  CurielTJCoukosGZouLAlvarezXChengPMottramPet al. Specific recruitment of regulatory T cells in ovarian carcinoma fosters immune privilege and predicts reduced survival. Nat Med (2004) 10:942–9. doi: 10.1038/nm1093

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 26

  RodigNRyanTAllenJAPangHGrabieNChernovaTet al. Endothelial expression of PD-L1 and PD-L2 down-regulates CD8+ T cell activation and cytolysis. Eur J Immunol (2003) 33:3117–26. doi: 10.1002/eji.200324270

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 27

  ShettySWestonCJOoYHWesterlundNStamatakiZYousterJet al. Common Lymphatic Endothelial and Vascular Endothelial Receptor-1 Mediates the Transmigration of Regulatory T Cells across Human Hepatic Sinusoidal Endothelium. J Immunol (2011) 186:4147–55. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1002961

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 28

  NakashimaSSugitaYMiyoshiHArakawaFMutaHIshibashiYet al. Endothelin B receptor expression in malignant gliomas: the perivascular immune escape mechanism of gliomas. J Neurooncol (2016) 127:23–32. doi: 10.1007/s11060-015-2017-5

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 29

  NummerDSuri-PayerESchmitz-WinnenthalHBonertzAGalindoLAntolovichDet al. Role of tumor endothelium in CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cell infiltration of human pancreatic carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst (2007) 99:1188–99. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djm064

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 30

  QuezadaSAPeggsKSSimpsonTRShenYLittmanDRAllisonJP. Limited tumor infiltration by activated T effector cells restricts the therapeutic activity of regulatory T cell depletion against established melanoma. J Exp Med (2008) 205:2125–38. doi: 10.1084/jem.20080099

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 31

  BoseATaylorJLAlberSWatkinsSCGarciaJARiniBIet al. Immunity in Concert With Specific Vaccination. Int J Cancer (2011) 129:2158–70. doi: 10.1002/ijc.25863.Sunitinib

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32

  HuangYYuanJRighiEKamounWSAncukiewiczMNezivarJet al. Vascular normalizing doses of antiangiogenic treatment reprogram the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment and enhance immunotherapy. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2012) 109:17561–6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1215397109

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 33

  ManningEAUllmanJGMLeathermanJMAsquithJMHansenTRArmstrongTDet al. A vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 inhibitor enhances antitumor immunity through an immune-based mechanism. Clin Cancer Res (2007) 13:3951–9. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-0374

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 34

  ShrimaliRKYuZTheoretMRChinnasamyDRestifoNPRosenbergSA. Antiangiogenic Agents Can Increase Lymphocyte Infiltration into Tumor and Enhance the Effectiveness of Adoptive Immunotherapy of Cancer. Cancer Res (2010) 70:6171–80. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-0153

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 35

  KloepperJRiedemannLAmoozgarZSeanoGSusekKYuVet al. Ang-2/VEGF bispecific antibody reprograms macrophages and resident microglia to anti-tumor phenotype and prolongs glioblastoma survival. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2016) 113:4476–81. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1525360113

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 36

  ParkJSKimIKHanSParkIKimCBaeJet al. Normalization of Tumor Vessels by Tie2 Activation and Ang2 Inhibition Enhances Drug Delivery and Produces a Favorable Tumor Microenvironment. Cancer Cell (2016) 30:953–67. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2016.10.018

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 37

  MartinJDCabralHStylianopoulosTJainRK. Improving cancer immunotherapy using nanomedicines: progress, opportunities and challenges. Nat Rev Clin Oncol (2020) 17:251–66. doi: 10.1038/s41571-019-0308-z

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 38

  SherwoodLMParrisEEFolkmanJ. Tumor Angiogenesis: Therapeutic Implications. N Engl J Med (1971) 285:1182–6. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197111182852108

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 39

  BaeriswylVChristoforiG. Seminars in Cancer Biology The angiogenic switch in carcinogenesis. Semin Cancer Biol (2009) 19:329–37. doi: 10.1016/j.semcancer.2009.05.003

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 40

  FolkmanJ. Fundamental Concepts of the Angiogenic Process. Curr Mol Med (2003) 3:643–51. doi: 10.2174/1566524033479465

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 41

  MousaSARajabiM. The role of angiogenesis in cancer treatment. Biomedicines (2017) 5:1–12. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines5020034

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 42

  RelfMLejeuneSScottPAEFoxSSmithKLeekRet al. Expression of the angiogenic factors vascular endothelial cell growth factor, acidic and basic fibroblast growth factor, tumor growth factor beta-1, platelet-derived endothelial cell growth factor, placenta growth factor, and pleiotrophin in human primary breast cancer and its relation to angiogenesis. Cancer Res (1997) 57:963–9.

  • Google Scholar

• 43

  RakJKlementG. Impact of oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes on deregulation of hemostasis and angiogenesis in cancer. Cancer Metastasis Rev (2000) 19:93–6. doi: 10.1023/a:1026516920119

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 44

  DvorakHF. Tumors:Wounds That Do Not Heal. N Engl J Med (1986) 315:1650–9. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198612253152606

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 45

  FosterDSLongakerMTJeffreyAFosterDSJonesRERansomRCet al. The evolving relationship of wound healing and tumor stroma Find the latest version : The evolving relationship of wound healing and tumor stroma. J Clin Invest (2018) 3:1–17. doi: 10.1172/jci.insight.99911

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 46

  FisherDTMuhitchJBKimMDoyenKCBognerPNEvansSSet al. Intraoperative intravital microscopy permits the study of human tumour vessels. Nat Commun (2016) 7:1–9. doi: 10.1038/ncomms10684

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 47

  HeikalLFernsGAA. Hypoxia, angiogenesis and atherogenesis. In: Physiologic and Pathologic Angiogenesis - Signaling Mechanisms and Targeted Therapy. IntechOpen (2017).

  • Google Scholar

• 48

  GabrilovichDIChenHLGirgisKRCunninghamHTMenyGMNadafSet al. Production of vascular endothelial growth factor by human tumors inhibits the functional maturation of dendritic cells. Nat Med (1996) 2:1096–103. doi: 10.1038/nm1096-1096

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 49

  OhmJEGabrilovichDISempowskiGDKisselevaEParmanKSNadafSet al. VEGF inhibits T-cell development and may contribute to tumor-induced immune suppression. Blood (2003) 101:4878–86. doi: 10.1182/blood-2002-07-1956

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 50

  CasazzaADi ConzaGWenesMFinisguerraVDeschoemaekerSMazzoneM. Tumor stroma: A complexity dictated by the hypoxic tumor microenvironment. Oncogene (2014) 33:1743–54. doi: 10.1038/onc.2013.121

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 51

  SidibeARoprazPJemelinSEmreYPoittevinMPocardMet al. Angiogenic factor-driven inflammation promotes extravasation of human proangiogenic monocytes to tumours. Nat Commun (2018) 9(1):355. doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-02610-0

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 52

  JungKHeishiTIncioJHuangYBeechEYPinterMet al. Targeting CXCR4-dependent immunosuppressive Ly6Clow monocytes improves antiangiogenic therapy in colorectal cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2017) 114:10455–60. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1710754114

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 53

  ImtiyazHZWilliamsEPHickeyMMPatelSADurhamACYuanLet al. Hypoxia-inducible factor 2 α regulates macrophage function in mouse models of acute and tumor inflammation. J Clin Invest (2010) 120:2699–714. doi: 10.1172/JCI39506.phages

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 54

  ClambeyETMcnameeENWestrichJAGloverLECampbellELJedlickaP. Hypoxia-inducible factor-1 alpha – dependent induction of FoxP3 drives regulatory T-cell abundance and function during in fl ammatory hypoxia of the mucosa. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2012) 109:2784–93. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1202366109

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 55

  RytelewskiMHaryutyunanKNwajeiFShanmugasundaramMWspanialyPZalMAet al. Merger of dynamic two-photon and phosphorescence lifetime microscopy reveals dependence of lymphocyte motility on oxygen in solid and hematological tumors. J Immunother Cancer (2019) 7:1–13. doi: 10.1186/s40425-019-0543-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 56

  HeemskerkNVan RijsselJVan BuulJD. Rho-GTPase signaling in leukocyte extravasation: An endothelial point of view. Cell Adhes Migr (2014) 8:67–75. doi: 10.4161/cam.28244

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 57

  HeemskerkNSchimmelLOortCvan RijsselJYinTMaBet al. F-actin-rich contractile endothelial pores prevent vascular leakage during leukocyte diapedesis through local RhoA signalling. Nat Commun (2016) 7:10493. doi: 10.1038/ncomms10493

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 58

  ButcherEC. Leukocyte-Endothelial Cell Recognition: Three (or More) Steps to Specificity and Diversity Minireview. Cell (1991) 67:1033–6. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(91)90279-8

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 59

  SpringerTA. Traffic signals for lymphocyte recirculation and leukocyte emigration: The multistep paradigm. Cell (1994) 76:301–14. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(94)90337-9

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 60

  SchimmelLHeemskerkNvan BuulJD. Leukocyte transendothelial migration: A local affair. Small GTPases (2017) 8:1–15. doi: 10.1080/21541248.2016.1197872

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 61

  BorsigL. Selectins in cancer immunity. Glycobiology (2018) 28:648–55. doi: 10.1093/glycob/cwx105.Selectins

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 62

  HobbsSJNolzJC. Regulation of T cell trafficking by enzymatic synthesis of O-glycans. Front Immunol (2017) 8:600. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00600

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 63

  WangLFusterMSriramaraoPEskoJD. Endothelial heparan sulfate deficiency impairs L-selectin- and chemokine-mediated neutrophil trafficking during inflammatory responses. Nat Immunol (2005) 6:902–10. doi: 10.1038/ni1233

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 64

  ParishCR. The role of heparan sulphate in inflammation. Nat Rev Immunol (2006) 6:633–43. doi: 10.1038/nri1918

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 65

  MartinelliRZeigerASWhitfieldMSciutoTEDvorakAVan VlietKJet al. Probing the biomechanical contribution of the endothelium to lymphocyte migration: diapedesis by the path of least resistance. J Cell Sci (2014) 127:3720–34. doi: 10.1242/jcs.148619

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 66

  RenkawitzJKopfAStoppJde VriesIDriscollMKMerrinJet al. Nuclear positioning facilitates amoeboid migration along the path of least resistance. Nature (2019) 568:546–50. doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1087-5

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 67

  AkinoTHidaKHidaYTsuchiyaKFreedmanDMurakiCet al. Cytogenetic abnormalities of tumor-associated endothelial cells in human malignant tumors. Am J Pathol (2009) 175:2657–67. doi: 10.2353/ajpath.2009.090202

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 68

  HidaKHidaYAminDNFlintAFPanigrahyDMortonCCet al. Tumor-associated endothelial cells with cytogenetic abnormalities. Cancer Res (2004) 64:8249–55. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-1567

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 69

  SeamanSStevensJYangMYLogsdonDGraff-CherryCCroixBS. Genes that Distinguish Physiological and Pathological Angiogenesis. Cancer Cell (2007) 11:539–5413(2):R47. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2007.04.017

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 70

  LuCBonomeTLiYKamatAAHanLYSchmandtRet al. Gene alterations identified by expression profiling in tumor-associated endothelial cells from invasive ovarian carcinoma. Cancer Res (2007) 67:1757–68. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-3700

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 71

  LambrechtsDWautersEBoeckxBAibarSNittnerDBurtonOet al. Phenotype molding of stromal cells in the lung tumor microenvironment. Nat Med (2018) 24:1277–89. doi: 10.1038/s41591-018-0096-5

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 72

  GoveiaJRohlenovaKTavernaFTrepsLConradiLCPircherAet al. An Integrated Gene Expression Landscape Profiling Approach to Identify Lung Tumor Endothelial Cell Heterogeneity and Angiogenic Candidates. Cancer Cell (2020) 37:21–36.e13. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2019.12.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 73

  KuczynskiEAVermeulenPBPezzellaFKerbelRSReynoldsAR. Vessel co-option in cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol (2019) 16:469–93. doi: 10.1038/s41571-019-0181-9

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 74

  DudleyAC. Tumor endothelial cells. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med (2012) 2:1–18. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a006536

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 75

  LangenkampEvom HagenFMZwiersPJMoorlagHESchoutenJPHammesH-Pet al. Tumor Vascular Morphology Undergoes Dramatic Changes during Outgrowth of B16 Melanoma While Proangiogenic Gene Expression Remains Unchanged. ISRN Oncol (2011) 2011:1–14. doi: 10.5402/2011/409308

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 76

  GriffioenAWDamenCABlijhamGHGroenewegenG. Tumor angiogenesis is accompanied by a decreased inflammatory response of tumor-associated endothelium. Blood (1996) 88:667–73. doi: 10.1182/blood.v88.2.667.bloodjournal882667

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 77

  GriffioenAWDamenCAMartinottiSBlijhamGHGroenewegenG. Endothelial intercellular adhesion molecule-1 expression is suppressed in human malignancies: The role of angiogenic factors. Cancer Res (1996) 56:1111–7.

  • Google Scholar

• 78

  BoissonnasAFetlerLZeelenbergISHuguesSAmigorenaS. In vivo imaging of cytotoxic T cell infiltration and elimination of a solid tumor. J Exp Med (2007) 204:345–56. doi: 10.1084/jem.20061890

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 79

  BarthelSRGavinoJDDeschenyLDimitroffCJ. Targeting selectins and selectin ligands in inflammation and cancer. Expert Opin Ther Targets (2007) 11:1473–91. doi: 10.1517/14728222.11.11.1473.Targeting

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 80

  HarlinHMengYPetersonACZhaYTretiakovaMSlingluffCet al. Chemokine Expression in Melanoma Metastases Associated with CD8+ T-Cell Recruitment. Cancer Res (2009) 69:1–18. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-2281.Chemokine

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 81

  MushaHOhtaniHMizoiTKinouchiMNakayamaTShiibaK. Selective infiltration of CCR5 1 CXCR3 1 T lymphocytes in human colorectal carcinoma. Int J Cancer (2005) 956:949–56. doi: 10.1002/ijc.21135

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 82

  MulliganAMRaitmanIFeeleyLPinnaduwageDNguyenLTO’MalleyFPet al. Tumoral lymphocytic infiltration and expression of the chemokine CXCL10 in breast cancers from the ontario familial breast cancer registry. Clin Cancer Res (2013) 19:336–46. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-3314

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 83

  KunzMToksoyAGoebelerMEngelhardtEBröckerEBGillitzerR. Strong expression of the lymphoattractant C-X-C chemokine Mig is associated with heavy infiltration of T cells in human malignant melanoma. J Pathol (1999) 189:552–8. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9896(199912)189:4<552::AID-PATH469>3.0.CO;2-I

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 84

  MullinsIMSlingluffCLLeeJKGarbeeCFShuJAndersonSGet al. CXC chemokine receptor 3 expression by activated CD8+ T cells is associated with survival in melanoma patients with stage III disease. Cancer Res (2004) 64:7697–701. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-2059

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 85

  GuirnaldaPWoodLGoenkaRCrespoJPatersonY. Interferon γ-induced intratumoral expression of CXCL9 alters the local distribution of T cells following immunotherapy with Listeria monocytogenes. Oncoimmunology (2013) 2:1–9. doi: 10.4161/onci.25752

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 86

  TannenbaumCSTubbsRArmstrongDFinkeJHBukowskiRMHamiltonTA. The CXC chemokines IP-10 and Mig are necessary for IL-12-mediated regression of the mouse RENCA tumor. J Immunol (1998) 161:927–32.

  • Google Scholar

• 87

  MoonEKCarpenitoCSunJWangLCSKapoorVPredinaJet al. Expression of a functional CCR2 receptor enhances tumor localization and tumor eradication by retargeted human T cells expressing a mesothelin-specific chimeric antibody receptor. Clin Cancer Res (2011) 17:4719–30. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-0351

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 88

  FukumuraDSalehiHAWitwerBMelderRJJainRKTumaRF. Tumor Necrosis Factor α-induced Leukocyte Adhesion in Normal and Tumor Vessels: Effect of Tumor Type, Transplantation Site, and Host Strain. Cancer Res (1995) 55:4824–9.

  • Google Scholar

• 89

  ColomboMPLombardiLMelaniCParenzaMBaroniCRucoLet al. Hypoxic Tumor Cell Death and Modulation of Endothelial Adhesion Molecules in the Regression of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating. Am J Pathol (1996) 148:473–83.

  • Google Scholar

• 90

  GriffinGKNewtonGTarrioMLBuDMaganto-GarciaEAzcutiaVet al. IL-17 and TNF-α Sustain Neutrophil Recruitment during Inflammation through Synergistic Effects on Endothelial Activation. J Immunol (2012) 188:6287–99. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1200385

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 91

  GroomJRLusterAD. CXCR3 ligands: redundant, collaborative and antagonistic functions. Immunol Cell Biol (2011) 89:207–15. doi: 10.1038/icb.2010.158.CXCR3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 92

  OgawaMTsutsuiTZouJ-PMuJWijesuriyaRYuW-Get al. Enhanced Induction of Very Late Antigen 4 / Lymphocyte Function-associated Antigen 1-dependent T-Cell Migration to Tumor Sites following Administration of Interleukin 12. Cancer Res (1997) 57:2216–22.

  • Google Scholar

• 93

  FisherDTChenQSkitzkiJJMuhitchJBZhouLAppenheimerMMet al. IL-6 trans-signaling licenses mouse and human tumor microvascular gateways for trafficking of cytotoxic T cells. J Clin Invest (2011) 121:3846–59. doi: 10.1172/JCI44952

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 94

  GarbiNArnoldBGordonSHämmerlingGJGanssR. CpG Motifs as Proinflammatory Factors Render Autochthonous Tumors Permissive for Infiltration and Destruction. J Immunol (2004) 172:5861–9. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.172.10.5861

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 95

  LohrJRatliffTHuppertzAGeYDictusCAhmadiRet al. Effector T-cell infiltration positively impacts survival of glioblastoma patients and is impaired by tumor-derived TGF-β. Clin Cancer Res (2011) 17:4296–308. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-2557

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 96

  SchmitsRKündigTMBakerDMShumakerGSimardJJLDuncanGet al. LFA-1-deficient mice show normal CTL responses to virus but fail to reject immunogenic tumor. J Exp Med (1996) 183:1415–26. doi: 10.1084/jem.183.4.1415

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 97

  TakeichiTMoceviciusPDeduchovasOSalnikovaOCastro-SantaEBüchlerMWet al. α lβ 2 integrin is indispensable for CD8 + T-cell recruitment in experimental pancreatic and hepatocellular cancer. Int J Cancer (2012) 130:2067–76. doi: 10.1002/ijc.26223

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 98

  BlankCBrownIKachaAKMarkiewiczMAGajewskiTF. ICAM-1 Contributes to but Is Not Essential for Tumor Antigen Cross-Priming and CD8 + T Cell-Mediated Tumor Rejection In Vivo. J Immunol (2005) 174:3416–20. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.174.6.3416

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 99

  LeyKLaudannaCCybulskyMINoursharghS. Getting to the site of inflammation: the leukocyte adhesion cascade updated. Nat Rev Immunol (2007) 7:678–89. doi: 10.1038/nri2156

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 100

  Yu KDWangXYangCZengXHShaoZM. Host genotype and tumor phenotype of chemokine decoy receptors integrally affect breast cancer relapse. Oncotarget (2015) 6:26519–27. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.4470

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 101

  LangenesVSvenssonHBörjessonLGustavssonBBemarkMSjölingÅet al. Expression of the chemokine decoy receptor D6 is decreased in colon adenocarcinomas. Cancer Immunol Immunother (2013) 62:1687–95. doi: 10.1007/s00262-013-1472-0

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 102

  ProostPSchutyserEMentenPStruyfSWuytsAOpdenakkerGet al. Amino-terminal truncation of CXCR3 agonists impairs receptor signaling and lymphocyte chemotaxis, while preserving antiangiogenic properties. Blood (2001) 98:3554–61. doi: 10.1182/blood.v98.13.3554

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 103

  SugitaYTerasakiMNakashimaSOhshimaKMoriokaMAbeH. The perivascular microenvironment in primary central nervous system lymphomas: the role of chemokines and the endothelin B receptor. Brain Tumor Pathol (2015) 32:41–8. doi: 10.1007/s10014-014-0206-0

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 104

  TanakaTShoMTakayamaTWakatsukiKMatsumotoSMigitaKet al. Endothelin B receptor expression correlates with tumour angiogenesis and prognosis in oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Br J Cancer (2014) 110:1027–33. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2013.784

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 105

  KoderaMGrailerJJKaralewitzAPASubramanianHSteeberDA. T lymphocyte migration to lymph nodes is maintained during homeostatic proliferation. Microsc Microanal (2008) 14:211–24. doi: 10.1017/S1431927608080215

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 106

  AbadierMPramodABMcArdleSMarkiAFanZGutierrezEet al. Effector and Regulatory T Cells Roll at High Shear Stress by Inducible Tether and Sling Formation. Cell Rep (2017) 21:3885–99. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2017.11.099

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 107

  YanMJeneNByrneDMillarEKAO’TooleSAMcNeilCMet al. Recruitment of regulatory T cells is correlated with hypoxia-induced CXCR4 expression, and is associated with poor prognosis in basal-like breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res (2011) 13(2):R47. doi: 10.1186/bcr2869

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 108

  KarikoskiMMarttila-IchiharaFElimaKRantakariPHollménMKelkkaTet al. Clever-1/stabilin-1 controls cancer growth and metastasis. Clin Cancer Res (2014) 20:6452–64. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-1236

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 109

  MalmbergKJCarlstenMBjörklundASohlbergEBrycesonYTLjunggrenHG. Natural killer cell-mediated immunosurveillance of human cancer. Semin Immunol (2017) 31:20–9. doi: 10.1016/j.smim.2017.08.002

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 110

  ChiossoneLVienneMKerdilesYMVivierE. Natural killer cell immunotherapies against cancer: checkpoint inhibitors and more. Semin Immunol (2017) 31:55–63. doi: 10.1016/j.smim.2017.08.003

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 111

  NiLDongC. New checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy. Immunol Rev (2017) 276:52–65. doi: 10.1111/imr.12524

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 112

  GuoXXueHShaoQWangJGuoXChenXet al. Hypoxia promotes glioma-associated macrophage infiltration via periostin and subsequent M2 polarization by upregulating TGF-beta and M-CSFR. Oncotarget (2016) 7:80521–42. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.11825

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 113

  CaiJXiaLLiJNiSSongHWuX. Tumor-associated macrophages derived TGF-β-induced epithelial to mesenchymal transition in colorectal cancer cells through Smad2,3-4/Snail signaling pathway. Cancer Res Treat (2019) 51:252–6. doi: 10.4143/crt.2017.613

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 114

  LiuZKuangWZhouQZhangY. TGF-β1 secreted by M2 phenotype macrophages enhances the stemness and migration of glioma cells via the SMAD2/3 signalling pathway. Int J Mol Med (2018) 42:3395–403. doi: 10.3892/ijmm.2018.3923

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 115

  FreudAGMundy-BosseBLYuJCaligiuriMA. The Broad Spectrum of Human Natural Killer Cell Diversity. Immunity (2017) 47:820–33. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2017.10.008

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 116

  SobolevOSternPLacy-HulbertAHynesRO. Natural killer cells require selectins for suppression of subcutaneous tumors. Cancer Res (2009) 69:2531–9. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-3126

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 117

  FoglerWEVolkerKMcCormickKLWatanabeMOrtaldoJRWiltroutRH. NK cell infiltration into lung, liver, and subcutaneous B16 melanoma is mediated by VCAM-1/VLA-4 interaction. J Immunol (1996) 156:4707–14.

  • Google Scholar

• 118

  CastriconiRCarregaPDonderoABelloraFCasuBRegisSet al. Molecular mechanisms directing migration and retention of natural killer cells in human tissues. Front Immunol (2018) 9:2324. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.02324

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 119

  GabrilovichDINagarajS. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells as regulators of the immune system. Nat Rev Immunol (2009) 9:162–74. doi: 10.1038/nri2506

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 120

  CoffeltSBWellensteinMDDe VisserKE. Neutrophils in cancer: Neutral no more. Nat Rev Cancer (2016) 16:431–46. doi: 10.1038/nrc.2016.52

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 121

  HäuselmannIRoblekMProtsyukDHuckVKnopfovaLGrässleSet al. Monocyte induction of E-selectin-mediated endothelial activation releases VE-cadherin junctions to promote tumor cell extravasation in the metastasis cascade. Cancer Res (2016) 76:5302–12. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-16-0784

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 122

  LäubliHStevensonJLVarkiAVarkiNMBorsigL. L-selectin facilitation of metastasis involves temporal induction of Fut7-dependent ligands at sites of tumor cell arrest. Cancer Res (2006) 66:1536–42. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-3121

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 123

  TazawaHOkadaFKobayashiTTadaMMoriYUneYet al. Infiltration of Neutrophils Is Required for Acquisition of Metastatic Phenotype of Benign Murine Fibrosarcoma Cells: Implication of Inflammation-Associated Carcinogenesis and Tumor Progression. Am J Pathol (2003) 163:2221–32. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)63580-8

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 124

  AhnGOTsengDLiaoCHDorieMJCzechowiczABrownJM. Inhibition of Mac-1 (CD11b/CD18) enhances tumor response to radiation by reducing myeloid cell recruitment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2010) 107:8363–8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0911378107

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 125

  PelletierMMaggiLMichelettiALazzeriETamassiaNCostantiniCet al. Evidence for a cross-talk between human neutrophils and Th17 cells. Blood (2010) 115:335–43. doi: 10.1182/blood-2009-04-216085

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 126

  CoffeltSBKerstenKDoornebalCWWeidenJVrijlandKHauC-Set al. IL-17-producing γδ T cells and neutrophils conspire to promote breast cancer metastasis. Nature (2015) 522(7556):345–8. doi: 10.1038/nature14282

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 127

  BosteenMHTritsarisKHansenAJDissingS. IL-17A potentiates TNFα-induced secretion from human endothelial cells and alters barrier functions controlling neutrophils rights of passage. Pflugers Arch Eur J Physiol (2014) 466:961–72. doi: 10.1007/s00424-013-1354-5

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 128

  ChaoTFurthEEVonderheideRH. CXCR2-dependent accumulation of tumor-associated neutrophils regulates T-cell immunity in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Cancer Immunol Res (2016) 4:968–82. doi: 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-16-0188

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 129

  ChenCLWangYHuangCYZhouZQZhaoJJZhangXFet al. IL-17 induces antitumor immunity by promoting beneficial neutrophil recruitment and activation in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Oncoimmunology (2017) 7:1–11. doi: 10.1080/2162402X.2017.1373234

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 130

  BlaisdellACrequerAColombusDDaikokuTMittalKDeySKet al. Neutrophils Oppose Uterine Epithelial Carcinogenesis via Debridement of Hypoxic Tumor Cells. Cancer Cell (2015) 28:785–99. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2015.11.005.Neutrophils

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 131

  CavalloFDi CarloEButeraMVerruaRColomboMPMusianiPet al. Immune events associated with the cure of established tumors and spontaneous metastases by local and systemic interleukin 12. Cancer Res (1999) 59:414–21.

  • Google Scholar

• 132

  JuanTYRofflerSRHouHSHuangSMChenKCLeuYLet al. Antiangiogenesis targeting tumor microenvironment synergizes glucuronide prodrug antitumor activity. Clin Cancer Res (2009) 15:4600–11. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-0090

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 133

  BlahetaRAPowerskiMHudakLJuengelEJonasDvon KnethenAet al. Tumor-Endothelium Cross Talk Blocks Recruitment of Neutrophils to Endothelial Cells: A Novel Mechanism of Endothelial Cell Anergy. Neoplasia (2009) 11:1054–63. doi: 10.1593/neo.09762

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 134

  van BuulJDvan RijsselJvan AlphenFPJvan StalborchA-MMulEPJHordijkPLet al. ICAM-1 clustering on endothelial cells recruits VCAM-1. J BioMed Biotechnol (2010) 2010:120328. doi: 10.1155/2010/120328

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 135

  JeongJSuhYJungK. Context Drives Diversification of Monocytes and Neutrophils in Orchestrating the Tumor Microenvironment. Front Immunol (2019) 10:1817. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.01817

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 136

  QianBZLiJZhangHKitamuraTZhangJCampionLRet al. CCL2 recruits inflammatory monocytes to facilitate breast-tumour metastasis. Nature (2011) 475:222–5. doi: 10.1038/nature10138

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 137

  ChittezhathMDhillonMKLimJYLaouiDShalovaINTeoYLet al. Molecular Profiling Reveals a Tumor-Promoting Phenotype of Monocytes and Macrophages in Human Cancer Progression. Immunity (2014) 41:815–29. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2014.09.014

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 138

  ChenYHuangYReibergerTDuyvermanAMHuangPSamuelRet al. Differential effects of sorafenib on liver versus tumor fibrosis mediated by stromal-derived factor 1 alpha/C-X-C receptor type 4 axis and myeloid differentiation antigen-positive myeloid cell infiltration in mice. Hepatology (2014) 59:1435–47. doi: 10.1002/hep.26790

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 139

  SanfordDEBeltBAPanniRZMayerADeshpandeADCarpenterDet al. Inflammatory monocyte mobilization decreases patient survival in pancreatic cancer: A role for targeting the CCL2/CCR2 axis. Clin Cancer Res (2013) 19:3404–15. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-0525

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 140

  LongKBGladneyWLTookerGMGrahamKFraiettaJABeattyGL. IFNγ and CCL2 cooperate to redirect tumor-infiltrating monocytes to degrade fibrosis and enhance chemotherapy efficacy in pancreatic carcinoma. Cancer Discovery (2016) 6:400–13. doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-15-1032

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 141

  PorrelloALesliePLHarrisonEBGorentlaBKKattulaSGhoshSKet al. Factor XIIIA-expressing inflammatory monocytes promote lung squamous cancer through fibrin cross-linking. Nat Commun (2018) 9(1):1988. doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-04355-w

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 142

  Cortez-RetamozoVEtzrodtMNewtonARyanRPucciFSioSWet al. Angiotensin II Drives the Production of Tumor-Promoting Macrophages. Immunity (2013) 38:296–308. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2012.10.015

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 143

  GrossmanJGNyweningTMBeltBAPanniRZKrasnickBADeNardoDGet al. Recruitment of CCR2 + tumor associated macrophage to sites of liver metastasis confers a poor prognosis in human colorectal cancer. Oncoimmunology (2018) 7:1–11. doi: 10.1080/2162402X.2018.1470729

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 144

  Flores-ToroJALuoDGopinathASarkisianMRCampbellJJCharoIFet al. CCR2 inhibition reduces tumor myeloid cells and unmasks a checkpoint inhibitor effect to slow progression of resistant murine gliomas. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2020) 117:1129–38. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1910856117

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 145

  BorsigLWongRHynesROVarkiNMVarkiA. Synergistic effects of L- and P-selectin in facilitating tumor metastasis can involve non-mucin ligands and implicate leukocytes as enhancers of metastasis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2002) 99:2193–8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.261704098

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 146

  JinHSuJGarmy-SusiniBKleemanJVarnerJ. Integrin α4β1 promotes monocyte trafficking and angiogenesis in tumors. Cancer Res (2006) 66:2146–52. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-2704

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 147

  Czystowska-KuzmiczMSosnowskaANowisDRamjiKSzajnikMChlebowska-TuzJet al. Small extracellular vesicles containing arginase-1 suppress T-cell responses and promote tumor growth in ovarian carcinoma. Nat Commun (2019) 10:1–16. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-10979-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 148

  HuangBLeiZZhaoJGongWLiuJChenZet al. CCL2/CCR2 pathway mediates recruitment of myeloid suppressor cells to cancers. Cancer Lett (2007) 252:86–92. doi: 10.1016/j.canlet.2006.12.012

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 149

  OlingyCEDinhHQHedrickCC. Monocyte heterogeneity and functions in cancer. J Leukoc Biol (2019) 106:309–22. doi: 10.1002/JLB.4RI0818-311R

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 150

  HannaRNCekicCSagDTackeRThomasGDNowyhedHet al. Patrolling monocytes control tumor metastasis to the lung. Science (80- ) (2015) 350:985–90. doi: 10.1126/science.aac9407

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 151

  PlebanekMPAngeloniNLVinokourELiJHenkinAMartinez-MarinDet al. Pre-metastatic cancer exosomes induce immune surveillance by patrolling monocytes at the metastatic niche. Nat Commun (2017) 8(1):1319. doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-01433-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 152

  LavinYKobayashiSLeaderAAmir E adDElefantNBigenwaldCet al. Innate Immune Landscape in Early Lung Adenocarcinoma by Paired Single-Cell Analyses. Cell (2017) 169:750–765.e17. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.04.014

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 153

  KuboHMensuradoSGonçalves-SousaNSerreKSilva-SantosB. Primary tumors limit metastasis formation through induction of IL15-mediated cross-talk between patrolling monocytes and NK cells. Cancer Immunol Res (2017) 5:812–20. doi: 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-17-0082

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 154

  JungKHeishiTKhanOFKowalskiPSIncioJRahbariNNet al. Ly6Clo monocytes drive immunosuppression and confer resistance to anti-VEGFR2 cancer therapy. J Clin Invest (2017) 127:3039–51. doi: 10.1172/JCI93182

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 155

  NaxerovaKReiterJGBrachtelELennerzJKVan De WeteringMRowanAet al. Origins of lymphatic and distant metastases in human colorectal cancer. Science (80- ) (2017) 357:55–60. doi: 10.1126/science.aai8515

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 156

  BeerlingERitsmaLVrisekoopNDerksenPWvan RheenenJ. Intravital microscopy: new insights into metastasis of tumors. J Cell Sci (2011) 124:299–310. doi: 10.1242/jcs.072728

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 157

  SiemannDW. The unique characteristics of tumor vasculature and preclinical evidence for its selective disruption by Tumor-Vascular Disrupting Agents. Cancer Treat Rev (2011) 37:63–74. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2010.05.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 158

  HosakaKYangYSekiTFischerCDubeyOFredlundEet al. Pericyte-fibroblast transition promotes tumor growth and metastasis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2016) 113:E5618–27. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1608384113

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 159

  NagyJAChangSHDvorakAMDvorakHF. Why are tumour blood vessels abnormal and why is it important to know? Br J Cancer (2009) 100:865–9. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604929

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 160

  Abou KhouzamRGouthamHVZaarourRFChamseddineANFrancisABuartSet al. Integrating tumor hypoxic stress in novel and more adaptable strategies for cancer immunotherapy. Semin Cancer Biol (2020) 65:140–54. doi: 10.1016/j.semcancer.2020.01.003

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 161

  ZhangXDDongXQXuJLChenSCSunZ. Hypoxia promotes epithelial-mesenchymal transition of hepatocellular carcinoma cells via inducing Twist1 expression. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci (2017) 21:3061–8.

  • Google Scholar

• 162

  SchwabLPPeacockDLMajumdarDIngelsJFJensenLCSmithKDet al. Hypoxia-inducible factor 1α promotes primary tumor growth and tumor-initiating cell activity in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res (2012) 14:1–25. doi: 10.1186/bcr3087

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 163

  SchäfferLScheidASpielmannPBreymannCZimmermannRMeuliMet al. Oxygen-regulated expression of TGF-β3, a growth factor involved in trophoblast differentiation. Placenta (2003) 24:941–50. doi: 10.1016/S0143-4004(03)00166-8

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 164

  NishiHNakadaTHokamuraMOsakabeYItokazuOHuangLEet al. Hypoxia-inducible factor-1 transactivates transforming growth factor-β3 in trophoblast. Endocrinology (2004) 145:4113–8. doi: 10.1210/en.2003-1639

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 165

  ChenJImanakaNChenJGriffinJD. Hypoxia potentiates Notch signaling in breast cancer leading to decreased E-cadherin expression and increased cell migration and invasion. Br J Cancer (2010) 102:351–60. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605486

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 166

  StackerSAWilliamsSPKarnezisTShayanRFoxSBAchenMG. Lymphangiogenesis and lymphatic vessel remodelling in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer (2014) 14:159–72. doi: 10.1038/nrc3677

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 167

  StackerSACaesarCBaldwinMEThorntonGEWilliamsRAPrevoRet al. VEGF-D promotes the metastatic spread of tumor cells via the lymphatics. Nat Med (2001) 7:186–91. doi: 10.1038/84635

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 168

  MandriotaSJJussilaLJeltschMCompagniABaetensDPrevoRet al. Vascular endothelial growth factor-C-mediated lymphangiogenesis promotes tumour metastasis. EMBO J (2001) 20:672–82. doi: 10.1093/emboj/20.4.672

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 169

  PaderaTPKadambiADi TomasoEMouta CarreiraCBrownEBBoucherYet al. Lymphatic metastasis in the absence of functional intratumor lymphatics. Science (80- ) (2002) 296:1883–6. doi: 10.1126/science.1071420

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 170

  PytowskiBGoldmanJPersaudKWuYWitteLHicklinDJet al. Complete and specific inhibition of adult lymphatic regeneration by a novel VEGFR-3 neutralizing antibody. J Natl Cancer Inst (2005) 97:14–21. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dji003

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 171

  TvorogovDAnisimovAZhengWLeppänenVMTammelaTLaurinaviciusSet al. Effective Suppression of Vascular Network Formation by Combination of Antibodies Blocking VEGFR Ligand Binding and Receptor Dimerization. Cancer Cell (2010) 18:630–40. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2010.11.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 172

  De BockKCauwenberghsSCarmelietP. Vessel abnormalization: Another hallmark of cancer? Molecular mechanisms and therapeutic implications. Curr Opin Genet Dev (2011) 21:73–9. doi: 10.1016/j.gde.2010.10.008

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 173

  CarmelietPJainRK. Principles and mechanisms of vessel normalization for cancer and other angiogenic diseases. Nat Rev Drug Discovery (2011) 10:417–27. doi: 10.1038/nrd3455

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 174

  LevinVAMendelssohnNDChanJStovallMCPeakSJYeeJLet al. Impact of bevacizumab administered dose on overall survival of patients with progressive glioblastoma. J Neurooncol (2015) 122:145–50. doi: 10.1007/s11060-014-1693-x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 175

  JaysonGCKerbelREllisLMHarrisAL. Antiangiogenic therapy in oncology: current status and future directions. Lancet (2016) 388:518–29. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01088-0

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 176

  JainRKDudaDGClarkJWLoefflerJS. Lessons from phase III clinical trials on anti-VEGF therapy for cancer. Nat Clin Pract Oncol (2006) 3:24–40. doi: 10.1038/ncponc0403

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 177

  ChaeSSKamounWSFarrarCTKirkpatrickNDNiemeyerEDe GraafAMAet al. Angiopoietin-2 interferes with anti-VEGFR2-induced vessel normalization and survival benefit in mice bearing gliomas. Clin Cancer Res (2010) 16:3618–27. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-3073

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 178

  KimHSWonYJShimJHKimHJKimJHongHNet al. Morphological characteristics of vasculogenic mimicry and its correlation with EphA2 expression in gastric adenocarcinoma. Sci Rep (2019) 9:1–13. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-40265-7

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 179

  AllenEJabouilleARiveraLBLodewijckxIMissiaenRSteriVet al. Combined antiangiogenic and anti-PD-L1 therapy stimulates tumor immunity through HEV formation. Sci Transl Med (2017) 9(385):eaak9679. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aak9679

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 180

  GreenbergJIShieldsDBarillasSGAcevedoLMMurphyEHuangJet al. A Role for VEGF as a Negative Regulator of Pericyte Function and Vessel Maturation. Nature (2008) 456:809–13. doi: 10.1038/nature07424

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 181

  Hansen-AlgenstaedtNStollBRPaderaTPDolmansDEJGJHicklinDJFukumuraDet al. Tumor oxygenation in hormone-dependent tumors during vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 blockade, hormone ablation, and chemotherapy. Cancer Res (2000) 60:4556–60.

  • Google Scholar

• 182

  DingsRPMLorenMHeunHMcnielEGriffioenAWMayoKHet al. Scheduling of Radiation with Angiogenesis Inhibitors Anginex and Avastin Improves Therapeutic Outcome via Vessel Normalization. Clin Cancer Res (2007) 13:3395–403. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-2441

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 183

  McgeeMCHamnerJBWilliamsRFRosatiFSimsTLNgCYet al. Improved intratumoral oxygenation through vascular normalization increases glioma sensitivity to ionizing radiation. Int J Radiat Oncol (2010) 76:1537–45. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.12.010.Improved

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 184

  WinklerFKozinSVTongRTChaeS-SBoothMFGarkavtsevIet al. Kinetics of vascular normalization by VEGFR2 blockade governs brain tumor response to radiation. Cancer Cell (2004) 6:553–63. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2004.10.011

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 185

  TongRTBoucherYKozinSVWinklerFHicklinDJJainRK. Vascular normalization by vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 blockade induces a pressure gradient across the vasculature and improves drug penetration in tumors. Cancer Res (2004) 64:3731–6. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-0074

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 186

  InaiTMancusoMHashizumeHBaffertFHaskellABalukPet al. Inhibition of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) Signaling in Cancer Causes Loss of Endothelial Fenestrations, Regression of Tumor Vessels, and Appearance of Basement Membrane Ghosts. Am J Pathol (2004) 165:35–52. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)63273-7

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 187

  LiBLalaniASHardingTCLuanBKoprivnikarKHuantuGet al. Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Blockade Reduces Intratumoral Regulatory T Cells and Enhances the Efficacy of a GM-CSF ^ Secreting Cancer Immunotherapy. Clin Cancer Res (2006) 12:6808–17. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-1558

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 188

  KwilasARArdianiADonahueRNAftabDTHodgeJW. Dual effects of a targeted small-molecule inhibitor (cabozantinib) on immune-mediated killing of tumor cells and immune tumor microenvironment permissiveness when combined with a cancer vaccine. J Transl Med (2014) 12:1–15. doi: 10.1186/s12967-014-0294-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 189

  TianLGoldsteinAWangHLoHCKimISWelteTet al. Mutual regulation of tumour vessel normalization and immunostimulatory reprogramming. Nature (2017) 544:250–4. doi: 10.1038/nature21724

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 190

  SchmittnaegelMRigamontiNKadiogluECassaráARmiliCWKiialainenAet al. Dual angiopoietin-2 and VEGFA inhibition elicits antitumor immunity that is enhanced by PD-1 checkpoint blockade. Sci Transl Med (2017) 9(385):eaak9670. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aak9670

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 191

  SchoenfeldJJinushiMNakazakiYWienerDParkJSoifferRet al. Active immunotherapy induces antibody responses that target tumor angiogenesis. Cancer Res (2010) 70:10150–60. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-1852

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 192

  RennerDNMaloCSJinFParneyIFPavelkoKDJohnsonAJ. Improved Treatment Efficacy of Antiangiogenic Therapy when Combined with Picornavirus Vaccination in the GL261 Glioma Model. Neurotherapeutics (2016) 13(1):226–36. doi: 10.1007/s13311-015-0407-1

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 193

  TaoLHuangGShiSChenL. Bevacizumab improves the antitumor efficacy of adoptive cytokine-induced killer cells therapy in non-small cell lung cancer models. Med Oncol (2014) 31(1):777. doi: 10.1007/s12032-013-0777-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 194

  WangWMaYLiJShiHSWangLQGuoFCet al. Specificity redirection by CAR with human VEGFR-1 affinity endows T lymphocytes with tumor-killing ability and anti-angiogenic potency. Gene Ther (2013) 20:970–8. doi: 10.1038/gt.2013.19

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 195

  YasudaSShoMYamatoI. Simultaneous blockade of programmed death 1 and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2 ) induces synergistic anti-tumour effect in vivo. Clin Exp Immunol (2013) 172(31):500–6. doi: 10.1111/cei.12069

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 196

  WuFTHManSXuPChowAPaez-RibesMLeeCRet al. Efficacy of cotargeting angiopoietin-2 and the VEGF pathway in the adjuvant postsurgical setting for early breast, colorectal, and renal cancers. Cancer Res (2016) 76:6988–7000. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-16-0888

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 197

  AvellaDMLiGSchellTDLiuDZhangSSLouXet al. Regression of Established Hepatocellular Carcinoma Is Induced by Chemoimmunotherapy in an Orthotopic Murine Model. Hepatology (2012) 55:141–52. doi: 10.1002/hep.24652

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 198

  FarsaciBHigginsJPHodgeJW. Consequence of dose scheduling of sunitinib on host immune response elements and vaccine combination therapy. In J Cancer (2012) 130(8):1948–59. doi: 10.1002/ijc.26219

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 199

  Du FourSMaenhoutSKNiclouSPThielemansKNeynsBAertsJL. Combined VEGFR and CTLA-4 blockade increases the antigen-presenting function of intratumoral DCs and reduces the suppressive capacity of intratumoral MDSCs. Am J Cancer Res (2016) 6:2514–31.

  • Google Scholar

• 200

  MederLSchuldtPThelenMSchmittADietleinFKleinSet al. Combined VEGF and PD-L1 blockade displays synergistic treatment effects in an autochthonous mouse model of small cell lung cancer. Cancer Res (2018) 78:4270–81. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-17-2176

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 201

  WuXGiobbie-hurderALiaoXConnellyCErinMLiJet al. Angiopoietin-2 as a biomarker and target for immune checkpoint therapy. Cancer Immunol Res (2017) 5:17–28. doi: 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-16-0206.Angiopoietin-2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 202

  ShigetaKDattaMHatoTKitaharaSChenIXMatsuiAet al. Dual Programmed Death Receptor-1 and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-2 Blockade Promotes Vascular Normalization and Enhances Antitumor Immune Responses in Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Hepatology (2020) 71:1247–61. doi: 10.1002/hep.30889

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 203

  ShiSWangRChenYSongHChenLHuangG. Combining Antiangiogenic Therapy with Adoptive Cell Immunotherapy Exerts Better Antitumor Effects in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Models. PloS One (2013) 8(6):e65757. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0065757

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 204

  DicksonPVHamnerJBSimsTLFragaCHNgCYCRajasekeranSet al. Bevacizumab-induced transient remodeling of the vasculature in neuroblastoma xenografts results in improved delivery and efficacy of systemically administered chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res (2007) 13:3942–50. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-0278

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 205

  KohYJKimHZHwangSILeeJEOhNJungKet al. Double antiangiogenic protein, DAAP, targeting VEGF-A and angiopoietins in tumor angiogenesis, metastasis, and vascular leakage. Cancer Cell (2010) 18:171–84. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2010.07.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 206

  PetersonTEKirkpatrickNDHuangYFarrarCTMarijtKA. Dual inhibition of Ang-2 and VEGF receptors normalizes tumor vasculature and prolongs survival in glioblastoma by altering macrophages. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2016) 113:4470–5. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1525349113

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 207

  RiniBIHalabiSRosenbergJEStadlerWMVaenaDAArcherLet al. Phase III trial of bevacizumab plus interferon alfa versus interferon alfa monotherapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Final results of CALGB 90206. J Clin Oncol (2010) 28:2137–43. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.26.5561

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 208

  EscudierBBellmuntJNégrierSBajettaEMelicharBBracardaSet al. Phase III trial of bevacizumab plus interferon alfa-2a in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (AVOREN): Final analysis of overall survival. J Clin Oncol (2010) 28:2144–50. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.26.7849

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 209

  AminADudekAZLoganTFLanceRSHolzbeierleinJMKnoxJJet al. Survival with AGS-003, an autologous dendritic cell-based immunotherapy, in combination with sunitinib in unfavorable risk patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC): Phase 2 study results. J Immunother Cancer (2015) 3:1–13. doi: 10.1186/s40425-015-0055-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 210

  HodiFSLawrenceDLezcanoCWuXZhouJSasadaTet al. Bevacizumab plus Ipilimumab in Patients with Metastatic Melanoma. Cancer Immunol Res (2014) 2:632–42. doi: 10.1038/jid.2014.371

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 211

  AminAPlimackERErnstoffMSLewisLDBauerTMMcDermottDFet al. Safety and efficacy of nivolumab in combination with sunitinib or pazopanib in advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma: The CheckMate 016 study. J Immunother Cancer (2018) 6:1–12. doi: 10.1186/s40425-018-0420-0

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 212

  ArkenauHMartin-LiberalJCalvoEPenelNKrebsMGHerbstRSet al. Ramucirumab Plus Pembrolizumab in Patients with Previously Treated Advanced or Metastatic Biliary Tract Cancer: Nonrandomized, Open-Label, Phase I Trial (JVDF). Oncologist (2018) 23:1407. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0044

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 213

  McGregorBAMcKayRRBraunDAWernerLGrayKFlaifelAet al. Results of a multicenter phase II study of atezolizumab and bevacizumab for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma with variant histology and/or sarcomatoid features. J Clin Oncol (2020) 38:63–70. doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.01882

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 214

  LiuSVCamidgeDRGettingerSNGiacconeGHeistRSHodiFSet al. Long-term survival follow-up of atezolizumab in combination with platinum-based doublet chemotherapy in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer. Eur J Cancer (2018) 101:114–22. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2018.06.033

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 215

  ReckMMokTSKNishioMJotteRMCappuzzoFOrlandiFet al. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer (IMpower150): key subgroup analyses of patients with EGFR mutations or baseline liver metastases in a randomised, open-label phase 3 trial. Lancet Respir Med (2019) 7:387–401. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(19)30084-0

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 216

  SocinskiMAJotteRMCappuzzoFOrlandiFStroyakovskiyDNogamiNet al. Atezolizumab for first-line treatment of metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC. N Engl J Med (2018) 378:2288–301. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1716948

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 217

  ChoueiriTKLarkinJOyaMThistlethwaiteFMartignoniMNathanPet al. Preliminary results for avelumab plus axitinib as first-line therapy in patients with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma (JAVELIN Renal 100): an open-label, dose-finding and dose-expansion, phase 1b trial. Lancet Oncol (2018) 19:451–60. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30107-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 218

  ChoueiriTKMotzerRJRiniBIHaanenJCampbellMTVenugopalBet al. Updated efficacy results from the JAVELIN Renal 101 trial: first-line avelumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Ann Oncol (2020) 31(8):1030–39. doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.04.010

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 219

  MotzerRJ. Avelumab plus Axitinib versus Sunitinib for Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma. Physiol Behav (2018) 176:139–48. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2017.03.040

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 220

  XuJZhangYJiaRYueCChangLLiuRet al. Anti-PD-1 antibody SHR-1210 combined with apatinib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, gastric, or esophagogastric junction cancer: An Open-label, Dose Escalation and Expansion Study. Clin Cancer Res (2019) 25:515–23. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-2484

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 221

  HuoMZhaoYSatterleeABWangYXuYHuangL. Tumor-targeted delivery of sunitinib base enhances vaccine therapy for advanced melanoma by remodeling the tumor microenvironment. J Control Release (2017) 245:81–94. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2017.03.040

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 222

  RiniBIPlimackERStusVGafanovRHawkinsRNosovDet al. Pembrolizumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib for advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med (2019) 380:1116–27. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1816714

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 223

  KandalaftLEPowellDJChiangCLTanyiJKimSBoschMet al. Autologous lysate-pulsed dendritic cell vaccination followed by adoptive transfer of vaccine-primed ex vivo co-stimulated t cells in recurrent ovarian cancer. Oncoimmunology (2013) 2:37–41. doi: 10.4161/onci.22664

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 224

  De BockKGeorgiadouMSchoorsSKuchnioAWongBWCantelmoARet al. Role of PFKFB3-driven glycolysis in vessel sprouting. Cell (2013) 154:651–63. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.06.037

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 225

  SchoorsSDe BockKCantelmoARGeorgiadouMGhesquièreBCauwenberghsSet al. Partial and transient reduction of glycolysis by PFKFB3 blockade reduces pathological angiogenesis. Cell Metab (2014) 19:37–48. doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2013.11.008

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 226

  CantelmoARConradiLCBrajicAGoveiaJKaluckaJPircherAet al. Inhibition of the Glycolytic Activator PFKFB3 in Endothelium Induces Tumor Vessel Normalization, Impairs Metastasis, and Improves Chemotherapy. Cancer Cell (2016) 30:968–85. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2016.10.006

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 227

  ConradiLCBrajicACantelmoARBouchéAKaluckaJPircherAet al. Tumor vessel disintegration by maximum tolerable PFKFB3 blockade. Angiogenesis (2017) 20:599–613. doi: 10.1007/s10456-017-9573-6

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 228

  RohlenovaKGoveiaJGarcía-CaballeroMSubramanianAKaluckaJTrepsLet al. Single-Cell RNA Sequencing Maps Endothelial Metabolic Plasticity in Pathological Angiogenesis. Cell Metab (2020) 31:862–877.e14. doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2020.03.009

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 229

  JohanssonAHamzahJPayneCJGanssR. Tumor-targeted TNFα stabilizes tumor vessels and enhances active immunotherapy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U.S.A. (2012) 109:7841–6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1118296109

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 230

  CalcinottoAGrioniMJachettiECurnisFMondinoAParmianiGet al. Targeting TNF-α to Neoangiogenic Vessels Enhances Lymphocyte Infiltration in Tumors and Increases the Therapeutic Potential of Immunotherapy. J Immunol (2012) 188:2687–94. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1101877

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 231

  RybakJNRoesliCKasparMVillaANeriD. The extra-domain A of fibronectin is a vascular marker of solid tumors and metastases. Cancer Res (2007) 67:10948–57. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-07-1436

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 232

  NeriDCarnemollaBNissimALepriniAQuerzèGBalzaEet al. Targeting by affinity–matured recombinant antibody fragments of an angiogenesis associated fibronectin isoform. Nat Biotechnol (1997) 15:1271–5. doi: 10.1038/nbt1197-1271

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 233

  SantimariaMMoscatelliGVialeGLGiovannoniLNeriGVitiFet al. Immunoscintigraphic detection of the ED-B domain of fibronectin, a marker of angiogenesis, in patients with cancer. Clin Cancer Res (2003) 9:571–9.

  • Google Scholar

• 234

  JohannsenMSpitaleriGCuriglianoGRoigasJWeikertSKempkensteffenCet al. The tumour-targeting human L19-IL2 immunocytokine: Preclinical safety studies, phase i clinical trial in patients with solid tumours and expansion into patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Eur J Cancer (2010) 46:2926–35. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.07.033

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 235

  CarnemollaBBorsiLBalzaECastellaniPMeazzaRBerndtAet al. Enhancement of the antitumor properties of interleukin-2 by its targeted delivery to the tumor blood vessel extracellular matrix. Blood (2002) 99:1659–65. doi: 10.1182/blood.V99.5.1659

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 236

  DanielliRPatuzzoRMariaAGiacomoDGallinoGMaurichiAet al. Intralesional administration of L19 − IL2 / L19 − TNF in stage III or stage IVM1a melanoma patients : results of a phase II study. Cancer Immunol Immunother (2015) 65:999–1009. doi: 10.1007/s00262-015-1704-6

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 237

  PalazónATeijeiraAMartínez-ForeroIHervás-StubbsSRoncalCPeñuelasIet al. Agonist anti-CD137 mAb act on tumor endothelial cells to enhance recruitment of activated T lymphocytes. Cancer Res (2011) 71:801–11. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-1733

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 238

  LiSJiangQLiuSZhangYTianYSongCet al. A DNA nanorobot functions as a cancer therapeutic in response to a molecular trigger in vivo. Nat Biotechnol (2018) 36:258–64. doi: 10.1038/nbt.4071

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar