Kun Zhang1†
Zheng Wang2†
Jiaqi He3Liuru Lu3Wenshu Wang2Aiwei Yang2Huayi Xie3Linhui Huang3
Yuying Huang2
Ke Zhang4*
Mingyang Jiang4*Ruqiong Wei5*- 1Department of Trauma Orthopedics, Shenzhen Longhua District People’s Hospital, Shenzhen, China
- 2The Second Clinical Medical College of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China
- 3The First Clinical Medical College of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China
- 4Department of Bone and Joint Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China
- 5Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, China
Osteosarcoma, the most prevalent primary malignant bone tumor in children and adolescents, remains a formidable clinical challenge due to its high metastatic potential and limited therapeutic progress over the past three decades. While surgery combined with multi-agent chemotherapy has improved outcomes for patients with localized disease, prognosis for those with recurrent or metastatic osteosarcoma remains poor. Although immunotherapy has revolutionized cancer care across multiple malignancies, its efficacy in osteosarcoma has been modest, largely owing to an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment, functional T cell exhaustion, and pronounced antigenic heterogeneity. Recent advances in T cell–based strategies, including MHC-independent γδ T cells, immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting PD−1/PD−L1 and CTLA−4, and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells directed against antigens such as HER2, GD2, and B7−H3, have demonstrated encouraging preclinical activity but limited clinical translation. Emerging evidence suggests that impaired antigen presentation, suppressive immune cell populations, and inadequate T cell trafficking collectively restrict therapeutic efficacy. This review summarizes recent mechanistic and translational advances in T cell–directed immunotherapy for osteosarcoma and proposes future directions to improve clinical outcomes.
1 Introduction
Osteosarcoma is the most common primary malignant bone tumor, predominantly affecting children and adolescents, with a second incidence peak observed among older adults (1, 2). Current standard-of-care management, consisting of surgical resection combined with perioperative chemotherapy. However, outcomes for individuals with metastatic osteosarcoma remain dismal; published data indicate that the 5-year survival rate is below 20%, with little appreciable improvement over the past three decades (3). This stagnation highlights an urgent need to identify effective therapeutic strategies for patients with advanced-stage disease. In recent years, immunotherapy has emerged as a transformative modality across several malignancies, reshaping therapeutic paradigms by harnessing anti-tumor immune responses (4–7).
Approaches targeting T-cell–mediated immunity—such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies—have achieved remarkable success in selected tumor types and are considered prototype strategies for next-generation cancer treatment (8–10). Notably, osteosarcoma has been reported to harbor a substantially higher density of tumor-infiltrating T cells than many other sarcoma subtypes, suggesting an immunologically active tumor microenvironment and providing a theoretical rationale for the application of immunotherapeutic interventions (11, 12). Despite these promising observations, osteosarcoma remains largely refractory to currently available immune-based therapies, underscoring the complexity of its immune landscape and the need for deeper mechanistic understanding (13, 14). This review summarizes recent foundational and clinical advances in cell-based immunotherapy for osteosarcoma, with the aim of informing future therapeutic optimization and translational research.
2 The immune system and cancer immunotherapy
The immune system constitutes a highly sophisticated and integrated network, orchestrating a multitude of immune cells and molecular mediators to preserve host homeostasis (15–17). This network is fundamental for defense against exogenous pathogens and the detection of endogenous cellular aberrations, all while maintaining strict self-tolerance (18, 19). Immunological defense is classically segmented into two complementary branches: innate and adaptive immunity. The innate immune response provides an immediate, non-specific first line of defense, mediated by cells such as dendritic cells (DCs), macrophages, natural killer (NK) cells, and neutrophils (20–22). In contrast, the adaptive immune response confers antigen-specific memory and potency, primarily executed by B lymphocytes, CD4+ helper T cells, and CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes (23–25). These two systems operate in concert to enable the precise recognition and elimination of invading pathogens, infected cells, and malignant transformations.
The interaction between the immune system and neoplastic development is a dynamic and multifaceted process, encompassing critical phases of immune surveillance, immune cell infiltration, and the eventual elimination of transformed cells (26–28). A principal hallmark of oncogenesis is the capacity for immune evasion, whereby malignant clones develop mechanisms to subvert immunological detection. Such mechanisms frequently involve the loss or alteration of tumor-specific antigens, rendering neoplastic cells less visible to immune effectors (29). Under physiological conditions, nascent transformed cells are typically identified and eradicated through coordinated actions, including NK cell activation, the production of interferons, and the subsequent maturation of DCs, which are essential for priming antigen-specific cytotoxic T-cell responses (30, 31). However, tumor cells frequently develop immune resistance by secreting immunosuppressive cytokines or downregulating immunogenic molecules. These adaptations effectively enable tumors to circumvent immune-mediated destruction and facilitate disease progression (32).
This complex interaction is conceptualized in the “cancer immunoediting” model, which comprises three sequential but overlapping phases: elimination, equilibrium, and escape (33, 34). During the elimination phase, immunogenic tumor antigens are identified, leading to clonal expansion of tumor-reactive T cells and targeted tumor cell destruction (34–36). In the equilibrium phase, tumor cells that evade initial clearance may persist in a dormant state under continuous immune pressure, wherein adaptive immune responses, particularly memory T cells, play a critical role in suppressing outgrowth (34, 37). Eventually, in the escape phase, subclones of tumor cells acquire further immune-resistant features and proliferate unchecked (38, 39). The downregulation of antigen-presenting machinery (HLA molecules), recruitment of immunosuppressive cell types such as M2-polarized macrophages, and upregulation of inhibitory immune checkpoints play important roles in immune escape (40–42). Notably, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) may become functionally impaired through increased expression of inhibitory receptors (CTLA-4, PD-1), while tumor cells may overexpress their corresponding ligands (PD-L1), leading to T cell exhaustion and immune dysfunction (43–45).
3 Innate cell-based therapies: γδ T cells in osteosarcoma immunotherapy
The innate immune system is distinguished by its capacity to mount anti−tumor responses in the absence of prior antigen sensitization, a process typically driven by pro−inflammatory signals such as tumor necrosis factor−α (TNF−α) and the Fas–Fas ligand axis (46, 47). Although NK cells have long been regarded as the principal effectors of innate antitumor immunity, emerging evidence underscores the pivotal contribution of γδ T cells in tumor immunosurveillance and immunotherapy (48, 49). Unlike conventional αβ T cells, which express αβ T−cell receptors (TCRs), γδ T cells carry a γδ TCR and constitute approximately 10% of the total peripheral T−cell pool (50). While many facets of their biology remain incompletely understood, γδ T cells are characterized by low antigen specificity, MHC−independent activation, and potent cytotoxic and cytokine−secreting functions (51, 52). These attributes render them particularly suited for targeting malignancies that evade adaptive immune recognition. Among human γδ T−cell subsets, the Vγ9/Vδ2 population has garnered considerable attention for its capacity to detect isopentenyl pyrophosphate (IPP), a metabolite of the mevalonate pathway, and to exert potent cytolytic activity against diverse tumor types (53, 54). Notably, synthetic phosphoantigens, when administered in combination with interleukin−2 (IL−2), induce γδ T−cell activation by promoting intracellular accumulation of IPP through inhibition of farnesyl pyrophosphate synthase (55, 56). In a clinical study of hormone−refractory prostate cancer, Francesco et al. (57) demonstrated that treatment with phosphoantigens and IL−2 led to robust activation of Vγ9/Vδ2 T cells, favorable clinical outcomes, and a well−tolerated safety profile. Furthermore, γδ T cells have been integrated into adoptive cell therapy platforms, in which autologous γδ T cells are isolated, expanded ex vivo using phosphoantigens and IL−2, and subsequently reinfused into patients. Preliminary data from several Phase I/II trials have reported encouraging safety and initial signs of antitumor efficacy (58, 59).
In osteosarcoma, research on γδ T cells remains predominantly at the preclinical stage. These cells exhibit robust anti-proliferative and cytotoxic activity against osteosarcoma cell lines, including putative cancer stem-like subpopulations (60). Recent studies indicate that combination strategies incorporating phosphoantigens and nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates—such as pamidronate or zoledronate—enhance γδ T cell–mediated cytotoxicity against osteosarcoma cells (15, 16). Beyond their MHC-unrestricted recognition and phosphoantigen responsiveness, γδ T cells deploy a diverse arsenal of effector mechanisms to mediate anti-tumor immunity. A principal cytotoxic pathway involves the granzyme B/perforin axis, whereby activated γδ T cells release perforin to form pores in target cell membranes, facilitating the entry of granzyme B and subsequent induction of apoptosis (61). This mechanism has been directly implicated in the killing of osteosarcoma cells in vitro, particularly after stimulation with nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates such as zoledronate, which potentiate γδ T cell cytotoxic degranulation (62). Furthermore, γδ T cells are prolific producers of pro-inflammatory cytokines, notably interferon-γ (IFN-γ) and TNF-α, both of which contribute to remodeling the tumor microenvironment and recruiting secondary immune effectors (61, 63). IFN-γ upregulates MHC class I expression on tumor cells and activates antigen-presenting cells (APCs), whereas TNF-α can promote tumor necrosis and stimulate dendritic cell maturation (64, 65). Additionally, γδ T cells engage in crosstalk with dendritic cells (DCs) and myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) to modulate innate and adaptive immune responses. For instance, through CCL20 interactions and cytokine secretion, γδ T cells can promote DC maturation, thereby enhancing the priming of αβ T cell responses (66–68). emerging evidence suggests that γδ T cells may also counteract MDSC-mediated immunosuppression, thereby alleviating a major barrier to T cell activation in osteosarcoma (69, 70). These immunomodulatory functions position γδ T cells not merely as direct cytotoxic effectors, but as pivotal orchestrators of anti-tumor immunity within the osteosarcoma microenvironment (Supplementary Table S1).
4 Adaptive T cell–based therapies in osteosarcoma immunotherapy
4.1 Tumor vaccines and dendritic cell vaccines
Tumor vaccines constitute one of the earliest immunotherapeutic strategies, designed to elicit antitumor immune responses through the delivery of tumor-associated antigens (TAAs). Available vaccine platforms encompass whole−cell lysates, peptides, proteins, DNA, RNA, and synthetic long peptides (71, 72). In preclinical studies, diverse vaccine formats—including peptide− and RNA−based approaches targeting TAAs such as SART3 and WT1—have demonstrated promising immunogenicity, as evidenced by in vitro T−cell activation assays and murine osteosarcoma models (73, 74). Furthermore, advances in proteomic screening have facilitated the identification of potential neoantigens, thereby enhancing the prospect of antigen−specific vaccine design. Despite these preclinical advances, early clinical trials employing autologous tumor cell vaccines yielded limited therapeutic benefit in osteosarcoma patients (4, 64). A critical determinant of effective peptide vaccination is the endogenous presentation of peptide–HLA complexes on tumor cells. However, assessing such presentation has remained methodologically challenging, largely due to the scarcity of high−avidity, soluble T−cell receptors (TCRs) specific for TAAs. Recently, researchers have developed two soluble TCR multimers directed against survivin−2B (SVN−2B) and PBF peptides (HLA−A*24:02). These reagents were derived from cytotoxic T−lymphocyte clones isolated from vaccinated patients and enable the direct detection of naturally presented TAA peptides, thus highlighting the utility of TCR multimers as precision tools for advancing osteosarcoma immunotherapy (75).
DCs are professional APCs capable of activating T cells and promoting cytotoxic T lymphocyte expansion (76, 77). First-generation DC vaccines are typically produced by isolating peripheral blood mononuclear cells or hematopoietic progenitors from patients, differentiating them in vitro with GM-CSF, pulsing with tumor antigens, and then reinfusing the mature DCs back into the host. Clinical studies have confirmed the safety and immunogenicity of this approach (78). In immunocompetent murine models, DC vaccines loaded with osteosarcoma lysates or tumor−derived RNA have demonstrated an ability to impede tumor progression and promote antigen−specific T cell activation, thereby indicating a capacity for immunological tumor control. Nevertheless, early−phase clinical trials in human osteosarcoma patients—for example, those employing autologous tumor lysate−pulsed DCs—have to date elicited only modest immune responses and limited clinical benefit (79, 80). These findings highlight the translational gap between experimental promise and clinical efficacy. To address these limitations, ongoing clinical investigations are focusing on combinatorial regimens, incorporating either immunostimulatory adjuvants or agents that target immunosuppressive elements within the tumor microenvironment, such as MDSCs.
4.2 Chimeric antigen receptor T cells
Adoptive cellular therapy employing CAR-T cells has emerged as a powerful immunotherapeutic strategy to circumvent central mechanisms of tumor immune evasion. This approach is particularly salient in contexts where tumor cells downregulate human leukocyte antigen (HLA) molecules or exhibit low intrinsic immunogenicity (81, 82). By genetically reprogramming T cells to express synthetic receptors that recognize tumor-associated antigens (TAAs), CAR-T cells mediate HLA-independent target recognition and confer direct, potent cytotoxic activity. The canonical CAR architecture comprises an extracellular single-chain variable fragment (scFv) derived from tumor-specific monoclonal antibodies, a hinge region for flexibility, and intracellular signaling motifs critical for T cell activation (83–85). First-generation CARs incorporated the CD3ζ signaling domain alone. Subsequent iterations have enhanced persistence and efficacy: second- and third-generation constructs integrate one or more costimulatory domains (CD28, 4-1BB), while fourth-generation “armored” CARs further incorporate inducible cytokine expression cassettes (IL-12) to augment antitumor function within the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (86). To mitigate antigen escape, dual-targeting CAR-T cells capable of recognizing multiple antigens are also under active preclinical and clinical investigation (87). Antigen selection is a key determinant of CAR-T cell efficacy. Notably, CD19-directed CAR-T therapy has achieved regulatory approval as a first salvage therapy for refractory large B-cell lymphoma, validating the clinical potential of this platform (88). HER2, a well-established oncogene in breast cancer, is frequently overexpressed in osteosarcoma, although its prognostic significance in bone tumors remains controversial. Preclinical evidence indicates that HER2-targeted CAR-T cells can effectively recognize and lyse osteosarcoma cells, even those exhibiting low levels of HER2 expression, supporting its continued investigation as a therapeutic target in this malignancy (89).
Ahmed and colleagues (90) reported a Phase I clinical trial evaluating second−generation HER2−targeting CAR−T cells in patients with refractory HER2−positive malignancies, including osteosarcoma. Infusion−related reactions were limited to mild adverse events, and stable disease was achieved in three individuals for durations of 12–15 weeks, suggesting preliminary evidence of clinical activity. With continued refinement in CAR architecture and the identification of novel target antigens, multiple ongoing trials are assessing additional candidates for osteosarcoma, such as GD2, CD22, IL11RA, IGF−1R, ROR1, and B7−H3. Current GD2−directed CAR−T studies are further augmented by complementary engineering strategies—for example, the co−expression of chemokine receptors such as CXCR2 to potentiate T−cell trafficking and tumor infiltration (91–93). However, tumor antigen heterogeneity frequently drives the emergence of antigen−escape variants and subsequent relapse. To broaden antigen coverage and reduce the risk of immune evasion, dual−antigen CAR systems (simultaneous targeting of CD33 and CD3) and incorporation of the co−stimulatory molecule B7−H3 (CD276) have been developed (94–96). Besides, CAR−T cell exhaustion—characterized by loss of effector function and persistent upregulation of inhibitory receptors including PD−1, TIM−3, and LAG−3—is aggravated by the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (97, 98). Recent approaches such as incorporating checkpoint blockade (PD-1), metabolic reprogramming, or memory stem T cell–enriched formulations aim to preserve CAR-T cell persistence and cytotoxicity in hostile microenvironments (99–102). These strategies underscore the need for integrated CAR-T cell designs that address both the physical and immunologic barriers within solid tumors (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Advances in T cell–based immunotherapy for osteosarcoma.
5 ICIs and osteosarcoma immunotherapy
To preserve immune homeostasis and avert excessive inflammation, the immune system depends on intrinsic immunoregulatory pathways. Central to this regulatory framework are immune checkpoints, which are critical for maintaining self-tolerance, preventing autoimmune pathology, and modulating immune responses. Notably, these same pathways are co−opted by malignant tumors to evade immune surveillance and establish a state of immunoresistance (103, 104). Prominent among these checkpoint molecules are CTLA−4, PD−1, and TIM−3 (105). Engagement of these receptors on T cells with their respective ligands transduces downstream signals that suppress T−cell activation and effector functions, thereby enabling tumor cells to persist undetected (106). Under physiological conditions, such checkpoint signaling is indispensable for regulating immunosuppressive cell populations, including Tregs and MDSCs (107–109). Within the tumor microenvironment, however, malignant cells exploit these mechanisms to attenuate anti−tumor immunity. Tumors secrete chemokines such as CCL20 to recruit Tregs and upregulate checkpoint ligands such as PD−L1 to directly inhibit cytotoxic T−cell responses (110, 111). PD−L1 is broadly expressed on tumor−associated macrophages and tumor cells; its interaction with PD−1 induces T−cell exhaustion, thereby impairing effective anti−tumor immunity (112, 113). Targeting this axis has yielded substantial clinical success across multiple malignancies. Anti−PD−1 agents (nivolumab) and anti−CTLA−4 agents (ipilimumab) have demonstrated durable responses in melanoma, non−small cell lung cancer, and renal cell carcinoma, frequently surpassing outcomes achieved with conventional chemotherapy (114–117).
In osteosarcoma, PD-L1 is frequently overexpressed, and its expression has been consistently correlated with unfavorable clinical prognosis (118). Preclinical investigations employing PD-1 blockade in murine models of osteosarcoma have demonstrated significant inhibition of tumor progression and an overall improvement in survival (119). Despite these promising preclinical findings, clinical outcomes in human trials have been largely discouraging. The Phase II SARC028 trial, which evaluated the PD-1 inhibitor pembrolizumab in patients with advanced osteosarcoma, reported only limited therapeutic activity (40). Similarly, another Phase II study (PEMBROSARC) combining pembrolizumab with low-dose cyclophosphamide in refractory sarcoma patients, including those with osteosarcoma, failed to demonstrate a significant improvement in objective response rate (ORR) (120). These disappointing clinical results may be attributable, in part, to the profoundly immunosuppressive characteristics of the osteosarcoma tumor microenvironment (4). Notably, osteosarcoma lesions are commonly infiltrated by abundant immunoregulatory cell populations, such as FoxP3+ Tregs, which actively suppress cytotoxic T lymphocyte function and thereby attenuate antitumor immunity (121, 122). Furthermore, tumor-associated macrophages within osteosarcoma tissues frequently exhibit an M2-like polarization state, characterized by expression of CD163 and CD206 and secretion of anti-inflammatory cytokines including IL-10 and TGF-β, which collectively reinforce local immune suppression (123–125). Additionally, osteosarcoma cells often downregulate major histocompatibility complex class I (MHC I) molecules, a mechanism that impairs antigen presentation to T cells and consequently diminishes the efficacy of T cell–mediated cytotoxicity (126).
6 Conclusion
Immunotherapy represents a paradigm shift in oncology, offering new hope for cancers previously deemed unresponsive to conventional treatment. In osteosarcoma, however, translating immunological breakthroughs into clinical benefit remains a formidable task. Accumulating evidence highlights the complex interplay between tumor cells and the immune system, with innate immune subsets like γδ T cells and adaptive platforms such as tumor vaccines, CAR-T cells, and dendritic cell therapies—each showing promise, though most remain in early investigational stages. Immune checkpoint blockade, while transformative in other solid tumors, has shown only modest benefit in osteosarcoma, underscoring the need to better understand and overcome the immunosuppressive and antigenically heterogeneous tumor microenvironment.
Future research must prioritize the identification of robust osteosarcoma-specific immune targets, refine patient stratification strategies through immunogenomic profiling, and develop rational combination therapies that synergize immune activation with other modalities such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or metabolic intervention. In particular, personalized neoantigen vaccines tailored to the mutational landscape of individual patients may enhance antigen specificity and immunogenicity. Bispecific T cell engagers (BiTEs) represent a promising modality to redirect cytotoxic T cells toward osteosarcoma cells with high precision. The development of armored CAR-T cells, engineered to overcome immunosuppressive barriers via the secretion of stimulatory cytokines or checkpoint blockade molecules, may further enhance therapeutic efficacy in otherwise refractory tumors. Moreover, the integration of single-cell and spatial transcriptomics is expected to refine our understanding of the osteosarcoma immune microenvironment, enabling the identification of resistant cellular subpopulations and uncovering context-specific targets for immunotherapy. Longitudinal studies are needed to elucidate the mechanisms of immune resistance and T cell dysfunction in osteosarcoma. Ultimately, advancing osteosarcoma immunotherapy will require not only technological innovation but also a nuanced appreciation of the tumor–immune interface. With strategic integration of multi-omics approaches, biomarker discovery, and translational immunology, the next generation of immunotherapy may transform the treatment landscape for this intractable malignancy.
Author contributions
KunZ: Writing – original draft. ZW: Writing – original draft. JH: Writing – original draft. LL: Writing – original draft. WW: Writing – original draft. AY: Writing – original draft. HX: Writing – original draft. LH: Writing – original draft. YH: Writing – original draft. KeZ: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft. MJ: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft. RW: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This study was supported by Medical Research Project of Shenzhen Longhua Medical Association (2024LHMA26) the Scientific Research Projects of Medical and Health Institutions of Longhua District, Shenzhen (2025011).
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2026.1769847/full#supplementary-material
References
1. Force LM, Kocarnik JM, May ML, Bhangdia K, Crist A, Penberthy L, et al.The global, regional, and national burden of cancer, 1990-2023, with forecasts to 2050: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2023. Lancet. (2025) 406:1565–86. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(25)01635-6
2. Gyau BB and Man TK. A spatiotemporal model of CXCL10 as a master regulator of immune evasion and metastasis in osteosarcoma. Int J Mol Sci. (2025) 27:319. doi: 10.3390/ijms27010319
3. Kager L, Zoubek A, Pötschger U, Kastner U, Kempf-Bielack B, Branscheid D, et al. Primary metastatic osteosarcoma: presentation and outcome of patients treated on neoadjuvant Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study Group protocols. J Clin Oncol. (2003) 21:2011–8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.08.132
4. Yu S and Yao X. Advances on immunotherapy for osteosarcoma. Mol Cancer. (2024) 23:192. doi: 10.1186/s12943-024-02105-9
5. Chen C, Xie L, Ren T, Huang Y, Xu J, and Guo W. Immunotherapy for osteosarcoma: Fundamental mechanism, rationale, and recent breakthroughs. Cancer Lett. (2021) 500:1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.canlet.2020.12.024
6. Gong X, Chi H, Xia Z, Yang G, and Tian G. Advances in HPV-associated tumor management: Therapeutic strategies and emerging insights. J Med Virol. (2023) 95:e28950. doi: 10.1002/jmv.28950
7. Xia Z, Chen S, He M, Li B, Deng Y, Yi L, et al. Editorial: Targeting metabolism to activate T cells and enhance the efficacy of checkpoint blockade immunotherapy in solid tumors. Front Immunol. (2023) 14:1247178. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1247178
8. Wang X, Fan R, Mu M, Zhou L, Zou B, Tong A, et al. Harnessing nanoengineered CAR-T cell strategies to advance solid tumor immunotherapy. Trends Cell Biol. (2025) 35:782–98. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2024.11.010
9. Sharif S, Sharma U, and Yadav AK. CAR-T cell therapy: A therapeutic strategy for cancer treatment. Semin Oncol. (2025) 52:152430. doi: 10.1016/j.seminoncol.2025.152430
10. Geyer MB, DeWolf S, Mi X, Weis K, Shaffer BC, Cadzin B, et al. CD371-targeted CAR T cells secreting interleukin-18 exhibit robust expansion and clear refractory acute myeloid leukemia. Blood. (2025) 146:3163–74. doi: 10.1182/blood.2025029532
11. Cascio MJ, Whitley EM, Sahay B, Cortes-Hinojosa G, Chang LJ, Cowart J, et al. Canine osteosarcoma checkpoint expression correlates with metastasis and T-cell infiltrate. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. (2021) 232:110169. doi: 10.1016/j.vetimm.2020.110169
12. Han Q, Shi H, and Liu F. CD163(+) M2-type tumor-associated macrophage support the suppression of tumor-infiltrating T cells in osteosarcoma. Int Immunopharmacol. (2016) 34:101–6. doi: 10.1016/j.intimp.2016.01.023
13. Hattinger CM, Salaroglio IC, Fantoni L, Godel M, Casotti C, Kopecka J, et al. Strategies to overcome resistance to immune-based therapies in osteosarcoma. Int J Mol Sci. (2023) 24:799. doi: 10.3390/ijms24010799
14. Wu CC, Beird HC, Andrew Livingston J, Advani S, Mitra A, Cao S, et al. Immuno-genomic landscape of osteosarcoma. Nat Commun. (2020) 11:1008. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-14646-w
15. Bie J, Li Y, Song C, Weng Q, Zhao L, Su L, et al. LAMTOR1 ablation impedes cGAS degradation caused by chemotherapy and promotes antitumor immunity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U.S.A. (2024) 121:e2320591121. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2320591121
16. Wang X, Li Y, Li Y, Wang X, Song H, Wang Y, et al. AMPK-dependent Parkin activation suppresses macrophage antigen presentation to promote tumor progression. Sci Adv. (2025) 11:eadn8402. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adn8402
17. Vogt KC, Silberman PC, Lin Q, Han JE, Laflin A, Gellineau HA, et al. Microenvironment actuated CAR T cells improve solid tumor efficacy without toxicity. Sci Adv. (2025) 11:eads3403. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.ads3403
18. Arneth B. Molecular mechanisms of immune regulation: A review. Cells. (2025) 14:283. doi: 10.3390/cells14040283
19. Xie H, Xi X, Lei T, Liu H, and Xia Z. CD8(+) T cell exhaustion in the tumor microenvironment of breast cancer. Front Immunol. (2024) 15:1507283. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1507283
20. Deng Y, Shi M, Yi L, Naveed Khan M, Xia Z, and Li X. Eliminating a barrier: Aiming at VISTA, reversing MDSC-mediated T cell suppression in the tumor microenvironment. Heliyon. (2024) 10:e37060. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e37060
21. Yue X, Cui J, Ren S, Zhang Y, Li Y, Cui H, et al. NK-cell-derived extracellular vesicles engineered to carry senolytics eliminate chemotherapy-induced senescent osteosarcoma cells. J Extracell Vesicles. (2025) 14:e70123. doi: 10.1002/jev2.70123
22. Zou Y, Kang J, Zhu S, Ren X, Li Z, Niu J, et al. The osteosarcoma immune microenvironment in progression: PLEK as a prognostic biomarker and therapeutic target. Front Immunol. (2025) 16:1651858. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1651858
23. Zhang Z, Zhang J, Duan Y, Li X, Pan J, Wang G, et al. Identification of B cell marker genes based on single-cell sequencing to establish a prognostic model and identify immune infiltration in osteosarcoma. Front Immunol. (2022) 13:1026701. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.1026701
24. Qi J, Xue G, Wu B, Zhu P, and Wang Y. hMSCs-derived exosomal MIR17HG promotes follicular helper T cell differentiation and osteosarcoma progression via the miR-372-3p/BCL6 axis. J Bone Oncol. (2025) 55:100726. doi: 10.1016/j.jbo.2025.100726
25. Liu HX, Li YC, Su RB, Liu CX, and Wen SY. Astragalus injection inhibits the growth of osteosarcoma by activating cytotoxic T lymphocyte and targeting CTSL. J Ethnopharmacol. (2025) 345:119607. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2025.119607
26. Wu C, Tan J, Shen H, Deng C, Kleber C, Osterhoff G, et al. Exploring the relationship between metabolism and immune microenvironment in osteosarcoma based on metabolic pathways. J BioMed Sci. (2024) 31:4. doi: 10.1186/s12929-024-00999-7
27. Liu R, Hu Y, Liu T, and Wang Y. Profiles of immune cell infiltration and immune-related genes in the tumor microenvironment of osteosarcoma cancer. BMC Cancer. (2021) 21:1345. doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-09042-6
28. Orrapin S, Moonmuang S, Udomruk S, Yongpitakwattana P, Pruksakorn D, and Chaiyawat P. Unlocking the tumor-immune microenvironment in osteosarcoma: insights into the immune landscape and mechanisms. Front Immunol. (2024) 15:1394284. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1394284
29. Evdokimova V, Gassmann H, Radvanyi L, and Burdach SEG. Current state of immunotherapy and mechanisms of immune evasion in ewing sarcoma and osteosarcoma. Cancers (Basel). (2022) 15:272. doi: 10.3390/cancers15010272
30. Kiany S, Huang G, and Kleinerman ES. Effect of entinostat on NK cell-mediated cytotoxicity against osteosarcoma cells and osteosarcoma lung metastasis. Oncoimmunology. (2017) 6:e1333214. doi: 10.1080/2162402X.2017.1333214
31. Ocadlikova D, Lecciso M, Broto JM, Scotlandi K, Cavo M, Curti A, et al. Sunitinib exerts in vitro immunomodulatory activity on sarcomas via dendritic cells and synergizes with PD-1 blockade. Front Immunol. (2021) 12:577766. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.577766
32. Hui X, Farooq MA, Chen Y, Ajmal I, Ren Y, Xue M, et al. A novel strategy of co-expressing CXCR5 and IL-7 enhances CAR-T cell effectiveness in osteosarcoma. Front Immunol. (2024) 15:1462076. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1462076
33. Schreiber RD, Old LJ, and Smyth MJ. Cancer immunoediting: integrating immunity’s roles in cancer suppression and promotion. Science. (2011) 331:1565–70. doi: 10.1126/science.1203486
34. Mittal D, Gubin MM, Schreiber RD, and Smyth MJ. New insights into cancer immunoediting and its three component phases–elimination, equilibrium and escape. Curr Opin Immunol. (2014) 27:16–25. doi: 10.1016/j.coi.2014.01.004
35. Gubin MM and Vesely MD. Cancer immunoediting in the era of immuno-oncology. Clin Cancer Res. (2022) 28:3917–28. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-1804
36. Vesely MD and Schreiber RD. Cancer immunoediting: antigens, mechanisms, and implications to cancer immunotherapy. Ann N Y Acad Sci. (2013) 1284:1–5. doi: 10.1111/nyas.12105
37. Gabriel SS and Kallies A. Tissue-resident memory T cells keep cancer dormant. Cell Res. (2019) 29:341–2. doi: 10.1038/s41422-019-0156-5
38. Monjazeb AM, Zamora AE, Grossenbacher SK, Mirsoian A, Sckisel GD, and Murphy WJ. Immunoediting and antigen loss: overcoming the achilles heel of immunotherapy with antigen non-specific therapies. Front Oncol. (2013) 3:197. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2013.00197
39. Fan J, Jin Y, Lv F, Wu W, Sun L, and Wang C. Cancer-associated fibroblasts in osteosarcoma: key players in immune escape and targeted therapy. Front Immunol. (2025) 16:1668535. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1668535
40. Chen X, Lu Q, Zhou H, Liu J, Nadorp B, Lasry A, et al. A membrane-associated MHC-I inhibitory axis for cancer immune evasion. Cell. (2023) 186:3903–3920.e3921. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2023.07.016
41. Zhang Z and Wu Y. Research progress on mechanisms of tumor immune microenvironment and gastrointestinal resistance to immunotherapy: mini review. Front Immunol. (2025) 16:1641518. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1641518
42. Zhong C, Wang L, Liu Y, Wang X, Xia Z, Li Y, et al. PSGL-1 is a phagocytosis checkpoint that enables tumor escape from macrophage clearance. Sci Immunol. (2025) 10:eadn4302. doi: 10.1126/sciimmunol.adn4302
43. Markel JE, Noore J, Emery EJ, Bobnar HJ, Kleinerman ES, and Lindsey BA. Using the spleen as an in vivo systemic immune barometer alongside osteosarcoma disease progression and immunotherapy with α-PD-L1. Sarcoma. (2018) 2018:8694397. doi: 10.1155/2018/8694397
44. Zheng C, Li H, Zhao X, Yang S, Zhan J, Liu H, et al. Expression of PD-1 mitigates phagocytic activities TAM in osteosarcoma. Heliyon. (2024) 10:e23498. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e23498
45. Li J, Ding Z, Liu J, Li G, Li Y, Wang W, et al. Reshaping tumor immune microenvironment and modulating T cell function based on hierarchical nanotherapeutics for synergistically inhibiting osteosarcoma. Mater Today Bio. (2025) 34:102095. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2025.102095
46. Marcus A, Gowen BG, Thompson TW, Iannello A, Ardolino M, Deng W, et al. Recognition of tumors by the innate immune system and natural killer cells. Adv Immunol. (2014) 122:91–128. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-800267-4.00003-1
47. Strasser A, Jost PJ, and Nagata S. The many roles of FAS receptor signaling in the immune system. Immunity. (2009) 30:180–92. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2009.01.001
48. Liu Y and Zhang C. The role of human γδ T cells in anti-tumor immunity and their potential for cancer immunotherapy. Cells. (2020) 9:1206. doi: 10.3390/cells9051206
49. Kabelitz D, Serrano R, Kouakanou L, Peters C, and Kalyan S. Cancer immunotherapy with γδ T cells: many paths ahead of us. Cell Mol Immunol. (2020) 17:925–39. doi: 10.1038/s41423-020-0504-x
50. Chen Y, Li J, Zeng X, Yuan W, and YJAoB X. γδ T cells and their roles in immunotherapy: a narrative review. Ann Blood. (2022) 7:42. doi: 10.21037/aob-21-33
51. Park JH and Lee HK. Function of γδ T cells in tumor immunology and their application to cancer therapy. Exp Mol Med. (2021) 53:318–27. doi: 10.1038/s12276-021-00576-0
52. Wu YL, Ding YP, Tanaka Y, Shen LW, Wei CH, Minato N, et al. γδ T cells and their potential for immunotherapy. Int J Biol Sci. (2014) 10:119–35. doi: 10.7150/ijbs.7823
53. Gogoi D and Chiplunkar SV. Targeting gamma delta T cells for cancer immunotherapy: bench to bedside. Indian J Med Res. (2013) 138:755–61.
54. Peters C, Kouakanou L, Oberg HH, Wesch D, and Kabelitz D. In vitro expansion of Vγ9Vδ2 T cells for immunotherapy. Methods Enzymol. (2020) 631:223–37. doi: 10.1016/bs.mie.2019.07.019
55. Serrano R, Wesch D, and Kabelitz D. Activation of human γδ T cells: modulation by toll-like receptor 8 ligands and role of monocytes. Cells. (2020) 9:713. doi: 10.3390/cells9030713
56. Takimoto R, Suzawa T, Yamada A, Sasa K, Miyamoto Y, Yoshimura K, et al. Zoledronate promotes inflammatory cytokine expression in human CD14-positive monocytes among peripheral mononuclear cells in the presence of γδ T cells. Immunology. (2021) 162:306–13. doi: 10.1111/imm.13283
57. Dieli F, Vermijlen D, Fulfaro F, Caccamo N, Meraviglia S, Cicero G, et al. Targeting human {gamma}delta} T cells with zoledronate and interleukin-2 for immunotherapy of hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Cancer Res. (2007) 67:7450–7. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-07-0199
58. Kobayashi H, Tanaka Y, Yagi J, Minato N, and Tanabe K. Phase I/II study of adoptive transfer of γδ T cells in combination with zoledronic acid and IL-2 to patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Cancer Immunol Immunother. (2011) 60:1075–84. doi: 10.1007/s00262-011-1021-7
59. Kunzmann V, Smetak M, Kimmel B, Weigang-Koehler K, Goebeler M, Birkmann J, et al. Tumor-promoting versus tumor-antagonizing roles of γδ T cells in cancer immunotherapy: results from a prospective phase I/II trial. J Immunother. (2012) 35:205–13. doi: 10.1097/CJI.0b013e318245bb1e
60. Wang Z, Wang Z, Li S, Li B, Sun L, Li H, et al. Decitabine enhances Vγ9Vδ2 T cell-mediated cytotoxic effects on osteosarcoma cells via the NKG2DL-NKG2D axis. Front Immunol. (2018) 9:1239. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.01239
61. Lv J, Liu Z, Ren X, Song S, Zhang Y, and Wang Y. γδT cells, a key subset of T cell for cancer immunotherapy. Front Immunol. (2025) 16:1562188. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1562188
62. Wang Z, Li B, Ren Y, and Ye Z. T-cell-based immunotherapy for osteosarcoma: challenges and opportunities. Front Immunol. (2016) 7:353. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2016.00353
63. Chan KF, Duarte JDG, Ostrouska S, and Behren A. γδ T cells in the tumor microenvironment-interactions with other immune cells. Front Immunol. (2022) 13:894315. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.894315
64. Han Z, Chen G, and Wang D. Emerging immunotherapies in osteosarcoma: from checkpoint blockade to cellular therapies. Front Immunol. (2025) 16:1579822. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1579822
65. Miwa S, Nishida H, Tanzawa Y, Takata M, Takeuchi A, Yamamoto N, et al. TNF-α and tumor lysate promote the maturation of dendritic cells for immunotherapy for advanced Malignant bone and soft tissue tumors. PloS One. (2012) 7:e52926. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052926
66. Ismaili J, Olislagers V, Poupot R, Fournié JJ, and Goldman M. Human gamma delta T cells induce dendritic cell maturation. Clin Immunol. (2002) 103:296–302. doi: 10.1006/clim.2002.5218
67. Petrasca A and Doherty DG. Human Vδ2(+) γδ T cells differentially induce maturation, cytokine production, and alloreactive T cell stimulation by dendritic cells and B cells. Front Immunol. (2014) 5:650. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00650
68. Galluzzi L and Celià-Terrassa T. IL17-producing γδ T cells promote radioresistance via immunosuppression. Trends Cancer. (2025) 11:1134–6. doi: 10.1016/j.trecan.2025.10.007
69. Zhang M, Wu Y, Qin Y, Shen J, Cui Z, Lei F, et al. Dual regulation effect and mechanism of human myeloid-derived suppressor cells on anticolorectal cancer cells activity of Vγ9Vδ2 T cells. Cell Biochem Funct. (2024) 42:e3929. doi: 10.1002/cbf.3929
70. Fowler D, Barisa M, Southern A, Nattress C, Hawkins E, Vassalou E, et al. Payload-delivering engineered γδ T cells display enhanced cytotoxicity, persistence, and efficacy in preclinical models of osteosarcoma. Sci Transl Med. (2024) 16:eadg9814. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.adg9814
71. Musser ML, Berger EP, Tripp CD, Clifford CA, Bergman PJ, and Johannes CM. Safety evaluation of the canine osteosarcoma vaccine, live Listeria vector. Vet Comp Oncol. (2021) 19:92–8. doi: 10.1111/vco.12642
72. Fang Z, Peng L, Filler R, Suzuki K, McNamara A, Lin Q, et al. Omicron-specific mRNA vaccination alone and as a heterologous booster against SARS-CoV-2. Nat Commun. (2022) 13:3250. doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-30878-4
73. Tsuda N, Murayama K, Ishida H, Matsunaga K, Komiya S, Itoh K, et al. Expression of a newly defined tumor-rejection antigen SART3 in musculoskeletal tumors and induction of HLA class I-restricted cytotoxic T lymphocytes by SART3-derived peptides. J Orthop Res. (2001) 19:346–51. doi: 10.1016/S0736-0266(00)90031-7
74. Maheswaran S, Englert C, Bennett P, Heinrich G, and Haber DA. The WT1 gene product stabilizes p53 and inhibits p53-mediated apoptosis. Genes Dev. (1995) 9:2143–56. doi: 10.1101/gad.9.17.2143
75. Watanabe K, Tsukahara T, Toji S, Saitoh S, Hirohashi Y, Nakatsugawa M, et al. Development of a T-cell receptor multimer with high avidity for detecting a naturally presented tumor-associated antigen on osteosarcoma cells. Cancer Sci. (2019) 110:40–51. doi: 10.1111/cas.13854
76. Sun C, Ma X, Zhou C, Zhang Z, and Guo J. Irreversible electroporation combined with dendritic cell-based vaccines for the treatment of osteosarcoma. Anticancer Res. (2023) 43:3389–400. doi: 10.21873/anticanres.16514
77. Visser LL, Bleijs M, Margaritis T, van de Wetering M, Holstege FCP, and Clevers H. Ewing sarcoma single-cell transcriptome analysis reveals functionally impaired antigen-presenting cells. Cancer Res Commun. (2023) 3:2158–69. doi: 10.1158/2767-9764.CRC-23-0027
78. Prakash M, Cortez CD, Jayaraman A, Hsu SY, Huang YC, Yeh CY, et al. Innovative gene engineering and drug delivery systems for dendritic cells in cancer immunotherapy. J BioMed Sci. (2025) 32:95. doi: 10.1186/s12929-025-01191-1
79. Miwa S, Nishida H, Tanzawa Y, Takeuchi A, Hayashi K, Yamamoto N, et al. Phase 1/2 study of immunotherapy with dendritic cells pulsed with autologous tumor lysate in patients with refractory bone and soft tissue sarcoma. Cancer. (2017) 123:1576–84. doi: 10.1002/cncr.30606
80. Himoudi N, Wallace R, Parsley KL, Gilmour K, Barrie AU, Howe K, et al. Lack of T-cell responses following autologous tumour lysate pulsed dendritic cell vaccination, in patients with relapsed osteosarcoma. Clin Transl Oncol. (2012) 14:271–9. doi: 10.1007/s12094-012-0795-1
81. Patel KK, Tariveranmoshabad M, Kadu S, Shobaki N, and June C. From concept to cure: The evolution of CAR-T cell therapy. Mol Ther. (2025) 33:2123–40. doi: 10.1016/j.ymthe.2025.03.005
82. Chen Z, Zeng C, Yang L, Che Y, Chen M, Sau L, et al. YTHDF2 promotes ATP synthesis and immune evasion in B cell Malignancies. Cell. (2025) 188:331–351.e330. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2024.11.007
83. Yoo HJ and Harapan BN. Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) immunotherapy: basic principles, current advances, and future prospects in neuro-oncology. Immunol Res. (2021) 69:471–86. doi: 10.1007/s12026-021-09236-x
84. Guedan S, Calderon H, Posey AD Jr., and Maus MV. Engineering and design of chimeric antigen receptors. Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev. (2019) 12:145–56. doi: 10.1016/j.omtm.2018.12.009
85. Roselli E, Faramand R, and Davila ML. Insight into next-generation CAR therapeutics: designing CAR T cells to improve clinical outcomes. J Clin Invest. (2021) 131:e142030. doi: 10.1172/JCI142030
86. Smirnov S, Zaritsky Y, Silonov S, Gavrilova A, and Fonin A. Advancing CAR-T therapy for solid tumors: from barriers to clinical progress. Biomolecules. (2025) 15:1407. doi: 10.3390/biom15101407
87. Roddie C, Lekakis LJ, Marzolini MAV, Ramakrishnan A, Zhang Y, Hu Y, et al. Dual targeting of CD19 and CD22 with bicistronic CAR-T cells in patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma. Blood. (2023) 141:2470–82. doi: 10.1182/blood.2022018598
88. Dreger P, Corradini P, Gribben JG, Glass B, Jerkeman M, Kersten MJ, et al. CD19-directed CAR T cells as first salvage therapy for large B-cell lymphoma: towards a rational approach. Lancet Haematol. (2023) 10:e1006–15. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(23)00307-1
89. Zhu J, Simayi N, Wan R, and Huang W. CAR T targets and microenvironmental barriers of osteosarcoma. Cytotherapy. (2022) 24:567–76. doi: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2021.12.010
90. Ahmed N, Brawley VS, Hegde M, Robertson C, Ghazi A, Gerken C, et al. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -specific chimeric antigen receptor-modified T cells for the immunotherapy of HER2-positive sarcoma. J Clin Oncol. (2015) 33:1688–96. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2014.58.0225
91. Kaczanowska S, Murty T, Alimadadi A, Contreras CF, Duault C, Subrahmanyam PB, et al. Immune determinants of CAR-T cell expansion in solid tumor patients receiving GD2 CAR-T cell therapy. Cancer Cell. (2024) 42:35–51.e38. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2023.11.011
92. Arnett AB and Heczey A. GD2-CAR CAR T cells in patients with osteosarcoma and neuroblastoma-it’s not only the T cells that matter. Cancer Cell. (2024) 42:8–10. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2023.11.012
93. Talbot LJ, Chabot A, Ross AB, Beckett A, Nguyen P, Fleming A, et al. Redirecting B7-H3.CAR T cells to chemokines expressed in osteosarcoma enhances homing and antitumor activity in preclinical models. Clin Cancer Res. (2024) 30:4434–49. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-23-3298
94. Wang L, Zhang GC, Kang FB, Zhang L, and Zhang YZ. hsa_circ0021347 as a potential target regulated by B7-H3 in modulating the Malignant characteristics of osteosarcoma. BioMed Res Int. (2019) 2019:9301989. doi: 10.1155/2019/9301989
95. Silva HJ, Martin G, Birocchi F, Wehrli M, Kann MC, Supper V, et al. CD70 CAR T cells secreting an anti-CD33/anti-CD3 dual-targeting antibody overcome antigen heterogeneity in AML. Blood. (2025) 145:720–31. doi: 10.1182/blood.2023023210
96. Cao JW, Lake J, Impastato R, Chow L, Perez L, Chubb L, et al. Targeting osteosarcoma with canine B7-H3 CAR T cells and impact of CXCR2 Co-expression on functional activity. Cancer Immunol Immunother. (2024) 73:77. doi: 10.1007/s00262-024-03642-4
97. Liu Z, Zhou Z, Dang Q, Xu H, Lv J, Li H, et al. Immunosuppression in tumor immune microenvironment and its optimization from CAR-T cell therapy. Theranostics. (2022) 12:6273–90. doi: 10.7150/thno.76854
98. Zhang W, Wang Y, and Li B. Harnessing type II cytokines to reinvigorate exhausted T cells for durable cancer immunotherapy. Genomics Proteomics Bioinf. (2025) 22:qzae093. doi: 10.1093/gpbjnl/qzae093
99. Yin S, Li C, Shen X, Yu G, Cui L, Wu Y, et al. Siglec-G Suppresses CD8(+) T Cells Responses through Metabolic Rewiring and Can be Targeted to Enhance Tumor Immunotherapy. Adv Sci (Weinh). (2024) 11:e2403438. doi: 10.1002/advs.202403438
100. Meyran D, Zhu JJ, Butler J, Tantalo D, MacDonald S, Nguyen TN, et al. T(STEM)-like CAR-T cells exhibit improved persistence and tumor control compared with conventional CAR-T cells in preclinical models. Sci Transl Med. (2023) 15:eabk1900. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.abk1900
101. Zheng D, Qin L, Lv J, Che M, He B, Zheng Y, et al. CD4(+) anti-TGF-beta CAR T cells and CD8(+) conventional CAR T cells exhibit synergistic antitumor effects. Cell Rep Med. (2025) 6:102020. doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2025.102020
102. Chen W, Liao Y, Yao H, Zou Y, Fang J, Zhang J, et al. Multiomics integration analysis identifies tumor cell-derived MIF as a therapeutic target and potentiates anti-PD-1 therapy in osteosarcoma. J Immunother Cancer. (2025) 13:e011091. doi: 10.1136/jitc-2024-011091
103. Wang H, Zhu T, Yang K, Xu C, Zhang Z, Liu G, et al. Decoding the immune microenvironment in osteosarcoma: new insights into checkpoints, vaccines, and CAR-T cells. Front Oncol. (2025) 15:1702219. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2025.1702219
104. Wen Y, Tang F, Tu C, Hornicek F, Duan Z, and Min L. Immune checkpoints in osteosarcoma: Recent advances and therapeutic potential. Cancer Lett. (2022) 547:215887. doi: 10.1016/j.canlet.2022.215887
105. Sorkhabi AD, Sarkesh A, Fotouhi A, Saeedi H, and Aghebati-Maleki L. Cancer combination therapies by silencing of CTLA-4, PD-L1, and TIM3 in osteosarcoma. IUBMB Life. (2022) 74:908–17. doi: 10.1002/iub.2655
106. Wang SD, Li HY, Li BH, Xie T, Zhu T, Sun LL, et al. The role of CTLA-4 and PD-1 in anti-tumor immune response and their potential efficacy against osteosarcoma. Int Immunopharmacol. (2016) 38:81–9. doi: 10.1016/j.intimp.2016.05.016
107. Shi X, Li X, Wang H, Yu Z, Zhu Y, and Gao Y. Specific inhibition of PI3Kδ/γ enhances the efficacy of anti-PD1 against osteosarcoma cancer. J Bone Oncol. (2019) 16:100206. doi: 10.1016/j.jbo.2018.11.001
108. Ligon JA, Choi W, Cojocaru G, Fu W, Hsiue EH, Oke TF, et al. Pathways of immune exclusion in metastatic osteosarcoma are associated with inferior patient outcomes. J Immunother Cancer. (2021) 9:e001772. doi: 10.1136/jitc-2020-001772
109. Sun CY, Zhang Z, Tao L, Xu FF, Li HY, Zhang HY, et al. T cell exhaustion drives osteosarcoma pathogenesis. Ann Transl Med. (2021) 9:1447. doi: 10.21037/atm-21-3928
110. Wang Y, Chen W, Qiao S, Zou H, Yu XJ, Yang Y, et al. Lipid droplet accumulation mediates macrophage survival and Treg recruitment via the CCL20/CCR6 axis in human hepatocellular carcinoma. Cell Mol Immunol. (2024) 21:1120–30. doi: 10.1038/s41423-024-01199-x
111. Kwantwi LB, Wang S, Zhang W, Peng W, Cai Z, Sheng Y, et al. Tumor-associated neutrophils activated by tumor-derived CCL20 (C-C motif chemokine ligand 20) promote T cell immunosuppression via programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) in breast cancer. Bioengineered. (2021) 12:6996–7006. doi: 10.1080/21655979.2021.1977102
112. Lin J, Xu A, Jin J, Zhang M, Lou J, Qian C, et al. MerTK-mediated efferocytosis promotes immune tolerance and tumor progression in osteosarcoma through enhancing M2 polarization and PD-L1 expression. Oncoimmunology. (2022) 11:2024941. doi: 10.1080/2162402X.2021.2024941
113. Yang C, Lai Y, Wang J, Chen Q, Pan Q, Xu C, et al. Spatial heterogeneity of PD-1/PD-L1 defined osteosarcoma microenvironments at single-cell spatial resolution. Lab Invest. (2024) 104:102143. doi: 10.1016/j.labinv.2024.102143
114. Palmerini E, Lopez Pousa A, Grignani G, Redondo A, Hindi N, Provenzano S, et al. Nivolumab and sunitinib in patients with advanced bone sarcomas: A multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 trial. Cancer. (2025) 131:e35628. doi: 10.1002/cncr.35628
115. Chen XY, Li YD, Xie Y, Cao LQ, Ashby CR Jr., Zhao H, et al. Nivolumab and relatlimab for the treatment of melanoma. Drugs Today (Barc). (2023) 59:91–104. doi: 10.1358/dot.2023.59.2.3509756
116. Reck M, Ciuleanu TE, Schenker M, Bordenave S, Cobo M, Juan-Vidal O, et al. Five-year outcomes with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with 2 cycles of chemotherapy versus 4 cycles of chemotherapy alone in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer in the randomized CheckMate 9LA trial. Eur J Cancer. (2024) 211:114296. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2024.114296
117. Tannir NM, Albigès L, McDermott DF, Burotto M, Choueiri TK, Hammers HJ, et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib for first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma: extended 8-year follow-up results of efficacy and safety from the phase III CheckMate 214 trial. Ann Oncol. (2024) 35:1026–38. doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2024.07.727
118. Wang J, Guo W, Wang X, Tang X, Sun X, and Ren T. Circulating exosomal PD-L1 at initial diagnosis predicts outcome and survival of patients with osteosarcoma. Clin Cancer Res. (2023) 29:659–66. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-22-2682
119. Zheng B, Ren T, Huang Y, Sun K, Wang S, Bao X, et al. PD-1 axis expression in musculoskeletal tumors and antitumor effect of nivolumab in osteosarcoma model of humanized mouse. J Hematol Oncol. (2018) 11:16. doi: 10.1186/s13045-018-0560-1
120. Le Cesne A, Marec-Berard P, Blay JY, Gaspar N, Bertucci F, Penel N, et al. Programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) targeting in patients with advanced osteosarcomas: results from the PEMBROSARC study. Eur J Cancer. (2019) 119:151–7. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.07.018
121. Fritzsching B, Fellenberg J, Moskovszky L, Sápi Z, Krenacs T, MaChado I, et al. CD8(+)/FOXP3(+)-ratio in osteosarcoma microenvironment separates survivors from non-survivors: a multicenter validated retrospective study. Oncoimmunology. (2015) 4:e990800. doi: 10.4161/2162402X.2014.990800
122. Karimi S, Chattopadhyay S, and Chakraborty NG. Manipulation of regulatory T cells and antigen-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte-based tumour immunotherapy. Immunology. (2015) 144:186–96. doi: 10.1111/imm.12387
123. Liu W, Li L, Bai X, Zhang M, Lv W, Ma Y, et al. Osteosarcoma cell-derived migrasomes promote macrophage M2 polarization to aggravate osteosarcoma proliferation and metastasis. Adv Sci (Weinh). (2025) 12:e2409870. doi: 10.1002/advs.202409870
124. Ding L, Wu L, Cao Y, Wang H, Li D, Chen W, et al. Modulating tumor-associated macrophage polarization by anti-maRCO mAb exerts anti-osteosarcoma effects through regulating osteosarcoma cell proliferation, migration and apoptosis. J Orthop Surg Res. (2024) 19:453. doi: 10.1186/s13018-024-04950-2
125. Kimura Y and Sumiyoshi M. Antitumor and antimetastatic actions of dihydroxycoumarins (esculetin or fraxetin) through the inhibition of M2 macrophage differentiation in tumor-associated macrophages and/or G1 arrest in tumor cells. Eur J Pharmacol. (2015) 746:115–25. doi: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2014.10.048
Keywords: adaptive immunity, immune checkpoint inhibitors, immune evasion, immunotherapy, innate immunity, osteosarcoma, T cells
Citation: Zhang K, Wang Z, He J, Lu L, Wang W, Yang A, Xie H, Huang L, Huang Y, Zhang K, Jiang M and Wei R (2026) Advances in T cell–based immunotherapy for osteosarcoma. Front. Immunol. 17:1769847. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2026.1769847
Received: 17 December 2025; Accepted: 19 January 2026; Revised: 17 January 2026;
Published: 05 February 2026.
Edited by:
Yunfei Liu, Central South University, ChinaReviewed by:
Xiao-Jie Zhou, Heilongjiang University of Chinese Medicine, ChinaCopyright © 2026 Zhang, Wang, He, Lu, Wang, Yang, Xie, Huang, Huang, Zhang, Jiang and Wei. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Ruqiong Wei, cnVxaW9uZ3dlaUBzci5neG11LmVkdS5jbg==; Mingyang Jiang, MjAyMTIwNTc2QHNyLmd4bXUuZWR1LmNu; Ke Zhang, a3oxODIwMjI4MjgwMUAxNjMuY29t
†These authors have contributed equally to this work