Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a heterogeneous disease with one of the highest rates of incidence and mortality among cancers worldwide. Understanding the CRC tumor microenvironment (TME) is essential to improve diagnosis and treatment. Within the CRC TME, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) consist of a heterogeneous mixture of adaptive immune cells composed of mainly anti-tumor effector T cells (CD4+ and CD8+ subpopulations), and suppressive regulatory CD4+ T (Treg) cells. The balance between these two populations is critical in anti-tumor immunity. In general, while tumor antigen-specific T cell responses are observed, tumor clearance frequently does not occur. Treg cells are considered to play an important role in tumor immune escape by hampering effective anti-tumor immune responses. Therefore, CRC-tumors with increased numbers of Treg cells have been associated with promoting tumor development, immunotherapy failure, and a poorer prognosis. Enrichment of Treg cells in CRC can have multiple causes including their differentiation, recruitment, and preferential transcriptional and metabolic adaptation to the TME. Targeting tumor-associated Treg cell may be an effective addition to current immunotherapy approaches. Strategies for depleting Treg cells, such as low-dose cyclophosphamide treatment, or targeting one or more checkpoint receptors such as CTLA-4 with PD-1 with monoclonal antibodies, have been explored. These have resulted in activation of anti-tumor immune responses in CRC-patients. Overall, it seems likely that CRC-associated Treg cells play an important role in determining the success of such therapeutic approaches. Here, we review our understanding of the role of Treg cells in CRC, the possible mechanisms that support their homeostasis in the tumor microenvironment, and current approaches for manipulating Treg cells function in cancer.
Introduction
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most diagnosed cancer worldwide, and the second main cause of cancer-related death (). The main causes of high mortality are late diagnosis and high relapse after treatment, with 70% of patients only being diagnosed when the tumor has metastasized to distant organs such as liver (20%-70%) and lung (10%-20%) (, ). CRC patients are a heterogeneous group, where differences at the molecular and genetic level influence clinical outcomes and response to therapy (, ). Seventy percent of CRC is of mostly sporadic origin, while 20-30% of cases are familial. From these, approximately one-third are caused by highly penetrant inherited mutations that have been well characterized, so-called hereditary CRC. The etiology of the remaining familial cases is not completely understood but is often associated with lower-penetrance susceptibility genes and specific polymorphisms regulated by environmental, or other genetic inherited factors, that when co-inherited increase cancer risk (–). Additionally, intestinal inflammatory responses related to inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) can result in the development of CRC (). Prolonged and severe inflammation often correlates with increased cancer risk (). Colorectal polyps or adenomas arise from the epithelial cells lining the colon and are considered precursors to tumor development. During the initiation of CRC, epithelial cells acquire genetic and epigenetic modifications increasing the risk of malignant transformation and conferring a selective advantage. These can increase in size and the degree of dysplasia eventually leading to the development of dysplastic adenomas that subsequently evolve to adenoma-carcinoma (, ). The immune response can recognize and target tumor-specific and tumor-associated neo-antigens thereby arresting CRC development. Here, CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) play an essential role, with the cooperation of CD4+ helper T (Th) cells. However, CRC tumors can manipulate the tumor microenvironment (TME), promoting cancer outgrowth through regulation of immune infiltration, and generating an immunosuppressive and inflammatory environment. In this way, the TME plays a key role in modulating the plasticity of tumor cells and providing immune escape mechanisms (–).
The CRC Tumor Microenvironment and Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes
The TME includes malignant tumor cells together with immune cells, stromal cells, endothelial cells, extracellular matrix (ECM), cytokines, chemokines, and other soluble mediators (–). Cancer development in general, and CRC progression in particular, are linked with the complex role that the immune response plays in the early stages of tumor development (, –). The immune system has a multi-faceted role in CRC development () and has a substantial impact on patient outcome (). Tumor-infiltrating immune cells (TIICs) include adaptive immune cells (T cells and B cells), natural killer (NK) cells, macrophages, and additional innate cells such as myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) (, , ). TIICs directly participate in the generation and maintenance of an actively suppressive anti-tumor immune response supporting CRC progression (). MDSCs secrete cytokines and express immunosuppressive molecules at their surface that can inhibit T cells, B cells, and NK cells while promoting Treg cells and tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) (, ). The most enriched population of TIICs are tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) that promote inflammation and are often used to evaluate disease prognosis (, ). TILs are a heterogeneous mixture of lymphocytes composed mainly of anti-tumor effector T cells (CD4+ and CD8+ subpopulations) and immunosuppressive Treg cells (, ). The balance between these two populations is critical in anti-tumor immunity. In general, while tumor antigen-specific T cell responses are observed, tumor clearance frequently does not occur, highlighting the important role of immunosuppressive Treg cells (, ). Since tumors can directly shape TIICs populations and function, this interplay provides the capacity to escape immunosurveillance (, ). TILs are also associated with the molecular classification of CRC tumors, and with patient prognosis and immunotherapy responses (, , ). CRC-tumors composed of mainly anti-tumor T cells, particularly type 1 helper T cells (Th1) and cytotoxic CD8+ T cells, correlate with favorable prognosis and survival (, ). In contrast, increased accumulation of Treg cells is generally associated with CRC progression and metastasis, immunotherapy failure, and a poorer prognosis, although this correlation is not definitive (–). Understanding the dynamics between CRC tumors and immune cells in the TME is essential to improve both diagnosis and treatment.
FOXP3+ Regulatory T Cells
FOXP3+ regulatory T cells, hereafter termed Treg cells, are essential in the maintenance of immunological homeostasis and self-tolerance (–). They can have broad suppressive activity, secreting immunomodulatory cytokines and cytolytic molecules allowing them to regulate immune responses (). Treg cells have been well-studied due to their capacity to regulate the function of a wide variety immune cells including lymphocytes, dendritic cells (DCs), and macrophages (). The depletion or reduction of Treg cells is associated with beneficial anti-tumor immune responses and eradication of microbes during chronic infections (, ). The concept of Treg cells as suppressor T cells was first proposed in the 1970s (–) and was later further defined as a subpopulation of approximately 10% of peripheral CD4+ T-cells expressing the IL-2 receptor alpha-chain (CD25) (). However, the use of CD25 to identify Treg cells is problematic since it is a general marker of activated T-cells (, ). Subsequently, in a breakthrough for the field, the forkhead box P3 transcription factor (Foxp3) was found to be an additional marker of Treg cell ontogeny (–). Subsequent studies in both mice and humans identified FOXP3 is a master regulator of both Treg cell development and function (, ). Naïve CD4+ T cells can transiently upregulate CD25 and FOXP3 expression upon activation () and human Treg cells are usually characterized by the expression of FOXP3, CD25, and the low expression of the IL-7 receptor alpha chain, CD127 ().
In the thymus, tTreg cell differentiation is driven by strong T cell receptor (TCR)-mediated recognition of self-antigens (, ). In secondary lymphoid organs, peripheral Treg cells (pTreg) can differentiate from naïve or effector CD4+ T cells through TCR stimulation in the presence of TGF-β and IL-2, inducing FOXP3 expression (–). The pTreg cell TCR repertoire recognizes foreign-antigens, as opposed to tTreg that are biased towards self-recognition (, ). Furthermore, the expression of transcription factor Helios and the cell-surface glycoprotein neuropilin-1 (Nrp1) can be used to distinguish tTreg that highly express both factors from pTreg that poorly express them. However, pTreg can also upregulate Helios and Nrp1 under inflammatory conditions, or in response to certain activation signals such as IL-2 stimulation (–).
FOXP3-expressing CD4+ T cells can be further subdivided into two main subsets: central Treg cells (cTreg cells) and effector Treg cells (eTreg cells). However, in humans, activated Teff cells can transiently express FOXP3 and secrete pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-17, IL-2, and IFNγ), however they are considered to be non-suppressive (, ). cTreg cells are recent thymic emigrants that have not yet been activated and exhibit a naïve phenotype (CD45RA+ FOXP3lo) with low suppressive activity. They are enriched in lymphoid tissues where they express lymphoid-tissue homing molecules including CD62Lhigh, CD44low and CCR7, and are dependent on IL-2 for maintaining their quiescent state (). In secondary lymphoid organs, cTreg cells undergo further differentiation upon TCR engagement to become eTreg cells (CD45RA- FOXP3hi). These cells proliferate, further and develop into highly suppressive cells, upregulating activation markers, immunosuppressive cytokines, chemokines, and their receptors. They subsequently migrate to non-lymphoid tissues, downregulate lymphoid-tissue homing molecules (CD62Llow, CD44high) and acquire a tissue-specific transcriptional signature associated with their role in each location (, , ). eTreg cell suppressive function correlates with co-expression of FOXP3 and lineage-specific transcription factors common the Teff cells population (Table 1).
Table 1
| Characterize by | Localization | Function | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ontogeny | tTreg cells | CD45RA+ FOXP3lo Helioshi Nrp1 hi | Thymus | tTreg cell TCR repertoire recognizes self-antigens | |
| pTreg cells | CD45RA- FOXP3hi Helioslo/- Nrp1 lo/- | Secondary lymphoid organs | pTreg cell TCR repertoire recognizes tissue specific and foreign antigens | ||
| Function | cTreg cells | CD45RA+ FOXP3lo CD25lo CD62Lhi CD44lo CCR7hi, secondary lymphoid tissue homing molecule | Leave the thymus to lymphoid tissues, enriched in secondary lymphoid organs | Naïve phenotype with low suppressive activity Control autoimmune reactions and induce transplant tolerance | |
| eTreg cells | CD45RA- FOXP3hi CD25hi CD62Llo CD44hi CCR7lo Activation molecules: ICOS and OX-40 Inhibitory molecules: CTLA, PD-1, TIGIT and LAG-3 Effector molecules: IL-10, TGF-β, IL-35 | Originated in secondary lymphoid organs and migrate to non-lymphoid tissues | Highly suppressive cells Maintain immune homeostasis OX-40+ and ICOS+ Treg cell: secrete high levels of suppressive cytokines such as IL-10 CTLA+, PD-1 and TIGIT+ Treg cell: impair dendritic cell function preventing Teff activation | ||
| eTreg cell subtypes | Th1-like Treg cells | T-bet+ IFNγ+ CXCR3, migration to inflamed tissue mediated by Th1 cells | Inflammatory loci in non-lymphoid tissues | Inflammatory autoimmunity Secrete IFNγ and suppress Th1 and Th17 pro-inflammatory immune response | |
| Th2-like Treg cells | Gata3+ IRF4+ IL4+ CCR8, recruitment to inflamed tissue mediated by Th2 cells | Inflammatory loci in non-lymphoid tissues | Secrete IL-4 and IL-13 and suppress Th2- mediated response | ||
| Th17-like Treg cells | RORγt+ IL-17+ CCR6, recruitment to inflamed tissue mediated by Th17 cells | Inflammatory loci in non-lymphoid tissues | Oral tolerance Mucosal immunity, maintain homeostasis and tolerance to commensal microbiota Secrete anti-inflammatory IL-10 to inhibit pathogenic Th17 cell responses | ||
Treg cells subtypes.
Histone post-translational modifications and DNA methylation patterns are intimately associated with the differentiation and function of Treg cells (–). FOXP3 transcription is epigenetically controlled through regulation of its promoter and several intronic enhancers, termed conserved non-coding DNA sequences (CNS) 0–3 (, ). The demethylation status of CNS1 and CNS2 is regulated by TGF-β and IL-2 and associated with the stable expression of Foxp3 (–). TET1/2 methylcytosine dioxygenases demethylate CNS1/2 thereby stabilizing Foxp3 expression and other Treg cell signature genes including Cd25, Nrp1, and Il1rl1 (). Mice with CNS1‐deficiencies can generate tTreg cells but not pTreg cells, leading to a deficiency of colonic Treg cells, development of aggressive inflammation in the mucosa, and spontaneous colitis (, , ). For tTreg cell stability, Foxp3 expression alone is insufficient and additionally requires genome-wide CpG hypomethylation driven by TCR stimulation ().
The mechanisms by which Treg cells modulate immune suppression have been the subject of many studies (, , ). In general, Treg cells exert their immunosuppressive function through three main mechanisms. Firstly, Treg cells repress the immune response of effector immune cells by secreting immunomodulatory cytokines and cytotoxic molecules. Secondly, Treg cells express immune checkpoint receptors by which they interact and suppress Teff cells or antigen-presenting cells. Furthermore, Treg cells interfere with the metabolism of effector cells thereby affecting their function.
Tissue-Resident Intestinal Treg Cells
Over the last decade, it has become clear that Treg cells undergo tissue-specific adaptation in non-lymphoid tissues and acquire context-dependent tissue-specific gene signatures (, 87, 88). As described above, cTreg cells express lymphoid tissue homing molecules involved in trafficking to secondary lymphoid organs. In these secondary organs, tissue-specific self-antigens or microbial antigens recognized by cTreg cells lead to their differentiation to eTreg cells, upregulating activation markers (CD44hi), effector molecules (CTLA4, GZMB, KLRG1), chemokines and their receptors (CCR4), and immunosuppressive cytokines (IL-10) (, 89). Upon TCR stimulation, the upregulation of homing receptors, including chemokine receptors and adhesion molecules, further directs the migration and localization of the eTreg cells to non-lymphoid peripheral sites in response to specific stimuli (89).
Tissue-resident eTreg cells are found in almost all peripheral tissues where they adapt to environmental cues and exhibit a tissue-specific transcriptional adaptation associated with their function (88, 90). They are specialized in controlling peripheral immune homeostasis by acquiring a combination of homing receptors, transcription factors, immune-regulatory mechanisms, and a specific TCR repertoire (). eTreg cells not only dampen immune responses but also promote the regeneration and repair of injured tissue or stimulate stem cell differentiation (91, 92). In the intestinal tract, the majority of the immunoregulatory processes occur in the mucosal lamina propria (LP). Among the total CD4+ T-cell population in the LP, 10-15% in the small intestine and 25-35% in the large intestine are Treg cells. To maintain intestinal immune homeostasis, Treg cells control immune responses against innocuous food and microbial antigens (, 93). Colonic pTreg cells are mainly directed towards microbial antigens, as highlighted in studies using germ-free mice, where a reduced number of colonic Treg cells was observed compared to specific pathogen-free (SPF) mice (94). Some colonic eTreg cells originate from tTreg cells and are characterized by expression of the transcription factors Gata3, Helios, and Nrp1 (95). However, most eTreg cells result from the conversion of CD4+Foxp3− T cells to pTreg cells expressing the nuclear hormone receptor RORγt, with low Helios or Nrp1 expression (96). Control of Foxp3 expression in pTregs generated in the digestive-system lymphoid-tissue has been attributed to regulation of CNS1 (). CNS1 contains binding sites for several transcription factors including NFAT, Smad, and retinoic acid receptor (RAR) and retinoid X receptor (RXR) whose binding promotes Foxp3 expression. TCR stimulation activates NFAT, while TGF-β signaling activates Smad3 whose association with CNS1 contributes to histone acetylation and enhancer activation. This synergistic binding of NFAT and Smad to CNS1 is essential for Foxp3 expression ().
Transcriptional and functional analysis of both murine and human colonic Treg cells has defined two specialized subsets based on the expression of transcription factors and cell surface markers. One population, the FOXP3+ GATA3+ Helios+ Nrp1+ Treg cells are similar to so-called Th2-like eTreg cells. GATA3 is a canonical Th2 transcription factor with a fundamental role in controlling Treg cell fate and accumulation in tissues during inflammation. It is expressed in Treg cells homing to barrier sites such as skin and intestine, constituting one-third of the colonic Treg cells (97). Most of the GATA3+ Treg cells also express IL-1RL1 (also known as ST2), whose expression is GATA3-dependent. ST2 binds to tissue-danger signal IL-33, which is elevated in the colon after inflammation-driven tissue damage. The IL-33-ST2 pathway is crucial for Treg cell homing and accumulation in the intestine, along with high expression of the intestinal-homing receptors CCR9 and α4β7. In a positive feedback loop, IL-33 induces the recruitment of GATA3 to the il1r1 enhancer and foxp3 promoter, resulting in increased FOXP3 and ST2 expression establishing the eTreg cell transcriptional program. GATA3+ ST2+ Treg cells also secrete amphiregulin, a tissue-remodeling factor that mediates tissue-regeneration, and IL-10, a cytokine that supports intestinal stem cell renewal, restraining their proliferation and aberrant differentiation (98–100). In this way, Treg cell accumulation limits tissue damage by a rapid adaptation to tissue inflammation.
A second, larger proportion of eTreg cells express FOXP3+ RORγt+ Helios- Nrp1- and are classed as Th17-like Treg cells. RORγt Treg cells constitute 40-60% of total colonic Treg cells (96, 101) and are normally directed against microbiota, constraining intestinal immune responses (94, 102). Recently, RORγt expression in colonic Treg cells has been associated with maintenance of Foxp3 expression during colitis (103). Deletion of RORγt was found to lead to an upregulation of T-bet and IFN-γ, loss of Foxp3 expression, and severe intestinal inflammation in mice. T-bet deletion in RORγt knockout animals was found to restore Foxp3 expression and immunosuppressive function during inflammation. These results suggest that RORγt, by suppressing T-bet expression, promotes Foxp3 expression and thereby Treg cell function (103). Moreover, RORγt expression correlates with upregulation of immunosuppressive receptors including PD-1, ICOS, and CTLA4, the nucleotidases CD39 and CD73, and secretion of high amounts of anti-inflammatory cytokines including IL-10 and TGF-β. This transcriptional reprogramming enhances regulatory function to restrain inflammatory responses critical for controlling chronic inflammation (96, 101, 104).
Taken together, these findings illustrate a range of Treg cell phenotypes and functions in the intestinal mucosa, with remarkable flexibility to maintain tissue homeostasis. While transcriptional analysis of mice colonic Treg cells identified Gata3+Helios+ and RORγt+ Helios− subpopulations, in humans this is less clear. GATA3+ Treg cells have been described in blood, however, they have not yet been identified in human intestine (97). RORγt+ Treg cells are present in comparable levels in biopsies from healthy colonic LP and patients with Crohn’s disease (96). Furthermore, RORγt+ Treg cells are elevated both in blood and tissues of IBD patients, and in the blood and tumors of CRC patients during different stages of the disease (105, 106).
Tumor-Infiltrating Treg Cells and CRC
Since the observation of a population of immunosuppressive CD4+ T-cells in sarcoma tumor-bearing mice (107), a steadily increasing number of studies has demonstrated an important role for Treg cells regulating anti-tumor immunity (108–110). Treg cells can account for more than 50% of all CD4+ T cells in the TME of solid tumors including gastric (111), lung (112), breast (113), ovarian (114), cervical (115), melanomas (116) and hepatocellular (112) cancer. As already mentioned, high numbers of TI-Treg cells is often associated with poor prognosis and low survival rates (117, 118). In CRC, increased numbers of FOXP3+ T cells correlate with both, improved (, , 117, 119–121) or worsened prognosis and overall survival (122). This discrepancy may be explained by the difficulties in defining the identity of suppressive FOXP3+ Treg cells at the tumor site. In line with this, analysis of TILs in human CRC identified two heterogeneous subpopulations of FOXP3+ T-cells associated with patient outcome (123). Better prognosis was associated with increased infiltration of non-suppressive FOXP3lo non-Treg cells (CD45RA- FOXP3lo). These were found to generate a strong pro-inflammatory environment through the secretion of inflammatory cytokines such as TGF-β, IL-12, and TNF-α. In contrast, increased numbers of suppressive CD45RA- FOXP3hi eTreg cells correlate with poorer outcomes and lower disease-free survival (123).
The percentage of Treg cells, as a proportion of CD4+ T cells, infiltrating the TME in CRC is significantly higher compared to healthy colon (124). While some studies support the concept that TI-Treg cells may originate from tTreg cells that migrate and/or expand in the TME, others support in situ generation of pTreg cells (, 125–127). TI-Treg cells expressing Helios have also been identified suggesting their thymic origin in human CRC (128). Studies analyzing CD4+ TCR repertoires in murine solid tumor models have demonstrated largely distinct TCR repertoires in Foxp3+ and Foxp3− CD4+ T cells. This suggests that increased numbers of TI-Treg cells is due to the in situ proliferation of Treg cell clones in tumors, and not conversion of CD4+ T cells to Treg cells (129, 130). Consistent with these findings, additional studies of TCR repertoires support that TI-Treg cells have little overlap with conventional CD4+ T-cells in murine models of prostate cancer (131) or human breast cancer (128). In CRC patients, Teff and Treg cells have been shown to develop distinct TCR repertoires against tumor-associated antigens, leading to specific tumor-associated antigen responses. Treg cells have high specificity for a limited repertoire of tumor antigens and exert their immunosuppressive function against Teff cells to damp their responses. Since the repertoire of antigens that Teff and Treg cells can detect is different, this provides the potential for therapeutic approaches that identify peptides that can stimulate anti-tumor T-cell but not Treg cell responses (132). A recent study characterizing the TCR repertoires of TI-Treg cells in human metastatic gastrointestinal melanoma, and ovarian cancers showed a significant overlap with circulating Treg cells but not with conventional CD4+ T cells found in either tumor or blood (133).
TI-Treg cells generally exhibit CpG hypomethylation patterns required for the induction of Foxp3 expression and generation of stable, functional Treg cells (, , 134). In colonic RORγt+ Treg cells, the CNS2 region, also referred to as the major Treg-specific demethylated region (TSDR), is significantly demethylated (101, 135). In CRC tumors, TSDR demethylation has been associated with STAT5 and TET2, and the expression of both is upregulated in CRC tumor-infiltrating CD4+ T cells. Here, STAT5 and TET2 coordinately bind the FOXP3-TSDR, promoting DNA hypomethylation and FOXP3 expression (136). Analysis of the FOXP3-TSDR demethylation rates (TSDR-DMRs) in Treg cells from CRC tumors and adjacent healthy colon samples demonstrated higher TSDR-DMRs demethylation in TI-Treg cells (137). In another study utilizing 130 paired samples of CRC tumor tissue and adjacent healthy colonic mucosa samples, significantly higher TSDR-DMRs and increased FOXP3 mRNA and protein expression were also observed in TI-Treg cells (138). These observations provide an explanation for increased FOXP3 expression in CRC tumor-infiltrating Treg cells compared to healthy colon tissue.
The CRC TME can also promote the conversion of CD4+ T-cells to TI-Treg cells through a variety of ways, for example increasing the availability of TGF-β (Figure 1C) (139). Other mechanisms associated with the differentiation of CD4+ T cells to Treg cells include the increased expression of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) in mouse and human CRC TME. IDO converts tryptophan to kynurenine, which can bind the aromatic hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) in CD4+ T cells thereby promoting Foxp3 expression (140, 141). Treg cells localize to the CRC TME through their expression of specific chemokine receptors. These include: CC chemokine receptor 4 (CCR4), attracted to inflammatory loci by the ligands CCL22 or CCL17 produced by CRC tumor cells or macrophages (142); CCR5, highly expressed in TI-Treg cells and associated with Treg cell recruitment towards the ligands CCL3, and CCL4 expressed by CRC tumor cells (, 143); CCR6, involved in migration to the TME in response to CCL20 produced by tumor-associated macrophages (144, 145); CCR8, exclusively expressed by TI-Treg cells (146) and CCL1, expressed by tumor-infiltrating myeloid cells (128). Taken together, multiple mechanisms are involved in the increased numbers of Treg cells in the context of CRC. This can involve accumulation in the TME by chemotaxis and clonal expansion by recognition of tumor-associated antigens.
Figure 1
TI-Treg cells are more proliferative and have a more activated immunosuppressive phenotype when compared to Treg cells from healthy tissue or peripheral blood (147). Helios, associated with Treg cell thymic origin, is highly expressed in CRC Foxp3hi TI-Treg cells which also co-express activation markers such as ICOS and OX-40, and inhibitory molecules such as PD-1, CTLA-4, TIM-3 (Figure 1G), and CD39 that mediate their highly suppressive phenotype (Figure 1F) (148). CD39 is an ectonucleotidase that catalyzes the generation of adenosine from ATP, negatively regulating immune responses (149). A recent study comparing CRC tumors and healthy colon tissues identified three clusters of Treg cells differentially expressing CD39. The subgroups with the highest and intermediate expression of CD39 were found in the tumor, while the subgroup with the lowest expression was found in healthy colon tissue. Higher expression of CD39 correlated with poorer outcome (150).
In the context of CRC, the most significantly enriched TI-Treg cell population has a Th17-like profile. IL-17+ TI-Treg cells, originated from memory CCR6+ T cells, cTreg cells, or the transdifferentiation of Th17-to-Treg cells, accumulate in colitis inflamed tissue and are associated with CRC progression (151–153). These cells maintain transcriptional and epigenetic signatures of both Th17 cells (Folr4, GARP, Itgb8, Pglyrp1, Il1rl1 and Itgae) and Treg cells (Foxp3, Tigit and Icos) (135, 153). IL-17+ TI-Treg cells also acquire RORγt expression contributing to local inflammation by producing IL-17, IL-2, IL-6, TNF and IFN-γ, in combination with the capacity to inhibit T cell immunity, thereby driving initiation of tumorigenesis (105, 106, 153–156). RORγt expression is increased and promoted by Wnt signaling. In healthy colonic Treg cells, TCF-1 and FOXP3 co-bind to the enhancer regions of pro-inflammatory genes such as Rorc (RORγt), Il17a (IL-17) and Ifng (IFNγ), repressing their expression. However, in CRC RORγt+ TI-Treg cells, sustained Wnt and/or TCR signaling leads to nuclear translocation of β-catenin where it binds to TCF-1 facilitating the transcription of pro-inflammatory genes. Increased numbers of pathogenic β-catenin(hi) RORγt+ TI-Treg cells correlates with the progression from IBD to CRC in humans and in murine colitis-associated dysplasia models (105, 157). CRC-associated Treg cells have decreased TCF-1 expression and increased Th17 expression signatures compared to normal tissues. Reduced TCF-1 activity in Treg cells increases their immunosuppressive function against T cell proliferation, but at the same time promotes their pro-inflammatory activity, promoting tumor growth in polyp-prone mice (158). Conversely, the specific ablation of RORγt in Foxp3+ Treg cells of polyp-prone mice improves anti-tumor responses and reduces polyposis (106, 159).
Epigenetic modifications at the promoter regions of TI-Treg cell genes promote immunosuppressive function and support tumor immune evasion. Expression levels of immune checkpoint proteins such as PD-1, CTLA-4, TIM-3 and TIGIT, and checkpoint ligands including PD-L1 and galectin-9 are higher in peripheral blood or tumor tissue for CRC patients, compared with blood or colon tissue from healthy donors (160, 161). Increased DNA hypomethylation at the promoters of CTLA-4 and TIGIT in TI-Treg cells, compared to healthy colon tissue, correlates with increased expression of TETs. Moreover, the distribution of the repressive histone modifications H3K27me3 in CTLA-4 and TIM-3, and H3K9me3 in PD-1, TIM-3 and TIGIT, is lower in TI-Treg cells correlating with higher expression of these immune checkpoint receptors (160). RORγt+ Treg cells retain a suppressive phenotype through hypomethylation of Treg-specific signature genes including Foxp3, Ctla-4, Gitr, Eos, and Helios (135, 151, 152, 154). Their immunosuppressive activity in the TME is thought to occur through the release of factors such as TGF-β (Figure 1D), which is upregulated in around 80% of the RORγt+ TI-Treg cells. A smaller proportion also expresses IL-10 (Figure 1D), and they can also release IL-6, IL-4, IFN-γ, and TNF-α (106, 154). RORγt+ TI-Treg cells can also co-express the BLIMP1 transcription factor identified as the primary regulator of IL-10 expression in the colon, suppressing inflammation-driven CRC (162). BLIMP1+ TI-Treg cells have been associated with longer disease-free survival in CRC patients (163). In summary, RORγt has an important role in the balance between suppressive Treg cells and pathogenic RORγt+ Treg cells that can contribute to an inflammatory and immunosuppressive environment that can promote both CRC tumor development and immune evasion.
The majority of TI-Treg cells express co-inhibitory receptors such as LAG-3 and TIM-3 that can modulate T cell responses (Figure 1G) (164). LAG-3+ Treg cells have increased IL-10 and TGF-β production and are enriched both in the TME and peripheral blood of CRC patients (165). TIM-3+ Treg cells have been associated with multiple cancers including CRC and have a role in regulating immune responses by driving T cell inhibition or exhaustion. They express CD39/CD73 (Figure 1F), IL-10, and TGF-β (Figure 1D) and upregulate the expression of checkpoint receptors (Figure 1G), such as CTLA-4, PD-1, and LAG-3 (166–170). CRC tumors implanted in TIM-3 deficient mice have a reduced infiltration of Treg cells, reduced CD8+ Teff cell exhaustion, and slower tumor growth (170). LAG-3+TIM-3+ TI-Treg cells are also enriched in CRC tumors compared to healthy colon, with increased TGF-β and IL-10 release, and upregulation of CTLA-4 expression compared to LAG-3−TIM-3− TI-Treg cells. In addition, LAG-3+TIM-3+ TI-Treg cells can reduce macrophage expression of MHC class II, CD80/CD86, and TNF-α and increase IL-10 secretion thereby supporting immunosuppression (171).
Additional CRC-related Treg cell subsets have been described, although less is known about their functional relevance. TI-Treg cells producing IL-35 have been identified in CRC patients (Figure 1D); however, their origin, phenotype, and function remain to be defined. IL-35 has immunosuppressive activity both in vitro and in vivo, inhibiting Teff cell proliferation and inducing conversion to IL-35-producing Treg cells (172–174). Studies with CRC patients and mouse models found increased TI-Treg cell numbers correlated with high levels of IL-35 expression in serum and TME (173–176). Latency-associated peptide (LAP) non-covalently binds to TGF-β and forms a latent TGF-β complex inhibiting the interaction with its cognate receptors on immune cells (177). LAP+ TI-Treg are functionally more immunosuppressive than LAP- TI-Tregs, and their numbers increase with CRC progression and the metastatic stage (178, 179). A study of 42 CRC patients concluded that LAP+ TI-Treg cells were increased in the peripheral blood and tumor tissue of patients compared to healthy colon controls. These Treg cells upregulated effector molecules including tumor necrosis factor receptor II, granzyme B, perforin, Ki67, and CCR5 that further support their immunosuppressive function. LAP+ TI-Treg cells can direct cell-mediated cytotoxicity through the expression of perforin and granzyme B, thereby also suppressing Teff cells (Figure 1E) (178).
Taken together, Treg cell plasticity and heterogeneity provide a broad range of mechanisms to temper anti-tumor immune responses and promote immune evasion. It is therefore important to accurately characterize Treg cell populations to improve the diagnosis and outcome of CRC patients and more specifically target TI-Treg cells.
The TME Promotes Treg Cell Metabolic Reprogramming
The reprograming of energy metabolism is one of the hallmarks of cancer whereby tumors can influence the immunosuppressive TME. In CRC, this already takes place at the colon adenoma stage (180) where CRC initiation, proliferation, invasion, and metastasis are closely associated with the metabolic crosstalk between tumor cells, the TME, and the microbiota (181). CRC tumor cells reprogram their metabolism in order to fulfill their excessive energy and nutrient needs, relying on aerobic glycolysis, glutaminolysis, and fatty acid synthesis. As a result of the rapid proliferation of tumor cells and the immaturity of tumor vasculature, the TME is characterized by hypoxia, acidity, and nutrient deficiency including glucose, glutamine, and tryptophan, with enrichment of lactate and kynurenine (182, 183). These metabolic changes hamper effective Teff cell activation and proliferation, which themselves rely on aerobic glycolysis. In contrast, this harsh metabolic environment promotes the recruitment and differentiation of Treg cells (184). FOXP3 is a central regulator of TI-Treg cell metabolic adaptation, driving a distinct metabolic profile compared to Teff cells. TI-Treg cells are less dependent on glycolysis, increasing FA-oxidation (FAO) and oxidative phosphorylation (OXOPHOS) to support their differentiation and function (185, 186). In CRC, as in other solid tumors, TI-Treg cells utilize these alternative metabolic pathways to produce energy, proliferate and perform their immunosuppressive functions (187–189).
Accumulation of lactate (Figure 2A), the end-product of tumor cell glycolysis, affects the TME through multiple mechanisms. Treg cells can metabolically adapt to increased lactate in the TME, utilizing it as a carbon source for intracellular metabolism. TI-Treg cells upregulate pathways related to the metabolism of lactate such as lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and the lactate transporter MCT1 (SLC16A1) (190, 191). FOXP3 directly alters T cell metabolism to maintain Treg cell suppressive function in lactate-rich environments (185). By binding to the MYC promoter, FOXP3 can suppress c-myc expression, a transcription factor regulating glycolytic gene expression, thereby suppressing glycolysis. FOXP3 also influences LDH activity, promoting the conversion of lactate to pyruvate and increasing oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS), and the NAD : NADH ratio. These adaptations permit Treg cells to differentiate and work effectively under conditions of low-glucose and high lactate as found in the TME (185).
Figure 2
Besides lactate, TI-Treg cells also rely on fatty acids (Figure 2B), utilizing lipid metabolism to meet both their energy demands and immunosuppressive function through FAO-driven OXPHOS (185, 186). Fatty acids stimulate the AMPK pathway, inhibiting mTOR signaling and promoting mitochondrial FAO (186). TI-Treg cells also upregulate SREBP transcription factors in order to adapt to the TME. SREBPs regulate the expression of genes required for de novo synthesis of lipids by fatty acid synthase (FAS), promoting the functional maturation of TI-Treg cells. SREBP-deficient Treg cells show decreased expression of PD-1 and have been associated with an effective anti-tumor immune response and reduced tumor growth (192). PD-1 signaling in TI-Treg cells can also promote FAO by upregulating palmitoyltransferase-1A (CPT1A), an importer of fatty acids to the mitochondria (193). A study in CRC, among other solid tumors, showed that high levels of fatty acids in the TME are an essential energy source for TI-Treg cells (188). TI-Treg cells also increase intracellular lipid accumulation through increases in fatty acid synthesis (188). In a CRC murine model, TI-Treg cells were found to upregulate CD36, an FA-importer, increasing FA uptake and FAO (194). This metabolic flexibility allows TI-Treg cells to thrive and supports their suppressive activity in the TME under conditions of high concentrations of tumor-derived lipids (195).
Under homeostatic conditions, amino acids regulate the activation of mTORC1 which is important for the functional fitness of eTreg cells (196, 197). However, the TME generally has low availability of many amino acids (Figure 2C), particularly glutamine. Reduced levels of glutamine, with the subsequent reduction of glutamine catabolism, stimulates the conversion of CD4+ T cells to Treg cells during Th1 polarization in vitro (198, 199). In addition, the TME often has high levels of amino acid-degrading enzymes such as IDO. IDO is expressed by both tumor cells and Treg cells and, as already mentioned, catabolizes tryptophan to kynurenine, binding to AhR in Teff cells and promoting the Treg cell differentiation (200–205). High IDO expression by CRC cells and tryptophan depletion in the TME has been associated with tumor immune evasion and increased Treg infiltration in CRC (206).
Other metabolites abundant in the TME include retinoic acid (RA) and adenosine. RA can act as a cofactor to induce Foxp3 expression and promote the conversion of CD4+ T cells into Treg cells while inhibiting the generation of Th17 cells. In the intestine, CD103+ DCs can generate RA from vitamin A and drive Treg cells differentiation in the presence of TGF-β (207, 208). A colitis-associated CRC murine model treated with RA showed an increased frequency of TI-Treg cells in the tumor and reduced inflammation (209). Adenosine levels are increased in response to hypoxia and chronic inflammation, both characteristics of CRC. Treg cells can produce adenosine by CD39/CD73 action but can also respond to it by engaging the adenosine receptors (A2A AR) (Figure 1F). A2A engagement promotes the intracellular accumulation of cAMP and, subsequently, the activation of the cAMP response element-binding protein (CREB) that drives the expression of anti-inflammatory cytokines, including IL-10 and TGF-β (210, 211).
Despite the metabolic challenges present in the TME such as low glucose and amino acid availability, high lactate and lipid concentration, acidity, and hypoxia, TI-Treg cells show a remarkable ability to engage unique metabolic reprogramming, compared to other Teff cells, to support their bioenergetic and functional needs. Understanding the TI-Treg cell metabolic reprogramming potentially provides novel therapeutic approaches for targeting in the control CRC pathogenesis.
Therapeutic Approaches to Target Treg Cells in CRC
Modulating TI-Treg cell function offers an important strategy to improve therapeutic responses for a wide variety of tumors. A variety of approaches are currently under development including Treg cell depletion, suppressing their activity, impeding their recruitment, and preventing their differentiation within the TME. The challenge presented is to specifically target TI-Treg cells without affecting other Treg populations, thereby diminishing the risk of developing unwanted autoimmune responses. In the past decade, the efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors to block immune checkpoint receptors or their ligands has greatly benefited the survival of patients with solid tumors (212–216). As discussed earlier, CRC TI-Treg cells express immune checkpoint receptors including PD-1, CTLA-4, TIM-3, and the NTPDase CD39 that regulate their immunosuppressive phenotype and support tumor cells in escaping immune surveillance (Figure 1G) (148, 217). A variety of humanized monoclonal antibodies developed against these receptors have been evaluated in CRC patients in order to alter TI-Treg cells numbers and functionality (Table 2).
Table 2
| Clinical trial | Antibody target | n CRC patients and tumor type | Response to treatment | PFS | OS | Comments and references |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NCT01876511 (Phase II) | anti-PD-1 pembrolizumab (MK-3475, SCH 900475) | 10 metastatic MSI CRC patients 11 metastatic MSS CRC patients | 40% MSI ORR 0% MSS ORR | 78% MSI 11% MSS | This findings drove FDA-approval for the treatment of unresectable, metastatic MSI-H and dMMR (218) | |
| NCT00441337 (Phase I) | anti-PD-1 nivolumab (BMS-936558, MDX-1106, ONO-4538) | 14 metastatic MSI or MSS CRC patients | 1 MSI CR ≥ 21 months | Followed up in: NCT02060188 (phase II) (219) | ||
| NCT02060188 (Phase II) | anti-PD-1 nivolumab | 74 refractory metastatic dMMR/MSI-H CRC patients | 23 patients PR 31% ORR 69% DCR ≥ 12 weeks | 50% ≥ 12 months | 73% ≥ 12 months | This findings drove FDA-approval for the treatment of refractory MSI-H/dMMR CRC (212) |
| anti-PD-1 nivolumab in combination with anti-CTLA-4 ipilimumab (IgG1 isotype) | 119 refractory metastatic dMMR/MSI-H CRC patients | 55% ORR 80% DCR ≥ 12 weeks | 71% ≥ 12 months | 85% ≥ 12 months | Combination therapy improves therapeutic efficacy for dMMR/ MSI-H CRC (220) | |
| NCT00313794 (Phase II) | anti-CTLA-4 tremelimumab (CP-675,206 or ticilimumab) | 47 refractory metastatic CRC patients Subtype not determined | 45 response-evaluable patients | 2% 15 months before relapse | 45% ≥ 6 months | No clinically meaningful but interesting for combinational approaches (221) |
| NCT02870920 (Phase II) | anti-CTLA-4 tremelimumab and anti-PD-L1 durvalumab | 180 pre-treated-refractory MSS or proficient MMR CRC patients | 1.8 months | 6.6 months | Combination therapy improves the OS and quality of life of patients with advanced refractory CRC but not dMMR CRC (222) | |
| NCT03101475 (Phase II) | anti-CTLA-4 tremelimumab and anti-PD-L1 durvalumab | Currently, 22 metastatic CRC patients | Ongoing clinical trial | |||
| NCT02794571 (Phase I) | anti-TIGIT (MTIG7192A) as monotherapy or in combination with anti-PD-L1 atezolizumab | Recruiting advanced incurable tumors, including CRC patients | Ongoing clinical trial | |||
| NCT01968109 (Phase I/IIa) | anti-LAG-3 relatlimab (BMS-986016) as monotherapy or in combination with anti-PD1 nivolumab | Recruiting advanced solid tumors including CRC patients | Ongoing clinical trial | |||
| NCT03156114 (Phase I) | anti-LAG-3 miptenalimab (BI 754111) as monotherapy or in combination with anti- PD-1 ezabenlimab (BI 75409111) | Recruiting advanced solid tumors including metastatic CRC patients | Ongoing clinical trial | |||
| NCT02608268 (Phase I/II) | anti-TIM-3 (MBG453) with anti-PD-1 spartalizumab (PDR001) | 6 metastatic CRC patients | 2 partially responded | Ongoing clinical trial (223) | ||
| NCT02817633 (Phase I) | anti-TIM-3 (TSR-022) as monotherapy or in combination with anti- PD-1 dostarlimab (TSR-042) | Recruiting advanced solid tumors including CRC patients | Ongoing clinical trial | |||
| NCT02705105 (Phase I/II) | anti-CCR4 mogamulizumab as monotherapy or in combination with anti- PD-1 nivolumab | 29 MSS CRC patients | 0 ORR with monotherapy 1 ORR with combination therapy | No enhanced efficacy of the combination therapy compared to monotherapy with nivolumab (224) |
CRC clinical trials potentially targeting Treg cell populations.
PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival; MSI, microsatellite instability tumors; MSS, microsatellite stable tumors; dMMR, different mismatch-repair; ORR, overall response rate; PR, Partial response; CR, Complete response; DCR, disease control rate; BSC, best supportive care.
PD-1 is highly expressed in TI-Treg cells and plays a role in their homeostasis and function. PD-1 signaling also promotes FAO to support their bioenergetics needs in the TME (193). PD-1-expressing Treg cells are considered a critical element in tumor immune evasion and progression of CRC (225). PD-1, expressed on tumor cells and Treg cells, can bind its ligand PD-L1 on Teff cells activating inhibitory signals that interfere with the TCR signal transduction thereby blocking anti-tumor immune responses (226, 227). Humanized monoclonal anti-PD-1 antibodies (mAbs) block interaction with PD-L1 and can thereby benefit the anti-tumor immune response (217, 228). Recently, it has been demonstrated that the balance of PD-1 expressing CD8+ Teff cells and eTreg cells in the TME is relevant in predicting the efficacy of anti-PD-1 mAbs (229), although how PD-1 signaling promotes Treg cell suppressive function is unclear. A study in CRC patients showed that anti-PD-1 mAb therapy has a better outcome for patients with high numbers of PD-1+ CD8+ T cells compared to non-responders that have higher numbers of eTreg cells. In line with these previous results, a CRC murine model demonstrated the capacity of anti-PD-1 mAbs to restore the effector function of PD-1+ CD8+ T cells and promote tumor regression (230). Clinical trials have investigated the possibility of using humanized anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of CRC patients (Table 2). Promising clinical results with the first mAb against PD-1, pembrolizumab (MK-3475, SCH 900475) and, later, nivolumab (BMS-936558, MDX-1106, ONO-4538) in CRC patients lead the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to approve them for the treatment of refractory metastatic CRC that still progressed after prior treatment with chemotherapeutics (212, 231). The diverse outcomes observed in CRC patients treated with different anti-PD-1 mAbs can be explained according to the subtype of CRC tumor. Unfortunately, few studies have reported responses regarding the targeting of TI-Treg cells by these antibodies in CRC patients. However, based on current knowledge it is likely that anti-PD-1 mAbs target Treg cells and in this way support activation of an anti-tumor immune response.
Treg cells express high levels of cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) in a FOXP3-dependent manner. CTLA-4 binds and inhibits B7 molecules (CD80 and CD86) on the surface of APCs such as DCs with higher affinity than their CD28 co-stimulatory signal. This results in the induction of immunological tolerance (230). Murine CRC models have shown that anti-CTLA4 mAbs induce a potent immune response, rejection of the tumor, and significantly prolonged survival (232). Humanized anti-CTLA-4 mAbs such as ipilimumab (IgG1 isotype) and tremelimumab (IgG2 isotype) have been tested in multiple clinical trials with solid tumors (233–235). The anti-tumor mechanism of these anti-CTLA-4 mAb was first attributed to preventing interaction of CTLA-4 with its ligand B7 allowing APCs to present antigens and activate anti-tumor T cells response. Recently, it has been shown that anti-CTLA-4 mAbs also deplete TI-Treg cells, but not pTreg cells in secondary lymphoid organs. This selective Treg cell depletion depends on their ability to activate Fc receptors on tumor-associated macrophages or NK cells that can subsequently phagocytose or kill Treg cells (234, 236–241). The use of anti-CTLA-4 (IgG2a isotype) in two murine subcutaneous CRC tumor models demonstrated successful reduction of TI-Treg cells together with the expansion of CD8+ Teff cells promoting anti-tumor activity (238). The use of anti-CTLA-4 mAb in clinical trials for patients with metastatic CRC, overall, has shown improved therapeutic efficacy in combination with anti-PD-1 mAbs compared to anti-CTLA-4 mAb monotherapy (Table 2) (212, 220, 222). Currently, the dual combination of checkpoint inhibitors is being evaluated in various phase II clinical trials for metastatic CRC patients, for example, durvalumab, an anti-PD-L1 mAb, and tremelimumab, an anti-CTLA-4 mAb (NCT03101475). There have been no specific reports on anti-CTLA-4 mAb targeting TI-Treg cells in these CRC patients, but again it is likely that TI-Treg cell function and numbers are impacted. Anti-CTLA4 mAbs have also been shown to have a T-cell intrinsic mechanism of action that enhances the proliferation of Teff and Treg cells in response to self-antigens as shown in human and mouse models (130, 242, 243).
Novel immune checkpoint targets such as TIGIT, LAG-3 and TIM-3 are currently under pre-clinical investigation and are being evaluated for their safety profiles in phase I trials (244, 245). In CRC, these receptors are highly expressed on TI-Treg cells compared to healthy colon tissue (150). TIGIT is a co-inhibitory molecule, a member of the CD28 family, expressed preferentially in T cells and NK cells. TIGIT competes with the co-stimulatory receptor CD226 in T-cells to bind CD155 on APCs which become tolerogenic, cannot activate T-cells, and release IL-10 inhibiting of Teff cell anti-tumor responses (246–248). A phase I clinical trial (NCT02794571; Genentech) utilizing humanized anti-TIGIT mAb (MTIG7192A) as monotherapy or in combination with anti-PD-L1 mAb (atezolizumab) is ongoing in advanced or metastatic tumors including CRC (Table 2). LAG-3 is expressed on activated CD4+ and CD8+ T cells (249), Tregs (250), a subpopulation of natural killer (NK) cells (251), B cells (252), and plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs) (253). The LAG-3 co-inhibitory receptor can bind stable peptide-MHC-II complexes impairing DC function, maturation, and proliferation. LAG-3 can also induce the production of IDO, impairing Teff cell and DC proliferation, but promoting eTreg cell differentiation (165, 230, 254, 255). In CRC patients, LAG-3+ Treg cells have been identified in both TILs and in peripheral blood (165). Currently, there are two ongoing clinical trials that aim to investigate the efficacy of anti-LAG-3 mAb alone or in combination with anti-PD-L1 mAb in patients with advanced solid tumors including CRC (Table 2). The rationale behind this combinational treatment is to synergistically restore T cell activation and enhance antitumor immunity.
TIM-3 is another immune checkpoint molecule expressed on innate immune cells such as DCs and NK cells (256). pTreg cells do not normally express TIM-3, however, TIM-3+ TI-Treg cells have been identified in the TME where they exert an inhibitory role against Teff cell responses mainly by driving their exhaustion (166–168, 257). This suggests a therapeutic advantage over other checkpoint receptors, such as CTLA-4 and PD-1, due to expression predominantly on TI-Treg cells. For CRC patients, the combination therapy anti-TIM-3 mAb and anti-PD-1 mAb has already been tested showing partial response (Table 2) (223). An ongoing Phase 1 clinical trial using a humanized anti-TIM-3 mAb (TSR-022) aims to evaluate first the dosage and, then, the anti-tumor capacity of the antibody in advanced solid tumors (NCT02817633). For CRC patients, anti-TIM-3 was administrated as monotherapy or in combination with an anti-PD-1 mAb, dostarlimab (TSR-042) (Table 2).
As already discussed, TI-Treg cells express high levels of CD39/CD73 ectonucleotidases that convert ATP to adenosine, a potent suppressor of tumor immunity (Figure 1f) (258). CD39+ TI-Treg cells have been found to play an important role during CRC tumor growth (150) and inhibition of CD39 enzymatic activity has been evaluated in a CRC hepatic-metastatic murine model. Here, CD39+ Treg cells modulate NK reactivity against the tumor, and targeting CD39 was found to both inhibit Treg cell activity in vitro and reduce tumor growth in vivo (259). Adoptive reconstitution of either wild-type or CD73-deficient Treg cells has been performed in Treg cell-depleted mice implanted with CRC-tumors. Only mice reconstituted with wild-type Treg cells effectively support tumor growth, suggesting a possible therapeutic benefit of targeting CD73-Treg cells (260).
CCR8 expression can discriminate between Treg cells infiltrating CRC and other solid tumors, from those found in secondary lymphoid organs (261). In solid tumors, CCR8 expressing cells migrate in response to CCL1 ligand secreted by cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), M2-polarized tumor-associated macrophages and Treg cells (262–264). Murine tumor models including colorectal adenocarcinoma have been used to evaluate the efficacy of targeting CCR8+ Treg cells in the TME. Administration of monoclonal antibodies targeting either the receptor or ligand reduces the number of TI-Treg cells without affecting the pTreg cells, reinforcing the anti-tumor immune response (265). CCR4+ TI-Treg cells also contribute to the CRCTME, and CCR4 expression is increased in TI-Treg cells compared to those of healthy colon tissue (266). Mogamulizumab is an anti-CCR4 mAb that has been used in clinical trials for the treatment of solid tumors with the aim of depleting TI-Treg cells. It has been evaluated as monotherapy (NCT01929486) or in combination with other targeted therapies such as anti-PD-1 mAb (nivolumab) (NCT02705105). Dose, safety, and efficacy for combination therapy has been assessed in 114 patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors, including 29 MSS-CRC patients. The result showed no enhanced efficacy of the combination therapy compared to monotherapy with nivolumab. In the case of the CRC patients, only one out of the 29 showed ORR, similar to previously reported results of single-nivolumab treatment where none responded (224). Further evaluation of chemotaxis receptor-targeting therapeutics may provide more selective therapeutic strategies avoiding targeting pTreg cells.
Other broader strategies effective in Treg cell depletion include drugs such as cyclophosphamide (CY). The administration of low-dose CY, a chemotherapeutic agent used to treat cancer, seems to predominantly affect Treg cells over other effector cells (Teff cells or NKs), as has been demonstrated in a variety of human cancers and animal models. Low-dose CY can lead to a reduction in Treg cell numbers, upregulation of pro-inflammatory cytokines, and boosts the innate antitumor immune response (267–270). In CRC murine and rat models, the efficacy of low-dose CY, inhibiting Treg cells, in combination treatment with mycobacterium bovis Bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG) has been evaluated. BCG has TLR-agonist activity and increases the capacity of DCs to mediate an efficient anti-tumor immune response. The combination therapy resulted in tumor regression with Treg cell depletion in the blood and lymphoid organs but also decreased the number of TI-Treg cells (271). The synergistic combination of IL-12 gene therapy in mice with subcutaneous CRC, pre-treated with low-dose CY, was found to induce a potent anti-tumor effect. Combined treatment reduced the number of MDSCs and increased the anti-tumor DC responses and the number of IFN-γ-secreting CD4+ T cells (272, 273). Depletion of Treg cells by low-dose CY also results in significant anti-tumor responses in advanced chemotherapy-resistant solid cancers (268). In a randomized clinical trial with inoperable metastatic CRC patients, low-dose CY treatment resulted in delayed tumor progression associated with an increase in IFNγ+ anti-tumor T-cell responses, and reduction of Treg cells, B cells, and NK cells (274, 275).
Refinement of combinational therapies targeting Treg cells while promoting anti-tumor immune responses is clearly a promising approach to treat CRC more effectively. However, it remains critical to consider CRC subtypes, and to specifically target TI-Treg cells, rather than systemically depleting all Treg or other Teff cells. These are issues that still require proper evaluation when considering new therapeutic strategies.
Future Directions
CRC FOXP3+ TI-Treg cells are a heterogeneous immune population with specific gene signatures and distinct functional properties. The phenotype and function of Treg cells are both modulated and exploited by the TME to promote immune evasion, tumor progression, and resulting in poor prognosis. Knowledge concerning Treg cell adaptation to the TME is invaluable in designing therapeutic strategies to target TI-Treg cells. However, it remains hard to specifically target Treg cells in the context of the TME. This is compounded by the difficulty of studying Treg biology in vivo or developing valid models for evaluating immune cell-TME interactions in vitro. Immunotherapy approaches can stimulate anti-tumor immune responses of effector cells or inhibit immunosuppressive mechanisms. Refinement of combinational therapies targeting Treg cells together with promoting Teff cell anti-tumor immune responses provides promising strategies to treat CRC more effectively. However, Treg cell-directed immunotherapy for CRC patients has several limitations. To start with, the different CRC molecular subtypes likely have a critical role in determining the success of certain therapeutic approaches. Due to CRC heterogeneity, treatment stratification to the tumor subtype will likely be required. Moreover, a better understanding of the (sub)phenotypes and functional diversity of CRC TI-Treg cells is still needed. This is essential to avoid compromising immune hemostasis and thereby developing unwanted side effects. Utilizing bivalent antibody approaches may help relieve the problem of specifically targeting only TI-Treg cells, as long as appropriate tumor markers are also available (276). Importantly, the expression of therapeutic targets on both TI-Treg cells and Teff cells does not necessarily prevent their application. Differential expression levels and dynamic expression profiles can still provide preferential Treg cell depletion in the context of the TME. Besides antibody-based immunotherapy approaches, the application of small molecule inhibitors remains an avenue of active exploration to disable TI-Treg cells. For example, FOXP3 protein stability is maintained by both active acetylation and deubiquitination, and inhibiting these processes effectively disables Treg cell function (277, 278). As already discussed, Treg cells can thrive in the altered metabolic environment of the TME. Increasing our understanding of the metabolic interactions between infiltrating T cells and tumor cells may help to expose an Achille’s heel that can be used to inhibit TI-Treg cell function more specifically. Combining such approaches with checkpoint inhibitor therapy may help drive the differentiation of anti-tumor effector T cells, at the expense of Treg cells, which are then free to reduce tumor progression. Similarly, understanding the contribution of epigenetic mechanisms to the control of Treg cell suppressive capacity is also relevant. Particularly as several small-molecule epigenetic modifiers are FDA approved and utilized in the clinic (279). Hypomethylating agents, inhibitors of histone deacetylases, and bromodomain inhibitors are all relevant in this context. For example, both the bromodomain inhibitor JQ1, and the HDAC6 inhibitor ricolinostat were found to attenuate Treg cell suppressive function, facilitate immune-mediated tumor growth arrest, and lead to prolonged survival of mice with lung adenocarcinomas (280).
Taken together, these studies further highlight the potential of not only targeting Treg cell markers but also Treg cell biology, in developing novel approaches to effectively re-activate anti-tumor immunity in CRC.
Funding
This work was supported by a Worldwide Cancer Research grant (Reference: 19-0371).
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.
Statements
Author contributions
SAR conceptualized, wrote, edited and approved the manuscript. PJC conceptualized, edited, and approved the manuscript. OK contributed to the revision and final approval of the manuscript.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank all members of the Coffer and Kranenberg labs for helpful discussions. All figures were created using BioRender.com.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
1
World Health Organization (WHO). International Agency for Research on Cancer. World. In: GLOBOCAN 2020. WHO Website (2021). https://gco.iarc.fr/today/data/factsheets/populations/900-world-fact-sheets.pdf\.
2
YamashitaKWatanabeM. Clinical Significance of Tumor Markers and an Emerging Perspective on Colorectal Cancer. Cancer Sci (2009) 100(2):195–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2008.01022.x
3
DuboisRN. Role of Inflammation and Inflammatory Mediators in Colorectal Cancer. Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc (2014) 125:358–73.
4
YamauchiMLochheadPMorikawaTHuttenhowerCChanATGiovannucciEet al. Colorectal Cancer: A Tale of Two Sides or a Continuum? Gut (2012) 61(6):794–7. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2012-302014
5
MarkowitzSDBertagnolliMM. Molecular Basis of Colorectal Cancer. N Engl J Med (2009) 361(25):2449–60. doi: 10.1056/nejmra0804588
6
PearlmanRFrankelWLSwansonBZhaoWYilmazAMillerKet al. Prevalence and Spectrum of Germline Cancer Susceptibility Gene Mutations Among Patients With Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer. JAMA Oncol (2017) 3(4):464–71. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.5194
7
StiglianoVSanchez-MeteLMartayanAAntiM. Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer: A Sporadic or Inherited Disease? World J Gastroenterol (2014) 20(35):12420–30. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i35.12420
8
JaspersonKWTuohyTMNeklasonDWBurtRW. Hereditary and Familial Colon Cancer. Gastroenterology (2010) 138(6):2044–58. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2010.01.054
9
GrivennikovSI. Inflammation and Colorectal Cancer: Colitis-Associated Neoplasia. Semin Immunopathol (2013) 35(2):229–44. doi: 10.1007/S00281-012-0352-6
10
SturlanSOberhuberGBeinhauerBGTichyBKappelSWangJet al. Interleukin-10-Deficient Mice and Inflammatory Bowel Disease Associated Cancer Development. Carcinogenesis (2001) 22(4):665–71. doi: 10.1093/carcin/22.4.665
11
TengMWLSwannJBKoebelCMSchreiberRDSmythMJ. Immune-Mediated Dormancy: An Equilibrium With Cancer. J Leukoc Biol (2008) 84(4):988–93. doi: 10.1189/JLB.1107774
12
HanahanDCoussensLM. Accessories to the Crime: Functions of Cells Recruited to the Tumor Microenvironment. Cancer Cell (2012) 21(3):309–22. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2012.02.022
13
QuailDFJoyceJA. Microenvironmental Regulation of Tumor Progression and Metastasis. Nat Med (2013) 19(11):1423–37. doi: 10.1038/nm.3394
14
JoyceJAPollardJW. Microenvironmental Regulation of Metastasis. Nat Rev Cancer (2009) 9(4):239–52. doi: 10.1038/nrc2618
15
MarkmanJLShiaoSL. Impact of the Immune System and Immunotherapy in Colorectal Cancer. J Gastrointest Oncol (2015) 6(2):208–23. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2078-6891.2014.077
16
LiottaLAKohnEC. The Microenvironment of the Tumour - Host Interface. Nature (2001) 411(6835):375–9. doi: 10.1038/35077241
17
LiMChaDJLaiYVillaruzAESturdevantDEOttoM. The Antimicrobial Peptide-Sensing System Aps of Staphylococcus Aureus. Mol Microbiol (2007) 66(5):1136–47. doi: 10.1111/J.1365-2958.2007.05986.X
18
GalonJCostesASanchez-CaboFKirilovskyAMlecnikBLagorce-PagèsCet al. Type, Density, and Location of Immune Cells Within Human Colorectal Tumors Predict Clinical Outcome. Sci (80-) (2006) 313(5795):1960–4. doi: 10.1126/science.1129139
19
GatenbeeCDBakerAMSchenckROStroblMWestJNevesMPet al. Immunosuppressive Niche Engineering at the Onset of Human Colorectal Cancer. Nat Commun (2022) 13(1):1798. doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-29027-8
20
BeckerWRNevinsSAChenDCChiuRHorningALaquindanumRet al. Single-Cell Analyses Reveal a Continuum of Cell State and Composition Changes in the Malignant Transformation of Polyps to Colorectal Cancer. bioRxiv (2021) 2021:3. doi: 10.1101/2021.03.24.436532
21
GalonJPagèsFMarincolaFMAngellHKThurinMLugliAet al. Cancer Classification Using the Immunoscore: A Worldwide Task Force. J Transl Med (2012) 10(1):1–10. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-10-205/FIGURES/2
22
BindeaGMlecnikBTosoliniMKirilovskyAWaldnerMObenaufACet al. Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Intratumoral Immune Cells Reveal the Immune Landscape in Human Cancer. Immunity (2013) 39(4):782–95. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2013.10.003
23
GuoLWangCQiuXPuXChangP. Colorectal Cancer Immune Infiltrates: Significance in Patient Prognosis and Immunotherapeutic Efficacy. Front Immunol (2020) 11:1052. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.01052
24
YangYLiCLiuTDaiXBazhinAV. Myeloid-Derived Suppressor Cells in Tumors: From Mechanisms to Antigen Specificity and Microenvironmental Regulation. Front Immunol (2020) 11:1371. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.01371
25
LiuSRenJten DijkeP. Targeting Tgfβ Signal Transduction for Cancer Therapy. Signal Transduct Target Ther (2021) 6(8):1–20. doi: 10.1038/s41392-020-00436-9
26
ChenJPitmonEWangK. Microbiome, Inflammation and Colorectal Cancer. Semin Immunol (2017) 32:43–53. doi: 10.1016/J.SMIM.2017.09.006
27
SatoEOlsonSHAhnJBundyBNishikawaHQianFet al. Intraepithelial CD8+ Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes and a High CD8+/regulatory T Cell Ratio are Associated With Favorable Prognosis in Ovarian Cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2005) 102(51):18538–43. doi: 10.1073/PNAS.0509182102
28
CurielTJCoukosGZouLAlvarezXChengPMottramPet al. Specific Recruitment of Regulatory T Cells in Ovarian Carcinoma Fosters Immune Privilege and Predicts Reduced Survival. Nat Med (2004) 10(9):942–9. doi: 10.1038/nm1093
29
YoonHHOrrockJMFosterNRSargentDJSmyrkTCSinicropeFA. Prognostic Impact of FoxP3+ Regulatory T Cells in Relation to CD8+ T Lymphocyte Density in Human Colon Carcinomas. PloS One (2012) 7(8):e42274. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0042274
30
DeLeeuwRJKostSEKakalJANelsonBH. The Prognostic Value of FoxP3+ Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes in Cancer: A Critical Review of the Literature. Clin Cancer Res (2012) 18(11):3022–9. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-3216
31
PhanVDisisML. Tumor Stromal Barriers to the Success of Adoptive T Cell Therapy. Cancer Immunol Immunother (2008) 57(2):281–3. doi: 10.1007/s00262-007-0356-6
32
PagèsFKirilovskyAMlecnikBAsslaberMTosoliniMBindeaGet al. In Situ Cytotoxic and Memory T Cells Predict Outcome in Patients With Early-Stage Colorectal Cancer. J Clin Oncol (2009) 27(35):5944–51. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.19.6147
33
ZitvogelLGalluzziLKeppOSmythMJKroemerG. Type I Interferons in Anticancer Immunity. Nat Rev Immunol (2015) 15(7):405–14. doi: 10.1038/nri3845
34
ChangLYLinYCMahalingamJHuangCTChenTWKangCWet al. Tumor-Derived Chemokine CCL5 Enhances TGF-β-Mediated Killing of CD8 + T Cells in Colon Cancer by T-Regulatory Cells. Cancer Res (2012) 72(5):1092–102. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-2493
35
CuiGShiYCuiJTangFFlorholmenJ. Immune Microenvironmental Shift Along Human Colorectal Adenoma-Carcinoma Sequence: Is it Relevant to Tumor Development, Biomarkers and Biotherapeutic Targets? Scand J Gastroenterol (2012) 47(4):367–77. doi: 10.3109/00365521.2011.648950
36
ChaputNLouafiSBardierACharlotteFVaillantJCFMénégauxet al. Identification of CD8 +CD25 +Foxp 3+ Suppressive T Cells in Colorectal Cancer Tissue. Gut (2009) 58(4):520–9. doi: 10.1136/gut.2008.158824
37
ClarkeSLBettsGJPlantAWrightKLEl-ShanawanyTMHarropRet al. CD4+CD25+FOXP3+ Regulatory T Cells Suppress Anti-Tumor Immune Responses in Patients With Colorectal Cancer. PloS One (2006) 1(1):e129. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000129
38
KatzSCBamboatZMMakerAVShiaJPillarisettyVGYoppACet al. Regulatory T Cell Infiltration Predicts Outcome Following Resection of Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases. Ann Surg Oncol (2013) 20(3):946–55. doi: 10.1245/s10434-012-2668-9
39
NagorsenDVoigtSBergESteinHThielELoddenkemperC. Tumor-Infiltrating Macrophages and Dendritic Cells in Human Colorectal Cancer: Relation to Local Regulatory T Cells, Systemic T-Cell Response Against Tumor-Associated Antigens and Survival. J Transl Med (2007) 5(1):1–8. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-5-62/FIGURES/2
40
BrudvikKWHenjumKAandahlEMBjørnbethBATaskénK. Regulatory T-Cell-Mediated Inhibition of Antitumor Immune Responses is Associated With Clinical Outcome in Patients With Liver Metastasis From Colorectal Cancer. Cancer Immunol Immunother (2012) 61(7):1045–53. doi: 10.1007/s00262-011-1174-4
41
SakaguchiSYamaguchiTNomuraTOnoM. Regulatory T Cells and Immune Tolerance. Cell. (2008) 133(5):775–87. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2008.05.009
42
OkekeEBUzonnaJE. The Pivotal Role of Regulatory T Cells in the Regulation of Innate Immune Cells. Front Immunol (2019) 10:680(APR). doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00680
43
ShevyrevDTereshchenkoV. Treg Heterogeneity, Function, and Homeostasis. Front Immunol (2020) 10:3100. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.03100
44
VignaliDAACollisonLWWorkmanCJ. How Regulatory T Cells Work. Nat Rev Immunol (2008) 8(7):523–32. doi: 10.1038/nri2343
45
BelkaidYRouseBT. Natural Regulatory T Cells in Infectious Disease. Nat Immunol (2005) 6(4):353–60. doi: 10.1038/ni1181
46
WangHYWangRF. Regulatory T Cells and Cancer. Curr Opin Immunol (2007) 19(2):217–23. doi: 10.1016/j.coi.2007.02.004
47
GershonRKKondoK. Cell Interactions in the Induction of Tolerance: The Role of Thymic Lymphocytes. Immunology (1970) 18(5):723–37.
48
SakaguchiSFukumaKKuribayashiKMasudaT. Organ-Specific Autoimmune Diseases Induced in Mice by Elimination of T Cell Subset. I. Evidence for the Active Participation of T Cells in Natural Self-Tolerance; Deficit of a T Cell Subset as a Possible Cause of Autoimmune Disease. J Exp Med (1985) 161(1):72–87. doi: 10.1084/JEM.161.1.72
49
MöllerG. Do Suppressor T Cells Exist? Scand J Immunol (1988) 27(3):247–50. doi: 10.1111/J.1365-3083.1988.TB02344.X
50
SakaguchiSSakaguchiNAsanoMItohMTodaM. Immunologic Self-Tolerance Maintained by Activated T Cells Expressing IL-2 Receptor Alpha-Chains (CD25). Breakdown of a Single Mechanism of Self-Tolerance Causes Various Autoimmune Diseases. J Immunol (1995) 155(3):1151–64.
51
AshwellJDRobbRJMalekTR. Proliferation of T Lymphocytes in Response to Interleukin 2 Varies With Their State of Activation. J Immunol (1986) 137(8):2572–8.
52
LenardoMJ. Lnterleukin-2 Programs Mouse αβ T Lymphocytes for Apoptosis. Nature. (1991) 353(6347):858–61. doi: 10.1038/353858a0
53
BrunkowMEJefferyEWHjerrildKAPaeperBClarkLBYasaykoSAet al. Disruption of a New Forkhead/Winged-Helix Protein, Scurfin, Results in the Fatal Lymphoproliferative Disorder of the Scurfy Mouse. Nat Genet (2001) 27(1):68–73. doi: 10.1038/83784
54
FontenotJDGavinMARudenskyAY. Foxp3 Programs the Development and Function of CD4+CD25+ Regulatory T Cells. J Immunol (2017) 198(3):986–92. doi: 10.1038/ni904
55
HoriSNomuraTSakaguchiS. Control of Regulatory T Cell Development by the Transcription Factor Foxp3. J Immunol (2017) 198(3):981–5. doi: 10.1126/science.1079490
56
KhattriRCoxTYasaykoSARamsdellF. An Essential Role for Scurfin in CD4+CD25+T Regulatory Cells. J Immunol (2017) 198(3):993–8. doi: 10.1038/ni909
57
FontenotJDRasmussenJPWilliamsLMDooleyJLFarrAGRudenskyAY. Regulatory T Cell Lineage Specification by the Forkhead Transcription Factor Foxp3. Immunity (2005) 22(3):329–41. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2005.01.016
58
JosefowiczSZLuLFRudenskyAY. Regulatory T Cells: Mechanisms of Differentiation and Function. Annu Rev Immunol (2012) 30:531–64. doi: 10.1146/annurev.immunol.25.022106.141623
59
RoncadorGBrownPJMaestreLHueSMartínez-TorrecuadradaJLLingKLet al. Analysis of FOXP3 Protein Expression in Human CD4+CD25+ Regulatory T Cells at the Single-Cell Level. Eur J Immunol (2005) 35(6):1681–91. doi: 10.1002/eji.200526189
60
GavinMATorgersonTRHoustonEDeRoosPHoWYStray-PedersenAet al. Single-Cell Analysis of Normal and FOXP3-Mutant Human T Cells: FOXP3 Expression Without Regulatory T Cell Development. Proc Natl Acad Sci (2006) 103(17):6659–64. doi: 10.1073/PNAS.0509484103
61
SakaguchiSMiyaraMCostantinoCMHaflerDA. FOXP3 + Regulatory T Cells in the Human Immune System. Nat Rev Immunol (2010) 10(7):490–500. doi: 10.1038/nri2785
62
KitagawaYOhkuraNKidaniYVandenbonAHirotaKKawakamiRet al. Guidance of Regulatory T Cell Development by Satb1-Dependent Super-Enhancer Establishment. Nat Immunol (2017) 18(2):173–83. doi: 10.1038/ni.3646
63
TogashiYNishikawaH. Regulatory T Cells: Molecular and Cellular Basis for Immunoregulation. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol (2017) 410:3–27. doi: 10.1007/82_2017_58
64
ChenWJJinWHardegenNLeiKJLiLMarinosNet al. Conversion of Peripheral CD4+CD25– Naive T Cells to CD4+CD25+ Regulatory T Cells by TGF-β Induction of Transcription Factor Foxp3. J Exp Med (2003) 198(12):1875–86. doi: 10.1084/JEM.20030152
65
ZhengSGWangJWangPGrayJDHorwitzDA. IL-2 Is Essential for TGF-β to Convert Naive CD4 + CD25 – Cells to CD25 + Foxp3 + Regulatory T Cells and for Expansion of These Cells. J Immunol (2007) 178(4):2018–27. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.4.2018
66
LathropSKBloomSMRaoSMNutschKLioCWSantacruzNet al. Peripheral Education of the Immune System by Colonic Commensal Microbiota. Nature (2011) 478(7368):250–4. doi: 10.1038/nature10434
67
YadavMStephanSBluestoneJA. Peripherally Induced Tregs-Role in Immune Homeostasis and Autoimmunity. Front Immunol (2013) 4:232. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2013.00232
68
ElkordE. Helios Should Not be Cited as a Marker of Human Thymus-Derived Tregs. Commentary: Helios+ and Helios- Cells Coexist Within the Natural FOXP3+ T Regulatory Cell Subset in Humans. Front Immunol (2016) 7:276. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2016.00276
69
YadavMLouvetCDaviniDGardnerJMMartinez-LlordellaMBailey-BucktroutSet al. Neuropilin-1 Distinguishes Natural and Inducible Regulatory T Cells Among Regulatory T Cell Subsets In Vivo. J Exp Med (2012) 209(10):1713–22. doi: 10.1084/JEM.20120822
70
WeissJMBilateAMGobertMDingYde LafailleMACParkhurstCNet al. Neuropilin 1 is Expressed on Thymus-Derived Natural Regulatory T Cells, But Not Mucosa-Generated Induced Foxp3+ T Reg Cells. J Exp Med (2012) 209(10):1723–42. doi: 10.1084/JEM.20120914
71
MiyaraMYoshiokaYKitohAShimaTWingKNiwaAet al. Functional Delineation and Differentiation Dynamics of Human CD4+ T Cells Expressing the FoxP3 Transcription Factor. Immunity. (2009) 30(6):899–911. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2009.03.019
72
TranDQRamseyHShevachEM. Induction of FOXP3 Expression in Naive Human CD4+FOXP3 - T Cells by T-Cell Receptor Stimulation is Transforming Growth Factor-β-Dependent But Does Not Confer a Regulatory Phenotype. Blood. (2007) 110(8):2983–90. doi: 10.1182/blood-2007-06-094656
73
SmigielKSRichardsESrivastavaSThomasKRDuddaJCKlonowskiKDet al. CCR7 Provides Localized Access to IL-2 and Defines Homeostatically Distinct Regulatory T Cell Subsets. J Exp Med (2014) 211(1):121–36. doi: 10.1084/jem.20131142
74
MiragaiaRJGomesTChomkaAJardineLRiedelAHegazyANet al. Single-Cell Transcriptomics of Regulatory T Cells Reveals Trajectories of Tissue Adaptation. Immunity. (2019) 50(2):493–504.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2019.01.001
75
PanduroMBenoistCMathisD. Tissue Tregs. Annu Rev Immunol (2016) 34:609–33. doi: 10.1146/annurev-immunol-032712-095948
76
KimHPLeonardWJ. CREB/ATF-Dependent T Cell Receptor-Induced FoxP3 Gene Expression: A Role for DNA Methylation. J Exp Med (2007) 204(7):1543–51. doi: 10.1084/jem.20070109
77
ZhengYJosefowiczSChaudhryAPengXPForbushKRudenskyAY. Role of Conserved non-Coding DNA Elements in the Foxp3 Gene in Regulatory T-Cell Fate. Nature. (2010) 463(7282):808–12. doi: 10.1038/nature08750
78
SchmidlCKlugMBoeldTJAndreesenRHoffmannPEdingerMet al. Lineage-Specific DNA Methylation in T Cells Correlates With Histone Methylation and Enhancer Activity. Genome Res (2009) 19(7):1165–74. doi: 10.1101/gr.091470.109
79
FengYArveyAChinenTvan der VeekenJGasteigerGRudenskyAY. Control of the Inheritance of Regulatory T Cell Identity by a Cis Element in the Foxp3 Locus. Cell. (2014) 158(4):749–63. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.07.031
80
YueXTrifariSÄijöTTsagaratouAPastorWAZepeda-MartínezJAet al. Control of Foxp3 Stability Through Modulation of TET Activity. J Exp Med (2016) 213(3):377–97. doi: 10.1084/JEM.20151438
81
YangRQuCZhouYKonkelJEShiSLiuYet al. Hydrogen Sulfide Promotes Tet1- and Tet2-Mediated Foxp3 Demethylation to Drive Regulatory T Cell Differentiation and Maintain Immune Homeostasis. Immunity. (2015) 43(2):251–63. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2015.07.017
82
YueXLioCWJSamaniego-CastruitaDLiXRaoA. Loss of TET2 and TET3 in Regulatory T Cells Unleashes Effector Function. Nat Commun (2019) 10(1):1–14. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-09541-y
83
ToneYFuruuchiKKojimaYTykocinskiMLGreeneMIToneM. Smad3 and NFAT Cooperate to Induce Foxp3 Expression Through its Enhancer. Nat Immunol (2008) 9(2):194–202. doi: 10.1038/ni1549
84
JosefowiczSZNiecREKimHYTreutingPChinenTZhengYet al. Extrathymically Generated Regulatory T Cells Control Mucosal T H 2 Inflammation. Nature. (2012) 482(7385):395–9. doi: 10.1038/nature10772
85
OhkuraNHamaguchiMMorikawaHSugimuraKTanakaAItoYet al. T Cell Receptor Stimulation-Induced Epigenetic Changes and Foxp3 Expression Are Independent and Complementary Events Required for Treg Cell Development. Immunity. (2012) 37(5):785–99. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2012.09.010
86
ZhaoHLiaoXKangY. Tregs: Where We are and What Comes Next? Front Immunol (2017) 8:1578. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01578
87
BollrathJPowrieFM. Controlling the Frontier: Regulatory T-Cells and Intestinal Homeostasis. Semin Immunol (2013) 25(5):352–7. doi: 10.1016/J.SMIM.2013.09.002
88
ListonAGrayDHD. Homeostatic Control of Regulatory T Cell Diversity. Nat Rev Immunol (2014) 14(3):154–65. doi: 10.1038/nri3605
89
HuehnJHamannA. Homing to Suppress: Address Codes for Treg Migration. Trends Immunol (2005) 26(12):632–6. doi: 10.1016/J.IT.2005.10.001
90
DelacherMImbuschCDWeichenhanDBreilingAHotz-WagenblattATrägerUet al. Genome-Wide DNA-Methylation Landscape Defines Specialization of Regulatory T Cells in Tissues. Nat Immunol (2017) 18(10):1160–72. doi: 10.1038/ni.3799
91
BurzynDKuswantoWKolodinDShadrachJLCerlettiMJangYet al. A Special Population of Regulatory T Cells Potentiates Muscle Repair. Cell (2013) 155(6):1282–95. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.10.054
92
KalekarLACohenJNPrevelNSandovalPMMathurANMoreauJMet al. Regulatory T Cells in Skin are Uniquely Poised to Suppress Profibrotic Immune Responses. Sci Immunol (2019) 4(39):eaaw2910. doi: 10.1126/SCIIMMUNOL.AAW2910
93
TanoueTAtarashiKHondaK. Development and Maintenance of Intestinal Regulatory T Cells. Nat Rev Immunol (2016) 16(5):295–309. doi: 10.1038/nri.2016.36
94
AtarashiKTanoueTShimaTImaokaAKuwaharaTMomoseYet al. Induction of Colonic Regulatory T Cells by Indigenous Clostridium Species. Science. (2011) 331(6015):337–41. doi: 10.1126/science.1198469
95
CebulaASewerynMRempalaGAPablaSSMcIndoeRADenningTLet al. Thymus-Derived Regulatory T Cells Contribute to Tolerance to Commensal Microbiota. Nature. (2013) 497(7448):258–62. doi: 10.1038/nature12079
96
SefikEGeva-ZatorskyNOhSKonnikovaLZemmourDMcGuireAMet al. Individual Intestinal Symbionts Induce a Distinct Population of Rorγ+ Regulatory T Cells. Science. (2015) 349(6251):993–7. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa9420
97
WohlfertEAGraingerJRBouladouxNKonkelJEOldenhoveGRibeiroCHet al. GATA3 Controls Foxp3+ Regulatory T Cell Fate During Inflammation in Mice. J Clin Invest. (2011) 121(11):4503–15. doi: 10.1172/JCI57456
98
SchieringCKrausgruberTChomkaAFröhlichAAdelmannKWohlfertEAet al. The Alarmin IL-33 Promotes Regulatory T-Cell Function in the Intestine. Nature. (2014) 513(7519):564–8. doi: 10.1038/nature13577
99
SiedeJFröhlichADatsiAHegazyANVargaDVHolecskaVet al. IL-33 Receptor-Expressing Regulatory T Cells are Highly Activated, Th2 Biased and Suppress CD4 T Cell Proliferation Through IL-10 and Tgfβ Release. PloS One (2016) 11(8):e0161507. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0161507
100
BitonMHaberALRogelNBurginGBeyazSSchnellAet al. T Helper Cell Cytokines Modulate Intestinal Stem Cell Renewal and Differentiation. Cell. (2018) 175(5):1307–20.e22. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2018.10.008
101
OhnmachtCParkJHCordingSWingJBAtarashiKObataYet al. The Microbiota Regulates Type 2 Immunity Through Rorγt+ T Cells. Science. (2015) 349(6251):989–93. doi: 10.1126/science.aac4263
102
GeukingMBCahenzliJLawsonMAENgDCKSlackEHapfelmeierSet al. Intestinal Bacterial Colonization Induces Mutualistic Regulatory T Cell Responses. Immunity (2011) 34(5):794–806. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2011.03.021
103
BhaumikSMickaelMEMoranMSpellMBasuR. Rorγt Promotes Foxp3 Expression by Antagonizing the Effector Program in Colonic Regulatory T Cells. J Immunol (2021) 207(8):2027–38. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.2100175
104
GrouxHO’GarraABiglerMRouleauMAntonenkoSDe VriesJEet al. A CD4+ T-Cell Subset Inhibits Antigen-Specific T-Cell Responses and Prevents Colitis. Nature (1997) 389(6652):737–42. doi: 10.1038/39614
105
QuandtJArnovitzSHaghiLWoehlkJMohsinAOkoreehMet al. Wnt–β-Catenin Activation Epigenetically Reprograms Treg Cells in Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Dysplastic Progression. Nat Immunol (2021) 22(4):471–84. doi: 10.1038/s41590-021-00889-2
106
BlatnerNRMulcahyMFDennisKLScholtensDBentremDJPhillipsJDet al. Expression of Rorγt Marks a Pathogenic Regulatory T Cell Subset in Human Colon Cancer. Sci Transl Med (2012) 4(164):164ra159. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3004566
107
FujimotoSGreeneMSehonAH. Immunosuppressor T Cells in Tumor Bearing Hosts. Immunol Invest (1975) 4(3):201–17. doi: 10.3109/08820137409055774
108
BerendtMJNorthRJ. T-Cell-Mediated Suppression of Anti-Tumor Immunity. An Explanation for Progressive Growth of an Immunogenic Tumor. J Exp Med (1980) 151(1):69–80. doi: 10.1084/jem.151.1.69
109
AwwadMNorthRJ. Immunologically Mediated Regression of a Murine Lymphoma After Treatment With Anti-L3T4 Antibody. A Consequence of Removing L3T4+ Suppressor T Cells From a Host Generating Predominantly Lyt-2+ T Cell-Mediated Immunity. J Exp Med (1988) 168(6):2193–206. doi: 10.1084/JEM.168.6.2193
110
OnizukaSTawaraIShimizuJSakaguchiSFujitaTNakayamaE. Tumor Rejection by In Vivo Administration of Anti-CD25 (Interleukin-2 Receptor α) Monoclonal Antibody. Cancer Res (1999) 59(13):3128–33.
111
KiyozumiYIwatsukiMYamashitaKKogaYYoshidaNBabaH. Update on Targeted Therapy and Immune Therapy for Gastric Cancer. J Cancer Metastasis Treat (2018) 4:31. doi: 10.20517/2394-4722.2017.77
112
ZhengCZhengLYooJKGuoHZhangYGuoXet al. Landscape of Infiltrating T Cells in Liver Cancer Revealed by Single-Cell Sequencing. Cell (2017) 169(7):1342–1356.e16. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.05.035
113
LoyherPLRochefortJBaudesson De ChanvilleCHamonPLescailleGBertolusCet al. CCR2 Influences T Regulatory Cell Migration to Tumors and Serves as a Biomarker of Cyclophosphamide Sensitivity. Cancer Res (2016) 76(22):6483–94. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-16-0984
114
YouYLiYLiMLeiMWuMQuYet al. Ovarian Cancer Stem Cells Promote Tumour Immune Privilege and Invasion via CCL5 and Regulatory T Cells. Clin Exp Immunol (2018) 191(1):60–73. doi: 10.1111/cei.13044
115
TangYXuXGuoSZhangCTangYTianYet al. An Increased Abundance of Tumor-Infiltrating Regulatory T Cells is Correlated With the Progression and Prognosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma. PloS One (2014) 9(3):e91551. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0091551
116
VenceLPaluckaAKFayJWItoTLiuYJBanchereauJet al. Circulating Tumor Antigen-Specific Regulatory T Cells in Patients With Metastatic Melanoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2007) 104(52):20884–9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0710557105
117
ShangBLiuYJiangSJLiuY. Prognostic Value of Tumor-Infiltrating FoxP3+ Regulatory T Cells in Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sci Rep (2015) 5:15179. doi: 10.1038/srep15179
118
NishikawaHSakaguchiS. Regulatory T Cells in Cancer Immunotherapy. Curr Opin Immunol (2014) 27(1):1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.coi.2013.12.005
119
SinicropeFARegoRLAnsellSMKnutsonKLFosterNRSargentDJ. Intraepithelial Effector (CD3+)/Regulatory (FoxP3+) T-Cell Ratio Predicts a Clinical Outcome of Human Colon Carcinoma. Gastroenterology (2009) 137(4):1270–9. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2009.06.053
120
SalamaPPhillipsMGrieuFMorrisMZepsNJosephDet al. Tumor-Infiltrating FOXP3+ T Regulatory Cells Show Strong Prognostic Significance in Colorectal Cancer. J Clin Oncol (2009) 27(2):186–92. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.7229
121
FreyDMDroeserRAViehlCTZlobecILugliAZinggUet al. High Frequency of Tumor-Infiltrating FOXP3+ Regulatory T Cells Predicts Improved Survival in Mismatch Repair-Proficient Colorectal Cancer Patients. Wiley Online Libr (2010) 126(11):2635–43. doi: 10.1002/ijc.24989
122
LadoireSMartinFGhiringhelliF. Prognostic Role of FOXP3+ Regulatory T Cells Infiltrating Human Carcinomas: The Paradox of Colorectal Cancer. Cancer Immunol Immunother. (2011) 60(7):909–18. doi: 10.1007/s00262-011-1046-y
123
SaitoTNishikawaHWadaHNaganoYSugiyamaDAtarashiKet al. Two FOXP3 + CD4 + T Cell Subpopulations Distinctly Control the Prognosis of Colorectal Cancers. Nat Med (2016) 22(6):679–84. doi: 10.1038/nm.4086
124
LoddenkemperCSchernusMNoutsiasMSteinHThielENagorsenD. In Situ Analysis of FOXP3+ Regulatory T Cells in Human Colorectal Cancer. J Transl Med (2006) 4(1):1–8. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-4-52/FIGURES/1
125
ValzasinaBPiconeseSGuiducciCColomboMP. Tumor-Induced Expansion of Regulatory T Cells by Conversion of CD4+CD25- Lymphocytes is Thymus and Proliferation Independent. Cancer Res (2006) 66(8):4488–95. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-4217
126
LiuVCWongLYJangTShahAHParkIYangXet al. Tumor Evasion of the Immune System by Converting CD4 + CD25 – T Cells Into CD4 + CD25 + T Regulatory Cells: Role of Tumor-Derived TGF-β. J Immunol (2007) 178(5):2883–92. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.5.2883
127
HindleyJPFerreiraCJonesELauderSNLadellKWynnKKet al. Analysis of the T-Cell Receptor Repertoires of Tumor-Infiltrating Conventional and Regulatory T Cells Reveals No Evidence for Conversion in Carcinogen-Induced Tumors. Cancer Res (2011) 71(3):736–46. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-1797
128
PlitasGKonopackiCWuKBosPDMorrowMPutintsevaEVet al. Regulatory T Cells Exhibit Distinct Features in Human Breast Cancer. Immunity (2016) 45(5):1122–34. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2016.10.032
129
Sainz-PerezALimALemercierBLeclercC. The T-Cell Receptor Repertoire of Tumor-Infiltrating Regulatory T Lymphocytes is Skewed Toward Public Sequences. Cancer Res (2012) 72(14):3557–69. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-0277
130
MarangoniFZhakypACorsiniMGeelsSNCarrizosaEThelenMet al. Expansion of Tumor-Associated Treg Cells Upon Disruption of a CTLA-4-Dependent Feedback Loop. Cell (2021) 184(15):3998–4015.e19. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2021.05.027
131
MalchowSLeventhalDSNishiSFischerBIShenLPanerGPet al. Aire-Dependent Thymic Development of Tumor-Associated Regulatory T Cells. Science. (2013) 339(6124):1219–24. doi: 10.1126/science.1233913
132
BonertzAWeitzJPietschDHKRahbariNNSchludeCGeYet al. Antigen-Specific Tregs Control T Cell Responses Against a Limited Repertoire of Tumor Antigens in Patients With Colorectal Carcinoma. J Clin Invest. (2009) 119(11):3311–21. doi: 10.1172/JCI39608
133
AhmadzadehMPasettoAJiaLDenigerDCStevanovićSRobbinsPFet al. Tumor-Infiltrating Human CD4+ Regulatory T Cells Display a Distinct TCR Repertoire and Exhibit Tumor and Neoantigen Reactivity. Sci Immunol (2019) 4:eaao4310. doi: 10.1126/SCIIMMUNOL.AAO4310
134
EhrlichMGama-SosaMAHuangLHMidgettRMKuoKCMccuneRAet al. Amount and Distribution of 5-Methylcytosine in Human DNA From Different Types of Tissues or Cells. Nucleic Acids Res (1982) 10(8):2709–21. doi: 10.1093/nar/10.8.2709
135
YangBHHagemannSMamareliPLauerUHoffmannUBeckstetteMet al. Foxp3(+) T Cells Expressing Rorγt Represent a Stable Regulatory T-Cell Effector Lineage With Enhanced Suppressive Capacity During Intestinal Inflammation. Mucosal Immunol (2016) 9(2):444–57. doi: 10.1038/MI.2015.74
136
MaHGaoWSunXWangW. STAT5 and TET2 Cooperate to Regulate FOXP3-TSDR Demethylation in CD4+ T Cells of Patients With Colorectal Cancer. J Immunol Res (2018) 2018:6985031. doi: 10.1155/2018/6985031
137
WieczorekGAsemissenAModelFTurbachovaIFloessSLiebenbergVet al. Quantitative DNA Methylation Analysis of FOXP3 as a New Method for Counting Regulatory T Cells in Peripheral Blood and Solid Tissue. Cancer Res (2009) 69(2):599–608. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-2361
138
ZhuoCLiZXuYWangYLiQPengJet al. Higher FOXP3-TSDR Demethylation Rates in Adjacent Normal Tissues in Patients With Colon Cancer Were Associated With Worse Survival. Mol Cancer (2014) 13:153. doi: 10.1186/1476-4598-13-153
139
PickupMNovitskiySMosesHL. The Roles of Tgfβ in the Tumour Microenvironment. Nat Rev Cancer (2013) 13(11):788–99. doi: 10.1038/nrc3603
140
TangSWangJYuS. IDO in Colorectal Tumorigenesis: Involvement of Immune Tolerance and Significance in Prevention and Therapy. Cmgh (2021) 12(4):1503–4. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmgh.2021.06.021
141
TakamatsuMHirataAOhtakiHHoshiMAndoTItoHet al. Inhibition of Indoleamine 2,3-Dioxygenase 1 Expression Alters Immune Response in Colon Tumor Microenvironment in Mice. Cancer Sci (2015) 106(8):1008–15. doi: 10.1111/cas.12705
142
JonuleitHSchmittEStassenMTuettenbergAKnopJEnkAH. Identification and Functional Characterization of Human CD4+CD25+ T Cells With Regulatory Properties Isolated From Peripheral Blood. J Exp Med (2001) 193(11):1285–94. doi: 10.1084/jem.193.11.1285
143
WardSTLiKKHepburnEWestonCJCurbishleySMReynoldsGMet al. The Effects of CCR5 Inhibition on Regulatory T-Cell Recruitment to Colorectal Cancer. Br J Cancer (2015) 112(2):319–28. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.572
144
WaniczekDLorencZŚnieturaMWeseckiMKopecAMuc-WierzgońM. Tumor-Associated Macrophages and Regulatory T Cells Infiltration and the Clinical Outcome in Colorectal Cancer. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz) (2017) 65(5):445–54. doi: 10.1007/s00005-017-0463-9
145
LiuJZhangNLiQZhangWKeFLengQet al. Tumor-Associated Macrophages Recruit CCR6+ Regulatory T Cells and Promote the Development of Colorectal Cancer via Enhancing CCL20 Production in Mice. PloS One (2011) 6(4):e19495. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0019495
146
KuroseKOhueYWadaHIidaSIshidaTKojimaTet al. Phase Ia Study of FoxP3+ CD4 Treg Depletion by Infusion of a Humanized Anti-CCR4 Antibody, KW-0761, in Cancer Patients. Clin Cancer Res (2015) 21(19):4327–36. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-0357
147
LeeGR. Phenotypic and Functional Properties of Tumor-Infiltrating Regulatory T Cells. Mediators Inflammation (2017) 2017:9. doi: 10.1155/2017/5458178
148
KhajaASSToorSMSalhatHEAliBRElkordE. Intratumoral FoxP3+Helios+ Regulatory T Cells Upregulating Immunosuppressive Molecules are Expanded in Human Colorectal Cancer. Front Immunol (2017) 8:619. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00619
149
StaggJSmythMJ. Extracellular Adenosine Triphosphate and Adenosine in Cancer. Oncogene (2010) 29(39):5346–58. doi: 10.1038/onc.2010.292
150
SzeponikLAhlmannerFSundströmPRodinWGustavssonBBexe LindskogEet al. Intratumoral Regulatory T Cells From Colon Cancer Patients Comprise Several Activated Effector Populations. BMC Immunol (2021) 22(1):1–12. doi: 10.1186/s12865-021-00449-1
151
MaCDongX. Colorectal Cancer-Derived Foxp3(+) IL-17(+) T Cells Suppress Tumour-Specific CD8+ T Cells. Scand J Immunol (2011) 74(1):47–51. doi: 10.1111/J.1365-3083.2011.02539.X
152
KryczekIWuKZhaoEWeiSVatanLSzeligaWet al. IL-17 + Regulatory T Cells in the Microenvironments of Chronic Inflammation and Cancer. J Immunol (2011) 186(7):4388–95. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1003251
153
Downs-CannerSBerkeySDelgoffeGMEdwardsRPCurielTOdunsiKet al. Suppressive IL-17a+ Foxp3+ and Ex-Th17 IL-17aneg Foxp3+ Treg Cells are a Source of Tumour-Associated Treg Cells. Nat Commun (2017) 8:14649. doi: 10.1038/ncomms14649
154
GounarisEBlatnerNRDennisKMagnussonFGurishMFStromTBet al. T-Regulatory Cells Shift From a Protective Anti-Inflammatory to a Cancer-Promoting Proinflammatory Phenotype in Polyposis. Cancer Res (2009) 69(13):5490–7. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-09-0304
155
BlatnerNRBonertzA-DBeckhovePCheonECKrantzSStrouchMet al. In Colorectal Cancer Mast Cells Contribute to Systemic Regulatory T-Cell Dysfunction. Natl Acad Sci (2010) 107(27):12405. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0913683107
156
KeerthivasanSAghajaniKDoseMMolineroLKhanMWVenkateswaranVet al. β-Catenin Promotes Colitis and Colon Cancer Through Imprinting of Proinflammatory Properties in T Cells. Sci Transl Med (2014) 6(225):225ra28. doi: 10.1126/SCITRANSLMED.3007607
157
CanèSBronteV. Wnt–β-Catenin as an Epigenetic Switcher in Colonic Treg Cells. Nat Immunol (2021) 22(4):400–1. doi: 10.1038/s41590-021-00904-6
158
OsmanAYanBLiYPavelkoKDQuandtJSaadallaAet al. TCF-1 Controls T Reg Cell Functions That Regulate Inflammation, CD8 + T Cell Cytotoxicity and Severity of Colon Cancer. Nat Immunol (2021) 22(9):1152–62. doi: 10.1038/S41590-021-00987-1
159
RizzoADiGMStolfiCFranzeEFehlingHJCarsettiRet al. RORGT-Expressing Tregs Drive the Growth of Colitis-Associated Colorectal Cancer by Controlling IL6 in Dendritic Cells. Cancer Immunol Res (2018) 6(9):1082–92. doi: 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-17-0698
160
Sasidharan NairVToorSMTahaRZShaathHElkordE. DNA Methylation and Repressive Histones in the Promoters of PD-1, CTLA-4, TIM-3, LAG-3, TIGIT, PD-L1, and Galectin-9 Genes in Human Colorectal Cancer. Clin Epigenetics (2018) 10(1):1–9. doi: 10.1186/s13148-018-0539-3
161
ElashiAASasidharan NairVTahaRZShaathHElkordE. DNA Methylation of Immune Checkpoints in the Peripheral Blood of Breast and Colorectal Cancer Patients. Oncoimmunology (2019) 8(2):e1542918. doi: 10.1080/2162402X.2018.1542918
162
NortonSEWard-HartstongeKAMcCallJLLemanJKHTaylorESMunroFet al. High-Dimensional Mass Cytometric Analysis Reveals an Increase in Effector Regulatory T Cells as a Distinguishing Feature of Colorectal Tumors. J Immunol (2019) 202(6):1871–84. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1801368
163
Ward-HartstongeKAMcCallJLMcCullochTRKampsAKGirardinACretneyEet al. Inclusion of BLIMP-1+ Effector Regulatory T Cells Improves the Immunoscore in a Cohort of New Zealand Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Pilot Study. Cancer Immunol Immunother (2017) 66(4):515–22. doi: 10.1007/s00262-016-1951-1
164
AndersonACJollerNKuchrooVK. Lag-3, Tim-3, and TIGIT: Co-Inhibitory Receptors With Specialized Functions in Immune Regulation. Immunity (2016) 44(5):989–1004. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2016.05.001
165
CamisaschiCCasatiCRiniFPeregoMDe FilippoATriebelFet al. LAG-3 Expression Defines a Subset of CD4 + CD25 High Foxp3 + Regulatory T Cells That Are Expanded at Tumor Sites. J Immunol (2010) 184(11):6545–51. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.0903879
166
YanJZhangYZhangJPLiangJLiLZhengL. Tim-3 Expression Defines Regulatory T Cells in Human Tumors. PloS One (2013) 8(3):e58006. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058006
167
DasMZhuCKuchrooVK. Tim-3 and its Role in Regulating Anti-Tumor Immunity. Immunol Rev (2017) 276(1):97–111. doi: 10.1111/imr.12520
168
SakuishiKNgiowSFSullivanJMTengMWLKuchrooVKSmythMJet al. TIM3+FOXP3+ Regulatory T Cells are Tissue-Specific Promoters of T-Cell Dysfunction in Cancer. Oncoimmunology. (2013) 2(4):e23849. doi: 10.4161/onci.23849
169
GautronASDominguez-VillarMde MarckenMHaflerDA. Enhanced Suppressor Function of TIM-3+FoxP3+ Regulatory T Cells. Eur J Immunol (2014) 44(9):2703–11. doi: 10.1002/eji.201344392
170
BanerjeeHNieves-RosadoHKulkarniAMurterBMcGrathKVChandranURet al. Expression of Tim-3 Drives Phenotypic and Functional Changes in Treg Cells in Secondary Lymphoid Organs and the Tumor Microenvironment. Cell Rep (2021) 36(11):109699. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2021.109699
171
MaQLiuJWuGTengMWangSCuiMet al. Co-Expression of LAG3 and TIM3 Identifies a Potent Treg Population That Suppresses Macrophage Functions in Colorectal Cancer Patients. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol (2018) 45(10):1002–9. doi: 10.1111/1440-1681.12992
172
SawantDVHamiltonKVignaliDAA. Interleukin-35: Expanding Its Job Profile. J Interf Cytokine Res (2015) 35(7):499–512. doi: 10.1089/jir.2015.0015
173
MaYChenLXieGZhouYYueCYuanXet al. Elevated Level of Interleukin-35 in Colorectal Cancer Induces Conversion of T Cells Into Itr35 by Activating STAT1/STAT3. Oncotarget. (2016) 7(45):73003–15. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.12193
174
CollisonLWChaturvediVHendersonALGiacominPRGuyCBankotiJet al. IL-35-Mediated Induction of a Potent Regulatory T Cell Population. Nat Immunol (2010) 11(12):1093–101. doi: 10.1038/ni.1952
175
CollisonLWDelgoffeGMGuyCSVignaliKMChaturvediVFairweatherDet al. The Composition and Signaling of the IL-35 Receptor are Unconventional. Nat Immunol (2012) 13(3):290–9. doi: 10.1038/ni.2227
176
CollisonLWWorkmanCJKuoTTBoydKWangYVignaliKMet al. The Inhibitory Cytokine IL-35 Contributes to Regulatory T-Cell Function. Nature. (2007) 450(7169):566–9. doi: 10.1038/nature06306
177
OidaTZhangXGotoMHachimuraSTotsukaMKaminogawaSet al. CD4 + CD25 – T Cells That Express Latency-Associated Peptide on the Surface Suppress CD4 + CD45RB High -Induced Colitis by a TGF-β-Dependent Mechanism. J Immunol (2003) 170(5):2516–22. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.170.5.2516
178
MahalingamJLinCYChiangJMSuPJChuYYLaiHYet al. CD4+ T Cells Expressing Latency-Associated Peptide and Foxp3 Are an Activated Subgroup of Regulatory T Cells Enriched in Patients With Colorectal Cancer. PloS One (2014) 9(9):e108554. doi: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0108554
179
ZhongWJiangZYZhangLHuangJHWangSJLiaoCet al. Role of LAP+CD4+ T Cells in the Tumor Microenvironment of Colorectal Cancer. World J Gastroenterol (2017) 23(3):455. doi: 10.3748/WJG.V23.I3.455
180
SatohKSaitohKKojimaYKushidaYDesigned Research, TS. Global Metabolic Reprogramming of Colorectal Cancer Occurs at Adenoma Stage and is Induced by MYC. Natl Acad Sci (2017) 114(37):E7697–706. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1710366114
181
La VecchiaSSebastiánC. Metabolic Pathways Regulating Colorectal Cancer Initiation and Progression. Semin Cell Dev Biol (2020) 98:63–70. doi: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2019.05.018
182
PavlovaNNThompsonCB. The Emerging Hallmarks of Cancer Metabolism. Cell Metab (2016) 23(1):27–47. doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2015.12.006
183
BensardCLWisidagamaDROlsonKABergJAKrahNMSchellJCet al. Regulation of Tumor Initiation by the Mitochondrial Pyruvate Carrier. Cell Metab (2020) 31(2):284–300.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2019.11.002
184
KisielowP. How Does the Immune System Learn to Distinguish Between Good and Evil? The First Definitive Studies of T Cell Central Tolerance and Positive Selection. Immunogenetics (2019) 71(8–9):513–8. doi: 10.1007/s00251-019-01127-8
185
AngelinAGil-de-GómezLDahiyaSJiaoJGuoLLevineMHet al. Foxp3 Reprograms T Cell Metabolism to Function in Low-Glucose, High-Lactate Environments. Cell Metab (2017) 25(6):1282–1293.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2016.12.018
186
MichalekRDGerrietsVAJacobsSRMacintyreANMacIverNJMasonEFet al. Cutting Edge: Distinct Glycolytic and Lipid Oxidative Metabolic Programs Are Essential for Effector and Regulatory CD4 + T Cell Subsets. J Immunol (2011) 186(6):3299–303. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1003613
187
DingCShanZLiMChenHLiXJinZ. Characterization of the Fatty Acid Metabolism in Colorectal Cancer to Guide Clinical Therapy. Mol Ther - Oncolytics. (2021) 20:532–44. doi: 10.1016/J.OMTO.2021.02.010
188
PacellaIProcacciniCFocaccettiCMiacciSTimperiEFaicchiaDet al. Fatty Acid Metabolism Complements Glycolysis in Th Selective Regulatory T Cell Expansion During Tumor Growth. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. (2018) 115(28):E6546–55. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1720113115
189
FieldCSBaixauliFKyleRLPulestonDJCameronAMSaninDEet al. Mitochondrial Integrity Regulated by Lipid Metabolism Is a Cell-Intrinsic Checkpoint for Treg Suppressive Function. Cell Metab (2020) 31(2):422–437.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2019.11.021
190
WatsonMLJVignaliPDAMullettSJOveracre-DelgoffeAEPeraltaRMGrebinoskiSet al. Metabolic Support of Tumour-Infiltrating Regulatory T Cells by Lactic Acid. Nature. (2021) 591(7851):645–51. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-03045-2
191
ZappasodiRSerganovaICohenIJMaedaMShindoMSenbabaogluYet al. CTLA-4 Blockade Drives Loss of Treg Stability in Glycolysis-Low Tumours. Nature. (2021) 591(7851):652–8. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03326-4
192
LimSAWeiJNguyenTLMShiHSuWPalaciosGet al. Lipid Signalling Enforces Functional Specialization of Treg Cells in Tumours. Nature. (2021) 591(7849):306–11. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03235-6
193
PatsoukisNBardhanKChatterjeePSariDLiuBBellLNet al. PD-1 Alters T-Cell Metabolic Reprogramming by Inhibiting Glycolysis and Promoting Lipolysis and Fatty Acid Oxidation. Nat Commun (2015) 6:6692. doi: 10.1038/ncomms7692
194
WangHFrancoFTsuiYCXieXTrefnyMPZappasodiRet al. CD36-Mediated Metabolic Adaptation Supports Regulatory T Cell Survival and Function in Tumors. Nat Immunol (2020) 21(3):298–308. doi: 10.1038/s41590-019-0589-5
195
HowieDCobboldSPAdamsETenBAASNZhangWet al. Foxp3 Drives Oxidative Phosphorylation and Protection From Lipotoxicity. JCI Insight (2017) 2(3):e89160. doi: 10.1172/jci.insight.89160
196
ZengHYangKCloerCNealeGVogelPChiH. MTORC1 Couples Immune Signals and Metabolic Programming to Establish T Reg-Cell Function. Nature. (2013) 499(7459):485–90. doi: 10.1038/nature12297
197
ShiHChapmanNMWenJGuyCLongLDhunganaYet al. Amino Acids License Kinase Mtorc1 Activity and Treg Cell Function via Small G Proteins Rag and Rheb. Immunity. (2019) 51(6):1012–1027.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2019.10.001
198
KlyszDTaiXRobertPACraveiroMCretenetGOburogluLet al. Glutamine-Dependent α-Ketoglutarate Production Regulates the Balance Between T Helper 1 Cell and Regulatory T Cell Generation. Sci Signal (2015) 8(396):ra97. doi: 10.1126/SCISIGNAL.AAB2610
199
AraujoLKhimPMkhikianHMortalesCLDemetriouM. Glycolysis and Glutaminolysis Cooperatively Control T Cell Function by Limiting Metabolite Supply to N-Glycosylation. Elife. (2017) 6:e21330. doi: 10.7554/eLife.21330
200
FallarinoFGrohmannUYouSMcGrathBCCavenerDRVaccaCet al. The Combined Effects of Tryptophan Starvation and Tryptophan Catabolites Down-Regulate T Cell Receptor ζ-Chain and Induce a Regulatory Phenotype in Naive T Cells. J Immunol (2006) 176(11):6752–61. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.176.11.6752
201
MunnDHSharmaMDBabanBHardingHPZhangYRonDet al. GCN2 Kinase in T Cells Mediates Proliferative Arrest and Anergy Induction in Response to Indoleamine 2,3-Dioxygenase. Immunity. (2005) 22(5):633–42. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2005.03.013
202
ChenWLiangXPetersonAJMunnDHBlazarBR. The Indoleamine 2,3-Dioxygenase Pathway Is Essential for Human Plasmacytoid Dendritic Cell-Induced Adaptive T Regulatory Cell Generation. J Immunol (2008) 181(8):5396–404. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.181.8.5396
203
SharmaMDBabanBChandlerPHouDYSinghNYagitaHet al. Plasmacytoid Dendritic Cells From Mouse Tumor-Draining Lymph Nodes Directly Activate Mature Tregs via Indoleamine 2,3-Dioxygenase. J Clin Invest. (2007) 117(9):2570–82. doi: 10.1172/JCI31911
204
BabanBChandlerPRSharmaMDPihkalaJKoniPAMunnDHet al. IDO Activates Regulatory T Cells and Blocks Their Conversion Into Th17-Like T Cells. J Immunol (2009) 183(4):2475–83. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.0900986
205
YuJSunJWangSELiHCaoSCongYet al. Upregulated Expression of Indoleamine 2, 3-Dioxygenase in Primary Breast Cancer Correlates With Increase of Infiltrated Regulatory T Cells in Situ and Lymph Node Metastasis. Clin Dev Immunol (2011) 2011:469135. doi: 10.1155/2011/469135
206
BrandacherGPerathonerALadurnerRSchneebergerSObristPWinklerCet al. Prognostic Value of Indoleamine 2,3-Dioxygenase Expression in Colorectal Cancer: Effect on Tumor-Infiltrating T Cells. Clin Cancer Res (2006) 12(4):1144–51. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-1966
207
CoombesJLSiddiquiKRRArancibia-CárcamoCVHallJSunCMBelkaidYet al. A Functionally Specialized Population of Mucosal CD103+ DCs Induces Foxp3+ Regulatory T Cells via a TGF-β -and Retinoic Acid-Dependent Mechanism. J Exp Med (2007) 204(8):1757–64. doi: 10.1084/jem.20070590
208
SunCMHallJABlankRBBouladouxNOukkaMMoraJRet al. Small Intestine Lamina Propria Dendritic Cells Promote De Novo Generation of Foxp3 T Reg Cells via Retinoic Acid. J Exp Med (2007) 204(8):1775–85. doi: 10.1084/jem.20070602
209
BhattacharyaNYuanRPrestwoodTRPennyHLDiMaioMAReticker-FlynnNEet al. Normalizing Microbiota-Induced Retinoic Acid Deficiency Stimulates Protective CD8+ T Cell-Mediated Immunity in Colorectal Cancer. Immunity. (2016) 45(3):641–55. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2016.08.008
210
NaganumaMWiznerowiczEBLappasCMLindenJWorthingtonMTErnstPB. Cutting Edge: Critical Role for A 2a Adenosine Receptors in the T Cell-Mediated Regulation of Colitis. J Immunol (2006) 177(5):2765–9. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.177.5.2765
211
ZarekPEHuangCTLutzERKowalskiJHortonMRLindenJet al. A2A Receptor Signaling Promotes Peripheral Tolerance by Inducing T-Cell Anergy and the Generation of Adaptive Regulatory T Cells. Blood. (2008) 111(1):251–9. doi: 10.1182/blood-2007-03-081646
212
OvermanMJMcDermottRLeachJLLonardiSLenzHJMorseMAet al. Nivolumab in Patients With Metastatic DNA Mismatch Repair-Deficient or Microsatellite Instability-High Colorectal Cancer (CheckMate 142): An Open-Label, Multicentre, Phase 2 Study. Lancet Oncol (2017) 18(9):1182–91. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30422-9
213
KhanSBurtDJRalphCThistlethwaiteFCHawkinsREElkordE. Tremelimumab (Anti-CTLA4) Mediates Immune Responses Mainly by Direct Activation of T Effector Cells Rather Than by Affecting T Regulatory Cells. Clin Immunol (2011) 138(1):85–96. doi: 10.1016/j.clim.2010.09.011
214
El-KhoueiryABSangroBYauTCrocenziTSKudoMHsuCet al. Nivolumab in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma (CheckMate 040): An Open-Label, non-Comparative, Phase 1/2 Dose Escalation and Expansion Trial. Lancet. (2017) 389(10088):2492–502. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31046-2
215
LeDTDurhamJNSmithKNWangHBartlettBRAulakhLKet al. Mismatch Repair Deficiency Predicts Response of Solid Tumors to PD-1 Blockade. Science. (2017) 357(6349):409–13. doi: 10.1126/science.aan6733
216
FerrisRLBlumenscheinGFayetteJGuigayJColevasADLicitraLet al. Nivolumab for Recurrent Squamous-Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck. N Engl J Med (2016) 375(19):1856–67. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1602252
217
JiaoQRenYAriston GabrieANWangQWangYDuLet al. Advances of Immune Checkpoints in Colorectal Cancer Treatment. BioMed Pharmacother. (2020) 123:109745. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2019.109745
218
LeDTUramJNWangHBartlettBRKemberlingHEyringADet al. PD-1 Blockade in Tumors With Mismatch-Repair Deficiency. N Engl J Med (2015) 372(26):2509–20. doi: 10.1056/NEJMOA1500596
219
BrahmerJRDrakeCGWollnerIPowderlyJDPicusJSharfmanWHet al. Phase I Study of Single-Agent Anti-Programmed Death-1 (MDX-1106) in Refractory Solid Tumors: Safety, Clinical Activity, Pharmacodynamics, and Immunologic Correlates. J Clin Oncol (2010) 28(19):3167–75. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.26.7609
220
OvermanMJLonardiSWongKYMLenzHJGelsominoFAgliettaMet al. Durable Clinical Benefit With Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in DNA Mismatch Repair-Deficient/Microsatellite Instability-High Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. J Clin Oncol (2018) 36(8):773–9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.76.9901
221
ChungKYGoreIFongLVenookABeckSBDorazioPet al. Phase II Study of the Anti-Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte-Associated Antigen 4 Monoclonal Antibody, Tremelimumab, in Patients With Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. J Clin Oncol (2010) 28(21):3485–90. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.28.3994
222
ChenEXJonkerDJLoreeJMKenneckeHFBerrySRCoutureFet al. Effect of Combined Immune Checkpoint Inhibition vs Best Supportive Care Alone in Patients With Advanced Colorectal Cancer: The Canadian Cancer Trials Group Co. 26 Study. JAMA Oncol (2020) 6(6):831–8. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.0910
223
CuriglianoGGelderblomHMachNDoiTTaiWMDFordePet al. Abstract CT183: Phase (Ph) I/II Study of MBG453± Spartalizumab (PDR001) in Patients (Pts) With Advanced Malignancies. Cancer Res (2019) 79(13_Supplement):CT183–3. doi: 10.1158/1538-7445.am2019-ct183
224
HongDSRixeOChiuVKFordePMDragovichTLouYet al. Mogamulizumab in Combination With Nivolumab in a Phase I/II Study of Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Solid Tumors. Clin Cancer Res (2022) 28(3):479–88. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-2781
225
FujimotoHSaitoYOhuchidaKKawakamiEFujikiSWatanabeTet al. Deregulated Mucosal Immune Surveillance Through Gut-Associated Regulatory T Cells and PD-1 + T Cells in Human Colorectal Cancer. J Immunol (2018) 200(9):3291–303. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1701222
226
FreemanGJLongAJIwaiYBourqueKChernovaTNishimuraHet al. Engagement of the Pd-1 Immunoinhibitory Receptor by a Novel B7 Family Member Leads to Negative Regulation of Lymphocyte Activation. J Exp Med (2000) 192(7):1027–34. doi: 10.1084/JEM.192.7.1027
227
PatsoukisNWangQStraussLBoussiotisVA. Revisiting the PD-1 Pathway. Sci Adv (2020) 6(38):eabd2712. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abd2712
228
NaZYeoSPBharathSRBowlerMWBalikçiEWangCIet al. Structural Basis for Blocking PD-1-Mediated Immune Suppression by Therapeutic Antibody Pembrolizumab. Cell Res (2017) 27(1):147–50. doi: 10.1038/cr.2016.77
229
KumagaiSTogashiYKamadaTSugiyamaENishinakamuraHTakeuchiYet al. The PD-1 Expression Balance Between Effector and Regulatory T Cells Predicts the Clinical Efficacy of PD-1 Blockade Therapies. Nat Immunol (2020) 21(11):1346–58. doi: 10.1038/s41590-020-0769-3
230
WalkerLSKSansomDM. The Emerging Role of CTLA4 as a Cell-Extrinsic Regulator of T Cell Responses. Nat Rev Immunol (2011) 11(12):852–63. doi: 10.1038/nri3108
231
MarcusLLemerySJKeeganPPazdurR. FDA Approval Summary: Pembrolizumab for the Treatment of Microsatellite Instability-High Solid Tumors. Clin Cancer Res (2019) 25(13):3753–8. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-4070
232
LuteKDMayKFLuPZhangHKocakEMosingerBet al. Human CTLA4 Knock-in Mice Unravel the Quantitative Link Between Tumor Immunity and Autoimmunity Induced by Anti-CTLA-4 Antibodies. Blood. (2005) 106(9):3127–33. doi: 10.1182/blood-2005-06-2298
233
AsciertoPAMarincolaFMRibasA. Anti-CTLA4 Monoclonal Antibodies: The Past and the Future in Clinical Application. J Transl Med (2011) 9(1):196. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-9-196
234
SimpsonTRLiFMontalvo-OrtizWSepulvedaMABergerhoffKArceFet al. Fc-Dependent Depletion of Tumor-Infiltrating Regulatory T Cells Co-Defines the Efficacy of Anti-CTLA-4 Therapy Against Melanoma. J Exp Med (2013) 210(9):1695–710. doi: 10.1084/jem.20130579
235
HoosAIbrahimRKormanAAbdallahKBermanDShahabiVet al. Development of Ipilimumab: Contribution to a New Paradigm for Cancer Immunotherapy. Semin Oncol (2010) 37(5):533–46. doi: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2010.09.015
236
WingKOnishiYPrieto-MartinPYamaguchiTMiyaraMFehervariZet al. CTLA-4 Control Over Foxp3+ Regulatory T Cell Function. Science. (2008) 322(5899):271–5. doi: 10.1126/science.1160062
237
TangFDuXLiuMZhengPLiuY. Anti-CTLA-4 Antibodies in Cancer Immunotherapy: Selective Depletion of Intratumoral Regulatory T Cells or Checkpoint Blockade? Cell Biosci (2018) 8:30. doi: 10.1186/s13578-018-0229-z
238
SelbyMJEngelhardtJJQuigleyMHenningKAChenTSrinivasanMet al. Anti-CTLA-4 Antibodies of IgG2a Isotype Enhance Antitumor Activity Through Reduction of Intratumoral Regulatory T Cells. Cancer Immunol Res (2013) 1(1):32–42. doi: 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-13-0013
239
BulliardYJolicoeurRWindmanMRueSMEttenbergSKneeDAet al. Activating Fc γ Receptors Contribute to the Antitumor Activities of Immunoregulatory Receptor-Targeting Antibodies. J Exp Med (2013) 210(9):1685–93. doi: 10.1084/jem.20130573
240
QureshiOSZhengYNakamuraKAttridgeKManzottiCSchmidtEMet al. Trans-Endocytosis of CD80 and CD86: A Molecular Basis for the Cell-Extrinsic Function of CTLA-4. Science. (2011) 332(6029):600–3. doi: 10.1126/science.1202947
241
VargasFAFurnessAJSLitchfieldKJoshiKRosenthalRGhoraniEet al. Fc Effector Function Contributes to the Activity of Human Anti-CTLA-4 Antibodies. Cancer Cell (2018) 33(4):649–663.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2018.02.010
242
QuezadaSAPeggsKSCurranMAAllisonJP. CTLA4 Blockade and GM-CSF Combination Immunotherapy Alters the Intratumor Balance of Effector and Regulatory T Cells. J Clin Invest. (2006) 116(7):1935–45. doi: 10.1172/JCI27745
243
KavanaghBO’BrienSLeeDHouYWeinbergVRiniBet al. CTLA4 Blockade Expands FoxP3+ Regulatory and Activated Effector CD4 + T Cells in a Dose-Dependent Fashion. Blood. (2008) 112(4):1175–83. doi: 10.1182/blood-2007-11-125435
244
ZhouEHuangQWangJFangCYangLZhuMet al. Up-Regulation of Tim-3 is Associated With Poor Prognosis of Patients With Colon Cancer. Int J Clin Exp Pathol (2015) 8(7):8018–27.
245
YuXHuangXChenXLiuJWuCPuQet al. Characterization of a Novel Anti-Human Lymphocyte Activation Gene 3 (LAG-3) Antibody for Cancer Immunotherapy. MAbs. (2019) 11(6):1139–48. doi: 10.1080/19420862.2019.1629239
246
YuXHardenKGonzalezLCFrancescoMChiangEIrvingBet al. The Surface Protein TIGIT Suppresses T Cell Activation by Promoting the Generation of Mature Immunoregulatory Dendritic Cells. Nat Immunol (2009) 10(1):48–57. doi: 10.1038/ni.1674
247
LevinSDTaftDWBrandtCSBucherCHowardEDChadwickEMet al. Vstm3 is a Member of the CD28 Family and an Important Modulator of T-Cell Function. Eur J Immunol (2011) 41(4):902–15. doi: 10.1002/eji.201041136
248
JohnstonRJComps-AgrarLHackneyJYuXHuseniMYangYet al. The Immunoreceptor TIGIT Regulates Antitumor and Antiviral CD8+ T Cell Effector Function. Cancer Cell (2014) 26(6):923–37. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2014.10.018
249
TriebelFJitsukawaSBaixerasERoman-RomanSGeneveeCViegas-PequignotEet al. LAG-3, a Novel Lymphocyte Activation Gene Closely Related to CD4. J Exp Med (1990) 171(5):1393–405. doi: 10.1084/JEM.171.5.1393
250
HuangCTWorkmanCJFliesDPanXMarsonALZhouGet al. Role of LAG-3 in Regulatory T Cells. Immunity. (2004) 21(4):503–13. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2004.08.010
251
HuardBTournierMTriebelF. LAG-3 Does Not Define a Specific Mode of Natural Killing in Human. Immunol Lett (1998) 61(2–3):109–12. doi: 10.1016/S0165-2478(97)00170-3
252
KisielowMKisielowJCapoferri-SollamiGKarjalainenK. Expression of Lymphocyte Activation Gene 3 (LAG-3) on B Cells is Induced by T Cells. Eur J Immunol (2005) 35(7):2081–8. doi: 10.1002/eji.200526090
253
AndreaeSPirasFBurdinNTriebelF. Maturation and Activation of Dendritic Cells Induced by Lymphocyte Activation Gene-3 (Cd223). J Immunol (2002) 168(8):3874–80. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.168.8.3874
254
FallarinoFGrohmannUHwangKWOrabonaCVaccaCBianchiRet al. Modulation of Tryptophan Catabolism by Regulatory T Cells. Nat Immunol (2003) 4(12):1206–12. doi: 10.1038/ni1003
255
MaruhashiTOkazakiISugiuraDTakahashiSMaedaTKShimizuKet al. LAG-3 Inhibits the Activation of CD4 + T Cells That Recognize Stable pMHCII Through its Conformation-Dependent Recognition of pMHCII. . Nat Immunol (2018) 19(12):1415–26. doi: 10.1038/s41590-018-0217-9
256
MeyersJHSabatosCAChakravartiSKuchrooVK. The TIM Gene Family Regulates Autoimmune and Allergic Diseases. Trends Mol Med (2005) 11(8):362–9. doi: 10.1016/J.MOLMED.2005.06.008
257
GaoXZhuYLiGHuangHZhangGWangFet al. TIM-3 Expression Characterizes Regulatory T Cells in Tumor Tissues and is Associated With Lung Cancer Progression. PloS One (2012) 7(2):e30676. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0030676
258
ScurrMLadellKBesneuxMChristianAHockeyTSmartKet al. Highly Prevalent Colorectal Cancer-Infiltrating LAP+ Foxp3– T Cells Exhibit More Potent Immunosuppressive Activity Than Foxp3+ Regulatory T Cells. Mucosal Immunol (2014) 7(2):428–39. doi: 10.1038/MI.2013.62
259
SunXWuYGaoWEnjyojiKCsizmadiaEMüllerCEet al. CD39/ENTPD1 Expression by CD4+Foxp3+ Regulatory T Cells Promotes Hepatic Metastatic Tumor Growth in Mice. Gastroenterology. (2010) 139(3):1030–40. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2010.05.007
260
StaggJDivisekeraUDuretHSparwasserTTengMWLDarcyPKet al. CD73-Deficient Mice Have Increased Antitumor Immunity and are Resistant to Experimental Metastasis. Cancer Res (2011) 71(8):2892–900. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-4246
261
De SimoneMArrigoniARossettiGGruarinPRanzaniVPolitanoCet al. Transcriptional Landscape of Human Tissue Lymphocytes Unveils Uniqueness of Tumor-Infiltrating T Regulatory Cells. Immunity. (2016) 45(5):1135–47. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2016.10.021
262
LiZChanKQiYLuLNingFWuMet al. Participation of Ccl1 in Snail-Positive Fibroblasts in Colorectal Cancer Contribute to 5-Fluorouracil/Paclitaxel Chemoresistance. Cancer Res Treat (2018) 50(3):894–907. doi: 10.4143/crt.2017.356
263
SunDLuoTDongPZhangNChenJZhangSet al. M2-Polarized Tumor-Associated Macrophages Promote Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition via Activation of the AKT3/PRAS40 Signaling Pathway in Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma. J Cell Biochem (2020) 121(4):2828–38. doi: 10.1002/jcb.29514
264
HoelzingerDBSmithSEMirzaNDominguezALManriqueSZLustgartenJ. Blockade of CCL1 Inhibits T Regulatory Cell Suppressive Function Enhancing Tumor Immunity Without Affecting T Effector Responses. J Immunol (2010) 184(12):6833–42. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.0904084
265
VillarrealDOL’HuillierAArmingtonSMottersheadCFilippovaEVCoderBDet al. Targeting CCR8 Induces Protective Antitumor Immunity and Enhances Vaccine-Induced Responses in Colon Cancer. Cancer Res (2018) 78(18):5340–8. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-1119
266
HalimLRomanoMMcGregorRCorreaIPavlidisPGragedaNet al. An Atlas of Human Regulatory T Helper-Like Cells Reveals Features of Th2-Like Tregs That Support a Tumorigenic Environment. Cell Rep (2017) 20(3):757–70. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2017.06.079
267
LutsiakMECSemnaniRTDe PascalisRKashmiriSVSSchlomJSabzevariH. Inhibition of CD4+25+ T Regulatory Cell Function Implicated in Enhanced Immune Response by Low-Dose Cyclophosphamide. Blood. (2005) 105(7):2862–8. doi: 10.1182/blood-2004-06-2410
268
GhiringhelliFMenardCPuigPELadoireSRouxSMartinFet al. Metronomic Cyclophosphamide Regimen Selectively Depletes CD4 +CD25+ Regulatory T Cells and Restores T and NK Effector Functions in End Stage Cancer Patients. Cancer Immunol Immunother. (2007) 56(5):641–8. doi: 10.1007/s00262-006-0225-8
269
TermeMChaputNCombadiereBMaAOhtekiTZitvogelL. Regulatory T Cells Control Dendritic Cell/NK Cell Cross-Talk in Lymph Nodes at the Steady State by Inhibiting CD4+ Self-Reactive T Cells. J Immunol (2008) 180(7):4679–86. doi: 10.4049/JIMMUNOL.180.7.4679
270
SistiguAViaudSChaputNBracciLProiettiEZitvogelL. Immunomodulatory Effects of Cyclophosphamide and Implementations for Vaccine Design. Semin Immunopathol (2011) 33(4):369–83. doi: 10.1007/S00281-011-0245-0
271
RouxSApetohLChalminFLadoireSMignotGPuigPEet al. CD4+CD25+ Tregs Control the TRAIL-Dependent Cytotoxicity of Tumor-Infiltrating DCs in Rodent Models of Colon Cancer. J Clin Invest. (2008) 118(11):3751–61. doi: 10.1172/JCI35890
272
MalviciniMIngolottiMPiccioniFGarciaMBayoJAtorrasagastiCet al. Reversal of Gastrointestinal Carcinoma-Induced Immunosuppression and Induction of Antitumoural Immunity by a Combination of Cyclophosphamide and Gene Transfer of IL-12. Mol Oncol (2011) 5(3):242–55. doi: 10.1016/J.MOLONC.2011.03.007
273
MalviciniMAlanizLBayoJGarcíaMPiccioniFFioreEet al. Single Low-Dose Cyclophosphamide Combined With Interleukin-12 Gene Therapy is Superior to a Metronomic Schedule in Inducing Immunity Against Colorectal Carcinoma in Mice. Oncoimmunology. (2012) 1(7):1038–47. doi: 10.4161/onci.20684
274
ScurrMPembrokeTBloomARobertsDThomsonASmartKet al. Low-Dose Cyclophosphamide Induces Antitumor T-Cell Responses, Which Associate With Survival in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. Clin Cancer Res (2017) 23(22):6771–80. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-0895
275
ScurrMPembrokeTBloomARobertsDThomsonASmartKet al. Effect of Modified Vaccinia Ankara–5T4 and Low-Dose Cyclophosphamide on Antitumor Immunity in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol (2017) 3(10):e172579. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.2579
276
SuursFVLub-de HoogeMNde VriesEGEde GrootDJA. A Review of Bispecific Antibodies and Antibody Constructs in Oncology and Clinical Challenges. Pharmacol Ther (2019) 201:103–19. doi: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2019.04.006
277
BarbiJPardollDMPanF. Ubiquitin-Dependent Regulation of Foxp3 and Treg Function. Immunol Rev (2015) 266(1):27–45. doi: 10.1111/imr.12312
278
WangLBeierUHAkimovaTDahiyaSHanRSamantaAet al. Histone/protein Deacetylase Inhibitor Therapy for Enhancement of Foxp3+ T-Regulatory Cell Function Posttransplantation. Am J Transplant. (2018) 18(7):1596–603. doi: 10.1111/ajt.14749
279
XiaoWZhouQWenXWangRLiuRWangTet al. Small-Molecule Inhibitors Overcome Epigenetic Reprogramming for Cancer Therapy. Front Pharmacol (2021) 12:702360. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.702360
280
AdeegbeDOLiuYLizottePHKamiharaYArefARAlmonteCet al. Synergistic Immunostimulatory Effects and Therapeutic Benefit of Combined Histone Deacetylase and Bromodomain Inhibition in non–Small Cell Lung Cancer. Cancer Discovery (2017) 7(8):852–67. doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-16-1020
Summary
Keywords
colorectal cancer, CRC, T regulatory cells, Treg, tumor microenvironment, immunotherapy, immunometabolism, tumor infiltrating cells
Citation
Aristin Revilla S, Kranenburg O and Coffer PJ (2022) Colorectal Cancer-Infiltrating Regulatory T Cells: Functional Heterogeneity, Metabolic Adaptation, and Therapeutic Targeting. Front. Immunol. 13:903564. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.903564
Received
24 March 2022
Accepted
06 June 2022
Published
08 July 2022
Volume
13 - 2022
Edited by
Paula D. Bos, Virginia Commonwealth University, United States
Reviewed by
Theresa L. Whiteside, University of Pittsburgh, United States; Khashayarsha Khazaie, Mayo Clinic Arizona, United States
Updates
Copyright
© 2022 Aristin Revilla, Kranenburg and Coffer.
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: Paul J. Coffer, pcoffer@umcutrecht.nl
This article was submitted to T Cell Biology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology
Disclaimer
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.