Chunhong Li1
Xiulin Jiang- 1Department of Oncology, Suining Central Hospital, Suining, Sichuan, China
- 2Department of Systems Biology, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Monrovia, CA, United States
- 3Biomedical Research Center, Monrovia, CA, United States
- 4Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China
- 5School of Biosciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
- 6Department of Gastrointestinal Surgical Unit, Suining Central Hospital, Suining, Sichuan, China
N6-methyladenosine (m6A) is the most abundant post-transcriptional modification in eukaryotic mRNA, extensively involved in RNA splicing, export, stability, and translation. In recent years, accumulating evidence has demonstrated that m6A modification plays a critical role in regulating the differentiation and function of immune cells. Among these, myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs), as a key immunosuppressive population within the tumor microenvironment (TME), accelerate tumor progression by inhibiting T cell activity and promoting immune evasion and therapy resistance. Emerging studies indicate that m6A modification modulates the development, accumulation, and immunosuppressive function of MDSCs, thereby contributing to tumor initiation and progression. This review provides a narrative overview of the current evidence regarding the crosstalk between m6A modification and MDSCs, with a focus on the underlying molecular mechanisms and their potential implications for cancer immunotherapy. Furthermore, we discuss future research directions and the challenges associated with clinical translation.
1 Introduction
M6A is the most prevalent internal modification of eukaryotic messenger RNA (mRNA) and has emerged as a crucial layer of epitranscriptomic regulation (1, 2). By dynamically modulating RNA splicing, stability, nuclear export, and translation, m6A modification fine-tunes gene expression at the post-transcriptional level and exerts profound impacts on diverse biological processes, including cell differentiation, stress responses, and immune regulation (3–6).
MDSCs are a heterogeneous population of immature myeloid cells that expand in pathological conditions such as cancer, chronic infection, and inflammation (7–9). Within the tumor microenvironment, MDSCs play a pivotal role in promoting immune suppression, facilitating tumor progression, and contributing to therapeutic resistance (10–12). They exert their immunosuppressive functions through multiple mechanisms, including inhibition of T-cell proliferation and activation, induction of regulatory T cells, and modulation of other immune and stromal components (13).
Recent studies have begun to reveal a close interplay between RNA m6A modification and MDSC biology. m6A regulators have been shown to influence the differentiation, expansion, and immunosuppressive functions of MDSCs, thereby shaping the immune landscape of tumors (14–17). Understanding the m6A-MDSC axis not only provides new mechanistic insights into tumor immune evasion but also opens up potential therapeutic opportunities for targeting MDSCs in cancer and other immune-related diseases. In this review, we summarize current knowledge on the roles of m6A methylation in MDSC regulation, highlight their functional consequences in the tumor microenvironment, and discuss therapeutic implications and future perspectives.
2 Overview of RNA m6A methylation
m6A is dynamically regulated by a set of reversible factors. The core regulatory network of m6A consists of “writers, “ “erasers, “ and “readers.” Writers are responsible for catalyzing m6A deposition. METTL3 and METTL14 form the catalytic core, while WTAP acts as a scaffold to stabilize the complex and recruit substrate RNAs (16, 18–23). RBM15 and RBM15B guide m6A deposition by binding specific RNA regions, and METTL16 mediates m6A modification on select RNA substrates (24–26). Erasers confer reversibility to m6A through demethylation, with FTO and ALKBH5 being the primary enzymes. FTO was the first identified m6A demethylase and is involved in metabolic regulation and tumorigenesis, whereas ALKBH5 plays crucial roles in RNA stability, cell proliferation, and modulation of the tumor immune microenvironment (27–30). Readers recognize and bind m6A-modified sites, thereby determining the fate of target RNAs. The YTH domain family proteins (YTHDF1/2/3, YTHDC1/2) modulate mRNA translation, stability, and nuclear export (31–35). IGF2BP family members (IGF2BP1/2/3) stabilize m6A-modified transcripts to enhance their expression (31, 36). Heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins (HNRNPs), including HNRNPA2B1 (37), influence alternative splicing and pre-mRNA processing, while other m6A-binding proteins such as FXR1, RBM45, and RBM33 also participate in RNA metabolism and gene regulation (38–41). Functionally, m6A modification fine-tunes gene expression and broadly participates in immune regulation and tumorigenesis. In the immune system, m6A modulates the differentiation and function of dendritic cells, T cells, and macrophages, thereby affecting antigen presentation and immune responses. Notably, its regulation of immunosuppressive cells, including MDSCs, plays a pivotal role in shaping the immunosuppressive TME (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Dynamic regulation and functions of m6A modification. Upper panel:Schematic representation of the m6A RNA methylation process, including the coordinated action of methyltransferases (writers), demethylases (erasers), and m6A-binding proteins (readers), and their roles in post-transcriptional gene regulation. Lower panel: overview of how m6A “writers” regulate the expansion, differentiation, and immunosuppressive function of MDSCs.
3 MDSCs: biology and immunosuppressive functions
MDSCs originating from the bone marrow (8, 9). Under normal physiological conditions, myeloid progenitors gradually differentiate into mature neutrophils, monocytes, macrophages, or dendritic cells (42). However, in pathological states such as cancer, chronic inflammation, infection, and autoimmune diseases, myeloid differentiation is disrupted, leading to the accumulation of immature immunosuppressive cells that constitute MDSCs (41, 43, 44).
MDSCs consist of heterogeneous subsets with distinct developmental origins, phenotypes, and suppressive mechanisms. PMN-MDSCs (polymorphonuclear MDSCs) represent a population closely resembling neutrophils, characterized by CD11b+Ly6G+Ly6Clow in mice and CD11b+CD15+/CD66b+HLA-DR- in humans (45). They primarily suppress T-cell responses through reactive oxygen species (ROS), Arg1, and other oxidative pathways. In contrast, M-MDSCs (monocytic MDSCs) resemble monocytes and are defined by CD11b+Ly6ChighLy6G- in mice and CD11b+CD14+HLA-DR- in humans. They typically exert immunosuppression through iNOS/NO, COX2-PGE2 signaling, and metabolic reprogramming. A third subset, eMDSCs (early-stage MDSCs), consists of immature myeloid progenitors that lack clear neutrophil or monocyte lineage markers. They are identified in humans as Lin-HLA-DR-CD33+ cells and represent a more primitive suppressive population involved in early immune dysregulation. Together, these three MDSC subsets differ in lineage characteristics, phenotype, and suppressive mechanisms, reflecting their diverse roles across inflammatory, autoimmune, and tumor settings (46).
The expansion and functional activation of MDSCs are tightly regulated by multiple signaling pathways, among which STAT3 is considered a central driver (47, 48). Cytokines such as IL-6, G-CSF, and GM-CSF activate STAT3 in various tumor contexts, promoting MDSC survival, blocking their differentiation, and inducing the expression of immunosuppressive molecules, including arginase-1 (ARG1) and inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) (49–51). The NF-κB pathway further enhances MDSC suppressive activity through upregulation of inflammatory cytokines such as IL-1β and TNF-α (52). Within hypoxic tumor microenvironments, HIF-1α signaling promotes the differentiation of M-MDSCs into tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) and drives the expression of lactate and ARG1, thereby inhibiting T cell effector function (45, 53, 54). Transcription factors such as C/EBPβ also play essential roles in mediating myeloid differentiation arrest and regulating immunosuppressive genes (55, 56). Moreover, MDSCs undergo extensive metabolic reprogramming, with enhanced glycolysis, fatty acid oxidation, and glutamine metabolism sustaining both cellular energy demands and the production of immunosuppressive mediators.
MDSCs suppress immune responses through multiple mechanisms. First, high expression of ARG1, iNOS, and indoleamine 2, 3-dioxygenase (IDO) depletes L-arginine and tryptophan in the microenvironment, limiting T cell proliferation and function (57). Second, reactive oxygen species (ROS) and reactive nitrogen species (RNS) directly damage the T cell receptor (TCR-CD3) complex, impairing antigen recognition (58). Third, upregulation of immune checkpoint molecules, such as PD-L1, promotes T cell exhaustion. Fourth, MDSCs secrete cytokines including IL-10 and TGF-β to expand regulatory T cells (Tregs), indirectly reinforcing immunosuppressive effects (50). Additionally, they inhibit natural killer (NK) cell cytotoxicity and impair dendritic cell-mediated antigen presentation. MDSCs play pivotal roles in various pathological conditions. In cancer, they accumulate in peripheral blood and the tumor microenvironment, suppress anti-tumor T cell and NK cell responses, promote angiogenesis, invasion, and metastasis, and are closely associated with resistance to immunotherapy (11, 45, 59). In chronic infections, MDSCs suppress excessive immune responses, mitigating tissue damage but potentially allowing pathogen persistence (60, 61). In chronic inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease, MDSC accumulation can alleviate inflammation, yet excessive immunosuppression may impair immune surveillance (62–64). In summary, MDSCs are highly heterogeneous immunosuppressive cells that not only play critical roles in tumor development but also broadly regulate immune responses in infection and inflammatory diseases. Therefore, a deeper understanding of MDSC biology and molecular mechanisms is essential for developing novel immunomodulatory and anti-tumor therapeutic strategies.
4 Crosstalk between m6A methylation and MDSCs
To provide a comprehensive overview of current research, we summarized the major m6A regulators, the experimental models used, their functions in MDSCs, associated mechanisms, and key references in Table 1.
Table 1. Key m6A regulators and their roles in MDSC biology across experimental models.
4.1 Functions and mechanisms of m6A methyltransferases in MDSCs
Current studies increasingly support the view that m6A RNA methylation plays a critical role in the tumor immune microenvironment by regulating MDSCs (65). In colorectal cancer (CRC) murine models, knockdown of METTL3 in CRC cells markedly reduced MDSC accumulation, thereby maintaining the activation and proliferation of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells and ultimately inhibiting tumor growth. Mechanistically, METTL3 promotes BHLHE41 expression in an m6A-dependent manner, which in turn induces CXCL1 transcription, enhancing MDSC migration (66). In vitro experiments further showed that silencing BHLHE41 or treating with CXCL1 protein/CXCR2 inhibitor SB265610 significantly attenuated METTL3-mediated MDSC migration, indicating that this effect primarily depends on the BHLHE41–CXCL1/CXCR2 axis. Moreover, in vivo experiments revealed that depletion of MDSCs using anti-Gr1 antibodies or SB265610 effectively blocked the tumor-promoting effect of METTL3 (66). Similarly, in ovarian cancer (OC) models, OC cells establish an immunosuppressive microenvironment by altering host immune cell functions. In Mettl3 conditional knockout (cKO) mice, OC cell growth was significantly enhanced, and Mettl3 deficiency in myeloid cells increased CCL2 and CXCL2 secretion in the peritoneal lavage fluid, thereby promoting recruitment and activation of immunosuppressive myeloid cells, such as MDSCs (15). Interestingly, Mettl3 deletion also augmented IL-1β secretion induced by surviving OC cells, independently of inflammasome activation and cell death (15). In human bladder cancer, cisplatin administered via intra-arterial infusion chemotherapy (IAIC) similarly inhibited METTL3 activity in tumor cells, reducing granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) levels, which correlated with decreased m6A methylation (67). Cisplatin-mediated reduction of METTL3 suppressed G-CSF production, thereby inhibiting the accumulation and immunosuppressive function of fibrotic MDSCs (f-MDSCs) and improving the local tumor immune microenvironment (67). Additionally, radiotherapy, a standard treatment for locally advanced human non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), is often limited by radioresistance. Clinical studies have shown that RBM15 protein is highly expressed in radioresistant patients and correlates with poor prognosis. Mechanistically, RBM15 upregulates CBR3-AS1 via an m6A-IGF2BP3-dependent pathway and promotes CXCL1 expression by sponging miR-409-3p, leading to MDSC recruitment and suppression of T cell activity (68). In vivo experiments further demonstrated that RBM15 silencing reduced MDSC infiltration and enhanced CD8+ and CD4+ T cell tumor infiltration, thereby overcoming NSCLC radioresistance (68) (Figure 1). Collectively, these studies consistently indicate that m6A methyltransferases, such as METTL3 and RBM15, regulate MDSC recruitment and immunosuppressive functions across multiple tumor types, profoundly influencing tumor growth, metastasis, and therapeutic resistance. Therefore, targeting m6A regulatory pathways to inhibit MDSC function, alone or in combination with existing immunotherapy and radio/chemotherapy strategies, may represent a promising approach to enhance antitumor efficacy.
4.2 Functions and mechanisms of m6A demethylases in MDSCs
Recent advances have provided evidence that the m6A demethylase ALKBH5 plays a pivotal role in tumor immune regulation. Notably, ALKBH5 deletion has been shown to significantly enhance tumor sensitivity to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapy. During ICB treatment, ALKBH5 modulates m6A levels and RNA splicing events in tumor cells, thereby influencing the expression of Mct4/Slc16a3 and lactate content in the tumor microenvironment, which in turn alters the composition of tumor-infiltrating Tregs and MDSCs (69). Specifically, ALKBH5 inhibition reduces MDSC-mediated immunosuppression and enhances the efficacy of immunotherapy, suggesting that ALKBH5 may serve as a potential adjuvant target for immune-based therapies (69). In CRC murine model, high ALKBH5 expression is frequently associated with poor prognosis. Animal studies further indicate that ALKBH5 promotes MDSC accumulation while reducing NK cells and cytotoxic CD8+ T cells, thereby facilitating tumor development and immune evasion (70). Mechanistic investigations revealed that ALKBH5 demethylates AXIN2 mRNA, leading to its dissociation from the m6A reader IGF2BP1 and subsequent degradation. This process activates the Wnt/β-catenin–DKK1 signaling axis, resulting in MDSC recruitment and suppression of CD8+ T cell and NK cell function (70). Targeting ALKBH5 or DKK1 effectively diminishes MDSC accumulation and enhances anti-PD-1 therapeutic responses, highlighting new potential strategies for CRC immunotherapy (70). Additionally, another study demonstrated that ALKBH5 regulates m6A modifications of Arg-1 mRNA in MDSCs, reducing its stability and expression, thereby attenuating MDSC immunosuppressive activity and inhibiting tumor progression (71). These findings further underscore the critical role of ALKBH5 in modulating MDSC function and antitumor immunity. Importantly, ALKBH5 also plays a key role in autoimmune disease. In a systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) model, ALKBH5 upregulates FoxO1 expression in monocytic MDSCs (M-MDSCs) via m6A modification, suppresses the Met/COX2/PGE2 signaling pathway, and thereby regulates B cell proliferation and activation, ultimately ameliorating disease progression (72). This discovery reveals the central role of the ALKBH5-FoxO1-M-MDSC axis in immune regulation and provides a potential therapeutic target for autoimmune interventions (72) (Figure 2). Collectively, these studies indicate that ALKBH5 regulates MDSC-mediated immunosuppressive functions through multiple mechanisms in both tumor and autoimmune contexts. As such, targeting ALKBH5 not only represents a promising strategy to enhance cancer immunotherapy but also offers novel insights for the treatment of autoimmune diseases.
Figure 2. Functions and mechanisms of m6A demethylases and m6A reader proteins in MDSCs. Depiction of m6A “erasers” and m6A “readers” interpreting methylation marks in MDSCs, affecting mRNA fate and downstream immunoregulatory functions.
4.3 Functions and mechanisms of m6A reader proteins in MDSCs
Evidence continues to accumulate, indicating that RNA m6A modification plays a crucial role in regulating the differentiation, activation, and function of MDSCs within the tumor immune microenvironment. In CRC murine models, Ythdf1 deletion markedly enhances anti-tumor immune responses in CT26 and MC38 syngeneic tumors, whereas Ythdf1 overexpression promotes an immunosuppressive TIME and accelerates CRC progression (14). Single-cell RNA sequencing demonstrates that Ythdf1-deficient tumors exhibit reduced MDSC abundance alongside increased cytotoxic T cells. Mechanistic studies indicate that YTHDF1 regulates the p65-CXCL1-MDSC axis via m6A modification, promoting MDSC migration and suppressing CD8+ T cell function, thereby shaping an immunosuppressive TIME (14). Targeting YTHDF1 reduces MDSC accumulation and enhances anti-PD-1 therapy efficacy, suggesting a potential therapeutic target for CRC immunotherapy (14). Similarly, in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis-related hepatocellular carcinoma (NASH-HCC) murine model, YTHDF1 is significantly overexpressed in tumor tissues. Liver-specific Ythdf1 overexpression drives spontaneous NASH-HCC development and promotes MDSC recruitment and activation through m6A-mediated regulation of the EZH2-IL-6 axis, concurrently suppressing CD8+ T cell function and establishing an immunosuppressive TIME (73). Targeting YTHDF1 likewise improves anti-PD-1 therapeutic responses, highlighting a potential immunotherapeutic target in NASH-HCC (73). Moreover, ionizing radiation (IR) has been shown to induce expansion of immunosuppressive MDSCs and upregulate YTHDF2 expression in both mouse models and humans (74). Following IR exposure, Ythdf2 deficiency in myeloid cells enhances anti-tumor immunity and reverses tumor radioresistance by modulating MDSC differentiation, infiltration, and immunosuppressive activity (74). Further studies reveal that IR-induced YTHDF2 expression is dependent on the NF-κB signaling pathway, and YTHDF2 forms a positive feedback loop by directly binding and degrading NF-κB negative regulators. Pharmacological inhibition of YTHDF2 overcomes MDSC-mediated immunosuppression and improves the efficacy of radiotherapy and radiotherapy/anti-PD-L1 combination therapy (74). Additionally, YTHDF2 degrades Bambi mRNA via an m6A-dependent mechanism, thereby regulating MDSC infiltration and immunosuppressive function, which affects post-radiotherapy anti-tumor immunity. Targeting BAMBI enhances both radiotherapy and combined radiotherapy/immunotherapy efficacy, representing a novel strategy to overcome tumor radioresistance (75). In HCC murine model, pH-responsive lipid nanoparticles (Lip@si-YTHDF2) effectively deliver siRNA to suppress YTHDF2, reduce the immunosuppressive phenotype of MDSCs, restore T cell-mediated anti-tumor immunity, and significantly inhibit tumor growth in combination with PD-1 blockade, providing a feasible strategy for HCC immunotherapy (76). Mechanistic studies revealed that Lip@si-YTHDF2 inhibits YTHDF2, promotes m6A-mediated degradation of MYC, and restores antitumor immunity in hepatocellular carcinoma (76). Notably, tumor-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs) also contribute to MDSC regulation.
In YTHDF2 conditional knock-out mice, the loss of YTHDF2 resulted in a gradual elevation of MDSCs including PMN-MDSCs both in liver and ultimately in the BM (77). Loss of YTHDF2 in myeloid cells leads to a progressive accumulation of MDSCs, particularly PMN-MDSCs, first in the liver and eventually in the bone marrow. These YTHDF2-deficient MDSCs exhibit enhanced suppressive capacity toward T cell proliferation, and their increased expansion and chemotactic migration to the liver contribute to the attenuation of ConA-induced immune-mediated liver injury (77). Mechanistically, multi-omic analyses identified RXRα as a direct m6A-modified target of YTHDF2. YTHDF2 binds RXRα mRNA and promotes its degradation, thereby limiting RXRα expression under physiological conditions (77).
In human colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM), tlhe long non-coding RNA MIR181A1HG is progressively upregulated in patient tissues and serum EVs. HNRNPA2B1 mediates its packaging into CRC-derived EVs, and through a competing endogenous RNA (ceRNA) mechanism, sequesters miR-373-3p, thereby activating hepatic stellate cells (HSCs) (78). Activated HSCs secrete CXCL12, which remodels the extracellular matrix and recruits MDSCs to the liver, promoting hepatic metastasis (Figure 2). Collectively, these studies indicate that m6A modification regulates MDSC differentiation, recruitment, activation, and immunosuppressive function through multiple layers and pathways. This not only provides new insights into the mechanisms of tumor immune suppression but also identifies potential molecular targets for MDSC-directed immunotherapy. These findings highlight the clinical potential of modulating m6A modification to reshape the tumor immune microenvironment.
Across different models, m6A regulation appears to show subtype-specific patterns in MDSCs. In PMN-MDSCs, YTHDF2 exerts a dominant role by binding to and destabilizing RXRα mRNA, thereby restraining PMN-MDSC accumulation and suppressive function (77). Loss of YTHDF2 markedly increases PMN-MDSCs in the liver and bone marrow and enhances their immunosuppressive capacity. In contrast, in M-MDSCs the central axis involves ALKBH5-mediated m6A demethylation of FoxO1 mRNA. Reduced FoxO1, either in lupus patients or in FoxO1-deficient mice, impairs the Met/COX2/PGE2 pathway, leading to B-cell hyperactivation (72). Conversely, upregulation of FoxO1 through ALKBH5 or pharmacological interventions (e.g., SF/DP) increases FoxO1 stability, inhibits glycolysis via PFKFB3, and reinforces the suppressive activity of M-MDSCs. Thus, whereas PMN-MDSCs rely on m6A-dependent degradation driven by YTHDF2, M-MDSCs are controlled by m6A demethylation that stabilizes FoxO1, underscoring distinct epitranscriptomic programs that fine-tune the immunoregulatory functions of these two MDSC subsets.
5 Therapeutic implications
With growing insights into the role of m6A modification in regulating MDSCs, targeting m6A regulators to modulate MDSC accumulation and function has emerged as a promising therapeutic strategy. Current research primarily focuses on modulating the activity of m6A “writers, “ “erasers, “ and “readers” to alter the fate of MDSC-associated transcripts, thereby alleviating immunosuppression within the tumor microenvironment (69). First, inhibitors of m6A demethylases (“erasers”) have demonstrated significant anti-tumor potential. For example, FTO inhibitors, such as R-2-hydroxyglutarate (R-2HG), can stabilize key anti-tumor transcripts, suppress MDSC-mediated immunosuppressive functions, and enhance T cell-mediated anti-tumor immunity (79, 80). Similarly, ALKBH5 inhibitors have been reported to reduce MDSC accumulation within the TME and decrease the expression of immunosuppressive factors, thereby improving responses to immunotherapy (70). Conversely, modulating the activity of m6A methyltransferases (“writers”) also holds therapeutic promise. METTL3, as a core methyltransferase, has been shown to regulate MDSC differentiation and function, and specific activators or inhibitors of METTL3 could potentially be used to precisely manipulate the immunosuppressive activity of MDSCs. Second, combination therapies represent an emerging focus in m6A-targeted treatment strategies. Since MDSCs play a critical role in resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), co-administration of m6A-targeted agents with ICIs may provide synergistic benefits. For instance, combining FTO or ALKBH5 inhibitors with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 or anti-CTLA-4 antibodies could attenuate MDSC-mediated immunosuppression while restoring T cell function, thereby markedly enhancing the clinical efficacy of immunotherapy. Furthermore, m6A-targeted agents can potentially be integrated with conventional chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Although standard chemo- and radiotherapies directly eliminate tumor cells, they may also induce MDSC accumulation, limiting therapeutic efficacy; addition of m6A modulators could mitigate this effect and improve overall anti-tumor outcomes. Despite these promising prospects, m6A-MDSC-targeted therapies face several challenges. The first is specificity: as a pervasive post-transcriptional regulatory mechanism, modulating m6A regulators may inadvertently affect normal hematopoietic and immune cell functions, leading to off-target effects. The second challenge lies in delivery: achieving precise delivery of m6A inhibitors or activators to MDSCs within the TME, without systemic distribution, remains a key barrier to clinical translation. Finally, safety and toxicity concerns are critical. Given the involvement of m6A modification in metabolism, immunity, and cellular homeostasis, long-term systemic interventions may elicit unforeseen adverse effects. Consequently, developing tissue- or cell type-specific delivery systems, such as nanoparticles or targeted antibody-drug conjugates, as well as identifying more precise molecular targets, will be essential for clinical translation of the m6A-MDSC axis. Targeting m6A regulators can directly attenuate MDSC-mediated immunosuppression while enhancing the efficacy of existing ICIs and conventional chemo- or radiotherapies. Nonetheless, overcoming challenges related to specificity, delivery, and potential toxicity will require further mechanistic studies and technological innovations.
6 Challenges and future perspectives
Despite significant progress in recent years regarding the role of m6A modification in regulating MDSC function, several challenges remain, limiting its translation into clinical applications (58). First, the high heterogeneity of MDSCs constitutes a major obstacle. MDSCs consist of two principal subsets: PMN-MDSCs and M-MDSCs, which differ in phenotype, molecular mechanisms, and immunosuppressive capacity (81). Most current studies focus on the bulk MDSC population, lacking a detailed analysis of m6A modification patterns and functional distinctions among individual subsets. Furthermore, m6A may exert context-specific effects depending on the pathological environment; for example, in certain inflammatory or infectious conditions, m6A regulation may confer protective effects on MDSCs, whereas in tumors it predominantly promotes immunosuppression (8). Such context-dependency further complicates mechanistic interpretation and clinical translation. Second, technical limitations present another significant bottleneck. While high-throughput sequencing and MeRIP-seq have greatly advanced m6A research, these methods primarily operate at the population level and cannot resolve the heterogeneity within MDSCs. Emerging single-cell m6A sequencing technologies show promise but still face limitations in sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility, making them insufficient to fully capture the dynamic landscape of m6A modifications within MDSCs. Therefore, the development of more precise, high-resolution single-cell epitranscriptomic approaches represents a key direction for future research. From a clinical translation perspective, targeting the m6A-MDSC axis faces multiple challenges. Drug safety is a primary concern, as m6A modification is a ubiquitous post-transcriptional regulatory mechanism involved in normal hematopoiesis, metabolism, and immune homeostasis; excessive or prolonged inhibition may lead to severe off-target effects (51). Additionally, patient heterogeneity and molecular subtypes have not been fully considered, as the role of m6A in regulating MDSCs may vary significantly across different patients or tumor types, posing challenges for broad therapeutic applicability. The lack of reliable biomarkers also limits patient stratification and efficacy prediction for m6A-targeted therapies; developing molecular markers based on m6A signatures or MDSC functional states will be critical to facilitate clinical implementation.
Looking forward, research should focus on several directions. First, precise targeting of MDSC subsets is essential. By elucidating subset-specific m6A modification patterns, more selective intervention strategies can be developed. Second, combination therapy strategies merit further exploration. Integrating m6A-targeted agents with immune checkpoint inhibitors (e.g., anti-[9]PD-1/PD-L1 or anti-CTLA-4) or conventional chemo- and radiotherapy could attenuate MDSC-mediated immunosuppression while enhancing T cell activity, thereby improving the overall response to cancer immunotherapy. Finally, advances in single-cell multi-omics, integrated multi-omics, and artificial intelligence-based analyses are expected to comprehensively map the dynamic regulatory networks of m6A in MDSCs, facilitating more precise and personalized immunotherapeutic strategies. In summary, m6A modification, as a crucial regulator of MDSC function, is emerging as a frontier in tumor immunotherapy research. Despite challenges related to heterogeneity, technical limitations, and translational hurdles, ongoing advances in basic research and technology are likely to enable the m6A–MDSC axis as a novel avenue for cancer immunotherapy.
7 Conclusion
m6A modification play critical roles in the differentiation, function, and homeostasis of various immune cells. A growing body of studies suggests that m6A also serves as a key regulator of the expansion, differentiation, and immunosuppressive activity of MDSCs. By modulating MDSC metabolic pathways, the expression of immunosuppressive factors, and interactions with T cells, dendritic cells, and other immune effector cells, m6A not only shapes the tumor immune microenvironment but also profoundly influences anti-tumor immune responses and the efficacy of immunotherapy. Therefore, the m6A-MDSC axis represents a promising molecular target and therapeutic strategy in cancer immunotherapy. Looking forward, with the continuous advancement of single-cell multi-omics and epitranscriptomic technologies, the subset-specific roles of m6A in MDSCs are expected to be elucidated in greater detail. This will help clarify the context-dependent effects of m6A under different pathological conditions and facilitate the development of personalized therapeutic strategies. Furthermore, combining m6A-targeted agents with immune checkpoint inhibitors, radiotherapy, or chemotherapy holds the potential to modulate the immune microenvironment on multiple fronts, thereby enhancing the clinical efficacy of cancer immunotherapy. Although challenges related to drug specificity, delivery systems, and safety remain, it is foreseeable that, as our understanding of the m6A-MDSC axis deepens, this approach will offer broad applications in the field of tumor immunotherapy.
Author contributions
CL: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft. XJ: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. YY: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. XC: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization, Data curation, Visualization. SP: Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing – original draft. KL: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization, Methodology. LL: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing. QW: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This study was supported by Sichuan Science and Technology Program (2025ZNSFSC1926) and Medical Research Project/Youth Innovation Project of Sichuan Medical Association (S202500042).
Conflict of interest
The authors declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. The author(s) used AI-based tools solely for language refinement during the preparation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1. Yang Y, Hsu PJ, Chen YS, and Yang YG. Dynamic transcriptomic m(6)A decoration: writers, erasers, readers and functions in RNA metabolism. Cell Res. (2018) 28:616–24. doi: 10.1038/s41422-018-0040-8
2. Chen X, Yuan Y, Zhou F, Li L, Pu J, and Jiang X. m6A RNA methylation: a pivotal regulator of tumor immunity and a promising target for cancer immunotherapy. J Transl Med. (2025) 23:245. doi: 10.1186/s12967-025-06221-y
3. Linder B, Grozhik AV, Olarerin-George AO, Meydan C, Mason CE, and Jaffrey SR. Single-nucleotide-resolution mapping of m6A and m6Am throughout the transcriptome. Nat Methods. (2015) 12:767–72. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.3453
4. Dunin-Horkawicz S, Czerwoniec A, Gajda MJ, Feder M, Grosjean H, and Bujnicki JM. MODOMICS: a database of RNA modification pathways. Nucleic Acids Res. (2006) 34:D145–9. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkj084
5. Boccaletto P, Stefaniak F, Ray A, Cappannini A, Mukherjee S, Purta E, et al. MODOMICS: a database of RNA modification pathways. 2021 update. Nucleic Acids Res. (2022) 50:D231–d235.
6. Zaccara S, Ries RJ, and Jaffrey SR. Reading, writing and erasing mRNA methylation. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. (2019) 20:608–24. doi: 10.1038/s41580-019-0168-5
7. Gabrilovich DI. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells. Cancer Immunol Res. (2017) 5:3–8. doi: 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-16-0297
8. Lasser SA, Ozbay Kurt FG, Arkhypov I, Utikal J, and Umansky V. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells in cancer and cancer therapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. (2024) 21:147–64. doi: 10.1038/s41571-023-00846-y
9. Veglia F, Perego M, and Gabrilovich D. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells coming of age. Nat Immunol. (2018) 19:108–19. doi: 10.1038/s41590-017-0022-x
10. Li K, Shi H, Zhang B, Ou X, Ma Q, Chen Y, et al. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells as immunosuppressive regulators and therapeutic targets in cancer. Signal Transduct Target Ther. (2021) 6:362. doi: 10.1038/s41392-021-00670-9
11. Wu Y, Yi M, Niu M, Mei Q, and Wu K. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells: an emerging target for anticancer immunotherapy. Mol Cancer. (2022) 21:184. doi: 10.1186/s12943-022-01657-y
12. Woodland DL. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells. Viral Immunol. (2017) 30:81. doi: 10.1089/vim.2017.29016.dlw
13. Schrijver IT, Théroude C, and Roger T. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells in sepsis. Front Immunol. (2019) 10:327. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00327
14. Bao Y, Zhai J, Chen H, Wong CC, Liang C, Ding Y, et al. Targeting m(6)A reader YTHDF1 augments antitumour immunity and boosts anti-PD-1 efficacy in colorectal cancer. Gut. (2023) 72:1497–509. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2022-328845
15. Wang J, Ling D, Shi L, Li H, Peng M, Wen H, et al. METTL3-mediated m6A methylation regulates ovarian cancer progression by recruiting myeloid-derived suppressor cells. Cell Biosci. (2023) 13:202. doi: 10.1186/s13578-023-01149-6
16. Jiang X, Liu B, Nie Z, Duan L, Xiong Q, Jin Z, et al. The role of m6A modification in the biological functions and diseases. Signal Transduct Target Ther. (2021) 6:74. doi: 10.1038/s41392-020-00450-x
17. Ren W, Yuan Y, Li Y, Mutti L, Peng J, and Jiang X. The function and clinical implication of YTHDF1 in the human system development and cancer. biomark Res. (2023) 11:5. doi: 10.1186/s40364-023-00452-1
18. Deng LJ, Deng WQ, Fan SR, Chen MF, Qi M, Lyu WY, et al. m6A modification: recent advances, anticancer targeted drug discovery and beyond. Mol Cancer. (2022) 21:52. doi: 10.1186/s12943-022-01510-2
19. Roundtree IA, Evans ME, Pan T, and He C. Dynamic RNA modifications in gene expression regulation. Cell. (2017) 169:1187–200. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.05.045
20. Shi H, Wei J, and He C. Where, when, and how: context-dependent functions of RNA methylation writers, readers, and erasers. Mol Cell. (2019) 74:640–50. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2019.04.025
21. Sun Y, Shen W, Hu S, Lyu Q, Wang Q, Wei T, et al. METTL3 promotes chemoresistance in small cell lung cancer by inducing mitophagy. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. (2023) 42:65. doi: 10.1186/s13046-023-02638-9
22. Sun C, Wang J, Li H, Liu L, Lin Y, Zhang L, et al. METTL14 regulates CD8(+)T-cell activation and immune responses to anti-PD-1 therapy in lung cancer. World J Surg Oncol. (2024) 22:128. doi: 10.1186/s12957-024-03402-9
23. Ping XL, Sun BF, Wang L, Xiao W, Yang X, Wang WJ, et al. Mammalian WTAP is a regulatory subunit of the RNA N6-methyladenosine methyltransferase. Cell Res. (2014) 24:177–89. doi: 10.1038/cr.2014.3
24. Patil DP, Chen CK, Pickering BF, Chow A, Jackson C, Guttman M, et al. m(6)A RNA methylation promotes XIST-mediated transcriptional repression. Nature. (2016) 537:369–73. doi: 10.1038/nature19342
25. Lan T, Li H, Zhang D, Xu L, Liu H, Hao X, et al. KIAA1429 contributes to liver cancer progression through N6-methyladenosine-dependent post-transcriptional modification of GATA3. Mol Cancer. (2019) 18:186. doi: 10.1186/s12943-019-1106-z
26. Zhang H, Yin M, Huang H, Zhao G, and Lu M. METTL16 in human diseases: What should we do next? Open Med (Wars). (2023) 18:20230856.
27. Wei J, Yu X, Yang L, Liu X, Gao B, Huang B, et al. FTO mediates LINE1 m(6)A demethylation and chromatin regulation in mESCs and mouse development. Science. (2022) 376:968–73. doi: 10.1126/science.abe9582
28. Deng X, Qing Y, Horne D, Huang H, and Chen J. The roles and implications of RNA m(6)A modification in cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. (2023) 20:507–26. doi: 10.1038/s41571-023-00774-x
29. Huang H, Weng H, and Chen J. m(6)A modification in coding and non-coding RNAs: roles and therapeutic implications in cancer. Cancer Cell. (2020) 37:270–88. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2020.02.004
30. E AA, He C, and Klungland A. ALKBHs-facilitated RNA modifications and de-modifications. DNA Repair (Amst). (2016) 44:87–91. doi: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2016.05.026
31. Huang H, Weng H, Sun W, Qin X, Shi H, Wu H, et al. Recognition of RNA N(6)-methyladenosine by IGF2BP proteins enhances mRNA stability and translation. Nat Cell Biol. (2018) 20:285–95. doi: 10.1038/s41556-018-0045-z
32. Wang X, Lu Z, Gomez A, Hon GC, Yue Y, Han D, et al. N6-methyladenosine-dependent regulation of messenger RNA stability. Nature. (2014) 505:117–20. doi: 10.1038/nature12730
33. Xiao W, Adhikari S, Dahal U, Chen YS, Hao YJ, Sun BF, et al. Nuclear m(6)A Reader YTHDC1 Regulates mRNA Splicing. Mol Cell. (2016) 61:507–19. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.01.012
34. Roundtree IA, Luo GZ, Zhang Z, Wang X, Zhou T, Cui Y, et al. YTHDC1 mediates nuclear export of N(6)-methyladenosine methylated mRNAs. Elife. (2017) 6. doi: 10.7554/eLife.31311
35. Zou Z, Sepich-Poore C, Zhou X, Wei J, and He C. The mechanism underlying redundant functions of the YTHDF proteins. Genome Biol. (2023) 24:17. doi: 10.1186/s13059-023-02862-8
36. Song B, Zeng Y, Cao Y, Zhang J, Xu C, Pan Y, et al. Emerging role of METTL3 in inflammatory diseases: mechanisms and therapeutic applications. Front Immunol. (2023) 14:1221609. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1221609
37. Wu B, Su S, Patil DP, Liu H, Gan J, Jaffrey SR, et al. Molecular basis for the specific and multivariant recognitions of RNA substrates by human hnRNP A2/B1. Nat Commun. (2018) 9:420. doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-02770-z
38. Yu F, Zhu AC, Liu S, Gao B, Wang Y, Khudaverdyan N, et al. RBM33 is a unique m(6)A RNA-binding protein that regulates ALKBH5 demethylase activity and substrate selectivity. Mol Cell. (2023) 83:2003–2019.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2023.05.010
39. Choi SH, Flamand MN, Liu B, Zhu H, Hu M, Wang M, et al. RBM45 is an m(6)A-binding protein that affects neuronal differentiation and the. Splicing Subset mRNAs Cell Rep. (2022) 40:111293. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2022.111293
40. Deng S, Zhang J, Su J, Zuo Z, Zeng L, Liu K, et al. RNA m(6)A regulates transcription via DNA demethylation and chromatin accessibility. Nat Genet. (2022) 54:1427–37. doi: 10.1038/s41588-022-01173-1
41. Liu K, Iyer R, Li Y, Zhu J, Cai Z, Wei J, et al. USP22 drives tumor immune evasion and checkpoint blockade resistance through EZH2-mediated epigenetic silencing of MHC-I. J Clin Invest. (2025). doi: 10.1172/JCI193162
42. Ma S, Sun B, Duan S, Han J, Barr T, Zhang J, et al. YTHDF2 orchestrates tumor-associated macrophage reprogramming and controls antitumor immunity through CD8(+) T cells. Nat Immunol. (2023) 24:255–66. doi: 10.1038/s41590-022-01398-6
43. Sieminska I and Baran J. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells in colorectal cancer. Front Immunol. (2020) 11:1526. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.01526
44. Liu K, Gao Q, Jia Y, Wei J, Chaudhuri SM, Wang S, et al. Ubiquitin-specific peptidase 22 controls integrin-dependent cancer cell stemness and metastasis. iScience. (2024) 27:110592. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.110592
45. Bronte V, Brandau S, Chen SH, Colombo MP, Frey AB, Greten TF, et al. Recommendations for myeloid-derived suppressor cell nomenclature and characterization standards. Nat Commun. (2016) 7:12150. doi: 10.1038/ncomms12150
46. Dysthe M and Parihar R. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells in the tumor microenvironment. Adv Exp Med Biol. (2020) 1224:117–40.
47. Hinshaw DC and Shevde LA. The tumor microenvironment innately modulates cancer progression. Cancer Res. (2019) 79:4557–66. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-3962
48. Yang T, Li J, Li R, Yang C, Zhang W, Qiu Y, et al. Correlation between MDSC and immune tolerance in transplantation: cytokines, pathways and cell-cell interaction. Curr Gene Ther. (2019) 19:81–92. doi: 10.2174/1566523219666190618093707
49. Sun R, Sun Y, Wu C, Liu Y, Zhou M, Dong Y, et al. CXCR4-modified CAR-T cells suppresses MDSCs recruitment via STAT3/NF-κB/SDF-1α axis to enhance efficacy against pancreatic cancer. Mol Ther. (2023) 31:3193–209. doi: 10.1016/j.ymthe.2023.09.010
50. Wang C, Zheng X, Zhang J, Jiang X, Wang J, Li Y, et al. CD300ld on neutrophils is required for tumour-driven immune suppression. Nature. (2023) 621:830–9. doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06511-9
51. Weber R, Groth C, Lasser S, Arkhypov I, Petrova V, Altevogt P, et al. IL-6 as a major regulator of MDSC activity and possible target for cancer immunotherapy. Cell Immunol. (2021) 359:104254. doi: 10.1016/j.cellimm.2020.104254
52. Zhou X, Fang D, Liu H, Ou X, Zhang C, Zhao Z, et al. PMN-MDSCs accumulation induced by CXCL1 promotes CD8(+) T cells exhaustion in gastric cancer. Cancer Lett. (2022) 532:215598. doi: 10.1016/j.canlet.2022.215598
53. Long X, Wong CC, Tong L, Chu ESH, Ho Szeto C, Go MYY, et al. Peptostreptococcus anaerobius promotes colorectal carcinogenesis and modulates tumour immunity. Nat Microbiol. (2019) 4:2319–30. doi: 10.1038/s41564-019-0541-3
54. Veglia F, Sanseviero E, and Gabrilovich DI. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells in the era of increasing myeloid cell diversity. Nat Rev Immunol. (2021) 21:485–98. doi: 10.1038/s41577-020-00490-y
55. Zhao Y, Wu T, Shao S, Shi B, and Zhao Y. Phenotype, development, and biological function of myeloid-derived suppressor cells. Oncoimmunology. (2016) 5:e1004983. doi: 10.1080/2162402X.2015.1004983
56. Fultang N, Li X, Li T, and Chen YH. Myeloid-derived suppressor cell differentiation in cancer: transcriptional regulators and enhanceosome-mediated mechanisms. Front Immunol. (2020) 11:619253. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.619253
57. Alshetaiwi H, Pervolarakis N, McIntyre LL, Ma D, Nguyen Q, Rath JA, et al. Defining the emergence of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in breast cancer using single-cell transcriptomics. Sci Immunol. (2020) 5. doi: 10.1126/sciimmunol.aay6017
58. Hegde S, Leader AM, and Merad M. MDSC: Markers, development, states, and unaddressed complexity. Immunity. (2021) 54:875–84. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2021.04.004
59. Liu K, Jiang L, Shi Y, Liu B, He Y, Shen Q, et al. Hypoxia-induced GLT8D1 promotes glioma stem cell maintenance by inhibiting CD133 degradation through N-linked glycosylation. Cell Death Differ. (2022) 29:1834–49. doi: 10.1038/s41418-022-00969-2
60. Nakamura K and Smyth MJ. Myeloid immunosuppression and immune checkpoints in the tumor microenvironment. Cell Mol Immunol. (2020) 17:1–12. doi: 10.1038/s41423-019-0306-1
61. Zhao H, Teng D, Yang L, Xu X, Chen J, Jiang T, et al. Myeloid-derived itaconate suppresses cytotoxic CD8(+) T cells and promotes tumour growth. Nat Metab. (2022) 4:1660–73. doi: 10.1038/s42255-022-00676-9
62. Tang PM, Nikolic-Paterson DJ, and Lan HY. Macrophages: versatile players in renal inflammation and fibrosis. Nat Rev Nephrol. (2019) 15:144–58. doi: 10.1038/s41581-019-0110-2
63. Salminen A, Kaarniranta K, and Kauppinen A. Photoaging: UV radiation-induced inflammation and immunosuppression accelerate the aging process in the skin. Inflammation Res. (2022) 71:817–31. doi: 10.1007/s00011-022-01598-8
64. Luo Y, Li L, Chen X, Gou H, Yan K, and Xu Y. Effects of lactate in immunosuppression and inflammation: Progress and prospects. Int Rev Immunol. (2022) 41:19–29. doi: 10.1080/08830185.2021.1974856
65. Guo L, Yang H, Zhou C, Shi Y, Huang L, and Zhang J. N6-methyladenosine RNA modification in the tumor immune microenvironment: novel implications for immunotherapy. Front Immunol. (2021) 12:773570. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.773570
66. Chen H, Pan Y, Zhou Q, Liang C, Wong CC, Zhou Y, et al. METTL3 inhibits antitumor immunity by targeting m(6)A-BHLHE41-CXCL1/CXCR2 axis to promote colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology. (2022) 163:891–907. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2022.06.024
67. Mu X, Wu K, Zhu Y, Zhu Y, Wang Y, Xiao L, et al. Intra-arterial infusion chemotherapy utilizing cisplatin inhibits bladder cancer by decreasing the fibrocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells in an m6A-dependent manner. Mol Immunol. (2021) 137:28–40. doi: 10.1016/j.molimm.2021.06.012
68. Hu S, Zhan N, Li J, Wang L, Liu Y, Jin K, et al. RBM15 recruits myeloid-derived suppressor cells via the m6A-IGF2BP3/CBR3-AS1/miR-409-3p/CXCL1 axis, facilitating radioresistance in non-small-cell lung cancer. J Transl Med. (2025) 23:191. doi: 10.1186/s12967-025-06205-y
69. Li N, Kang Y, Wang L, Huff S, Tang R, Hui H, et al. ALKBH5 regulates anti-PD-1 therapy response by modulating lactate and suppressive immune cell accumulation in tumor microenvironment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U.S.A. (2020) 117:20159–70.
70. Zhai J, Chen H, Wong CC, Peng Y, Gou H, Zhang J, et al. ALKBH5 drives immune suppression via targeting AXIN2 to promote colorectal cancer and is a target for boosting immunotherapy. Gastroenterology. (2023) 165:445–62. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2023.04.032
71. Feng L, Li M, Ma J, Wang W, Wang S, Mao Z, et al. ALKBH5 regulates arginase 1 expression in MDSCs and their immunosuppressive activity in tumor-bearing host. Noncoding RNA Res. (2024) 9:913–20. doi: 10.1016/j.ncrna.2024.03.003
72. Tan L, Wang X, Wang S, Wu Z, Zhang L, Zhang T, et al. Soufeng Sanjie formula alleviates the progression of lupus and joint injury by regulating the ALKBH5-FoxO1-PFKFB3 axis in M-MDSCs. Phytomedicine. (2025) 141:156687. doi: 10.1016/j.phymed.2025.156687
73. Wang L, Zhu L, Liang C, Huang X, Liu Z, Huo J, et al. Targeting N6-methyladenosine reader YTHDF1 with siRNA boosts antitumor immunity in NASH-HCC by inhibiting EZH2-IL-6 axis. J Hepatol. (2023) 79:1185–200. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2023.06.021
74. Wang L, Dou X, Chen S, Yu X, Huang X, Zhang L, et al. YTHDF2 inhibition potentiates radiotherapy antitumor efficacy. Cancer Cell. (2023) 41:1294–1308.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2023.04.019
75. Wang L, Si W, Yu X, Piffko A, Dou X, Ding X, et al. Epitranscriptional regulation of TGF-β pseudoreceptor BAMBI by m6A/YTHDF2 drives extrinsic radioresistance. J Clin Invest. (2023) 133. doi: 10.1172/JCI172919
76. Guo Z, Huang Q, Cui Z, Yang C, and Yang L. Targeting YTHDF2 with pH-responsive siRNA nanoparticles suppresses MYC m6A modification and restores antitumor immunity in hepatocellular carcinoma. J Nanobiotechnol. (2025) 23:469. doi: 10.1186/s12951-025-03538-0
77. Lyu Z, Huang B, Zhang J, Qian Q, P X, Cui N, et al. Suppression of YTHDF2 attenuates autoimmune hepatitis by expansion of myeloid-derived suppressor cells. J Autoimmun. (2023) 135:102993. doi: 10.1016/j.jaut.2023.102993
78. Gu Y, Mi Y, Cao Y, Yu K, Zhang Z, Lian P, et al. The lncRNA MIR181A1HG in extracellular vesicles derived from highly metastatic colorectal cancer cells promotes liver metastasis by remodeling the extracellular matrix and recruiting myeloid-derived suppressor cells. Cell Biosci. (2025) 15:23. doi: 10.1186/s13578-025-01365-2
79. Su R, Dong L, Li C, Nachtergaele S, Wunderlich M, Qing Y, et al. R-2HG exhibits anti-tumor activity by targeting FTO/m(6)A/MYC/CEBPA signaling. Cell. (2018) 172:90–105.e23. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.11.031
80. Qing Y, Dong L, Gao L, Li C, Li Y, Han L, et al. R-2-hydroxyglutarate attenuates aerobic glycolysis in leukemia by targeting the FTO/m(6)A/PFKP/LDHB axis. Mol Cell. (2021) 81:922–939.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2020.12.026
Keywords: epitranscriptome, immunotherapy, m6A modification, MDSC, tumor microenvironment
Citation: Li C, Jiang X, Yuan Y, Chen X, Pu S, Lian K, Li L and Wang Q (2026) m6A RNA modification and myeloid-derived suppressor cells: mechanistic insights and clinical prospects. Front. Immunol. 17:1694842. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2026.1694842
Received: 29 October 2025; Accepted: 05 January 2026; Revised: 24 December 2025;
Published: 23 January 2026.
Edited by:
Zhihao Wang, Wuhan University, ChinaReviewed by:
Nikoleta Bizymi, University of Crete, GreeceCopyright © 2026 Li, Jiang, Yuan, Chen, Pu, Lian, Li and Wang. 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: Qiang Wang, d2FuZ3FpYW5nOTAyNDk3QDEyNi5jb20=