Targeting cellular source-specific CXCL9 signaling for immunotherapy in oral squamous cell carcinoma

Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) remains a clinical challenge due to its high recurrence, metastatic potential, and limited responsiveness to current immunotherapies. Within the tumor microenvironment (TME), the C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 9 (CXCL9) plays a pivotal yet paradoxical role, functioning as both an anti-tumor effector and a tumor-promoting factor depending on its cellular origin. This review proposes that the function of CXCL9 is not intrinsic but dictated by the interplay among its cellular source, microenvironmental context, and receptor-expressing cells. We delineate how this tripartite crosstalk influences immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) outcomes through mechanisms such as T-cell suppression, regulatory T cells recruitment, and PD-L1 upregulation. Myeloid cell-derived CXCL9 generally mediates anti-tumor immunity by recruiting cytotoxic lymphocytes, whereas CXCL9 produced by stromal cells like cancer-associated fibroblasts often contributes to metastasis and immune evasion. Given this complexity and unique immunosuppressive and fibrotic properties of OSCC, we argue that simply augmenting or blocking CXCL9 is insufficient. Instead, overcoming ICB resistance in OSCC requires a precision strategy focused on targeting cell-specific CXCL9 signaling. Ultimately, dissecting and therapeutically navigating the source-specific CXCL9 network is essential to transform the OSCC TME and improve clinical outcomes.

1 Introduction

Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) accounts for over 90% of oral malignancies and remains one of the most aggressive head and neck cancers, characterized by frequent local recurrence, lymph node metastasis, and a five-year survival rate below 50% (1). Most OSCC cases are diagnosed at advanced stages with a high risk of metastasis, which is the primary cause of mortality (2, 3). Although surgical resection combined with radiotherapy or chemotherapy remains the standard of care, the survival rate has improved only marginally in recent decades (4). Therefore, elucidating the molecular mechanisms underlying OSCC progression and identifying effective biomarkers for early diagnosis and predicting immunotherapy responsiveness are critical important.

OSCC development is driven by a complex interplay of genetic, epigenetic, and environmental factors, including epithelial-mesenchymal transition (5, 6), angiogenesis or lymphangiogenesis (7–9), oral microbial community (10, 11), long non-coding RNA (12, 13) and the tumor microenvironment (TME) (14). Among these, TME has emerged as a central determinant of tumor progression and therapeutic resistance. The TME comprises non-malignant stromal and immune cells such as macrophages, fibroblasts, neutrophils, dendritic cells, and myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs), as well as soluble factors like cytokines, chemokines, and extracellular vesicles. Despite growing interest, most TME-targeted strategies remain in preclinical stages, likely due to an incomplete understanding of the dynamic intercellular signaling that shapes immune responses (15).

Chemokines are a subset of chemoattractant cytokines, defined by their ability to stimulate cellular migration and positioning along a chemical gradient within the TME. Their interactions with specific G-protein-coupled receptors orchestrate the recruitment of diverse immune cells, critically shaping anti-tumor immunity while also being co-opted by tumors to promote angiogenesis, metastasis, and an immunosuppressive niche (16, 17). Among them, the CXC subfamily, particularly those lacking ELR motif (ELR^-), are pivotal in immune cell trafficking. One such pivotal ELR^- CXC chemokine is C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 9 (CXCL9) induced by interferon-gamma (IFN-γ). CXCL9 binds with the receptor CXCR3 and recruits CXCR3⁺ cells such as cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs), natural killer cell (NK) cells, and regulatory T cells (Tregs). Through this pathway, CXCL9 can promote both immune activation and suppression, influencing tumor growth, angiogenesis, and metastasis. The transcriptional regulation of CXCL9 involves multiple pathways, including Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription 1 (JAK/STAT1), nuclear factor κB (NF‐κB), myeloid transcription factor PU.1 (PU.1), multiple myeloma oncogene 1 (MUM1), Fos‐related antigen 1 (Fra-1), and Early growth response‐1(Egr-1) (18). Notably, the receptor CXCR3 exists in three isoforms, CXCR3-A, CXCR3-B, and CXCR3-Alt, which exhibit differences in their expression profiles and biological effects (19–21). While CXCR3-A generally mediates leukocyte migration and immune activation, CXCR3-A on tumor cells can paradoxically enhance tumor progression (22), whereas CXCR3-B exerts anti-proliferative and anti-metastatic effects (23–25). This duality shaped by receptor isoform distribution and the cellular origin of CXCL9 underscores the complex and context-dependent nature of the CXCL9/CXCR3 axis in cancer.

In this review, we highlight the dual roles of CXCL9 within the TME, emphasizing the cell-source–specific determinants of its function. We focus on CXCL9 derived from macrophages, dendritic cells, and fibroblasts-three key cellular compartments that collectively define immune equilibrium in OSCC. We further discuss how these mechanisms contribute to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) responsiveness and propose that selective modulation of CXCL9 signaling by cellular origin may represent a next-generation approach to improving immunotherapy outcomes in OSCC.

2 The dual nature of CXCL9 in the tumor microenvironment

CXCL9 is increasingly recognized as a pivotal but paradoxical mediator within TME, exerting both anti-tumor and pro-tumor functions depending on the cellular and molecular context. This duality arises from its pleiotropic effects on immune cell recruitment, angiogenesis, and tumor cell signaling. Understanding this context-dependent role is crucial for interpreting the divergent outcomes observed across different cancers and therapeutic settings.

2.1 CXCL9: an effector or accomplice in disease progression

CXCL9 is widely recognized as a pivotal mediator of anti-tumor immunity and a key determinant of the therapeutic efficacy of ICB, primarily owing to its potent capacity to recruit CXCR3⁺ effector T cells and NK cells (26–28). However, accumulating evidence has revealed a contradictory effect in the function of CXCL9, indicating that it cannot only drive anti-tumor immunity but also mediate immunosuppression and tumor metastasis (29, 30). This apparent contradiction is not an intrinsic property of the molecule itself, but instead reflects the complex interplay among the cellular source of CXCL9, the dynamic TME, and the nature of the receptor-expressing cells. Therefore, a comprehensive understanding of the determinants that shape the functional fate of CXCL9 is essential for harnessing its therapeutic potential. The following sections will dissect this duality by examining the distinct functional outcomes associated with CXCL9 derived from two major cellular compartments: myeloid cells and stromal cells.

2.2 Myeloid-derived CXCL9 as an engine of anti-tumor immunity

In immune-activated microenvironment such as those induced by ICB, specific myeloid cell subsets represent the predominant source of protective CXCL9 (26, 31, 32). Within the TME, macrophages are not only more abundant than dendritic cells but also produce substantially higher levels of CXCL9, both in mice and in patients receiving immune checkpoint therapy (33). A distinct pro-inflammatory macrophage population (F4/80⁺MHCII⁺Ly6C^lo) serves as a critical source of CXCL9, indispensable for the efficacy of anti-PD-L1 therapy through the recruitment of CXCR3⁺ T cells; blockade of CXCL9 abrogates therapeutic response in CT26 tumors (26). It was also reported that CXCL9 increases cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) chemotaxis and inhibits angiogenesis, thereby suppressing tumor growth (34). These M1-hot tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) facilitated not only the recruitment of CTLs but also the establishment and metabolic maintenance of CD8⁺ tissue-resident memory T cells via CXCL9-mediated signaling, sustaining them through enhanced fatty acid availability, a process linked to prolonged survival (35).

In head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), an immune-hot gene signature composed of CXCL9, CXCL10, CXCL11, and CCL5 predicts responsiveness to ICB (28), underscoring the clinical significance of myeloid-derived CXCL9. Moreover, CD103⁺ conventional type 1 dendritic cells (cDC1s) constitute another non-redundant source (31). Their co-expression of CXCL9 and IL-12 is crucial for NK cell recruitment and activation, which are indispensable for the anti-tumor efficacy of CD47 blockade (36). CXCL9⁺ antigen-presenting cells (CD11c⁺) located within the T-cell zones of tertiary lymphoid structures further shape an immune-activated microenvironment highly responsive to ICB (37). Collectively, myeloid-derived CXCL9 acts as a coordinator of anti-tumor immunity by orchestrating cytotoxic lymphocyte recruitment and activation, ultimately constructing an immune-activated niche that enhances therapeutic efficacy (38).

2.3 The tumor-promoting effect of interstitial cells and CXCL9

When CXCL9 is produced by stromal cells or within an immunosuppressive TME, its function can be subverted towards promoting tumor progression. In breast cancer and melanoma models, cancer-associated fibroblast (CAF)-derived CXCL9/10 activates CXCR3 receptors on tumor cells, markedly enhancing their migratory potential and facilitating lung colonization through the JNK-IL-1 signaling axis, constituting a non–immune-dependent mechanism of metastasis (30, 39, 40). Similarly, CXCL9 expressed by tumor vascular endothelial cells exhibits potent chemotactic activity toward melanoma cells, thereby promoting distant metastasis (41). These represent a stark deviation from its canonical immune recruiting role.

Beyond its direct tumor-promoting effects, CXCL9 can also be hijacked to foster immune suppression. For instance, CXCL9 secreted by BATF3⁺ dendritic cells recruits CXCR3⁺ regulatory T cells into the TME, dampening antitumor immunity and accelerating tumor progression (29). In bladder cancer, tumor-associated dendritic cells produce high levels of CXCL9 that upregulate PD-L1 expression on T24 tumor cells through CXCR3-mediated signaling, thus promoting tumor growth (42). Moreover, the immunosuppressive milieu itself can extinguish protective CXCL9 signaling. Transforming growth factor β1 (TGF-β1), a key driver of immune evasion and therapeutic resistance, epigenetically silences CXCL9/10 expression in fibroblasts through chromatin remodelings (43). Altogether, CXCL9 may contribute to tumor progression either by recruiting suppressive Tregs or invasive cancer cells, or by being silenced within an immunosuppressive microenvironment.

2.4 The crosstalk between source, microenvironment and receiver determines the function of CXCL9

The biological outcome of CXCL9 signaling is ultimately shaped by the interplay among its cellular source, the surrounding microenvironment, and the receptor-bearing cells (Figure 1). Most studies demonstrate that CXCL9 enhances anti-tumor immunity and ICB responsiveness primarily by recruiting CD8⁺T cells. Myeloid-derived CXCL9, particularly from macrophages or dendritic cells, is generally associated with protective immunity (28, 35), whereas stromal cell-derived CXCL9, originating from CAFs or endothelial cells, is frequently linked to tumor progression and metastasis (30, 40, 41).

Figure 1

Figure 1. The crosstalk between source, microenvironment and receiver determines the function of CXCL9. CXCL9 function is determined by the convergence of three elements: (1) Producer (the cellular source): myeloid cells (dendritic cells, macrophages) secrete CXCL9 to mediate anti-tumor responses, while stromal cells (fibroblasts, endothelial cells) produce CXCL9 that contributes to pro-tumor processes; (2) Context (the tumor microenvironment): the immune-activating context (IFN-γ, ICB therapy) enhances CXCL9 secretion by myeloid cells; conversely, the immune-suppressive context (e.g., TGF-β) inhibits CXCL9 production in stromal cells, reshaping the balance of CXCL9-mediated effects; (3) Receiver (the target cell): engagement with CTLs or NK cells drives tumor elimination, however, ligation to CXCR3 on Tregs and cancer cells exerts pro-tumor/immune suppression effect. This model explains the opposing roles of CXCL9 in tumor progression and immunity. The top dashed box indicates the transcription factors governing CXCL9 expression.

Nevertheless, this dichotomy is not absolute, as cellular states are highly plastic and environmentally regulated. Certain dendritic cell subsets can switch to an immunosuppressive phenotype, producing CXCL9 that recruits Tregs or induces PD-L1 expression (29, 42). This highlights the decisive role of the TME, which orchestrates CXCL9 expression and function. Immunostimulatory signals such as IFN-γ or ICB treatment promote CXCL9 production in immune cells (26, 35), whereas immunosuppressive cytokines, notably TGF-β, suppress or reprogram CXCL9 activity through epigenetic silencing, particularly within stromal compartments (43, 44).

Ultimately, the biological consequence depends on the CXCR3⁺ recipient cell. Engagement with CTLs or NK cells drives tumor elimination, however, ligation to CXCR3 on Tregs suppresses effector immune responses (29), and if engagement with tumor cells expressing CXCR3 directly promotes invasion and metastatic dissemination (22, 30, 39). Therefore, the multifaceted effects of CXCL9 are defined by a triad of determinants-its source, the microenvironmental context, and the receptor cell population.

3 What is the effect of CXCL9 in the complex microenvironment of OSCC?

The OSCC tumor microenvironment exhibits distinctive anatomical and biological features, shaped by three interrelated determinants (10, 45, 46). First, it is characterized by intense fibrosis and stromal desmoplasia, which leads to a dominant presence of CAFs. Second, it engages in a persistent crosstalk with a diverse and spatially constrained oral microbiome that exerts direct regulatory effects on local immune responses. Third, OSCC arises within a specialized mucosal immune niche that is structurally and functionally distinct from those of other head and neck cancer sites. Collectively, these contextual features critically shape the spatiotemporal activity and functional interpretation of chemokine signaling pathways, including CXCL9.

Emerging evidence, particularly from HPV-negative HNSCC, reinforces the classic paradigm of CXCL9 as a cornerstone of immunologically “hot” tumors. Spatial multiomics studies confirm that CXCL9 upregulation is a core feature of highly immune-active tumors, where it correlates with active interferon signaling, enhanced antigen presentation, and crucially, the spatial co-localization of CD8⁺ T cells with tumor cells (47). In this context, CXCL9 production by DCs and TAMs is understood to promote CD8⁺ T cell recruitment, activation, and tumor cell killing, fostering a favorable antitumor microenvironment (28, 48).

However, the functional role of the chemokine CXCL9 transcends its classical function in recruiting Th1 and T cells and is instead reprogrammed by TME to serve as a critical mediator of immune evasion in OSCC. This functional reprogramming is primarily mediated by a distinct subpopulation of CAFs that express CXCL9, thereby establishing a direct link between the characteristic interstitial fibrosis observed in OSCC and the suppression of antitumor immunity. Single-cell RNA sequencing studies have identified a TDO2⁺ myofibroblast subset within OSCC that secretes chemokines such as CXCL9 to recruit T cells to peritumoral regions. However, it induces the differentiation of CD4⁺ T cells into Tregs and drives CD8⁺ T-cell dysfunction, thereby hijacking CXCL9-mediated recruitment to establish localized immunosuppressive niches (49). More directly, spatial transcriptomic analyses in HNSCC (which includes OSCC) have revealed MHC-I^hiGalectin-9⁺ (Gal9⁺⁾ CAFs. This subset highly expresses CXCL9, CXCL10, and CXCL12. It uses CXCL9 to recruit CD8⁺ T cells into its vicinity, then employs its surface-bound Gal9 to directly induce T-cell exhaustion. This action spatially forms a “trap” that restricts productive T-cell infiltration into tumor islets (50). Furthermore, tumor cell-derived fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF-2) is identified as an upstream regulator of CXCL9 in OSCC. FGF-2 promotes lymphangiogenesis and, critically, stimulates the secretion of CXCL9. This cascade mediates the recruitment and subsequent egress of CD8⁺ T cells via newly formed lymphatic vessels, directly contributing to an immune-cold TME and poorer patient prognosis (51).

Notably, the regulation of CXCL9 expression by the oral microbiome also appears to exhibit this context-dependent, bidirectional nature. Specifically, periodontal pathogens represented by Porphyromonas gingivalis have been demonstrated to suppress Th1-type chemokines including CXCL9 and contribute to an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment in OSCC (52). Conversely, evidence from other tumor types indicates that selected commensal bacteria or probiotics can enhance anti-tumor immunity by activating myeloid cells and promoting CXCL9 production, suggesting that microbial effects on the CXCL9 axis are highly context-dependent (53–55). Consequently, the integrated impact and dominant regulatory function of the entire oral microbial community on the CXCL9 network in OSCC is an area of active investigation.

This dichotomy presents a critical question for OSCC: whether the CAFs and immunosuppressive microbiota completely dominate CXCL9-mediated tumor progression, or whether protective signals derived from myeloid cells could be unmasked? To visualize and address this central question, we have developed a model presented in Figure 2, which illustrates how the functional fate of CXCL9 is governed by the dynamic interplay of opposing forces. Understanding this balance is essential for developing therapeutic strategies aimed at modulating the CXCL9-CXCR3 axis to enhance anti-tumor immunity while mitigating its pro-tumorigenic effects. Such insights directly motivate the exploration of CXCL9-targeted approaches in overcoming ICB resistance, as discussed in the following section.

Figure 2

Figure 2. The functional fate of CXCL9 in the OSCC tumor microenvironment. The OSCC microenvironment is characterized by profound immunosuppression, intense fibrosis, and constant exposure to a unique oral microbiome. CXCL9 signaling in OSCC is determined by the integration of three elements, often skewed toward a pro-tumor outcome. Stromal cells (e.g., fibroblasts) produce CXCL9 that directly activates CXCR3 on tumor cells, driving invasion and metastasis. In contrast, myeloid cells (e.g., macrophages, DCs) produce CXCL9 that recruits and activates cytotoxic CD8⁺ T cells, initiating anti-tumor immunity. A dominant immunosuppressive environment favors the pro-tumor axis. Successful intervention, such as immune checkpoint blockade, can shift the balance to an immune-activated environment, unleashing the anti-tumor potential of CXCL9 and resulting in immune-mediated tumor killing. The net effect of the complex oral microbiome on the CXCL9 axis is context-dependent and an area of active investigation. The model highlights that therapeutic success depends on suppressing the pro-tumor axis (red) while promoting the anti-tumor axis (green).

4 Targeting the CXCL9-CXCR3 axis to overcome immunotherapy resistance in OSCC

ICB, particularly antibodies against PD-1/PD-L1, represents a breakthrough in cancer therapy, supplementing surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy (56). By blocking PD-1/PD-L1 signaling, ICB alleviates immunosuppression on T lymphocytes, leading to enhanced CTL activation and, in some cases, remarkable tumor regression (57, 58). However, only a minority of OSCC patients achieve clinical benefit, with response rates ranging from 6.5% to 21.8% in recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (59). The limited efficacy is largely attributed to the “cold” tumor phenotype, characterized by poor infiltration of effector CD8+ T cells or abundant accumulation of Tregs (60–62). Other contributing factors include impaired antigen presentation, immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment, and microbiome composition (63–66). These obstacles underscore the urgent need to identify biomarkers predictive of ICB responsiveness and develop strategies to enhance anti-tumor immunity in OSCC.

The chemokine CXCL9 plays a pivotal role in shaping the immune landscape of OSCC and influencing ICB outcomes. CXCL9 produced by myeloid cells, such as macrophages and dendritic cells, recruits and activates CD8⁺ T cells and NK cells, thus promoting an “immune-hot” TME conducive to effective checkpoint inhibition (26, 35, 38). Conversely, CXCL9 derived from stromal cells, including CAFs and vascular endothelial cells, may contribute to immunosuppression or tumor progression, potentially dampening the therapeutic benefits of ICB (29, 30, 40, 41). These findings highlight the dual role of CXCL9 in OSCC and suggest that its expression and source within the TME can serve as a biomarker for predicting ICB responsiveness.

A substantial and multi-tiered body of evidence supports the therapeutic modulation of the CXCL9-CXCR3 axis. As summarized in Table 1, this evidence spans direct clinical interventions to foundational mechanistic studies, collectively informing a precision oncology framework. Although definitive late-phase clinical trial data specific to OSCC are still emerging, the existing body of evidence is robust and compelling. First, direct interventional strategies aim to remodel the local immune microenvironment through focal delivery or induction of CXCL9. These strategies encompass a range of approaches, such as intratumoral delivery of CXCL9 via oncolytic viruses in HNSCC, engineered nanoparticles that deliver CXCL9-encoding circular RNA with anti-PD-1 single-chain variable fragment (scFv) (67), co-delivery CXCL9 with BRD4-PROTAC(dBET6) (68), the use of recombinant adeno-associated virus (AAV) vectors for focal and sustained CXCL9 expression (69) and the application of CXCL9/10-engineered DCs therapy combined with ICB (70). Second, clinical-translational insights reveal key regulatory nodes. For instance, somatic NCOA3 mutations suppressed CXCL9 expression and CD8⁺ T-cell infiltration via the HSP90α/EZH2 axis, highlighting tumor-intrinsic control of this chemokine network (71). Third, preclinical studies solidify stromal-derived CXCL9 as an actionable target. In melanoma and OSCC models, inhibition of CXCL9/10 secretion from fibroblasts was shown to attenuate metastasis (40, 49). Moreover, THBS2-expressing matrix CAFs suppress myeloid-derived CXCL9/10 to limit CXCR3⁺CD8⁺T-cell recruitment, an effect that can be reversed by blocking this axis (72). Collectively, these diverse approaches share the unified objective of rebalancing the CXCL9 network to overcome ICB monotherapy resistance.

Table 1

Table 1. Evidence landscape for targeting the CXCL9/CXCR3 axis.

The heterogeneous responses to immunotherapy in OSCC can be fundamentally traced to interpatient variability in the dominant cellular source of CXCL9. To address this, we propose a “cellular source-determined” precision framework, which is particularly compelling in OSCC given its unique pathological context: the prevalent fibrotic stroma establishes stromal cells as a critical therapeutic target, while the anatomical accessibility of the oral cavity favors localized, spatially-informed interventions. This framework is implemented through spatial profiling techniques. Spatial transcriptomics (10x Visium) and multiplex immunofluorescence (mIF) can be employed to directly visualize and quantify CXCL9 expression in relation to specific cellular markers, such as α-smooth muscle actin (α-SMA), fibroblast activation protein (FAP), and Gal9 for fibroblasts, or CD68 and CD11c for myeloid cells (47, 50, 72). These approaches allow precise discrimination of CXCL9 cellular origin within intact tumor architecture, thereby clarifying its context-dependent function.

This spatial profiling enables molecular stratification, which provides a rational basis for therapeutic decision-making. A “myeloid-dominant” profile supports strategies aimed at reinforcing immune activation, whereas a “stroma-dominant” profile suggests that modulation of the stromal compartment should precede or accompany immune checkpoint blockade. This closed-loop, biomarker-guided strategy represents a precision medicine approach that is particularly suited to overcoming immune exclusion and ICB resistance in OSCC.

In conclusion, overcoming immunotherapy resistance in OSCC requires a nuanced understanding of the CXCL9-CXCR3 axis. By adopting a precision medicine framework that integrates spatial profiling with source-specific therapeutic design, it becomes possible to transform a traditionally immune-resistant tumor into one that is amenable to immunomodulation.

5 Conclusion

The function of the chemokine CXCL9 in cancer is not predetermined but is principally determined by its cellular source within the tumor microenvironment. This review establishes that distinguishing between CXCL9 derived from anti-tumor myeloid cells versus pro-tumor stromal cells is critical for understanding its duality. Specifically, CXCL9 derived from myeloid lineages, such as macrophages and dendritic cells, generally serves as a cornerstone of anti-tumor immunity by recruiting and activating effector lymphocytes. In contrast, CXCL9 produced by stromal cells, including CAFs and endothelial cells, often participates in pro-tumorigenic processes, notably metastasis. In is characterized by an immunosuppressive and highly fibrotic TME, metastasis-promoting signals originating from the stromal cells may predominate, potentially undermining the therapeutic benefits of immune activation by myeloid lineages. Importantly, under specific conditions such as during ICB therapy, the immune-activating properties of CXCL9 may demonstrate significant therapeutic potential.

Therefore, research should transition from merely evaluating CXCL9 expression levels to identifying its cellular sources within the OSCC TME. The therapeutic objective is not to indiscriminately inhibit or augment CXCL9, but to develop precision strategies that selectively target its detrimental sources while preserving or enhancing its beneficial functions. This source-specific approach holds significant promise for the rational design of CXCL9-targeted therapies and combined therapy in OSCC.

Author contributions

MQ: Visualization, Investigation, Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft. LW: Writing – review & editing, Investigation. HT: Writing – review & editing, Supervision. SJ: Supervision, Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization.

Funding

The author(s) declared that financial support was not received for this work and/or its publication.

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

1. Chattopadhyay I, Verma M, and Panda M. Role of oral microbiome signatures in diagnosis and prognosis of oral cancer. Technol Cancer Res Treat. (2019) 18:1533033819867354. doi: 10.1177/1533033819867354

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

2. Sklenicka S, Gardiner S, Dierks EJ, Potter BE, and Bell RB. Survival analysis and risk factors for recurrence in oral squamous cell carcinoma: does surgical salvage affect outcome? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. (2010) 68:1270–5. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2009.11.016

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

3. Zeng H, Chen W, Zheng R, Zhang S, Ji JS, Zou X, et al. Changing cancer survival in China during 2003-15: A pooled analysis of 17 population-based cancer registries. Lancet Glob Health. (2018) 6:e555–e67. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30127-X

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

4. head, neck cancer working group C. Chinese society of clinical oncology (Csco) diagnosis and treatment guidelines for head and neck cancer 2018 (English version). Chin J Cancer Res = Chung-kuo Yen Cheng Yen Chiu. (2019) 31:84–168. doi: 10.21147/j.issn.1000-9604.2019.01.04

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

5. Jayanthi P, Varun BR, and Selvaraj J. Epithelial-mesenchymal transition in oral squamous cell carcinoma: an insight into molecular mechanisms and clinical implications. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. (2020) 24:189. doi: 10.4103/jomfp.JOMFP_334_19

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

6. Ling Z, Cheng B, and Tao X. Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in oral squamous cell carcinoma: challenges and opportunities. Int J Cancer. (2021) 148:1548–61. doi: 10.1002/ijc.33352

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

7. Kämmerer PW, Al-Nawas B, Kalkan S, Liese J, Fruth K, Frerich B, et al. Angiogenesis-related prognosis in patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma-role of the vegf +936 C/T polymorphism. J Oral Pathol Med. (2015) 44:429–36. doi: 10.1111/jop.12254

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

8. Shivamallappa SM, Venkatraman NT, Shreedhar B, Mohanty L, and Shenoy S. Role of angiogenesis in oral squamous cell carcinoma development and metastasis: an immunohistochemical study. Int J Oral Sci. (2011) 3:216–24. doi: 10.4248/IJOS11077

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

9. Li X, Wang C, Zhang H, Li Y, Hou D, Liu D, et al. Circfndc3b accelerates vasculature formation and metastasis in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Res. (2023) 83:1459–75. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-22-2585

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

10. Li R, Xiao L, Gong T, Liu J, Li Y, Zhou X, et al. Role of oral microbiome in oral oncogenesis, tumor progression, and metastasis. Mol Oral Microbiol. (2023) 38:9–22. doi: 10.1111/omi.12403

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

11. Su SC, Chang LC, Huang HD, Peng CY, Chuang CY, Chen YT, et al. Oral microbial dysbiosis and its performance in predicting oral cancer. Carcinogenesis. (2021) 42:127–35. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgaa062

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

12. Tang J, Fang X, Chen J, Zhang H, and Tang Z. Long non-coding rna (Lncrna) in oral squamous cell carcinoma: biological function and clinical application. Cancers (Basel). (2021) 13:5944. doi: 10.3390/cancers13235944

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

13. Shi L, Yang Y, Li M, Li C, Zhou Z, Tang G, et al. Lncrna ifitm4p promotes immune escape by up-regulating pd-L1 via dual mechanism in oral carcinogenesis. Mol Ther. (2022) 30:1564–77. doi: 10.1016/j.ymthe.2022.01.003

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

14. Mughees M, Sengupta A, Khowal S, and Wajid S. Mechanism of tumour microenvironment in the progression and development of oral cancer. Mol Biol Rep. (2021) 48:1773–86. doi: 10.1007/s11033-020-06054-6

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

15. Xiao Y and Yu D. Tumor microenvironment as a therapeutic target in cancer. Pharmacol Ther. (2021) 221:107753. doi: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2020.107753

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

16. Drouillard D, Craig BT, and Dwinell MB. Physiology of chemokines in the cancer microenvironment. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. (2023) 324:C167–C82. doi: 10.1152/ajpcell.00151.2022

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

17. Mempel TR, Lill JK, and Altenburger LM. How chemokines organize the tumour microenvironment. Nat Rev Cancer. (2024) 24:28–50. doi: 10.1038/s41568-023-00635-w

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

18. Ding Q, Lu P, Xia Y, Ding S, Fan Y, Li X, et al. Cxcl9: evidence and contradictions for its role in tumor progression. Cancer Med. (2016) 5:3246–59. doi: 10.1002/cam4.934

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

19. Reynders N, Abboud D, Baragli A, Noman MZ, Rogister B, Niclou SP, et al. The distinct roles of cxcr3 variants and their ligands in the tumor microenvironment. Cells. (2019) 8:613. doi: 10.3390/cells8060613

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

20. Oghumu S, Varikuti S, Terrazas C, Kotov D, Nasser MW, Powell CA, et al. Cxcr3 deficiency enhances tumor progression by promoting macrophage M2 polarization in a murine breast cancer model. Immunology. (2014) 143:109–19. doi: 10.1111/imm.12293

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

21. Li CX, Ling CC, Shao Y, Xu A, Li XC, Ng KT, et al. Cxcl10/cxcr3 signaling mobilized-regulatory T cells promote liver tumor recurrence after transplantation. J Hepatol. (2016) 65:944–52. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2016.05.032

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

22. Bronger H, Karge A, Dreyer T, Zech D, Kraeft S, Avril S, et al. Induction of cathepsin B by the cxcr3 chemokines cxcl9 and cxcl10 in human breast cancer cells. Oncol Lett. (2017) 13:4224–30. doi: 10.3892/ol.2017.5994

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

23. Lasagni L, Francalanci M, Annunziato F, Lazzeri E, Giannini S, Cosmi L, et al. An alternatively spliced variant of cxcr3 mediates the inhibition of endothelial cell growth induced by ip-10, mig, and I-tac, and acts as functional receptor for platelet factor 4. J Exp Med. (2003) 197:1537–49. doi: 10.1084/jem.20021897

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

24. Gacci M, Serni S, Lapini A, Vittori G, Alessandrini M, Nesi G, et al. Cxcr3-B expression correlates with tumor necrosis extension in renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. (2009) 181:843–8. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.10.063

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

25. Li Y, Reader JC, Ma X, Kundu N, Kochel T, and Fulton AM. Divergent roles of cxcr3 isoforms in promoting cancer stem-like cell survival and metastasis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. (2015) 149:403–15. doi: 10.1007/s10549-014-3229-7

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

26. Qu Y, Wen J, Thomas G, Yang W, Prior W, He W, et al. Baseline frequency of inflammatory cxcl9-expressing tumor-associated macrophages predicts response to avelumab treatment. Cell Rep. (2020) 32:107873. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.107873

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

27. de Masson A, Darbord D, Dobos G, Boisson M, Roelens M, Ram-Wolff C, et al. Macrophage-derived cxcl9 and cxcl11, T-cell skin homing, and disease control in mogamulizumab-treated ctcl patients. Blood. (2022) 139:1820–32. doi: 10.1182/blood.2021013341

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

28. Huang Y, Liu H, Liu X, Li N, Bai H, Guo C, et al. The chemokines initiating and maintaining immune hot phenotype are prognostic in icb of hnscc. Front Genet. (2022) 13:820065. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2022.820065

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

29. Moreno Ayala MA, Campbell TF, Zhang C, Dahan N, Bockman A, Prakash V, et al. Cxcr3 Expression in Regulatory T cells Drives Interactions with Type I Dendritic Cells in Tumors to Restrict Cd8(+) T cell Antitumor Immunity. Immunity. (2023) 56:1613–30 e5. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2023.06.003

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

30. Pein M, Insua-Rodríguez J, Hongu T, Riedel A, Meier J, Wiedmann L, et al. Metastasis-initiating cells induce and exploit a fibroblast niche to fuel Malignant colonization of the lungs. Nat Commun. (2020) 11:1494. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-15188-x

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

31. Chow MT, Ozga AJ, Servis RL, Frederick DT, Lo JA, Fisher DE, et al. Intratumoral activity of the cxcr3 chemokine system is required for the efficacy of anti-pd-1 therapy. Immunity. (2019) 50:1498–512 e5. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2019.04.010

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

32. Dangaj D, Bruand M, Grimm AJ, Ronet C, Barras D, Duttagupta PA, et al. Cooperation between constitutive and inducible chemokines enables T cell engraftment and immune attack in solid tumors. Cancer Cell. (2019) 35:885–900 e10. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2019.05.004

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

33. House IG, Savas P, Lai J, Chen AXY, Oliver AJ, Teo ZL, et al. Macrophage-derived cxcl9 and cxcl10 are required for antitumor immune responses following immune checkpoint blockade. Clin Cancer Res. (2020) 26:487–504. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-1868

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

34. Liu L, Gao J, Xing X, Jiang M, Liu Q, Wang S, et al. Cyclin G2 in macrophages triggers ctl-mediated antitumor immunity and antiangiogenesis via interferon-gamma. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. (2022) 41:358. doi: 10.1186/s13046-022-02564-2

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

35. Garrido-Martin EM, Mellows TWP, Clarke J, Ganesan AP, Wood O, Cazaly A, et al. M1(Hot) tumor-associated macrophages boost tissue-resident memory T cells infiltration and survival in human lung cancer. J Immunother Cancer. (2020) 8:708–716. doi: 10.1136/jitc-2020-000778

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

36. Wang S, Wu Q, Chen T, Su R, Pan C, Qian J, et al. Blocking cd47 promotes antitumour immunity through cd103(+) dendritic cell-nk cell axis in murine hepatocellular carcinoma model. J Hepatol. (2022) 77:467–78. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2022.03.011

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

37. Nagase Y, Kodama M, Aimono E, Nakamura K, Takamatsu R, Abe K, et al. Cxcl9 and cxcl13 shape endometrial cancer immune-activated microenvironment via tertiary lymphoid structure formation. Cancer Sci. (2025) 116:1193–202. doi: 10.1111/cas.16371

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

38. Bergamaschi C, Pandit H, Nagy BA, Stellas D, Jensen SM, Bear J, et al. Heterodimeric il-15 delays tumor growth and promotes intratumoral ctl and dendritic cell accumulation by a cytokine network involving xcl1, ifn-Γ, cxcl9 and cxcl10. J Immunother Cancer. (2020) 8:e004244. doi: 10.1136/jitc-2020-000599

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

39. Ma X, Norsworthy K, Kundu N, Rodgers WH, Gimotty PA, Goloubeva O, et al. Cxcr3 expression is associated with poor survival in breast cancer and promotes metastasis in a murine model. Mol Cancer Ther. (2009) 8:490–8. doi: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-08-0485

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

40. Muramatsu M, Gao L, Peresie J, Balderman B, Akakura S, and Gelman IH. Ssecks/akap12 scaffolding functions suppress B16f10-induced peritoneal metastasis by attenuating cxcl9/10 secretion by resident fibroblasts. Oncotarget. (2017) 8:70281–98. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.20092

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

41. Amatschek S, Lucas R, Eger A, Pflueger M, Hundsberger H, Knoll C, et al. Cxcl9 induces chemotaxis, chemorepulsion and endothelial barrier disruption through cxcr3-mediated activation of melanoma cells. Br J Cancer. (2011) 104:469–79. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6606056

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

42. Xiu W and Luo J. Cxcl9 secreted by tumor-associated dendritic cells up-regulates pd-L1 expression in bladder cancer cells by activating the cxcr3 signaling. BMC Immunol. (2021) 22:3. doi: 10.1186/s12865-020-00396-3

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

43. Vienot A, Pallandre JR, Renaude E, Viot J, Bouard A, Spehner L, et al. Chemokine switch regulated by tgf-B1 in cancer-associated fibroblast subsets determines the efficacy of chemo-immunotherapy. Oncoimmunology. (2022) 11:2144669. doi: 10.1080/2162402X.2022.2144669

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

44. Park D, Sahai E, and Rullan A. Snapshot: cancer-associated fibroblasts. Cell. (2020) 181:486–e1. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.03.013

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

45. Li C, Dong X, and Li B. Tumor microenvironment in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Front Immunol. (2024) 15:1485174. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1485174

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

46. Tan Y, Wang Z, Xu M, Li B, Huang Z, Qin S, et al. Oral squamous cell carcinomas: state of the field and emerging directions. Int J Oral Sci. (2023) 15:44. doi: 10.1038/s41368-023-00249-w

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

47. Zwing N, Voith von Voithenberg L, Alberti L, Gabriel SM, Monné Rodriguez JM, Feddersen R, et al. Mapping immune activity in hpv-negative head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: A spatial multiomics analysis. J Immunother Cancer. (2025) 13:011851. doi: 10.1136/jitc-2025-011851

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

48. Chakraborty AK, Kroehling L, Raut RD, Choudhury C, Kukuruzinska MA, Gutkind JS, et al. Lsd1 inhibition induces mhc-I and dendritic cell activation to promote antitumor immunity in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Res. (2025). doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-24-3239

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

49. Hu S, Lu H, Xie W, Wang D, Shan Z, Xing X, et al. Tdo2+ Myofibroblasts mediate immune suppression in Malignant transformation of squamous cell carcinoma. J Clin Invest. (2022) 132:e157649. doi: 10.1172/JCI157649

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

50. Li C, Guo H, Zhai P, Yan M, Liu C, Wang X, et al. Spatial and single-cell transcriptomics reveal a cancer-associated fibroblast subset in hnscc that restricts infiltration and antitumor activity of cd8+ T cells. Cancer Res. (2024) 84:258–75. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-23-1448

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

51. Kang J, Cheng A, Chen G, Zhu L, Han Z, and Xu Q. Tumor cells-derived fgf-2 promotes lymphangiogenesis as a prognostic marker in oscc. J Oral Pathol Med. (2025) 54:694–705. doi: 10.1111/jop.70019

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

52. Jauregui CE, Wang Q, Wright CJ, Takeuchi H, Uriarte SM, and Lamont RJ. Suppression of T-cell chemokines by porphyromonas gingivalis. Infect Immun. (2013) 81:2288–95. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00264-13

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

53. Cremonesi E, Governa V, Garzon JFG, Mele V, Amicarella F, Muraro MG, et al. Gut microbiota modulate T cell trafficking into human colorectal cancer. Gut. (2018) 67:1984–94. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2016-313498

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

54. Wang X, Geng Q, Jiang H, Yue J, Qi C, and Qin L. Fecal microbiota transplantation enhanced the effect of chemoimmunotherapy by restoring intestinal microbiota in llc tumor-bearing mice. BMC Immunol. (2025) 26:30. doi: 10.1186/s12865-025-00710-x

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

55. Fan Z, Yi Z, Li S, and He J. Parabacteroides distasonis promotes cxcl9 secretion of tumor-associated macrophages and enhances cd8(+)T cell activity to trigger anti-tumor immunity against anti-pd-1 treatment in non-small cell lung cancer mice. BMC Biotechnol. (2025) 25:30. doi: 10.1186/s12896-025-00963-9

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

56. Noguchi E, Shien T, and Iwata H. Current status of pd-1/pd-L1 blockade immunotherapy in breast cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol. (2021) 51:321–32. doi: 10.1093/jjco/hyaa230

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

57. Dong W, Wu X, Ma S, Wang Y, Nalin AP, Zhu Z, et al. The mechanism of anti-pd-L1 antibody efficacy against pd-L1-negative tumors identifies nk cells expressing pd-L1 as a cytolytic effector. Cancer Discov. (2019) 9:1422–37. doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-18-1259

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

58. Shergold AL, Millar R, and Nibbs RJB. Understanding and overcoming the resistance of cancer to pd-1/pd-L1 blockade. Pharmacol Res. (2019) 145:104258. doi: 10.1016/j.phrs.2019.104258

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

59. Clarke E, Eriksen JG, and Barrett S. The effects of pd-1/pd-L1 checkpoint inhibitors on recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: A critical review of the literature and meta-analysis. Acta Oncol. (2021) 60:1534–42. doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2021.1964699

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

60. Sevenich L. Turning “Cold” into “Hot” Tumors-Opportunities and Challenges for Radio-Immunotherapy against Primary and Metastatic Brain Cancers. Front Oncol. (2019) 9:163. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2019.00163

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

61. Ribas A and Wolchok JD. Cancer immunotherapy using checkpoint blockade. Science. (2018) 359:1350–5. doi: 10.1126/science.aar4060

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

62. Juneja VR, McGuire KA, Manguso RT, LaFleur MW, Collins N, Haining WN, et al. Pd-L1 on tumor cells is sufficient for immune evasion in immunogenic tumors and inhibits cd8 T cell cytotoxicity. J Exp Med. (2017) 214:895–904. doi: 10.1084/jem.20160801

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

63. Zhou L, Zeng Z, Egloff AM, Zhang F, Guo F, Campbell KM, et al. Checkpoint blockade-induced cd8+ T cell differentiation in head and neck cancer responders. J Immunother Cancer. (2022) 10:104613. doi: 10.1136/jitc-2021-004034

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

64. Piersiala K, Farrajota Neves da Silva P, Hjalmarsson E, Kolev A, Kågedal Å, Starkhammar M, et al. Cd4(+) and cd8(+) T cells in sentinel nodes exhibit distinct pattern of pd-1, cd69, and hla-dr expression compared to tumor tissue in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Sci. (2021) 112:1048–59. doi: 10.1111/cas.14816

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

65. Liu L, Lim MA, Jung SN, Oh C, Won HR, Jin YL, et al. The effect of curcumin on multi-level immune checkpoint blockade and T cell dysfunction in head and neck cancer. Phytomedicine. (2021) 92:153758. doi: 10.1016/j.phymed.2021.153758

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

66. Routy B, Le Chatelier E, Derosa L, Duong CPM, Alou MT, Daillère R, et al. Gut microbiome influences efficacy of pd-1-based immunotherapy against epithelial tumors. Science. (2018) 359:91–7. doi: 10.1126/science.aan3706

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

67. Liu Y, He W, Li X, Lu X, Wu C, Gao Y, et al. Neutrophil membrane-coated circular rna nanoparticles for targeted immunotherapy in her2-positive breast cancer brain metastasis. Cell Commun Signal. (2025) 23:333. doi: 10.1186/s12964-025-02321-w

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

68. Chen J, Ma F, Zhang Y, Xu M, Xu L, Liu Y, et al. Advanced Functional Materials. Advanced Functional Materials. (2024) 34:2314203. doi: 10.1002/adfm.202314203

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

69. von Roemeling CA, Patel JA, Carpenter SL, Yegorov O, Yang C, Bhatia A, et al. Adeno-associated virus delivered cxcl9 sensitizes glioblastoma to anti-pd-1 immune checkpoint blockade. Nat Commun. (2024) 15:5871. doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-49989-1. Synergizing Cxcl9 with Brd4-Protac Using Nanochaperone Boosts Robust T Cell-Dependent Antitumor Immune Responses for Cancer Immunotherapy.

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

70. Lim RJ, Salehi-Rad R, Tran LM, Oh MS, Dumitras C, Crosson WP, et al. Cxcl9/10-engineered dendritic cells promote T cell activation and enhance immune checkpoint blockade for lung cancer. Cell Rep Med. (2024) 5:101479. doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2024.101479

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

71. Liu J, Su Y, Zhang C, Dong H, Yu R, Yang X, et al. Ncoa3 impairs the efficacy of anti-pd-L1 therapy via hsp90α/ezh2/cxcl9 axis in colon cancer. Int Immunopharmacol. (2025) 155:114579. doi: 10.1016/j.intimp.2025.114579

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

72. Iwane K, Nakanishi Y, Muta Y, Chen J, Yasumura K, Omatsu M, et al. Targeting fibroblast derived thrombospondin 2 disrupts an immune-exclusionary environment at the tumor front in colorectal cancer. Nat Commun. (2025) 16:11590. doi: 10.1038/s41467-025-66485-2

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

73. Liu R, Liu Q, Wang Y, Liu T, Zhang Z, Zhao C, et al. Enhanced antitumor immunity of vnp20009-ccl2-cxcl9 via the cgas/sting axis in osteosarcoma lung metastasis. J Immunother Cancer. (2025) 13:012269. doi: 10.1136/jitc-2025-012269

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

74. Peng D, Kryczek I, Nagarsheth N, Zhao L, Wei S, Wang W, et al. Epigenetic silencing of th1-type chemokines shapes tumour immunity and immunotherapy. Nature. (2015) 527:249–53. doi: 10.1038/nature15520

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

75. de Mingo Pulido Á, Hänggi K, Celias DP, Gardner A, Li J, Batista-Bittencourt B, et al. The inhibitory receptor tim-3 limits activation of the cgas-sting pathway in intra-tumoral dendritic cells by suppressing extracellular DNA uptake. Immunity. (2021) 54:1154–67 e7. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2021.04.019

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar