Web-Books
in the Austria-Forum
Austria-Forum
Web-Books
Naturwissenschaften
Chemie
Cancer Nanotheranostics - What Have We Learnd So Far?
Page - 71 -
  • User
  • Version
    • full version
    • text only version
  • Language
    • Deutsch - German
    • English

Page - 71 - in Cancer Nanotheranostics - What Have We Learnd So Far?

Image of the Page - 71 -

Image of the Page - 71 - in Cancer Nanotheranostics - What Have We Learnd So Far?

Text of the Page - 71 -

Conniotet al. Nanocarriers for immunecell targetingand tracking growthsuppressionandmetastasis(Chenetal.,2014b).Highlev- elsofindoleamine2,3-dioxygenasehavealsobeenfoundintumor microenvironment, reducing tryptophanpool levels,whichdrive TlymphocytestobearrestedatG1phaseofthecellcycle(Ahmad etal., 2004). TUMORMICROENVIRONMENT:TUMOR-INFLITRATINGIMMUNECELLS ANDRELATEDREGULATORYPATHWAYS The progress of cancer disease results from severalmechanisms developed by tumors to evade antitumor immune responses (SectionCancer immune evasionmechanisms), which has been associatedmostly to tumormicroenvironmentmolecular path- waysandinfiltratingcellsat thisparticularregion,ratherthanthe ignoranceanddefectsofanti-tumorTcells (Gajewskietal.,2013; Ma et al., 2013). In fact, the presence of different cells and their dynamic interactionwithmalignant cells have aprofound effect on tumorprogression (Mishra et al., 2010;Bussolati et al., 2011; Cortez-Retamozoetal., 2012;RahirandMoser,2012). It iswidelyaccepted that thedensityofTcell infiltrateswithin tumormicroenvironment is the most important factor to pre- dictcancerpatients’ survival (Eerolaetal.,2000;Obleetal.,2009; Mahmoudet al., 2011).Nevertheless,macrophages are also cur- rently recognizedas a fundamental cell type.As aheterogeneous population,itsdualfunctiontowardcancerisdeterminedbytheir polarization status (Mantovani and Sica, 2010). Macrophages are regulated by transcription factors, whichwill lead to differ- ent phenotypes of tumor-associatedmacrophages (TAMs). M1 and M2 have been already characterized, being associated to the pathogenesis of several diseases, namely inflammatory and tumordiseases (Sica et al., 2006). Indeed, pro-inflammatoryM1 macrophages, afterbeingactivatedby IFN-γ, favorTh1 immune cell activity andpotentiate theeradicationofmalignant cells.On the other hand,M2 phenotype enables Th2 immune responses andregulate tissuerepair,presentingpro-tumoralabilities insev- eral tumor types (Sica andMantovani, 2012; Cornelissen et al., 2014). Moreover, the production of several cytokines, such as IL-1, IL-6, IL-10,VEGF, andTGF-βbyM2TAMselicits thepro- liferation andmetastasis of tumor cells (Biswas andMantovani, 2010). As a result, it has been described that the number ofM2 macrophages and the overallM2/M1 ratio of TAMs are impor- tant predictors of survival for distinct types of cancers, namely melanoma (Erdag et al., 2012;Herwig et al., 2013), ovarian can- cer(Lanetal.,2013;Colvin,2014),T-cell (Niinoetal.,2010),and B-cell lymphomas (Nam et al., 2014), breast (Leek et al., 1996) andpancreaticcancer(Inoetal., 2013). It is important tomentionhowever that theM1andM2clas- sification of TAMs is not static, being usually very complex and seems to be dictated by several mediators resultant from cel- lular cross-talk and environmental conditions (Cai et al., 2012; Escribese et al., 2012; Shimeet al., 2012). Even tough, the causes underlying thedifferentiationofTAMstoM1orM2phenotypes are not yet fully understood. Type I interferon pathway seems tobe fundamental for the activationof innate immune response against tumorcells.However, theproductionof type I interferon byDCsremainanunderexplored issue(Fuertesetal., 2011). DCs are alsopresentwithin tumormicroenvironment,where they can recognize and capture live and dying tumor cells (Dhodapkar et al., 2008; Ma et al., 2013). Their presence in tumorsofdifferent stagesandgradescorrelates toprolongeddis- ease survival and lower invasiveness, as reviewed inPalucka and Banchereau (2012). Even though, some of this heterogeneous hematopoietic lineage displays anti-tumor effects while others present immunosuppressive functions at tumor site. Actually, tumor-infiltratingDCs functionalitymay vary according to the combinationof environmental factors andpathwayswithinvari- able tumor site.AmongDCsubsets, it shouldbeemphasized the roleof tumor-infiltratingplasmacytoidDCs(pDCs)andCD8α+ DCslineage,being thefirstoftenrelated toTcell tolerance,while the latter is in fact particularly efficient in the cross-presentation of antigens via MHCI pathways and thus in cytotoxic T-cell immunity(Hildneretal.,2008;Fuertesetal.,2011;Watkinsetal., 2011). The characterization of different solid tumors, asmelanoma, showed thepresenceof tumor-infiltrating lymphoid cell lineage, includingCD8+Tcells. Their function ismainly compromised by immune system-inhibitorypathways at tumormicroenviron- ment, enablingT cell anergy (Gajewski et al., 2013). It has been reported thepresenceofhighamountsofCD4+Foxp3+ regula- toryTcells(Tregcells)thatareattractedbythechemokineCCL22 via CCR4 (Toulza et al., 2010; Spranger et al., 2013). However, the functionofT-cell subsetswithin tumormicroenvironment is highlycomplex,dependingonseveral factors, suchas the typeof receptorsprimed. Another hypothesis for the presence of T cells within the tumormicroenvironmentofcertaintumorsmayberelatedtothe formationofalymphnode-likestructurecalledtertiarylymphoid tissues, where it is possible to findB cells, T cells and activated DCs (Messina et al., 2012). Still, it is not clear if the formation of those lymphoidstructures is involved intumorgrowth invivo. On theotherhand, tumor-infiltratedTcells can expressCCL21. CCL21 is related to tumor tolerance by stimulatingnaïveT cells towhich thepresentationofTAAswillnotbeefficientdue to the absenceofco-stimulatory factors (Shieldsetal., 2010). NK,NKTandγδTcellsalsoseemtohaveanimportantrole in theimmunomodulationoftumormicroenvironment(Pengetal., 2007;Mishra et al., 2010;Marcu-Malina et al., 2011; Liu et al., 2012). The antitumor effect ofNKhas been linked to solid and hematopoietic tumors, whileγδTcells andNKTcells have been involved in tumor inhibition.However, they showimmunoregu- latory functions incertain circumstances that arenot completely known(Pengetal.,2007;Mishraetal.,2010;Marcu-Malinaetal., 2011; Liu et al., 2012).Apromising strategyhasbeen focused in the stimulation of DCs by α-galactosylceramide to primeNKT, promoting theproductionof IFN-γ (Shimizuetal., 2013). Besides these cells, tumor stroma has also been associated with tumor growth and includes different elements as colla- gen, endothelial cells, fibroblast and severalmacrophage subsets, whichcontributesfortumorimmuneevasion.Inaddition,higher levelsofangiogenic factorswere foundintumorswhere thepres- ence of tumor-infiltrating T cells is poor (Danhier et al., 2010). Themajorimmunosuppressivemechanismsincludethesecretion of IL-10,TGF-β, andCCL22byM2macrophages (Condeelis and Pollard,2006).ThetraffickingofTcellswithintumormicroenvi- ronmenthasbeenrelatedtothesecretionofdifferentchemokines Frontiers inChemistry | ChemicalEngineering November2014 |Volume2 |Article105 | 71
back to the  book Cancer Nanotheranostics - What Have We Learnd So Far?"
Cancer Nanotheranostics What Have We Learnd So Far?
Title
Cancer Nanotheranostics
Subtitle
What Have We Learnd So Far?
Authors
João Conde
Pedro Viana Baptista
Jesús M. De La Fuente
Furong Tian
Editor
Frontiers in Chemistry
Date
2016
Language
English
License
CC BY 4.0
ISBN
978-2-88919-776-7
Size
21.0 x 27.7 cm
Pages
132
Keywords
Nanomedicine, Nanoparticles, nanomaterials, Cancer, heranostics, Immunotherapy, bioimaging, Drug delivery, Gene Therapy, Phototherapy
Categories
Naturwissenschaften Chemie
Web-Books
Library
Privacy
Imprint
Austria-Forum
Austria-Forum
Web-Books
Cancer Nanotheranostics